Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,713

    Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    The opener is making appearances across more and more teams in baseball. The Reds have yet you utilize it which is a tad surprising giving their new found focus on analytics. The Reds have a couple starting pitchers who seem like they would benefit from the opener. And they also have a great option to use as the opener. Personally, I would like to see the Reds use this strategy from time to time.

    Pitchers who would benefit:

    Tanner Roark - Typically only goes about 5 IP. his FIP jumps to 5.99 third time through the order
    Anthony DeSclafani - pitched beyond 5 IP in half his starts. FIP jumps to 6.50 third time through the order.

    Who becomes our opener:

    Michael Lorenzen - he's been pitching well this year and doesn't really have a defined role in the bullpen. He has previous starting experience so the impact of "opening" shouldn't be much. Another added benefit is his bat, especially when the Reds are on the road. If Lorenzen pitches 2 IP, he gets 1 AB.



    Thoughts and opinions?
    "Today was the byproduct of us thinking we can come back from anything." - Joey Votto after blowing a 10-1 lead and holding on for the 12-11 win on 8/25/2010.

  2. Likes:

    Bob Sheed (05-17-2019),DocRed (05-17-2019)

  3. Turn Off Ads?
  4. #2
    Member JaxRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    13,123

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    Sorry.... just don't see the benefit.
    The lowest acceptable payroll amount for ownership to show they are not greedy pigs is 15 million more than they are currently paying. No matter what that currently is.

  5. Likes:

    cumberlandreds (05-17-2019),KYExtemper (05-17-2019),mth123 (05-17-2019)

  6. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,713

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    Quote Originally Posted by JaxRed View Post
    Sorry.... just don't see the benefit.
    The theory is that your opener has better stuff than your starter or long guy, but doesn't have the stamina. So your opener faces the top of the order once, then your long guy starts with the bottom of the order and won't have to face the good hitters (top of the order) three times. You might get more innings out of your starter, or at least better performance in the innings they pitch. The preference should always be to have your better pitchers facing their opposing teams better hitters. Below is an example of how a game with an opener would, in theory, work out.

    Inning, pitcher, spot of hitters faced:
    1 - Opener (1-4)
    2 - Opener (5-7)
    3 - Starter (8-2)
    4 - Starter (3-6)
    5 - Starter (7-9)
    6 - Starter (1-5)
    7 - Starter (6-9)
    8/9 Bullpen
    Last edited by Griffey012; 05-17-2019 at 09:35 AM.
    "Today was the byproduct of us thinking we can come back from anything." - Joey Votto after blowing a 10-1 lead and holding on for the 12-11 win on 8/25/2010.

  7. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    4

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    Not sure why anyone is even talking about changing the rotation at this point....

  8. Likes:

    goldglover9 (05-17-2019),Old school 1983 (05-17-2019)

  9. #5
    Member Tracy Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    3,635

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    Quote Originally Posted by bing View Post
    Not sure why anyone is even talking about changing the rotation at this point....
    Ways to improve, no matter how successful something is at a given point, should always be discussed. That being said, I’m not wild about this particular idea.

  10. Likes:

    Griffey012 (05-17-2019),Old school 1983 (05-17-2019)

  11. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    267

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    Depends as always on the matchups. If there was a situation where the top 3/4 guys in the opponents lineup historically do very well against the Reds starting pitcher-- I'd be inclined to consider it. In fact, I wouldn't be opposed to Amir or even Wandy starting the games on Saturday and Sunday-- just so one of them can face Bellinger whose OPS is 1.387 vs righties this year. The caveat always being-- will the relief pitcher be comfortable starting the game? Will the SP be comfortable coming in the 2nd inning? Everyone has their routine they are comfortable with.


    Actually, considering how Pederson is 4-9 with 2 HR's and a double in his career vs Disco--- I'd really be inclined to open with a lefty not named Duke today, just so they could face Pederson and Bellinger in the 1st. (I'm guessing Pederson will be leadoff and Bellinger will bat 3rd.)

  12. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    27,173

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Griffey012 View Post
    The opener is making appearances across more and more teams in baseball. The Reds have yet you utilize it which is a tad surprising giving their new found focus on analytics. The Reds have a couple starting pitchers who seem like they would benefit from the opener. And they also have a great option to use as the opener. Personally, I would like to see the Reds use this strategy from time to time.

    Pitchers who would benefit:

    Tanner Roark - Typically only goes about 5 IP. his FIP jumps to 5.99 third time through the order
    Anthony DeSclafani - pitched beyond 5 IP in half his starts. FIP jumps to 6.50 third time through the order.

    Who becomes our opener:

    Michael Lorenzen - he's been pitching well this year and doesn't really have a defined role in the bullpen. He has previous starting experience so the impact of "opening" shouldn't be much. Another added benefit is his bat, especially when the Reds are on the road. If Lorenzen pitches 2 IP, he gets 1 AB.

    Thoughts and opinions?

    Lorenzen might be the last guy Reds would use as opener.

    With four man bench they could need him for late inning, or extra inning, emergencies as PH or OF.

    I don’t see a plan to have him out of the game by inning two or three.
    Last edited by Kc61; 05-17-2019 at 10:19 AM.

  13. Likes:

    RiverRat13 (05-17-2019)

  14. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    12,689

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    To me the opener makes sense when the other team is, for example, very lefty, and you want to use a lefty to open.

    It might be affective vs. The Reds.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  15. Likes:

    757690 (05-17-2019),Griffey012 (05-17-2019),RED VAN HOT (05-17-2019)

  16. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    2,046

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    Lorenzen might be the last guy Reds would use as opener.

