Offense, not pitching is going to be the key to 2011

[JTrea81]

Tell that to the Yankees at the end of this season...by all means please

Last time I checked the Yankees won 95 games and made the playoffs.

Pitching matters a lot when you get to the playoffs, but you've got to get there first.

[Jurczak]

Say we trade Guthrie, Arrieta, Tillman, and Bergesen for offensive production and say that we get an extra run per game out of that and we don't get any starting pitchers back ready to contribute at the major league level. That offensive production would bring us to 775 runs on the season. Good enough for 7th in the majors in runs scored, 3 ahead of Philly, 5 ahead of Colorado, 20 ahead of Toronto. Still 84 behind the Yankees, still 43 behind Boston.

In that scenario, we hold on to Matusz and Britton as our main young arms. Matusz is in the rotation now. We want to wait to bring up Britton until at least midway through the season and that assumes good performance and health. How would you fill the remaining the remaining four rotation spots, and since so much money will be tied up in the offensive players (high contracts, extensions, etc.) you would have a budget for $25 million for those four free agent pitchers? And how many runs do you think the team would then give up?

And I'm being absolutely serious, this is not a rhetorical question. I'd like to know which 4 free agent pitchers, that you could get for roughly an estimated $25 million combined for the 2011 season.

[Jurczak]

Last time I checked the Yankees won 95 games and made the playoffs.

Pitching matters a lot when you get to the playoffs, but you've got to get there first.

So your plan is to get to the playoffs, and then assure yourself that you can't win when you get there?

[Scrat1]

I started to type up a response but then I fell asleep for a thousand years.

The point of the game is to score more runs than the other team. You need both. The end.

[byrdz]

Both are "key".

The End

[Oriolidae85]

Last time I checked the Yankees won 95 games and made the playoffs.

Pitching matters a lot when you get to the playoffs, but you've got to get there first.

Rather than go back and forth on a disagreement, I'll just ping you my response. Cheers!

[TakebackOPACY]

Laughable that this thread had 3 votes and 1 star. The OP is extremely one-sided as you'd expect from JTrea, but it's presented very well. If you disagree with the OP, it should actually be fun to debate; not the typical 'going in circles' that many of you hate when debating with Trea... because, while you're not going to convince Trea, you can still debate his points.

Now, on to his points...

That last phrase, seems to be key, as MacPhail of course seems to think pitching is the most important facet of the game.

While this may be true, it's not evident in the quote you provided. If this team has a chance to be great under their current path, it'll be because Matusz and another pitcher (Britton?) emerge as better than #3 starters. I know you don't have faith in the current path, but IF he strikes gold with a couple of these young starting pitchers, all will be salvaged and we'll be heading in the right direction.

However it was the offense that was so dreadful last season, not the pitching, and while the pitching was stellar under Showalter, it had to be, otherwise they wouldn't have won all those games as the offense still wasn't clicking even in August and September.

2nd to last in the AL in runs scored. (so you are correct).

2nd to last in ERA (so you are incorrect).

2nd to last in ERA from starters (hmm).

2nd to last in ERA from relievers (hmm).

What's going to happen when the pitching slips back to a more sustainable pace? The answer is the offense is going to have to be there to back them up. If the offense has a season like it did last year, this team isn't going to reach .500 let alone be considered a contender no matter how solid the pitching is. The pitching is going to hit a certain ceiling and they can only do so much. The pace they had under Buck simply isn't realistically sustainable.

I agree. But I think what MacPhail is saying is that if this team is going to be, by some miracle (okay, he didn't say that), a contender, it'll be, first and foremost, because a couple of these young pitchers are awesome. AND, if this team is horrible, it'll be, first and foremost, because these young pitchers don't do the job.

Getting back to the offense, the Orioles have several question marks in their lineup, the biggest being Adam Jones, Matt Wieters and Nick Markakis.

Those three are going to be crucial to the performance of the team going forward. Guthrie, Matusz, Bergesen can all pitch lights out, but it isn't going to make a difference if those three core position players aren't performing IMO.

I agree. Well, I don't know if they are the BIGGEST question marks, but I agree that they are the most important offensive pieces in the mid or long term, and equally important as Matusz, Britton, and friends. And to think that MacPhail doesn't agree would mean to think that a few quotes encapsulate MacPhail completely.

And then you have the players that were acquired to supplement the lineup, in Reynolds, Lee and Hardy. While good acquisitions on the surface, they too carry many question marks going into 2011. With Lee and Hardy the injury question looms large. Hardy is most certain to not make 140 starts and Lee age and injury factors in especially as he's dealing with a back problem similar to Roberts that most likely played a role in his subpar season last year. With Reynolds, you hope that he'll return to 2009 form, but again he's tinkering with his swing to cut down on strikeouts, so you hope he doesn't screw up his mechanics that gives him that valuable power.

