Continue reading »]]> Although the Rockies came out of the weekend sporting a respectable 37-33 record, the injuries are starting to mount and roster changes are happening rapidly. The lineup is suffering from Tulo’s annual extended absence, and lingering injuries to CarGo and Dex are not helping matters. The bullpen is also beset by injuries and ineffectiveness with Escalona recently joining Betancourt on the DL, Chris Volstadt bouncing back forth from AAA, and Lopez returning to his early season form. The starting pitching had been the biggest victim of the injury bug, but it looks to be healthy for now with Chatwood returning from his triceps injury and DLR pitching through a cut finger. In the midst of all the injury chaos, comes the Wizard of Os, Roy Oswalt, who is progressing nicely through the minors. Oswalt has an opt-out clause in his contract if he is not activated by June 18, so he will be knocking on the door very shortly. Here, we take a closer look at what activating Oswalt might mean for the Rockies.

1. Is Roy Oswalt better suited to the bullpen or starting rotation?

Brendan: Bullpen. The Rockies are in shambles due to injuries right now, but the one area that is the healthiest is the starting staff. Outside of Brothers and Belisle, the bullpen has been erratic: Escalona (before he was on the DL), Outman, and Ottavino have all been trending down, Scahill, Corpas, and Kensing are unknowns, and Lopez is still a wild card. The ‘pen needs to be solidified and Oswalt is the man for the job. In Oswalt’s 17 games in 2012, 8 of those appearances were in relief. Although the sample size is too small to be a true predictor, Oswalt was more effective last year as a reliever than as a starter with Texas (ERA: 3.65 vs 6.36; WHIP: 0.892 vs 1.693; K/9: 14.6 vs 7.5). I think that eventually Oswalt makes his way into the rotation, but he should begin his stay with the Rockies where he is most needed, and for the immediate future that is the bullpen.

Kevin: The Rockies desperately need Oswalt to be a quality starting pitcher. The rotation held on through the first third of the season, but if the Rockies are going to compete for the remainder, the rotation needs to be better. Nicasio has been pitching better of late, and he deserves to stay in the rotation (for now). Francis, however, is killing this team. He is averaging fewer than five innings per start, which puts way too much strain on the bullpen. Not surprisingly for a guy who can’t make it through five innings, he gives up 0.64 runs per inning. Oswalt needs to bump Francis to the bullpen.

Ned: Oswalt was signed to be a part of the rotation, and should be a part of the rotation. Despite occasional lapses, the bullpen has been a strong point for this team. The best way for the Rockies to improve the bullpen is to improve the starting pitching so that the relief workers can start later in the game, and not always in troubled circumstances with opposing runners in scoring position. This team’s rotation is fragile. Does any starter qualify as a stopper? No. Does any starter make you feel good when his turn arises? No. Are you surprised when any starter goes five innings without yielding a run? Yes. If Oswalt can be anywhere near the pitcher he was with the Phillies, he needs to be in the starting rotation.

2. Who should Oswalt replace on the active roster?

Brendan: Rob Scahill. I expect to see more roster moves (13 pitchers on the roster is not sustainable), but I would guess that it comes down to Scahill, Corpas, or Kensing. Both Nicasio and Francis have more to offer the club than the end-of-the-bench relievers, and I think that they will hang around. Nicasio and Francis are likely both pitching for their jobs every time that they take the mound, so one (or both) could be on their way out soon. Replacing an unknown in the bullpen with Oswalt eases him back into the big leagues, strengthens a current weakness, and allows the Rockies to delay the inevitable choice between Nicasio and Francis in the rotation.

Kevin: The Rockies are already carrying thirteen pitchers, so Oswalt needs to replace a pitcher. My top three choices in no particular order would be Josh Outman, Rob Scahill, and Logan Kensing. The Rockies might try to maintain the number of lefty arms in the pen, so if Oswalt bumps Francis to the bullpen, Josh Outman might get the boot. I would get rid of Rob Scahill, because quite simply he’s the worst of the bunch. Outman, though shaky, still has some value, and Kensing is a total unknown.

Ned: Assuming no injuries to the starters, Oswalt will likely replace Francis or Nicasio. In order to become the pitcher he can be, Nicasio needs to develop a secondary off-speed pitch—a change-up would sure be nice. Therefore, a stint at Colorado Springs or Tulsa could do Nicasio a world of good. But the Rockies, who amazingly are still in the hunt for the western division lead, likely won’t move Nicasio down—even for a short period of time. Therefore, Francis probably draws the short straw.

3. Does Oswalt represent a significant improvement for the Rockies?

Brendan: No. The name recognition is nice, but I am not sure that his actual performance will represent a real upgrade. Oswalt is 35 and has been very average the last couple of seasons going 13-13 with a 4.32 ERA and 1.39 WHIP. It is unlikely that a pitcher of his age will suddenly regain his dominance, so we are looking at an aging, mediocre, right-handed pitcher. An argument can certainly be made that by simply being mediocre, he represents an upgrade over Nicasio or Francis, but I am not convinced. Nicasio (4.61 ERA and 1.33 WHIP) has a similar line to Oswalt’s last two seasons and Francis (5.87 ERA and 1.54 WHIP), well, I am running out of apologies for him. Oswalt joining the club will be exciting, but I do not expect his contributions to make the Rockies a significantly better team.

Kevin: It all depends on how they use him. If Oswalt replaces Francis in the starting rotation, that could be a huge improvement, but it might be only a small improvement if he replaces Nicasio. Either way, both Francis and Nicasio are below-average, and substituting Oswalt (even though he’s 35-years-old) for either one should be an improvement.

Ned: If Roy Oswalt can pitch for the Rockies like he pitched for the Phillies in 2010 and 2011, he will be a huge upgrade. The Tulsa Drillers games are not available on Denver TV, so we haven’t seen him pitch in 2013. Reportedly, his velocity is off a touch, but he is still reaching 91 to 92 mph. The guy is supposed to have five pitches, including a slow curve and a change. Although a hot fastball is especially important at altitude, the ability to throw other pitches with good command is a key for making any fastball effective. Oswalt was very good in his last outing with the Drillers, and his addition to the Rockies’ rotation should be a significant improvement.

Have a different take? Let us know in the comments below.

Got an idea for a future 3U3D discussion? Email us at BlakeStBulletin@gmail.com

Continue reading »]]>

Colin Moran

The 2013 rule 4 MLB draft takes place on Thursday and thanks to the dismal 2012 performance, the Rockies hold the third pick.  Poor drafting has been a big problem for the Rockies with notable busts including, but not limited to, Greg Reynolds (#2 in 2006) and Casey Weathers (#8 in 2007).  The Rockies have also had some success in the first round with Tulo (2005), Francis (2002), and Helton (1995) being active contributors, and Jason Jennings (1999) and Jake Westbrook (1996) also finding success at the major league level.  Although the MLB draft lacks the excitement of the NFL or even NBA drafts, it does provide a temporary distraction from the recent disappointing play from the Rockies.  Here, we take a look at some of the top prospects and weigh in on who we want to see the Rockies select.

Complete scouting reports can be found at baseballprospectnation.com

Colin Moran (3B, North Carolina)

Moran has recently been linked to Houston at #1 overall.  He is big and strong physically (6’3”; 215lbs), but with limited athleticism. Moran is a good line drive hitter who utilizes the whole field.  He is comfortable working deep into counts and therefore draws a lot of walks.  Despite his size, he has not hit for much homerun power, but can drive the ball from gap to gap for doubles.  Defensively, Moran has good hands and a strong arm, but very limited range.  The lack of speed and athleticism prevents a potential move to the outfield, and the lack of homerun power is a question mark at 1B.  Overall, Moran is a good line drive hitter with limited power and poor defensive projections.

