Matusz - Is it possible?

[winkies]

I don't want him back, and the lack of command is maddening at time, but he's really fairly effective.

Agreed.

[Frobby]

Problem is, he is going to be due north of $4M in arbitration, too much for a LOOGY. At that salary, O's have to consider either non-tender or go in the opposite direction and make him a starter. I wonder if he might be open to an extension at his current salary and stay as a LOOGY/low leverage guy. Something like 3 years/$10M. If he won't do that, I say non-tender and role with Cabral or whomever.

Interesting note: Matusz has been worth 0.9 rWAR, 0.6 fWAR so far this season. At that value, it is not difficult to justify his salary. However, Buck has been reluctant to use him in high leverage situations, and that makes his salary much more debatable.

[DrungoHazewood]

Interesting note: Matusz has been worth 0.9 rWAR, 0.6 fWAR so far this season. At that value, it is not difficult to justify his salary. However, Buck has been reluctant to use him in high leverage situations, and that makes his salary much more debatable.

I think that you can always question paying going market rates for free agents expected to produce a win, win-and-a-half, or less. The Orioles are pretty good at identifying relief pitchers, getting quality for almost free. I understand not wanting to constantly turn over the whole pen, and if you're not careful you end up with some duds. But I don't think you ever have to pay millions for a LOOGY. You don't need to lock in fractions of a win.

[Creamsicle]

I have this sinking feeling that if Mattress goes to another team he'll morph into a TOR guy somehow. I don't actually believe it, just feel it.

[Nevermore]

Interesting note: Matusz has been worth 0.9 rWAR, 0.6 fWAR so far this season. At that value, it is not difficult to justify his salary. However, Buck has been reluctant to use him in high leverage situations, and that makes his salary much more debatable.

He was used tonight in a high leverage situation. He did fine.

I'm beginning to warm up to him. He does a lot in the community, sponsoring guests at the games, being the main Oriole player, "ambassador" for the charity run/walk.

[sportsfan8703]

He was used tonight in a high leverage situation. He did fine.

I'm beginning to warm up to him. He does a lot in the community, sponsoring guests at the games, being the main Oriole player, "ambassador" for the charity run/walk.

Going 3-0 on the first two hitters in the 8th is not doing well. Cespedes bailed him out and dude just missed homering twice. He's nowhere near worth 4 million. I'd rather have a loopy competition in spring and have optionable lefties throughout the year.

[25 Nuggets]

Interesting thing about Matusz:

SO/9

2013: 8.8

2014: 9.2

2015: 10.4

BB/9

2013: 2.8

2014: 3.0

2015: 4.2

H/9

2013: 7.6

2014: 8.9

2015: 6.8

Now, PA break down:

2013: 96 vs. righties, 112 vs. lefties

2014: 114 vs. righties, 112 vs. lefties

2015: 84 vs. righties, 79 vs. lefties

Against righties:

2013: .302/.375 /.372 - .747 OPS

2014: .277 /.351/.525 - .876 OPS

2015: .288/.415 /.409 - .824 OPS

So, he's still facing A LOT of righties. But I'm guessing the strategy is to pitch around them. Maybe that's why his control numbers are such a disaster?

Let's compare Matusz to Chen:

.265/.311/.451 - .762 OPS career numbers vs. righties

Chen is not known for doing well against righties. But Matusz's career against righties (including starting):

.302/.371/.489 - .860 OPS

About 100 points higher OPS against righties than Chen. And that's mixing in 3 years worth of relief appearances where he's pitching around righties and with increased velocity (I'd imagine) being in the relief role.

Personally I think it's fools gold to put Matusz in the rotation. I could see him sporting an ERA over 5 in a starting role just due to the number of righties he'll have to face, being exposed to hitters multiple times through the order, lack of control against righties and decreased "stuff" in a starting role.

I think you got it to an extent -- his OBP is higher than his SLG given up vs righties this year. Indicative of more walks than damaging hits.

