Lucas and Scott up

[foxfield]

1 minute ago, Camden_yardbird said:

Is it bad when your team calls up 4 relievers in the second full week of the season?

Roster resource is going to have to hire an Orioles only intern.

No, but it isn't helpful that they can only call up relievers from the Orioles organization.

[interloper]

19 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Has he been a good pitcher, or has he been a mediocre pitcher who has gotten good results?

Honestly, sometimes it doesn't matter. Especially for a reliever. He clearly has a knack for NOT allowing home runs when healthy, that's the big thing for me. 

[Tony-OH]

37 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

That may explain why he's looked absolutely awful this year.  But I still have serious doubts that a 32-year-old with a minor league RA of 4.70 is going to be a good MLB pitcher.

Bleier has certainly defied the odds, the scouts, the numbers, and just about everything else. But he's still a guy who put up a 1.97 ERA in his first 111 big league games covering 119 innings. His stuff really isn't that far away from what it was in the past, it was just his location was off which probably has a lot more to do with the long layoff than shoulder tendinitis. 

By putting him on the DL, he gets paid a major league salary and keeps incurring major league service time, including when he goes on his minor league rehab. It's the right thing to do rather than demote him.

I would not bet against Bleier coming back and being effective again later in the year, though pitching to a sub 2 ERA may not be in the cards. 

[Frobby]

21 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Results are what matter.

Pitchers can have the greats stuff and not be effective or be good pitchers.  Arrieta as an Oriole is a good example.   

What matters is can a pitcher get batters out consistently.

The real issue is whether the pitcher got his results by being good or by being lucky, and therefore, whether the past good results are likely to be repeated.   And while I don’t subscribe to the theory that (1) FIP is a perfect measure of skill, or (2) the differential between FIP and ERA is entirely attributable to luck, I do worry whenever I see a big gap between FIP and ERA whether that difference is sustainable.   The good news here is that even Bleier’s FIP is pretty decent.    So if he returns to form in terms of quality of pitches and command, I expect him to be a decent or better reliever.    

[DrungoHazewood]

14 minutes ago, interloper said:

Honestly, sometimes it doesn't matter. Especially for a reliever. He clearly has a knack for NOT allowing home runs when healthy, that's the big thing for me. 

It always matters when looking forward.  Luck, or whatever you want to call a large gap between peripherals and ERA, generally isn't repeatable. You can make the case that a guy with a 1.80 ERA might deserve the Cy Young despite a 4.00 FIP.  But I'm not expecting anything like the 1.80 next year.

[HowAboutThat]

Does Bleier get his ML salary while on the DL?

[wildcard]

22 minutes ago, Frobby said:

The real issue is whether the pitcher got his results by being good or by being lucky, and therefore, whether the past good results are likely to be repeated.   And while I don’t subscribe to the theory that (1) FIP is a perfect measure of skill, or (2) the differential between FIP and ERA is entirely attributable to luck, I do worry whenever I see a big gap between FIP and ERA whether that difference is sustainable.   The good news here is that even Bleier’s FIP is pretty decent.    So if he returns to form in terms of quality of pitches and command, I expect him to be a decent or better reliever.    

Pretty hard to just lucky for a year and a half to the tune of a sub 2.00 ERA,

[wildcard]

5 minutes ago, Philip said:

Does Bleier get his ML salary while on the DL?

Yes, he does while he is on the IL.

[atomic]

1 hour ago, Tony-OH said:

Why not? Rogers doesn't have major league stuff and is spent, Bleier doesn't look like the same guy and may need some DL time or some minor league time to build back up.

That all seems correct.  But I don't know if Tanner Scott will be much better. Lucas has some good minor league numbers.  Lets see what he can do.   

[atomic]

55 minutes ago, foxfield said:

No, but it isn't helpful that they can only call up relievers from the Orioles organization.

The nice thing for pitchers on other rosters. If you get DFA'd you know you will be picked up by the Orioles.  

[wildcard]

5 minutes ago, atomic said:

That all seems correct.  But I don't know if Tanner Scott will be much better. Lucas has some good minor league numbers.  Lets see what he can do.   

I don't expect for Scott to be with the O's long.  IMO he got called up because Ramirez just pitched.  Ramirez will be available to pitch again on Sunday.  Scott may be optioned at that time.  JMO.

Scott has control problems that have not been fixed in the first week of the minor league season.   He needs more time in the minors.  But the O's had a need and Scott is on the 40 man roster.

[SurhoffRules]

19 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Pretty hard to just lucky for a year and a half to the tune of a sub 2.00 ERA,

While not as low of an ERA, Brad Bergesen threw 123 innings as a starter to a 3.43 ERA with similar peripherals to Bleier in 2009 . His next 271 innings in Baltimore didn't go near as well. 

For whatever that's worth.

[maybenxtyr]

20 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Pretty hard to just lucky for a year and a half to the tune of a sub 2.00 ERA,

I'm not going to say he's just been lucky, but there have been a multitude of RP's that have short unexpected bursts of success.

[HowAboutThat]

I was reading last night’s game recap at royals review. It seems that in seven of the royals losses they were tied or leading in the 7th inning, and there was much wringing of hands.

If they want to feel better they can check out our bullpen…

meanwhile, I agree that Scott is a known quantity and not a major league pitcher.

I would prefer to bring up guys with bigger question marks. If they flop, at least we know, and maybe they won’t.

[Frobby]

7 minutes ago, Philip said:

meanwhile, I agree that Scott is a known quantity and not a major league pitcher.

I would prefer to bring up guys with bigger question marks. If they flop, at least we know, and maybe they won’t.

Wow, interesting take on Scott.   I am not a big fan of wild pitchers, but this is a guy who struck out 12.8 batters per 9 innings in the majors last year.  You don’t give up easily on a guy like that.   He’s probably got the highest ceiling of any reliever in our organization if he can refine his command a bit more.  Personally, I’d prefer to have him working on that in the minors for a few months, but circumstances are compelling an all hands on deck approach.