Rays the first team to try an idea I have had.....

[Myles]

2 games in a row, they started a "closer". Romo pitched well in both opportunities.
I have been preaching doing this for years. It makes sense. The biggest argument against it is that the starting pitcher won't be able to go for a no hitter. Who cares?

 

[Fountain City Blues]

I am totally fine with this. Takes advantage of the fact the only inning with a 100 % known trio of hitters (save for PH'ers which ok...) is the 1st inning. Have two badass LHB's? Guess what, you're seeing the LHP of death in the first. Well, at least in a good bullpen anyways

 

[Myles]

I didn't mean for this to come off as me being cocky. I am saying that this is a good thing to try. The first 4 hitters are usually very good. Having a closer taking care of them and then putting in the starter seems to make sense.

 

[Chewbaccer]

I wish pitching would revert back to the days of the early 1900s where pitchers were throwing 350+ innings, bullpens weren't used much and nobody cried about pitch counts.

 

[Chewbaccer]

I didn't mean for this to come off as me being cocky. I am saying that this is a good thing to try. The first 4 hitters are usually very good. Having a closer taking care of them and then putting in the starter seems to make sense.

You'd better have two closers then, because that 27th out is the hardest to get and not everyone can handle it.

 

[Myles]

You'd better have two closers then, because that 27th out is the hardest to get and not everyone can handle it.

i agree. I think most teams have at least 2 "closers".

 

[Chewbaccer]

i agree. I think most teams have at least 2 "closers".

Braves don't even have one I trust as far as I can throw.

Dan Winkler looks like he has closer potential, but they haven't tried him yet, and you never can tell until you put them out there.

Shane Carle has potential too, but he's far too valuable at cleaning up other pitchers' messes. He's the best I've seen at working out of a jam he didn't create.

 

[Win TWINS!!!]

I didn't mean for this to come off as me being cocky. I am saying that this is a good thing to try. The first 4 hitters are usually very good. Having a closer taking care of them and then putting in the starter seems to make sense.

 

[Tapey]

Braves don't even have one I trust as far as I can throw.

Dan Winkler looks like he has closer potential, but they haven't tried him yet, and you never can tell until you put them out there.

Shane Carle has potential too, but he's far too valuable at cleaning up other pitchers' messes. He's the best I've seen at working out of a jam he didn't create.

Shit, the Mariners only have 2 pitchers all together, that i feel fine when they are in the game

 

[DragonfromTO]

They didn't use a "closer" though, they used a back end bullpen piece with bad platoon splits. That was a big part of what they did and why they did it.

 

[DragonfromTO]

I didn't mean for this to come off as me being cocky. I am saying that this is a good thing to try. The first 4 hitters are usually very good. Having a closer taking care of them and then putting in the starter seems to make sense.

If you want to feel humbled just talk to anyone who plays in a Sim league . This is actually kind of an "old trick" in that realm, where there are no human beings throwing the pitches to object to their usage.

 

[huskers1217]

You'd better have two closers then, because that 27th out is the hardest to get and not everyone can handle it.

9 innings. Might as well have 9 closers

1st - John smoltz
2nd - lee smith

Fill in a few more

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

What is the advantage gained here?

 

[DragonfromTO]

What is the advantage gained here?

The Rays were probably looking at two potential advantages. The first is that Romo gets to face all (good) RHBs with his platoon advantage in the 1st inning rather than dealing with what happens with situations and handedness if you bring him in later.

In addition, if the "real starter" (I think it was Yarborough here?) is going to pitch for a typical starter term he would seem to have it easier as well. Starting the 1st inning and going 2 and a half times through the lineup means that he faces the top of the order 3 times and the bottom of the order twice. This way he ends up facing the bottom of the order 3 times and the top of the order twice instead, so when he's tired he's focusing on getting Maldonado out rather than on getting Trout out.

 

[The Q]

I really like this idea for say a winner take all scenario.

1st inning is one of the highest scoring innings in baseball and the only time you can know and control who your pitchers will face.

Letting Romo kill some RHBs when you know they're up and in one of the more higher scoring time frames can be a huge advantage.

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

The Rays were probably looking at two potential advantages. The first is that Romo gets to face all (good) RHBs with his platoon advantage in the 1st inning rather than dealing with what happens with situations and handedness if you bring him in later.

In addition, if the "real starter" (I think it was Yarborough here?) is going to pitch for a typical starter term he would seem to have it easier as well. Starting the 1st inning and going 2 and a half times through the lineup means that he faces the top of the order 3 times and the bottom of the order twice. This way he ends up facing the bottom of the order 3 times and the top of the order twice instead, so when he's tired he's focusing on getting Maldonado out rather than on getting Trout out.

Got it, analytics does say that offensive numbers drastically improve the 3rd time through the order vs the same pitcher, that seems like the main train of thought

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

I really like this idea for say a winner take all scenario.

1st inning is one of the highest scoring innings in baseball and the only time you can know and control who your pitchers will face.

Letting Romo kill some RHBs when you know they're up and in one of the more higher scoring time frames can be a huge advantage.

I like it in the postseason, I remember back in the day we would joke around about starting Mariano Rivera in elimination games, and just let him throw until his arm falls off....Never knowing that something similiar may become a reality

 

[DragonfromTO]

I really like this idea for say a winner take all scenario.

1st inning is one of the highest scoring innings in baseball and the only time you can know and control who your pitchers will face.

Letting Romo kill some RHBs when you know they're up and in one of the more higher scoring time frames can be a huge advantage.

Like I hinted at earlier, part of the problem is that in real life you have to get the pitchers on board with it. Hell, it's probably hard enough just getting a manager who's game let alone a pitching staff.

 

[Pure Steel]

They should do it like little league....Everyone gets to pitch an inning.....

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

You'd better have two closers then, because that 27th out is the hardest to get and not everyone can handle it.

That's my only question: who's closing the ninth? Or, are we now hoping that the starter will go 8 innings? (Doubtful, the way managers use bullpens these days)

Also, most starters might not likely having their routine messed with.