Matusz speaks

[DrungoHazewood]

A lot of issues going on here, but the original comments included something about tweaking his mechanics to improve his performace with stolen bases against. In his career he's allowed 32 steals in 46 games. 7 caught. That's maybe half a dozen runs attributable to steals. Maybe there are other things going on here, but it's ridiculous to change a guy's mechanics on the basis of potentially helping eliminate a handful of runs a year.

[TGO]

As Stotle said a week or two ago, if they took a notorious short strider and tried to make his stride shorter, they are fools.

[Stotle]

As Stotle said a week or two ago, if they took a notorious short strider and tried to make his stride shorter, they are fools.

Not to mention there have to be about a dozen ways to easily help a lefty hold runners more effectively. If it is true that the O's messed with Matusz's mechanics in order to get him to home more quickly, I think it's an example of coaching being fixed in their ways, rather than looking to apply the tactics best suited to individual players. That, of course, is said by someone on the outside and not fully aware of all the facts.

[Dipper9]

Brian may very well have created this problem himself and there could be little blame to pass to Buck or Connor or Adair.

However, when an ENTIRE pitching staff that was top five in the majors for the final two months of last season suddenly ALL take a step backwards under the new coaching staff, shouldn't that be a GIANT red flag that this isn't just a Brian Matusz problem? I'm not saying the players don't share some blame, and I know there is now video in the league of all our young guys. But hell, Brian, Arrieta, Tillman, Bergy, Berken, etc....they ALL suddenly take a step backwards at the same time? Nah, I don't buy it. Where there's smoke, there's fire, and I think Buck's coaches have done a major disservice to our young pitchers!

[SilentJames]

So let me see if I have this right? I guy who will not take the advice and the direction of his coaches and uses his father as his hitting coach is a good acquisition as a nugget, but a guy who actually tries to implement the coach's plan and gets hurt in the process and then talks about it is not a nugget?

bingo....

[allstar1579]

So let me see if I have this right? I guy who will not take the advice and the direction of his coaches and uses his father as his hitting coach is a good acquisition as a nugget, but a guy who actually tries to implement the coach's plan and gets hurt in the process and then talks about it is not a nugget?

That's funny, I was just thinking the same thing.

[nerdlinger]

They wanted him to be quicker to the plate...They shortened his stride..By doing that, it throws off his mechanics and brings the velocity down.

And why? Just so guys don't steal bases on him? Who the hell cares.

He had managed to have a pretty good start to his career with the mechanics they felt he had to fix.

You want him to hold runners better? Fine..Tell him to go talk to Flanny and have Flanny teach him his move to first. He was a master at that and Flanny is a brilliant pitching mind and could have helped him out.

Instead, you change his mechanics? Are you kidding me? Sorry but that's idiotic.

I totally agree here, who gives a crap about base stealers if you are gonna totally screw a guy up? The obsession with quickness to the plate is ridiculous! Wieters is throwing everyone out anyway so who cares!

[Oriology]

A lot of issues going on here, but the original comments included something about tweaking his mechanics to improve his performace with stolen bases against. In his career he's allowed 32 steals in 46 games. 7 caught. That's maybe half a dozen runs attributable to steals. Maybe there are other things going on here, but it's ridiculous to change a guy's mechanics on the basis of potentially helping eliminate a handful of runs a year.

However, when an ENTIRE pitching staff that was top five in the majors for the final two months of last season suddenly ALL take a step backwards under the new coaching staff, shouldn't that be a GIANT red flag that this isn't just a Brian Matusz problem?

I agree with these posts the most after reading the article and considering the entire situation. Sure, the pitchers (and Matusz in particular) cannot get off scot-free for this year's debacle, but viewing the whole thing in context it seems that whatever coaching was done to them to start this season, it was misguided and counterproductive. I didn't sense that much arrogance from Matusz; it seemed that he was open to changing his approach in future seasons.

[allstar1579]

I agree with these posts the most after reading the article and considering the entire situation. Sure, the pitchers (and Matusz in particular) cannot get off scot-free for this year's debacle, but viewing the whole thing in context it seems that whatever coaching was done to them to start this season, it was misguided and counterproductive. I didn't sense that much arrogance from Matusz; it seemed that he was open to changing his approach in future seasons.

Seems to me when the ENTIRE pitching staff has regressions after a coaching change, something is wrong. It's not like it was a guy or two, but every one of them. Trying to withhold judgement until I see someone else in there in a permanent role, but something clearly isn't working.

[LookitsPuck]

Seems to me when the ENTIRE pitching staff has regressions after a coaching change, something is wrong. It's not like it was a guy or two, but every one of them. Trying to withhold judgement until I see someone else in there in a permanent role, but something clearly isn't working.

I'm thinking Buck hired on Connor, Connor pushed a bit too much, and Buck convinced Connor to leave on his own.

[UCBird]

I'm assuming Matusz will eventually get straightened out and be the pitcher everyone thought he would be. With that said, if he stays in the minors for the rest of the year does that result in an extra year under O's control?

[JTrea81]

I'm assuming Matusz will eventually get straightened out and be the pitcher everyone thought he would be. With that said, if he stays in the minors for the rest of the year does that result in an extra year under O's control?

Matusz has a major league contract I believe so I think the answer is no.

[Frobby]

Matusz has a major league contract I believe so I think the answer is no.

I do not believe that having a major league contract affects service time. Matusz had 1.062 years of service entering 2011, and he was in the majors for 91 days this season. That puts him at 1.153, about 19 days short of two years' service time. So yes, if we kept Matusz in the minors for the rest of this year, Baltimore would still have him under team control for five more seasons. Good reason not to bring him back unless he earns it.

[ShaneDawg85]

I think there's enough blame that can be directed towards Matusz, and the same goes with the coaching staff. I tend to blame the coaching staff more than I do Matusz, but that's just me. I do think that this again highlights a lot of the flaws within the overall organizational teaching and philosophies. I've never seen much of a universal plan from the Orioles in how their staffs operate from the minors to the majors. They talked about doing it when Mazzone was coach, similar to what he did with the Braves that clearly had success, but nothing ever happened, and the more and more these guys struggle the more and more I can't shake the belief that there are so many inconsistencies and flaws in the system. There are lots of things that need to change, and one of them is getting a real, consistent organizational philosophy, and pitching is where it needs to start.

[gallden]

Has anyone posted the obligatory we could have had this guy instead comment?