S Marshall to Reds, T Wood to Cubs

[TheRunner77]

2 minor leaguers also going to Cubs, names not yet known.

What will Marshall's role be?

[Todd Zola]

Quietly, one of the best set-up guys in the NL, has the peripherals to close and did vulture some late season saves from Marmol in September.

However, the Reds are in win-now mode so they may still look for an established closer and use Marshall as their 8th inning "closer".

[CubFan]

Cincy does not need another starter and Wood became expendable. As Todd noted Marshall will likely be used as the set-up guy. When Marshall started for the Cubs a couple years ago he had mixed success. Being a lefty he fared much better against lefties. He's also 29 and a FA in 2013. Wood will be 25 on Opening Day and will be under team control through 2016. It appears Theo is dead set on rebuilding and a 29 year old relief pitcher....albeit a very good one....is a luxury a team does not need to carry for the next 2 years. Wood was not very good this past year. I have mixed feelings as I would have liked to see if Marshall could handle being a starter again. Time will tell if Theo and his scouts can evaluate young talent.

[Captain Hook]

Time will tell if Theo and his scouts can evaluate young talent.

Which is why I am really interested in seeing who the two minor leaguers headed to the Cubs are

[TheRunner77]

Does the change of scenery help T Wood in any way? There is always the fear about how Dusty handles young pitchers.

Fair to say that Wood won't be noticeably better in 2012 on account of the move? Looking at 2010 scouting reports, Wood projected as a no. 4/set-up reliever. Doesn't own overpowering stuff, best offering then was a change-up -- basically, a guy who works on feel, keeps hitters off balance, will go inside.

Wood doesn't strike me as huge loss for the Reds -- those 2 prospects in the deal may tilt the balance -- we'll have to wait and see. Marshall as a reliever, is solid. Has closerworthy potential and still young at 29 and fills a huge need for the Reds.

Between Wood's youth and Marshall's better "stuff", I'd lean toward Marshall, even though he's not a worthwhile contributor to fantasy players in a lot of set-ups, in a set-up role.

[Todd Zola]

There is always the fear about how Dusty handles young pitchers.

There is always the MYTH about how Dusty handles young pitchers.

[TheRunner77]

There is always the fear about how Dusty handles young pitchers.

There is always the MYTH about how Dusty handles young pitchers.

I'll take your word for it.

Although, couldn't help but notice peristent comments in the Latos deal, about how Volquez was going to experience a more "nurturing" environment."

[Todd Zola]

It is all anecdotal, based on Mark Prior - who has Marcus Giles to blame for his woes, not Dusty. Don't believe me? List all the young guys that Dusty has ruined and show that there are significantly more than any other team. You won't have to do the second part because there are not enough names from the first part.

[Captain Hook]

Does the change of scenery help T Wood in any way?

Yeah it gets him into a rotation pitching every 5th day

[TheRunner77]

I don't know if anyone's conducted a thorough and authoritative long-term analysis, however the knock against Baker has always been workload issues in respect of young arms.

From a Hardball Times 2006 piece:

Baker has long been known to put little stock in pitch counts. He's had a pitcher finish in the top-eleven in pitches thrown each of the past six years, and he has left the starter out there for 122 or more pitches 88 times this millennium, more than any other manager.

Baker belongs to the old school of managers. About 10% of his pitchers' starts go over 120 pitches, and he's apt to leave his starter in too long than go to the bullpen too soon. He's among those that believe if pitchers could handle it in back in his day, they can handle it now—PAP scores be damned.

Link: http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/artic ... ch-counts/

From a May 2010 Fangraphs write-up:

Reds starters are being called on to throw between 103 and 113 pitches slightly less frequently than in 2009, but they are also throwing 118 pitches or more with greater regularity (albeit with a very small sample size). So, is Dusty abusing his rotation? It depends on where you draw the threshold for what constitutes overuse.

Link: http://www.fangraphs.com/community/inde ... ch-counts/

Good piece in Baseball Prospectus from May 2011. They look at the smoke generated by Baker's handling of pitching and yes, there is fire. But to what extent:

Baker allowed four of his 2003 starters to top 125 pitches (with Wood and Prior topping 140 and 130 respectively), but has not allowed a starter to exceed 125 pitches during his time with the Reds.

While the extremeness of Baker’s negligence has curbed, he still allows his pitchers to throw more pitches per start than the league-average (...). The gap between Baker’s staff and the league-average is less egregious than it was in the past, though (...)

A February 2010 piece tries to paint a picture using both sides but provides several convincing arguments that Baker does push the envelope. Again, it's a matter of correlation between number of pitches and injuries sustained -- at what point are pitch counts a factor?

In 14 out of 16 years, pitchers on Baker's teams have thrown more pitches per start than the average for National League pitchers.

It’s not just Prior and Wood:

Livan Hernandez:

Would you be surprised to know in 110 total starts for Hernandez under Baker, he had three outings with 140+ pitches, 13 outings with 130+ pitches, and a ridiculous 43 outings with 120+ pitches?

