CSS Button No Image Css3Menu.com

Baseball Prospectus home
Click here to log in Click here for forgotten password Click here to subscribe

<< Previous Article
Premium Article Punk Hits: Will the Ya... (08/29)
<< Previous Column
Premium Article Overthinking It: What ... (08/28)
Next Column >>
Premium Article Overthinking It: From ... (08/31)
Next Article >>
What You Need to Know:... (08/30)

August 29, 2012

Overthinking It

What Stephen Strasburg's Season Could Have Looked Like

by Ben Lindbergh

the archives are now free.

All Baseball Prospectus Premium and Fantasy articles more than a year old are now free as a thank you to the entire Internet for making our work possible.

Not a subscriber? Get exclusive content like this delivered hot to your inbox every weekday. Click here for more information on Baseball Prospectus subscriptions or use the buttons to the right to subscribe and get instant access to the best baseball content on the web.

Subscribe for $4.95 per month
Recurring subscription - cancel anytime.

a 33% savings over the monthly price!

Purchase a $39.95 gift subscription
a 33% savings over the monthly price!

Already a subscriber? Click here and use the blue login bar to log in.

WARNING: Here there be hindsight.

We can’t say Mike Rizzo didn’t warn us. “There’s not going to be a whole lot of tinkering done,” he said. “We’re going to run him out there until his innings are done.” That was on February 20th, the earliest reference by Rizzo I can find to any specific plan for limiting Stephen Strasburg’s workload. We knew then that the Nats weren’t going to get creative: they were going to pitch Strasburg like any other starter until he was fresh out of innings. What we didn’t know then (and what we still don’t really know now), is when that would be. For months, everyone assumed Strasburg would go into storage after 160 innings. Why 160? As far as I can tell, the 160 meme began innocently enough, with this sentence from an mlb.com article by Bill Ladson on February 19th: “He is expected to throw 160 innings, the same number his teammate Jordan Zimmermann threw last year after coming off elbow reconstruction.” Expected by whom? The article didn’t say. Certainly not by the Nationals. But before long, 160 was ubiquitous, and usually attributed to the team. By the time Rizzo denied the number had come from him in an article at BP in April, it was already accepted as fact.

After a five-inning outing last night, Strasburg is now fewer than 10 away from 160. If Rizzo was searching for a sign that shutting him down is the right thing to do, he couldn’t have asked for a better one than what he got: Strasburg’s second-worst start of the season, and a 9-0 loss to Miami. But one lousy outing won't change many other minds. What we think we know now is that he won’t go beyond 180 (which seems to be something Rizzo really said). On regular rest, without any tinkering, that would give him another five starts at the outside and prevent him from pitching in the playoffs. As good as the Nats’ other starters are, and as young and primed for the future as the rest of the roster is, losing their ace for October isn’t ideal. Ross Detwiler might be better than most post-season fourth starters, but he’s no Stephen Strasburg.

What if Rizzo had tinkered? What if the innings limit had stayed the same, but the innings hadn’t come quite so quickly? It’s a hypothetical question, in Strasburg’s case, but it’s a scenario we’ve seen play out elsewhere in the NL East.

Strasburg had Tommy John surgery on September 3, 2010. Braves starter Kris Medlen underwent the same procedure a couple weeks earlier, on August 18th. Strasburg returned to a professional mound on August 7 of the following season and totaled 44 1/3 innings. Medlen followed in his footsteps several weeks later, getting into a game on September 25th and pitching 2 1/3 innings before the end of the year.

That takes us to 2012. Strasburg started the season in the rotation and has stayed there ever since, without any major adjustments made to his schedule. Medlen started the season in the bullpen and didn’t make his first start until July 31st. Since then, he’s made six, and he hasn’t allowed more than one run in any of them. In his last 28 1/3 innings, including eight last night in San Diego, he hasn’t allowed any. (Almost halfway to Hershiser!) Medlen wasn’t in Atlanta’s playoff rotation a month ago, but he might be now. It’s an option, at least: because he started the season in the bullpen, Medlen is up to only 95 innings, nowhere near the end of his leash.

According to an item in Ken Rosenthal’s Tuesday column, though, Medlen’s leash at the start of the season was no longer than Strasburg’s:

Braves manager Fredi Gonzalez said GM Frank Wren told him in spring training that Medlen would be available for 160 to 180 innings — the same restriction that the Nationals likely will apply to Strasburg. Wren also warned Gonzalez: If you open with Medlen in the rotation, you might never want to take him out.

