Royals Review: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Cal RB Jahvid Best Seriously Injured, Carted Off Field

Soria as a starter? Not everyone agrees

For most Royals fans, the question isn't whether Joakim Soria should become starting pitcher, it is when and how.  He's got multiple plus pitches, good control and sound mechanics.  I am in that majority and I think the Royals should use Soria as a reliever and spot starter this year to get him up to about 95-100 IP.  Then, in 2009, he could spend most of the season as a starter, getting his IP up to about 130.


Soria's best tool is the golden aura that surrounds him

However, the "experts," commentators and analysts don't necessarily agree that Soria should ever become a starting pitcher.  Here are a few comments I've run accross on these lines:

BL (Bozeman): The notion of moving Joakim Soria to the rotation... do it now, do it never, or do it later?

Christina Kahrl: He's had some problems in the past, and when you're as good as he's been initially in a relief role, as Jonathan Papelbon demonstrates, it becomes very hard to move past the automatic instinct to not fix what isn't broken.  --  February 28, 2008 from a Baseball Prospectus chat session

Huh?  What problems?  His shoulder inflammation that put him on one 15-day DL stint?  I haven't read anyone say that this was significant or worrisome.  And shouldn't they move past the "automatic instinct"?  This seems to fly in the face of the more common sabermetric analysis that a starting pitching is much more valuable than relief pitching, regardless of role.  

Joe Posnanski: Joakim Soria is the closer - and he's fun to watch. I was messaging with Rob [Neyer] about this: I cannot remember a young pitcher who started out his career as a closer and then became a good major league starter. I bring this up because the Royals keep talking about making him a starter down the road ... I don't think so. Seems to me the decision is made.

Rich Lederer: Jonathan Papelbon? Oh, that's right. That only last a couple of starts in spring training last year. Hmmm... I can think of some pretty good pitchers who started as relievers (Orel Hershiser, Fergie Jenkins, Pedro Martinez, Dave Stewart, Bob Welch, and David Wells to name an Antonio Alfonseca handful), but I guess it would be unfair to call them "closers." I don't know, Joe, you might be on to something here. The closest one that I can think of would be Charlie Hough. As a knuckleballer, maybe he doesn't qualify. Or maybe you don't think he was a "good major league pitcher?"

Joe Posnanski: Well, Charlie Hough doesn't qualify in my mind because he wasn't especially young when he came up as a closer (he was 28 in his first full season) and while he did become a good starter at 34, I'm suspecting that's probably not the career arc the Royals are hoping for with Soria. Knuckleballers are indeed a whole other thing. And yes, the Cardinals are trying to do it with Braden Looper, but you couldn't call that a success story yet. ... The closest I've been able to find is actually Scott Garrelts, who wasn't exactly the closer with the Giants -- he was sort of a co-closer with Craig Lefferts -- and then he had one really good year as a starter, another so-so year, and then he got hurt and was done. Again, not exactly the model I think anyone is hoping for. -- March 11, 2008 from BaseballAnalysts.com

Joe, I like you but sometimes, I don't know...  Is he trying to say that because Soria was a closer in his rookie season that we should expect that he'll never be a good starting pitcher?  First, that's silly and unsupported.  Many good starting pitchers started their MLB careers as relievers.  In addition to those named above, Johan Santana, Kelvim Escobar, and Curt Schilling all started as relievers and turned into very good starting pitchers. Second, he started as a reliever because he was a Rule 5 acquisition.  If he had stayed in the Padres system, they would have developed him as a starter.  If the Royals had the luxury of keeping him in the minors, they would have used him as a starter.  He was used as a reliever in his rookie season out of the necessity caused by the Rule 5 draft acquisition.  Third, he was a closer as a rookie (for part of the season) because of injury to Dotel and because he's so damn good.  None of the above is a sound argument for him never becoming a good starting pitcher.

While I don't think they have made up their mind on Soria's future, the Royals organization sees him as a possible/likely future starter.

"I think we all would like to see what he can do as a starter," pitching coach Bob McClure said. "When that is, I don't know. But after watching him start last year in spring training, that's something we have in the back of our minds." -- February 7, 2008 Royals pitching coach Bob McClure in the KC Star

But clearly they think the time for Soria to start is not now.

Joakim Soria, the Rule 5 Draft steal from the Padres, stepped in brilliantly for Octavio Dotel, who was first injured and later traded. Soria saved 17 games in 21 chances as a rookie and is looked upon as the full-time closer this year. There's been scant consideration given of switching him to a starter.

"We haven't even discussed that because we all like him as a closer so much," manager Trey Hillman said. "If we were really serious about doing that, we'd have been more aggressive about going after someone to fill that closing role." -- February 6, 2008 KCRoyals.com

The Royals situation with Soria is mirrored by the Yankees quandry with Joba Chamberlain.  He dominated as a reliever and scouts think he has the stuff to be a very successful starting pitcher.  Many commentators think the Yankees should keep in the bullpen and groom him to be Mariano Rivera's successor as closer.


