Pinella goes to the bullpen....

spleen1015 · 07-06-2005, 02:32 PM

...to start the game!

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/07/06/Ra...o_starti.shtml

It would be something if he did this and they rattled off 5 in a row or something!

eriqjaffe · 07-06-2005, 02:36 PM

When is Lou just going to start carrying a "FIRE ME" sign around with him?

Y0DA55 · 07-06-2005, 02:46 PM

The team sucks... why not try this?

CommishJoe · 07-06-2005, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Y0DA55

The team sucks... why not try this?

Seconded. Interesting idea for a team who's bullpen sucks.

abailey3313 · 07-06-2005, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CommishJoe

Seconded. Interesting idea for a team who's bullpen sucks.

That was my thought.

Is the plan here that, instead of blowing a lead in the 8th and having only an inning to get back, they'll just start being down a couple runs and have plenty of time to come back?

sebastian0622 · 07-06-2005, 03:07 PM

I've thought about this idea before and, in theory, it makes some sense for teams with poor bullpens.

Let's say that your team ace is rested and ready to go today and you bullpen is rested as well. Your ace is usually good for 7-8 innings, but sometimes only 6 and sometimes (although rarely) 9. You can:

a) Send out your ace for 7 innings then turn it over to the bullpen to hope they hold on.

b) Send out your bullpen for 2-3 innings then decide, based on the score at that time, whether to use your ace or not for innings 3+.

One way to look at it is that your bullpen is going to have to pitch 2-3 innings anyway the vast majority of games. Shouldn't those innings be at the start so that you can decide which starter to use based on how winnable the game is?

CubsLose · 07-06-2005, 03:07 PM

This idea is mentioned in Moneyball, and I'm sure there is research that shows it can work. Especially in the NL, it allows you to play with a DH if you keep pinch hitting every two innings or so.

I tried this in my solo league, Montreal Expos 2000, and Jason Isringhausen and Guillermo Mota both recorded victories

andjbock · 07-06-2005, 03:19 PM

Pinella has down this before. I believe it was during a Chris Bosio start as punishment for something or other. The A's may have done it once in the past 10 or so years as I recall as well.

Go for it Lou, since this probably your last season as a manager.

Davey Eckstein · 07-06-2005, 03:26 PM

I picked the Rays to finish in third this year... oops...

But this still does seem like a rather odd thing to do. How long will he try this assuming it works the first game? Should be interesting to watch.

rem · 07-06-2005, 03:44 PM

I think this has been done a few times in the past with little success.

swampdragon · 07-06-2005, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eriqjaffe

When is Lou just going to start carrying a "FIRE ME" sign around with him?

I thought he already was.

Anachronism · 07-06-2005, 05:53 PM

Hasn't Pinella done this "Starter by commitee" tactic before? Or was that LaRussa?

jazzrack · 07-06-2005, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anachronism

Hasn't Pinella done this "Starter by commitee" tactic before? Or was that LaRussa?

LaRussa in his last year with the A's, it was pretty awfull. But then so were the pitchers he had.

Mike D · 07-06-2005, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andjbock

Go for it Lou, since this probably your last season as a manager.

Last season as a Devil Rays manager yes, but unless he retires, it won't be his last period. In fact, if he's not managing the D-Rays next year, he will be managing in AL anyway.

sixto · 07-06-2005, 07:12 PM

It didn't work because LaRussa's idea had pitchers going 3 IP whether they were throwing a no-hitter or not, which meant he was forced to either remove a pitcher throwing BBs or mess up his rotation any time he allowed a pitcher to go more than 3 IP. It was simply not thought through very well.

Green & Gold Heart · 07-06-2005, 09:24 PM

All talk so far. Fossum started today's game, as scheduled.

SoxWin · 07-06-2005, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixto

It didn't work because LaRussa's idea had pitchers going 3 IP whether they were throwing a no-hitter or not, which meant he was forced to either remove a pitcher throwing BBs or mess up his rotation any time he allowed a pitcher to go more than 3 IP. It was simply not thought through very well.

