Mid Season Pitcher Workloads
At the midway point of the season, it’s always interesting to see how teams are utilizing their pitching staffs. I’ve been examining workloads through the metric I created, called Fatigue Units. This metric accounts for days between appearances, stress during pitching, and time between pitches – you can read more about it here. TLDR; Fatigue Units appear to be a more accurate indicator of “overworked” pitchers than pitches, or innings pitched.
To start off – what does the midway point indicate about a pitcher’s workload? It doesn’t necessarily indicate what the workload will be by season’s end, but it does say that the pitcher has worked hard in the first half. It definitely says that the team has trusted that pitcher, and, that pitcher is very good. Here’s what the halfway point workloads looked like in 2016.
| Rank | Name | Fatigue Units | Average Days Between Games | SD of Days Between | Games Appearances | Inning Appearances | 5 or More Days Rest | 2 – 4 Days Rest | 1 Day Rest | Pitch Count |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nate Jones | 14.46 | 2.42 | 1.93 | 49 | 63 | 8 | 21 | 20 | 685 |
| 2 | Travis Wood | 14.15 | 2.34 | 1.48 | 51 | 64 | 6 | 27 | 18 | 693 |
| 3 | Chris Sale | 13.85 | 6.05 | 1.47 | 20 | 144 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 2117 |
| 4 | David Phelps | 13.48 | 2.37 | 1.32 | 50 | 61 | 6 | 29 | 15 | 923 |
| 5 | Max Scherzer | 13.44 | 5.52 | 0.87 | 22 | 150 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 2327 |
| 6 | Seung Hwan Oh | 13.36 | 2.27 | 1.13 | 52 | 57 | 4 | 33 | 15 | 895 |
| 7 | Zach Duke | 13.14 | 2.23 | 1.26 | 53 | 62 | 5 | 31 | 17 | 615 |
| 8 | Dellin Betances | 12.94 | 2.33 | 1.48 | 49 | 56 | 5 | 30 | 14 | 817 |
| 9 | Ryan Pressly | 12.68 | 2.35 | 1.32 | 50 | 63 | 3 | 33 | 14 | 843 |
| 10 | John Lackey | 12.39 | 5.60 | 0.88 | 21 | 141 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 2099 |
| 11 | Chris Archer | 12.22 | 5.43 | 0.60 | 22 | 135 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 2254 |
| 12 | David Hernandez | 12.04 | 2.50 | 1.28 | 47 | 55 | 5 | 30 | 12 | 832 |
| 13 | Johnny Cueto | 12.04 | 5.42 | 1.38 | 21 | 151 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 2226 |
| 14 | Madison Bumgarner | 12.03 | 5.43 | 0.60 | 22 | 154 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 2331 |
| 15 | Bud Norris | 12.02 | 4.11 | 1.76 | 28 | 109 | 15 | 12 | 1 | 1693 |
And, here’s what they looked like at the end of the season.
| Rank | Name | Fatigue Units | Average Days Between Games | SD of Days Between | Games Appearances | Inning Appearances | 5 or More Days Rest | 2 – 4 Days Rest | 1 Day Rest | Pitch Count |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Chris Sale | 21.51 | 5.84 | 1.21 | 32 | 232 | 32 | 0 | 0 | 3417 |
| 2 | Nate Jones | 20.27 | 2.56 | 1.98 | 71 | 90 | 12 | 32 | 27 | 998 |
| 3 | Max Scherzer | 20.16 | 5.48 | 0.76 | 34 | 231 | 34 | 0 | 0 | 3555 |
| 4 | Dellin Betances | 20.15 | 2.52 | 1.64 | 72 | 85 | 12 | 36 | 24 | 1224 |
| 5 | Travis Wood | 20.13 | 2.38 | 1.44 | 77 | 93 | 7 | 45 | 25 | 1015 |
| 6 | Zach Duke | 19.84 | 2.23 | 1.21 | 81 | 95 | 6 | 49 | 26 | 1014 |
| 7 | Andrew Miller | 19.44 | 2.62 | 1.57 | 69 | 83 | 9 | 41 | 19 | 1105 |
| 8 | Seung Hwan Oh | 19.26 | 2.45 | 1.42 | 75 | 86 | 9 | 45 | 21 | 1305 |
| 9 | Chris Archer | 18.93 | 5.59 | 0.67 | 33 | 209 | 33 | 0 | 0 | 3405 |
| 10 | Juan Nicasio | 18.84 | 3.36 | 2.27 | 52 | 126 | 16 | 27 | 9 | 2168 |
| 11 | Randall Delgado | 18.71 | 2.32 | 1.16 | 79 | 100 | 4 | 53 | 22 | 1351 |
| 12 | JC Ramirez | 18.52 | 2.36 | 1.34 | 70 | 89 | 7 | 45 | 18 | 1237 |
| 13 | Madison Bumgarner | 18.03 | 5.42 | 0.56 | 34 | 232 | 34 | 0 | 0 | 3547 |
| 14 | Johnny Cueto | 17.92 | 5.53 | 1.30 | 32 | 225 | 32 | 0 | 0 | 3290 |
| 15 | David Hernandez | 17.88 | 2.61 | 1.33 | 70 | 84 | 7 | 47 | 16 | 1274 |
So halfway point doesn’t necessarily indicate that you can linearly extrapolate the workload for the rest of the season, but you do see that 9 of the 15 all start break workload leaders ended up being in the top 15 at the end of the season.