Kris Bryant (3B/OF, San Diego)

Bryant is another big and strong hitter (6’5”; 220lbs) who could be the best college position player in the draft.  He is an average contact hitter with lots of raw power to all fields.  Moran has a long swing and needs to improve against breaking pitches, but he profiles as a legitimate middle of the order bat.  Defensively, Bryant lacks the lateral quickness to play 3B, but has the arm and range to play RF.  All 5 tools are average or above, including possible elite power.  Overall, Bryant is very polished and is expected to progress rapidly through the minors.

Clint Frazier (OF, Loganville High School)

Frazier could be the best position player in the draft.  He is smaller than his collegiate contemporaries (6’1”; 190lbs), but is a superior athlete and should get bigger as he matures.  He is a very aggressive pull hitter with excellent bat speed.  Frazier needs to improve his pitch recognition and patience as the competition increases, but he has the most raw power in the draft.  He has not shown the ability to consistently drive the ball to the opposite field, and may struggle with advanced breaking pitches until he learns to trust his hands and bat speed.  He is new to the OF and is not yet an instinctual defender, but he has a strong arm and good speed with the potential to play any OF position.  Overall, Frazier has the most power in the draft but will need polish on his hitting to advance through the minors.

Mark Appel (RHP, Stanford)

Appel may be the best player available in the draft.  He is physically imposing (6’5”; 215lbs) and comes out of college with good mechanics.  He averages in the mid 90’s with his fastball and can top out in the upper 90’s.  He also features an impressive slider (86-88 mph) and a quality change-up.  He has exceptional control with all of his pitches (106 K vs. 15 BB in 2013), and can locate his fastball on either side of the plate.  He projects as top of the line starter and should progress rapidly through the minors.  Appel’s physical tools are outstanding, but signing him is the problem.  He is represented by Scott Boras and turned down $3.2M last year from the Pirates.  He is no longer eligible to play NCAA baseball, so he does not have the same leverage as last year, but his signability remains a significant red flag.  Overall, Appel is the best pitcher in the draft, but coming to terms on a contract will be very challenging.

Jonathan Gray (RHP, Oklahoma)

Gray is a big, powerful pitcher (6’4”; 240lbs) with a huge ceiling.  He has shown dramatic improvement this season in college, and the ability to sustain that success is unknown.  Gray has an explosive fastball that averages in the mid 90’s with an ability to get to 100.  He has excellent movement on his fastball and mixes in a dominant slider (high 80’s) and intriguing change-up.  He throws strikes, but his command is average and struggles to locate within the zone.  The action on his pitches has been enough to miss bats in college, but his command will need to improve as a pro.  Overall, Gray has a dominating arm with the potential to be a top-line starter if he can improve his ability to locate the fastball within the strike zone.

Kohl Stewart (RHP, St. Pius X High School)

Stewart is an elite QB recruit who has committed to play football and baseball at Texas A&M.  He is tall, lean, and athletic (6’3”; 195lbs) with an ideal pitcher’s body.  Stewart’s mechanics are very raw and requires more repetition to improve his consistency.  He throws in the mid 90’s and could get a little more velocity with physical maturity and focus on baseball. Additionally, he has a very good slider but not much else.  He needs work on his command and continued development of off speed pitches.  He has a very live arm, but needs considerable work to become a quality pro-pitcher.  Overall, Stewart may be the best prep pitcher in the draft, but will require significant work to be major league ready and could be facing a tedious developmental process.

With the 3^rd pick in the 2013 MLB draft, the Rockies should select ___________.

Brendan:  My top 3 (in order) are Appel, Gray, and Bryant.  The Rockies do not have a strong history in drafting first round pitchers, but either Appel or Gray could really help the organization.  Either one gives the Rockies a prospect who could be a top of the line starter.  Pitching is the Rockies’ biggest challenge, and acquiring high quality prospects with quick paths to the big leagues is the best way to improve.  Appel’s ordeal last year might scare off some teams, but he was even better in 2013 than 2012, and is the best player available.  He also does not have the same leverage as last year, so it should be an easier task to sign him this year.  I am not sold on the prep prospects at the third pick and I doubt Stewart would even sign with the Rockies given his college situation.  For position players, I like that Bryant’s game is well rounded with a good power profile, and I am worried about Frazier being so pull-happy.  I would be thrilled with either Appel or Gray, and hopefully Houston passes on one of them in favor of a position player.

Kevin: The Rockies should draft Mark Appel, assuming he falls to third. Appel has the talent to be a number one starter. He is polished and will advance quickly through the minors. He can locate his pitches, which is a difficult skill to develop. It’s rare to find a pitcher who can locate nasty stuff. He is also more signable than last year’s debacle leads you to believe: he cannot go back to college, and under the new draft rules, a team that pays over-slot incurs fines and loses future draft picks (depending on how high over-slot they go). The result is that Appel is unlikely to get the money he wants from anyone because his exorbitant monetary demands will result in fines and forfeiting picks. The Rockies can offer him slot money, and if he doesn’t sign, the Rockies should show Appel a picture of Matt Harrington changing tires at Cosco as they accept the fourth pick in the 2014 draft. If they don’t draft Appel, I would love to see them draft Gray. I am worried that Kris Bryant spells his name with a K, but mostly that he has a long swing (see, Ian Stewart). I would be happy with Clint Frazier. I do not want them to draft Kohl Stewart, simply because I have no faith in them developing him; if the Rockies were, say, the Giants, I would be happy with them drafting Stewart.

Ned: The best pitcher available.  Appel and Gray are expected to be the top choices.  After the Pirates experience last year with Mark Appel and his “advisor” Scott Boras, it is likely that he will slip down to the Rockies who will then have an interesting choice.  Under the new CBA, teams are allotted a specific number of dollars to sign all of their draft picks.  Exceeding the cap results in the imposition of a luxury tax, and thereafter a loss of future draft picks.  Boras reportedly pushed Pittsburgh to the cash limit last year with Appel, but the Pirates drew the line at sacrificing future draft choices.  Appel refused to sign.  Would the Rockies be willing to endure the sacrifice of this year’s draft, and possibly even part of next year’s draft in order to sign Mark Appel, assuming he is available at the third pick?  As much promise as Appel seems to have, the Rockies would be foolish to compromise next year’s draft, and would be well advised not to completely hamstring themselves in their ability to sign their 2013 draftees.  Keep in mind that Boras makes his money on his players’ contracts–if they don’t sign, he doesn’t get paid.  Perhaps the Pirates’ experience with Appel and Boras last year was merely a test probe to see how far a team would go under the new CBA.  But then again, maybe Mark Appel will be become the new Matt Harrington.  If Appel is as good as advertised, the Rockies should take him and figure-out how to make the numbers work.

Continue reading »]]> The Rockies’ staved off their May swoon with an impressive 5-2 home stand against the top of the NL West.   A little home cooking was just what the offense needed and hopefully the bats stay hot as the Rockies head to San Francisco for a weekend set.  Nolan Arenado has continued to impress with both his offense and defense, and is quickly making Rockies fans forget about the 3^rd base problems of the past several seasons.  DJ LeMahieu has looked solid since being recalled from AAA, and will replace the struggling Josh Rutledge at second base.  On the injury front, Michael Cuddyer returned from the DL, Rafael Betancourt is listed as day to day with a groin injury, and Jeff Francis is in the middle of a 15 day DL stint.  Here, we take a closer look at what Francis’ trip to the DL means for the pitching staff.

1. True or False: Francis’ injury makes the Rockies better.

Brendan: True, but that is more about Chatwood being great than Francis being terrible.  Tyler Chatwood has been very impressive in his limited appearances and should remain in the rotation, but I am not convinced that Francis is the pitcher that needs to be replaced.  From the small samples available, Francis and Jon Garland are remarkably similar with nearly identical WHIPs (1.583 vs. 1.558), H/9 (10.8 vs. 11.4), and HR/9 (1.5 vs. 1.2).  After getting off to a fast start to the year, Garland has struggled in May with a 6.00 ERA and 1.81 WHIP.  Francis is still a serviceable “crafty lefty” who can consistently get through 5 innings and keep the Rockies in the game.  Furthermore, he is not afraid of Coors Field and I am worried that Garland might go the way of Guthrie after another bad outing.  Francis and Garland are both replacement level pitchers so the emergence of Chatwood is the real story here, and his presence has given the rotation some quality depth behind Chacin and DLR. 