Joba can't wait to become a starter and have more opportunities to throw at Kevin Youkilis

Chris Russo: Why mess around with a sure thing?
Mike Francesa: Why has everyone come to the conclusion that he's a better pitcher as a starter than as a reliever?
Sweeny Murti: Because of his tools including multiple plus pitches
Mike Francesa: But the only success he's shown in the majors is as a reliever...The idea that that job [setup man and heir to Rivera as the closer] isn't more important [than starting] then no one has paid attention to what has gone on here for the last decade or so...The Red Sox won last year more for any other reason than that Okajima and Papelbon were the best bullpen in baseball.
-- March 5, 2008 WFAN Radio

Russo and Francesa aren't the average sports talk radio guys.  They aren't just reactionary guys trying to stir things up.  They are intelligent and thoughtful in their analysis, although definitely not at all progressive.  I think they and those that agree with them are way off.  If he can be a good starting pitcher, he's worth a lot more to his team than a very good setup man or closer.  The numbers are pretty clear on that.

Our friends at Baseball Prospectus disagree Russo and Francesa and their analysis of Chamberlain.

I worry about a Dave Righetti scenario here. It's very easy to imagine Chamberlain pitching well in the pen and the Yankees saying, "We don't want to mess with success." To invoke Nate [Silver] for about the umpteenth time this chat, last year he did a good bit of analysis (on Unfiltered, I think) trying to find the break-even point for Jon Papelbon-as-starter vs. as-reliever. We need to ask him to do that again for Chamberlain. My guess is that the threshold for the reliever argument has got to be pretty high -- Joba has to be spectacularly good in the pen, not just really good -- to justify giving up the high-side expectations of what he can do in the rotation. --  February 27, 2008 Steven Goldman Baseball Prospectus

So with Chamberlain, the Yankees can afford to waste him in the bullpen.  But with Soria, they should "fix what isn't broken."  Seems like a contradition.  But of course BP, sabermetricians and baseball analysis isn't one big monolith with only one opinion and perspective.  Perhaps others at BP disagree with Kahrl -- who, in my opinion, is usually dismissive of the Royals.  But it is clear that some, perhaps many, commentators think Soria should stay in the bullpen indefinitely.

What do you think?  Is there anything to the theory that Soria will pitch best as a closer, so let's just keep him in that role?  Can we expect him to succeed as a starting pitcher?  Should the Royals give him a shot in the rotation?  And if so, when and how?

0 recs  |  Comment 71 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

I think I am in the closer camp
It seems that he can impact more games in a positive way than as a starter.  I can remember back, not too long ago, when we did not have an effective closer and it seemed as if we were losing a lot of games with blown saves.  It probably has a psychological impact on the team as well.  I say, given what Mariano Rivera does for the Yankees, we keep him as our long term closer.  If he goes Papelbon on us, we can consider stretching him out, if we have a viable replacement (which I don't think we have right now).
Success is counted sweetest by those who ne'er succeed. - Emily Dickinson

by buddyball on Mar 12, 2008 9:36 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

The value of innings
180 innings of a 4.00 ERA is worth more to a team than 70 innings of 3.00 ERA, particularly when you consider the quality of pitching that Soria would be replacing in the rotation compared with the quality of pitcher who would replace him.  The Royals have many pitchers who could close, but they've only got three good starting pitchers.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 12, 2008 9:59 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

whatever joakim soria is
he's

winning records follow good bullpens

by slayor on Mar 13, 2008 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

WOW
That is awesome!!!!
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Mar 14, 2008 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I've heard the Yankees are going
to use Chamberlain in the pen for the first half and then use him as a starter. That sounds about right to me. I'd like to use him as a setup type for the first half and then let him destroy the league. Maybe up to 120-130 innings. That way he could start 2009 in the rotation and work up to around 180 or so. I was hoping that the Royals would sign a Gagne or think about an internal option at closer in the offseason (Nunez, Davies, JDLR), but they didn't and that alarms me. Even if he has to be in the bullpen, I'd rather he be able to work 2 or 3 innings rather than just one. I love Dayton and Trey is growing on me, but they're making a mistake if they let this guy's talent waste away in the bullpen.

by royaldaddy on Mar 12, 2008 10:02 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

A quick comparison of two 2009 pitching staffs
Here are two hypothetical and possible 2009 Royals pitching staffs

POS Pitcher IP ERA
SP Meche 200 4.00
SP Greinke 200 4.00
SP Bannister 180 4.25
SP Hochevar 150 4.75
SP Soria 180 4.00

RP Peralta 70 4.00
RP Yabuta 70 3.75
RP Gobble 55 3.50
RP Nunez 70 4.25
RP Bale 95 4.6
RP Mahay 60 4.25
RP Braun/Musser 55 4.5
P POOL 60 6

TOTAL 1445 4.07 ERA 653.6 Earned Runs Allowed

POS Pitcher IP ERA
SP Meche 200 4.00
SP Greinke 200 4.00
SP Bannister 190 4.25
SP Hochevar 150 4.75
SP #5 starter 150 5.00

RP Soria 70 3.25
RP Peralta 70 4.00
RP Yabuta 70 3.75   
RP Gobble 55 3.50
RP Nunez 70 4.25
RP Bale 110 4.60   
RP Mahay 60 3.75
P POOL 50 6.00

TOTAL 1445 4.26 684.6 Earned Runs Allowed

I know that Soria wouldn't be ready to throw 180 innings in 2009, but this is merely an illustration of the different value of Soria as a full-time starter, vs. as a closer.

