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

[Stotle]

Stotle, are you implying that the O's motives are something other than making Matusz compete and prove that he belongs before handing him a spot? Retribution, perhaps?

No. I'm saying that it's in the best interest of the players and the organization that both sides feel they are united in a purpose. That could absolutely be the case in Baltimore.

But the idea that many in this thread are putting forth -- that a young player should be forced to "earn" his way onto a 25-man roster, and Baltimore is right to bring in "competition" -- is misplaced.

[Brendan25]

No. I'm saying that it's in the best interest of the players and the organization that both sides feel they are united in a purpose. That could absolutely be the case in Baltimore.

But the idea that many in this thread are putting forth -- that a young player should be forced to "earn" his way onto a 25-man roster, and Baltimore is right to bring in "competition" -- is misplaced.

You disagree?

[Stotle]

You disagree?

Maybe, if you bold the entire thought and ask the same question. Depends on motives.

[Lucky Jim]

Maybe, if you bold the entire thought and ask the same question. Depends on motives.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Stotle again.

[LookinUp]

No. I'm saying that it's in the best interest of the players and the organization that both sides feel they are united in a purpose. That could absolutely be the case in Baltimore.

But the idea that many in this thread are putting forth -- that a young player should be forced to "earn" his way onto a 25-man roster, and Baltimore is right to bring in "competition" -- is misplaced.

I don't think it is. Why can't it be both?

I bet everyone understands that the Brian Matusz we expected would have a spot in the rotation. All I'm seeing is the reality that he isn't that guy yet, and we're not going to take for granted that he will be. I sure hope DD isn't the type that wouldn't have the courage to cut a guy like Eveland if Matusz has shown he's truly ready.

[GoldGlove21]

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.

I suppose that creating competition could directly tie to blocking young players. If a guy gets beat out for a spot, but gets the job because he is young with upside, did you really create competition?

[Stotle]

I don't think it is. Why can't it be both?

I bet everyone understands that the Brian Matusz we expected would have a spot in the rotation. All I'm seeing is the reality that he isn't that guy yet, and we're not going to take for granted that he will be. I sure hope DD isn't the type that wouldn't have the courage to cut a guy like Eveland if Matusz has shown he's truly ready.

I mean, I feel like I'm talking in circles here. I laid out the concerns I thought were important when considering whether or not an organization should promote a player. Not sure what you are asking, here.

It depends on the motives behind bringing in the bevy of replacement players, it depends on the overall focus of the organization and it depends on the understanding between the "newly blocked" players and the organization.

[Stotle]

I suppose that creating competition could directly tie to blocking young players. If a guy gets beat out for a spot, but gets the job because he is young with upside, did you really create competition?

Are your bringing in a player to fill a hole, or are you bringing in a body for your upside kid to compete with in hopes the upside kid wins out? The idea that

If Baltimore decided that Matusz/Tillman/Arrieta cannot be counted on, and the team needs a 4 and 5 starter, then that's fine. Assuming Baltimore has a sound decision-making process in place I really don't care what the decision is. I am skeptical that performance during spring training is a great gauge of "readiness", but I defer to the experts.

I am interested, however, to know that if Matusz/Tillman/Arrieta aren't being groomed to take a spot in the rotation to start the year, that the organization has a plan to get them to the 25-man at some point. The way Tillman has been handled, and the way Matusz was handled post-injury, has me a little worried that there isn't an overarching plan in place.

[Brendan25]

Are your bringing in a player to fill a hole, or are you bringing in a body for your upside kid to compete with in hopes the upside kid wins out? The idea that

If Baltimore decided that Matusz/Tillman/Arrieta cannot be counted on, and the team needs a 4 and 5 starter, then that's fine. Assuming Baltimore has a sound decision-making process in place I really don't care what the decision is. I am skeptical that performance during spring training is a great gauge of "readiness", but I defer to the experts.

I am interested, however, to know that if Matusz/Tillman/Arrieta aren't being groomed to take a spot in the rotation to start the year, that the organization has a plan to get them to the 25-man at some point. The way Tillman has been handled, and the way Matusz was handled post-injury, has me a little worried that there isn't an overarching plan in place.

Do you think Matusz was expecting all offseason to have a spot in the rotation waiting for him to start the season?

[Stotle]

Do you think Matusz was expecting all offseason to have a spot in the rotation waiting for him to start the season?

I am not sure what Matusz's expectations are, or what the organization's expectations are. As long as the two are on the same page, the rest doesn't much matter to me (outside of general developmental stratagem).