So, how are things looking in 2017?
| Rank | Name | Fatigue Units | Average Days Between Games | SD of Days Between | Games Appearances | Inning Appearances | 5 or More Days Rest | 2 – 4 Days Rest | 1 Day Rest | Pitch Count |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Enny Romero | 14.18 | 2.71 | 1.93 | 36 | 49 | 6 | 19 | 11 | 713 |
| 2 | Felipe Rivero | 14.17 | 2.23 | 1.09 | 44 | 55 | 1 | 28 | 15 | 696 |
| 3 | Chris Sale | 12.60 | 5.41 | 0.62 | 18 | 129 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 1953 |
| 4 | Shane Greene | 12.33 | 2.29 | 1.25 | 43 | 56 | 3 | 28 | 12 | 661 |
| 5 | Chris Devenski | 12.28 | 2.76 | 1.30 | 35 | 59 | 4 | 24 | 7 | 802 |
| 6 | Brian Duensing | 12.26 | 2.50 | 1.58 | 35 | 51 | 6 | 18 | 11 | 647 |
| 7 | Corey Knebel | 12.24 | 2.31 | 1.47 | 43 | 48 | 5 | 24 | 14 | 782 |
| 8 | Andrew Miller | 12.16 | 2.67 | 1.57 | 37 | 51 | 7 | 19 | 11 | 671 |
| 9 | Mychal Givens | 11.83 | 2.67 | 1.31 | 37 | 57 | 4 | 27 | 6 | 728 |
| 10 | Bryan Shaw | 11.81 | 2.34 | 1.15 | 42 | 54 | 3 | 27 | 12 | 645 |
| 11 | Jim Johnson | 11.67 | 2.51 | 1.46 | 38 | 40 | 6 | 18 | 14 | 626 |
| 12 | Anthony Swarzak | 11.65 | 2.56 | 1.50 | 35 | 57 | 4 | 22 | 9 | 642 |
| 13 | Dan Jennings | 11.61 | 2.30 | 1.14 | 41 | 62 | 3 | 28 | 10 | 637 |
| 14 | Carlos Martinez | 11.54 | 5.65 | 0.79 | 18 | 119 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 1738 |
| 15 | Edwin Diaz | 11.45 | 2.79 | 1.70 | 35 | 41 | 8 | 15 | 12 | 626 |

| Team | Fatigue Units | Pitches | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rockies | 50.45 | 8432 |
| 2 | Diamondbacks | 49.82 | 8546 |
| 3 | Nationals | 49.02 | 8850 |
| 4 | Giants | 47.94 | 8664 |
| 5 | Red Sox | 47.68 | 8758 |
| 6 | Cardinals | 46.94 | 8145 |
| 7 | Angels | 46.67 | 8261 |
| 8 | Astros | 46.16 | 8108 |
| 9 | Indians | 45.72 | 8040 |
| 10 | Mets | 45.50 | 8072 |
| 11 | Rangers | 45.44 | 8218 |
| 12 | Dodgers | 44.89 | 7972 |
| 13 | Pirates | 44.55 | 7786 |
| 14 | Mariners | 44.36 | 7869 |
| 15 | Twins | 44.09 | 7943 |
| 16 | Yankees | 43.81 | 7797 |
| 17 | Orioles | 43.50 | 8442 |
| 18 | Rays | 43.45 | 8582 |
| 19 | Padres | 43.35 | 7641 |
| 20 | Cubs | 43.34 | 8051 |
| 21 | Tigers | 43.22 | 8373 |
| 22 | Brewers | 43.16 | 8237 |
| 23 | Athletics | 42.95 | 8114 |
| 24 | Royals | 42.24 | 7850 |
| 25 | White Sox | 42.15 | 8137 |
| 26 | Braves | 41.95 | 7919 |
| 27 | Blue Jays | 41.58 | 7994 |
| 28 | Marlins | 40.81 | 7441 |
| 29 | Phillies | 40.19 | 7954 |
| 30 | Reds | 38.47 | 7600 |
This table indicates a few things; the first being – The Rockies starters are doing incredible work this year. They are absolutely crushing it, in an environment that has been so traditionally hard on pitchers. It may be that the offence has been so good, the pitchers are being given a bit more leash. Any way you slice it, they’re sparing their bullpen, which will likely be called upon frequently in the second half, as the young Rockies starters get a break from time to time. On the other end of this – you can see that the terrible Blue Jays, Phillies, and Reds rotations aren’t getting overworked, because most of the time – their starters are getting shelled, and are out of the game early.