The 31 fewer runs allowed amounts to about 3 more wins for the Royals.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 12, 2008 10:39 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

but can you balance that
against blown save opportunities?  I can't argue against your statistics (rosy though they may be), but a blown save that Soria would have kept is more damaging, in my opinion.
Success is counted sweetest by those who ne'er succeed. - Emily Dickinson

by buddyball on Mar 12, 2008 10:46 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

It is true that all innings are not equal
High leverage innings are worth more than low leverage innings.  But there are a couple of important points here.  First, how many more saves are Yabuta or Peralta or someone else going to blow than Soria would have.  His save conversion percentage last year (81%) wasn't exactly at the elite closer level.  Second, closers often aren't getting a whole lot of high leverage innings.  Researchers who have quanitified the "leverage" of various situations have found that 9th inning, 0 out with the pitcher's team up 2 or 3 runs are actually very low leverage situations.  High leverage situations usually come up in the 6th, 7th or 8th inning and the closer, for some reason, is kept away from them.

So, long story short, I don't think Soria as closer would be facing a great deal of high leverage innings.  Nor do I think his replacement would be significantly worse in save situations.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 12, 2008 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

the "closer"

to me is someone very much overrated.  the game is on the line at least as many times in the 7th and 8th as it is in the 9th.  

While obviously not spectacular in any way, Todd Jones and Borowski manage to "close" games.  I know its not a great example, but it does show something.

Alex Gordon in '08

by RoyalJHWKR on Mar 13, 2008 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

oops

i didn't mean "someone", i meant as a spot or position in the bullpen it is overrated.
Alex Gordon in '08

by RoyalJHWKR on Mar 13, 2008 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed
Closers, as they have come be used, are either mediocre pitchers who get too much glory that they don't deserve because they rake in Saves, or genuinely good pitchers who are often wasted by the limited way in which they are used.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 12:20 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

The Middle Path
To enlightenment is to designate another closer and use Mexituf as the setup man, bringing him on in high leverage situations after the 5th inning when possible. Stretch his innings out and, if he keeps succeeding, try him as a starter in '09 or '10. Middle relief gets little respect, but I think it's becoming more important in the DH and pitch count era. They're virtually second starters and vital to keep from blowing up the bullpen. A guy who can do 2 to 3 innings well every 2 or three games is a necessity now. I also see Hiram, JDLR and Nunie as guys who could flourish in this role, even if they never become starters.
I'm not getting older....oh, wait, yes I am....and slower.... and weaker. God, this is great!

by philofthenorth on Mar 12, 2008 11:31 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

That's a great idea, but...
I don't know if there is any manager in baseball who is going to use their best relief pitcher in any role other than closer.  And I don't think any manager in recent years has used closers in a manner different from the current conventional wisdom.

In short, it is a great idea.  I fully support it.  It would help the Royals win more games because the Royals best reliever would get more high leverage innings.  And it is never going to happen.

Actually, it might happen if they do want to stretch him out later in the season for some spot starts, but they haven't yet shown any desire to do that this season.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 12, 2008 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

If there was a manager, Hillman would be the guy.
He seems to do a lot of things out of the box.
I'm really good at being wrong... sometimes.

by BlownSave on Mar 12, 2008 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's a really good idea.
What are the odds the R's have the stones to try it?

by stuckinstl12 on Mar 12, 2008 11:42 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Woops...
didn't see NYRoyal's post...

by stuckinstl12 on Mar 12, 2008 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

You Can't Win
A game in the 7th inning, but you can lose it.
I'm not getting older....oh, wait, yes I am....and slower.... and weaker. God, this is great!

by philofthenorth on Mar 12, 2008 11:48 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I think we should leave Soria
where he is as the closer.  If he save 40 games a season that to me is better than pitching in the rotation and winning maybe 15.  It is the old bird in the hand thing.
Be loyal, Be Brave, Be Free.

by hardyguy on Mar 13, 2008 12:05 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Winning games

probably isn't the best comparison.  I would even say that many pitchers who "saved" 40 games weren't particularly exceptional pitchers when compared to the best in their league.
Alex Gordon in '08

by RoyalJHWKR on Mar 13, 2008 12:19 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

i think this is one where I defer to scouts
not on the general question of value, but on if a guy can handle starting or not

by royalsreview on Mar 13, 2008 12:12 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

The scouts
I've only read pieces from scouts about Soria here and there, but I haven't read anyone saying that think he might not have the stuff, control or stamina to handle starting.  Quite frankly I don't think any commentator, analyst or anyone has argued that he shouldn't be a starter because they don't think he'll do well.  It's all the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it," "don't mess with a good thing," or similar cliche.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 12:18 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

wholeheartedly about the dismissive nature as you call it of JoePo and BP as being odd.  

I like your idea that we should increase Soria's innings 25-30% and get him ready to pitch 150-175 in 2009.  

Yeah from everything I've heard he has at least 3+ pitches, and command of a fourth.  That has starter written all over it.  Like you said, 160+ IP from a starter at 4.00 ERA is more valuable than 70 IP of 3.00.

With GMDM's continued acquisition of pitching talent the role of "closer" can be filled rather easily from my perspective.  

