Cory Lidle turns me on.

The Jays can use that extra long man to back up Escobar's starts which project to last anywhere from 3 to 6 innings before his pitch count gets used up.

He did pitch 7 innings a few times in '01 though.

I guess this means that (a) neither Halladay nor Lidle are in the club's long-term plans, (b) the Jays think that they can handle it, or (c) some combination of both. Maybe they think that Halladay can handle it, and that they might as well get what they can out of Lidle, Hendrickson and Escobar.

The move also shows that they have confidence in their coaching staff. I assume that they are smart enough not to throw a tired pitcher out there on three days' rest (which was Lidle's concern). I also assume that the pitchers are smart enough to let the coaches know if they're actually hurting (which Carpenter, apparently, didn't do).

It'll be an interesting experience.

Well if Richard Griffin hates it, it must be a good idea.

http://economics.about.com
Again, I absolutely love the idea. Back on May 2nd I said it'd be interesting if the Jays had a set-up like this:

Day 1: Halladay [6IP], Walker [3IP], Tam, Politte, Davis if nec.
Day 2: Lidle [6IP], Hendrickson [3IP], Tam, Politte, T. Miller if nec.
Day 3: Escobar [5IP], Doug Davis [4IP], Tam, Politte, Walker if nec.
Day 4: Sturtze [6IP], T. Miller [3IP], Tam, Politte, Hendrickson if nec.

Day 1: Halladay [6IP], Walker [3IP], Tam, Politte, Escobar if nec.
Day 2: Lidle [6IP], Hendrickson [3IP], Tam, Politte, T. Miller if nec.
Day 3: Davis [5IP], Escobar [4IP], Tam, Politte, Walker if nec.
Day 4: Sturtze [6IP], T. Miller [3IP], Tam, Politte, Hendrickson if nec.

Now I guess we'd have to change Sturtze for Hendrickson and juggle around the relievers to get the L/R matchups right, but I still think this would work really well.

Mike

Griffin's article in today's Star sure mixed concepts, didn't it? He complained about the four-man rotation, then as an example of why it's a poor idea, used the Oakland A's from the early eighties for which the top three starters each had 15 or 20+ complete games (in a four-man rotation, of course).

I think most of us saber types realize that pitch counts matter more than innings pitched, and if the coaching staff effectively controls the number of pitches per start, that this experiment could be successful.

The question becomes, will Halladay and Lidle accept being pulled from a game earlier than they are used to? In my opinion, the limit should be set at 90-100 pitches per start. We have plenty of guys in the pen that can pile up the innings if the need arises.

Better safe than sorry...

Geez, a guy takes off a few days to move, and so much happens. My new house is still in disarray, and my body hurts everywhere, but we are finally back on line and this morning, I found a teenager-free computer.

As you would expect, when there's a change to discuss, especially one that challenges "traditional wisdom," Mr. Griffin is at his most provocative:

The bottom line is that this is a number-cruncher's course of action only a statistically driven organization that worships at the altar of the hard-drive like the Jays would undertake. If it was a viable big-league option, in the long run, given the shallow water in every organization's pitching pool, someone would have utilized the strategy over the last 20 years.

Or, this is a practical, short-term solution, taking advantage of some quirks in the schedule. The four-man rotation won't be rushed into effect; nobody has to pitch on short rest for a while because of all the off-days. I was speculating a week ago about Hendrickson becoming the second lefty in the 'pen because they already knew he could be an effective reliever and they were still evaluating Davis. Now, it appears they've seen enough of Davis every fifth day and have settled on Lurch as the more consistent starter. Suits me fine. If Doug Creek never recovers from his sore elbow, and Davis can get a few people out three times a week, even better.

This organization isn't constrained by a mere 25-man roster; J.P. takes advantage of the depth he's added to his farm system, and has done a great job of juggling the right people through the seats at the end of the dugout and the bullpen. That flexibility will continue, and the cast of characters will change according to the situation. When (if) the Jays decide they need a spot starter, they can always call up Mike Smith, Corey Thurman or Josh Towers, who hasn't even been demoted yet.

Gee, Dave is the only one who sees some curious questions in this move as far as Halladay's future/health are concerned? Obviously Ricciardi, Law etc. have researched this and you'd think they're not knowingly going to be reckless with not only their best pitcher, but the only starting pitcher they're slotted to have in the rotation in the spring of '04.

They've guarded his pitch counts to the point they've taken him out of games in the 8th at the cost of blown saves ('02 season) by Escobar, he had the big hike in innings pitched last year, and now this potential experiment? I am a little willy-nilly on this, and if I had one of the 'true' aces in MLB on my staff, and almost no other frontline starting pitching, i'd think Jays management might be a little willy-nilly themselves. It'd be cool to see how far the four-man could go, and to what success it might have, but to me the risk is worrisome.