Gonzalez resisted that temptation. He put Medlen in the bullpen, where he could ease some of the strain on Craig Kimbrel and Jonny Venters. Then he waited for an opportunity to transition him to starting, which came courtesy of Jair Jurrjens’s 6.89 ERA. Now the Braves have Medlen’s services for as long as they need him: if he remains in the rotation and everything plays out perfectly in the playoffs for Atlanta, he’ll approach the lower bound of his innings limit right at the end of their run.

Forget, for a moment, whether innings limits even make sense and whether the Nats should have been more or less cryptic about their plans from a PR perspective. Let’s assume the 160-180 range was set in stone, that to go beyond it would have meant certain surgery. Did the Braves do a better job of working around their post-surgery pitcher’s innings limit? Should the Nats have done something similar?

In hindsight, perhaps. The Nats started the season with Drew Storen on the DL and a rotation so deep they were forced to send John Lannan to Syracuse. Even a few weeks in the bullpen would have ensured that Strasburg could contribute all year.

But despite the similarities—the surgery, the recovery timeline, the innings limit—Strasburg and Medlen aren’t much alike. Strasburg is the former best pitching prospect ever, a prodigy who pitched like an ace from his first start on. Medlen is a former 10th-round pick with a mid-rotation ceiling. Medlen had major-league experience in relief, while Strasburg has never pitched out of the pen as a pro. Converting from the rotation to the bullpen and back isn’t without its risks, both physical and psychological, and while plenty of promising pitchers have debuted in the bullpen before snagging a rotation spot, few have gone back again after establishing themselves as starters. Those risks were much lower in Medlen’s case, both because he’s a less valuable arm and because he’s 2 ½ years older, which puts him out of the injury nexus.

There’s another factor to consider here: the Braves were expected to contend, while the Nationals weren’t. The BP staff picked the Nats to finish fourth in the East, without a single first-place vote.  An early end to the season for Strasburg wouldn’t be a big issue if the Nats were well out of the race. When Jordan Zimmermann was shut down in late August of last year, Washington was over 20 games out in the East, and no one said a word. The Nats’ success probably shouldn’t have been as surprising to them as it was to outside observers, but expecting the NL’s best record would have been unrealistic. Something else to keep in mind: the Nats are ahead in the East by only four games. If the Braves finish strong, those extra regular-season innings from Strasburg might make the difference between a Wild Card spot and a guaranteed trip to the NLDS. And the gain in championship expectancy from avoiding a play-in game could be greater than the gain from starting Strasburg over Detwiler a few times in October.

Strasburg will be encased in carbonite one of these weeks, barring a credibility-killing change of heart by Rizzo. When it happens, we’ll all be sorry to see him go. Washington will be even sorrier. As galling as it might be to see their division rival driven by creative management of Medlen, though, and as well as it might have worked out, the Nats can’t be faulted for not starting Strasburg in the pen. But we can still take exception to what seems like a lack of flexibility. As Tom Tango wrote recently,  

If you box yourself into a “pitch every 5 days” or “pitch every 5 games”, and there’s a decent chance that random variation itself is going to propel you into the playoffs, then you’re going to be stuck.  That’s the Nationals.  They probably had a 15-20% chance of making the playoffs at the start of the season based on what we knew.  But once they got to be ten games over, then their odds jumped to probably 40-50%.

At that point, they could have modified his pattern slightly.

In an interview on MLB Network Radio last September, Rizzo said:

If we're lucky enough and improved enough to be playing meaningful games in September [2012] and his pitch limits are up, just like Jordan Zimmermann this year, he will be done. We'll sit with our plan and we'll stick to it.

It’s good to make plans. It often makes sense to stick to them, no matter how strenuously relatively uninformed internet writers object. But other times, it makes the most sense to alter them. We’ve known for months that the Nats were better than we thought they were, and that their playoff odds were significantly higher than anyone had projected them to be before the season. That’s valuable information that Mike Rizzo didn’t have when his plan was put in place, and disregarding it out of a misguided commitment to staying the course—if that’s what Washington did—could cost them. A skipped start here, an earlier hook there, and we might not be debating this now. In Strasburg’s case, a little tinkering might have gone a long way. 

Ben Lindbergh is an author of Baseball Prospectus. 
Click here to see Ben's other articles. You can contact Ben by clicking here

29 comments have been left for this article. (Click to hide comments)

BP Comment Quick Links


Another way to think about it: if the Braves had been pitching Medlen in the rotation from day 1, instead of Jurrjens and his 6.89 ERA, maybe they wouldn't be 4 games back with 35 to play.

Also, I would not be surprised if the Nats calculated that their best path to contention this year was a fast start, and that they needed Strasburg in the rotation to make that happen.