Alex Gordon in '08

by RoyalJHWKR on Mar 13, 2008 12:22 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think JoPo is arguing from
the fact that he couldn't come up with any "great" closers who successfully transitioned to starter. I don't dispute his fact but I'm not sure it suggests limiting Soria to that role. If we define a "great" closer as someone who has had sustained success at the position, I think there is a reason they didn't move to starting. They (probably) have a skill set that doesn't translate well to starting. They either have limited effectiveness if not able to max out every pitch (starters must dial it down a bit) or they rely heavily on one or two pitches (an effective starter needs more diversity). It's likely that every closer failed as a starter somewhere in the minors. They've been vetted. Soria doesn't fit this mold. Success shouldn't limit him.

by stuckinstl12 on Mar 13, 2008 12:57 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

what exactly would you be willing to tolerate
from soria if he were to switch?  what would be a break-even switch to starter, and what's a successful switch?

soria was 2.48 ERA last year, 75/19 K/BB, and pitched about 70 innings.

would you consider a soria a couple years down the road at 4.5 ERA, 200 IP, and maybe 1.5/1 K/BB to be a success?  that'd be close to league average (i guess, without looking), which is worth how much a year?  (i'm guessing $10m.)  whereas soria as closer, doing 70 IP even at 2.5 ERA, is never going to be harder to replace than $5m a year, right?  what does billy wagner get?

again, in short, what would be a successful switch?

by Sean O Se on Mar 13, 2008 12:33 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

That's the key question
If he makes the switch to SP, how good does he have to be?  My quick and dirty, half-assed math says that even if we're comparing him as a full-time starter with a 4.50 ERA against being a closer with a 2.50 ERA, the pitching staff with Soria as a starter still gives up 15 fewer runs or 1.5 wins.  But that assumes that Soria is replacing a 5.00 ERA pitcher in the rotation (the hypothetical #5 starter).

But there are a lot of variables at play.  If two of Hochevar/Cortes/Pimentel/Rosa become at least average major league starters, then having Soria in the rotation as an average starter doesn't gain you anything.  Similarly, if someone like Nunez/Cortes/Pimental/Rosa/Davies can step in and be a pretty good closer, then you don't need Soria to close.  That's a long way of saying a key part of the analysis of value of Soria in different roles depends on who would replace him in his old role and who would he be replacing in his new role.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 12:41 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

You must have missed the Fransisco Cordero
signing this offseason. I thought we should sign him for 5-6 mil a year. Sounds reasonable right? Yeah, try 11.5 to the Cincinati Reds. Couple that with the raise K-Rod and Bobby Jenks are about to recieve and the price of a "good closer" is rising faster than gas prices.

by royaldaddy on Mar 13, 2008 12:55 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's why a small market team should never...
...sign a FA who has the label of "closer."  It pushes their price tag up much, much higher than they are actually worth to the team.  Either develop your closer's in house or sign a good reliever who hasn't been a closer and make him your closer.  I am confident that with or without Soria in the bullpen, Moore can easily find pitchers from without or within who can close inexpensively for the Royals.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 12:59 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

does anyone else think JDLR
could be 80% of Soria as a reliever?

by royalsreview on Mar 13, 2008 12:56 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I don't know...maybe
Unfortunately, I think JDLR would be best as a LOOGY.  But there is a possibility that he could be a good one or two inning guy in some role.  Would he be 80% as good as Soria?  Maybe...depending on what exactly "80% of Soria" means in practical terms.  But even as a reliever he would need to improve his control.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 1:02 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

No
de la Rosa has never been able to get righties out.  His career line against righties (.301/.386/.501) is basically the same as Manny Ramirez last year.

He does not have an effective secondary pitch against righties.  His 1-7 curveball tends toward 2-8 more than 12-6, so it often has the effect of speeding up a righty's swing by moving in on him.  The best adjective to describe his change up is "scattershot," in terms of location, break, and velocity (he throws too many in the mid-80s, which provide little separation from his inconsistent fastball that sometimes drops into high-80s).

Right now, however, he might be 80%-90% of Jimmy Gobble.

by Gopherballs on Mar 13, 2008 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

wait and see
Keep an open mind to it, but don't make it a necessity one way or another.

--Say "the big 3" do close to as they are expected, and one of Hochevar and Davies steps up to be a league average type starter. In this scenario, we have four average to above average starters in addition to Rosa/Pimentel/Cortes/Wood all knocking on the door as high upside pitchers. Thus, keep him in the back of the bullpen.

--However, if we find out (for example) that Bannister or Greinke just isn't going to get it done, and we have only one or two known quantities going into 2009, we should have Soria make the transition into the rotation. Because quite frankly, if we only have one or two known quantities going into 2009, we're not going to be competing for anything and could quite easily be careful with his innings/pitch counts.

I think I said this before...best case scenario...Davies and Hochevar grab onto spots in the rotation and don't let go. Not only that, but one of Wood/Pimentel distinguishes themselves as elite prospects aside Cortes. That way, we seemingly have the rotation set for years, AND have an elite closer (Soria) to boot.

