Baseball Musings
Baseball Musings
June 17, 2006
The Weavers

Rich Lederer at Baseball Analysts notes that Jered Weaver was sent down to AAA yesterday:

Jered was interviewed after the game and seemed rather downcast despite saying all the right things. I'm on record as stating that sending Weaver down is nothing more than the easy way out. You don't mess with a prized prospect who has won four games in his first four starts while fashioning a 1.37 ERA. Going to a six-man rotation, as unconventional as that might seem, would make more sense than demoting Weaver.

There's another solution I discussed on my radio show this week. Jeff Weaver is a four inning pitcher. He's good early in the game, but around the fifth or sixth inning, things start to go wrong. And it seems to happen quickly, before a manager can really react. He's cruising along, and then gives up a couple of hits. It's the fifth inning, no big deal. But then you turn your head for a minute and he's given up a couple of runs. You don't have time to get the bullpen ready and then two more are in.

Four inning pitchers are difficult to place these days. Starters should go at least six. Relievers are specialized, and most pitch one inning in a game. But Jeff could be utilized in the pen as a LRWCAP (Long Reliever Who Can Actually Pitch). When a starter gets roughed up early, he comes in to get the team to the seventh and the regular bullpen order. When the bullpen is worn out, you bring him on for the three inning save. It's the role Bob Stanley had with the Red Sox before he became a closer. I think Jeff Weaver would be effective in this role as it plays to his strength and hides his weakness.


Posted by David Pinto at 09:34 AM | Transactions | TrackBack (0)
Comments

It strikes me that a four-inning pitcher would be incredibly useful when so many teams have weak #4 and #5 starters. They'd have the flexibility to pull a starter who's struggling, instead of letting him absorb a beating in hopes of "saving the bullpen." They might also be able to carry 11 pitchers instead of 12, adding more flexibility for in-game strategy.

I only see two potential problems: (1) getting Jeff Weaver to accept the role, and (2) having a manager who's willing to think outside the box and adjust his thinking to make use of an unusual asset. In a very different case, it's like how the Red Sox have adjusted themselves to make use of Tim Wakefield, an extremely useful pitcher who creates some strategic issues (his occasional terrible games, the need for a catcher who can handle the knuckler).

Posted by: johnw at June 17, 2006 10:19 AM

It's nice to say he's a "four-inning pitcher" but do the stats bear this out?

To test the case, I checked out Weaver's splits by pitch count (at ESPN) for 2006 and previous seasons. Weaver tends to start off poorly over the first 15 pitches, improves by pitches 16-30, and by pitches 30-45 becomes lights out -- even with sample size considerations, he tends to have very strong results during this pitch-count stretch. Then he tails down somewhat, and by pitches 61-75 (certainly this past year and also somewhat in previous years) he becomes terrible. So that leaves you with indeed the profile of a four-inning pitcher -- or more precisely, a 45-60 pitch pitcher...
his stats suggest that as long as you don't put him in the game with runners on, he can do as good as anyone protecting a lead over a long stretch like that, a la Bob Stanley.

Posted by: Leonard at June 19, 2006 11:24 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?