Aug 29, 2012 07:30 AM
rating: 7
BP staff member Ben Lindbergh
BP staff

Possible, though I think they might be more in need of Medlen now than they were before Beachy broke.

Aug 29, 2012 07:40 AM

It's a complicated issue. At first, Mike Rizzo sounds like an unimaginative guy. It's just startling that in the languid pace of a 162-game season, that you wouldn't debate this stuff and consider alternatives, or would consider a plan of "running him out there till he's done" to be your best strategy. In a 16-game football season, sure -- you don't really have a ton of time to switch horses in midstream. But baseball? Come on.

At the same time, maybe this is an effective way of boxing themselves in and enforcing that innings limit. Had they shortened Strasburg's outings, given him more rest, moved him to the bullpen or in some other way enabled him to get to the end of September with 160 innings, then what? That's a much harder time to be saying, "nope, not gonna do it."

I guess when you have such a once-in-a-generation pitching prospect, maybe it's best not to try to squeeze every last drop out of him so early, and sticking to "the plan" is the safest course of all. Maybe not the most creative or effective, but the safest. With a pitcher like Strasburg, that's really not such a bad course to choose.

Aug 29, 2012 07:35 AM
rating: 2

The problem with the late start approach is twofold. Firstly, at the time that decisions were made, the Nats were odds against to reach the playoffs. Secondly, the Nats have an interest in getting Strasburg right up to his cap, so that the jump next season is not so big. In the long term, they'll want 240 innings a year or something like that from him.

Also, I've seen comments from medical folks that being too creative in terms of skipping starts, taking him out early and moving him back and forwards between the rotation and the pen is not ideal. I'm sure there is some flexibility, but perhaps not as much as people think.

Finally, there is huge value in winning the division. The Nats are four games ahead of Atlanta. That suggests a) that they need Strasburg now, and b) that having used him in other ways (a la Medlen), they may not even have the division lead at all.

The only alternative strategy that seems to me to have any merit is to say that he appears to be strong and healthy, and as long as that remains the case, you're going to keep sending him out every fifth day because you don't often get a chance of winning the WS. Not being a doctor, or privy to Strasburg's medicals, I don't know the risks in doing that. The Nationals have that information, and they are choosing to shut him down.

Aug 29, 2012 07:56 AM
rating: 3

All they needed to do was claim "elbow soreness" or "sore calf", and put Strasburg on the 15-day DL twice this year. This would have meant missing 6 starts, which would have kept him below his innings limit.

Aug 29, 2012 08:11 AM
rating: 0

But the doctors told them that stopping and starting Strasburg like this would put him at greater risk of injury.

Aug 30, 2012 05:41 AM
rating: 2

I think (in hindsight of course) that they could have found even 2 or 3 occurrences to skip him in the rotation, when they had off-days, or when his turn was against the Astros or some other bottom-feeder like that. They had Lannan, whom they could have brought up to spot-start here and there. We all were discussing how they really could have gone with a 6-man rotation for at least PART of the season, with Detwiler, Wang and Lannan ostensibly available.
However, as pointed out by many, they might not have the 5-game division lead had they done that. Without the fast start, they might not have built the confidence to play so well for the first 5 months. There are all sorts of "what-ifs."
Right NOW, I think I try and skip him once or maybe twice in September if possible, and try to get at least ONE playoff start out of him. Perhaps two.

Aug 30, 2012 06:10 AM
rating: 1

Another difference between Strasburg and Medlen is that Strasburg could be expected to put fannies in the seats. I don't claim to know, but I'd expect that the Nats sold quite a few extra tickets for his starts early in the season, before it became apparent that their playoff odds were pretty good after all.

Aug 29, 2012 08:15 AM
rating: 0

Actually, I think the attendance effect of Strasburg starts wore off at some point after he came back last year. I believe Mark Zuckerman (one of the beat writers) has documented that his impact on attendance this year is minimal. Attendance started going up significantly for all games once it became clear how good the team was (mid-May).

Aug 29, 2012 08:24 AM
rating: 0
BP staff member Ben Lindbergh
BP staff

Yeah, early this year, Nats attendance was pretty dismal, even when Strasburg started. an article about that.

Aug 29, 2012 08:26 AM
Other readers have rated this comment below the viewing threshold. Click here to view anyway.

The innings counting is insipid at best, since a perfect game could be registered in 27 pitches...or hundreds, considering max counts and foul balls, etc. Silly moi, I've been following the game for years, before robotics ruled, and I thought the idea was (actually it once was) to try to win it all. One has to wonder that were Rizzo directing one of his films, whether or not John Holmes might have been pulled (so to speak), uh, too soon.