Flame away...

by doublestix on Mar 13, 2008 1:17 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I mostly agree
But even in the first scenario where the big 3 are all good starters and someone else steps in to be a league average #4 starter, I still think I'd want Soria in that rotation.  As long as Soria would be significantly better than the unknown fifth starter in that rotation, then having him as a starter would help the team more than having him as a closer.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 1:29 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

greinke is on a one-year deal
I wonder when he'll leave the Royals as a FA.

by royalsreview on Mar 13, 2008 1:37 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

This was his first arb. eligible year
So he is under team control for 2008, 2009 and 2010.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 1:53 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I hope we lock him up long term
get him signed to a good long term deal. Even if he busts as a starter (which I really don't think he will) he would be the most dominant bullpen swingman in the bigs.

by wildthang on Mar 13, 2008 2:52 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think i've said this before
but I am really indifferent on where we have Soria. I like him wherever we choose to use him. I'm not so sure he has ever proven he has the stamina to be a starter over a full season, so I think he moving him to a starting role we have to calculate the risk of injury into expected performance.

I would need him to be probably a 4.00 ERA guy to honestly be sold on him in the rotation because I do think he has the stuff to be a top flight closer and  unlike Chamberlain I'm not sure if he has enough of a background as a starter to rely on minor league data.

by wildthang on Mar 13, 2008 2:54 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

how many perfect games does Soria have as closer?
It's evident he has the ability to start -- you don't suddenly forget how to throw a fastball because you are pitching in the first inning -- the question should really be about durability.  

If scouts believe that he doesn't possess the stamina or build to be able to handle a full load, then perhaps he should be left in the pen.  But if scouts think that eventually he'll be able to pitch 200 innings a year without injuring himself, we'd be dumb not to try it out.

Of course, I'm not suggesting we give him 200 innings right now, as that would foolishly increase his risk of arm problems, but there's no reason not to gradually increase his workload as NYRoyal suggested so that he can eventually get to that point.

I'm a little surprised by the discussion above by some of the experts quoted by NYRoyal.  

One, I don't see how performing well in a closing role should make you less likely to succeed than someone who performed well in a less demanding role in the pen.  If anything, it should be a better sign if you're able to succeed in that role.  The reason you rarely see closers advance to starter is because teams are often loathe to mess with success, even if it would end up being better for the team.  Closers that are shifted to starter and fail usually were shifted to that role because the team found a better closer, not because they needed a starter.  That's actually more of an indictment of the player than anything.

Two, to compare how the Sox have handled the Papelbon situation and how the Yankees will handle the Chamberlain situation to what the Royals should do with Soria seems a bit silly to me.  To the credit of the guys quoted above, I don't think the majority were really doing that.

If the Royals had Jon Lester as a 5th starter, then sure, go ahead leave Soria in as closer.  But when we're staring at Davies, DLR, and even a minute chance of Hideo Nomo as a possibility there, it's pretty clear we're not in the same situation as Boston.  Soria could eventually fix a major problem there.

The Yankees represent the other extreme.  They already have a premiere guy filling the closer role, so it doesn't matter what they do with Joba at this point.  Clearly, trying him out as a starter makes the most sense as there's very little to lose.  

This is sort of like comparing apples with perenial 100 game losers.  It's just not a valid comparison.

Now, I'm not sure that the guys quoted above were really arguing against using Soria in the rotation so much as describing what they thought would happen with him.  There's a minor but important difference.  

I'm not sure, but it does read however that Joe may have been advocating for leaving him in the pen, and it looks pretty clear Hillman (and by extension Moore) aren't really considering moving him.  This is sort of a disappointing development, but maybe they're just saying what they need to say since there's no other real option to close right now.  

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Mar 13, 2008 8:07 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Parallels
I think the Royals and Yankees situations are very similar.  The Royals have a good bullpen but no clear closer outside of Soria.  The Royals also have a pretty good, but somewhat thin starting rotation.  The Yankees have an ok bullpen but no good setup men outside of Chamberlain (Farnsworth and Hawkins are the leading contenders).  The Yankees also have a pretty good, but somewhat thin starting rotation.

So both teams have a need for the young phenom pitcher in the bullpen, but also have a need for him in the rotation as well.

Also, how do you feel about Nunez as a reliever vs. closer?  I don't know if you've ever spoken to that issue but since you said:

If scouts believe that he doesn't possess the stamina or build to be able to handle a full load, then perhaps he should be left in the pen.

...then I would assume you are leaning towards keeping Nunez in the pen.  I've heard that said about Leo a lot.  I've never heard it about Joakim.  I think the majority sentiment among Royals fans is that Nunez should get a shot as a starter.  I don't think the scouts agree.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I like Nunez in the rotation
... he seems to have handled himself well there last season and earlier in his career.  

I'll have to defer to scouts when it comes to injury risk.  My own belief is that he can probably succeed there, in the way that Pedro Martinez succeeded there as a small guy with a violent delivery.  

Of course, Pedro got injured.  That fate may befall Nunez, too, but I think in large part Pedro got injured due to mismanaged pitch counts and innings.

Fortunately, I also think Nunez would make a fine closer.  For this reason, I'd support Soria over Nunez in the rotation (if it has to be an either/or situation), but as I've expressed before, I think it is worth giving Nunez a shot as a starter.