It must have been for everyone but Stottlemyre who threw 209 innings that year, but can you really blame him? His starters weren't throwing bb's that often

Code:

SP  Todd Stottlemyre    30  31   4.55  14   7  0  31   0   2   0  209.7  228  117  106   80  26  205  920  11   6  0   7  95
SP  Steve Ontiveros     34  22   4.37   9   6  0  22   0   2   1  129.7  144   75   63   38  12   77  558   5   4  0   0  99
SP  Ron Darling         34  21   6.23   4   7  0  21   0   1   0  104.0  124   79   72   46  16   69  484   5   4  0   2  70
SP  Dave Stewart        38  16   6.89   3   7  0  16   0   0   0   81.0  101   65   62   39  11   58  381   8   2  1   1  63
SP  Mike Harkey         28  14   6.27   4   6  0  12   1   0   0   66.0   75   46   46   31  12   28  296   2   3  0   0  69

CL  Dennis Eckersley    40  52   4.83   4   6 29   0  48   0   0   50.3   53   29   27   11   5   40  212   0   1  0   0  90
RP *Rick Honeycutt      41  49   2.42   5   1  2   0   6   0   0   44.7   37   13   12    9   5   21  174   0   1  0   0 180
RP  Mark Acre           26  43   5.71   1   2  0   0  10   0   0   52.0   52   35   33   28   7   47  236   2   2  1   2  76
RP  Carlos Reyes        26  40   5.09   4   6  0   1  19   0   0   69.0   71   43   39   28  10   48  306   5   5  0   4  85
RP  Jim Corsi           33  38   2.20   2   4  2   0   7   0   0   45.0   31   14   11   26   2   26  187   0   2  0   1 197

    Todd Van Poppel     23  36   4.88   4   8  0  14  10   1   0  138.3  125   77   75   56  16  122  582   4   4  0   1  89
    Ariel Prieto        25  14   4.97   2   6  0   9   1   1   0   58.0   57   35   32   32   4   37  258   4   5  1   1  87
   *Doug Johns          27  11   4.61   5   3  0   9   1   1   1   54.7   44   32   28   26   5   25  229   5   5  1   1  94
   *Steve Wojciechowski 24  14   5.18   2   3  0   7   3   0   0   48.7   51   28   28   28   7   13  219   0   1  0   1  84
    Don Wengert         25  19   3.34   1   1  0   0  10   0   0   29.7   30   14   11   12   3   16  129   1   1  0   2 130
   *Mike Mohler         26  28   3.04   1   1  1   0   6   0   0   23.7   16    8    8   18   0   15  100   1   0  0   1 143
   *Dave Leiper         33  24   3.57   1   1  0   0   3   0   0   22.7   23   10    9   13   3   10  103   0   1  0   1 122
    John Briscoe        27  16   8.35   0   1  0   0   7   0   0   18.3   25   17   17   21   4   19   99   1   2  0   1  52
    John Wasdin         22   5   4.67   1   1  0   2   3   0   0   17.3   14    9    9    3   4    6   69   0   1  0   0  93
   *Scott Baker         25   1   9.82   0   0  0   0   0   0   0    3.7    5    4    4    5   0    3   22   0   1  0   0  44
   *Chris Eddy          25   6   7.36   0   0  0   0   0   0   0    3.7    7    3    3    2   0    2   22   1   2  0   0  59
    Steve Phoenix       27   1  32.40   0   0  0   0   0   0   0    1.7    3    6    6    3   1    3   11   0   0  0   0  13
    Ramon Fermin        22   1  13.50   0   0  0   0   1   0   0    1.3    4    2    2    1   0    0    9   1   0  0   0  32

Fool Inc. · 07-06-2005, 10:10 PM

Hopefully he'll start tomorrow so the Tigers can reck them (well even more than they should).

Jonzard · 07-06-2005, 10:21 PM

I have seen some discussion about changing the role of the closer on ESPN today. It was brought on by Pinellas new tactic. Using your best reliever in the 9th exclusively is something I would love to see managers do less of.

I am glad Pinella's actions have brought some of these discussions to the forefront.

Slackker · 07-06-2005, 10:48 PM

For the sake of argument lets say it works, and catches on. Would we just reverse the terms for starters and relievers, since their roles would be reversed? Or would we get to come up with some new, catchy titles?!

07-06-2005, 02:32 PM	#1
spleen1015 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 6,006	Pinella goes to the bullpen.... ...to start the game! http://www.sptimes.com/2005/07/06/Ra...o_starti.shtml It would be something if he did this and they rattled off 5 in a row or something!

