A Rocky Dilemma

    For me, sabermetrics has never been about statistics, but about constant innovation - thinking outside the box and escaping static dogma.  In that vein, I would like to argue that the lowly Colorado Rockies innovate by creating a pitching staff composed completely of relievers.  I do not have the expertise, nor the time to run the numbers and see what would possibly happen, but here are my thoughts, nonetheless.
    Since the Rockies lack the financial resources to overcome this home-field disadvantage, they must overcome it by innovation, and turn it into an advantage.  The Rockies must carry 12 pitchers, with every pitcher used as a reliever.  The Rockies' roster would include 12 pitchers, each with the ability to pitch 2 or 3 innings approximately every other day.

Possible advantages to this proposal include:
-Relievers by nature have lower eras than starters because lineups see them less often in a game, and because they do not have to keep anything in reserve for the later stages of a ball game.
-Relievers that are not over-used require less recuperation time.
-Relievers are less expensive than starters - therefore the Rockies can direct more of their money to offense.
-In the NL, changing pitchers more often could have an offensive advantage - pinch hitters could be brought in earlier in games, in better situations, and more often.
-By not drafting high-priced pitchers with low-success rates, and instead solid pitchers with rubber arms, the Rockies would be taking advantage of a market inefficiency (no one else would capitalizing on such an idea), and would once again be able to save money that could be directed to offense.
-Having a large number of relievers, as well as a farm system stocked with replacements would allow a wise general manager to make a killing in the volatile reliever market.
-Long and expensive contracts tend to weigh down teams and limit their ability to make future moves.  Relievers command shorter, less expensive contracts, and therefore a mistake would be less costly to a team.

    I realize that there are possible disadvantages (there is no track record for such an idea, and the relievers could be overused, but I personally believe that when you are consistently one of the worst teams in baseball, you have nothing to lose, and should always innovate.  I would love to hear your guys' thoughts on this.

-Steven

P.S.  Great work on the power rankings as always.