This space intentionally left blank.

by marbotty on Mar 13, 2008 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

In addition to injury risk...
...I think strength and stamina are issues for Nunez as a starter.  He could handle it in the minors, but he didn't need to be at 100% or even 90% the third and fourth time through the lineup in the minors.  He can't afford to drop off too much in the majors.  And last year, he started to really struggle in the majors once he was going through the lineup the third time.  The Royals were careful with him and usually didn't leave him out there too long to get hit too much.  Nunez's other problem is that his secondary pitches aren't that great.  I don't think he has enough good pitches to get major league batters out consistently the third and fourth time they've seen him in a game.  Soria, on the other hand, has multiple good pitches.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Something nobody has mentioned
Has everyone forgotten that Soria has a history of elbow problems and had to have surgery?  Why would you test his arm out as a starter and risk repeat injury?  Pitching fewer innings more often seemed to suit him fine last year.

by pet575 on Mar 13, 2008 12:27 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Elbow problems and surgery are common for SP's
Many young starting pitchers have elbow surgery and come back from it just fine and have long, successful careers.  This is even true of major procedures like ligament replacement.  When good pitching prospects have elbow surgery, they don't turn them into relievers out of fear of injury.  Unless there is some particular current, chronic or nagging injury that we don't know about, I wouldn't be too worried about this.  I'd certainly keep my eye on him as his innings go up, but I don't think this is a concern which would keep me from trying him as a starter.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

TJ surgery 5 years ago
And, to my knowledge, no elbow problems since.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Value of closer
I think a lot of this Soria-to-start pressure is founded in the premise that starters are inherently much more valuable than closers, and to a degree, the numbers support this notion.  

Starters pitch more innings--as a closer, Soria might be expected to pitch 70 innings this year, as a starter, he might be closer to 170.  I don't know what the projections are for Soria as a reliever, but I'd imagine them to be around a 3.5 ERA.  Starters tend to get up to a full point bump on their projections--what's the VORP on a 3.5 ERA for 70 innings vs the VORP on a 4.5 ERA for 170 innings?  

Again, I haven't read the papers on high leverage/low leverage innings, and it makes perfect sense to me that the 9th inning, no outs and a 2 run lead is, mathematically a low-leverage inning.  The odds of a team scoring 2+ runs in any given inning are pretty low.  But I think for anyone who's ever watched team using a "closer by committee" approach for a season, it's evident that the 8th and 9th innings are not "any given innings" for most pitchers.  They're people, there's pressure, they come out of their delivery, they throw 8 balls in a row in the dirt.  Soria's tough--he makes the 9th inning just another inning.  Successful closers make the 9th just another inning.  Has anyone run numbers on this psychological aspect of the late innings?  I don't know how you'd do it--possibly comparing a set of 'closers' 'late-inning ERA' minus 'non-late-inning ERA' vs 'non-closers' 'late-inning ERA' minus 'non-late-inning ERA.'

Lastly, having a solid guy at the back of the bullpen allows stability in the whole bullpen.  The value of a great closer may show up in his teammates numbers, not just his own.  Again, I don't know how you measure this, but any study that neglects this factor cannot be considered complete.

by kcdc on Mar 13, 2008 12:39 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

A different look at this

Here's what I haven't read anybody argue:

Instead of debating whether Soria contributing a 4.00 ERA over 180 IP vs Soria contributing a 2.50 ERA over 70 IP, ask yourself these questions:

  1. What if Soria is better than the norm, and his ERA only bumps up half a run when starting?
  2. What if, after fretting over never having a #1 (apologies to Greinke and Meche aside), the Royals find out too late that they had one all along, and never realized it?
This franchise has had a history of underutilizing pitching assets due to misidentification of the best usage for said assets. I can cite Jimmy Gobble recently, who they kept trying to force as a starter, and if you want to go back in time, Tom Gordon, who they forced as a starter, and Jay Witasick the same. Now the may be erroring in the other direction.

As for the Chamberlain and Papelbon arguments, I think we should NOT compare those situations to the Royals at all. My reason is the differences in payroll allow for both the Yankees and the Red Sox to have the luxury of making decisions like they have, whereas the Royals can not afford to find out if Soria could be an ace or not.

by loyal2s dad on Mar 13, 2008 1:26 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Exactly
We don't know how Soria would perform as a starter.  Maybe he'll be significantly worse as a starter, maybe not, and maybe he could be a very good or even great starter.  All of the above are possible.  But it makes absolutely no sense for the Royals to not find out.  Otherwise, the potential is wasted.  So why not try it and see if he can succeed in that role.  If he flops as a starter, he can go right back to the bullpen.  

My reason is the differences in payroll allow for both the Yankees and the Red Sox to have the luxury of making decisions like they have, whereas the Royals can not afford to find out if Soria could be an ace or not.

And yet, even with their payroll, the Yankees recognize the greater value of a good starting pitcher and that is why they are developing Chamberlain into a starter.  And, quite frankly, if the Red Sox weren't so deep with good SP's, I have a strong feeling Papelbon would be moved to the rotation as well.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Another argument
Ask yourself which is more scarce:

A closer who can convert 80% of his save chances reliably,

OR

A starter who can post a 3.50 - 4.00 ERA

Without even accounting for the difference in innings pitched, I think the answer should be obvious.

by loyal2s dad on Mar 13, 2008 1:30 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Starter- no question
I fully agree with the statistical analysis as a starter, but consider money.

If he doesn't work at starter you can always move someone to the pen.  What does an average starter cost on the market today?  How about 8-12M a year.  A great bullpen guy who is not a closer costs 3-6M.  This team unfortunately must look at finances first.  Leveraging innings per dollar is probably the most important attribute.  A league average starter who only costs $400K is a HUGE advantage for a team that can't afford to buy an ace.  