Kevin: Clearly true. Francis is a below average pitcher, and has been since 2008. His ERA+ for 2013 is 76 (league average is 100). Clearly his rotation spot is in sore need of an upgrade. The two most likely replacements, Tyler Chatwood and Drew Pomeranz, have been pitching well in Colorado Springs, and Chatwood has thrown well in a handful of MLB starts this year. Because Francis has been so bad this year, his replacement only needs to be OK in order to be an upgrade.

Ned: Of course it does not make the Rockies better.  The five starters from the beginning of the year have not exactly been Cy Young award candidates.  This is, and will continue to be, a struggling rotation, with occasional flashes of competence from De La Rosa and Chacin, and most recently a one game glimpse of decent pitching from Nicasio.  The Rockies need all the starting pitching they can muster.  Francis may not be Steve Carlton, but he does give the team a reasonable shot at a win every time he takes the ball.  Although Chatwood is pushing for a rotation spot, this time last year Chatwood looked like a batting practice hurler.  Pomeranz is still struggling for consistency at triple A, and Friedrich can’t seem to stay off the DL.  Let’s get Francis healthy, and then determine what to do with him.

2. Should Francis’ spot in the rotation be guaranteed when he returns from injury?

Brendan: No, but I think he will return to the rotation.  Losing a spot due to injury should only occur when the upgrade is clear, and in this case I am not convinced.  Francis, Nicasio, and Garland have all struggled at times this year and should all be on notice that their starting spots are in jeopardy.  Garland started the season well, but has been trending downward lately.  Nicasio has the most potential, but he is incredibly inconsistent and likely has the shortest leash.  Francis has also struggled, but I do not see him as appreciably worse than Garland or Nicasio.  The Rockies have stayed in contention this year by getting 5-6 innings from the starters and then handing off to the bullpen, which has been very good.  Francis is exactly the kind of guy that can consistently give the Rockies the type of performance that has keyed the early success.

Kevin: Francis’ rotation spot should be guaranteed to someone else. I am not a believer that you automatically get your starting spot upon returning from injury (see generally, Drew Bledsoe). It was questionable for the Rockies to keep Francis in the rotation prior to his injury, and if Chatwood continues to pitch well, Francis should relinquish his spot in the rotation.

Ned: No pitcher on the Rockies staff should have a guaranteed roster spot.  Pitchers are like a perishable commodity—by nature they have a limited useful life.  If there is a better pitcher available, Francis should be placed in a reserve role, either in extended “rehab” assignment or in triple A.  Whether Francis will accept an assignment to Colorado Springs is the unanswered question.

3. What is the best role for Francis going forward?

Brendan: 5^th starter.  I do not believe that Francis profiles as an effective bullpen pitcher.  The multi inning guys (Escalona, Outman, and Otavino) have all been very good and they are all hard throwers who strike hitters out.  Is the idea of Francis coming into a tied game in the 6^th appealing to anyone?  If the bullpen is out, then it is either stay as a starter or designating him for assignment.  I think that Francis can still help this team contend (at least in the short term) so I am not ready to see him released.  The bottom line is that the trio of Francis, Nicasio, and Garland should occupy no more than 2 spots in the rotation (and preferably only 1).  Therefore, someone has to go soon, it will likely come down to Francis and Garland, and I think Francis is a better option.

Kevin: Assuming Francis is unwilling to take a demotion to Colorado Springs, the Rockies should designate him for assignment. In the likely event the Rockies cannot find a trade partner after DFAing him, they will have to pay him the remaining amount on his $1.5 million contract, which is not a big deal. The Rockies have sufficient rotation depth that they don’t need Francis, plus he’s just not very good, so if the depth gets depleted they should be able to match his production (or lack thereof) by picking someone up off a scrap heap.

Ned: Chatwood looks like he will be part of the rotation for the near future.  On the time proven theory that you never have enough pitching, the Rockies need to keep Francis available either in the starting rotation or in a reserve role.  He is not a legitimate candidate for a bullpen role, and given the continued terrific performance of the bullpen guys (yes, even Wilton Lopez) there is no room for him even as a long reliever.  Garland likely would not accept a triple A assignment, so we need to assume that he would be gone if demoted.  Nicasio needs work on his control and breaking pitch.  Wouldn’t it be great if he had a reliable change-up?  Nicasio has options left, and is a prime candidate for demotion when Francis returns.

Have a different take? Let us know in the comments below.

Got an idea for a future 3U3D discussion?  Email us at BlakeStBulletin@gmail.com

Continue reading »]]> The Rockies dropped to third place in the NL West after finishing their home stand a disappointing 2-4 and following that up by losing 2 of 3 in St. Louis.  The pitching struggles came from unexpected sources with Matt Belisle, Jhoulys Chacin, and Rafael Betancourt all recording losses.  Despite Nolan Arenado’s arrival and Todd Helton’s return, the offense also collapsed; averaging just 3.2 R/game over the last three series (4.8 R/game for the season).  Troy Tulowitzki was held out of 3 games due to leg soreness and his absence contributed to Rockies struggles at home – both in run scoring and run prevention.  Here, we take a closer look at Tulowitzki: his playing time, back-up, and future.

1. Are the Rockies too cautious in their handling of Tulowitzki’s recent injuries?

Brendan: No.  Tulo is a major difference maker for the Rockies and it is critical to keep him healthy for the entire year.  If keeping Tulo healthy for August and September means that he can only log 120 games, then that is the cost of doing business with the best shortstop in the game.  As a fan, it is always disappointing to watch a game (especially at the ball park) only to find that Tulo is being held out of the lineup for something as lame as “leg soreness.”  However, I believe that the Rockies are right in taking the long-view with Tulo and doing everything possible to keep him healthy.  The Rockies are a noticeably better team when Tulo is on the field, and I for one would rather see him sit out twice a week in May and June if that will help keep him in the lineup later in the summer.

Kevin: When healthy, Tulowitzki is by far the best player on the team and possibly a top 15 player in all of baseball. Tulo has four seasons in which his WAR exceeded 5; by comparison, Cargo has reached a WAR of 5 just once. The Rockies have started the season well, and forcing a banged up Tulo to play an afternoon game in freezing cold weather is begging for him to get hurt long-term, and such an injury would completely derail the season.

Ned:  Not at all.  Tulo is a once in a generation shortstop—superb defender who hits for power and average.  Think the Yankees would like to have Tulo?  If they did, the eastern press would herald him as  the new Jeter but with a Mickey Mantle bat..  The left leg/groin is an issue that needs to be handled wisely, and not pushed.  Further damage could end his career, at least at shortstop.  Given the muscle pulling issues that the Rockies’ players have had over the years (e.g., obliques, lower backs, groins and hamstrings), why isn’t the team looking at its training staff and asking if the stretching regimens need modification?

2. Who is the best candidate to back-up Tulowitzki?

Brendan: DJ LeMahieu.  The back-up plan for Tulo becomes much more important when considered in the context of Tulo only playing 120-130 games.  That leaves about a quarter of the season for the replacement and the Rockies need to find a real contributor, not just a fill-in.  The regular need for the back-up to play takes Rutledge out of the equation because he needs to focus on being the everyday second baseman.  Herrera and Brignac are both more suited to stop-gap appearances, not being regular contributors.  DJ LeMahieu can play every infield position (making him a viable 6^th infielder) and is hitting .358 with a .906 OPS in AAA.  LeMahieu would easily replace both Herrera and Brignac, which would open up a roster spot for a 5^th outfielder like Blackmon (once Cuddy returns from the DL) or Colvin.  I expect the Rockies to keep sending Herrera out there, but I think LeMahieu would be a better option.

