I didn't have an opportunity to mention this over the weekend, but per both Kirby Arnold and Shannon Drayer, the M's are going to be looking to stretch Shawn Kelley out a little bit through the rest of spring training. As has been the case with pretty much everything the Mariners have done all offseason, Wak says this is about adding more versatility. The people in charge of this team must take forever when they go appliance shopping.
This is one of those baseball decisions that's pretty easy to understand without having to dig below the surface. With David Aardsma, Mark Lowe, and Brandon League, the M's already have the back of their bullpen figured out. Those are the guys we'll see handed a lot of 7th, 8th, and 9th innings. Kelley, then, will fill a different role, and given the overwhelming likelihood that the M's go with a six-man bullpen, there's going to be a need for some arms who can handle multiple-inning appearances. Kelley's going to be the most talented of the bottom three guys, so it makes sense that the team would look to him to go longer. You always want to maximize the innings you give to your best pitchers.
Kelley is already no stranger to going more than one inning. He made twelve appearances lasting more than one inning a year ago, and averaged 1.3 innings per appearance in the minors. It's not like he has the track record of a specialist. But by the same token, he only threw more than 35 pitches one time in 2009, and the M's would probably like to see if he can get up to 40-50. If Kelley can do that, then suddenly you're talking about potential two- to three-inning appearances from a guy with a K/BB over 5. That's a valuable reliever who offers a good amount of flexibility.
What makes this story all the more interesting is that Kelley talked to Drayer about how he used to be a starter, and Wak admits that the team has discussed the possibility of trying him in the rotation. When you have a team with our current 3-4-5, it's tempting to let your mind wander and envision a guy with Kelley's numbers throwing five or six innings at a time. He started 16 games in college as recently as 2007, after all, and it's not like he's completely forgotten everything he used to know about preparation and pacing.
But as fun as it can be to think about that sort of scenario, I wouldn't count on it happening. The M's have a plan right now, and that plan involves Shawn Kelley throwing big innings in relief. They're not in position to start experimenting with one of their best bullpen arms. And besides, there's no guarantee that Kelley would work out as a starter. His fastball would drop into the low-90s, he'd almost certainly have to either learn or re-establish a changeup that last year he hardly ever used, and he'd need his body to stay together, which it didn't do in 2003, when he had Tommy John surgery. Among other things. Roles aren't random - Kelley was selected for bullpen work for a reason.
I'd be lying if I said I weren't intrigued. Kelley's fastball can probably afford to drop a tick or three, and his breaking ball has pseudo-curveball movement that makes it effective against righties and lefties alike. It's easy to see why the idea is appealing. Transitioning from the bullpen into the rotation, though, isn't a piece of cake, because if it were, you'd see a lot more effective relievers turning into starters. It's a gamble, and while it's one the team might be more willing to try out in a different situation, the 2009 Mariners are built to win, and Shawn Kelley's prepared to help them win in relief.
I like Shawn Kelley. Quite a bit, even. In a vacuum, I'm fond of the idea of seeing how far he can stretch. But things being what they are, I'm perfectly content to take him in shorter bursts. This isn't a Brandon Morrow situation. Kelley doesn't have electric, ace-quality stuff. His hypothetical upside as a starter is far more limited, and for that reason I can't bring myself to be the least bit upset that he is where he is. He's good there. Damn good.
0 recs | 15 comments
Isn't it 2010 yet?
Schuxu - March 16, 2010
I think this is kind of crazy for a few more reasons.
On Minor League Splits, I saw that, In 78 innings the Minors (‘07-’09) and purely in relief, Kelley was something of a groundballer 48.6% (GB), 20.6% (LD), (29.4%) FB, 12.1% (IF), 6.3% (HR). But he had only 31.3% GB or so in the majors and a 51.5% FB. He’s a flyball pitcher.
He had 2.84 BB/9 and 9.73 K/9 and a 2.97 FIP (alhough his FIP was 3.62 vs. lefties with 4.28 BB/9 and 8.55 K/9, while it was 2.52 FIP w/ 1.85 BB/9 and 10.54 K/9 against rights). He was much more effective against lefties than righties in the majors though. So maybe he can keep being effective against lefties as a starter.