Now with the Bullpens, you can see some interesting trends;
| Rank | Team | Fatigue Units | Back to Back Appearances | Pitches |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mets | 79.12 | 81 | 5259 |
| 2 | Pirates | 76.35 | 63 | 5092 |
| 3 | Marlins | 76.21 | 65 | 5606 |
| 4 | Brewers | 74.70 | 71 | 5651 |
| 5 | White Sox | 73.12 | 55 | 5099 |
| 6 | Blue Jays | 72.65 | 58 | 5108 |
| 7 | Padres | 71.56 | 52 | 5044 |
| 8 | Braves | 70.91 | 60 | 4559 |
| 9 | Orioles | 70.13 | 51 | 5455 |
| 10 | Indians | 70.02 | 64 | 4412 |
| 11 | Astros | 69.73 | 49 | 5124 |
| 12 | Cubs | 68.54 | 47 | 5173 |
| 13 | Cardinals | 68.47 | 54 | 4874 |
| 14 | Reds | 68.16 | 36 | 5460 |
| 15 | Athletics | 67.41 | 50 | 5120 |
| 16 | Phillies | 67.01 | 56 | 4819 |
| 17 | Royals | 66.52 | 51 | 4838 |
| 18 | Mariners | 66.34 | 53 | 4885 |
| 19 | Dodgers | 66.10 | 57 | 4901 |
| 20 | Angels | 65.99 | 49 | 4916 |
| 21 | Rockies | 65.62 | 49 | 4817 |
| 22 | Diamondbacks | 65.44 | 58 | 4497 |
| 23 | Yankees | 64.45 | 40 | 4802 |
| 24 | Twins | 64.33 | 53 | 5043 |
| 25 | Nationals | 62.27 | 51 | 4151 |
| 26 | Red Sox | 62.21 | 42 | 4699 |
| 27 | Rays | 61.42 | 41 | 4778 |
| 28 | Tigers | 61.07 | 46 | 4711 |
| 29 | Rangers | 60.85 | 44 | 4679 |
| 30 | Giants | 60.02 | 47 | 4456 |
First and foremost – the Mets are running their bullpen into the ground. They have a signficant lead in fatigue units over the second place team, and a massive lead in back to back appearances from their bullpen pitchers (81 times this year, a pitcher has come into a Mets game having pitched the day before). That seems… drastic. The Brewers are next, with 71 back to back appearances, and then the values seem to level off.
Once again – this is hardly a kiss of death for pitchers. This was an attempt to present a more physiologically representative method of workload demands on pitchers. You don’t need to go add and drop anyone any time soon because of this list – but if it comes down to one hot hand vs. another in your playoff matchups, you might want to go with the reliever with more gas left in the tank.
Ergonomist (CCPE) and Injury Prevention researcher. I like science and baseball - the order depends on the day. Twitter: @DrMikeSonne
The use of that meme is ruthless. I approve.
Likely a stupid question, but how could Sale or Archer have never pitched on 4 days rest in 2016? I don’t remember them having a 6-guy rotation for the entire year. If you have 5 starters in the rotation and no off days for a period of 10 days, then would not that equal 4 days rest in between starts?
So, there would be 4 days off. The 5th day is the next start. Also keep in mind, most teams get a Monday or a Thursday off.
The Fatigue Units for David Price went crazy at the end of 2015 when John Gibbons got a hold of him.
I agree with Horatio. It shouldn’t be “4 days of rest” in your data-set and have it be zero for Chris Sale. That means he’s never pitched in 5 days at all during the entire season.
5-man rotation equals 4 days of rest, with some but sporadically placed days off for teams throughout the season. I believe the 4 days of rest number should be higher than zero.
I think the data isn’t worded correctly.
Very nice article. This seems a bit misplaced for Rotographs. Tweaking the conclusions of this article would make it a good read in the Fangraphs portion of this website.
I agree with you Garyth, this could probably be tweaked to fit the Fangraph side of things. But at the same time I am pleased to see this kind of stuff in Rotographs too.
My bad!