Rob Neyer has a good piece up, discussing the recent success Phil Hughes has had working out of the bullpen. He writes:
With all due respect to all the fine and wondrous relievers out there in Baseball Land, isn’t Hughes yet another nail in their coffin, value-wise? Good relief pitchers are merely failed starters, while great relievers — Billy Wagner and Mariano Rivera come to mind — might simply be good starters who never got a real shot to start. Makes me wonder if instead of bringing good minor league relievers to the majors, teams should instead focus on good minor league starters as bullpen material
I agree 100%. The off-the-charts success of Joba, Hughes and Price in the pen and their struggles as starters shows just how much easier it is to only have to go once through a lineup, if that. And the Yanks have been using pitchers as starters in the minors who they envision as eventually becoming MLB relievers. Phil Coke is a good example of that. The trend of drafting relievers out of College seems to be sputtering of late, with very few making an MLB impact.
I’ve never bought into this “relievers are a different breed” nonsense. Most of that seems to come from the fact that they have bad-ass theme songs and ones like Gossage and Paps try to intimidate people. But Clemens and Pedro were intimidators as well, just without the drama and loud music. At the end of the day it comes down to your stuff, and the ability to throw quality strikes. If you can do that, you will get people out. Whether its the 3rd inning or the 9th. But to be a starter, most will need at least 3 quality pitches. Joba has 4, and that’s why he is and always has been a starting pitcher.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
0 Responses to The 'Relievers are a seperate breed' myth
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
“I’ve never bought into this “relievers are a different breed” nonsense.”
This is so true and, to some degree, false! Most (very good) BP pitchers are good pitchers as starters. There are many reasons why one is in the BP; only two pitches, is better in the BP, not strong/big enough to go 7 innings etc. Yes, Phil Coke is a perfect example of having better stuff as a BP pitcher then a starter.
Not all good pitchers can be good BP pitchers. It’s not because of being a “different breed”, it’s more like…having a efferent mind SET…some can do it and many can’t.
I disagree any pitcher who can start in today’s major league baseball can also relieve, now maybe they can’t be an elite closer but they can be a great 7th or 8th inning guy. Relievers can’t necessarily be starters but all starters can be relievers, look at Wang when he came back from the DL he is exactly the opposite of an ideal reliever slow to warm up lack of major heater and little strike out ability but even he pitched well out of the pen it’s just easier.
Second Old Ranger, it’s not that relievers are a different breed, it’s that some pitchers have stuff that translates better to the pen. Someone with one dominant pitch, ala Robertson, Edwar when it’s working, and of course Mariano can be very effective. He can dial that in for a K when he inherits runners. A fastball pitcher can rear back and throw top speed for an inning or two. But while a groundball pitcher such as Wang or Pettitte can be effective out of the pen he is unlikely to be dominant because his forte is economical innings. Inherited runners are more likely to be a problem for someone who doesn’t have that strikeout pitch.
If pitching out of the bullpen was so easy, our bullpens wouldn’t have been our Achilles Heel for the better part of this decade. Teams with decent, deep starting rotations wouldn’t struggle to find seventh and eighth inning guys. Yes it’s easier to be a dominant reliever than a dominant starter. Yes most marginal starters would have a better shot at success in the bullpen. But it’s not as cut and dry as people make it out to be.