Kevin: Jonathan Herrera, DJ LeMahieu, Josh Rutledge, and Reid Brignac are all weak choices, but the Rockies must choose one. Rutledge is a poor defensive shortstop, so the Rockies should keep him at second. LeMahieu has played two major league games at shortstop, so he is out, irrespective of whether he deserves it. That trims the candidates to Herrera and Brignac. Both suck. They play OK defense at shortstop, but neither can hit. I’ll take Brignac just because I don’t know why the Rockies have kept Herrera around for five plus years.

Ned:   Jonathan Herrera is a nice defensive substitute, but has never been able to hit a lick.  Likewise, Brignac can’t hit above the Mendoza line.  The best candidate in the farm system is LeMahieu who, while not Tulo at the plate, is nevertheless serviceable defensively and who can hit a little.  He is no Tulo, but who is?  Can Weiss still play?

3. True or False: The Rockies should move Tulowitzki away from short stop.

Brendan: False.  The true value of Tulo lies in his game-changing presence at the plate and in the field.  Moving Tulo away from short would give the Rockies an average shortstop (at best) and a plus bat with an injury history at a different position.  That does not strike me as a particularly good outcome.  Even in the event of a position change, I still expect Tulo to be handled very cautiously and I would be surprised to see him play more than 140 games.  Getting 20 more games out of Tulo by sacrificing his defensive contributions is not enough of a return to inspire the change.  I think that the Rockies would be better off trading Tulo than trying to move him to another position.

Kevin: They need to give the idea serious consideration, given his propensity to get hurt. Sure, some of the injuries take place on while hitting or running the bases. But, one way to minimize the chances of him getting hurt is by lessening his exposure to injury while playing defense. Third has fewer plays than shortstop, so moving Tulo to third could keep him the lineup while reducing his chances of getting hurt. Sure, playing third base would reduce his positive defensive impact, but it would be better to have him as a third baseman than injured. The Rockies shouldn’t move him this year, but depending on how Trevor Story progresses, it’s time to start thinking about Tulo as a third baseman. (Note: this logic suggests the Rockies should also consider playing Tulo at first base or left field. The Rockies should consider those positions as well).     

Ned:  All of the discussion about moving Tulo is predicated on the assumption that shortstop is the most physically stressful position on the team.  Why do we think that short is any tougher on the body than, for example, center where quick bursts, top speed sprinting and launching cannon throws are the norm?  Historically, players have been moved out of short when their natural aging and physical development has resulted in a stronger but slower body—not because of the physical stress of the position.  As Tulo ages and matures physically and begins to slow, he would be a perfect first baseman with his height, reflexes and glove.

Have a different take? Let us know in the comments below.

Got an idea for a future 3U3D discussion?  Email us at BlakeStBulletin@gmail.com

Continue reading »]]>

Roy Oswalt

One month is officially in the books and the Rockies are in first place in the NL West with a 17-11 mark.  Importantly, the Rockies are 8-8 on the road with a +8 run differential including 6 road wins against divisional foes.  The team made some interesting personnel moves prior to commencing interleague play this week: Roy Oswalt was signed to a minor league deal, Chris Nelson was traded to the Yankees, and Nolan Arenado made his much anticipated major league debut.  Here, we discuss the Oswalt signing, what we expect from Arenado, and if it is time to revise season expectations.

1. What does the Roy Oswalt signing mean for the starting pitchers?

Brendan: Better depth. I believe that an organization needs to have 7 or 8 pitchers capable of starting to make it through a whole season.  Between injuries and poor performance, 5 pitchers are never enough.Add Oswalt to the Chatwood-Pomeranz-Friedrich-Cook back-up quartet and the Rockies are looking at a whole staff of reserves.  Oswalt struggled last year with the Rangers, posting some of the worst numbers of his career (5.80 ERA; 1.525 WHIP).  Even more troublesome is the fact his ground ball rate has been in decline over the past several seasons (0.99 to 0.85 to 0.82) resulting in elevated H/9 and HR/9 (12.1 and 1.7, respectively).  The numbers are ugly, but my biggest concern is that Oswalt’s presence will take a rotation spot away from deserving young player like Pomeranz or Chatwood.Even with the early success, the Rockies need to use this season to see what they have in the young guys to make decisions going forward.  Despite my concerns, I like the signing and it is exciting to watch the Rockies actively try to improve their most obvious weakness.

Kevin: Things are a changin’. By June, it is possible that the only starters remaining from the opening day rotation could be Chacin and De La Rosa. The way things are going, Francis and Nicasio have shown they need to be replaced. Fortunately, Chatwood is readily available to replace Nicasio. That leaves Francis and Garland at the back of the rotation. The Rockies have the pieces to upgrade both spots, but cutting ties with both Garland and Francis would take away from the rotation’s depth. I suspect that after replacing Nicasio with Chatwood, O’Dowd & Co. replace Francis with Oswalt. That leaves Garland in the rotation, with Pomeranz waiting in the wings for the next injury or melt down.

Ned: Oswalt’s signing puts the job of no starting pitcher in jeopardy since he won’t be ready to pitch for at least three weeks.  While the move is smart and virtually no risk, let’s not lose sight of the fact that it akin to putting a very used junkyard engine into your family car.  It might work for a while, but it is not what you would do if you could afford a new engine.  The signing says that the Rockies, like us, are very suspicious of the starting rotation, and are looking for reinforcements from wherever.  It also says that Oswalt, who surely had other clubs looking to sign him, thinks two things about the Rockies:  1—The team appears to have legitimate contender aspirations at this stage of the season; and 2—the rotation is fragile and will need replacements throughout the season.

2. Where will Nolan Arenado have the biggest impact?

Brendan: Extending the lineup.  Arenado makes an already potent offense even better.  Adding his bat in the 6 or 7 spot in the order will make it very difficult on opposing pitchers.  Like all young players, I expect Arenado to have some consistency issues, but he should be a big upgrade over what the Rockies have been putting at third for the last few years.  His presence in the lineup could also have trickle down effects: hitting behind Rosario should help Wilin to see some more fastballs on which to feast, and hitting in front of Rutledge should result in more RBI opportunities.  Third base has been a black hole for the Rockies, and Arenado has the potential to single handedly turn a weakness into a strength.  I can’t wait to see what the kid can do.

Kevin: Nelson was at best a mediocre hitter and fielder, and Arenado will be an upgrade both offensively and defensively. However, Arenado’s most immediate impact will be on defense. Although Arenado will become a force offensively, he might need some time to adjust to MLB pitching. Defense requires less adjusting, and his defense should immediately be better than Chris Nelson’s. This year’s defense on the left side of the infield should be substantially better than last year’s.

Ned: Defense at third.  Despite his fielding error last Wednesday he is a significant defensive upgrade at third. Watching his lateral movement, his soft glove, and his quick throw to first confirm why scouts rated Arenado as the top prospect in the organization.  He has struggled offensively in the early games, but in fairness he has been robbed of hits three times during his first week with the Rockies (such is baseball).  The best thing about Arenado is his body language—the kid does not lack for confidence.  He should be able to translate that confidence to results on the field.  The biggest negative about Arenado is Scott Boras, his agent.  Can you spell Matt Holliday?  Let us hope that he will take Cargo’s lead by overruling Boras to ultimately stay with the club.

3. After watching the Rockies for a month, have your expectations for the season changed?

Brendan: Yes. Coming into the season I thought this team was a 70-75 win type of club.  I now believe this is more like an 80 win ball club.  The offense is loaded with plenty of bats waiting in the Springs in case someone goes down.  The pitching has been the most importantdifference from last season, and it is a deep staff with several viable reinforcements at AAA.  The coaching staff has the team playing loose and Weiss has been getting much better with his bullpen management.  The Rockies have passed every test (except that sweep in SF) this year and continue to impress.  It took until May 25^th last year for the Rockies to record win 17, so they are already almost a month ahead of last year’s pace.  As long as Tulo and CarGo stay healthy, this team should be able to hang around .500 and then anything can happen.

