Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
Tony Sipp. Rafael Perez. Juan Lara. Tom Mastny. Ed Mujica. Has there ever been more Spring Training speculation surrounding a bunch of relievers, not one of whom is a good candidate to make the team? The Indians have been stockpiling power relief prospects conspicuously since acquiring Andy Brown three years ago. When I started ranking prospects here a year ago, I deliberately weighted my system against relievers, yet they kept popping up in great numbers, claiming four spots out of 13 in my most recent list. Three more are about to be added.
So there really is a groundswell of relief talent in the Indians system, and we were able to get a glimpse of it courtesy of the big-league club's first-half bust in 2006. Ed Mujica gave up no earned runs for five months, Tom Mastny went from nobody to closer and acquitted himself well enough, and Tony Sipp racked up big strikeout numbers in Akron all the while. People are interested.
What chances will these guys be given in 2007? Of course the needs of the big-league club will dictate that more than anything. But even beyond that, we can't read too much into the handling of these relievers, because there's going to be some roster-rule strangeness affecting the team's decisions. Mujica and Lara are on the 40-man, and Sipp is not; that is no accident. Mujica is a year younger than Sipp but was drafted three years younger. On top of that, the Rule 5 exemption was extended by a year -- after Mujica was added to the 40-man but before Sipp. So while Mujica was added at age 21 (end-of-2005), Sipp doesn't need to be added until age 24 (end-of-2007). That in and of itself will distort things.
Lara is the oldest of this group and in the middle with regard to service time and the options clock. He was added to the roster for the last three weeks of the 2006 season, which for option purposes is no different than adding him at the end of the year. The timing is interesting, because they could have chosen Sipp, and under the old CBA rules, they may have felt they had to. But at that moment (Sept. 6), the Indians at minimum knew that the owners were pushing hard for that extra year of Rule 5 exemption in the new CBA -- Dolan was one of the lead negotiators -- and probably suspected strongly that it was going to get done. That alone may be why Lara got the call, and Sipp never did.
So given everyone's age, ability, development path and roster status ... what does it all mean?
I think it means that Lara gets the first lefty callup spot, particularly if they let Perez resume development as a starter. Let's not forget, while not a dazzling prospect, Lara's numbers speak quite well for his major-league readiness, particularly as a LOOGY. He held lefties to a measly .195/.255/.208 line in the minors last season (about 95 PAs). If Lara keeps up that pace in Buffalo, there will be little reason for the Indians to feel pressured to add Sipp to the roster, particularly if they only need a LOOGY.
I think Sipp eventually will be installed as the closer in Buffalo. As the best all-around relief prospect in the system right now, and not yet on the 40-man roster, the Indians have every incentive to groom him by putting him in the closer role, and leaving him there all season. Or they may mix and match him in that role with Mastny and Mujica. A desire to give all three significant numbers of innings, especially Sipp, probably will preclude any strict one-inning-save usage pattern.
I think Mastny will be the first callup option in Buffalo, not because of his dramatic run of adequacy as a closer in Cleveland, but because of his dominant numbers against righties. Any righthander called up this season is likely to be put into long relief or ROOGY situations, and last season Mastny held minor-league righties to a ridiculous .153/.230/.190 line with a 12.92 K/9 (about 150 PAs).
Mujica will be next in line behind Mastny. His ROOGY numbers were also very good (.173/.232./.231) but not quite as dominant (8.53 K/9). He's also the youngest of this bunch (turning 23 this May) and at least a year ahead of everyone on the options clock. I believe both of these factors incent the Indians to give Mujica as much development as he needs in Buffalo this season. While he's a better all-around prospect than Mastny, he's unlikely to be better than Mastny this season, especially against major-league righties.
Perez is a wild card. As a starter in Akron, he was doing pretty well. But his peripherals were uninspiring, and as he'll turn 25 this May, they're unlikely to get much better as he gets promoted. On the other hand, lefties were truly helpless against him: .136/.189/.182. Realistically, he's probably going to be either the lefty Tom Mastny or the lefty Brian Slocum. Perez is older than Adam Miller, Fausto Carmona and J.D. Martin, so if he doesn't dominate in Buffalo, he may have trouble breaking into even the 7th starter spot for the big league club, even next season.