Maybe when our minor leaguers start panning out, we'll have the luxury of choosing who is the best candidate to start.  Right now our #4 & #5 starters are pretty poor choices compared to league average.  In that case proving a pitcher like Soria is a great starter, makes him a much more attractive commodity for trade.

Finally.  Any team that loses 97 games doesn't have a use for a closer!!!!  I don't care how good he is, you have to actually have a late inning lead before you worry about your bullpen quality.

by David Howards Legacy on Mar 13, 2008 2:45 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Agree with the entire post
And I like your idea of stretching him out slowly, but I must take issue with this:

Russo and Francesa aren't the average sports talk radio guys.  They aren't just reactionary guys trying to stir things up.  They are intelligent and thoughtful in their analysis,

Fail.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Mar 13, 2008 3:00 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Russo and Francesa
I think they are intelligent sports commentators.  They are very much traditionalists, like your average knowledgeable sports fan.  Nothing new or extra insightful.  No understanding of sabermetrics at all.  And, unlike some sports radio guys, they aren't just trying to be sensationalistic and get a rise out of people (like Jim Rome, et al.).
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Mike and the Mad Dog
Are by far the best sports talk.  By far.  It's not even close.  They're often wrong (they've been railing on how un-tough today's pitchers are for most of a week) but no one knows more about sports and sports history than those two.  They have total recall of games and lineups and situations and plays from decades ago.  They give tough interviews and never pull punches.

What makes them the best, though, is that they talk about the games.  They talk about plays and players and analyze what happened on the field.  They spend less time on peripheral crap than anyone else in the business.  They're good.  

by Billex Gordler on Mar 13, 2008 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Biggest question this year
Along with the "Is Mark Teahen valuable?" question, the Soria question is the most intriguing question of the year, for my money.

I think the Royals should transition Soria to a starter by the '09 All-Star Break.  I'm not sure exactly the best way to do that--maybe give him lots of two-inning close opportunities this year to get his innings up, maybe use him in long (but high-leverage) relieve...but I do think that the Rs would be crazy not to give him the chance to start.

The reason that JoePo can't find any successful Closers to Starters is that until like last season all relievers have been failed starters.  Closers never became starters because they'd ALREADY TRIED TO BE STARTERS AND FAILED!!  Anyway, what do the Rs lose by trying him as a starter?  Perhaps there's an increased injury risk in the rotation, perhaps.  But last I checked with Will Carroll, it's not clear whether the usage patterns of relievers (what with the short warm-up times, daily usage, etc) is less or more taxing, injury-wise.  That's really the only risk I can see.  And that risk is negligible.

Make him a starter.  

by Billex Gordler on Mar 13, 2008 5:44 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Derek Lowe
...began his career as a closer in Boston.  He hasn't been the best pitcher in the past few years, but very few starters have been as consistent as Lowe in the past 3-4 seasons.  Lowe is clearly of greater value as a starter.

Like Lowe, Soria is said to have about 4 quality pitches.  Surely there is a Royal pitcher who is clearly better suited for relief with only two plus pitches somewhere in the farm system.

I am disappointed that the Royals did not try to sign or designate a different closer during the offseason so that Soria may start instead.

by Stat Ninja on Mar 13, 2008 6:31 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

subject
I agree we need to find out what we have with Soria.. I would like to see him get a chance as a starter.. However, if he can't go more than 5 or 6 like Nunez then I don't think its worth it. That's yet to be seen and we shouldn't assume he can't until he proves otherwise.

I really like Nunez and would like to see him get a shot as the closer if we try to transition Soria to a starter and give the long relief / spot start role to Bale (assuming he doesn't cut it as the #4 or #5).. I just don't think Nunez has the stuff / endurance to make it as a starter but that doesn't mean he can't be effective  an inning at a time.

I thought it was intriguing to watch Greinke transition from starter to reliever and see how much more electric his stuff was coming out of the pen where he didn't have to hold back (at least that's how I saw it.. When he went back to starting was he hitting the same mph on the guns?) That's how I view Nunez and have my reservations the same will be true of Soria (although hopefully, as NY points out, that his multiple plus pitches will allow him to transition to an effective starter the third and fourth times through the lineup). My pessimism isnt from any evidence Soria has offered but more from 22+ years of Royals pitching projects not allowing me to be optimistic..

My long way of saying give the kid a shot at starting. What's the worst that could happen, we finish a few more games below .500 and he has to go back to his current role? Seems like a gamble we need to take...

by ctrell on Mar 13, 2008 6:32 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Moose
Why are the Royals in wait and see mode with Moustakas at short (where he is more valuable to the team, similar to Soria as a starter / reliever) when "people around the game" don't see Moose as a viable MLB SS, but don't seem to be taking the same approach with Soria (who by all accounts, hasn't been ruled out as a viable starter)? Seems a bit inconsistent and maybe even a little short sighted..

by ctrell on Mar 13, 2008 7:23 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Because Moose isn't a Royal
If you move Soria to the rotation and he fails or no one can handle the closer role or he gets injured, it hurts the major league team.  If Moose fails at SS and shows poor range and a glove of stone, then you are just hurting an A-ball team's record.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 7:54 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree..
Just thought it made a decent comparison in terms of letting a player get his shot to fulfill the role he would be most effective in on the big league club.. Maybe not. (Though I do believe sacrificing a few wins today in an effort to develop a good rotation for the future makes some decent sense, which is why I believe you posted the diary in the first place.. Or maybe not.)

by ctrell on Mar 13, 2008 9:03 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

If Soria were in the minors, he'd be a starter
I do think he should be transitioned into a starting pitcher.  But I don't think the organization is being inconsistent.  There's no risk in trying out a minor leaguer in any role.  The situation is much different in the majors.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

But everyone missed
That Soria's wish is to be a starter.  I think if the Royals never give him that chance, he may be more willing to test free agency when his time comes.  I think with his performance last year, and his selection of pitches, he's earned the chance.  

