SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Multiple long relief pitchers in the 2022 bullpen idea
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 19, 2021 13:15:30 GMT -5
In terms of the specific 2022 pitching staff laid out by @nny, I think we're going to see more FAs brought in (new iterations of the Andriese gambit) to compete for spots in the bullpen, not to mention guys that are already here like Claudio, Hartlieb, Bazardo, Schreiber, Rios, Ort. Also, what I would really like to see is Pivetta becoming the new Papelbon. The Canadian kid is clearly an adrenaline junkie and I think a ceiling as an impact closer would be more valuable than as a 4/5 starter. As shown above, you've got who as your closer? Barnes again? I don't think that's going to be the plan by the time pitchers and catchers report. Maybe they sign a Jansen but I'm skeptical Chaim pays top-market when he might have a closer on his staff in Pivetta who still has three years of control. So just FYI, Claudio was released on September 20 and Rios will be a MLFA. Doesn't change your point, but again, FYI.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,966
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 19, 2021 17:11:47 GMT -5
In terms of the specific 2022 pitching staff laid out by @nny, I think we're going to see more FAs brought in (new iterations of the Andriese gambit) to compete for spots in the bullpen, not to mention guys that are already here like Claudio, Hartlieb, Bazardo, Schreiber, Rios, Ort. Also, what I would really like to see is Pivetta becoming the new Papelbon. The Canadian kid is clearly an adrenaline junkie and I think a ceiling as an impact closer would be more valuable than as a 4/5 starter. As shown above, you've got who as your closer? Barnes again? I don't think that's going to be the plan by the time pitchers and catchers report. Maybe they sign a Jansen but I'm skeptical Chaim pays top-market when he might have a closer on his staff in Pivetta who still has three years of control. Papelbon was a great closer, but in terms of fWAR only two of his six seasons as Bosox closer were more valuable than Pivetta's so-so 2021 as a fourth-fifth starter, which they give 2.2 fWar. Starters are really valuable.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Oct 19, 2021 17:27:48 GMT -5
In terms of the specific 2022 pitching staff laid out by @nny, I think we're going to see more FAs brought in (new iterations of the Andriese gambit) to compete for spots in the bullpen, not to mention guys that are already here like Claudio, Hartlieb, Bazardo, Schreiber, Rios, Ort. Also, what I would really like to see is Pivetta becoming the new Papelbon. The Canadian kid is clearly an adrenaline junkie and I think a ceiling as an impact closer would be more valuable than as a 4/5 starter. As shown above, you've got who as your closer? Barnes again? I don't think that's going to be the plan by the time pitchers and catchers report. Maybe they sign a Jansen but I'm skeptical Chaim pays top-market when he might have a closer on his staff in Pivetta who still has three years of control. Papelbon was a great closer, but in terms of fWAR only two of his six seasons as Bosox closer were more valuable than Pivetta's so-so 2021 as a fourth-fifth starter, which they give 2.2 fWar. Starters are really valuable. And in the future starters that can actually go thru the lineup 3 times successfully and average 200+ innings will be even more valuable as they become rare birds. Someone like a Verlander.
|
|
|
Post by agastonguay13 on Oct 20, 2021 23:38:20 GMT -5
I hate to say that I think this sort of idea is the way baseball is going in general. It makes sense in the current meta of the game where you have guys so often who are dominant and have next to nothing left to prove at AAA, yet can't seem to get their feet under them when called up to the major league level. We've seen it for a while on the offensive side with platoons and the like, but it's getting to the point where using a pitcher who's started his entire career out of the bullpen for 3-4 innings in a piggyback-type role with a starter who is only effective 1-2 times through the order will 1) keep you in more games by taking the starter out with no worries after 2-3 innings, 2) save the actual relievers for their "traditional" innings, and 3) allow the younger pitchers a place on the roster where they can actually work on adjusting to that next level and find their way into the rotation.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 13,965
|
Post by cdj on Oct 25, 2021 8:42:35 GMT -5
Mata is throwing. I wonder if he could be a good fit in this role. Could be ideal for him. Maybe minimize the injury risk a little too
|
|
|
Post by agastonguay13 on Oct 25, 2021 10:48:38 GMT -5
Mata is throwing. I wonder if he could be a good fit in this role. Could be ideal for him. Maybe minimize the injury risk a little too I mean, that was the exact Whitlock model. Like I said above, too, allowing young starters a defined role, such as long relief, also offers them time to acclimate to the level
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 27, 2022 8:22:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Mar 31, 2022 23:58:14 GMT -5
Starter | IP
| Reliever 1
| IP | Reliever 2
| IP
| Eovaldi | 6 | Whitlock | 2 | Barnes | 1 | Pivetta | 6 | Holland | 1-2 |
|
| Houck | 5 | Strahm | 1 |
|
| Hill | 5 | Whitlock | 3 | Barnes | 1 | Wacha | 5 | Holland | 1-2
| Strahm | 1 | Sub-totals
| 27
|
| 9 |
| 3
|
Spitballing here about what the Sox innings load is going to look like.