It's great if the Indians aren't giving up on Perez as a starter. It's understandable, and Perez probably wants every chance to succeed in that role. But it can't be ignored that last season, Perez had a 7.08 K/9 as a Double-A starter, and a 10.87 K/9 as a Triple-A reliever. So the Indians probably won't hesitate to put him back in the bullpen if that's where the need is. They may well be expecting for him eventually to be a big-league reliever, but they know he'll get more work in as a starter for the time being. And he certainly didn't have trouble with the transition last season.
And for all of these reasons, despite the buzz around Sipp and despite his status as our best relief prospect, he probably is fifth in line to be promoted to the big league club in 2007. His non-roster status is influencing that, but the fact is that there are two terrific RHP options and two terrific LHP options ahead of him.
0 recs |
42 comments
Comments
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
I have a hard time imagining a scenario in which Perez makes it to Cleveland as a starter. He's 4th in line now (behind Carmona, Miller, and Slocum) with a bunch of other, potentially higher-ceiling guys, charging behind him.
My guess would be he replaces either Betancourt, Hernandez or Davis next year, if not earlier.
by APV on Feb 22, 2007 10:36 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by exileincincy on Feb 22, 2007 12:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by fwembt on Feb 22, 2007 4:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
Looking a little further out - say 2009 - it's fun to project the Tribe's fab five, if they are all home grown. Currently, it looks like CC, Sowers, Miller, Lofgren, and Carmona. But the latter couple of spots could just as easily be Perez, Slocum, Scott Lewis, or Huff.
Based on Jay's analysis of relievers, coupled with our depth of starters, perhaps we would rank around #2 in terms of pitching prospects. Position players is another story, but then again do we need many of them with such a young starting lineup?
by kov on Feb 23, 2007 8:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
That said, if they decide to put him in Buffalo's rotation to start the season, I don't think that limits his ability very much to be promoted to Cleveland as a reliever.
by APV on Feb 23, 2007 3:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by stuart dean on Feb 23, 2007 10:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
But if Sipp is exceeding expectations at Buffalo, they really need to bring him up this year, roster considerations and LOOGYs ahead of him be damned. If Sipp is the most dominant guy they have, and the tribe's bullpen needs help (not a very big if), bring him up but not as a LOOGY. Let him work in the 6th inning like they did with Cabrera in 05.
by oxforddave on Feb 22, 2007 11:30 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by Jay on Feb 22, 2007 11:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
This being said, hopefully the tribe bullpen will only need tweaks around the edges this year. Then all of the other guys are much better options than Sipp. But if Sipp can get all batters out better than the specialists (this is a big if), why go through guys who have more "senoirity"? Why not be like Ozzie and push the hot hand into the important situations?
by oxforddave on Feb 22, 2007 12:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by Jay on Feb 22, 2007 3:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by oxforddave on Feb 22, 2007 4:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
This is probably due to what you indicated, that there are guys that already have ML experience that would be called up before Tony. However, I definitely think Mr. Sipp has the highest upside and greatest potential to be a good closer of the whole lot, and I hope he settles into that role ASAP.
Regarding Perez, while I hope he's in the Buffalo rotation, I expect him to be installed in the pen and very likely the first pitching callup from Buffalo. Regardless of his stamina and decent success against righties, he gets lefties out, period. I've said before that it would be a real shame if a guy like that gets stuck in a loogie role for the majority of his ML career, but I'll lay even odds that that's what happens.
You might say "so what, he'll never be a starter in Cleveland", but to me that's not really the point, especially if you have a wealth of similar level relievers who will never be anything but 1-3 inning guys. If a guy has the tools to be an effective starter, he should be given every opportunity to become one, because its almost always a much more valuable role. Both to your team and, of course, to others.
by mcrose on Feb 22, 2007 12:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
It is a noteworthy analysis. I find myself readily agreeing with everything you have said. I have only one qualifier to your position.
