Jump to content

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


Frobby

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I think that him trying to reincorporate multiple pitches into his repertoire could indeed adversely impact his sinker command.

Well that all depends. He already throws a slider, just not very often.

A show me 4 seamer he can use up high isn't much different then a sinker, just a change in grip.

Changeup? Yeah, that one might be done forever. Slider is his off speed.

Its still going to sinker the vast majority of the time, just a little less vast then when closing.

Actually his best 2nd pitch might just be changing speeds on the sinker. Throw it 92 ish most of the time and crank it up to 96-97 sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that all depends. He already throws a slider, just not very often.

A show me 4 seamer he can use up high isn't much different then a sinker, just a change in grip.

Changeup? Yeah, that one might be done forever. Slider is his off speed.

Its still going to sinker the vast majority of the time, just a little less vast then when closing.

Actually his best 2nd pitch might just be changing speeds on the sinker. Throw it 92 ish most of the time and crank it up to 96-97 sometimes.

Did you forget about the curve ball?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone see a pattern?

                                                                                                                        I          Split   G  PA  AB  R   H 2B 3B HR SB CS BB  SO SO/W   BA  OBP  SLG  OPS  TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB ROE BAbip tOPS+    Pitch  1-25 155 709 648 57 158 26  2 12  0  0 53 140 2.64 .244 .304 .346 .649 224  27   3  4  1   0   6  .294    89    Pitch 26-50  56 322 291 37  76 13  0  6  0  0 26  59 2.27 .261 .322 .368 .690 107  12   1  2  2   4   3  .307   100    Pitch 51-75  44 270 232 32  58 14  0  4  0  2 32  47 1.47 .250 .341 .362 .703  84   7   1  3  2   0   3  .295   105   Pitch 76-100  43 218 181 34  53  9  2  5  0  0 30  21 0.70 .293 .386 .448 .834  81   7   0  3  4   3   2  .302   142     Pitch 101+  13  26  25  0   5  0  0  0  0  0  1   4 4.00 .200 .231 .200 .431   5   0   0  0  0   0   0  .238    26
                                                                                                                          I         Split   G   PA  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR SB CS  BB  SO SO/W   BA  OBP  SLG  OPS  TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB ROE BAbip tOPS+    as Starter  46 1101 968 153 270 50  4 22 10  6 111 165 1.49 .279 .353 .407 .760 394  35   4  9  9   7  13  .314   121   as Reliever 109  444 409  24  80 12  0  5  2  0  31 106 3.42 .196 .254 .262 .516 107  18   1  3  0   0   1  .252    50

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table

Generated 7/16/2015.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

He has three more years of arbitration remaining and is already making $3.5 million. He has two years of usefulness before he becomes too expensive for the O's (and some other teams) as a reliever. To get the most for him, they would have to trade him after next season, before his salary is too high. As a starter, they could probably keep him until he reaches free agency and then take a comp pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to compare Britton the starter, with Britton the reliever 2014 and now, since he finally got healthy and develop that nasty pitch of his.

That said, personally, I don't want him, anywhere, except where he is right now.

Again, just my own opinion.

