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

[AlbionHero]

Don't mess with what works, some guys are just suited for being relievers. Throwing 98 mph sinkers for 100 pitches a game isn't going to get it done as a starter.

[Can_of_corn]

He didn't throw 96-97 as a starter. And I doubt he can throw 96 for 100 pitches. At 90-92, is his sinker still effective?

I'm skeptical, but it could be worth trying it out in spring training. Let him prepare for it in the offseason, stretch him out the first half of ST. Not hard to move him back to closer in the last week of ST if he can't go deep in games. If his stuff is still nasty at 70 pitches and he can throw his 4 seamer and slider enough to keep guys honest, then give it a go.

I don't think it would be detrimental to his preparation, its just stretching him out for multiple innings. They do that anyway, this would be just be stretching out a little bit more.

He averaged ~93 with his sinker as a starter.

[Can_of_corn]

He didn't throw 96-97 as a starter. And I doubt he can throw 96 for 100 pitches. At 90-92, is his sinker still effective?

I'm skeptical, but it could be worth trying it out in spring training. Let him prepare for it in the offseason, stretch him out the first half of ST. Not hard to move him back to closer in the last week of ST if he can't go deep in games. If his stuff is still nasty at 70 pitches and he can throw his 4 seamer and slider enough to keep guys honest, then give it a go.

I don't think it would be detrimental to his preparation, its just stretching him out for multiple innings. They do that anyway, this would be just be stretching out a little bit more.

I think that him trying to reincorporate multiple pitches into his repertoire could indeed adversely impact his sinker command.

[beervendor]

Can you give an example of a successful major league starter, that wasn't a knuckleball pitcher, who used one pitch 90% of the time?

I'm checking the numbers from the last few years and the league leaders in FB% for starters are a bit over 70% Britton is about 90%.

There are no other RELIEVERS who throw 90%FB yet he's been wildly successful by any measure, proving that unusual pitch usage is not antithetical to effective pitching.Again, I'm certain he'd have to adjust his approach. Pitch selection would likely change, and he'd likely need to add another pitch (or 2). But if we find ourselves looking at a 2016 rotation of a struggling Tillman, a regressing Ubaldo, an uneven Gausman and Gonzales (assuming worst case 2nd half) without any solidifying FA and filling out with unprovens like Wright/Wilson; I might consider this contingency.

[Can_of_corn]

There are no other RELIEVERS who throw 90%FB yet he's been wildly successful by any measure, proving that unusual pitch usage is not antithetical to effective pitching.Again, I'm certain he'd have to adjust his approach. Pitch selection would likely change, and he'd likely need to add another pitch (or 2). But if we find ourselves looking at a 2016 rotation of a struggling Tillman, a regressing Ubaldo, an uneven Gausman and Gonzales (assuming worst case 2nd half) without any solidifying FA and filling out with unprovens like Wright/Wilson; I might consider this contingency.

Is a cutter a FB? They call it a cut fastball right?

[DrungoHazewood]

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?

What percentage of very good relief pitchers become starters? 5%? 1%? This cries out for a bb-ref query, which I may just do when I get home tonight. I would assume that many of those cases were young guys who were put into the pen out of necessity like Kevin Gausman. And in the past the differentiation between starter and reliever was less - I'd be willing to bet Kenny Rogers and David Wells didn't ditch several pitches and radically tailor their approaches out of the pen, like Britton. The other side of your Kershaw argument is that all very good relievers should be converted to starters since they'd be more valuable that way. Why haven't the Orioles tried Darren O'Day in the rotation? Why not Jim Johnson, and BJ Ryan, and Chaz Roe and all of them? Why not have a pitch-off in spring training and the top five guys start? Of course you don't do that because some pitchers profile as far more effective in short stints than six inning ones.

[DrungoHazewood]

The other thing that really concerns me is the injury risk that is associated with any role change. You're taking a guy out of his comfort zone and asking his body to do things it's now unaccustomed to doing. All of his physical prep for the last few years has been tailored to pitching one inning several times a week. That's just not the same as six or seven innings once every five days.

[beervendor]

He didn't throw 96-97 as a starter. And I doubt he can throw 96 for 100 pitches. At 90-92, is his sinker still effective?

Many pitchers get better sink with a little fatigue. Though being rested certainly doesn't seem to bother Zach.

[AlbionHero]

The big difference between Britton and guys lik Wells, Finley, Rodgers etc is that they all came up as relief pitchers and adjusted to starters later. Britton came up as a starter, failed, and had to find a new role to be successful. Theres no reason to think he wouldn't fail again as a starter. He's similar to Andrew Miller that way, he also came up as a starter and failed and now found his calling.

[mdbdotcom]

The thing that makes this idea most interesting to me is that Britton will soon make more money as a closer than the Orioles are willing to pay closers. He will soon need to be traded or moved to the rotation.

[DrungoHazewood]

The thing that makes this idea most interesting to me is that Britton will soon make more money as a closer than the Orioles are willing to pay closers. He will soon need to be traded or moved to the rotation.

Let's say he's moved to the rotation and meets the optimistic projections and becomes a 4- or 5-win starter. He'll ask for and receive very large salary increases in arbitration and as a free agent, and deserve them more than had he stayed a reliever. And the O's will not be any more likely to pay a starter $15-$20M a year than a reliever $8M, 10M, 12M or whatever. Whatever role he's in, if he succeeds he'll outgrow the Orioles' likely budget.

[Phantom]

The big difference between Britton and guys lik Wells, Finley, Rodgers etc is that they all came up as relief pitchers and adjusted to starters later. Britton came up as a starter, failed, and had to find a new role to be successful. Theres no reason to think he wouldn't fail again as a starter. He's similar to Andrew Miller that way, he also came up as a starter and failed and now found his calling.

So we are now considering young starters that pitch to 4.15ish FiPs to be failures? I'll make sure to mention this to Justin Verlander.

[BMann]

Put me in the "no thanks" column. Sure, moving Britton might fill a hole in the rotation, but it would just create another hole at the back end of the bullpen. Would it be all that much easier to find a shutdown closer than a who-knows-how-effective starter?

Kevin Gregg and Tommy Hunter showed that you can't just throw anyone in the closer role. O'Day would, theoretically, be fine, but he's as unproven as a closer as Britton is as a starter.

I like Britton where he is.

[Can_of_corn]

So we are now considering young starters that pitch to 4.15ish FiPs to be failures? I'll make sure to mention this to Justin Verlander.

Can you thank him for the lax security on his phone for me?

[Phantom]

Can you thank him for the lax security on his phone for me?