[mcgraw238]

With his expected salary next year, there is no doubt if Matusz comes back next year it has to be with the understanding that he's going to be in the rotation. I think with his struggles against right-handers that could be a problem unless he can get that change up back that used to be his best pitch. With Chen's expected departure and the trade of Davies, there is going to be a spot available in that rotation next year so it will be interesting to see if Matusz is given a shot. It could be expensive experiment but he didn't look terrible this spring as a starter so I would rule it out either.

I think we will see BMat in the rotation next year. I'd like to see the club add an impact starter to the mix and see what we can get in trade for Gonzo now that his salary is starting to rise. This is coming from a huge Gonzo fan.

[ChuckS]

Matusz is great when he's not pitching in a big spot. Or with multiple runners on base. Or when he's pitching to right handers.

Brian Matusz getting a shot in the rotation has been an ongoing them in Spring Training for like the last three seasons but he was never seriously considered. I don't see anything changing in 2016. Below average fastball, shaky command, and inconsistent change up are not a recipe for success in a big league rotation.

We do have a spot open in the rotation for 2016 and I fully expect them to sign a cheap stop gap to fill it.

[mcgraw238]

Matusz is great when he's not pitching in a big spot. Or with multiple runners on base. Or when he's pitching to right handers.

Brian Matusz getting a shot in the rotation has been an ongoing them in Spring Training for like the last three seasons but he was never seriously considered. I don't see anything changing in 2016. Below average fastball, shaky command, and inconsistent change up are not a recipe for success in a big league rotation.

We do have a spot open in the rotation for 2016 and I fully expect them to sign a cheap stop gap to fill it.

I think your analysis is on point except I think Matusz will be that cheap stop gap.

[Frobby]

I don't see the Orioles coming into spring training with Matusz in the rotation as Plan A. Maybe as Plan C or D. The guy is a decent LOOGY, and that's all, at this point. I wish I knew what happened to the guy I saw in 2009-10, who looked like a very solid starter. Somehow he got screwed up.

[mcgraw238]

I don't see the Orioles coming into spring training with Matusz in the rotation as Plan A. Maybe as Plan C or D. The guy is a decent LOOGY, and that's all, at this point. I wish I knew what happened to the guy I saw in 2009-10, who looked like a very solid starter. Somehow he got screwed up.

Time to the plate?

[ChuckS]

I don't see the Orioles coming into spring training with Matusz in the rotation as Plan A. Maybe as Plan C or D. The guy is a decent LOOGY, and that's all, at this point. I wish I knew what happened to the guy I saw in 2009-10, who looked like a very solid starter. Somehow he got screwed up.

That fastball was sitting 91-93 and he actually had command of all three of his pitches. Not sure what happened either. There was no significant injury to blame. When he was drafted and coming up in the minors the talk was always what a polished and poised pitcher he was. It's not like we were reaching picking him fourth overall. He was a consensus top five pick. Mind boggling.

[Enjoy Terror]

Thought this would be an interesting experiment.

Number of first round pitchers that panned out as starters in the majors (roughly):

2005: 8/26

2006: 6/27

2007: 3/32

2008: 7/21

2009: 9/28

2010: 7/26

2011: 7/30

2012: 6/27

2013: 3/20

2014: 2/20

Matusz isn't likely to become part of the "1/3" anytime soon, methinks.

[ChuckS]

Thought this would be an interesting experiment.

Number of first round pitchers that panned out as starters in the majors (roughly):

2005: 8/26

2006: 6/27

2007: 3/32

2008: 7/21

2009: 9/28

2010: 7/26

2011: 7/30

2012: 6/27

2013: 3/20

2014: 2/20

Matusz isn't likely to become part of the "1/3" anytime soon, methinks.

What about pitchers drafted in the first five overall? Bet it's closer to 50 percent. And even higher for a polished college pitcher like Brian.