Regardless of the roster implications, I think Sipp will be the first one up if it is one of the late inning pitchers who go down, most notably Borowski. There are cases for both Mastny and Mujica. You made them very well. But when push comes to shove, you go with the big dog. In this case, Sipp is the big dog. He projects far better as a closer than the others and he might be given the call if Hernandez goes down. In the other instances, I am in full agreement.
I have not had Perez rated as high as most of the posters on the site. He was my number 13. I still think of him as a LOOGY/long reliever. I suspect he is starting to build up his innings in case they need him quickly. For that reason, I think he is in the callup order somewhat ahead of Lara. Your facts and conclusions are dead on but it is the only conclusion I have that makes sense to start Perez in Buffalo. The thought of him being in the Tribe mix as a LH starter boggles my mind. Maybe in another organization but not this one. :)
by sdtribefan on Feb 22, 2007 3:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by hans on Feb 23, 2007 3:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
Well, that's a nice thought, but that really isn't it in my view.
As I see it, looking only at Perez's Double-A numbers, he's a B prospect as a starter at best. He turned 24 back in May, and while the ERA was nice, the peripherals were not what they need to be, and the great majority of pitchers are done developing "stuff" by age 23. His stuff isn't bad, but it doesn't appear (from the numbers) to be the kind of stuff that persists once he's two levels higher.
Now looking at only his Triple-A numbers, he looks like a valuable big-league lefty reliever right now. So in my view, it's only organization-specific in that we're not desperate for starters at the upper levels. He might be a starter possibility on another team, but not a particularly good one.
by Jay on Feb 23, 2007 5:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
I'm not really going anywhere with this, just wondering. Like you said he's probably not going to develop much farther at this age, although it isn't out of the realm of possiblitly, like you said his peripherials weren't that great nor that bad, when he last was used consistently as a SP in AA. This year is pretty much it for him, but his numbers weren't that bad to rule out some chance of improvement and reaching the ability to be a league avg. starter. (which brings me back to my initial question) In this day and age of bullpens being more and more important, would it be better to groom him as a shut-down LOOGY or hopefully a reliever, or as a league avg. or below avg. starter?
by hans on Feb 23, 2007 7:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
And yet, it is fairly clear that Perez can make it as a top LOOGY. Again, based on K rates.
by Jay on Feb 24, 2007 5:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by emil minty on Feb 24, 2007 8:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Jay also mentioned how quickly Sowers...
Hello emil minty,
I know Jay and I talked about this before regarding how quickly Sowers passed through AAA and ascended to the Majors - when many bring up his low K rate, we both have said it's POSSIBLE that Sowers' K rate could rebound a bit, up to around the 5 K/9 IP ratio that Moyer's career K/9 IP ratio has been, making it POSSIBLE that Sowers COULD follow a similar path to Moyer (I'm not saying it will happen, just that it's a possibility, even though Sowers' K/9 IP ratio is lower than Moyer's now.)
Sowers has only had 16 starts at AAA - essentially .5 to .75 of a season, which isn't a very long time. With the short time he spent in AAA, he may never have fully acclimated to AAA, which is why his K rates never rebounded, but being that he was averaging 7.65 K/9 IP at AA, the level most call the level that separates the contenders from the pretenders, it would seem reasonable to think that Sowers' K/9 IP ratio could rebound a bit. Being that he's only 22-23 can only help in that regard as well, as well as the fact that Sowers seems to make good adjustments and can read hitters pretty well - a rise in his K rate is NOT impossible.
Of course, only time will tell.
