Saying bye to Matusz?

[VeveJones007]

I'm not sure that Buck saying some nice words about a player is going to substantially increase their trade value. This would presume that other teams aren't making trades based on scouting reports, but instead are relying on PR and heresay.

Here's a great article by Jerry Crasnick where a couple of GMs anonymously make it clear that they don't generally let hype / PR get in the way of actually doing real evaluation of a player: http://espn.go.com/mlb/hotstove11/story/_/id/7347878/the-book-prince-fielder

I never said the "attempt" would work.

[El Gordo]

This is retroactively determining the quality of the decision based on the result, which is the kind of nonsense that's gotten the O's in 15 straight years of losing.

Buying a lottery ticket is always a stupid move, regardless of whether or not you win a million dollars. Winning doesn't make it a good move, it simply means that things worked out well in spite of making a poor decision. It doesn't retroactively change the quality of the decision.

The same goes for this Matusz situation. It's not that complex. Unless there is some mitigating factor that we are unaware of that makes it desirable to get rid of Matusz regardless of what we can get in return (ie - his personality is negatively impacting the other players or the clubhouse chemistry, etc), there is no valid reason to give up on him at this point.

The O's need young, inexpensive pitching with upside. Matusz fits all of those needs. He has a track record of success everywhere he's played except for last season. Prior to spring training last year, he was deemed untouchable my many and the cornerstone of the O's staff.

He had one bad (granted it was horrible) season. But it was only 49 innings.

Check out these two stats lines:

Pitcher 1 - Age: 23, GS: 13, IP: 67.2, ERA: 10.64, WHIP: 2.202, H/9: 14.2, Years in Majors: 2+

Pitcher 2 - Age: 24, GS: 12, IP: 49.2, ERA: 10.69, WHIP: 2.114, H/9: 14.7, Years in Majors: 2+

Both pitchers got a cup of coffee in their first year, pitched a full season in their second year and looked like up and coming TOR starters and both regressed so badly in their 2nd full year that they were historically bad and looked like potential busts.

Pitcher 2 is Brian Matusz. Pitcher 1 is Roy Halladay.

We all know how the Halladay story turned out. Two seasons after posting a 10+ ERA, Halladay made the All-Star team and three seasons later he won the AL Cy Young. But at the end of 2000, after posting a season worse than Matusz did in 2011 (due to more innings pitched) a lot of people gave up on Halladay.

But the Blue Jays didn't. They were patient and gave Halladay time and coaching so that he could work his way back. And there was no other "right" choice to make. The Jays weren't going to get full value back for Halladay in trade coming off a horrible season like that, so that wasn't even really an option.

And it's not an option with Matusz either. Trading him now for less than his full value (ie - a top 100 prospect with All-Star potential) is the wrong decision regardless of how Matusz eventually turns out. Even if he never returns to form, the O's must give him at least 1 more season before they can justify "dumping" him.

The only scenario I can imagine where it would make sense to move Matusz right now would be for a similar former top prospect who also struggled in 2011 and who's still got a lot of upside. Maybe a change of scenery helps both players rebound. But selling Matusz for anything less than another top prospect would be inexcusable in my book.

So if we are patient Matusz will turn into Halladay? There may indeed be things that the coaches and scouts have seen that are not reflected in the numbers. They may think he's toast, or just not right for this organization. In which case get what you can for him.

[Frobby]

4.30 ERA is nothing speical. And he only had 8 games at AA when the orioles called him up. He was rushed. Give the guy time in the minors. It isn't wasting time. It is developing as a pitcher. We rush guys and then wonder why they aren't successful.

I agree 4.30 isn't anything special, but it certainly isn't the ERA of a pitcher who isn't ready for the majors. I don't think the Orioles planned to bring Matusz to the majors in 2009; a rash of injuries more or less compelled it. But Matusz was more than respectable. It's very clear that 2011 wasn't a case of the league catching up to Matusz, it was a case of Matusz having issues that led him not to pitch as well as he was capable. So the issue in 2012 is have those issues gone away, and I think we'll learn the answer in March and make an informed decision then rather than pre-judging the situation now.

P.S. - please understand, I am not saying he gets into the April 2012 rotation unless he has earned it. Frankly, for service time reasons it wouldn't kill me if he spent a month in Norfolk.

[SrMeowMeow]

So if we are patient Matusz will turn into Halladay? There may indeed be things that the coaches and scouts have seen that are not reflected in the numbers. They may think he's toast, or just not right for this organization. In which case get what you can for him.