    With four man bench they could need him for late inning, or extra inning, emergencies as PH or OF.
    Especially since Lorenzen is right handed and the starters are all right handed. Tampa seems to go with lefty / righty alternations going from their opener to there next pitcher. Garrett or Wandy might make some sense against the Dodgers to get Pederson/Bellinger out in the 1st, and then bring in Disco/Roark. But then you lose Garret or Wandy for the 7th or 8th. Bellinger gets to face our right handed starter at some point. In the 1st inning with no score and no one on base (hopefully) or in the 8th with the game on the line and ducks on the pond?

  17. #10
    Member Spanky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Northern Kentucky
    Posts
    911

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    I'm sure we will see it at some point, but I'd rather have our pitchers with better stuff later in the games. If our rotation was worse than it is right now I'd probably be more for it, but I just don't see the point at this time with the rotation we have.
    The television crews left and about 10 reporters remained in the room. That's when Price took his turn doing the talking.
    What followed was a five-minute, 34-second expletive-filled tirade. The final tally was 77 uses of the "F" word or a variant and 11 uses of a vulgar term for feces (two bovine, one equine).

  18. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,722

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    Will it cause the Reds to actually hit?

  19. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    382

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    Since everything seems to be changing in the game now and there is way less emphasis on complete games or even 7 innings really shake things up. Plan to have three pitchers each pitch three innings. Pitch 3 innings and have two days off and pitch again. Basically a 9 man rotation.

  20. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,713

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ladeda View Post
    Depends as always on the matchups. If there was a situation where the top 3/4 guys in the opponents lineup historically do very well against the Reds starting pitcher-- I'd be inclined to consider it. In fact, I wouldn't be opposed to Amir or even Wandy starting the games on Saturday and Sunday-- just so one of them can face Bellinger whose OPS is 1.387 vs righties this year. The caveat always being-- will the relief pitcher be comfortable starting the game? Will the SP be comfortable coming in the 2nd inning? Everyone has their routine they are comfortable with.


    Actually, considering how Pederson is 4-9 with 2 HR's and a double in his career vs Disco--- I'd really be inclined to open with a lefty not named Duke today, just so they could face Pederson and Bellinger in the 1st. (I'm guessing Pederson will be leadoff and Bellinger will bat 3rd.)
    You bring up a good point that I left out, wasn't really considering the Lefty/Right matchups as much as I should. I agree with you, on a team like LAD I think it would make a ton of sense to use the strategy with a lefty to face those guys early.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    Lorenzen might be the last guy Reds would use as opener.

    With four man bench they could need him for late inning, or extra inning, emergencies as PH or OF.

    I don’t see a plan to have him out of the game by inning two or three.
    He would essentially be pinch hitting early in the game though. Instead of using a pinch hitter in the top of the 5th or top of the 6th because Roark is out of gas, he is fine to keep going until the 7th or 8th innings.
    "Today was the byproduct of us thinking we can come back from anything." - Joey Votto after blowing a 10-1 lead and holding on for the 12-11 win on 8/25/2010.

  21. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,713

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    Quote Originally Posted by UPRedsFan View Post
    Especially since Lorenzen is right handed and the starters are all right handed. Tampa seems to go with lefty / righty alternations going from their opener to there next pitcher. Garrett or Wandy might make some sense against the Dodgers to get Pederson/Bellinger out in the 1st, and then bring in Disco/Roark. But then you lose Garret or Wandy for the 7th or 8th. Bellinger gets to face our right handed starter at some point. In the 1st inning with no score and no one on base (hopefully) or in the 8th with the game on the line and ducks on the pond?
    Tampa has pretty much went to using Stanek exclusively as the opener. They used Hunter Wood 1 time compared to 11 for Stanek. I agree on the Lefty/Right matchups though, Lorezen isn't dominant enough to ignore them in my opinion.

    In the situation you describe, Bellinger gets to face the righty starter one less time though. If he's up in the 8th with ducks on the pond you better be pulling the starter.
    "Today was the byproduct of us thinking we can come back from anything." - Joey Votto after blowing a 10-1 lead and holding on for the 12-11 win on 8/25/2010.

  22. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,377

    Re: Should the Reds use "The Opener"?

    I had completely forgotten that Jim Leyland started reliever Ted Power in Game 6 of the 1990 NLCS. Power gave up 1 run before Zane Smith came in relief in the 3rd as Smith was the original starter. As many remember, the Pirates lost the game 2-1. Power's only run he gave up was kinda fluky. He allowed 4 baserunners in 2.1 IP.

    Also remember, Ted Power saved Game 1 by striking out Chris Sabo in a pressure situation.

    In a pre-game interview, Pirates pitching coach Ray Miller said this about why they're starting Ted Power:
    "What we're saying is we're trying to everything we can to win this game. Normally, like anybody else would do when it gets Game 7 you hear every manager say 'We'll use everybody today because today's the day.' We're trying to do that a little bit earlier and try to turn their lineup over a little bit and. . . and in essence what it's done is hey 'It's the 7th inning when the game starts.'"
    I don't like the idea of "The Opener" in the regular season. However, I'm fine with using it in the playoffs. I would just worry about using it in the playoffs when you really haven't done it much in the regular season. Either way, I'm still in favor of using it in the playoffs when you're on your #3 or #4 starter.
    Last edited by Todd Gack; 05-17-2019 at 11:28 AM.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | cumberlandreds | Gallen5862 | Plus Plus | Powel Crosley | RedlegJake | The Operator