About Skipping Starts -- A Modest Proposal

by Al on May 6, 2008 1:36 PM CDT

Recently, Lou has skipped starts by Rich Hill, and now, he's apparently going to bypass Jason Marquis' next turn, both because Marquis has been shaky, AND to get the three top starters (Ted Lilly, Carlos Zambrano, Ryan Dempster) to face the Diamondbacks this weekend.

In tandem with this was today's announcement that they are contemplating an extra reliever, to make 13 pitchers.

These two things are not only contradictory, they are backward. If you are skipping starts by starters, why do you need extra bullpen bodies?

In fact, take this a step further. If you are continually skipping your fifth starter, why not just have four starters -- in the Cubs' case right now, Z, Lilly, Dempster and Jon Lieber -- and then you could slot the "fifth" guy in when you need to, using off days to minimize the number of starts he'd make. In other words, start the first four guys every fifth day, and when you need to, put that fifth guy in.

If you assume that you'd want your first four starters to get 35 starts each -- probably the maximum anyone gets now with a 5-man rotation -- then they would combine for 140 starts. That leaves 22 for the fifth guy, probably about right. And the benefit is, you have that fifth guy as a long reliever the rest of the time, which means that not only do you not need thirteen pitchers, but you probably don't even need twelve. This could help reduce the staff to 11, and give you an extra bench player.

I now hereby apologize for this post. It makes way too much sense. Sorry.

1 recs | Comment 25 comments | Add your comment

Read Related

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

It allows

For you to not use the same 5th starter as well. If Marquis were to suck one week, you could spot start Gallagher, Hill, Marshall, etc instead. Your’e right Al…this makes great sense.

The only sense in keeping the same 5th starter is if you’re going to have the same set rotation, which the Cubs obviously don’t.

by walsh2317 on May 6, 2008 1:40 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

Exactly.

This way you can have two or three “long relievers” or spot starters. The “fifth” guy gets 22 starts, but you’re right, it wouldn’t have to be ONE guy getting all 22.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on May 6, 2008 1:50 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Being able to choose between a LHP and RHP

for 5th starter work is also nice give the splits of teams like the Cardinals and Brewers. Slot Marquis in against the Brew Crew and Marshall in against the Cards.

by DGU on May 7, 2008 7:40 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Schedule Meeting

Al- Please get on Lou’s calendar and get this proposal in front of him IMMEDIATELY! Marquis has been vocal about not going to the bullpen and I think this is the best way to “keep” him in the starting rotation.

Way back... outta here!!!

by Chubby Hugs on May 6, 2008 1:45 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

Or.....

Just have your relievers conditioned to go 2-3 innings instead of that ironclad “one inning per reliever” rule, and you can easily get by with a pitching staff of 11.

by perseman on May 6, 2008 1:46 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

Off days

The next off days are May 8th, May 22 (or they’re playing Indian Jones according to the cubs.com schedule) and June 9th. So for the next few weeks, they will have to use that 5th starter. If that 5 start rotates between Leiber, Gallagher, Marshall and Marquis, how much availability would they have before and after the start. Would it really make another guy available in the pen during long stretches like this?

"There are no curses here...Games are won and lost on the baseball field" - Lou Piniella

by El Borto on May 6, 2008 1:56 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

Not during a stretch like this, it wouldn't.

Remember, I said the 5th guy would make 22 starts—about 2/3 of what the first four make.

But with off days and the All-Star break, not to mention the off days we have already had, they COULD have had this going from March 31 till now, when that “fifth” guy might have made two or three starts instead of six or seven.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on May 6, 2008 2:05 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

Indiana Jones

That’s pretty funny.

Go Cubbies!

by NC Cubs Fan on May 6, 2008 2:44 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

He wasn't kidding.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on May 6, 2008 3:18 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

That's got to be some sort of inside joke

at least I hope so

by Emelie on May 7, 2008 4:15 AM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

I agree with what you're saying, no doubt about it.

