Jump to content
Frobby

Means has arm fatigue (Milone starts opening day)

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Roch says Means has a "dead arm." I thought that was the term used during baseball's first 100 years when guys couldn't pitch, even after a rubdown from the trainer or a whirlpool treatment, but the exact problem was unknown because nobody could diagnose the difference between a little stiffness and a career-ending injury.

But no reason to worry about Means being unavailable, with the starting pitching depth this team has. :eek:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once these bats grow they'll have to buy some arms.

Actually it may be in their best interest to go with "openers" instead of starters from now on, like the Rays once did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, 25 Nuggets said:

Once these bats grow they'll have to buy some arms.

Actually it may be in their best interest to go with "openers" instead of starters from now on, like the Rays once did.

You still have to pitch 9 innings.  Well the Orioles only have to pitch 8 on the road but you know what I mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, atomic said:

You still have to pitch 9 innings.  Well the Orioles only have to pitch 8 on the road but you know what I mean.

At least for the first two weeks of the season we will have a 10 or 11 man bullpen, so I don't think that will be too big a problem,.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was worried about this for all pitchers. 

Shut down for 3.5 months and then start back up. I know these guys kept working out and throwing but still. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There aren’t any rules about the number of pitchers on the active roster during this modified season, right.  Why not carry 17-18 pitchers to start?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, backwardsk said:

There aren’t any rules about the number of pitchers on the active roster during this modified season, right.  Why not carry 17-18 pitchers to start?

That should be enough to get the O's through nine innings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, backwardsk said:

There aren’t any rules about the number of pitchers on the active roster during this modified season, right.  Why not carry 17-18 pitchers to start?

No, there aren't.   Before Covid, there were going to be.   But those rules were scratched due to Covid-19.

But Hyde has said in interviews that he is deciding between a 15 and 16 man staff.

That really should be sufficient, anyway.   Especially if you have a few relievers who can go multiple innings.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The good news after Means their isn’t much of a drop off with the rest.  Some teams have big gap in depth lucky fir we have depth just not good depth.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SteveA said:

No, there aren't.   Before Covid, there were going to be.   But those rules were scratched due to Covid-19.

But Hyde has said in interviews that he is deciding between a 15 and 16 man staff.

That really should be sufficient, anyway.   Especially if you have a few relievers who can go multiple innings.   

So is the rule you have to pitch to 3 batters scrapped as well? With a 16 man staff these games could be pretty much unwatchable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, atomic said:

So is the rule you have to pitch to 3 batters scrapped as well? With a 16 man staff these games could be pretty much unwatchable.

No, that rule is still in play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, atomic said:

So is the rule you have to pitch to 3 batters scrapped as well? With a 16 man staff these games could be pretty much unwatchable.

Here's a link to a post from just before summer camp opened with a summary of the rules in effect for this season:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • So, to be clear, you think every player in the system should be brought up to the major league team?  As others have said, it is easy now, in hindsight, to say that Elias should have seen that Yaz was going to be a star in the three weeks of spring training he had to look at him, after an uninspiring minor league career under the previous regime, but that just seems to be an unreasonable assessment of Elias, IMO.
    • You can’t blame Elias for not seeing it coming though. 
    • I don’t think he should have had much of a chance. I wish we were smart enough to see it coming. That’s whT I’m disappointed in and what I don’t want to happen in the future.
    • Yaz played the instrument for years and wasn’t good.  He deserved nothing and didn’t earn anything.
    • Yeah, I don't consider returning a Rule 5 guy to be a fail.  In fact, it is the most likely result, league-wide.  I really consider taking Rule 5 shots at guys to be a matter of nothing ventured, nothing gained.  Also, IMO, picking up stop gap players and have them turn out to be exactly that isn't really a fail, either.  Sure, I'd like to see us strike gold on one of these guys, but I can't say that I expect it to happen.  I'm more interested in seeing how guys we acquire like Vavra and Smith turn out.
    • So? The guys we brought up for a chance, every guy brought up for a chance, as opposed to bringing up “because he is ready,” is by definition being given an opportunity that he doesn’t necessarily deserve. We risk nothing by bringing him up. I’m a musician, and I can’t judge a piece without paying it once. Maybe not all the way through, but gotta sit down and play it. Now, it might be by a terrible or unknown composer, and some would say,”it’s by Danzi, it sucks.” Well, so? Maybe it does suck. Danzi was a mediocre composer. But maybe it doesn’t suck. Maybe it’s worthwhile, as recital filler, or as a rare gem from a mediocrity. But if I play it, I’ll know. As another surprisingly similar example, the widow of a local cellist gave me some of her late husband’s music, including an untouched piece he bought 50+ years ago. So rare there’s only one lonely YouTube audio, and the music is long out of print and the publisher is itself long out of business. I played it and said, “this is an incredible piece.” And it is. So this piece is Yaz. The previous owner never bothered to play it, and I did, and I get the benefit. If he’d played lit, maybe he’d have hated it, maybe not. But he never gave it a chance.
    • Well let’s remember that a lot of parts of that system that are good were here before Elias got here.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...