Bullpens grew after teams figured out that there were a lot of guys out there who could be nasty for an inning or two but couldn't hold up over 6 or 7 innings, either because of bad mechanics or stuff that had decreasing returns the more hitters saw it.
This happened about the same time that baseball guys figured out that throwing a ball is an unnatural motion, so rather than finding the few guys who can throw 300 innings a year it might be smart to split the workload, save some arms, and try to extend careers.
When converting a reliever to starter, it's really just stuff and mechanics to me. Wilhelmsen has a bombshell curve that he can't throw for strikes out of the pen 4 times out of 5. He has a 97 mph fastball, so losing a little velo wouldn't kill him. His changeup is actually pretty decent, he just doesn't throw enough pitches in his appearances to do more than tinker with it. And his mechanics are fine - he's no Stephen Pryor.
So I don't see the holdup. As you said, the conversion of relievers to starters does happen. It's not a singularity. Look, if we had Fister as a long man and somebody talked about making him a starter, there would be concerns about whether he could keep throwing darts like that over 6 innings, or keep fooling hitters, or if his fastball would hold up to more intense scrutiny. But it'd be worth trying.
This is too. The worst thing that happens is he's no good as a starter and transitions back to the pen as a long man or 7th inning guy who tries to work his way back to the back end. The best thing is that we don't give some other team a wobbly reliever that they turn into a great starter. I mean, isn't that the Morrow complaint? We bullpenned him, then traded him as a bullpenner when he should have had starter value which some other team saw from the start?
Consider this a potential correction in that dynamic.
~G
Add new comment
1