One turn through the rotation is five games times nine innings, totaling 45 innings.
The guys in the table are the guys who are the starters plus the guys who have looked the best so far to me. (Southpaws in italics.)
I have Whitlock piggy-backing with Hill and then throwing another couple innings between Hill's starts, for ~5 IP/turn for Whitlock, not unlike a sixth starter. Holland only debuted today but he did pretty well; maybe a week will be enough for him. Strahm and Barnes have been okay too.
There are nine guys in the table accounting for 39 of the 45 IP needed for one turn through the rotation. Starting the year, there are likely to be 15 pitchers on the staff (according to AC, IIRC), which will drop to 13 at some point. That means that in this projection, the remaining 6 IP would need to come from a combination of Davis, Valdez, Brasier, Sawamura, Darwinzon, Diekman, Bazardo, and Garza -- six of whom will likely be on the roster to break camp and then the best four will remain when roster settle at 26, with others moving on or off the roster based on performance or injuries.
The table reflects what I would think would be mid-season workloads, when the rosters are at 26. When the rosters are expanded at the beginning of the season, the starters' workloads may well be truncated, so the six pitchers not in the table might need to account for 8-10 IP, whereas in mid-season it might be four guys combining for 6 IP. Also, there may well be turns when Barnes and/or Strahm pitch more than twice but twice seems like a good average. [N.B. Pitching twice every five games would work out to 64 appearances in a season.]
Writing it out like this makes me worry a little less about the staff heading into the season. A lot of relievers have struggled but in the end, they're not likely to account for a lot of innings, if these numbers hold up. Obviously, Barnes is going to have to be the Barnes who got paid last year, rather than the Barnes who didn't earn that new paycheck. At least three or four of the other (dozen or so) relievers need to be solid, as well. Starter depth (in the event of injury) looks like it is going to be Whitlock (moving into a full-time role) and Crawford early, with Winckowski and Seabold behind them and Sale and maybe Paxton available later. Groome, Bello, Ward, Mata in late summer?
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Apr 1, 2022 7:01:13 GMT -5
Starter | IP
| Reliever 1
| IP | Reliever 2
| IP
| Eovaldi | 6 | Whitlock | 2 | Barnes | 1 | Pivetta | 6 | Holland | 1-2 |
|
| Houck | 5 | Strahm | 1 |
|
| Hill | 5 | Whitlock | 3 | Barnes | 1 | Wacha | 5 | Holland | 1-2
| Strahm | 1 | Sub-totals
| 27
|
| 9 |
| 3
|
Spitballing here about what the Sox innings load is going to look like.
One turn through the rotation is five games times nine innings, totaling 45 innings.
The guys in the table are the guys who are the starters plus the guys who have looked the best so far to me. (Southpaws in italics.)
I have Whitlock piggy-backing with Hill and then throwing another couple innings between Hill's starts, for ~5 IP/turn for Whitlock, not unlike a sixth starter. Holland only debuted today but he did pretty well; maybe a week will be enough for him. Strahm and Barnes have been okay too.