Kevin: Yes. Originally I expected this team to win 70 to 75 games. Now I expect this team to contend for the playoffs. Sure, maybe that is completely delusional, but I do not care, and I thoroughly enjoyed the first month of the season. This team is much healthier than last year, it has more swagger than recent years, the lineup is a force, the pitching is solid (famous last words), the defense is better than last year, and the organization has depth to absorb injuries to position players. All aboard the delusion train!              

Ned: No.  I still expect a Cub-like June swoon from our guys, but am holding out hope that it doesn’t happen.  The starting pitching has held together much better than anyone expected.  If Chacin is able to return next week in full form, he will have a significant positive impact on the starting pitching.  Chatwood plugged the hole created by Chacin’s absence very well, but Chatwood probably isn’t yet a long term addition to the rotation.  Although it is a high anxiety event every time Nicasio and Francis take the mound, the club has struggled through most of their appearances thanks to the strong bullpen.  Nevertheless, after one month of play, few knowledgeable fans would have expected the Rockies to be tied for the best record in the National League.

 Have a different take? Let us know in the comments below.

Got an idea for a future 3U3D discussion?  Email us at BlakeStBulletin@gmail.com

Continue reading »]]> The Rockies finished their snowy home stand with a tidy 6-3 mark capped by a thrilling extra inning win over the MLB leading Braves. Although the Rockies managed to hold on to first place in the NL West, the week was not without adversity: Jeff Francis continued his transformation into the baby-faced Jamie Moyer, Jon Garland was roughed up for the first time this year, and the injury bug bit JhoulysChacinand Todd Helton. The Rockies are 3-4 on the road against division foes this year,as they head out on another NL West road trip where they finished with an 11-25 mark last year.Here, we discuss Chacin’s injury, Francis’s future, and what we are expecting as the Rockies head west.

1. How concerning is JhoulysChacin’s trip to the DL?

Brendan:Somewhat. All the reports have said that he is fine and the oblique is not the issue, which is a huge relief. I expect Chacin to return quickly and I do not think that this will be a lingering problem once the weather warms up. Although the long-term outlook is good, the short-term is worrisome. Chacin has been dominant so far and losing him puts more pressure on the whole staff, but I think it is really on Nicasio. DLR has pitched well enough to be a top of the rotation starter and Garland-Francis-Chatwood are clearly back end guys at this point. That leaves Nicasio as the guy who needs to step up from the latter group to the former. His fastball is electric, and when he is commanding the zone he can be very good. Command, however,has been the problem, and the lack thereof has resulted in elevated pitch counts and early exits. Thankfully, Chacin should be back at full strength relatively quickly, but in the meantime I’m nervously looking at Nicasio to pick up the slack and get some quality starts.

Kevin:It’s clearly very concerning, considering that he is the best pitcher on a team short on pitching. However, there is a silver lining here. This gives the Rockies a chance to audition Francis’ eventual replacement. If Chatwood proves to be just an average MLB pitcher, he would be a substantial upgrade over Francis as the fifth starter. Assuming this injury doesn’t derail Chacin’s season, this could be a blessing in disguise as it might usher in a better fifth starter.

Ned:If Chacin is out for more than three of four starts, you can probably kiss this season good-bye. The fourth and fifth starters are marginal, at best. Chatwood’s emergency start this week was barely OK. Although Chatwood has had a nice three weeks at Colorado Springs, he could use more time in AAA. Pomeranz does not yet look ready for prime time. If Chacin’s injury is worse than the team is making it out to be, we are quickly slipping back into 2012.

2. True or False: Jeff Francis is the best option for the 5th starter.

Brendan:True – at least for now. Francis has been terrible. In four starts, he has managed to pitch just 16 innings, yielding 20 runs (15 earned) with opposing hitters posting a whopping 1.045 OPS against him in the process. Despite the ugly numbers, I still believe he remains the Rockies best option for the immediate future. What other direction can they go? Pomeranz has been very good in the Springs, going 3-0 in 4 starts with a ridiculous 11 K/9 and 2.9 BB/9. Friedrich has struggled, pitching just 14.2 innings in 4 starts. Cook has also been awful, giving up 16 runs (all earned) in just 12.1 innings across 3 starts. Pomeranz is therefore the only real option at this point, but I do not think that now is the proper time. It is a matter of “when” not “if” that Pomeranz gets the call, but when he does, he needs to stay with the Rockies and not bounce back and forth. Francis is clearly running out of time to right the ship, but he should get a couple more starts before being designated for assignment.

Kevin:Obviously false. Francis is not competitive, and he does not give the Rockies a legitimate chance to win. Despite what some people at the Denver Post and in the blogosphere tried to say this offseason, Francis was never fit for an MLB rotation, even one this weak. He was very bad last year. He was bad in 2011. He was bad in 2010. Not surprisingly, he’s bad again in 2013. I don’t care if he “has a great attitude” or “isn’t afraid of Coors.” Does that really matter when his ERA is 8.44 and his career ERA is 4.90?

Ned:The question assumes that Francis has already dropped from fourth to fifth starter—and that is probably a correct assumption. After a very good spring, Francis has reverted to the soft tossing gopher-ball pitcher he became after his shoulder injury. But who does the team put in his place? Chatwood doesn’t look quite ready based on his emergency start this week, and Pomeranz needs more AAA time. The Rockies should keep Francis in the rotation, but on a very short leash. If he continues to get pounded, the team will need to move Chatwood into the rotation.

3. What do the Rockies need to do to make this road trip a success?

Brendan:3+ wins. If the Rockies want to compete, they must do better on the road – especially in the division. A modest 4 win improvement from last year would yield a 15-21 division road record, and should be attainable. Combine that with another 5-10 game improvement at home and suddenly the Rockies are looking at 75-80 wins without a real noticeable day to day change. Incremental improvement in multiple facets will result in a substantially improved finish, and playing better in the 36 division road games is a good start. This is admittedly a tough stretch of games and 2 wins on the trip avoids disaster. However, I am starting to expect success and not disaster avoidance with this club, so my over-under for wins on the current western swing is 3.

Kevin:Seeing as the Rockies are a baseball team, they need to win to be successful. But looking past that, they need to see two things: (1) improvement from Nicasio and Francis, and (2) the bats can’t disappear. Chacin and De La Rosa have been giving the Rockies very good chances to win when they pitch. In contrast, Nicasio and Francis had struggled to keep the team in games. The first step to this team being competitive is a serviceable back half of the rotation. Second, the Rockies also need the bats to produce on the road in order to compete. But, the Rockies haven’t hit on the road for the last twenty years, so I’m not sure why that wouldn’t happen now.

Ned:It is easy to say that .500 on the road is acceptable, but it isn’t. Good teams win on the road. The Rockies don’t need to dominate on the road, but on this particular seven game trip, four wins would be a success. The team is catching the Dodgers at a relatively good time when their play has been weak. Even if the Rockies lose four at Arizona, this trip would be a success if the boys could (dare I say it) sweep the Dodgers at Chavez Ravine.

Have a different take? Let us know in the comments below.
Got an idea for a future 3U3D discussion? Email us at BlakeStBulletin@gmail.com

Continue reading »]]>

Tulo is back!

As of Friday morning, the Rockies are 6-0 at home, 11-4 overall, and in first place in the NL West. Let that sink in for a minute. Yes, the schedule has been weak. Yes, better opponents are on the horizon. Yes, O’Dowd is still GM. But that doesn’t mean you can’t look at the standings and smile. Even with an opening day win last year, the Rockies did not spend a single day in first place in 2012. So savor it, Rockies fans, and try not to get bogged down by all of the things that might go wrong. Here, we take a look at what sets this team apart from last year, potential problems, and pleasant surprises.

