"They gotta pitch deeper into games!"

by SC on Jul 12, 2008 1:16 PM EDT

This is the prevailing thought of Ol' Clench Jaw, the one thing he seems to yammer on about more than all other potential thoughts on why the team has struggled.

I know what you might be thinking. "But, Scott! This team's .500ish play is one of the most surprising things in baseball!"

Yeah, I know, but struggling is struggling. You're either good or you're not. They're struggling to reach .500. They struggle. All the time.

Some folks 'round these parts have started wondering something else. "Well, if the problem is they aren't pitching deeper...then leave them the hell in the game, Dave."

Fair enough. There have been times when it seems he's taken the hook out a little early, and times when it seems he's taken the hook out a little late. But "early" seems to be more the problem. The winds of change -- thanks to the recent losing -- have started to sing a tale of Trembley's over-reliance on the bullpen. Let's take a look at pitch count data for our current starting five and see if we can find a method to Trembley's madness.

(All numbers are grabbed from Yahoo! Sports)

Yaz9eqvl_medium

Pitch Count	ERA	WHIP
1-15	10.67	2.23
16-30	4.41	1.10
31-45	1.50	1.11
46-60	1.27	1.13
61-75	6.19	1.56
76-90	4.64	1.27
91-105	5.14	1.43
106-120	0.00	1.50
IP at 91+ pitches: 17.1
*Total Innings: 124.2*

Wgyejajb_medium

Pitch Count	ERA	WHIP
1-15	9.19	1.15
16-30	7.02	1.68
31-45	2.50	1.28
46-60	2.29	0.81
61-75	0.92	0.97
76-90	1.25	0.92
91-105	3.77	1.26
106-120	0.00	3.30
121-135.0.00	INF
IP at 91+ pitches: 17.2
Total Innings: 129

Pitch Count	ERA	WHIP
1-15	3.86	1.29
16-30	10.13	2.63
31-45	7.71	1.47
46-60	1.80	1.60
61-75	4.82	1.29
76-90	4.15	1.38
91-105	0.00	0.83
106-120	0.00	INF
IP at 91+ pitches: 6
Total Innings: 98.2

Pitch Count	ERA	WHIP
1-15	18.90	2.00
16-30	5.68	1.18
31-45	4.38	1.54
46-60	4.15	1.46
61-75	2.45	1.09
76-90	1.42	2.53
91-105	0.00	2.45
106-120	0.00	1.50
IP at 91+ pitches: 5.1
Total Innings: 73.1

Pitch Count	ERA	WHIP
1-15	21.21	1.71
16-30	6.75	1.13
31-45	1.29	0.86
46-60	7.36	3.55
61-75	3.18	1.06
76-90	2.08	1.15
91-105	0.00	3.43
106-120	0.00	3.00
IP at 91+ pitches: 3
Total Innings: 33.1

Some tidbits about the numbers, and conclusions you can draw, and other than that I leave the numbers up to you to interpret how you wish:

The only guy on the team that doesn't start really, really slowly in the average start is Burres. He makes up for a solid 1-15 with a terrible 16-45, though.
Guthrie might get by without good run support if he didn't stink for 30 pitches.
Olson's good for about 75 pitches, which isn't surprising.
There's not really enough data on Liz (33 IP) to find anything meaningful.

Now I'll say this in defense of Brian Burres: it would seem to me that maybe we should let the dude pitch past 90 pitches a little more. If it results in disaster, big deal. At least we'll find out if he has the arm to go that far. Of course, Kranitz and Co. probably can make a good guess as it is, and maybe they know what they're doing. But he stays strong up to 90 pitches generally. If you're going to have someone like Burres in the rotation, you might as well see if he can also be a workhorse.

If you ask me -- nobody did, I realize -- Trembley's "they gotta pitch deeper into games!" rhetoric is starting to seem like he's picking on the guys in the rotation. Listen, the bullpen is out there for a reason. He's also dealing with two guys (Olson and Liz) that have never been pressed very hard before, and he treats Burres like he's a future All-Star prospect or something.

I mean, it's such an obvious thing to say that I'm starting to wonder if there's any real substance to it. We know what this rotation is -- a good starter (JG), an innings eater who runs a 50/50 chance of being any good that day (DC), a scrap arm (BB), and two kids (GO and RL). The problems this rotation has are in no way surprising or unique.

1 recs | Comment 4 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

SC, I like this article you put up.

I think you already know my feelings on Trembley pulling out starters early, and then complaining about it later. But anyway:

He treats Burres like he’s a future All-Star prospect or something.
That is actually a good thing; I know you didn’t imply otherwise. Even if Burres doesn’t develop into a great pitcher, getting pushed should squeeze him to pitch to the best of his ability.

But what really started to piss me off about Trembley is his total lack of accountability following questionable moves which result in a loss. He’ll blame the starter, he’ll blame the reliever, he’ll blame Kranitz for suggesting that a guy is “done” ... but he’ll never say, “I probably pulled him too early” or “maybe I should have left him in there.” Has anyone else noticed this? Not that I completely blame him for doing it. When you start criticizing yourself, you really start giving people a good reason to fire you… so it’s an understandable defense mechanism. But after a while, it starts to irk me… he makes himself sound like he’s perfect, but surrounded by incompetence. And stop throwing the players under the bus EVERY time they screw up, especially if he had something to do with it.

by Y Not on Jul 12, 2008 4:49 PM EDT 0 recs

what I meant by the Burres comment

was he protects him too much, I think. I’m starting to think he should press him—let him go past 90 sometimes. See what happens!

Dave holding players accountable is great and all, but I do wonder how it’ll affect some of these guys when the “fun” of the season wears off.

"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum

Camden Chat
Bad Left Hook

by SC on Jul 12, 2008 5:00 PM EDT up 0 recs

DD better have an open door

If he can blast people, they better have a way to vent back.

I forget who the business big name was, I just recall the anecdote. He had the reputation of being a hard ass and a yeller. When asked why people continue to work with him he said “they get to yell back”.

by drj on Jul 12, 2008 6:44 PM EDT up 0 recs

What about letting guys pitch?

When you look at guys like Liz and Olson you can make the arguement that they need to go deeper. But, the rest of the staff can’t go deeper if Trembley gives them the hook.

It was actually suggested one O’s broadcast (may have been Palmer) to let guys work out of jams sometimes.

"Have a Good time...all the time." - Viv Savage

by Jergs on Jul 12, 2008 8:37 PM EDT 0 recs