Fair enough. But here's the thing: If these guys disappoint, the O's will suck in 2011 but the flexibility to improve is still there. If the young pitchers disappoint (beyond growing pains), the whole organization will need to start over again. In support of your argument, it could be argued that the same is true if all of Wieters, Markakis, Jones disappoint.

You have aging returning vets in Roberts and Scott, both who have likely hit their career seasons and won't replicate what they did then. And with Roberts you also have the obvious health concerns.

VERY IMPORTANT for 2011; important, but not absolutely critical for the success of the organization for years to come.

There is no sure thing in the Orioles lineup at all, and that is very concerning IMO considering how the offense torpedoed the season in April.

If you were to try to figure out the likely run production and the statistical range, even with all the questions you can count on this O's offense to be at least a slight upgrade. With the starting pitchers, your upside is really, really good, but your more likely 2011 production is mediocre and your range is huge.

The depth on the bench and in the minors is non-existant as well. If Roberts falters, you only have no-hit MIers in Izturis and Harris to replace him. If Lee goes down you have Luke Scott to move to 1B, but then you have to put a bat like Fox, Reimold, Bell or Snyder in the DH spot, all non-proven options.

Now I agree strongly. They still have time to come up with some options here. Even a 'AAAA' slugger for Norfolk to replace Aubrey would help solve this problem. Those guys are still out there.

There is no quality positional depth whatsoever, so injuries like last year will absolutely kill this offense and this team. And it's also the reason why we must land another bat like Vlad or Thome, but that's for another thread...

So I don't see how MacPhail can say that the continued health and development of the pitching is going to be key, not when we saw what happened last season with the offense and the fact his response was to build an offense with duct tape (albeit it extra-strength) filling the holes along with a lot of hopes and prayers.

This is where you lose some of your fellow O's fans. We all know that the chances of this being a pennant caliber offense might be based on "duct tape... and prayers", but the chance of it being an improvement over 2010 and a reasonably competitive offense is pretty good. Most of us read the MacPhail quote you quoted as saying:

• the improvements to the offense, no matter how great or small they turn out to be, will be for naught if the young pitchers don't develop.
• the chance that this team is on the path to true pennant-level competitiveness is still dependent on the young pitchers.

If the offense falters, so does our entire season.

Yes, but if the pitching falters, so does the entire rebuilding effort.

[orayole]

I started to type up a response but then I fell asleep for a thousand years.

The point of the game is to score more runs than the other team. You need both. The end.

I agree with this. Both are as important as the other.

The O's biggest need the offseason was hitting because it was so bad during the season, but that doesn't mean pitching isn't important.

[JTrea81]

I appreciate the debate, but I want to show why the pitching didn't torpedo the season as much as the offense did:

First we'll get to your comment.

2nd to last in the AL in runs scored. (so you are correct).

2nd to last in ERA (so you are incorrect).

2nd to last in ERA from starters (hmm).

2nd to last in ERA from relievers (hmm).

You have to break down the pitching and hitting month by month to see the comparison between the two:

From BBRef:

Hitting:

<PRE>Split G GS PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB ROE BAbip tOPS+ sOPS+

April/March 240 23 871 794 75 192 41 3 19 71 6 6 64 154 .242 .304 .373 .677 296 23 9 0 4 4 10 .277 93 84

May 289 28 1034 938 100 239 30 1 25 96 12 8 81 181 .255 .318 .369 .687 346 33 7 5 3 5 7 .291 96 88

June 290 26 992 892 98 241 48 1 20 92 16 4 74 169 .270 .329 .393 .723 351 21 8 11 7 6 7 .311 106 97

July 262 27 1046 957 102 245 50 6 24 95 13 6 63 169 .256 .308 .396 .704 379 22 13 3 10 4 10 .286 100 91

August 274 28 1022 944 112 243 45 4 29 107 13 7 63 169 .257 .305 .406 .711 383 25 4 7 4 5 14 .285 102 96

Sept/Oct 309 30 1143 1029 126 280 50 6 16 116 16 3 79 214 .272 .327 .379 .706 390 30 13 5 17 8 10 .324 102 100

</PRE>

Pitching:

<PRE>Split W L W-L% ERA G GS GF CG SHO SV IP H R ER HR BB IBB SO HBP BK WP BF WHIP SO/9 SO/BB

April/March 5 18 .217 4.62 94 23 22 1 0 4 200.2 221 118 103 25 77 9 159 7 1 7 889 1.485 7.1 2.06

May 10 18 .357 4.68 104 28 28 0 0 5 244.0 266 135 127 37 87 8 139 9 1 6 1069 1.447 5.1 1.60