[LookinUp]

I am interested, however, to know that if Matusz/Tillman/Arrieta aren't being groomed to take a spot in the rotation to start the year, that the organization has a plan to get them to the 25-man at some point. The way Tillman has been handled, and the way Matusz was handled post-injury, has me a little worried that there isn't an overarching plan in place.

How has either been handled since DD came on board? All we really know is he has them working out, right?

I agree that the O's have crapped the bed with these guys, among others. I don't want to jump to conclusions though with respect to the current regime. I love the idea that they now have assets like Peterson in place, I assume, specifically to handle these guys in a better manner.

[Stotle]

How has either been handled since DD came on board? All we really know is he has them working out, right?

I agree that the O's have crapped the bed with these guys, among others. I don't want to jump to conclusions though with respect to the current regime. I love the idea that they now have assets like Peterson in place, I assume, specifically to handle these guys in a better manner.

None of what I have said was a slight against the Baltimore front office. I started out simply stating that I took issue with the framing of the conversation as relates to "competing for a rotation spot." Everything else has been an expansion on and explanation for why I think that line of thinking is flawed.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Are your bringing in a player to fill a hole, or are you bringing in a body for your upside kid to compete with in hopes the upside kid wins out? The idea that

If Baltimore decided that Matusz/Tillman/Arrieta cannot be counted on, and the team needs a 4 and 5 starter, then that's fine. Assuming Baltimore has a sound decision-making process in place I really don't care what the decision is. I am skeptical that performance during spring training is a great gauge of "readiness", but I defer to the experts.

I am interested, however, to know that if Matusz/Tillman/Arrieta aren't being groomed to take a spot in the rotation to start the year, that the organization has a plan to get them to the 25-man at some point. The way Tillman has been handled, and the way Matusz was handled post-injury, has me a little worried that there isn't an overarching plan in place.

I think the roster allows us the flexibility to move numerous guys (Eveland/Hunter/Chen/Wada etc.) from BP to SP or even to the minors if necessary. That's tougher with FA's like Saunders. I'm not much for "giving" guys spots but this roster seems to give us the best of both worlds by not blocking young guys who also need time to establish themselves and adjust to ML pitching. That time is fairly critical. To me the BP versus SP time isn't necessarily that significant in the short term. Without getting into names, they can certainly help themselves by showing up to camp in shape and mentally prepared for instruction.

[Stotle]

I think the roster allows us the flexibility to move numerous guys (Eveland/Hunter/Chen/Wada etc.) from BP to SP or even to the minors if necessary. That's tougher with FA's like Saunders. I'm not much for "giving" guys spots but this roster seems to give us the best of both worlds by not blocking young guys who also need time to establish themselves and adjust to ML pitching. That time is fairly critical. To me the BP versus SP time isn't necessarily that significant in the short term. Without getting into names, they can certainly help themselves by showing up to camp in shape and mentally prepared for instruction.

Sort of tangential to the issues I was addressing, but I don't necessarily disagree with you.

[LookitsPuck]

Stotle,

Love your posts and insight.

My issue with Matusz's season last year is a conglomerate of things:

1. He showed up out of shape

2. By accounts of misc. "insiders" and even some media members, Matusz has had attitude issues in regards to senses of entitlement*

3. He was injured in spring training

4. He was injured during the regular season

5. He was dealing with changes of pitching coaches (Kranitz -> Connor -> Adair)

In no particular order, btw. And #2, I'm not going to necessarily say is fact or not.

Now, Matusz had a historically awful season, which I think largely can be attributed to #1-#5. The Kranitz/Connor/Adair trifecta coupled with injuries are probably the biggest two.

With that said, if the organization is forthright with Matusz (and I'm guessing they have been if they've got him on a training program with Brady), then I'm *hoping* they've done the following:

1. Brought up the issues they've had with his attitude

2. Let him know that the pitching coach carousel was an unfortunate situation

3. Told him to show up stronger (see: training program)

4. Laid out a plan of where he should be at different phases of the year

#4 is most important. I think it's something, as an organization, that should be conveyed to every player: growth path.

This means Matusz needs to know expectations. Come to ST stronger and healthy (obviously). Most likely they'll start him at AAA. That the arms they're bringing in are for depth and insurance reasons, not to intentionally block Matusz (or anyone). That the organization wants Matusz healthy. That the organization wants Matusz to focus on his mechanics and his strength (get his velocity back). That once everything is in check in ST and in AAA, that he'll be called up to replace some of the depth that we have (Wada, Hunter, whoever), of course meaning that the organization has let the depth/insurance know of their role when they were brought on.

Thoughts?