Now that Carlos Carrasco is out for at least the first six weeks of the season, the starting pitching depth that the Mets acquired will get tested right away. Also getting a test will be manager Luis Rojas, who had already talked about using an opener before Carrasco went down and now that seems almost certain to happen. Is the opener a good idea? A bad idea? Or is it much ado about nothing?
The theory behind the opener is that you use a short reliever to pitch one or two innings and then have your “starter” enter the game, hopefully to give you five innings. The opener takes the tough hitters at the top of the lineup and turns the ball over to the starter for the lower part of the lineup. Since most managers want to limit their bottom-of-the-rotation guys from facing a good hitter three times, this makes it so that instead of facing, say, Ronald Acuna Jr. Ozzie Albies and Freddie Freeman three times, our starter instead will face Austin Riley, Christian Pache and the pitcher in his third time thru the order.
The ideal is that your opener gives you two clean innings, going six up and six down in the order. Then you bring on your starter for the third inning and hopefully he follows suit with another clean frame. Then it’s the fourth inning and your starter is facing the top of the lineup for the first time. If he can get thru the order two more times, over a span of four innings, he closes out his appearance against the bottom of the order, facing the opposing team’s weakest hitters for a third time, rather than the best hitters a third time.
If it works that way, then your opener and your starter have gotten you through seven innings, leaving your two best relievers to close things out.
Sounds great in theory. The key is having an opener who can keep runners off base. It doesn’t do you much good if they knock the opener around and you must bring in your starter before the first inning is even over. And since you don’t want to use your best relievers – you still want them for the eighth and ninth innings – you have to have a pretty solid pen.
With the 2021 Mets, you’d hold back Edwin Diaz and Trevor May for the end of the game. So, who do you use as an opener? You want to avoid guys who walk a lot of batters, which probably eliminates Dellin Betances and Jeurys Familia. You might think Seth Lugo would be an ideal guy to use in this situation. But you would be wrong. Lugo’s issue is getting through the order the first time, not the third.
So, who does that leave us with? The relievers who pitched at least 10 innings in 2020 with the best WHIP – Erasmo Ramirez (0.837) and Chasen Shreve (1.160) – are no longer on the team. Miguel Castro and Franklyn Kilome each had WHIPs over 2.0 so don’t even think about them. The fear is that Rojas will use Robert Gsellman as an opener, which seems crazy. But it seemed crazy to use him as a starter after he pitched one inning in a calendar year and they did that. It seemed crazy to tender him a contract in the offseason but they did that, too.
This seems like the role that Sam McWilliams could have been utilized. But they’ve already optioned him. Aaron Loup seems an unlikely candidate, in that they probably would want to hold him for high-leverage matchups against LHB late in games. So, that leaves us with Jacob Barnes and Drew Smith, assuming one of them actually makes the roster out of Spring Training.
Both Barnes (1.278) and Smith (1.143) had decent WHIPs last year but those were in small samples and go against what they’ve done previously in the majors. And Barnes hasn’t exactly impressed in Grapefruit League action so far with the Mets.
The other possibility is to use a starter in this role. Either Joey Lucchesi or Jordan Yamamoto figure to move into the rotation with Carrasco out. Perhaps one of these could be the opener and the other could be the guy to come in to replace him and give you bulk innings. But if a guy capable of going six innings gives you two scoreless frames – wouldn’t you leave him in for more innings?
It’s easy to be against the opener because on the surface it seems like a crazy idea. If you’re going to have a pitcher go five innings – why not have him as the starter? But there’s a tactical advantage to be had if your manager plays his cards right and if you have an opener who can get the job done. The question is: Do the Mets have either of these?
Last year we couldn’t get Rojas to bat guys with high OBPs in the leadoff spot and his pitching choices frequently left a lot to be desired. Shouldn’t he master those before he moves on to other strategical ploys? Also, we’ve only outlined what happens in an ideal scenario. How will Rojas react when the opener doesn’t have it? Does he have the managerial feel to remove his pitcher in the first inning?
And much like with the LOOGY, you must have the personnel to run the gambit successfully. Do the Mets have a reliever who is a good candidate to use as an opener? Do they have starters who can come on in either the first or second inning with runners on base and limit the damage? Can Rojas run his bullpen so he doesn’t use his opener too much as a traditional reliever when the other four starters are going?
