So goes without saying Badenhop had quite a breakout season. You could make the argument that he was our second best reliever behind Kiko.
Coming up through the minors, the report on him was simple: a good control GB pitcher. These aspects certainly translated to the majors; His 3.00 BB/9 is well below the 3.46 league average, and he finished first on the staff with a 54% ground ball rate.
But something else occurred. He struck players out. He would finish the season with a slightly above average K/9 of 7.13 after having a slightly below average K/9 last year of 6.65, meaning his career sits on an average rate of 6.94.
This is a far cry of what to suspect. The season before breaking into the Marlins' staff, he would post a 5.3 K/9 as a 24 year old in A+ ball. Excluding rehab starts, his minor league K/9 sits at 5.99.
Which then brings up quite an obvious question: if his stuff is good enough to strike out major league hitters, how is it not good enough to strike out minor league hitters?
The quickest answer would be: His stuff has changed. But there have been no reports of Badenhop trying something new, throughout the minors he was reported as being a Sinker/Slider/Change Up pitcher, which is exactly what he has been in the majors.
However, that slider. Both Dan Meyer and Ricky Nolasco credit a lot of their success to a slider taught to them by Mark Wiley. Perhaps it's a different slider then?
It certainly wouldn't appear so. Looking at Pitch/FX data, both Meyer's and Nolasco's sliders are of the "slider-cutter" variety. Badenhop's has more movement, being more of the "slider-curve" variety.
Now the biggest argument to be made is his move to the bullpen. In his career as a starter, he's sitting on a K/9 of 6.16, not much of a reach from his 5.99 MILB K/9. As a reliever, it has jumped all the way to 7.42. An increase in K's from starter to bullpen should be expected. So are his K-rates simply just from now having an ability to go more full-tilt? Right now that appears to be the case, though it still seems strange that a pitcher with a inability to strike out MILB hitters could sustain a pretty above average K rate against ML hitters.
But this brings up another question regarding Burke Badenhop: If he is so effective as a reliever, and the fact that the Marlins only have one pitcher without a question mark next to his name (regardless of the size of the Q), why not try him again as a starter?
Fact remains he has sucked as his time as a starter. His career ERA as a starter is 6.95, compared to 3.28 as a reliever. And his K/9 is far from the only rate change. His BB/9 are not even comparable; 4.57 v.s. 2.68 (He basically turns from Josh Johnson to Andrew Miller). He has given up 2 more HRs and 4 more doubles in 30 less innings, good for a ISO battle of .179 and .087.
Fact also remains that we're talking about a grand total of 45 innings as a starter, far from a decent sample size. You're looking at the fact that most of those innings came last year as a rookie trying to adjust to the ML level. He only made two starts this year, one of which was a horrible start against the cubs. But he was also injured and uncharacteristically walked 4 in 1.2 innings, showing that his location wasn't there. And in his other start, he went 5 innings (He could have gone more, but his arm was not stretched out and was pulled after 80 pitches) while only giving up 1 run (a HR), while striking out 3, walking one, and getting a GB 60% of the time against a very potent philly offense.
And for as much as you can talk about how he's going more full tilt in a reliever roll, it's not like he is a 1 IP guy. He has averaged 2 IP per relief appearance. Only 8 of his 33 relief appearances this year were for 1 inning or less. He had a 3.94 ERA in the 11 outings where he went more than 2 IP.
Based off his bullpen numbers, is it really pompous to assume he could have a K/9 of 6, a BB/9 of 3.5, and a HR/9 of 0.9 as a starter? We're still talking about a significant drop in rates there compared to his BP numbers. It would put him at a 4.33 FIP, which is above average for a starter (which is normally around the 4.5 range). You could do quite a lot worse in the back of the bullpen.
It also brings up another rather large thought process. Those rate numbers are basically what we are to suspect from Volstad. If you truly believe Badenhop can do that as a starter, and considering Volstad's rightfully superior trade value, would it be so wrong to trade Volstad and give Badenhop his spot?
Certainly Volstad has more potential, as you really hope he can start locating his pitches better and have a BB/9 more towards the 2's. But we're not talking about ace potential here.
And then a second thought process: If he was our second best reliever this past season, and our first is leaving via free agency, why should he not be the lead candidate for the closer roll? Hell, especially with his ability to go multiple innings. It'd never actually happen in the real world, but could imagine how great a closer that can go 2 ip regularly be? With his arm stretched out like it is, it shouldn't be that much of an issue.
But comparing him to Leo, who's completely ineffective XBH/HR, and Lindstrom, who's completely ineffective in everything outside of XBH/HR, why should he not be a leading candidate? Yeah, you should certainly expect some regression in his rate stats. Even then he performs better though.
And I'm sure the first argument will be we will then need to fill the long relief role. However, is it really that big of a hole to fill? The roll is mostly used when the starter was knocked out early, meaning the other team likely already has a lot of runs. We also already have another cost controlled serviceable pitcher who has shown he can go multiple innings in Brian Sanches.
mmm I think that's it.