He didn't suddenly develop that "nasty pitch of his". He always had the good sinker, it's just that sinker becomes a real weapon in short one inning stints. Most guys stuff play up in short stints. It's the reason why I still think Tim Berry will be a major league pitcher, but it will be in relief.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone see a pattern?
                                                                                                                        I          Split   G  PA  AB  R   H 2B 3B HR SB CS BB  SO SO/W   BA  OBP  SLG  OPS  TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB ROE BAbip tOPS+    Pitch  1-25 155 709 648 57 158 26  2 12  0  0 53 140 2.64 .244 .304 .346 .649 224  27   3  4  1   0   6  .294    89    Pitch 26-50  56 322 291 37  76 13  0  6  0  0 26  59 2.27 .261 .322 .368 .690 107  12   1  2  2   4   3  .307   100    Pitch 51-75  44 270 232 32  58 14  0  4  0  2 32  47 1.47 .250 .341 .362 .703  84   7   1  3  2   0   3  .295   105   Pitch 76-100  43 218 181 34  53  9  2  5  0  0 30  21 0.70 .293 .386 .448 .834  81   7   0  3  4   3   2  .302   142     Pitch 101+  13  26  25  0   5  0  0  0  0  0  1   4 4.00 .200 .231 .200 .431   5   0   0  0  0   0   0  .238    26
                                                                                                                          I         Split   G   PA  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR SB CS  BB  SO SO/W   BA  OBP  SLG  OPS  TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB ROE BAbip tOPS+    as Starter  46 1101 968 153 270 50  4 22 10  6 111 165 1.49 .279 .353 .407 .760 394  35   4  9  9   7  13  .314   121   as Reliever 109  444 409  24  80 12  0  5  2  0  31 106 3.42 .196 .254 .262 .516 107  18   1  3  0   0   1  .252    50

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table

Generated 7/16/2015.

Yes, clearly the key to success is to get him to throw 100 pitches.

And yeah, I am hesitant to draw lasting conclusions off of context-less small sample size data taken from different years of his development.

No one is sure he will be a good starter. I just don't see much risk in trying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He didn't suddenly develop that "nasty pitch of his". He always had the good sinker, it's just that sinker becomes a real weapon in short one inning stints. Most guys stuff play up in short stints. It's the reason why I still think Tim Berry will be a major league pitcher, but it will be in relief.

Okay True, he had the pitch, but he was very inconsistent with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has three more years of arbitration remaining and is already making $3.5 million. He has two years of usefulness before he becomes too expensive for the O's (and some other teams) as a reliever. To get the most for him, they would have to trade him after next season, before his salary is too high. As a starter, they could probably keep him until he reaches free agency and then take a comp pick.

Assuming that he's actually any good as a starter. I guess if you're being cynical/pessimistic you could assume 2016 is a rebuilding year. Try Britton as a starter and your Plan B if he doesn't work out is that he goes back to being a reliever but you keep his salary for '17 in check with a year of 25 starts, 144 innings and a 4.78 ERA. Maybe that was Paul Richards' plan for Goose Gossage in '76, he was just years ahead of his time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, clearly the key to success is to get him to throw 100 pitches.

And yeah, I am hesitant to draw lasting conclusions off of context-less small sample size data taken from different years of his development.

No one is sure he will be a good starter. I just don't see much risk in trying.

Be hesitant all you want, but his repertoire and the statistical evidence that shows he struggles the longer he's in games is why the Orioles converted him to closer and why they will keep him there.

You can count on one hand probably the amount of closers who successfully converted back to a starter and even less when it comes to a pitcher who primarily uses one pitch. Most of them I'd bet were converted to closers due to necessity, not because they had struggled as as a starter.

Injury concerns are a very big risk in moving a guy from relief to a starter's role as well. Asking a guy to start throwing more pitches with different grips is an injury risk. So unless you think Britton can successfully command his 94-97 MPH sinker for 100 pitches, you are taking on an injury risk with any kind of conversion attempt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, clearly the key to success is to get him to throw 100 pitches.

And yeah, I am hesitant to draw lasting conclusions off of context-less small sample size data taken from different years of his development.

No one is sure he will be a good starter. I just don't see much risk in trying.

While I agree with Tony's conclusion, this dataset is biased because the 1-25 data includes all of his one-inning stints as a reliever. Take that out and he probably has a very typical times-through-the-order penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be hesitant all you want, but his repertoire and the statistical evidence that shows he struggles the longer he's in games is why the Orioles converted him to closer and why they will keep him there.

You can count on one hand probably the amount of closers who successfully converted back to a starter and even less when it comes to a pitcher who primarily uses one pitch. Most of them I'd bet were converted to closers due to necessity, not because they had struggled as as a starter.