One of my biggest complaints with 21st Century baseball is when teams manage for an idea, rather than the talent on hand. If you have starters who can throw lots of innings and a shutdown closer, than a LOOGY makes sense. If your bullpen is already overworked, there’s no sense compounding the issue by carrying a guy who only faces one or two batters a game.
The idea with the opener is that the Rays and other clubs have had success with the move. It’s always a good idea to investigate how good teams do things and see if it makes sense for you to do the same. The top clubs all invest heavily in their infrastructure and the Mets were way behind in this department with previous ownership. It absolutely made sense for the Mets to beef up in this area. But the opener? For the 2021 Mets, it seems like following a trend, rather than a sound baseball decision.
Mike Montgomery or Tommy Hunter could be ideal for this role. I’m expecting it to be Montgomery actually and only with luchessi. Also expecting Peterson to start in the minors and Yamamoto and Luchessi to hold down the 4/5 til June.
In the past 3 years Montgomery has a 4.41 ERA and a 1.470 WHIP.
Hunter might not be a bad pick, with a 3.74 ERA and a 1.170 WHIP the past three years. But he’s not having a particularly good ST
I’d be curious about his ERA and WHIP in the first 2 innings of a game.
Since the Mets appear to be heavy in the starting pitchers, it makes sense to use two starters, each going 3 or 4 innings, especially going R-L with these, like Lucchesi and Yamamoto. The benefit is to keep your marginal starters involved in the active team mix, and allow the manager to extend either starter if he is being effective and has favorable hitters lined up for the next inning.
I hope Peterson gets first dibs on the 5th starter role… he earned it with solid rookie season and promising potential.
Also, I’m ready to pull the plug on Familia and Betances. Instead, maybe keep Tarpley, who can hardly do worse for one inning of work and gives some LH options. Relievers who walk hitters are a lost game waiting to happen.
The theory behind an opener sounds convincing, but I was under the impression that the Mets bullpen is most likely our Achilles heel for the season, so why trot them out? I would rather see the troika of Yamamato, Peterson, Lucchesi do 3-4 innings per game. Let those three be our #s 4/5. If it so happens that any of them is doing fine in a particular game, let them go 5 or 6 innings and then bring in bullpen arms; especially if we have a big lead.
I agree that Rojas will be severely tested in how he utilizes his bullpen and handle the loss of Carrasco; but isn’t that true of all managers? I, for one, am a skeptic regarding how good of a manager Luis will be. I hope time proves me wrong.
In a variation on the opener strategy, I remember when Pedro Martinez was nearing the end of his career with the Mets that he could be very effective for 4-5 innings and then he fell apart. The Mets had another starter whose name I’ve forgotten who could go 4 innings before the roof fell in. I kept wondering why they didn’t start Martinez and let him pitch his 4-5 innings and then go to the other starter for 4. It seemed to me that they’d make a pretty successful starter together and would save the bullpen. The Mets never did it. As Wobbit and Footballhead have pointed out, the Mets have a few starters who might be effective for a shorter number of innings. Perhaps they could pair two of them up to form one starter. As Brian has pointed out, a team should play to the strength of their players.
I have had the same thought for a long time – the use of paired pitching. In this case, if they can use Lucchesi and Yamamoto as 5 inning and 4 inning guys, assuming they are pitching well, it would give the bullpen a day of rest. Also, if they are used as the ‘5th’ starter, deGrom would follow and he can generally be counted on for 7 innings. That would keep the pen fresh.
I would actually alternate the starts for the paired pitchers to give each an opportunity to start the game.
I do not like the concept of the opener at all. Two issues. First, if a starter is not good enough to face the full line-up at least three times, maybe they should find a better starter. Second, by definition, it automatically ‘wastes’ a bullpen appearance that they might need later.
I like your idea of alternating paired pitchers, though in Pedro Martinez’s case, he was a star and so had to be the one to start, even at the end of his career. I also like your idea of using Lucchesi and Yamamoto as a pair. Bullpen management and giving the relievers sufficient rest has been a major problem for the Mets in recent years.