Gausman still could be the fifth starter right away

[epic]

What adjective would you prefer? I'm really not in much of a mood to debate wording. When he's consistently dominating in AAA games, I'll be interested in seeing him in the majors.

And what does consistently dominating mean to you? Because that's hard to do at AAA no matter who you are if it means the same to you as it does to me. I'm not trying to make a case for Gausman in the rotation right now or anything - all I'm trying to say is not many 23 year olds are going to dominate AAA.

To make a comparison, dominating a level in my eyes is what Bundy did in A- and A+; it's what Wieters did in A+ and AA.

You don't need to dominate or put up other-worldly numbers to show that you belong at the next level. Just my opinion though, and again it's kind of a wording thing, but I'd be interested to hear yours.

[Frobby]

Lol wut? As if guys like Clayton Kershaw or David Price never had WORSE performances than that at triple A. You do realize that guys arent perfecr and that they also use AAA to work or their weaknesses right? Oberreaction much?

I am not overreacting at all, in the context of what I'm discussing. I have a very high opinion of Kevin Gausman's potential. But I am really sick of seeing people slobber all over him because he can throw 99 mph when he dials it up. The road is littered with guys who could do that but never became good major league pitchers because they didn't have good command and/or movement on the pitch, or because they didn't have sufficient secondary pitches. So, my point is not that Gausman's mediocre start yesterday means he's going to be a mediocre pitcher, my point is that the fact that he threw 99 mph on occasion for me is outweighed by the fact that he didn't have a very good game. He has stuff to learn and abilities to develop before he can be mentioned in the same breath as a guy like Kershaw or Price. By the way, Kershaw made 44 minor league starts before starting a game in the majors, and Price made 19 before his first one and then was sent down the following season to make another 8. Gausman made 13, only 8 at the AA level, and frankly, it showed when he was called up. I want him to complete his minor league education and dominate down there before we see him again. And then I want him to get inserted into the rotation and never look back, instead of becoming a human yo-yo like so many other Oriole pitching prospects.

[LookitsPuck]

Velocity is so overrated. 4 hits, 3 walks, 3 runs, 2 earned runs in 4 IP in AAA? That's a very mediocre outing and I really don't care how hard he was throwing. The idea that he's ready to waltz into the majors right now and be materially better than the guys in our rotation is laughable. Folks should let the guy learn about professional pitching instead of being in a big rush because he can throw 99 and has a good change-up.

Bada bing, bada boom.

[Frobby]

And what does consistently dominating mean to you? Because that's hard to do at AAA no matter who you are if it means the same to you as it does to me. I'm not trying to make a case for Gausman in the rotation right now or anything - all I'm trying to say is not many 23 year olds are going to dominate AAA.

To make a comparison, dominating a level in my eyes is what Bundy did in A- and A+; it's what Wieters did in A+ and AA.

You don't need to dominate or put up other-worldly numbers to show that you belong at the next level. Just my opinion though, and again it's kind of a wording thing, but I'd be interested to hear yours.

I'm not using "dominate" quite as stringently as you are suggesting. Michael Wacha made 15 AAA starts and posted a 2.65 ERA and an 0.99 WHIP before he was inserted in the Cardinals' rotation. Something akin to that would suit me fine.

[Can_of_corn]

I'm not using "dominate" quite as stringently as you are suggesting. Michael Wacha made 15 AAA starts and posted a 2.65 ERA and an 0.99 WHIP before he was inserted in the Cardinals' rotation. Something akin to that would suit me fine.

I do think that, considering he was ill, his last start should not be held against him.

[Il BuonO]

How about a 3.63 ERA and a 1.287 WHIP?

Step right up and meet our current ace.

[Can_of_corn]

How about a 3.63 ERA and a 1.287 WHIP?

Step right up and meet our current ace.

And they brought in the fences this year.

So once Gausman throws a no hitter down there he will be good to go?

[epic]

I'm not using "dominate" quite as stringently as you are suggesting. Michael Wacha made 15 AAA starts and posted a 2.65 ERA and an 0.99 WHIP before he was inserted in the Cardinals' rotation. Something akin to that would suit me fine.

Gotcha. I'd love to see that from Gausman and I think he's capable of that too.

[Frobby]

How about a 3.63 ERA and a 1.287 WHIP?

Step right up and meet our current ace.

Very different situation. Tillman was in his final option year, and had 50 AAA starts under his belt, and three of the guys in our rotation had fallen apart. Even with all that, they waited until the end of June to call him up. He also was extremely good in AAA for the last 9-10 starts he made immediately before his call-up.

Look, I don't mean to suggest there's some magical formula of ERA and WHIP that determines exactly when Gausman should be called up. But we have a veteran staff of solid starting pitchers and the burden is very much on Gausman to show he's ready to be better than at least one of the guys we have. When Tillman was called up in 2012 we weren't in that mode.

[weams]

I think plus or maybe plus plus would be more accurate. Maybe great if you want to steer away from actual baseball terms for some reason. Bugs Bunny if you are feeling particularly animated.

When I hear good I think slightly above average.

Every word of this. Every one.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I'm with Frobby. I don't think KG is ready or deserving to start right now. I do think he'd make a killer closer this year though.

[BarclaySouthway]

I'm with Frobby. I don't think KG is ready or deserving to start right now. I do think he'd make a killer closer this year though.

Here, here. I was beating that closer drum, too. He had good numbers in relief. He'd be a nice weapon to have out of the pen.

It would be great to leave him in AAA until he's fully baked, but his promotion will probably have more to do with how the big club's starters fare (health-wise and performance-wise) than anything else.

[weams]

Which word? He said plus, maybe plus plus, or great. I'd go with plus.

He mentioned all the choices that industry people have used. I'll accept yours.

[weams]

And they brought in the fences this year.

So once Gausman throws a no hitter down there he will be good to go?

Tillman did. With the deep fences. It still took him a while to be a major league ace.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2010-04-28/sports/bs-sp-chris-tillman-no-hitter-0429-20100428_1_no-hitter-tides-gwinnett

[Il BuonO]

I'm not using "dominate" quite as stringently as you are suggesting. Michael Wacha made 15 AAA starts and posted a 2.65 ERA and an 0.99 WHIP before he was inserted in the Cardinals' rotation. Something akin to that would suit me fine.

Very different situation. Tillman was in his final option year, and had 50 AAA starts under his belt, and three of the guys in our rotation had fallen apart. Even with all that, they waited until the end of June to call him up. He also was extremely good in AAA for the last 9-10 starts he made immediately before his call-up.

Look, I don't mean to suggest there's some magical formula of ERA and WHIP that determines exactly when Gausman should be called up.

But we have a veteran staff of solid starting pitchers and the burden is very much on Gausman to show he's ready to be better than at least one of the guys we have. When Tillman was called up in 2012 we weren't in that mode.

So, you do or don't have a formula unless it's akin to Wacha?

The situation is always going to be different.

I agree with the team's decision to keep him down right now just not your rationale. The only reason to keep him down is to limit his innings as evidenced by his first two starts.