Would you consider putting Britton in the rotation at the start of 2016?

[backwardsk]

I would rather see them go after a left-handed SP.

Who do you think they could reasonably get?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Can_of_corn]

Who do you think they could reasonably get?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This Chen guy is a FA next year. Kinda worried about signing someone coming off a career year .

[backwardsk]

This Chen guy is a FA next year. Kinda worried about signing someone coming off a career year .

I understand who Chen is. In fact, I've seen him pitch before. My question was who do you think we could reasonably get.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Frobby]

If it works, don't fix it. Zach is a great closer. Why try and "fix" something that isn't broken?

It's the rotation that's broken. Putting Britton in is a proposed way to partially fix it. Believe me, I have considered all the downsides of trying that approach. They have weight with me. That's why the OP is in the form of a question.

[Frobby]

I would consider it if Britton actually wants to do it.

Which is a good question. I'm sure he was initially disappointed in going to the bullpen, but now that he's on the path to being a highly-paid closer and has been an all-star, he may prefer to follow the path where he had some pretty immediate success.

[Redskins Rick]

Who do you think they could reasonably get?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good Question,

Not many left handers on the market, and for that reason, Chen is going to get high dollars.

[Frobby]

Good Question,

Not many left handers on the market, and for that reason, Chen is going to get high dollars.

That, and the fact that he is a very good pitcher. Not an ace, but a very reliable, above average starter who is not that old.

[Phantom]

I hate the "if it ain't broke don't fix it logic". Chris Sale was a reliever. So was Derek Lowe. And C.J. Wilson. And Ryan Dempster. Chuck Finley. Dave Stewart. Kenny Rogers. David Wells. And many more.

Every great starter on every team could be a great reliever. Should they have been relegated to 70 IP per year simply because their ballclub brought them up in the bullpen? Should Kershaw just be the best closer in the game because he happened to come up at a time when his team needed a pen arm?

[Can_of_corn]

I hate the "if it ain't broke don't fix it logic". Chris Sale was a reliever. So was Derek Lowe. And C.J. Wilson. And Ryan Dempster. Chuck Finley. Dave Stewart. Kenny Rogers. David Wells. And many more.

Every great starter on every team could be a great reliever. Should they have been relegated to 70 IP per year simply because their ballclub brought them up in the bullpen? Should Kershaw just be the best closer in the game because he happened to come up at a time when his team needed a pen arm?

Refresh my memory, how many of those guys were "failures" as starters at the major league level, became successful relievers then were "successes" as starters at the major league level?

Personally I think to call Sale a relief pitcher turned starter is to call Jim Palmer a relief pitcher turned starter.

[TINSTAAPP]

It's the rotation that's broken. Putting Britton in is a proposed way to partially fix it. Believe me, I have considered all the downsides of trying that approach. They have weight with me. That's why the OP is in the form of a question.

This is where we have to trust Duquette. His teams have always had good pitchingeven at Fenway Park in the heart of the steroid era. The man knows how to build a pitching staff. He'll sign two veterans in free agency who won't cost too much money, pick up some minor league journeyman off the scrap heap who will give them some good innings and the Orioles will have an above average pitching staff again next year.

[beervendor]

Britton's on pace for a little less than 70 IP this season. *IF* there's reason to think he could make the conversion successfully, and *IF* there's a team need (I believe yes on both counts), why not? He's the best pitcher on the staff - why wouldn't you want him throwing 150-200 innings instead of 70?

[Can_of_corn]

Britton's on pace for a little less than 70 IP this season. *IF* there's reason to think he could make the conversion successfully, and *IF* there's a team need (I believe yes on both counts), why not? He's the best pitcher on the staff - why wouldn't you want him throwing 150-200 innings instead of 70?

Because the only pitchers that can throw 150-200 innings a season with his pitch usage patterns are knuckleballers.

[Phantom]

Refresh my memory, how many of those guys were "failures" as starters at the major league level, became successful relievers then were "successes" as starters at the major league level?

Personally I think to call Sale a relief pitcher turned starter is to call Jim Palmer a relief pitcher turned starter.

A few actually. A lot had a very similar bad first year of being a starter followed by success in the pen. Derek Lowe was a starter in Seattle. CJ Wilson was just awful as a starter. Kenny Rodgers and Chris Sale were both pegged as relievers due to durability concerns (which is hilarious in retrospect)

I'm not sure why we would consider Britton to be a failed starter. He's had 250 IPs to the tune of a 4.25 Fip and xFip. If we relegated every young starter with similar stats to the pen, we'd have missed out on a lot of aces.

[Phantom]

Because the only pitchers that can throw 150-200 innings a season with his pitch usage patterns are knuckleballers.

Why would we assume his pitch usage would be the same as a starter as it is as a reliever? There are some successful starters with high sinker usage, but I don't think anyone is recommending the exact same approach.

[Can_of_corn]

Why would we assume his pitch usage would be the same as a starter as it is as a reliever? There are some successful starters with high sinker usage, but I don't think anyone is recommending the exact same approach.

Why would we assume similar production with him being forced to use less effective pitch types?