I just...I can't come up with a witty quip for how poor this response is. You completely miss his main point (judging results vs. process) and instead "refute" his "claim" that Matusz will turn into Halladay if we're patient.

Let me put it this way. If your post could be expressed in terms of a pitching performance, it would be 49.2 innings of a 10.70 ERA.

[jtschrei]

Buck is very realistic. I liked his comments, not just about Matusz, but all the young pitchers. We need to put the team in a position where not every one of them has to come through in order to have a decent rotation, but I still think there is a lot of potential in this group.

Exactly. I think Buck LOVES BMat's makeup. After just about every game in which he struggled, Buck just kept saying, I know he's going to get it. He's too hard a worker. He's going to figure it out. I think it was a measure of how much Buck liked him that he kept giving BMat chance after chance down the stretch last year. Like BMat kept talking Buck into one more chance. I think Buck has a lot of faith in BMat and they certainly won't give him away for nothing. I think BMat is an Oriole next year.

The comment about BMat not getting along with Adair was most alarming to me.

[SilentJames]

So if we are patient Matusz will turn into Halladay? There may indeed be things that the coaches and scouts have seen that are not reflected in the numbers. They may think he's toast, or just not right for this organization. In which case get what you can for him.

This time last year some were picking Matusz as a ROY candidate. He had a horrendous season, he has a wealth of talent trading him now would be beyond pointless.

No one is saying that he will become Roy Halladay, but it is far too soon to give up on him.

[El Gordo]

I just...I can't come up with a witty quip for how poor this response is. You completely miss his main point (judging results vs. process) and instead "refute" his "claim" that Matusz will turn into Halladay if we're patient.

Let me put it this way. If your post could be expressed in terms of a pitching performance, it would be 49.2 innings of a 10.70 ERA.

So you don't think that it's possible that there may be things that coaches have seen regarding his health, fitness, performance and fit for this organization that would make this a reasonable decision. "Unless there is some mitigating factor that we are unaware of that makes it desirable to get rid of Matusz regardless of what we can get in return (ie - his personality is negatively impacting the other players or the clubhouse chemistry, etc), there is no valid reason to give up on him at this point." I would suggest that there are many more things that we are unawre of in this instance than aware. I'm sure you could come up with a number of SP with similar numbers who had a disasterous season and went on to be quickly out of the game. That is no more an indication that the same will happen to Matusz, than it is that he will go on to have Halladay's career.

[bluedog]

So if we are patient Matusz will turn into Halladay? There may indeed be things that the coaches and scouts have seen that are not reflected in the numbers. They may think he's toast, or just not right for this organization. In which case get what you can for him.

If we are patient Matusz will turn into whatever Matusz is going to turn into. It may be a TOR starter. It may be a bust. The Halladay story is to illustrate that great players go through horrible years and still end up being great. Matusz was a great player prior to last year. The O's would be foolish to move him prior to determining whether or not 2011 was an abberation or Sophmore slump or whatever. Obviously if the O's staff know something is horribly wrong with Matusz that no one else knows, they should act upon that information. But in the absence of such info, they simply can't dump Matusz based upon 40 some odd bad innings.

[ccbird]

Not me...I am a big fan of Floyd but I would much rather have BMat, Reimold, 20ish million and another 10ish years of service time vs Floyd and Quentin.

Yeah, I don't see how people think this would be a good trade. I think it's very possible BMat and Reimold give you the same, or close to the same production as Floyd and Quentin and they are much cheaper and under contract for much longer. Sure Floyd and Quentin are more of the sure things but they just aren't good enough, are pretty expensive and aren't under contract long enough to pull the trigger on this deal

[Tony-OH]

This is retroactively determining the quality of the decision based on the result, which is the kind of nonsense that's gotten the O's in 15 straight years of losing.

Buying a lottery ticket is always a stupid move, regardless of whether or not you win a million dollars. Winning doesn't make it a good move, it simply means that things worked out well in spite of making a poor decision. It doesn't retroactively change the quality of the decision.

The same goes for this Matusz situation. It's not that complex. Unless there is some mitigating factor that we are unaware of that makes it desirable to get rid of Matusz regardless of what we can get in return (ie - his personality is negatively impacting the other players or the clubhouse chemistry, etc), there is no valid reason to give up on him at this point.