His control has always been good, not great (it’s gotten a bit better since he was drafted). So he has that going for him.
But there’s no way he can strike out many people as a starter – (In COLLEGE, as a starter, from 2004-2007, he had a 7.3K/9, 6.5 K/9, 8.5 K/9, and a 5.8 K/9). I see no way he’ll strike out more than, what, maybe 4.5 per nine as a starter.
So does he have the elements that make a good starting pitcher (groundballs, control, strikeouts, a weapon against platoons?) – no on groundballs, maybe on control, no on srikeouts, and maybe on platoons. I see no reason to try this.
Decatur - March 16, 2010
I'm pretty excited about the bullpen.
I think they’ve got some quality arms back there, and we should see some good stuff from them this year.
Also, I’m confused (which seems to be happening easily lately), but doesn’t 1.3 innings equal two innings? Perhaps you meant it that way, Jeff, but that made me backtrack a bit when I read that.
JLProck - March 16, 2010
1.3 could be two innings in weird box score notation
I’m pretty sure in this case it is short hand for 1.333333(ad infinitum) or 4/3. The fact that once you get to three outs you no longer need the decimal is the big clue here.
Bearskin Rugburn - March 16, 2010
I go back and forth on which notation I prefer
The 1.1 notation is kind of weird.
Jeff Sullivan - March 16, 2010
1.1/1.2 is ubiquitous in pretty much all box scores that I read
Seems like it should be the standard, unless y’all want to start a revolution. I know StatCorner uses 1.3/1.7, which I’m guessing is due to M/G’s mathematical/engineering background. Whatevs, it’s easy enough to figure out what someone means.
appleshampoo - March 16, 2010
It's because it was easier for me to code as a simple rounding than if statements.
I prefer the .1 and .2
Matthew - March 16, 2010
Maybe it would be better if intead of a decimal it were a hyphen
but really its not a big problem,
Bearskin Rugburn - March 16, 2010
Yeah I think the 1.1 notation is annoying when I want to do math with it.
The 1.33 notation makes sense if you understand how fractions convert to decimals. It would be interesting to talk to the guy who started using the 1.1 notation. I don’t really mind it but it is a little strange when you think about it.
Edgar for Pres - March 16, 2010
I agree
Our bullpen looks alright, but it is not yet a net strength. Aardsma is a thrilling reliever in the way that a wooden rollercoaster in termite country is thrilling. Lowe has closer stuff but hasn’t yet translated it into closer results with any consistency. League is kind of in the same boat.
If we had Oakland’s pen, or Chicago’s, I’d feel more inclined to experiment. But we don’t. Given that nearly all relievers are inconsistent to begin with, and our guys in particular have spotty pasts even by that diminished standard, I think it’s wise to play it safe and stuff as much talent into the pen as possible.
Don’t fuck with Kelley. Stretch him to last a couple frames, sure ok. But don’t fool around with the rotation. Even if he could help there, it wouldn’t be in 2010.
Bearskin Rugburn - March 16, 2010
Looking at some pitch/fx data from last year...
… and seeing Kelley in Arizona twice this year leads me to believe there is a problem. Some very good pitches on the corners and at the knees are being hit for doubles and home runs. The only logical conclusion I can draw is extreme bad luck or Kelley is tipping pitches. Has anyone noticed anything or is it more likely luck that will eventually even out?
Jack Swan - March 16, 2010
Spring training.
BrianL - March 16, 2010
Matters
Sec 108 - March 16, 2010
I'm more concerned...
… about a trend that started last year and seems to be continuing. Although the HR’s I saw hit off him down here might have been meatballs (I wasn’t sitting right behind home plate, so I can’t say for sure) the XBH he was giving up in August and September of last year were coming off quality pitches. Hence the question of whether he’s tipping what he’s going to throw. From watching it is not something obvious, but I’ve heard stories of hitters being tipped off because a pitcher holds his glove just slightly different for a breaking pitch and a fastball.
Jack Swan - March 16, 2010
Maybe you do see a trend, but sprint training is such a small sample to base off of.
If he makes the team and sucks he will get sent down to work on it.
Sec 108 - March 16, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.