Neftali Feliz enjoyed early big-league success as a reliever, then was moved into the rotation and got hurt. In a recent chat, reader AJ wondered what might become of Feliz, who had Tommy John surgery last August and is on-target for a return in the second half of 2013. My answer waffled, but I mentioned the risk of making such a conversion.
In the chat, I cited Byung-Hyun Kim as a cautionary tale. Have there been others?
After trying several criteria, I settled on all pitchers who had made at least 150 big-league appearances by age 24, with 95 percent of games as a reliever but at least one start. This yields 13 names, which we'll call Group A:
The rest of this article is restricted to Baseball Prospectus Subscribers.
Not a subscriber?
Click here for more information
on Baseball Prospectus subscriptions or use the buttons to the right to subscribe and get access to the best baseball content on the web.
Geoff, I can find your comments about Feliz in the chat you reference, but not any mention of Byung-Hyun Kim. What am I missing? I was curious to see what you said.
Well, Timber, this is awkward. I was thinking of Kim when I wrote the comment but apparently never committed that thought to electrons. What I would have said isn't much more than what I said here in the introduction, i.e., that Kim provides an obvious cautionary tale worthy of further investigation.
None of these guys was Neftali Feliz. Very few were high-end prospects coming up. Kim had developed into a Kimbrell-esque closer, but the circumstances of his becoming a starter were totally different than Feliz. He became a starter because of his post-season implosions - both he and the D-backs were afraid of him being their closer. He was never a full time starter in the minors. Feliz was a full time starter in the minors and his relief career figured to be a brief stop.
His starting career was a small sample size to be sure, but I see no reason to believe he doesn't have the same likelihood of returning as a successful starter as any other young, successful pitcher who has TJ surgery.
I dug deeper to see which became full time starters after relieving for an extended period of time. We have Kim, Rawley, Allen, Daal, and maybe Hernandez. Hernandez was brought up as starter. Moved to pen for 3 years until 1980 where he started 7 games and pitched 108.1 innings. The next year in 1981 he pitched in 12 games. Why did he only pitch in 12 games? Did the Cubs try and convert him to a starter that year only for him to get hurt and come back late in the year and relieve? He stayed in the bullpen after that.
You mentioned Kim's injuries.
Rawley performed miserably for New York in 1984 while only pitching in 29 games 1 1/2 years after making the transition to starter. Was he ever injured? He straightened himself out with Philly and became solid. Settled in and made an All Star team in 1986, but also missed starts. Only started 26 games that year, but after starting for that long I don't want to speculate that this was because of the conversion.
Allen started some in 1983 and didn't start again regularly until 1986, when you said he had those injuries. You also said he had them in 1985, but he didn't start any games that year, so it's most likely that those events are dependent of each other.
Dall spot started in minors. Became regular starter in 1998 and performed admirably. Hit a bump in 2000, 19 losses and a 6.14 ERA while making only 16 starts and pitching in 20 games. Did Dall suffer some sort of injury? He was never the same starter after that.
My results are just as inconclusive as yours but there is a pattern that suggests that you shouldn't move starting pitching prospects to the bullpen if you plan on them starting for you in the future.
Western Front: An Almo... (12/18)
The Keeper Reaper: Rel... (01/09)
4 comments have been left for this article. 
Surprise Me!
Geoff, I can find your comments about Feliz in the chat you reference, but not any mention of Byung-Hyun Kim. What am I missing? I was curious to see what you said.
Well, Timber, this is awkward. I was thinking of Kim when I wrote the comment but apparently never committed that thought to electrons. What I would have said isn't much more than what I said here in the introduction, i.e., that Kim provides an obvious cautionary tale worthy of further investigation.