I don't believe that a 5-day rotation (which is what this will be 70% of the time) is a problem. This is a logical reaction to the way the schedule shapes up. In my opinion, if Halladay and Lidle gets 37 instead of 34 starts this year, it poses no extra risk and could represent a couple of games in the standings.

The strict 5-man rotation is one of my pet peeves. I believe it is symptomatic of the risk-averse society we seem to have landed in. Throwing a baseball 90 MPH overhand is inherently risky. I've never seen ANY evidence that occasionally starting on 3 days rest does any harm to a pitcher. Halladay and Lidle are perfect candidates for this because they pitch ahead in the count and do not run up high pitch counts.

What I call the 4 and a half man rotation, where your stud pitchers get 37 or 38 starts a year, makes a lot of sense to me.

I have no doubt about the Jays' commitment to preserve the arms of their starting pitchers, so I'm not too worried about pitch counts and rest for them.

I *am* certainly worried, however, about (a) the number of appearances by each pitcher in the Jays' bullpen, which may run into fatigue problems; it seems like every single one of them either pitches or heats every game already, and that will only increase.

And (b), the fact that the bullpen just isn't that good! Over the past month, the Jays have not had particularly ineffective starting pitching by the #5 man in the rotation. I'm not so sure that I'm confident about the Jays' ability to hold leads with Halladay and Lidle being yanked sooner from games.

My post took issue more with Mike Moffatt's "May 2nd Scheme." I agree with Robert that this will play out like a four-and-a-half-man rotation.

One good point Griffin raises (the only good point?) is that since 5-man rotations became common it has been contending teams that have experimented with 4-man rotations. I'm inclined to doubt that the JP et al. are trying to win more games this season with this move. I think it's more about determining if it's a better option than throwing Davis / Sturtze / Walker every fifth day, to determine if the club of the next decade should be constructed with a 4-man. If it pans out, advantage to the small-market sabremetrically-inclined clubs who can put together a good bullpen without spending much. Notice that JP's best reliever moves have been the cheap ones (Politte, Lopez), where he's gotten in trouble is where he strayed from the path (Tam, Creek).

I share Mike D's concern about Tosca's ability to handle this more complex pitching arrangement. I'm going to take the more optimistic viewpoint and hope that rather than making the reliever usage problems worse, it will force Tosca to smarten up. No more 3 pitch appearances, no more five pitcher innings. It's very scary that I'm not exaggerating there.

My memory is fuzzy on this, but didn't Tony LaRussa experiment with something in the early 90s where he basically used his entire staff like a bullpen, with the 'starting pitchers' only going three innings?

(From Griffin): If it was a viable big-league option, in the long run, given the shallow water in every organization's pitching pool, someone would have utilized the strategy over the last 20 years.

This reminds me, as many things do, of a great Dilbert cartoon. Wally has just proudly submitted his proposal for a new engineering system. The boss says, "This is fine, Wally, but if this works, how comes nobody else is doing it?" Wally, enraged, retorts: "Isn't it possible that maybe, just maybe, I came up with a good idea that nobody else has?" It says so much about your attitude towards change that when faced with an innovation, instead of being delighted with an opportunity to gain a market advantage, you dismiss it because you're convinced someone else must have already thought of it and tried it, unsuccessfully. That's Griff.

(From the WMS article:) Five-man rotations began coming into vogue in the early 1970's and over the last 30 years have become the norm for pitching staffs. Over that time, it has become generally accepted that the extra day of rest is better for pitchers' arms.

Well, yes, except that pitchers' arm injuries have been skyrocketing over the last 30 years. I'd never heard of a torn rotator cuff until the '80s, and the degree of attrition in major-league rotations in the '90s became almost absurd. I'm certainly not saying that the five-man rotation causes arm injuries, but it seems fairly clear to me that the five-man rotation hasn't prevented arm injuries either.

The spate of pitcher injuries mystifies me more than a little. Pitchers over the last 20 years are in better physical shape than they've ever been (and I imagine they're healthier specimens generally), they have access to far more advanced medical science (in terms of knowledge, technology and resources), and they're far more valuable to their teams in terms of money and time invested. Yet shoulders and elbows keep going under the knife. Why? I don't have an answer, but I'm pretty sure the six-man rotation isn't it. I don't buy a lot of the Old-Time Wisdom, but there is something to be said for the fact that more than one generation of smaller and weaker pitchers started 40 games a year and survived quite nicely.