June 9 17 .346 5.72 105 26 26 0 0 6 229.2 265 157 146 29 95 9 154 13 1 8 1041 1.567 6.0 1.62

July 8 19 .296 5.60 108 27 27 0 0 5 242.2 288 158 151 34 107 9 171 8 0 8 1115 1.628 6.3 1.60

August 17 11 .607 3.38 90 28 27 1 0 7 250.0 245 100 94 24 64 3 155 9 2 6 1037 1.236 5.6 2.42

Sept/Oct 17 13 .567 3.74 115 30 29 1 0 8 269.1 223 117 112 37 90 7 229 13 0 10 1111 1.162 7.7 2.54

</PRE>

The Orioles didn't get horrible pitching compared to other teams that were successful or at least respectable in the months of April and May.

In April, the Red Sox who had a 4.61 ERA (only .01 higher than the Orioles) went 11-12. The Orioles of course were 5-18. The Pirates were the worst team in the league in ERA and they went 10-13.

In May the Rangers, who had an identical ERA to the Orioles, went 15-12, and the White Sox who had an ERA of only .09 less went 13-14 while the O's went 10-18.

So the pitching was there for the Orioles to have a respectable record, but instead they went 15-36 primarily due to the offense or lack there of.

As the pitchers came into June, they were tired, frazzled and had completely lost confidence IMO, and you can see that by the way their ERA explodes in June and July.

Once Buck arrived on the scene, he restored their confidence and despite the lackluster offense, they were able to win.

However, we shouldn't assume this effect is going to last, as one, these pitchers were also pitching for their very jobs. In 2011, only Zach Britton is going to be in AAA to take a job from them. 4 rotation spots are pretty much locked up. So if they start to perform poorly, Buck can't exactly use the threat of them being sent down or traded and the offense is going to have to be there when it wasn't for the entire season.

So if you really look at the splits, the pitching was only horrible for two months, while the offense was horrible for 6. Hence, why I keep saying it's the offense that will determine the Orioles fate as it did in 2010.

Other teams have shown that they can win or at least be respectable with mediocre pitching, but for the Orioles, with a young rotation, it is crucial that the offense be there for them next season so they can do just that if they have to, so our pitchers won't have a repeat of June and July of last year.

If our pitching pitches like it did in April and May, we have the pitching to be a .500 team or slightly better if the offense does its job.

[wildcard]

Clearly the offense, defense and pitching have to work together and all three have to improve over a full season for the O's to be a winning team. That is what Buck does. Get players to reach their potential.

And yes, if key players are injured there will be a drop off in production. But that is no different from other teams. If ARod goes down there will be a drop off in productions. Same with Longoria, AGon and many other players around the league.

[AgentOrange]

So you say AM thinks the most important phase of the game is pitching, yet he upgrades 3 offensive positions while also upgrading 3 defensive positions which would help the pitching at the same time. I think he agrees with you that last years offense will not be good enough this year. He also thinks, sand rightfully so, that we have a solid stable of young arms that we hope take a step forward this year.

[Moose Milligan]

Last time I checked the Yankees won 95 games and made the playoffs.

Pitching matters a lot when you get to the playoffs, but you've got to get there first.

So pitching doesn't mean a lot for the 162 game marathon leading up to the playoffs. But once you get there, it means a lot?

Do you not see the disconnect in logic there?

[DrungoHazewood]

And here I thought someone had just bumped the 466th thread Trea started about his theory that pitching is 3% of baseball. But, alas, it's #467.

[Sanfran327]

So pitching doesn't mean a lot for the 162 game marathon leading up to the playoffs. But once you get there, it means a lot?

Do you not see the disconnect in logic there?

To be fair, the Yankees did pretty much slug their way to the playoffs last year. They score an overwhelming amount of runs, and other teams have a hard time keeping up with them.

Once you got past Sabathia and Hughes, their rotation was unimpressive. Also, Pettitte was out for a big chunk last year. The bullpen wasn't so great sans Mariano.

The difference here is that they have a HOF-caliber infield, and our offense isn't anywhere near the level of the Yankees. We stand to have a pretty dynamic offense in 2011 if all things break our way, but it will require career years from some guys and huge leaps forward from others. Even then, I think our best-case scenario leaves us 50+ runs short of NYY.

So for us mortals, pitching is still key.

[waroriole]

To be fair, the Yankees did pretty much slug their way to the playoffs last year. They score an overwhelming amount of runs, and other teams have a hard time keeping up with them.

They gave up 693 runs. While that was the most among playoff teams, they weren't exactly pitching poor. Agree with the rest though.

It's always about the pitching. Always. Just ask Earl.