I think Lou has NO faith in the pen, beyond Marmol. Wood is a crap shoot, Wuertz, and Howry have been mediocre, Gallagher and Marshall are just getting started.

Lou wants that extra reliever because of this.

I don’t agree with it. But I think that’s what he’s doing.

2008: The year we put it all together.

by drewishdrewid on May 6, 2008 2:21 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

Didn't the Mets

do this in ‘06 with Martinez? He started 20-25 games to keep him rested and injury free. And they came very close to being in the WS. Now if only Marquis could pitch like Pedro.

"The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball"

by Bump Bailey on May 6, 2008 2:25 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

Schedule a follow-up interview with Crane Kenney.

Or ask Bruce Miles to slip a note into Lou’s pocket during a pregame interview.

Nanika Ga Okoru!

Oh, and remember, folks: Alfonso Soriano is NOT batting leadoff. He's batting first.

by dat cubfan daver on May 6, 2008 2:33 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

Since Crane doesn't make out the rotation...

... maybe your second suggestion would work better.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on May 6, 2008 2:36 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

heyyyyyyy i said we should do this in a post earlier today. So I definitely agree.

Would starters vote against a 4-man rotation? It seems they might like it, since it would mean a more impressive W-L total and eventually bigger contract. It’s only a matter of time before someone brings it back (for more than a few weeks), I would have to think.

by Canseco's Roid Party on May 6, 2008 4:16 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

Yes and no.

For the first four starters I’m suggesting they get the same # of starts they get now. Only the fifth guy would “lose out”.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on May 6, 2008 4:23 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

fatigue?

I don’t remember the Cubs doing this very often in previous years, until September that is. Do you anticipate the guys who pitch every 5th day (zambrano, lilly, dempster) will have fatigue issues from this later on?

by neifi on May 6, 2008 5:02 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

No matter how the rotation works

I believe Marquis is on a pretty short leash right now. If Hill was pitching well Marquis very easily could have been moved to the pen and Lieber moved into the rotation. With the Cubs skipping Marquis start or pushing it back a few days, he’s probably a bad start or two away from losing his rotation spot. Lou wants to give Marshall a shot in the rotation, because he has been impressed with his stuff so far this year. Plus he likes having two lefties in the rotation. Whatever happens lets just hope Hill gets back in the rotation soon, and Lieber stays in the rotation over Marquis.(how it should have been in the first place)

by cubsfan25 on May 6, 2008 5:08 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

I think it is a BAD idea

I became seriously rotation obsessed when Maddux came back in 04. You will run your starters into the ground. They need that extra day off here and there. I have been very vocal in my belief that Lou killed Hill and whatever is left of Marquis will be killed too. So what happens when Lieber or Gallager turn in a shacky start ? Off with their heads ? You need to have some faith in pitchers. Marquis and Hill do not react well to this tactic so you are just about assuring they will never be effective starter. If Soriano can start 20 games at lead off desptite sucking AT EVERYTHING IN NEARLY ALL OF THEM , Hill should have been given a little support. Cubs have some luxury with Lieber, Gallager and Marshall ( if he still exists) to fall back on. One of the biggest downsides is the that having a guy start after 9 days or more REALLY throws them off , it does NOT make them better or even useful. There is a reason all the teams do it this way.
How bout we just get SORIANO out of lead off and the better run production will help the
pitchers ?

by Doggie Stalker on May 6, 2008 5:33 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs

A shacky start.

I’d love to see that.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on May 6, 2008 5:45 PM CDT up reply reply 0 recs

I agree in general....

...that 11 is better use of the roster. For this team right now I make an exception because the bullpen is going to be burned out by the all-star break at this rate, so I can see getting another reliever up there but you have to use that person. Don’t bring a guy up to sit in the pen and warm up. The leveraged formula could help get more relievers involved and give rest to the needy.

But overall I agree with you in terms of having the 4 man rotation and and an extra bench player.

by DudeVf11 on May 6, 2008 9:32 PM CDT reply reply 0 recs