Pitcher abuse studies are still in their infancy; IIRC, the folks at Baseball Prospectus have revised their Pitcher Abuse Points system at least once. We don't know what causes hurlers to break down physically: is it pitch counts? Batters faced? Batters faced after 100 pitches? Starts? Complete games? The split-fingered fastball? No one knows. Most front offices are scared by the prospect of overworking their starters and will employ kid gloves, and frankly, I don't blame them. But there comes a time when you need to challenge the conventional wisdom and try something different if you want to succeed. When the desk is stacked against you -- as it as with a team competing against two payroll behemoths and with few good starters -- the need becomes even more acute.

I'm in favour of this plan. Despite Griff's rhetoric, JP is not a stat guy -- he's a baseball guy who's been around the game for decades and, from numerous accounts, understands talent better than most. I have to believe -- and I suppose this is a leap of faith on my part -- that he wouldn't be doing this unless he had thought through all the consequences repeatedly. The rotation will be kept on pitch counts, their health will be monitored, their coaches will be studying them, and they will not be allowed to take the ball if they're tired or sore. And really, the biggest gamble isn't being taken by the pitchers, but by JP: if this backfires, and an ace like Halladay blows out his arm, JP would likely be finished in baseball.

Let's see how it works in June, when the physical strain won't be too great. If it succeeds, Toronto once again has the prime mover advantage, as it did when it jettisoned overpriced talent a year early. If it doesn't, it was worth a shot.

JP said that in the month of June the Jays have 3 Mondays free in the schedule which will help in using a 4 day rotation, there are 5 Mondays in June, meaning they are scheduled games on 2 Mondays, could they then use Davis on those 2 mondays, without upsetting the rythym of the now 4 starter, giving basically a 4 1/2 staff.

I have no clue how the vast majority of MLB teams slipped into the 5-man rotation and away from the 5-DAY rotation, because most 5th starters are terrible and shouldn't be given so many innings. Griffin, and many others, are acting like the temporary 4-man rotation hasn't been done in ages. Such short term memories. The Jays did it as recently as '97, giving Clemens an extra 2 starts and Hentgen one extra. Ditto in '96, giving Hentgen and the formidable Erik Hanson 2 extras each. Every season prior, back to 1993, the Jays have occasionally skipped the 5th starters.

Well, yes, except that pitchers' arm injuries have been skyrocketing over the last 30 years. I'd never heard of a torn rotator cuff until the '80s,

These injuries have always been around, they just called them "dead arms" or "sore arms" and they ended guy's careers then.

The Jays can use that extra long man to back up Escobar's starts which project to last anywhere from 3 to 6 innings before his pitch count gets used up.

He did pitch 7 innings a few times in '01 though.

Escobar doesn't really have a history of throwing a lot of pitches...it's just happened so far this season. In 2001, he started 11 games. He really didn't get going until after the first 2 or 3 starts. In 5 of the next 7 starts, he lasted 9IP, 8.1IP, 7.2IP, 7.1IP and 7IP throwing between 96 and 114 pitches each time. That's pretty efficient.

There are 38 games left until the All-Star break. The Jays have off days on June 2, June 9, June 16, July 3 and July 7th (assuming no rain outs).

A 5-day rotation might look like this:

Halladay: June 1, 6, 11, 17, 22, 27, July 2, 8, 13 (9 starts, 1 on 5 days' rest)
Lidle: June 3, 8, 13, 18, 23, 28, July 4, 9 (8 starts, 1 on 5 days' rest)
Escobar: June 4, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, July 5, 10 (8 starts, 1 on 5 days' rest)
Hendrickson: June 5, 12, 21, 26, July 1, 6, 11 (7 starts)
Davis: June 7, 14, 19, 24, 29, July 12 (6 starts)

In the above, no one starts on short rest. Given thenumber of off-days, this is the system most clubs would choose.

A 4-man plus spot start might look like this:

Halladay: June 1, 6, 11, 15, 20, 25, 29, July 4, 8, 12 (10 starts, 4 on short rest)
Lidle: June 3, 7, 12, 17, 21, 26, 30, July 5, 9, 13 (10 stats, 5 on short rest)
Escobar: June 4, 8, 13, 18, 22, 27, July 1, 6, 11 (9 starts, 3 on short rest)
Hendrickson: June 5, 10, 14, 19, 23, 28, July 2, 10 (8 starts, 3 on short rest)
Davis: June 24 (1 start)

The Jays play 16 consecutive games from June 17th to July 2nd - I put Davis in there in the middle to give the other guys a breather.

Halladay/Lidle get 3 extra starts; Escobar/Hendrickson get 2 extra starts. The 5th starter loses 5 starts. Obviously, if Davis is named the 4th starter he takes Hendrickson's schedule.

