HHP: Do you agree with DD not handing our young pitchers automatic spots in the rotation?

[Dipper9]

Aren't those the exact things you would say if you wanted guys (Britton/Matusz/Tillman/Arrietta) to come in ready to win a starting job? I don't think we should assume anything at this point until we see how things start shaking out. I don't see Buck as the type manager who is going to keep someone as a starter just because they can throw some innings and/or because of how much money they make.

Kevin Gregg says hello.

[Sports Guy]

Kevin Gregg says hello.

Do you have the same direct line to him that Strawdog had with Jones?

[Brendan25]

Of course this is true. That's a bs excuse.

Bmat struggled last year because of the injury, out of whack mechanics and a confidence issue.

I am positive that he can be healthy and get his mechanics right...I am not positive that what is going on between his ears will ever be right...we just don't know yet.

Does he strive to be great...or even good? If not, he will fail.

If he has the right mind set, gets in shape and comes in ready to go, then he will be fine.

If he has the right mind set, gets in shape and comes in ready to go, he will get his shot at the major league level. Whether that it is starting the season or in June.

[Stotle]

If he has the right mind set, gets in shape and comes in ready to go, he will get his shot at the major league level. Whether that it is starting the season or in June.

The operative question is whether or not Baltimore is bringing in insurance for Matusz/Arrieta/Tillman/etc., or whether Baltimore is creating artificial barriers for those players. The same replacement level pitcher can be brought in for two entirely different purposes.

[Dr. FLK]

Surprised no one in this discussion is differentiating between "creating competition" and "blocking young players". They are two separate issues, each of which could be argued to be at play in this instance.

It's only "blocking" if the young player has proven he deserves a spot and doesn't get it, right? Who exactly do we have who's proven they deserve a look but likely will be blocked?

[Stotle]

It's only "blocking" if the young player has proven he deserves a spot and doesn't get it, right? Who exactly do we have who's proven they deserve a look but likely will be blocked?

No, I don't think that's true. You can have true logjams whereby young players are not the better alternative, or you can have artificial logjams where teams create reasons to hold players black.

[Brendan25]

It's only "blocking" if the young player has proven he deserves a spot and doesn't get it, right? Who exactly do we have who's proven they deserve a look but likely will be blocked?

I hate that idea of "blocking" a young player. Jeremy Hellickson didn't get a spot handed to him because he was a young top prospect. He had to wait until an injury occured for him to get an opportunity and he took advantage of it. Domonic Brown didn't get handed a spot in Philly, he had to wait for Raul Ibanez to get injured, and he took advantage of the opportunity. If a young player is good enough to pitch at the big league level, then they will find their way on the roster and they will take advantage of it.

If Brian Matusz starts the year at AAA then a couple things can happen.

A) He sucks at the AAA level and continues to work on things in the minor leagues this year

B) He lights it up at AAA and a player on the major league roster struggles or gets injured and Matusz gets called up.

C) He lights it up at AAA, but there is no room for him on the major league roster. In order for that to happen, that means that Arrieta, Britton, Chen, and the 5th starter are all pitching well enough that we don't have enough room to add Matusz who is a top prospect to the major league level. I will take that option if it gets presented to us.

[mikegallo]

DD will make another trade Roch has been saying this for a week now, its gonna happen....And its gonna involve some pitching clearly.

Looks like a Matsuz will be traded before ST....If not him I could see Troy Patton goin maybe Patton/Simon/Tillman for Callaspo.

Did everyone catch the fangraph article on Maholm, it was on point and said pretty much everything I did in the Joe v Paul Thread...He even signed for the same contact I said 2/10 that second year was an option for the cubs but we all know for him to come here that wasn't realistic.

[LookinUp]

No, I don't think that's true. You can have true logjams whereby young players are not the better alternative, or you can have artificial logjams where teams create reasons to hold players black.

I'm trying to understand your point, but I don't. There's really only one pitcher that the O's could be doing this with, Matusz, and they'd be foolish to reserve a spot in the majors for him.