07-06-2005, 02:36 PM	#2
eriqjaffe Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2003 Location: Under The Christmas Fish Posts: 7,708	When is Lou just going to start carrying a "FIRE ME" sign around with him? __________________

07-06-2005, 02:46 PM	#3
Y0DA55 All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: In the middle of the Yankees/Red Sox Rivalry Posts: 1,771	The team sucks... why not try this? __________________ Do, or do not, there is no try!

07-06-2005, 03:07 PM	#7
CubsLose Minors (Single A) Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: London, England Posts: 87	This idea is mentioned in Moneyball, and I'm sure there is research that shows it can work. Especially in the NL, it allows you to play with a DH if you keep pinch hitting every two innings or so. I tried this in my solo league, Montreal Expos 2000, and Jason Isringhausen and Guillermo Mota both recorded victories __________________ Make Bono History The Boys of Yesteryear - Washington Senators

07-06-2005, 03:44 PM	#10
rem Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: College Park, Md. Posts: 5,024	I think this has been done a few times in the past with little success. __________________ OTBA: Washington Filibusters CLBR: Minnesota Twins 2005 Winner of LL's Pick the Loser Contest! - 15-0

07-06-2005, 03:07 PM	#6
sebastian0622 Banned Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,465	I've thought about this idea before and, in theory, it makes some sense for teams with poor bullpens. Let's say that your team ace is rested and ready to go today and you bullpen is rested as well. Your ace is usually good for 7-8 innings, but sometimes only 6 and sometimes (although rarely) 9. You can: a) Send out your ace for 7 innings then turn it over to the bullpen to hope they hold on. b) Send out your bullpen for 2-3 innings then decide, based on the score at that time, whether to use your ace or not for innings 3+. One way to look at it is that your bullpen is going to have to pitch 2-3 innings anyway the vast majority of games. Shouldn't those innings be at the start so that you can decide which starter to use based on how winnable the game is?

07-06-2005, 03:19 PM	#8
andjbock Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Somerville, MA, USA Bats: Right Throws: Left Posts: 3,637	Pinella has down this before. I believe it was during a Chris Bosio start as punishment for something or other. The A's may have done it once in the past 10 or so years as I recall as well. Go for it Lou, since this probably your last season as a manager.

07-06-2005, 03:26 PM	#9
Davey Eckstein Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Laundry Barn Favorite food: Bran flakes. Posts: 1,283	I picked the Rays to finish in third this year... oops... But this still does seem like a rather odd thing to do. How long will he try this assuming it works the first game? Should be interesting to watch.

07-06-2005, 05:53 PM	#12
Anachronism All Star Reserve Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Great White North Posts: 945	Hasn't Pinella done this "Starter by commitee" tactic before? Or was that LaRussa? __________________ "Ruth did it on Beer and Hotdogs..."

07-06-2005, 07:12 PM	#15
sixto Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,263	It didn't work because LaRussa's idea had pitchers going 3 IP whether they were throwing a no-hitter or not, which meant he was forced to either remove a pitcher throwing BBs or mess up his rotation any time he allowed a pitcher to go more than 3 IP. It was simply not thought through very well.

07-06-2005, 09:24 PM	#16
Green & Gold Heart Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 5,242	All talk so far. Fossum started today's game, as scheduled.

07-06-2005, 10:10 PM	#18
Fool Inc. Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Dearborn Heights, MI Posts: 342	Hopefully he'll start tomorrow so the Tigers can reck them (well even more than they should).

07-06-2005, 10:21 PM	#19
Jonzard Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,647	I have seen some discussion about changing the role of the closer on ESPN today. It was brought on by Pinellas new tactic. Using your best reliever in the 9th exclusively is something I would love to see managers do less of. I am glad Pinella's actions have brought some of these discussions to the forefront. __________________ For a scientist must indeed be freely imaginative and yet skeptical, creative and yet a critic. There is a sense in which he must be free, but another in which his thought must be very precisely regimented; there is poetry in science, but also a lot of bookkeeping. — Sir Peter B. Medawar FTB

07-06-2005, 10:48 PM	#20
Slackker All Star Reserve Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Connecticut Posts: 777	For the sake of argument lets say it works, and catches on. Would we just reverse the terms for starters and relievers, since their roles would be reversed? Or would we get to come up with some new, catchy titles?!