.
Q. How many RP's effectively convert to starters?
A. Not many.
Part of the reason is because, as has also been noted, most of those RP's were placed in the rotation in the first place, because they wouldn't have been very good starters. Or, as is true with Mark Lowe, because their arms wouldn't hold up to it.
But usually it's that the pitcher isn't good enough to throw 180 innings effectively. Most RP's would be overexposed in the rotation.
..............
If you want one very compelling example, though, check Adam Wainwright.
He had a 2006 season verrrrry similar to Shawn Kelley's 2006 -- came up as a reliever, pitched very effectively. 8+ strikeouts, 2+ walks. Saved a few games. Crucial part of the Cards' bullpen.
2007, he was placed into the rotation, and how would you like Shawn Kelley to run Wainwright's 2007-09 over the next three years? Wainwright's K/BB, over the three years, are also exactly what you dream of from Kelley -- dropping to 6/3 in the rotation but then getting better over the years.
Wainwright, however, was a 3-pitch pitcher even in the bullpen, and a 4-pitch guy to start the 2007 season. So that's one difference. As you know, I don't personally care a lot about number of pitches, but there's full disclosure. :- )
.
Q. Is that pretty rare?
A. It's not super common. Although the Rangers' blogger, doing such a fine job discussing C.J. Wilson, points out Scott Feldman in his own home town there. (I don't buy the Dempster example.)
Would you take a Scott Feldman season from Kelley in 2010?
Feldman, by the way, throws the same pitch mix that Kelley does -- 75% fastballs and cutters, 20% curves, show a changeup once every inning or two. So there's a guy, Feldman, who won 17 games with Kelley's repertoire. First time out.
Except Kelley pitches better than Feldman does. Kelley throws harder, and with better location. And would in the rotation, or would need to be switched back.
It's true that Feldman isn't going to win 17 again. But that's the part I like: Kelley's quite a bit better than Scott Feldman is, and Feldman (among others) adapted to the RP-SP conversion seamlessly.
...........
One of my favorite SP conversions was Jeff Fassero. He started as a SP in the low minors, was "wisely" converted to RP, came up as a RP, was good at it...
After two years as a RP, the Expos started trying him as a swing man, 15-20 starts a year. His 5th year in the bigs, he fanned 222 men and walked 55...
People just didn't give him credit for how good he was.
.
Q. I still think I like Kelley where he is -- giving us a pennant-class bullpen.
A. Me too.
And the beauty of stretching Kelley out, is that it's not like there's a huge cost associated. Pitch him three IP, then four, then five. If you decide against, so what?
It's going to leave me and you and the other guy in the same place that Wok would be -- okay, go throw your 50 pitches, then throw your 70, and then we'll talk again. No big loss.
.
Q. How is Shawn Kelley's changeup?
A. Let me check my crazy 8 ball.
....if it's no good, he throws Feldman's (and Edwin Jackson's, and Jason Johnson's, and...) pitch mix. If he has a change, I still hope he doesn't throw it more than 10% of the time. That fastball is his calling card.
.
Q. Anything else?
A. Ya. Historically, don't forget that the delineation between starting and relieving blends softly casual one into the other.
There are a lot of pitchers who swing between one and the other. Ramiro Mendoza, Steve Karsay, all kinds of guys .... earlier in the 20th century the flip-flopping was routine.
Several times in M's history we've seen one-inning relievers go out and start a game, go 5 innings, with zero preparation. Just get a 1.0 1 0 0 1 2 hold on Monday, and then throw 5 innings on Friday.
It's still getting hitters out. The transition isn't like 1B to 2B there, Dustin -- pitching the 7th or 1st, the catcher still sets up the same way.
.............
There's inertia involved. The M's have got to love a 8.0, 1.6 control guy in the bullpen. It's hard to give that up.
Still. Do you think you have a 15-game winner for free? If you do, you can't afford not to accept it.
Cheers,
Dr D
Printer-friendly version