1. What has been the most noticeable difference between this Rockies team and the 2012 version?

Brendan: Troy Tulowitzki. The pitching, defense, and hustle have all been improved as well, but Tulo is the most noticeable difference. Even when he was in the lineup last year, he was a shell of himself. In addition to being the Rockies’ emotional leader, Tulo solidifies both the defense and the offense. His play at shortstop has been stellar, something Scutaro could never approach last year. Having him in the cleanup spot is also a big difference that truly extends the lineup and allows Weiss to put Cuddyer, Rosario, and Helton/Pacheco in more appropriate slots in the order. As long as Tulo stays healthy, this team will stay dangerous.

Kevin: The team is healthy. Lots of front office haters think the team used the injuries from last year as an excuse. To some extent, they front office did use that as an excuse (as well as Coors Field), but the truth is that the injuries played a substantial role in last year’s failures. Last year the team lost substantial time from its best position player (Tulowitzki) and its two best pitchers (Chacin, De La Rosa). This year those three are healthy, and the difference is remarkable. The front office, despite their griping, had a fair point that last year’s team was decimated by injuries.

Ned: Tulo is back. The shortstop truly is the field leader of the team. With him in the lineup, everyone plays better. For example, Cargo doesn’t dare dog it with Tulo in there to “bark” at him. Tulo’s gold glove defensive presence certainly gives the pitchers confidence. Notice how often Tulo will make a quick trip to the mound in tough situations, and the effect those trips seem to have on the pitchers. The guy is player who elevates the game of all his teammates.

2. What is your biggest concern going forward?

Brendan: The bullpen. Health is the obvious choice, but I am going to ignore that elephant in the room for fear of waking it. I thought coming into the season that the bullpen would be a strength of the team, but I am no longer sure. Lopez looks awful. Ottavino has lost his command. Brothers still looks skittish. Even Belisle has run into some trouble. Despite those complaints, the bullpen has been very good so far with an ERA of 3.78 and only surrendering 3 homeruns in 50 innings. The bullpen has been a large part of the Rockies’ early success, but it is the one area about which I am most concerned as the Rockies start to face some better competition.

Kevin: The lineup is better than most national pundits believe, but it won’t continue hitting like this. Currently, the team’s BABIP is .332, which is pretty high and probably the result of good luck. Fortunately, the lineup is full of good hitters, so it will be more capable of absorbing a slump from one of its more prominent hitters. The offense is going to come down, but hopefully they can ride this high out a little longer. Is it too much to ask for the Rockies to play the Padres every week?

Ned: Keeping the rotation healthy. With the exception of Jeff Francis, who has had a couple of hiccups, the rotation has done just what the team has needed—keeping the club in the game until the bullpen can take over. In retrospect, Pomeranz and Friedrich were rushed last year (although what choice did management really have). Letting those two guys polish themselves in the minors should deliver positive result. We just need the current five starters to stay healthy for several more months.

3. What has been the biggest surprise?

Brendan: To quote Charlie Sheen, the “Winning!” No one would have believed that the Rockies could win 11 of the first 15. I know the season is still in its infancy and there will be hardship coming, but the winning has been the most surprising – and satisfying – development. The 2012 team only had two months that saw at least 11 wins and managed to put together just two 5 game winning streaks all year. This year’s team already has one month of 11 wins and it only took 15 games to best the streak mark with a 5 gamer and the current 6 game streak. Will it continue? Not at this rate, but I don’t care. This is what the optimism of a new year is all about and it has been a lot of fun to watch so far.

Bigger surprise than Garland?

Kevin: So far Jon Garland is the biggest surprise. I liked the signing when it happened: it was a low cost move that improved the rotation. But, my concern was that a guy who hadn’t pitched in a year and a half, was coming off major shoulder surgery, and was only an average pitcher when he was in his prime immediately improved the rotation. Yet, Garland has been more than just an upgrade from terrible to bad; he has been a good back-end pitcher who gives the Rockies a chance to win games. It remains to be seen whether that continues, but enjoy the good times while they last.

Ned: Two very positive things have been the biggest surprises of this young season. The first is Rosario, and the second is Garland. Rosario’s receiving has improved immensely. His glove is much softer, he is positioning himself well behind the plate, and he frames pitches like a veteran catcher. The pitchers are no longer afraid to put a slider in the dirt with Rosario. His improved catching makes the pitching better. His pitch recognition has also vastly improved to where he consistently recognizes breaking balls making him a beast at the plate. Garland has been a wonderful acquisition—so far. He is not afraid of Coors Field, and he is the real ground ball pitcher that Rockies’ fans have been seeking for so long. We were all worried that Garland would be another Guthrie. Fortunately, that is not happening.

Have a different take? Let us know in the comments below.
Got an idea for a future 3U3D discussion? Email us at BlakeStBulletin@gmail.com

Continue reading »]]> The first two weeks of the season have been representative of the ebb and flow of every baseball season.  From the “Another Rocktober!” optimism of a 5-1 opening week to the “100 losses here we come” depression of a sweep in San Francisco, the Rockies have watched the pendulum swing both directions already.  Only time will tell which one is more representative of what is to come during the 2013 season, and the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle.  Here, we look back at the first two weeks to evaluate how Weiss is doing and discuss the lack of production from 1^st base.

        What 3 words describe the first two weeks?

Brendan: Tulo is GOOD.  I knew the Rockies missed Tulo last year, but it took seeing him at full strength for me to completely grasp just how much he means to the team.  By anchoring the infield defense and the lineup, he is a critical part of both run prevention and run scoring.  Who would have thought that preventing the opponent from scoring runs and scoring runs yourself helps you stay in games?  Not me, apparently.  On top of being the best shortstop in baseball, he is also the Rockies’ emotional leader and demands accountability out of his teammates.  Tulo alone makes this club vastly better than the 2012 version, and I am embarrassed that I did not appreciate how much his absence killed the Rockies last year.  Tulo is back, he’s healthy, and he is awesome. 

Kevin: Good and bad. The Rockies played well during their first two series, winning five of six. Then came an early season test against the Giants, and the Rockies got an F. For whatever reason, when the Rockies play in San Francisco, they are at their worst and the Giants are at their best. Brandon Crawford with a three-run bomb? Please, you might not see another one of those all year. Anyways, the Rockies looked sharp against lesser competition, which is definitely good, but they struggled against a better foe. Until they learn how to beat the Giants, the Rockies aren’t going anywhere in the NL West.

      What are your early impressions of Walt Weiss?

Brendan: Definitely mixed. WWW is clearly learning on the job which is to be expected when this time last year he was coaching down at Regis Jesuit.  I like what he has done with the lineups and that he is not married to the L-R-L-R heart of the order like Tracy was.  I like how he has been dividing playing time, a skill that is translatable from the high school ranks.  I am increasingly concerned about his bullpen use, and not just who gets to pitch when.  Getting guys up and sitting them down only to have them get back up again will kill the bullpen faster than anything else.  He seems to rely quite a bit on his coaching staff to help him make the decisions and I fear that all those voices are causing too much indecision and leading to self-doubt. I trust that WWW will improve his bullpen management as he continues his on the job training and gains more confidence, but it is something that is worth keeping an eye on.      

Kevin: It’s too early to have any firm impressions, but so far I like him. His Sunday lineup was better than the feckless Sunday lineups Jim Tracy would trot out (this might be more a result of how the roster is constructed this year). Last Sunday, it was refreshing to think that the team had a good chance at winning. Again, that might be a result of them playing the Padres. Still, the last few years Tracy seemed intent on putting out the worst lineup possible every Sunday. The Rockies would have been better off not even showing up on Sundays and getting another off day.

      Who should be getting the majority of playing time at first base?

