Gameday Thread: Angels @ Tigers 5/9/2019 ( Fletcher LF) 2K Version

[totdprods]

7 minutes ago, floplag said:

of course, but if hes facing lesser competition in the bottom of the lineup versus the top the numbers are a bit artificial i would think.  
It is what it is and so far its worked so... go with it i guess 

Artificial isn’t the right word though - it’s accurate - and as said, that’s the point. 

His numbers *should* be better overall *because* he’s facing lesser competition. And it’s proving itself true - in a limited sample. 

What’s supposed to happen by deploying the opener is happening. 

Kudos to the Rays for recognizing this idea and implementing it. It worked for them and the more I think about it the more it makes sense, and it even becomes sort of a “why didn’t anyone ever think of this before?” situation because it makes so much sense, and the answer had simply been because 1) no one had done it and 2) traditionalism/purism.

I gotta see it in action more - it’s easy to like it know as its ‘worked’ so far - but I gotta say that it’s growing on me, especially for Pena. 

[Docwaukee]

1 minute ago, floplag said:

of course, but if hes facing lesser competition in the bottom of the lineup versus the top the numbers are a bit artificial i would think.  
It is what it is and so far its worked so... go with it i guess 

it's not so much artificial is it is optimized.  

as to your other comment, you are never going to use an opener for a guy who can go a full 9 innings so you're always going to use multiple pitchers.  However, there is typically only one guy who faces the lineup more than once which is shown to substantially decrease effectiveness with more exposure.  

for 2019:

1st time through - 3.30 era
2nd time through - 4.76 era
3rd time through - 5.38 era

If you're gonna face a part of the lineup the third time through, better it be 5-9 than 1-4.  

[Docwaukee]

the only thing I don't like about the opener is that most of the time you are guaranteeing that one of your good or even mediocre relievers is matching up to the other teams' top hitters.  You can mix and match that a little better in the later innings but it's likely still better than a guy facing those top hitters for a 3rd time.  

Today, Pena was able to get though 1 and 2 in their lineup for the 3rd time because he has a 10 run lead.  But if the game was close at that point, you'd have seen Buttrey in the 8th.  

[totdprods]

10 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

the only thing I don't like about the opener is that most of the time you are guaranteeing that one of your good or even mediocre relievers is matching up to the other teams' top hitters.  You can mix and match that a little better in the later innings but it's likely still better than a guy facing those top hitters for a 3rd time.  

Today, Pena was able to get though 1 and 2 in their lineup for the 3rd time because he has a 10 run lead.  But if the game was close at that point, you'd have seen Buttrey in the 8th.  

Yeah you need to have great pen depth and a decently rested pen at that for it to be effective over a full year. Thankfully, we have just enough guys to make it work for now, and enough guys with options to keep a good rotation. I really like out pitching staff as constructed and if Cahill and Harvey weren’t so awful, and Skaggs and Heaney were healthy, I think we’d see far better results across the staff as a whole. They’ve really caused the team to tread thin ice as a whole all season. Hopefully that starts to stabilize now with Skaggs and Heaney back or almost back, and Canning now a presence. Harvey and Cahill can’t stay this bad this much longer or they will play themselves off the team. Allen’s inability to even be an average reliever as well.

I love Bedrosian in the opener role, and originally Bard as well, but he’s starting to impress enough he may be needed for more high-lev situations soon.

Edited May 9, 2019 by totdprods

[Docwaukee]

4 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Yeah you need to have great pen depth and a decently rested pen at that for it to be effective over a full year. Thankfully, we have just enough guys to make it work for now, and enough guys with options to keep a good rotation. I really like out pitching staff as constructed and if Cahill and Harvey weren’t so awful, and Skaggs and Heaney were healthy, I think we’d see far better results across the staff as a whole. They’ve really caused the team to tread thin ice as a whole all season. Hopefully that starts to stabilize now with Skaggs and Heaney back or almost back, and Canning now a presence. Harvey and Cahill can’t stay this bad this much longer or they will play themselves off the team. Allen’s inability to even be an average reliever as well.

I love Bedrosian in the opener role, and originally Bard as well, but he’s starting to impress enough he may be needed for more high-lev situations soon.

that's why I was so concerned about our rotation this year and why I am more hopeful for next year.  I think people forget that the team was 23-14 last year through May 10th because Ohtani and Richards were in the rotation and pitching very well.  They both went out at virtually the same time and we were 11 games under .500 for the rest of the year.  We have a better offense and bullpen this year and the top performers in those categories will all be back next year if we want them to.  Drop Ohtani and another very good starter into the top of the rotation and that's a very good team.  Plus you've got other reinforcements as well that weren't there last year like Canning, possibly Suarez and some position player depth to potentially provide upside at 1b/3b and corner OF.  

Even if Cahill and Harvey are mediocre the rest of the way, we've actually got a shot at the 2nd WC although I could totally see CLE and BOS taking off and Tampa and the Yanks are legit.  MIN is gonna fall back some here soon.  They're getting some pretty smokey performances from their pen and no chance that Martin Perez and Jake Odorizzi continue their pace.  Their offense is pretty damn good though 

[floplag]

1 hour ago, totdprods said:

Artificial isn’t the right word though - it’s accurate - and as said, that’s the point. 

His numbers *should* be better overall *because* he’s facing lesser competition. And it’s proving itself true - in a limited sample. 

What’s supposed to happen by deploying the opener is happening. 

Kudos to the Rays for recognizing this idea and implementing it. It worked for them and the more I think about it the more it makes sense, and it even becomes sort of a “why didn’t anyone ever think of this before?” situation because it makes so much sense, and the answer had simply been because 1) no one had done it and 2) traditionalism/purism.

I gotta see it in action more - it’s easy to like it know as its ‘worked’ so far - but I gotta say that it’s growing on me, especially for Pena. 

It is perhaps not the best choice of words, i agree, its just the first one that came to mind.

[floplag]

1 hour ago, Dochalo said:

it's not so much artificial is it is optimized.  

as to your other comment, you are never going to use an opener for a guy who can go a full 9 innings so you're always going to use multiple pitchers.  However, there is typically only one guy who faces the lineup more than once which is shown to substantially decrease effectiveness with more exposure.  

for 2019:

1st time through - 3.30 era
2nd time through - 4.76 era
3rd time through - 5.38 era

If you're gonna face a part of the lineup the third time through, better it be 5-9 than 1-4.  

yes optimized is a better choice of word.  
I guess i thought artificial as it isnt really a fair comparison to those who face those guys without the benefit of it.

[krAbs]

1 hour ago, floplag said:

of course, but if hes facing lesser competition in the bottom of the lineup versus the top the numbers are a bit artificial i would think.  
It is what it is and so far its worked so... go with it i guess 

For SURE his stats will be artificially inflated by this. The question is what factor is greater: his artificial inflation, or the relievers artificial deflation (for facing better hitters more often). The choice being made is that you are better off with your most effective pitchers facing the most effective opposition and your less effective pitchers facing less effective opposition, rather than having your less effective pitchers facing more effective opposition, and more effective pitchers facing less effective pitching. To be frank, I have no idea if this is better or worse. But, I imagine that's kind of the calculation they are making.