Jump to content

Ed. Rodriguez and What Aces Do For Young Pitchers


gmelson26

Recommended Posts

It's interesting to consider if Bundy and Gausman look at Tillman that way.

To the extent you can hope for those two as the McDonald and Mussina for a new generation, it is understandable to think they might benefit from a Sutcliffe-type mentor, if Tillman is gone (or just isn't it).

Among the FA starters for next year, the ones I see with super-veteranosity who might not fall completely out of our price range are: 

Marco Estrada - only medium veteranosity, but an ideal fit for Gausman if the breaking ball is hopeless and he must progress as a fastball change guy.

John Lackey

Lance Lynn

CC Sabathia

I expect we'll be in on Tillman, but between his and Ubaldo's expiring contracts, imagine the rotation includes one new Ubaldo sized contract, give or take, next year.  Tillman may be on the way to pitching himself down to needing a pillow contract to try again after reestablishing value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gmelson26 said:

It's frustrating to me that we traded Rodriguez away.    The mentor stuff I take with a grain of salt.     I'm not saying it doesn't help, but I don't think you have to be a top 10 pitcher in MLB to be a good mentor for a younger pitcher.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

It's frustrating to me that we traded Rodriguez away.    The mentor stuff I take with a grain of salt.     I'm not saying it doesn't help, but I don't think you have to be a top 10 pitcher in MLB to be a good mentor for a younger pitcher.   

I liked having Andrew Miller.  And trying to win that World Series that we were supposed to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, weams said:

I liked having Andrew Miller.  And trying to win that World Series that we were supposed to. 

Me too.  I enjoyed the party and stayed until the end.  Doesn't seem right to complain about the cost afterward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 24fps said:

Me too.  I enjoyed the party and stayed until the end.  Doesn't seem right to complain about the cost afterward.

I complained at the time, so I'm entitled to complain now.    Miller was an asset, and performed as well or better than we could have hoped, but the long term cost was too high IMO.

But I don't really want to rehash that old topic.    I'm more interested in questioning the premise that great, super-talented pitchers like Price or Sale are somehow better mentors to younger pitchers than good, solid veterans like Chris Tillman.     I don't buy it.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, weams said:

I liked having Andrew Miller.  And trying to win that World Series that we were supposed to. 

I agree.  I don't get bent out of shape about losing Ed Rod.  Or Arrieta for that matter.  2104 was our year.  KC was lucky as hell.  Machado got hurt.  Davis got suspended.  MW was hurt too.  Miller was just viewed as a lefty that would maybe pitch 10-15 innings down the stretch.  That's what a lot of the reporters were saying.  DD saw what Miller could be.  Miller pitched in every game against the Tigers.  Britton was shaky that whole series.  Without Miller we don't win that series.  

Look at what Cleveland had to give up to Miller.  4 players and current top 70 prospects.  We gave up just a fringey top 100 guy that was having a down year in AA.  

I'm not going to hate on Ed Rod, he was one of my favorite players to follow in the minors, but the guy does pitch for the sox now.  I hope he has a 8 ERA the rest of the year.  

Like Arrietta, he benefited from a change of scenery.  Less pressure.  He got to leave his bad AA season behind him.  Even though he was just 21 when we traded him away he had been in the org. since we signed him when he was 16.  He responded right away to a change of scenery.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

 

Look at what Cleveland had to give up to Miller.  4 players and current top 70 prospects.  We gave up just a fringey top 100 guy that was having a down year in AA.  

2.3 years of Miller >>> .3 years of Miller.   He will play roughly 7 times as many games for Cleveland as he did for us.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, weams said:

I liked having Andrew Miller.  And trying to win that World Series that we were supposed to. 

I didn't like the trade at the time,  I get it, however.. we kept him from Det. and he pitched well against them, but we won the division or rather were going to win the division without him.  I just don't think 6 innings in the playoffs was worth it.  Let's just say someone else was used instead of him, I don't think we lose 3 games to them given that the starters left with the lead in all 3 games. 

I'm glad we tried to win it all that year, but the price was steep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Frobby said:

2.3 years of Miller >>> .3 years of Miller.   He will play roughly 7 times as many games for Cleveland as he did for us.    

Yup, didn't like the trade at the time and still don't. We win the division without Miller and I'm not buying that we go from sweeping Detroit to losing the series without him. What does that make him over a full season? About a 162 win player? Not to mention the O's won game 1 12-3 and Miller didn't pitch in the game 2 win. 

20 innings of Andrew Miller wasn't and isn't worth 6 years of Rodriguez.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Babypowder said:

We win the division without Miller and I'm not buying that we go from sweeping Detroit to losing the series without him.

You do know that the other team in the mix for Andrew Miller was the Detroit Tigers??  The Orioles offer was better than what the Tigers had to offer hence he pitched for the Orioles not against in the playoff game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...