Brendan: Michael Cuddyer. I want to give Helton the benefit of the doubt, but I do not believe he has enough left to be anything more than a once or twice a week player.  I would rather watch Helton have success in a more limited role than to keep going out there two out of every three games and looking completely overmatched at the plate.  If Helton is out of the equation, then it really comes down to Cuddy and Pacheco – and EY is the key.  Playing Cuddy at 1B opens up an outfield spot for EY2, and I think he adds more to the lineup than Pacheco does.  The team speed of the lineup with EY is crazy fast, and his improved outfield play makes him less of a liability.  For me, this question comes down to “Who should be getting Todd’s playing time?” and I think EY brings more to the table than Pacheco. 

Kevin: Cuddyer needs to be getting the lion’s share of the time at first. Helton is obviously struggling at the plate, and although he still flashes some leather in the field, he can only flash it when he gets to the ball, which is becoming harder and harder for him. Plus, starting Cuddyer at first allows Weiss to start EY at the top of the lineup. The Rockies’ lineup is better with EY leading off because (1) EY is a better on base hitter than Rutledge (who rarely walks), and (2) the power Dex is showing will be better served with him in the two hole rather than leading off.                                                                                                                

Have a different take? Let us know in the comments below.

Got an idea for a future 3U3D discussion?  Email us at BlakeStBulletin@gmail.com

Continue reading »]]> The Rockies experiment with a four-man rotation was perhaps the strangest development during the disastrous 2012 season.  Widely mocked, the four-man rotation with its 75 pitch limit did not last long and the Rockies are on the record as going forward this year with a traditional 5 man rotation with a 90-100 pitch limit.  What has not received enough attention was the motivation behind making the change in the first place.  Was the goal to limit injuries? Play to a strength of the team (the bullpen)? Perhaps the most compelling reason for the low pitch limit was to restrict the amount of times a starting pitcher must face the opposing team.  As a pitcher progresses through the lineup multiple times, his performance tends to decline.  This happens for any number of reasons including pitcher fatigue and batter experience: a slider at pitch 87 is going be more hittable than at pitch 11, especially when a batter is seeing it for a third or fourth time.  This notion is also supported statistically:

The theory of increasing pitching efficiency by limiting lineup exposure was formally presented in March 2011 by Greg Rubin at the MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference.  Rubin theorized that using a pair of starters each pitching 4 innings is more effective than a single ace.  Rubin’s calculations led to the conclusion that a paired pitching strategy would reduce the runs allowed by a pitching staff by 96 runs over the course of the season.  The four-man rotation from the Rockies was – intentional or not – a real world test of Rubin’s hypothesis.  As we know, the physical demands from the Rockies’ implementation attempt were too great: the starters were unable to stay healthy with just 3 days between starts.  However, the failure of the four-man rotation does not mean that the limiting exposure strategy is inherently flawed.  This may seem obvious, but it is an important distinction to make:  paired pitching or a four-man rotation are only ways to implement a limited exposure strategy.  The overarching idea behind the strategy is bigger than any one attempt at implementation.

If this is such a great idea and applicable across all MLB, then why should the Rockies be the only team to pursue such a departure from convention?  Is the exposure factor more impactful for the Rockies?  We have a table for that, too.

The six year averages suggest that, yes, the Rockies are subject to more severe effects of increased starting pitcher exposure.  2009 and 2007 are included as the high water marks in single season Rockies pitching.  Although the 2009 numbers were better than major league average, the 2007 season was worse and was consistent with the 6 year average.  Altogether, increased exposure affects the Rockies to a greater degree than the rest of MLB.  An interesting follow up question would be what the Coors Field specific effects are, but unfortunately those splits are not available.

The critical point to all these boring tables is that run prevention becomes less effective as a starting pitcher goes through the lineup a third time.  Not exactly an earth-shattering revelation, but statistically verifiable.  It therefore stands to logic that a reasonable goal would be to devise a game strategy that prevents the starter from going through the lineup more than twice.  Rubin’s original analysis utilized the fact that it takes just over 4 innings to go through a lineup twice (4.3PA/inning); hence the pair of four inning pitchers.  Four innings is, at least in theory, a magic number of sorts for limiting exposure, and the Rockies’ 75 pitch limit could be argued to target the same exit point with an expectation of 18 pitches per inning.  We all know how well that worked out, so how can Walt Weiss and the Rockies implement a limited exposure strategy?

The ultimate problem with both Rubin’s paired starters hypothesis and the Rockies’ 75 pitch limit approach is the rigidity of the system.   Understandably, it can be difficult for a manager to juggle the numerous pieces that go into implementing a limited exposure system.   Also, the system requires complete buy-in from the players.  Players can be skeptical of dramatic strategic changes for numerous reasons, including being unprepared to handle the altered workload and unable to accrue the statistics for their next contract.  Therefore, the key to implementation is accepting the statistical certainty that run prevention decreases as a pitcher’s exposure increases while finding a flexible way to apply the idea of limiting exposure within a traditional pitching staff.  Here is where some of Weiss’ comments during a spring MLB.com interview stand out.  Weiss said “[T]here’s no reinventing the game. Our goal is creating awareness about the things that are effective in the game and fine-tuning our focus on certain aspects of the game.”  Weiss also stressed the need to rely on “common-sensical things that help you win games.”

From the data presented above, limiting exposure qualifies as a common sense thing that is effective and should help the Rockies win ball games.  By simply being acutely aware of the statistics, Weiss can implement a flexible “quick hook” strategy that utilizes the limited exposure theory.  The idea is to allow the starting pitcher to get through the lineup twice, but have help ready in the bullpen at the first sign of trouble the third time through.  Essentially, the call to the bullpen should be proactive rather than reactive.  Such a strategy should not require any changes to off day routines for the starting pitchers, and affords them the opportunity to go deep into a game if they are pitching well.  The flexibility of such an approach allows a limited exposure strategy to be used in a selective manner depending on the game situation.

Consider this example: the starter has been effective, throwing 85 pitches through 5 innings.  It is a one run ballgame and the 6^th inning will see the 3-4-5 hitters come to the plate for the third time.  Do you make the change proactively and give the reliever a clean inning or wait and see what happens?  Tradition would dictate a wait and see approach while a limited exposure would say go to the bullpen.  A manager is faced with these types of situations in the 5^th and 6^th innings on a regular basis, and it is in these games where a limited exposure strategy is intended to be effective.  The games where the starter is dominant are relatively easy to manage, but they are the exception and not the rule.  In those rare occasions where a starter is dominating the opposition, the quick hook strategy gives the manager enough leeway to go with his gut and allow the starter to progress through the lineup for a third or fourth time.  Each situation will have obviously its own complexities, but consistently playing the percentages over the course of a season will result in the Rockies surrendering fewer runs.

A quick hook by a manager making a pitching change early in a game when the starter is struggling is not exactly a new approach.   However, a consistent commitment to making the change, regardless of who is pitching on any given day, would represent a departure from convention.  It is also important to point out that times through the lineup, innings, and pitches thrown are all inter-related, and it is virtually impossible to consider them in isolation.  An effective outing will see the pitcher face 3-4 batters per inning.  By extension, this means fewer pitches per inning and allows the starter to get deeper in the game before hitting the magical 100 pitch limit.  It also means that the lineup is turning over less frequently and that a starter can get deeper into the game before the third time through.

Being aware of how many times a pitcher has faced a lineup does not diminish the importance of monitoring pitch counts and using that information in the decision making process.  Lineup exposure can even help put the pitch count into better context: pitches 80-95 to 2-3-4 the third time through are much more dangerous than the same pitches to 8-9-1 the second/third time through.  Although it may seem like common sense, putting pitch count information into the context of lineup exposure is much more informative than either factor in isolation.  Furthermore, pitching changes based solely on pitches thrown versus times through the lineup will result in similar timing on some occasions.  Even though the end result is the same, the small but important difference is the process by which the manager arrived at that decision.  It is this subtle difference in decision making, when applied consistently, that is a deviation from traditional strategy.