There are nine guys in the table accounting for 39 of the 45 IP needed for one turn through the rotation. Starting the year, there are likely to be 15 pitchers on the staff (according to AC, IIRC), which will drop to 13 at some point. That means that in this projection, the remaining 6 IP would need to come from a combination of Davis, Valdez, Brasier, Sawamura, Darwinzon, Diekman, Bazardo, and Garza -- six of whom will likely be on the roster to break camp and then the best four will remain when roster settle at 26, with others moving on or off the roster based on performance or injuries.
The table reflects what I would think would be mid-season workloads, when the rosters are at 26. When the rosters are expanded at the beginning of the season, the starters' workloads may well be truncated, so the six pitchers not in the table might need to account for 8-10 IP, whereas in mid-season it might be four guys combining for 6 IP. Also, there may well be turns when Barnes and/or Strahm pitch more than twice but twice seems like a good average. [N.B. Pitching twice every five games would work out to 64 appearances in a season.]
Writing it out like this makes me worry a little less about the staff heading into the season. A lot of relievers have struggled but in the end, they're not likely to account for a lot of innings, if these numbers hold up. Obviously, Barnes is going to have to be the Barnes who got paid last year, rather than the Barnes who didn't earn that new paycheck. At least three or four of the other (dozen or so) relievers need to be solid, as well. Starter depth (in the event of injury) looks like it is going to be Whitlock (moving into a full-time role) and Crawford early, with Winckowski and Seabold behind them and Sale and maybe Paxton available later. Groome, Bello, Ward, Mata in late summer?
I like the effort and the thoughts on how it could go this year, thanks and it is close to how I see it going. You mention "worry less", I am not worried at all and think the team era will be in the 3.8 region. Just want to point out that the average start last season averaged 4 2/3 innings so backing off the actual starters just a little bit might be closer, as strange as that sounds. One more thing in looking at how TBays staffs have been managed and how it relates to the Sox. Just like the Sox they have a deep group between AAA and MLB and they aren't afraid to use them in those 2,3 inning roles. I think we will see a lot of guys that rotate thru the staff and if they aren't getting it done they won't get a long look unless they are producing, unless they are part of the core with higher expectations. Last thought is that if they can have a healthy dominant Chris Sale in the 2nd half and playoffs then the sky is the limit, he is the key along with health.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Apr 1, 2022 12:40:29 GMT -5
Starter | IP
| Reliever 1
| IP | Reliever 2
| IP
| Eovaldi | 6 | Whitlock | 2 | Barnes | 1 | Pivetta | 6 | Holland | 1-2 |
|
| Houck | 5 | Strahm | 1 |
|
| Hill | 5 | Whitlock | 3 | Barnes | 1 | Wacha | 5 | Holland | 1-2
| Strahm | 1 | Sub-totals
| 27
|
| 9 |
| 3
|
Spitballing here about what the Sox innings load is going to look like.
One turn through the rotation is five games...
Writing it out like this makes me worry a little less about the staff heading into the season. A lot of relievers have struggled but in the end, they're not likely to account for a lot of innings, if these numbers hold up. Obviously, Barnes is going to have to be the Barnes who got paid last year, rather than the Barnes who didn't earn that new paycheck. At least three or four of the other (dozen or so) relievers need to be solid, as well. Starter depth (in the event of injury) looks like it is going to be Whitlock (moving into a full-time role) and Crawford early, with Winckowski and Seabold behind them and Sale and maybe Paxton available later. Groome, Bello, Ward, Mata in late summer?
I like the effort and the thoughts on how it could go this year, thanks and it is close to how I see it going. You mention "worry less", I am not worried at all and think the team era will be in the 3.8 region. Just want to point out that the average start last season averaged 4 2/3 innings so backing off the actual starters just a little bit might be closer, as strange as that sounds. One more thing in looking at how TBays staffs have been managed and how it relates to the Sox. Just like the Sox they have a deep group between AAA and MLB and they aren't afraid to use them in those 2,3 inning roles. I think we will see a lot of guys that rotate thru the staff and if they aren't getting it done they won't get a long look unless they are producing, unless they are part of the core with higher expectations. Last thought is that if they can have a healthy dominant Chris Sale in the 2nd half and playoffs then the sky is the limit, he is the key along with health. Glad you liked it. I hesitated to pencil Eovaldi and Pivetta in for 6 IP per start but I didn't want to get into too many fractions and just wanted to get something on paper. At the same time, last year was odd due to coming off the short covid year, so I think we'll see average IP for starters begin to go back up, after they recover from the abbreviated spring.