Injury concerns are a very big risk in moving a guy from relief to a starter's role as well. Asking a guy to start throwing more pitches with different grips is an injury risk. So unless you think Britton can successfully command his 94-97 MPH sinker for 100 pitches, you are taking on an injury risk with any kind of conversion attempt.

Particularly with Britton's history of shoulder issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




  • Posts

    • One good Bud Norris year out of Rogers would be nice.  Two would be amazing.
    • Except he really isn't hurting the team at SS.  Again, he's an 8+ WAR player this year.  I don't know why anyone would want to argue for moving him off a position where he's performing at an MVP level.  This season is already as valuable as Ripken's '83 MVP season and more valuable than any other season Ripken had except 1984 and his monster 1991 campaign. I saw Cal play at shortstop, too.  And I think when we all think of Cal at shortstop, we think of the refined version....the guy that made 3 errors in a season (and somehow lost the Gold Glove to Ozzie f'ing Guillen) and the guy that had a whole chapter dedicated to him in George Will's "Men at Work." You neglected to respond to the idea that Gunnar can get better at the position.  There's a lot to like with him defensively already, but he's not a fully finished product and I don't think anyone here is arguing that he is.  I suspect that if you took Cal in his second season and matched that up with Gunnar, you'd see some similarities.  I also suspect that Gunnar isn't the defender that he'll be in 5 or 6 years from now, just like Ripken wasn't the best defender at SS in his early seasons. Gunnar is a 5 tool player.  There's nothing that he can't do on a baseball field and I'm sure if you put him in a "traditional power position" like a corner outfield spot, he'd be just fine. But I find it funny that you want to be called old fashioned, yet here we are discussing Cal Ripken, the guy that broke the mold for what a shortstop can be and turned it into a power position.  Ripken was ultimate anti-traditionalist of the position and responsible for the slew of power hitting shortstops that came in after him.  And quite frankly, I don't know why we're talking about power when we're debating defense.
    • Yeah, I agree something like this might happen some day, but only if the union comes around to believing MLB is on shaky financial footing -- if and when that ever happens. I don't like the idea of voiding a players' contract then and there, but perhaps performing below a certain level would trigger some contract years in the future to automatically become option years.  Something along those lines. It's hard to imagine deals like this today, except possibly here and there for players who are known to be very inconsistent.  As long as baseball is considered financially healthy I'm sure the union would push back strongly against deals like this, especially in large numbers.
    • Thank you. I knew there was something bogus about that post. I saw Cal play SS. And Gunnar is no Cal at SS. Not even close. And this is coming from a big fan of Gunnar. I would like to see him play a traditional power position. Call me old fashioned. He’s hurting the team at SS. 
    • Interesting.  We live in a data obsessed world now but it's not the answer to everything.  There should be a mix.  
    • Tobias Myers for the brewers tonight: 6 innings 4H -1ER 1BB 11 Ks. not bad at all!
    • I doubt solid MLB pitchers can be acquired just by trading position players the vast majority of the time.  Look at how we acquired Bradish and Povich -- by trading solid (at the time anyway) MLB level pitchers.  In those trades we were on the other end, but we forced teams to trade good young pitchers for Bundy and Lopez respectively.  Now we did acquire McDermott and Seth Johnson by trading Trey Mancini.  So it does happen that pitching can sometimes be acquired trading only a position player, but Mancini had had a strong major league career to that point.  My point is I don't think you can expect to acquire pitching only by trading position players -- but if you can it may need to be a strong veteran that is not easy to part with. Perhaps we could acquire Tarik Skubal for just Jackson Holliday -- or Holliday plus one or two other strong position prospects.  But that would be a whole other level of a blockbuster trade. Also, I'm not sure how we can say the system is bereft of homegrown minor league pitching talent and then complain that we traded Baumeister and Chace -- two homegrown minor league pitchers that everyone here seems to agree are talented.  We can criticize the trade, but clearly there was and probably still are some desirable arms in the system that we'd rather not trade.  No, none of the ones Elias drafted have made it to the bigs yet, but maybe those two would have been among the first.    
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...