[Dr. FLK]

No, I don't think that's true. You can have true logjams whereby young players are not the better alternative, or you can have artificial logjams where teams create reasons to hold players black.

I just don't see anyone who will be held back who hasn't brought the situation on with horrid performance.

[Stotle]

I hate that idea of "blocking" a young player. Jeremy Hellickson didn't get a spot handed to him because he was a young top prospect. He had to wait until an injury occured for him to get an opportunity and he took advantage of it. Domonic Brown didn't get handed a spot in Philly, he had to wait for Raul Ibanez to get injured, and he took advantage of the opportunity. If a young player is good enough to pitch at the big league level, then they will find their way on the roster and they will take advantage of it.

If Brian Matusz starts the year at AAA then a couple things can happen.

A) He sucks at the AAA level and continues to work on things in the minor leagues this year

B) He lights it up at AAA and a player on the major league roster struggles or gets injured and Matusz gets called up.

C) He lights it up at AAA, but there is no room for him on the major league roster. In order for that to happen, that means that Arrieta, Britton, Chen, and the 5th starter are all pitching well enough that we don't have enough room to add Matusz who is a top prospect to the major league level. I will take that option if it gets presented to us.

Hellickson's promotion was tied to a specific developmental plan Tampa has. If BAL wants to replicate Tampa's development of pitchers, that's fine. But it isn't as simple as "pitchers sit at Triple-A until they aren't 'blocked'".

Many in the industry think Philly absolutely damaged Brown's development in how they handled that situation.

If Brian matusz starts the year at Triple-A then you could also see:

D) Matusz waste 2-3 months of Major League adjustment time while Baltimore waits for a less qualified "replacement" to fail (which such replacement inevitably will).

There are arguments for handling Matusz in several different ways, but "we're bringing in this random guy so you can prove you're better than him" is probably not a good developmental approach, and that type of move shouldn't have advocates.

[Frobby]

It's only "blocking" if the young player has proven he deserves a spot and doesn't get it, right? Who exactly do we have who's proven they deserve a look but likely will be blocked?

To me, "blocking" is where you have an established player who is actually good, and someone in the minors who is ready for the majors but has no opportunity because there is a good player at his position. Pitchers are almost never "blocked," in my opinion. There's always a spot for someone who is ready to be pretty good.

[Stotle]

I just don't see anyone who will be held back who hasn't brought the situation on with horrid performance.

Again, it's distinguishing between "adding arms to account for holes that need to be filled" as opposed to "artifically construct 'challenges' for young arms to overcome as proof of their 'readiness' for the Majors."

[Lucky Jim]

Hellickson's promotion was tied to a specific developmental plan Tampa has. If BAL wants to replicate Tampa's development of pitchers, that's fine. But it isn't as simple as "pitchers sit at Triple-A until they aren't 'blocked'".

Many in the industry think Philly absolutely damaged Brown's development in how they handled that situation.

If Brian matusz starts the year at Triple-A then you could also see:

D) Matusz waste 2-3 months of Major League adjustment time while Baltimore waits for a less qualified "replacement" to fail (which such replacement inevitably will).

There are arguments for handling Matusz in several different ways, but "we're bringing in this random guy so you can prove you're better than him" is probably not a good developmental approach, and that type of move shouldn't have advocates.

I agree re: requiring proof. ST isn't where you vet Matusz. But I have no problem, coming off a horrific 2011, with bringing in insurance that allows him to continue whatever amends/refurb/rehab he's been doing off-season (on both body and soul) outside of the MLB rotation. That's pretty much what I think is going on. But it's just a hunch.

[El Gordo]

No, I don't think that's true. You can have true logjams whereby young players are not the better alternative, or you can have artificial logjams where teams create reasons to hold players black.

In this case what reasons would the O's have to hold players back. If they are young. talented. and ready, do the payroll commitments of guys like Wada, Eveland and Chen, really trump that? If they aren't ready(Matusz?) then whats's the problem.