The O's need young, inexpensive pitching with upside. Matusz fits all of those needs. He has a track record of success everywhere he's played except for last season. Prior to spring training last year, he was deemed untouchable my many and the cornerstone of the O's staff.

He had one bad (granted it was horrible) season. But it was only 49 innings.

Check out these two stats lines:

Pitcher 1 - Age: 23, GS: 13, IP: 67.2, ERA: 10.64, WHIP: 2.202, H/9: 14.2, Years in Majors: 2+

Pitcher 2 - Age: 24, GS: 12, IP: 49.2, ERA: 10.69, WHIP: 2.114, H/9: 14.7, Years in Majors: 2+

Both pitchers got a cup of coffee in their first year, pitched a full season in their second year and looked like up and coming TOR starters and both regressed so badly in their 2nd full year that they were historically bad and looked like potential busts.

Pitcher 2 is Brian Matusz. Pitcher 1 is Roy Halladay.

We all know how the Halladay story turned out. Two seasons after posting a 10+ ERA, Halladay made the All-Star team and three seasons later he won the AL Cy Young. But at the end of 2000, after posting a season worse than Matusz did in 2011 (due to more innings pitched) a lot of people gave up on Halladay.

But the Blue Jays didn't. They were patient and gave Halladay time and coaching so that he could work his way back. And there was no other "right" choice to make. The Jays weren't going to get full value back for Halladay in trade coming off a horrible season like that, so that wasn't even really an option.

And it's not an option with Matusz either. Trading him now for less than his full value (ie - a top 100 prospect with All-Star potential) is the wrong decision regardless of how Matusz eventually turns out. Even if he never returns to form, the O's must give him at least 1 more season before they can justify "dumping" him.

The only scenario I can imagine where it would make sense to move Matusz right now would be for a similar former top prospect who also struggled in 2011 and who's still got a lot of upside. Maybe a change of scenery helps both players rebound. But selling Matusz for anything less than another top prospect would be inexcusable in my book.

Was Halladay throwing three MPH slower than when he came up? Was he a flyball pitcher in a ballpark that's not conducive to being a flyball pitcher? Was the AL East the beast it is now? I've heard those comparisions before and although stat wise they look pretty similar, I'm concerned over Matusz' lost velocity since coming to the majors.

[bluedog]

4.30 ERA is nothing speical. And he only had 8 games at AA when the orioles called him up. He was rushed. Give the guy time in the minors. It isn't wasting time. It is developing as a pitcher. We rush guys and then wonder why they aren't successful.

4.30 ERA with Brian's peripherals as a 23 year old rookie pitcher in the AL East facing the best offenses in baseball day in and day out IS pretty special. I think your metrics for what's special and what's not special are off a bit.

[Tony-OH]

This time last year some were picking Matusz as a ROY candidate. He had a horrendous season, he has a wealth of talent trading him now would be beyond pointless.

No one is saying that he will become Roy Halladay, but it is far too soon to give up on him.

Agree 100 percent, but if they can move him for someone of value then it should be considered. In other words, he should not be untouchable, but at no point should he be just dumped.

[El Gordo]

Agree 100 percent, but if they can move him for someone of value then it should be considered. In other words, he should not be untouchable, but at no point should he be just dumped.

Do you consider trading him for Floyd a dump?

[bluedog]

Was Halladay throwing three MPH slower than when he came up? Was he a flyball pitcher in a ballpark that's not conducive to being a flyball pitcher? Was the AL East the beast it is now? I've heard those comparisions before and although stat wise they look pretty similar, I'm concerned over Matusz' lost velocity since coming to the majors.

Halladay threw 95 mph, but his pitches were up in the zone and straight as a board. His success occurred after he learned how to pitch down in the zone, to the corners using any of his pitches, regardless of speed. His pitching coach specifically called out the fact that Halladay started seeing more success once he started throwing with less velocity and more command.

Sure Brian's drop in velo is a concern. But the naysayers in Halladay's case were just as concerned over Roy's complete lack of movement on his fastball as we are over Matusz loss of velocity.

And the AL East comment confuses me. Matusz pitched better in 2010 against the East than Halladay did in 1999 against a weaker AL East. Doesn't that mean that Matusz is more impressive at his point in his career than Halladay was given the performance against stronger competition?

[NickPopagiorgio]

The whole Matusz vs. Halladay stats thing is great and all, but I'm sure if I really wanted to spend the time doing it I could find about 100 guys that were selling used cars within 3 years of putting up those kinds of numbers.