Coming up through the minors, the report on him was simple: a good control GB pitcher. These aspects certainly translated to the majors; His 3.00 BB/9 is well below the 3.46 league average, and he finished first on the staff with a 54% ground ball rate.
But something else occurred. He struck players out. He would finish the season with a slightly above average K/9 of 7.13 after having a slightly below average K/9 last year of 6.65, meaning his career sits on an average rate of 6.94.
This is a far cry of what to suspect. The season before breaking into the Marlins' staff, he would post a 5.3 K/9 as a 24 year old in A+ ball. Excluding rehab starts, his minor league K/9 sits at 5.99.
Which then brings up quite an obvious question: if his stuff is good enough to strike out major league hitters, how is it not good enough to strike out minor league hitters?
The quickest answer would be: His stuff has changed. But there have been no reports of Badenhop trying something new, throughout the minors he was reported as being a Sinker/Slider/Change Up pitcher, which is exactly what he has been in the majors.
However, that slider. Both Dan Meyer and Ricky Nolasco credit a lot of their success to a slider taught to them by Mark Wiley. Perhaps it's a different slider then?
It certainly wouldn't appear so. Looking at Pitch/FX data, both Meyer's and Nolasco's sliders are of the "slider-cutter" variety. Badenhop's has more movement, being more of the "slider-curve" variety.
Now the biggest argument to be made is his move to the bullpen. In his career as a starter, he's sitting on a K/9 of 6.16, not much of a reach from his 5.99 MILB K/9. As a reliever, it has jumped all the way to 7.42. An increase in K's from starter to bullpen should be expected. So are his K-rates simply just from now having an ability to go more full-tilt? Right now that appears to be the case, though it still seems strange that a pitcher with a inability to strike out MILB hitters could sustain a pretty above average K rate against ML hitters.
But this brings up another question regarding Burke Badenhop: If he is so effective as a reliever, and the fact that the Marlins only have one pitcher without a question mark next to his name (regardless of the size of the Q), why not try him again as a starter?
Fact remains he has sucked as his time as a starter. His career ERA as a starter is 6.95, compared to 3.28 as a reliever. And his K/9 is far from the only rate change. His BB/9 are not even comparable; 4.57 v.s. 2.68 (He basically turns from Josh Johnson to Andrew Miller). He has given up 2 more HRs and 4 more doubles in 30 less innings, good for a ISO battle of .179 and .087.
Fact also remains that we're talking about a grand total of 45 innings as a starter, far from a decent sample size. You're looking at the fact that most of those innings came last year as a rookie trying to adjust to the ML level. He only made two starts this year, one of which was a horrible start against the cubs. But he was also injured and uncharacteristically walked 4 in 1.2 innings, showing that his location wasn't there. And in his other start, he went 5 innings (He could have gone more, but his arm was not stretched out and was pulled after 80 pitches) while only giving up 1 run (a HR), while striking out 3, walking one, and getting a GB 60% of the time against a very potent philly offense.
And for as much as you can talk about how he's going more full tilt in a reliever roll, it's not like he is a 1 IP guy. He has averaged 2 IP per relief appearance. Only 8 of his 33 relief appearances this year were for 1 inning or less. He had a 3.94 ERA in the 11 outings where he went more than 2 IP.
Based off his bullpen numbers, is it really pompous to assume he could have a K/9 of 6, a BB/9 of 3.5, and a HR/9 of 0.9 as a starter? We're still talking about a significant drop in rates there compared to his BP numbers. It would put him at a 4.33 FIP, which is above average for a starter (which is normally around the 4.5 range). You could do quite a lot worse in the back of the bullpen.
It also brings up another rather large thought process. Those rate numbers are basically what we are to suspect from Volstad. If you truly believe Badenhop can do that as a starter, and considering Volstad's rightfully superior trade value, would it be so wrong to trade Volstad and give Badenhop his spot?
Certainly Volstad has more potential, as you really hope he can start locating his pitches better and have a BB/9 more towards the 2's. But we're not talking about ace potential here.
And then a second thought process: If he was our second best reliever this past season, and our first is leaving via free agency, why should he not be the lead candidate for the closer roll? Hell, especially with his ability to go multiple innings. It'd never actually happen in the real world, but could imagine how great a closer that can go 2 ip regularly be? With his arm stretched out like it is, it shouldn't be that much of an issue.
But comparing him to Leo, who's completely ineffective XBH/HR, and Lindstrom, who's completely ineffective in everything outside of XBH/HR, why should he not be a leading candidate? Yeah, you should certainly expect some regression in his rate stats. Even then he performs better though.
And I'm sure the first argument will be we will then need to fill the long relief role. However, is it really that big of a hole to fill? The roll is mostly used when the starter was knocked out early, meaning the other team likely already has a lot of runs. We also already have another cost controlled serviceable pitcher who has shown he can go multiple innings in Brian Sanches.
mmm I think that's it.
Comment