The Phillies called on their relievers to throw 421 innings last season, which is not a lot. Not only was it the fewest number of innings pitched by a National League bullpen in 2010, it was the fewest innings pitched by any bullpen in the NL in the last five years.
The table below shows the NL team with the fewest bullpen innings for each of the past ten seasons and the number of innings they threw that season:
| Year | Team | Bullpen innings |
| 2001 | ATL | 439 2/3 |
| 2002 | ARI | 387 1/3 |
| 2003 | CHC | 426 |
| 2004 | STL | 457 1/3 |
| 2005 | STL | 397 2/3 |
| 2006 | SF | 447 |
| 2007 | ARI | 483 |
| 2008 | ARI | 456 |
| 2009 | STL | 437 |
| 2010 | PHI | 421 |
In 2005, three NL teams threw less than 421 innings in relief. The Astros threw 414, the Mets threw 413 and the Cardinals 397 2/3.
In 2002, the Diamondbacks threw 387 1/3.
Those four bullpens are the only four in the last ten years that went fewer innings over the season than the Phillies did in 2010. So while it sure seems like a full season of Oswalt plus the addition of Lee should mean fewer innings for the pen, I think there’s a question of how many they can drop given that their 2010 numbers were so low already.
The 387 1/3 innings that Arizona threw in relief in 2002 was the lowest number since the Braves threw 364 innings in 1998. So, if the Phillies threw 34 fewer innings in 2011 than they did in 2010, they would pitch 387 innings in relief for the year in 2011 and would be the bullpen that has thrown the fewest innings in the NL since 1998 (assuming no other team threw fewer than 387 in 2011). To throw 34 fewer innings in relief, they would need to throw about .21 fewer innings per game over 162 games, which is less than one out per game.
January 6th, 2011 on 4:41 pm
Absolutely fascinating stat. Where the heck do you find this stuff? I had no idea that 400 relief innings would be a good number. Or that we might be seriously below it.
It seems to me that if the Fab Four have just their usual years, the pen might be able to go to the islands for a summer break for a few days, but they should not need the rest. One might reasonably expect all four to average 7 innings, yes? Assuming healthy arms and shoulders. If the four of them are reasonably competitive amongst themselves, it might draw from each man better than their career norms and the average start might even rise an out or so.
In any case, the guys who come out of the pen need to try to match their more famous starting staff in quality. The pitching standard ought to be awfully high; the pen’s reach might even exceed its grasp. Or what’s a Series for?
January 7th, 2011 on 9:30 am
I really think the total number of innings pitched by the bullpen can’t drop that much in 2011. Hamels won’t go that deep into games. Someone among the big four will miss significant time with injury. I would guess the chances that all four of Oswalt, Halladay, Lee and Hamels make 32 starts are pretty low. Unless Blanton is the fifth starter for the Phils, I don’t think the fifth starter will go very deep into games. Ditto for whoever the guys are that fill in for the big four in the starts they can’t make.
If the bullpen got one less out a game in 2011 over 162 games, that would be 162 outs or 54 fewer innings. That would have the bullpen throwing 367 innings in 2011. I’d love to see that happen, but I think it’s pretty unlikely.
January 7th, 2011 on 12:40 pm
Eric, do you have a projection of number of runs prevented as a result of 54 innings being thrown by starters instead of the bullpen?
Anyway, interesting that you picked Hamels as the guy that won’t go long. Seems to me it was Oswalt who tired more easily and didn’t make it through the 7th so much. Hamels was just getting pinch hit for a lot to try to make a run happen.
January 7th, 2011 on 1:27 pm
Using last year’s numbers, the Phils allowed .4269 run per inning pitched by a starter and .4703 runs per inning pitched by a reliever. That’s a difference of .0434 runs per inning. So, 54 innings pitched by starters instead of relievers would have saved about 2.34 runs if the pitchers allowed runs at those rates (.0434 * 54).
I hope we will see Hamels throw more innings in starts this year. Oswalt did throw more innings per start in 2010, but the two were very close in 2009. Hamels had more pitches per inning, though, as well as more than Hallady, Lee, Kendrick, Moyer or Blanton. So hopefully he can cut down on the number of pitches he needs to get through an inning and that can help him go more innings. In 2008, he went 6.89 innings per start, but he’s been down sharply since them. 6.05 in 2009 and 6.32 in 2010.
January 7th, 2011 on 3:51 pm
Hopefully he can stop giving up so damn many home runs!
January 7th, 2011 on 4:47 pm
With you on that one. 97 NL pitchers who made ten starts or more this year. If you rank them by home runs per nine innings, Josh Johnson, who allowed seven home runs in 183 2/3 innings, has the best rate of allowing HR and San Francisco’s Todd Wellemeyer, 12 in 58 2/3 innings, has the worst.
Among the Phillies the list looks like this:
Oswalt 34
Halladay 37
Hamels 69
Kendrick 80
Blanton 85
Moyer 93
Lee was even better than Oswalt at preventing the home run, and that’s pitching in the AL. Lee allowed 16 HR in 212 1/3 innings in 2010, which is 0.68 vs 0.81 for Oswalt.
At least Hamels was better at preventing the home run than Kendrick/Blanton/Moyer. His home run rate has been pretty consistent for the past three years, so I’m not expecting to see any dramatic improvement there in 2011. 1.109 per nine innings in 2008, 1.115 in ’09 and 1.121 in ’10. But we can always hope.
January 7th, 2011 on 5:26 pm
The sentence “At least Hamels was better at preventing the home run than Kendrick/Blanton/Moyer.” made my stomach heave. Geezus. Is that the best we ccan hope for? I hope that Hamels does not see that as a positive. My God.
January 8th, 2011 on 9:18 am
Adding 2.34 runs to the run differential.. is that even a Pythagorean win? I’m not sure how that formula works. At any rate it seems like an incremental improvement, not an evolution of the team.
I’m inclined to toss out Hamels’ 2009 and pretend it never happened. Hopefully 2011 will justify that..
January 8th, 2011 on 8:54 pm
Jim,
Hamels’ ERA+ by year:
2006: 115
2007: 135
2008: 142
2009: 97
2010: 132
2009 is clearly the outlier, and you don’t have to wait for his 2011 season to declare that 2009 was fluky, especially given his unseasonably high BAbip in 2009. After his 2006 season, Cole Hamels has been a top flight and All Star caliber starter for 3 of his 4 years in baseball (and he was pretty darn good his first year, too). Cole Hamels is a great pitcher. He may never win a Cy Young and may never be considered the best pitcher in baseball, but he’s certainly a great pitcher, and we’re very fortunate that he’ll be our 4TH STARTER (!) next year…
January 10th, 2011 on 9:17 am
I agree that we’re lucky to have Hamels. Being the MVP of the NLCS and the World Series before you turn 25 are good signs you can contribute. Two more seasons before he becomes a free agent. He’s still cheap, but not as cheap as he used to be. $9.5M in ’11, then one more year of arbitration before he becomes a free agent.