I guess I'm not really that worried but I'm probably haunted a bit by manfred 's pessimistic posts.
But seriously folks, I really hope that the Sox pitching staff doesn't go full Rays with a million guys in 2-3 inning roles. It's just not sustainable (something that Rich Hill talked about at length with Bradfo the other day). They had an insane number of pitchers on the IL last season and have already lost some guys this spring. They have been able to cover for it by having remarkable depth (thanks to outstanding scouting and development) but they had three rookie starters in the ALDS -- how did that work out?
I agree with Rich that at the end of the proverbial day (don't ask me which Proverb), you need starters to eat enough innings to keep from overtaxing the bullpen. As he points out, the Andrew Miller revolution was mostly in the playoffs; you can't do that to guys all season long. Not only that, Miller was a unicorn, so just trying to copy that is a fool's errand (like when KC won the World Series and suddenly the copycats -- hi, Cashman -- had to have three closers on their staff... that reminds me, Cashman was also the guy who paid Miller then immediately traded him to CLE for a bunch of bust prospects, LOL... but yeah, the reason they haven't won in 13 years is HOU cheated ...and the MFYs never did! I digress...).
I love the pitching depth that Chaim has built, especially in the bullpen, but I'm not sure he's planning on a lot of these guys going multiple innings on a regular basis. I would like to think that it's more about having not only numbers (to cover for inevitable injuries) but the ability to match specific arms vs. specific opponents. Guys with starting experience, like Holland, make sense in multiple inning stints and maybe that's something Crawford or Seabold (or, gulp, Houck) might transition to if they aren't effective starters but you can't do it with everybody like the Rays seem to do. The piggybacking role that I penciled Whitlock in for above is a controlled take on that.
Strong agree on Sale (like last year) and I love that Chaim doubled his chances of getting that kind of "mid-season acquisition" with Paxton.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Apr 1, 2022 12:58:32 GMT -5
I like the effort and the thoughts on how it could go this year, thanks and it is close to how I see it going. You mention "worry less", I am not worried at all and think the team era will be in the 3.8 region. Just want to point out that the average start last season averaged 4 2/3 innings so backing off the actual starters just a little bit might be closer, as strange as that sounds. One more thing in looking at how TBays staffs have been managed and how it relates to the Sox. Just like the Sox they have a deep group between AAA and MLB and they aren't afraid to use them in those 2,3 inning roles. I think we will see a lot of guys that rotate thru the staff and if they aren't getting it done they won't get a long look unless they are producing, unless they are part of the core with higher expectations. Last thought is that if they can have a healthy dominant Chris Sale in the 2nd half and playoffs then the sky is the limit, he is the key along with health. Glad you liked it. I hesitated to pencil Eovaldi and Pivetta in for 6 IP per start but I didn't want to get into too many fractions and just wanted to get something on paper. At the same time, last year was odd due to coming off the short covid year, so I think we'll see average IP for starters begin to go back up, after they recover from the abbreviated spring.
I guess I'm not really that worried but I'm probably haunted a bit by manfred 's pessimistic posts.
But seriously folks, I really hope that the Sox pitching staff doesn't go full Rays with a million guys in 2-3 inning roles. It's just not sustainable (something that Rich Hill talked about at length with Bradfo the other day). They had an insane number of pitchers on the IL last season and have already lost some guys this spring. They have been able to cover for it by having remarkable depth (thanks to outstanding scouting and development) but they had three rookie starters in the ALDS -- how did that work out?
I agree with Rich that at the end of the proverbial day (don't ask me which Proverb), you need starters to eat enough innings to keep from overtaxing the bullpen. As he points out, the Andrew Miller revolution was mostly in the playoffs; you can't do that to guys all season long. Not only that, Miller was a unicorn, so just trying to copy that is a fool's errand (like when KC won the World Series and suddenly the copycats -- hi, Cashman -- had to have three closers on their staff... that reminds me, Cashman was also the guy who paid Miller then immediately traded him to CLE for a bunch of bust prospects, LOL... but yeah, the reason they haven't won in 13 years is HOU cheated ...and the MFYs never did! I digress...).
