Do you agree with the O's decision to recall Britton from Norfolk?

[Emory Eagle]

If it's true that Britton can be sent back to the minors at any time this season in order to prevent the loss of service time, then this is not, in the abstract, a bad move.

If Britton is going to be up here for some amount of the season, what does it matter whether he pitches at the beginning or end of the year? Or both? I'd rather have him up when we know we are weak on starting pitching due to injury - e.g. right now.

Now, if you want to argue that once promoted, the O's will probably not send Britton down to avoid the loss of service time for whatever reason (based on past decisions by the O's or what have you), then that is a separate argument.

[JTrea81]

I long for the days when "service time"' will never be mentioned again when talking about calling up an Orioles prospect.

I don't know of any other sport where they keep their best young players back solely for financial reasons.

[SouthRider]

I have no doubt if Trembley were still manager this move would not have been made. It's a ballsy move which a winning organization would make. By not making it they send the wrong message to the team. I think Buck is going to have this team act like winners until proven otherwise. Matusz's injury is unfortunate timing but 'next man up' says bring the kid up. He is that next man.

[333WCamden]

You could say it...but there would be very little intelligence and reason behind the argument.

Well, now that the Orioles have made the move, I guess that means they don't get it either.

You do understand that this is an opinion of philosophy and there is no definite right or wrong answer, don't you?

[BaltimoreTerp]

It's a ballsy move which a winning organization would make.

You're half right.

[Crazysilver03]

While we can discuss different ways to send Britton down creatively, at this point I think it would be too difficult, unless he is pitching poorly. Assuming Duke and/or Matusz come back healthy and everyone else is pitching well, there is the option to send Britton down. You could also finagle around the All-Star break if you really wanted to.

But I don't see that happening. He is up, most likely for good. But the argument now comes in that the Orioles should be able to reproduce his production by 2016 with a much cheaper in-house option.

[wildcard]

They may have...Either way, expecting 6 IP per start is wrong.

It's not hard to believe that Britton can pitch 6 innings per start.

Actually, Britton pitched 6 inning per game at Bowie last year. 87 innings and 14 starts in 6.2 innings/start. There was one relief appearance and I don't know how many innings that was but as long as it was not more then 3 innings he still went 6 innings per start.

In the 2nd half, Britton pitched 5.5 innings per start over 12 starts. But since that he has had an off season of strength training and pitched many scoreless outing in spring training which should give him confidence that he can pitch at the major league level.

I don't think it is far fetched to think the Britton can pitch an average of 6 innings per start in the majors.

[hoosiers]

I was on board with sending Britton down due to the limited starts by the fifth starter early in the year and the ability to save ZB's service time for that last year.

I imagine we could still get through several starts from Bergy to save ZB's service time, but I think it's been made clear that this year is about winning and now that ZB is going to fill a role more important than the fifth starter slot while he is up, then I believe the decision to call him up is a good one.

IMO, you can't say this year is about winning, watch Bergy get lit up like a xmas tree, see Duke and Matusz go down and then look the professionals who were so geeked up for the season to start and tell them we are putting someone of the Eaton/Hendrickson/Bergy caliber out there after watching Britton dominate major league hitters in spring training.

As I see it, if Britton is average or worse until Matusz returns, then we can send him back down for a bit at that point or earlier, and the service time is back in our favor. If Britton is lights out, then we'll be winning games. Perhaps, later in the season, the schedule allows a break or two where we can send ZB back down and only have it cost a couple of starts.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Well, now that the Orioles have made the move, I guess that means they don't get it either.

You do understand that this is an opinion of philosophy and there is no definite right or wrong answer, don't you?

But there is a move that a smart team is more likely to make and a move that a lesser team is more likely to make. We did not make the former.

[Emory Eagle]

Well, now that the Orioles have made the move, I guess that means they don't get it either.

You do understand that this is an opinion of philosophy and there is no definite right or wrong answer, don't you?

Does it even have to be a question of philosophy? If you believe that conserving that extra year of service time is worth keeping Britton down for X amount of days, you can still support this promotion because, at any time of the year, Britton may be demoted for X amount of days.

Its just a question of when Britton should be up here during the season, and why not now, when we're short on quality SP?

[Emory Eagle]

While we can discuss different ways to send Britton down creatively, at this point I think it would be too difficult, unless he is pitching poorly. Assuming Duke and/or Matusz come back healthy and everyone else is pitching well, there is the option to send Britton down. You could also finagle around the All-Star break if you really wanted to.

But I don't see that happening. He is up, most likely for good. But the argument now comes in that the Orioles should be able to reproduce his production by 2016 with a much cheaper in-house option.

I'm curious about why people seem so certain that it will be difficult to send Britton back down following his promotion. Is it because of the O's particular pattern of dealing? Norms across the League?

It seems to me that if you can tell Britton that - "hey, you're good enough to make the ML squad right now, but we're going to keep you in the minors for X amount of days due to service time issues" - then you can, with equal justifiability, say to him later on - "hey, you're good enough to be with the ML squad, but we're going to send you down for X amount of days b/c of service time."

[BaltimoreTerp]

Does it even have to be a question of philosophy? If you believe that conserving that extra year of service time is worth keeping Britton down for X amount of days, you can still support this promotion because, at any time of the year, Britton may be demoted for X amount of days.

Its just a question of when Britton should be up here during the season, and why not now, when we're short on quality SP?

If you bring him up now with the idea of sending him down later to still get the service time, you pretty much have to root for ineffectiveness on his part or non-contention on the Orioles' part. Because if he is pitching well enough and the Orioles are close enough, there's little chance he goes back down. So instead of putting the team in that position, you take the small hit now. Then you are free to do with him what you wish.

[Crazysilver03]

I'm curious about why people seem so certain that it will be difficult to send Britton back down following his promotion. Is it because of the O's particular pattern of dealing? Norms across the League?

It seems to me that if you can tell Britton that - "hey, you're good enough to make the ML squad right now, but we're going to keep you in the minors for X amount of days due to service time issues" - then you can, with equal justifiability, say to him later on - "hey, you're good enough to be with the ML squad, but we're going to send you down for X amount of days b/c of service time."

It is one thing to send him down after ST with no major league experience. But if he comes up here and holds his own then it just looks way worse to send him down, knowing full well it is for service time issues.

[BaltimoreTerp]

It is one thing to send him down after ST with no major league experience. But if he comes up here and holds his own then it just looks way worse to send him down, knowing full well it is for service time issues.

Exactly. Right now you can still offer other reasons, like, "He still has some things we would like him to work on."

Later, it would be more likely, if one feels this way, to have the effects people want to pre-attribute to the decision like clubhouse unrest or a lack of confidence in management.

[Emory Eagle]

It is one thing to send him down after ST with no major league experience. But if he comes up here and holds his own then it just looks way worse to send him down, knowing full well it is for service time issues.

So the disagreement here really isn't about whether this move in and of itself is good or bad, its disagreement over speculation about what is to follow this move.

I'd stake my position out as: This is a good move IF AND ONLY IF Britton is sent down at some point for whatever amount of time in order to preserve that extra year of service time.

Now, you may be right about that looking bad and/or there being some stigma to sending someone down only due to service time, but that's a price I'm willing to pay. Others may not be.