Just my 2 cents. :-)
by indiansfan on Feb 24, 2007 10:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Jay also mentioned how quickly Sowers...
but since you mention it, perez and sowers both started 2005 in A-ball, and perez beat sowers to the majors in 2006. if we're going to grant allowances for one, we should for the other. perez is older, but does one year make that much difference?
and since we're keyed in on strike-outs: i understand that perez' k/9 looks great as a left-handed reliever (over 10 in both AAA and the show), but if you look at his ML splits, he struck out righties and lefties evenly (30% in 26 and 23 ABs respectively). Sowers, on the other hand, struck out about 8-9% of rhbs he faced and 16-17% of lhbs. (small sample size understood).
so i still don't quite get why, based upon "peripherals", sowers projects as the starter and perez projects as the loogy. which is not to say that i don't believe you, just that i don't get it.
by emil minty on Feb 24, 2007 11:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Jay also mentioned how quickly Sowers...
by Jay on Feb 25, 2007 9:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
I can't speak for Jay but I see Perez and Sowers as two completely different types of animals. Jay made the point that Ks/9 is the best measure but in the case of a pitcher like Sowers, that may not be the case. Some will suggest it still is and Sowers is in for a rude awakening this year but this is a player who has always made his living by denying batters good contact rather than swings and misses. There are exceptions to the rule and Sowers may be one. One the other hand, Perez has great stuff as a LOOGY, potential stuff for long relief, and real modest stuff as a Starter. He is not a pitcher you want to have some batters get extra looks at. I, for one, have not put a "sure thing" on Sowers because I don't think he is. Miller, to me, has more upside and is closer to being a #1 "sure thing" than Sowers. :)
by sdtribefan on Feb 24, 2007 10:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by emil minty on Feb 24, 2007 11:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by sdtribefan on Feb 25, 2007 12:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
In what universe does a team add a prospect to the 40-man, promote him to the majors and immediately annoint him the closer, or even the setup man? This is just not in touch with reality.
I'll give you the Big Dog for 2007: Fernando Cabrera.
by Jay on Feb 24, 2007 5:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
In a universe where he is the only one in the organization that has the stuff to be a closer. It seems to me that is has happened recently in other organizations and isn't that farfetched. You might even be able to think of a universe like that if you really try. :)
by sdtribefan on Feb 24, 2007 10:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
starting in akron in 2005 his k/9 was mid-6, not great, but he kept his k/bb well in the safe range (high 3) and his whip down (sub-1) so it doesn't worry me that much.
in limited starts at akron in 2006 and his k/bb went down but his k/9 picked up to around 7 and his whip stayed a low 1.1.
what should i be looking at to figure out why so many people think this kid doesn't have starter numbers? i'm not seeing it.
by emil minty on Feb 22, 2007 6:09 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by mrich on Feb 22, 2007 6:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by ken from alexandria on Feb 22, 2007 6:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
incent
SYLLABICATION: in·cent
PRONUNCIATION: n-snt
TRANSITIVE VERB: Inflected forms: in·cent·ed, in·cent·ing, in·cents
To incentivize: "would use tax breaks to incent corporations to invest in their future" (Scott Canon, Houston Chronicle 12/20/92).
ETYMOLOGY: Back-formation from incentive.
Gotta admit, I looked at it and hadn't heard it used before. But I really like "incentavize" too. As in, "Garko was incentavised to work on his defense this offseason".
by mcrose on Feb 22, 2007 11:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by emil minty on Feb 22, 2007 7:18 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by Jay on Feb 22, 2007 7:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
With all the depth we have at Buffalo pitching, it seems to me that we can start making some upgrade trades in the next year. Or maybe just some mediocre veterans for a prospect.
by crackaddictwhit on Feb 23, 2007 12:57 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by Jay on Feb 23, 2007 1:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by BSelby on Feb 23, 2007 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by Jeffrey R on Feb 23, 2007 4:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by macasson on Feb 23, 2007 2:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by hans on Feb 23, 2007 3:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
It used to be that relievers were failed starters. Most of these guys were good starters (or at least hadn't failed yet) but were converted to relief anyway. Mostly to accelerate their move to the big leagues, which it has definitely done.
by mcrose on Feb 23, 2007 3:55 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
by fanintexas on Feb 24, 2007 12:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Buffalo Bullpen Roulette
Mastny had the option of being a AA starter vs. the chance of advancing quicker from the pen. Three months later, he finds himself in Cleveland.
by mcrose on Feb 25, 2007 5:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 
