The problem that remains unresolved is the toll any limited exposure system will take on the bullpen.  It is easy to point at the numbers and say that the starter should not go through the lineup a third time, but someone has to get those remaining outs.  One way to handle the increased bullpen workload is to carry 13 rather than 12 pitchers.  This would be feasible in the AL where the DH limits the lineup maneuvers a manger may need to make, but only having 3 bats on the bench (not counting the backup catcher) is a huge handicap in the NL.  Another possibility is broadening the role of bullpen “specialists”.  A designated reliever for each of the 7^th, 8^th, and 9^th innings in addition to one or two lefty specialists leaves only 2-3 middle relievers.  Rather than building the bullpen from the 9^th inning backwards, the bullpen could be built with the understanding that they will need 3-4 relievers, each capable of going 2-3 innings, and then fill out the rest from there with single inning pitchers.  This is actually where Geivett will put his fingerprints on the team’s strategy most noticeably because he is in charge of the major league roster decisions.

Expecting a subtle shift in strategy to result in the Rockies suddenly having a top tier pitching staff is unreasonable.  However, the Rockies do not need to have a top pitching staff to be a very competitive club.  The best staffs in franchise history were part of the 2007 and 2009 playoff teams, but even those staffs only finished 8^th (50^th percentile) in the NL in staff ERA.  The history therefore suggests that if the Rockies can manage to be simply average (or even below average) and not league worst, good things will happen.  Saving even just ½ run per game would be a big deal for the Rockies and is a realistic outcome of limiting exposure.

Will the Rockies actually do this?  It is unlikely that Weiss or Geivett or anyone else will come out and openly admit that they are trying to limit exposure.  However, we should be able to tell by the in-game actions. Does Weiss have a quick hook for the starters the third time through the lineup?  Do the pitching changes happen at set pitch limits or as exposure increases?  Is there a consistency to Weiss’ actions? How are the relievers being used?  The inference of intent based on observed action is not always the best idea, but that is part of the fun and is something to watch for as the 2013 season gets underway.

Authors’ note: all statistics were compiled from www.baseball-reference.com through the “pitching splits” option. BA and OPS were directly obtained, while R/9 was derived from available data using the following formula: (R/PA)*4.3PA/inning*9inning.  Additional data calculations including HR/9, K/9, BB/9 and estWHIP are available upon request.

Continue reading »]]> Spring is officially here: longer days, warmer nights, and the Rockies are still in contention!  Yep, opening day is officially upon us and hope springs eternal (or so we are supposed to believe).  The lingering disappointment from the 2012 season is still heavy in the mountain air, but 2013 is all about new beginnings (bonus points for getting the movie reference).  Although the 2013 Rockies are not much different than the 2012 version, just about everything that could go wrong last year did – and that is not likely to happen again.  Here, we attempt to get psyched up for a new season by looking at the strengths of the team, who should be starting at third, and what are the criteria for defining a successful season.

What do you consider the 2013 Rockies’ biggest strength?

Brendan: The bats up the middle.  The Rockies’ offense in general should be the strength of the team, but the foundation of that strength will come from the middle of the diamond.  Many teams depend on corner positions (3B, 1B, LF, RF) for offensive production with middle positions (C, 2B, SS, CF) being more defense-oriented.  Not this club.  Production from the corners should be below average to average (even with CarGo lifting all boats) but the hitting from up the middle should be great.  Rosario, Rutledge, Tulo, and Fowler could approach 100 homeruns combined, and they will need to be the driving force behind the Rockies run scoring.  If this club is going to have a chance at being competitive, they are going to have to consistently score 5+ runs and production from the guys up the middle is essential.

Kevin: The Rockies have a strong core of young position players. Tulowitzki, Gonzalez, Fowler, Colvin, Rosario, Rutledge, and Young are all quality players who range from superstar to decent. They are all 28-years-old or younger, meaning they are either in their primes or approaching their primes. They all can hit. Some of them play excellent defense, others play terrible defense.  This group of players is better than most national pundits realize (fingers crossed I’m right), and they give the Rockies the best chance to win this year and in the next few years.

Ned: Pitching.  No, not the starters, but the bullpen.  Betancourt has proven to be a reliable closer.  Brothers has a devastatingly powerful arm.  He can turn hitters into statues.  With another year in the major leagues, he should be ready to be dominant—and not just against lefties.  Hopefully Ottavino can continue to show the reliability we saw in July and August last year.  Volstad, who had a strong spring, looks like nice addition.  Matt Belisle is a terrific set-up man.  Escalona, who has had a good Spring, remains a question mark.  Last year, he was hit hard in his relatively short times with the Rockies.  But the guy who should be the bullpen star is Wilton Lopez.  If he is as good during the regular season as he has looked this Spring, no one will remember the name Alex White.  As bad as the starters will probably be, this team will definitely need a very strong bullpen.

Who should be the starting third baseman for the Rockies?

Brendan: Chris Nelson.  He simply brings the most to the table of the available options.   Arenado needs to be getting the playing time as the season progresses, but there is no sense in burning a season of arbitration eligibility this year.  It therefore comes down to Nelson and Pacheco and I give Nelson the nod.  Pacheco could hit a line drive to right in his sleep, but he is a plodding singles hitter with no defensive instincts.  Nelson had a superior OPS compared to Pacheco last year (.810 and .762, respectively) and is a better defensive player.  They are very similar players (replacement level), but Nelson has earned the right of first failure.

Kevin: Chris Nelson. On Friday, the Rockies surprisingly made the wise move by sending Nolan Arenado to AAA, despite his strong spring. First, it is not clear that Arenado would immediately be a better third baseman than Nelson, who played well in the second half last year. Second, and most importantly, by not promoting Arenado until the mid-season at the earliest, the Rockies keep control of him until 2019, compared to 2018 if Arenado was the opening day third baseman. Let’s be realistic – in a year where the Rockies hope for .500 at best, it makes little sense to throw away a year of control over your top prospect for a marginal improvement at third base.

Ned: It is unanimous–Chris Nelson.  He began to look like a first round draft choice late last year when he started to hit for power and average.  His plate approach last year was also very professional.  Since he will probably be hitting out of the eight hole in 2013, he will need a good approach at the plate.  Defensively, he is much better than Pacheco, and should only improve with consistent playing time.  With a little luck, Arenado will tear up Triple A and push the team to call him up.  I am confident both Weiss and Geivett would love to have that problem on their hands.

What do the Rockies have to accomplish to consider 2013 a successful season?

Brendan: Successful? A .500 season and be in contention through August.  Even with the optimism of a new season, I don’t see that happening.  Let us then lower the bar to a more realistic scenario: avoiding disaster.  For 2013 to be not-disastrous, I would like to see some signs of player development.  Pomeranz and Friedrich both need to make about 20 starts.  Rosario needs to show defensive improvement.  Colvin and Rutledge need to prove they are every day players.  Brothers needs to show he won’t poop his pants in high leverage situations.  I would also like to see how the more promising prospects, especially Arenado, perform at the big league level.  Admittedly, wins are the ultimate measure of successful player development, but I am excited to watch the young players continue to grow even if the wins are hard to come by.

Kevin: 2013 will be a success only if the Rockies make the playoffs. Anything less is a failure. This should be the standard for success every year. I am tired of this franchise setting expectations low, and then applauding themselves when they meet the expectations or making excuses when they fail to meet their low expectations. Sure, when they don’t make the playoffs there might be some silver linings, but for the season to be a success, they must make the playoffs.

Ned: After a 98 loss season, our view of what constitutes success is horribly lowered.  81 wins in a season is the definition of average.  Yet, after 2012, .500 seems just fine.  90 wins—just nine more than average will likely place a major league team in the playoffs.  Reaching the playoffs would clearly be a successful season.  Unfortunately, the leadership of this franchise has conditioned most fans to consider a .500 season as a success.  Here is my take:  If none of the position players give up on the season (yes, I am looking at you Cargo), and if the team can exceed 81 wins, the Rockies season will have been a success.

Have a different take? Let us know in the comments below.

Got an idea for a future 3U3D discussion?  Email us at BlakeStBulletin@gmail.com