Reliever query: Castro vs Armstrong vs Sulser

[HowAboutThat]

I just checked some stats. Armstrong has 6 innings, Sulser 7.1  and Castro 7.1(Lakins at 7.2 actually has more than either of them)
Sulser Castro and Armstrong have All pitched well in high-pressure situations and have been used in garbage time rarely if ever. 
I thought I had a preference, but I’m  not sure I do.

Which guy do you prefer?

[accinfo]

6 minutes ago, Philip said:

I just checked some stats. Armstrong has 6 innings, Sulser 7.1  and Castro 7.1(Lakins at 7.2 actually has more than either of them)
Sulser Castro and Armstrong have All pitched well in high-pressure situations and have been used in garbage time rarely if ever. 
I thought I had a preference, but I’m  not sure I do.

Which guy do you prefer?

Castro has the best stuff in my humble opinion.  I think Sulser and Armstrong can be decent setup guys but I think Castro would be my closer.

[wildcard]

Sulser has ice in his veins.  And he learned from giving up that homer to Judge that he has to pick who he pitches to.  He pitched around Soto tonight which was smart and shows he is learning.   Palmer talks about picking who you pitch to all the time.

Castro has great stuff.  He is learning to control that stuff. The new delivery helps.    Sulser is a little better because you can bring him in with runners on and he will get out of it.   Castro needs to start an inning to be effective at this point.  That may change as he gets more experience.

Armstrong is not as good as the other two.  He gave up two runs earlier this year on a bad throw to a base,  And tonight he relieved Scott with a runner on 2nd and one out and let the runner score.   The scoring credits the run to Scott but it should go to Armstrong for  not  closing out the inning.

By the way Tanner Scott is on the verge of being  a monster reliever.  He has the stuff and is now starting to be able to control it.   He didn't field the bunt well tonight but the has been pitching well.  Its hard to find lefties with his stuff.

[SilverRocket]

I like how it was handled today. Go for a 2-inning save by default, but if the pitch count gets high or he's ineffective, go to the next one.

[Sports Guy]

Armstrong pretty easily.

[linedrive]

When there's no clear closer, or the closer has been ineffective, I'm all for a bullpen by committee. 

[wildcard]

4 minutes ago, linedrive said:

When there's no clear closer, or the closer has been ineffective, I'm all for a bullpen by committee. 

Hyde said that he would have kept Sulser in for a two inning save if he had not have thrown 30 pitches in the eighth.   In Hyde's mind Sulser is his closer.

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Hyde said that he would have kept Sulser in for a two inning save if he had not have thrown 30 pitches in the eighth.   In Hyde's mind Sulser is his closer.

Disappointing.

[linedrive]

6 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Hyde said that he would have kept Sulser in for a two inning save if he had not have thrown 30 pitches in the eighth.   In Hyde's mind Sulser is his closer.

I don't know if Hyde has made up his mind on a closer, but I see no reason to commit to anyone at this point. Not unless someone clearly earns it.

[HowAboutThat]

10 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Hyde said that he would have kept Sulser in for a two inning save if he had not have thrown 30 pitches in the eighth.   In Hyde's mind Sulser is his closer.

That’s my feeling as well, although I think, and I have said many times, that a designated closer is silly( Especially with this team for Pete’s sakes) my original preference was for Sulser, but Armstrong has done well(defense aside) and Castro has shown himself to be no lightweight( haha joke)

But Hyde seems to prefer Sulser. I’m wondering why we aren’t seeing more of Givens, though.

[wildcard]

2 minutes ago, linedrive said:

I don't know if Hyde has made up his mind on a closer, but I see no reason to commit to anyone at this point. Not unless someone clearly earns it.

Sulser has saved 3 of 4 changes.   Hyde held him out of games waiting for a save situation.   Sulser had not pitched in 5 days because there was not a save situation.   Hyde talked about it in to presser tonight.  Hyde's actions shows he has picked Sulser as his closer.

[wildcard]

5 hours ago, Philip said:

That’s my feeling as well, although I think, and I have said many times, that a designated closer is silly( Especially with this team for Pete’s sakes) my original preference was for Sulser, but Armstrong has done well(defense aside) and Castro has shown himself to be no lightweight( haha joke)

But Hyde seems to prefer Sulser. I’m wondering why we aren’t seeing more of Givens, though.

Givens velo in down.    

[Sports Guy]

Who cares who the closer is.  It’s a relatively meaningless position although it does get in the minds of some.  By that I mean, I want my best relievers pitching in the highest leverage situations.  That is not always the 9th inning.  I would rather Givens not be in that role, as it seemed to get in his head last year.

He’s a tradable asset and I want him performing in the best role for him as possible.

[Enjoy Terror]

Remember when Buck didn’t believe in the save rule but only the win rule?

Then proceeded to blow playoff games because he was overly concerned with the save rule?

Ah those were great times.

[linedrive]

15 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Sulser has saved 3 of 4 changes.   Hyde held him out of games waiting for a save situation.   Sulser had not pitched in 5 days because there was not a save situation.   Hyde talked about it in to presser tonight.  Hyde's actions shows he has picked Sulser as his closer.

Don't get me wrong. I like Sulser. And I trust Hyde's judgment. But I see no reason to commit to a closer. Not unless doing so turns him into a valuable trade commodity.