I love the pitching depth that Chaim has built, especially in the bullpen, but I'm not sure he's planning on a lot of these guys going multiple innings on a regular basis. I would like to think that it's more about having not only numbers (to cover for inevitable injuries) but the ability to match specific arms vs. specific opponents. Guys with starting experience, like Holland, make sense in multiple inning stints and maybe that's something Crawford or Seabold (or, gulp, Houck) might transition to if they aren't effective starters but you can't do it with everybody like the Rays seem to do. The piggybacking role that I penciled Whitlock in for above is a controlled take on that.
Strong agree on Sale (like last year) and I love that Chaim doubled his chances of getting that kind of "mid-season acquisition" with Paxton.
Moi? What pessimism? Things look ok. They should be solid for 3rd place. 2nd a real possibility. No *way* they finish behind the Orioles… see how positive I can be? The pen could be anything from a catastrophe to lights out. I know that is to say nothing at all, but I am neither pessimistic nor optimistic — I am just waiting to see how it shakes out. Impossible to anticipate.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Apr 1, 2022 14:09:52 GMT -5
I have no faith in Hernandez. I use to be so pumped about him. The only thing good about him the wheels fall off right away with him.
I think it would be ballsy of the FO if things go well to give a shot to Bello and Groome. What an injection the staff would have .
And if Bello and Groome make it up to Boston, they can put Houck at closer and have one of the best closers around.
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Apr 1, 2022 15:17:12 GMT -5
The pen could be anything from a catastrophe to lights out. A statement that could be said about any bullpen, for any team, every year in history.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 1, 2022 16:40:03 GMT -5
The pen could be anything from a catastrophe to lights out. A statement that could be said about any bullpen, for any team, every year in history. This.
And/but/also for what it's worth, here is a complete list of AL teams that project for more bullpen WAR value than the Red Sox, per fangraphs:
Yankees White Sox Angels
|
|
|
Post by keninten on Apr 1, 2022 17:15:43 GMT -5
A statement that could be said about any bullpen, for any team, every year in history. This.
And/but/also for what it's worth, here is a complete list of AL teams that project for more bullpen WAR value than the Red Sox, per fangraphs:
Yankees White Sox Angels
Without Kimbral the White Sox might not anymore
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Apr 1, 2022 17:35:43 GMT -5
This.
And/but/also for what it's worth, here is a complete list of AL teams that project for more bullpen WAR value than the Red Sox, per fangraphs:
Yankees White Sox Angels
Without Kimbral the White Sox might not anymore Their regular season bullpen WAR might go down but their chances for a deep playoff run just improved.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Apr 1, 2022 19:01:26 GMT -5
The pen could be anything from a catastrophe to lights out. A statement that could be said about any bullpen, for any team, every year in history. I know… I said I knew that wasn’t saying anything. But I meant I am done with optimism or pessimism. Play ball!
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 2, 2022 12:01:40 GMT -5
This.
And/but/also for what it's worth, here is a complete list of AL teams that project for more bullpen WAR value than the Red Sox, per fangraphs:
Yankees White Sox Angels
Without Kimbral the White Sox might not anymore That was without Kimbrel, actually. They still have a very good bullpen - in a second tier all by themselves with only the Yankees ahead of them.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,758
Member is Online
|
Post by mobaz on Apr 11, 2022 9:26:58 GMT -5
Loved seeing Crawford come back and earn the W last night. He looked really good; if he can give 2+ innings regularly, especially at the start of the season, that would be huge.
Overall, pretty strong showing from the bullpen, all things considered.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Apr 11, 2022 12:19:41 GMT -5
Prescient stuff from @nny (as well as from the guy who suggested they might piggyback one rotation spot)!
Still early but it looks like the plan is for Whitlock and Crawford to go multiple innings on a regular basis (with Whit piggybacking Hill).
Also, Darwinzon is being stretched out as a multiple-inning guy in Worcester, so it will be interesting to see if they try to translate that to BOS. Maybe they think he could be less wild if he knows that he has to pace himself for a few innings? Or maybe they want him to pitch in multiple innings in Worcester simply to give him more time to work on his mechanics facing unfriendly batters.