Russ Ortiz:

In 144 starts under Baker, he threw 120+ pitches 33 different starts, including six starts with 130+ pitches and two starts with 140+ pitches.

Aaron Harang:

The game in 2008 when Harang threw 63 pitches in relief then made his next start certainly seems like poor judgement in retrospect.

And yes, Prior and Wood:

Take a look at 2003. The Cubs had Prior, Wood, and Zambrano. All three of them threw over 210 innings. Baker allowed Prior and Wood to throw 130+ pitches in seven different starts. Then there was time where he sent out Kerry Wood for a seven inning outing in which he threw 141 pitches.

Link: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/3541 ... e-pitchers

I’ll beg to differ on the anecdotal part. There are several instances of managerial decision-making that point to a disregard for setting limits on the number of pitches Dusty’s hurlers have typically been allowed to make before being taken out.

Pitch count data, as one of the pieces points out, is a relatively new phenomena, but it’s been around the whole time Dusty has been managing. Either he puts no value in it, or he pretends it doesn’t exist.

We don’t know to what extent pitch counts impact on an ability for pitchers to avoid injury, but in the least, it’s pretty much accepted that there is some kind of correlation.

The good news is that Baker has become more frugal on pitch counts since he’s managed the Reds. However, there is a lot to be said about his “reputation” – I would argue there are a lot of incidents and practices from his Cubs days, that are difficult to ignore and simply dismiss as some kind of suburban legend. May have just been the remnant in him of some crusty manager from his playing days.

Bottom line, Baker has been better in terms of pitch counts (and by correlation, pitching workload). From a fantasy standpoint, that’s probably to the advantage of not only the “prepared mind” but to a bettter informed one. I think the above exercise has taught me that one needs to dig deeper and look under the hood.

The Baker from the more recent years does not appear to be any better or any worse than a whole lot of other managers – the Fangraphs piece in particular, and some of the others, convinced me of that. He doesn’t stray off that much from league averages now.

Part of the problem is that you can’t use just pitch counts as a guideline. It’s a tool but it needs to be used in correlation with something else. Of course, you’ll always have pitching specimens like Verlander who produce high pitch counts consistently, with no known adverse effects and examples like that take steam out of the pitch count argument.

What’s most important though, is the psyche that might prevail in the draft room, for the purposes of the fake games we partake in. Say your typical drafter is faced with a choice of two players – one, a better player who happens to be a pitching specimen on the Reds versus a lesser specimen on some other team. There is a decent chance that said drafter might make the judgment call that the hurler under Baker is riskier and go for the lesser player. May not happen often but there is hidden value in that kind of bias for the drafter lucky enough at the opportunity to inherit the better player.

[Todd Zola]

So the premise is Dusty Baker is bad for young pitchers and Livian Hernandez, Russ Ortiz and Aaron Harang are your star witnesses?

Your arguments are not in defense of the point being discussed. Of course Dusty is going to be above league average with pitch counts when he had Livian on his staff for many of those years. How he impacts youngsters is not related to how many pitches he let Livian throw, a guy notorious for high counts, regardless of his manager.

What most seem to forget about Harang is he was fine for a couple of those starts a little after infamous relief appearance. But because he struggled right after (which was expected), the cause and effect is obvious, it was Dusty's fault.

My point is on April 1, 2012, a young pitcher is in no more danger than if he was with any other manager.

[TheRunner77]

Does the change of scenery help T Wood in any way?

Yeah it gets him into a rotation pitching every 5th day

That, plus he goes from a park that favors right-handed batted HRs at a 25% clip (Reds) to one where RH HRs are only favored by 5% (Cubs).

Looking at his career splits, Wood, a lefty, is much more vulnerable against RH hitters. The move should help him keep the ball inside the park more often.

[TheRunner77]

So the premise is Dusty Baker is bad for young pitchers and Livian Hernandez, Russ Ortiz and Aaron Harang are your star witnesses?

Well, we've never really known how old Livan Hernandez is or how "young" he was when Baker managed him.

You're extrapolating from two distinct aspects of the post. The reputation on Baker is about how he handles young pitchers. The reality is that he's no worse now than most other managers in respect of pitch counts for any kind of pitcher, young or old.

Since we're not drafting in 2004, the point about Baker imposing too heavy a workload on his pitchers, is moot.

In response to your earlier post -- I don't believe the workload issue was anecdotal. But, it doesn't matter now since Baker seems to have moved away from his more liberal managerial approach with respect to pitch counts.

[TheRunner77]

My point is on April 1, 2012, a young pitcher is in no more danger than if he was with any other manager.

The conclusion from my last two posts is the same as yours.

I'm merely suggesting that Baker's past managerial approach in respect of pitch counts, was not anecdotal.

[Todd Zola]

Again -- you are debating apples and oranges.

Your statement specified Baker's treatment of YOUNG PITCHERS. It is that I commented on.

Pitch counts pertain to an entire staff, not just young pitchers.

