Blake Treinen Is Going To Close
At points, it looked like the next Nationals closer would be Koda Glover. At other points, it looked like it would be Shawn Kelley, and at other points, it looked like it would be David Robertson, or someone else belonging to another team. But now we can say that the next Nationals closer will be Blake Treinen. That is, at least, in the nearest-term future, barring a change or a trade, which could happen within any given matter of minutes.
For the Nationals, what this is is a resolution. It’s an answer, and all the other bullpen roles fall out of this assignment. For me, it’s a chance to write about Blake Treinen again. I’ve been on the Treinen bandwagon for a few years, mostly just because of his sinker. I’ve been somewhat obsessed with drawing parallels between Treinen and Zach Britton, another power-sinker reliever who converted from the rotation. Their sinkers behave similarly, thrown at similar speeds, and although there’s the clear difference of handedness, I have to go back to the well. Time to think about Treinen and Britton one more time.
Here is a Blake Treinen sinker. It registers at 97 miles per hour.
Here is a Zach Britton sinker. It registers at 96 miles per hour.
Britton’s a lefty who throws from the third-base side of the rubber. Treinen’s a righty who throws from the third-base side of the rubber. Britton, according to the team, stands 6’3; Treinen, according to the team, stands 6’5. Reasonably tall, the both of them. Britton has blossomed into one of the absolute most dominant relievers of his era. He’s gotten there by throwing sinker after sinker, leaving the hitter little mystery. Treinen has not graduated to that level. That much should be clear. He is still a successful ground-baller, coming off a 2.28 ERA. Treinen, last year, was good! He’s good at his job. And when I examine these two pitchers, I wonder if Treinen now is where Britton was after 2014.
In this table, a relevant comparison.
| Pitcher | Year | Velo | K-BB% | O-Swing% | Zone% | Hard-Soft% | SI Height |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zach Britton | 2014 | 95 | 14% | 31% | 49% | -11% | -0.5 |
| Blake Treinen | 2016 | 95 | 12% | 33% | 47% | -5% | -0.5 |
Back then, Britton was coming off his first effective year as a reliever, and as a closer. One notable difference not shown here: Britton threw 92% fastballs, while Treinen threw just 69% fastballs. Treinen’s more stubborn about forcing his slider, and his slider’s actually been a tremendously valuable pitch, but anyway, in general, you can see the parallels. In 2014, Britton was good without being dominant by his peripherals. He was a master of generating grounders and weak contact, with significantly more soft hits than hard hits in play. Last year, Treinen was similar. Not the same, but similar. Britton was the only pitcher in the majors last season to post a higher ground-ball rate.
Now behold how Britton has only gotten better:
| Year | K-BB% | GB/FB | O-Swing% | Zone% | Hard-Soft% | SI Height |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | 14% | 6.4 | 31% | 49% | -11% | -0.5 |
| 2015 | 26% | 8.3 | 42% | 45% | -15% | -0.8 |
| 2016 | 22% | 9.1 | 39% | 40% | -16% | -1.0 |
Between 2014 and 2015, Britton’s strikeouts took off. His chase rate took off, and he’s pitched less and less within the zone. There’s been even more soft contact, relative to hard contact, and you can look over in that last column. According to Brooks Baseball, in 2014, Britton’s average sinker was about six inches lower than the vertical midpoint of the strike zone. Last year, his average sinker was about twelve inches lower than the vertical midpoint of the strike zone. Britton’s gotten better about controlling that pitch around the knees, and now, from Baseball Savant, it’s time for some sinker-specific heat maps:
For comparative reference, here’s 2016 Treinen, showing only sinkers:
Treinen has been good about keeping that pitch in the lower half. We know from his grounders and ERA that he hasn’t made a habit of leaving too many sinkers up. His 2016 average sinker height is a perfect match for Britton’s 2014 average sinker height. Which should lead you to wonder: What if Treinen worked down even more? What if he further imitated the Zach Britton plan of attack? Obviously, no two pitchers are identical, and, obviously, one of these guys throws with the opposite hand. And then there’s the matter of MLB maybe trying to raise the lower part of the zone. But what if Treinen and his similar power sinker targeted the bottom of the kneecap, instead of the top? How much better could Blake Treinen get?
I don’t know the answer to that, but given how Britton has gone, I haven’t lost confidence that Treinen could become more effective still. He’s already a fine reliever, a guy who avoids batted balls in the air, and a guy who just got better against left-handed bats. If Blake Treinen is Sam Dyson, well, the Rangers aren’t complaining about Sam Dyson. Yet there is that higher upside, and maybe this is a spot where the Nationals could benefit from signing Matt Wieters. Wieters has been there to watch Britton grow. Wieters has caught him, and he’s guided him lower and lower. Matt Wieters has worked with that power sinker, and he could help Blake Treinen improve. I’m not saying it’s a guarantee, but that prior experience doesn’t hurt.
The Nationals like to trade, and the Nationals like to trade for new closers. They still could do that, at literally any point on any day. Yet Blake Treinen could be exactly what they need. He’s deserving of this chance, at the very least, and you don’t have to go far from DC to find another city where a pitcher like this has made himself untouchable.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.