I would have guessed that they would try something similar with Holland but so far he has pitched three scoreless single-inning appearances, all what I would call low- to medium-leverage (7th inning, down 1; 9th down 4; 9th up 5). Ort and Feltman have gotten the only save opportunities for the WooSox thus far, so Holland's potential role is still uncertain. Maybe they're still ramping him up.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,660
Member is Online
|
Post by gerry on Apr 11, 2022 12:49:30 GMT -5
Multi inning relievers make lots of sense considering the likelihood of 4-5 inning stints from much of the rotation and a 10 man pen in April and Sept and 8-9 in May-August.
This is especially true as Paxton and Sale return and a couple of current starters (capable of both spot starts and multiple innings) head to the pen. Even without signing a new pitcher, they plus Whitlock, Darwinzon, Crawford, Seabold? just might make for a more formidable pitching staff than initially thought. I am also excited about a healthy Barnes return surrounded by Robles, Diekman, Strahm, Feltman, etc. in mid-late innings. This might be better than expected if not what what we hoped for.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Apr 11, 2022 20:01:38 GMT -5
Prescient stuff from @nny (as well as from the guy who suggested they might piggyback one rotation spot)! Still early but it looks like the plan is for Whitlock and Crawford to go multiple innings on a regular basis (with Whit piggybacking Hill). Also, Darwinzon is being stretched out as a multiple-inning guy in Worcester, so it will be interesting to see if they try to translate that to BOS. Maybe they think he could be less wild if he knows that he has to pace himself for a few innings? Or maybe they want him to pitch in multiple innings in Worcester simply to give him more time to work on his mechanics facing unfriendly batters. I would have guessed that they would try something similar with Holland but so far he has pitched three scoreless single-inning appearances, all what I would call low- to medium-leverage (7th inning, down 1; 9th down 4; 9th up 5). Ort and Feltman have gotten the only save opportunities for the WooSox thus far, so Holland's potential role is still uncertain. Maybe they're still ramping him up. Holland excelled last September in a true 1-inning role. I doubt they're going to ramp him up to throw bulk. He's the first pitcher in the org to three appearances, making his third before some of his teammates in that bullpen made their second. (Kelly too, FWIW.) They're making sure they get their look at him before his May 1 opt-out. I also wouldn't read anything into when he enters games. He's a 10-year MLB veteran - he's just not going to feel the same pressure in a AAA game and they're smart enough to know that isn't going to make a difference. They also more-or-less script out who's pitching in a given game. here are the non-piggyback relievers Worcester has used: 1: Holland, Kelly, Ort 2: Hartlieb, Cole, Schreiber, Feltman 3: Bracho, Feliz, Holland4: Kelly, Ort, Hartlieb5: Cole, Schreiber, Feltman, Danish (after he arrived from NYC) 6: Holland, KellyI'd bet good money that Bracho, Feliz, and probably Ort follow Pannone tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 12, 2022 5:59:07 GMT -5
In general, the first pitcher out of the bullpen in a minor league game is likely to be the one they most care about developing. In other words, there is generally no magic to guys who get saves in minor league games and it doesn’t imply that those are the guys they’re grooming for a high-leverage MLB role.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Apr 13, 2022 18:06:21 GMT -5
Well, it happened. At least this one time...
Yesterday, Garrett Whitlock piggybacked Rich Hill, the two combining for a total of 8.1 IP and a Sox W.
After Hill fell behind 3-0 and left after 4.1 IP (due in no small part to some sketchy RF defense) with Sawamura finishing the bottom of the 5th, Whitlock coming on for multiple innings was no certainty. However, the Sox rallied to tie the game in the top of the 6th and while they were doing so, AC got Whitlock up. He entered a tie game to start the bottom of the 6th and took it the rest of the way.
After the game, AC extolled the virtues of this arrangement, noting that he felt confident using 5 relievers in the previous day's game, knowing that Whitlock might save the bullpen following Hill. He also looked forward to being able to empty the bullpen today before tomorrow's off day, which is exactly what he did, using 5 relievers to cover the final 4 innings.
When it works, it works great.
|
|
|