Lidle and Halladay pitch back to back on short rest once each; everyone else follows a start on short rest with one on normal rest.

If you are worried about Cory's stamina, you can switch his July 9th start with Hendrickson's on the 10th and start Davis on July 13th.

I think the four man rotation idea is a good one if you have sinkerball or offspeed guys. There was an article in Baseball America about this and I agree completely. People who ted to throw a lot of curveballs or sliders put a lot more stress on their arm than guys who change speed or throw "fat wrist" pitchs. This was a long time in coming, people proved before it could be done and it was only a matter of time before it came back. Most teams that make the post season turn to a four man rotation (or in Arizona's case a two man staff), even if it is for a shorter time. This will prepare the Jays pitchers to battle more and I think gives Doc confidence that he is the one that the front office wants out there and I think he will respond by pitching perhaps better.

Another thought is that perhaps JP is trying to use up Lidle and Escobar so when they are traded to whatever contender they sink them more than help, allowing the Jays to make the playoffs.

Another thought is that perhaps JP is trying to use up Lidle and Escobar so when they are traded to whatever contender they sink them more than help, allowing the Jays to make the playoffs.

Jeepers Ben, that doesn't sound good for Doc's future as he throws a ton of breaking stuff.

I have another thought though as well. These guys agents (doc's) might ask for huge salary compensation if this experiment carries on the rest of the season. The experiment is not completely with out career risk and if I was representing Doc I'd be calling JP.

Rany Jazayerli looked at this last year:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/20020813doctoring.shtml
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/20020820doctoring.shtml
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/20020830doctoring.shtml

His conclusion: "The four-man rotation is poised to make a comeback. As far as I'm concerned, it can't come back soon enough."

Rany knows a lot more about baseball and medicine than I ever will. If he's for it, and the Jays are for it, I guess I will keep my ZLC membership card and go along with it as well.

http://montreal.expos.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/news/mlb_news.jsp?ymd=20030601&content_id=348964&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb
Spencer Fordin is telling us that the Jays will not be going to a 4-man rotation. Click on my name for the latest. Looks to be a 5-day rotation instead.

This is ridiculous. After announcing this, and taking all the heat for it, the JP and Tosca aren't even going to TRY? This is a Devil Ray move, changing your plans because of the backlash. If you've done your research, stick to your guns. If you haven't, then you shouldn't be shooting off press releases.
Sounds to me like someone in the clubhouse went whining to Tosca - or perhaps Doc's agent, as mentioned above.

As for the LaRussa experiment mentioned above, this was the famous "flotation rotation" of 1993, courtesy of Tony and his pitching coach Dave Duncan. The A's were deep in last, having traded their best player to a certain front-running Canadian team. I don't remember the exact details of the scheme, but I seem to think that it involved 8 or 9 pitchers throwing three innings each on a rotating basis (so that each would get chances to start and finish games). It was widely ridiculed, and abandoned after about 10 days.

S.K., perhaps you should switch to decaf. Nobody changed plans with this latest clarification, and no whining was involved. To me it looks like they still plan a four-man rotation, although Davis (who was warmed up and ready to relieve Politte yesterday) will make two or three spot starts in the next month. Mike Ganter's report in the Sun confirms the Fordin story, and also mentions that by skipping Davis' next turn, the Jays avoid starting their similar lefties back-to-back.

Coach,

It sounds to me like they did back down. Tosca is quoted as saying that nobody is going to start on short rest. It sounds to me like they are going to do the 5-day rotation thing (as I outlined above):

Halladay: June 1, 6, 11, 17, 22, 27, July 2, 8, 13 (9 starts, 1 on 5 days' rest)
Lidle: June 3, 8, 13, 18, 23, 28, July 4, 9 (8 starts, 1 on 5 days' rest)
Escobar: June 4, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, July 5, 10 (8 starts, 1 on 5 days' rest)
Hendrickson: June 5, 12, 21, 26, July 1, 6, 11 (7 starts)
Davis: June 7, 14, 19, 24, 29, July 12 (6 starts)

The difference between their original plan and the current plan is that the 4 starters lose a start each and those 4 go back to the 5th guy.

Exactly my point. It sounds to me as if this decision was announced without actually speaking to any of the pitchers involved, because I've seen quotes from Lidle at least saying basically that he's happy now that he won't be "asked to start when he's not ready".
What they're doing now isn't a new thing at all, it's the kind of approach that teams use all the time without making a big thing of it.

The 4-man would have made the Jays title aspirations a lot more realistic, I think - if Escobar gets his act together (a big if, i'll admit) then all we're shopping for at the deadline is one reliable starter and boom, we're gold. Anyway, that's wishful thinking.