Aug 29, 2012 08:46 AM
rating: -5

As someone who has attended seven years of games without a single meaningful one in September, I don't want Rizzo to try win at all costs this season. I'd rather be watching meaningful September games for the next seven years.

If all that mattered was winning this year, Rizzo should have traded Harper for Josh Hamilton, and Rendon for Greinke. But there's always a balance to be struck, and I'm glad that Rizzo is thinking about the long-term future of the franchise (even if he's wrong on Strasburg).

Aug 29, 2012 09:12 AM
rating: 7

That's what gets me about Nats fans through all this. Many of you are convinced you'll be in the playoffs every year for the next decade. That's crazy. Baseball rarely works that way. The Nats have a nice team and what SHOULD be a good future. But you never know.

I have a feeling if the season ends in the NLDS with a healthy Strasburg on the bench, you guys won't take it so well.

Aug 29, 2012 16:02 PM
rating: 4

I don't think anyone believes the Nats will be in the playoffs every year for the next decade. All I said was that I want to watch meaningful games in September. Of course a lot has to go right for a team to compete in any given year, but a properly constructed roster should be able to count on competitiveness year-in and year-out. That's what Rizzo is going for, and appears to be in good position to achieve.

In other words, I'd rather be the Braves, with consistently good teams, than the Marlins, with a Series win surrounded by complete disasters.

Aug 30, 2012 06:11 AM
rating: 1

As a Nats fan, I also realize that pitching Strasburg until we make the playoffs, and then throughout the playoffs doesn't guarantee victory. We could ride him into the NLCS, have him get hurt, and we lose anyway - or not get hurt. Or get hurt and win. Or we lose, and he gets injured next Spring because of the workload.

Taking Strasburg off the Nats isn't the same as taking Peyton off of the Colts for the playoffs.

Aug 30, 2012 09:25 AM
rating: 1
Matthew Avery

When I've heard Rizzo talk about it, the thing that he's emphasized most was getting young pitchers started with a "pattern" that most closely resembles being a major league starter. Starters begin pitching in the rotation in April and pitch every 5th day from then on until they're done. From what I understand, the Nationals FO believes in establishing this pattern with young pitchers will help avoid injuries in the future and make them better starters.

So while there were certainly alternative ways to arrange "160-180 innings" so that Strasburg could be pitching in September and beyond, it's unclear that this was a priority for the Nationals. They believe this particular pattern will be superior to others for the pitcher's performance in future seasons, which was the real concern at the beginning of the year.

Aug 29, 2012 09:13 AM
rating: 2

Why not keep him around and put him on a pitch count for the rest of the year, including the playoffs? Even just 5 innings of Strasburg in a big game is better than they'll get from someone else. I think shutting him down is crazy, I don't see dynasty material when I look at the Nats. They should go for it now.

Aug 29, 2012 09:43 AM
rating: 2

All they had to do was make him the #5 starter and started his season on April 14th against Cincy. You would have saved him two starts from the begining without gimmicks. Furthemore, there was a day off and a rain out at the end of May/early June where you could have skipped him there (as what typically happens with #5 starters). Lastly, they could have just kept him as the #5 following the All-star break, saving him another start there. Again, this plan is gimmick free(no Joba or Hughes rules) and you would have saved him four starts.

Aug 29, 2012 10:00 AM
rating: 6

What's interesting, and something that no one is talking about, is that Zimmerman should be shut down around 180 innings. The Nats need Oswalt.

Aug 29, 2012 10:07 AM
rating: 2
Mike Smith

Had this same thought the other day. What is the Zimmerman plan, and will he be available for the full playoff run? Even without Strasburg, a front two of Gonzalez and Zimmerman for the playoffs ain't bad at all.

Aug 29, 2012 10:35 AM
rating: 0

Zimmermann (two n's)has been experiencing some shoulder discomfort, though there's no indication at present the Nats plan to do anything other than offer early relief in games and perhaps an occasional extra day off, given the flexibility they have in their remaining schedule.

Aug 29, 2012 10:40 AM
rating: 0

If you go with the plan that you don't want to increase a "young" pitcher's innings by more than 50 in a year, Zimm'nn is OK for ~210 innings this season.

Aug 30, 2012 09:28 AM
rating: 0

25 is the general innings increase I've seen, especially for a young starter coming off TJ.