After watching him in the WBC I’m thinking the long-term plan probably includes Enny Romero, too.
In the Britton heat map, the scale changes from 70 being dark in 2014 to 45 being dark in 2015 and 2016. And then you compare Britton’s 2014 map to Treinen’s 2016 map, which is using a different scale.
I can’t control those. That’s all Baseball Savant.
I think one big concern with Treinen as a closer is his BB%, rather than his K-BB%. 2016 Treinen might’ve had a similar K-BB% to 2014 Britton, but his BB% was 3.7% higher. A player like Treinen with a great batted ball profile against can afford for opposing hitters to put the ball in play against him more than many other pitchers can (as opposed to simply striking them out), but if he’s walking guys it won’t matter.
Unrelated, I’m very impressed with the in depth analysis so quickly! The announcement was made an hour and a half ago, and there’s already an in-depth analysis up about how it might go.
I agree with Dusty’s decision broadly — because I like Glover, but don’t think he’s quite ready for the gig — but I agree with you 100%, I think Treinen’s BBs are going to be an issue.
While Treinen’s Sinker is great, its not the weapon that Britton or Dyson have — per pitch f/x, Britton’s whiff rate is 17% (!!) on his sinker, Dyson’s is 10% and Treinen’s is 7%, and their LD/BIP rates are inverse — Britton 12%, Dyson 14%, Treinen 18%. Which is to say, Treinen’s going to allow more baserunners than Britton/Dyson due to BBs, doesn’t have the sinker to miss bats like Britton/Dyson, and sees harder contact on that sinker than Britton/Dyson — to me that’s a recipe for runs. Throw in Treinen’s got a bit of a split issue (maybe because his other pitch is a Slider) and I think he may get pushed out by Glover by June.
Glover just seems to have more swing and miss in his game than Treinen, he just doesn’t have Treinen’s polish yet.
His walk rate isn’t good but it’s artificially inflated by the6 (!) separate IBBs that Treinen had BOTH last year AND in 2015. That’s like 16% of his total walks during that timeframe! Granted, that’s predictable when you have an incompetent game manager at the helm, but it’s not reflective of the player’s skills.
kinda like Espinosa played shortstop last year? there is someone younger and better “waiting in the wings” but Dusty Baker is an idiot who can’t win a playoff series.
You like to pretend that you’re here to have reasoned discussion. Here’s a chance to prove yourself.
Explain how the Nats would have been better off with Michael Taylor playing everyday instead of Danny Espinosa – using facts, reasoning, and without once calling me or the site as a whole any names.
I meant Trea Turner
Trea Turner played CF.
The choice was not Turner or Espinosa at SS.
The choice was Turner in CF and Espinosa at SS. Or Turner at SS and Taylor in CF. When you pull out the common player in both options, you are left with exactly what I said: Taylor vs. Espinosa.
So I’ll repeat: Explain how the Nats would have been better off with Michael Taylor playing everyday instead of Danny Espinosa.
I disagree, baseball moves operate “on a curve”
its really not as simple as 3 sentences, I know hard to believe but its A LOT more complex of a puzzle. there are so many factors you are neglecting in your thought process.
Perhaps it is also more complex than “Dusty Baker is an idiot.”
Trea Turner not Taylor instead of Espinosa, kind upstanding citizen.
Trea Turner will be surprised to hear that he didn’t play in the playoffs
http://www.baseball-reference.com/postseason/2016_NLDS2.shtml
we’re talking to start the season…wow, just wow.
and I’m talking about how Dusty Baker seems to win more “manager of the year” awards than playoff series.
Turner didn’t start with the team for arb reasons, not Baker reasons.
So…you’re 0 for 3 on comments today. You’re the commenting version of Danny Espinosa – without the good defense.
ok he could of missed the first couple weeks LOL
he could of only miised the first couple weeks…think Kris Byrant
What does that have to do with Dusty Baker? He’s the manager, not the GM.
I actually think you’re 0-3 so I guess it just about who is keeping score…
Just last week Dusty announced Glover was his man. Dusty is so fickled!
Well written Jeff. Maybe the best baseball article I’ve read all year. Know fantasy is separate, but very happy I made the move of picking him up over Greg Holland after reading, though both have tremendous upside and risk for different reasons
Jeff, got a link problem with David Robertson. Most of his name actually links to David Roberts
Maybe the 9th isn’t the best spot for him, then. Maybe he’s your Harvey Keitel (the Wolf) from Pulp Fiction, the guy you call with men on base to fix messy situations.
Love the part about Wieters possibly helping Treinen improve with the power slider. Interesting. I hadn’t thought about that…
Two things make Treinen’s less than ideal for the closer role:
— Large career platoon differential (90 points of BA, 280 of OPS).
— Fantastic DP rate (twice the MLB average, per opportunity).
Last year, Treinen led all RPs with 17 DPs induced. And his usage was smartly skewed to his platoon advantage, facing 65% RHBs, whereas their closers had the edge less than half the time. Using him to start the 9th is a waste of resources.
Dusty, we Mets fans thank you.