The fact Baker ran a then 30 year old Harang out there to start 3 days after he pitched multiple innings in relief is not reflective of how he treats young pitchers.

Ortiz was 24 when he debuted, a few years older when he threw so many pitches, on a team in a win-now mode with Barry Bonds. He then went on to have to productive years with Atlanta. Was his career hindered by the early workload? Maybe, but he was certainly not the only guy to flame out after 6 or 7 solid seasons.

If the original point was how Baker, in a global sense, keeps his starters in longer than most, well, I would still be doing what I was doing an hour ago

[TheRunner77]

Quietly, one of the best set-up guys in the NL, has the peripherals to close and did vulture some late season saves from Marmol in September.

However, the Reds are in win-now mode so they may still look for an established closer and use Marshall as their 8th inning "closer".

Something to chew on, reminds me of your point about what you might usually find in a Stats Pass type of source:


2011:
78 games, 2.26 ERA, 75.2 IN, 66 H, 17 BB, 79 K, 1 HR, 34 holds
126 groundballs/83 flyballs (Last 3yrs 368 GB/299 FB)
vs LHB .206
vs RHB .249
Batting average against
.219 Men on
.215 RISP
.217 2/out RISP
7th inning: .198 in 87 PA/28 G
8th inning: .220 in 140 PA/44 G
9th inning: .340 in 59 PA/15 G


2010-2011
158 games, 2.45 ERA, 150.1 IN, 124 H, 42 BB, 169 K, 4 HR, 1.10 WHIP, 56 holds
6 saves/6 blown saves

Source: http://www.espn1530.com/pages/lancesBlo ... z1hFFDjaOA

2011 suggests he was more hittable in the 9th than he was in in the 7th or 8th. Small sample size to be sure and an incomplete observation as a stand-alone. Just throwing it out there.

[Todd Zola]

My point is on April 1, 2012, a young pitcher is in no more danger than if he was with any other manager.

The conclusion from my last two posts is the same as yours.

I'm merely suggesting that Baker's past managerial approach in respect of pitch counts, was not anecdotal.

You typed faster than me -- the anecdotal comment was not pertaining to pitch counts, but treatment of younger pitchers.

There is always the fear about how Dusty handles young pitchers.

PETA is on the phone, asking me to stop beating this dead horse

[TheRunner77]

Again -- you are debating apples and oranges.

Your statement specified Baker's treatment of YOUNG PITCHERS. It is that I commented on.

I've re-read that post. I called it the "fear". It's another word for reputation. However, I did not have the benefit of having reviewed multiple sources at the time I wrote it. I am a more prepared mind than I was about an hour ago, thanks to your "myth" reply.

Pitch counts pertain to an entire staff, not just young pitchers.

Not disagreeing with you on that. I made the distinction between past perception and current reality in an earlier post.

The fact Baker ran a then 30 year old Harang out there to start 3 days after he pitched multiple innings in relief is not reflective of how he treats young pitchers.

Agreed again. The perception about how Baker allegedly worked up pitch counts on young pitchers alone is unfounded. He was an equal opportunity offender at one time, who has now embraced gentler ways with all types of arms.

Ortiz was 24 when he debuted, a few years older when he threw so many pitches, on a team in a win-now mode with Barry Bonds. He then went on to have to productive years with Atlanta. Was his career hindered by the early workload? Maybe, but he was certainly not the only guy to flame out after 6 or 7 solid seasons.

Agreed again. As I indicated, my reading of these multiple sources does not establish a clear correlation between pitch counts and breakdown -- it is an indicator of workload that is widely accepted as such, however the extent to which pitch counts contribute to injury as opposed to some other factors, has not been definitively demonstrated. Suffice to say that keeping an eye on pitch counts is reflective of a reasonable precautionary approach given the very fallible nature of a pitching arm.

If the original point was how Baker, in a global sense, keeps his starters in longer than most, well, I would still be doing what I was doing an hour ago

Actually, if you hadn’t challenged my original post on Baker’s reputation, I too would have still been doing whatever I was doing an hour ago. ;o)

[TheRunner77]

You typed faster than me -- the anecdotal comment was not pertaining to pitch counts, but treatment of younger pitchers.

Fast typing is clearly overrated. I stand corrected.

PETA is on the phone, asking me to stop beating this dead horse

I thought PETA was already onto me on account of all the useless ways in which I was trying to skin a cat.

[da_big_kid_94]

I just get a gut feeling that Todd Frazier is one of the two prospects going to the Cubs.

[Todd Zola]

I just get a gut feeling that Todd Frazier is one of the two prospects going to the Cubs.

Close, right neighborhood, wrong address - Dave Sappelt.

And Ronald Torryes.

[Captain Hook]

Sappelt could easily be a fourth outfielder on some teams if he progresses and can handle major league pitching

Torreyes I saw as a rookie - very interesting player at shortstop (then) wasn't convinced in 2010 that his hitting would improve enough but that takes time to correctly gauge

Certainly a decent package for Marshall and for Team Theo