Aug 30, 2012 09:44 AM
rating: 0

Any of the "creative" ideas for what the Nats could have done to have Strasburg available to them in the playoffs (short of ignoring medical advice and their judgement on his overall limits) invariably involve reducing innings pitched during the regular season, and reserving them for a playoff opportunity.

Of course, having Stras in the rotation from the beginning of the year is one of the significant drivers in getting the Nats to where they are today. Just how were they to get to his point in the season 4 games up for the division, without his full effort season to date?

Aug 29, 2012 10:37 AM
rating: 1

What I think is interesting is that many people are faulting the Nats for replacing Strasburg with Lannan in September while at the same time advocating that the Nats should have replaced Strasburg with Lannan in April... A win is a win. The Nats are in the position that they are in now because of the games that they won in April and May.

Aug 30, 2012 09:27 AM
rating: 2

I feel like this wasn't the world's worst decision. After all, it's hard to imagine having started him off in the bullpen. Plus, if altering his workload somehow had prevented the Nats from their current lead, then, it would all have been for naught anyways. There are many factors to debate here, but the Nats seem to be making an informed decision. If they become reactionary, I'll be disappointed.

Aug 29, 2012 14:46 PM
rating: 2

Agree 100%.

Aug 29, 2012 18:38 PM
rating: -1

There are so many comments that I haven't read every detail, so sorry if this has already been said.

One problem with starting him slowly or holding him back is if you have a number of innings that you want him to throw, a DL stint during the season (for something totally unrelated let's assume) or something like that could leave you in a situation where you don't have enough of the season left to get him to his innings total because you were saving them. Presumably whatever number they had for him this year, they didn't think it was good for his rehab to fall well short of it either.

Aug 30, 2012 00:22 AM
rating: 0
BP staff member Ben Lindbergh
BP staff

Thanks for the good discussion, folks. I'm generally anti-innings limit, at least in a one-size-fits-all sense, but there are a lot of implementation angles to consider even if you accept that the Nationals' plan is sound. I could talk (or write) about Strasburg stuff all day.

Aug 30, 2012 00:28 AM
You must be a Premium subscriber to post a comment.
Not a subscriber? Sign up today!
<< Previous Article
Premium Article Punk Hits: Will the Ya... (08/29)
<< Previous Column
Premium Article Overthinking It: What ... (08/28)
Next Column >>
Premium Article Overthinking It: From ... (08/31)
Next Article >>
What You Need to Know:... (08/30)

Premium Article What You Need to Know: Bryant vs. Harper
West Coast By Us: Whatever, I'm Wearing Jort...
BP Wrigleyville
Premium Article Minor League Update: Games of Tuesday, May 2...
Premium Article The Prospectus Hit List: Wednesday, May 27
Premium Article Some Projection Left: Top 100 Draft Prospect...
Premium Article Rubbing Mud: Rubbing Not-Really-Mud

Premium Article Sobsequy: Compensation: A Dialogue Between T...
Premium Article Future Shock: 2013 Rookie of the Year Award
The Lineup Card: 7 Memorable Suspensions, Ba...
Fantasy Article Value Picks: Relievers for 8/29/12
Premium Article Collateral Damage Daily: Wednesday, August 2...
Premium Article The Prospectus Hit List: Wednesday, August 2...
What You Need to Know: Wednesday, August 29

2012-08-31 - BP Daily Podcast: Effectively Wild Episode 3...
2012-08-31 - Premium Article Overthinking It: From Prospect to Project to...
2012-08-30 - BP Daily Podcast: Effectively Wild Episode 3...
2012-08-29 - Premium Article Overthinking It: What Stephen Strasburg's Se...
2012-08-29 - BP Daily Podcast: Effectively Wild Episode 3...
2012-08-28 - Premium Article Overthinking It: What the New Skippers Have ...
2012-08-28 - BP Daily Podcast: Effectively Wild Episode 3...

2012-09-08 - Premium Article Overthinking It: The Mechanical Flaw Fixers
2012-09-07 - Premium Article Overthinking It: Feasting on the East
2012-08-31 - Premium Article Overthinking It: From Prospect to Project to...
2012-08-29 - Premium Article Overthinking It: What Stephen Strasburg's Se...
2012-08-28 - Premium Article Overthinking It: What the New Skippers Have ...
2012-08-24 - Premium Article Overthinking It: The A's, the Rays, and Two ...
2012-08-24 - Premium Article Overthinking It: Finding Life After 30

2014-05-13 - Premium Article Skewed Left: How Much Losing Jose Fernandez ...
2012-09-07 - Premium Article Raising Aces: The Ace-Time Continuum
2012-09-06 - Premium Article In A Pickle: How the Grinch Stole Strasmas