And besides, if it doesn't work out he goes back to the pen where he's been so good already.

by MarkH on Mar 13, 2008 11:02 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Mariao
Mariano rivera was a starter in 1995 but became a scrap middle man mid season.  He claimed notoriety during the 16 inning playof game which leyritz hit a walk off in the 16th...mariano pitched 3 solid innings and the next year he was the set up man for Johnny Wettland.  

As a starter, my friend and i noticed that he started to get rocked after the 4th inning...

I know it is not applicable to the original question but i figured i would throw it out there...

Anyone know if Muzzy Jackson is still with the club?

by munibroker23 on Mar 13, 2008 11:35 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

No he is not
He was demoted/reassigned when Moore took over as GM.  A year or so later, he left for greener pastures.  I'm not sure what if anything he's doing now.  He interviewed for the Astro's GM job, but didn't get it.  He's probably got a mid-level job in some organization.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 11:44 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

muzzy
That is the last info i could find on Muzzy as well...thanks for the post.  

what do you probably disagree with me about?

by munibroker23 on Mar 14, 2008 8:41 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's just my signature
It automatically appears at the bottom of all of my posts.
I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 14, 2008 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

HAHAHAHA
Anyone else find that ironically funny?

BTW, Mellinger linked this discussion on his blog.

by MileHighKCfan on Mar 14, 2008 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Bullpen
I agree that Soria should get a shot at starting eventually, like many others here.  

One thing I do want to inquire as far as this year's team goes is:

What makes us so sure that the Royals will have a good bullpen this year?  

Our bullpen was good last year(After May, I think).  A big part of that, though, came with three people that are not in it again this year: Greinke, Riske, and Dotel.  I'm not worried about the loss of Dotel so much because Soria proved that he could take that spot.  But, that is still three key bullpen members gone.  

I just think it's way too early to say that we have a good bullpen.  I've seen this before as a Royals fan.  Going into a season, we as fans feel like one aspect of the team is golden, only to be made for fools when on May 1st, we are already 10 games out of first.

Thoughts?

by I need more Esteban on Mar 14, 2008 5:29 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Why I think the bullpen will be good
Soria - His performance and tools speak for themselves

Yabuta - Dominated as a relief pitcher in Japan.  Has good stuff which I think should translate well to the majors.  But players new to MLB are never guarantees

Gobble - Was a mediocre pitcher until he changed his delivery to lefties and became a dominant LOOGY.  His great season last year was no fluke.  He changed his delivery so that now he dominates lefty batters.  There's no reason to think that will change.  And, given the fact that the bullpen is loaded with lefties, there's no reason to believe that he won't be used as a LOOGY again.  There's no reason for him to be used any other way.

Mahay - He has been very good in 4 of the last five seasons including an excellent season last year.  He might decline some with age, but he should still be good or even very good.  The good LHP/RHP mix in the bullpen means that he will be able to face mostly lefty batters this year which will help his performance.

Peralta - He had yet another good season as a workhorse in the Royals bullpen last year and he's one of the best strike out pitchers in the Royals bullpen.  There's no reason to expect a downturn from him.

Bale - He has good stuff and handles lefties well and gets a lot of strike outs.  He's no lock to be a good pitcher in either the bullpen or the rotation, but I really don't think he'll be a negative in the bullpen.

Nunez - He has good stuff, particularly for a reliever.  He's also a young, improving pitcher.  He could give the royals good innings in either short or long relief.

Depth - Musser and Braun are major league ready prospects who could definitely help if needed.  De La Rosa and Davies have great stuff and could be useful in the bullpen if they can't handle starting.

So, the Royals have a lot of talent and a lot of depth, as they did last year.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Mar 14, 2008 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

You sold me
I keep forgetting about Mahay.  Hopefully he can be the lefty version of Riske.

by I need more Esteban on Mar 14, 2008 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Soria as a starter
Rany just posted the same thing on his blog, how....coincidental.

by MileHighKCfan on Mar 18, 2008 1:02 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Kansas City Royals.
Start posting about the Royals »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Questions about Analyzing Defense
Glencoco_small
Mike Moustakas in the AFL Futures game
Small
JT20 Dynasty League
Royalsreview_small
KU-KSU Links: Battle for Mt. Sunflower!
Small
Royals ownership...how'd it happen?
Royalsretro_small
Royals trade Mark Teahen to the White Sox for 2B Chris Getz and 3B Josh Fields
Royalsreview_small
Rays Send Aki Iwamura to Pirates for Random Prospect
Glencoco_small
One Fan's Vision for the Royals
Img_0208_2_small
World Series Poll
N1309620122_30067195_1714_small
Offseason time

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Royalsreview_small royalsreview