Baez to be tried as starter?

[Elston Gunnn]

Andy McPhail is obviously only a GM because of an incredible series of lucky events. How does he continuously get out-thought by even lowly Internet discussion board dwellers? It's shameful. I'd like to see Peter Angelos give an OH dweller a shot to run the team - you know, like in "Rocky" when a regular guy off the street gets a shot and ends up being better than the "pro". Expose all these fancy-pants guys who have pro sports GM jobs falling into their laps as frauds! It's only a matter of time that pro sports teams realize the error of their ways and tap into the Internet discussion brain trust. It's inevitable - just like the soon-to-be-announced mastery of perpetual motion.

[Sports Guy]

Well, what ARE you saying then?

You're acting like MacPhail has just checked off his offseason to do list because Danyz Baez would like to be stretched out as a starter.

You're talking as if you know how the entire offseason is going to play out because MacPhail didn't respond with, "Are you crazy? You're horrible. You'll be lucky to even make the team, you old, washed up, waste of space has been."

I was very clear...IF we go to ST and the idea is still there to try him as a starter, it tells me that AM didn't do a good job getting starters here and increasing organizational depth...So, he will have done a bad job.

[Sports Guy]

Its just so amusing...Over the past year or so, anytime Baez's name was even mentioned, people would cringe...the first thing out of their mouth was, god why did we sign him.

Now, AM doesn't shut the door on the possibility of trying him as a starter and people think it is a good idea.

Amazing.

[McNulty]

Amazing.

Well, we agree on this at least.

[Crazysilver03]

I was very clear...IF we go to ST and the idea is still there to try him as a starter, it tells me that AM didn't do a good job getting starters here and increasing organizational depth...So, he will have done a bad job.

What if we do sign two starters but still try Baez as a starter, is MacPhail lazy then.

Right now, our starting options for 2009 are Guthrie, Cabrera, Burres, Bass, Waters, Simon, Penn, Olson, and Liz.

Even if we add two starters, we are still looking at a pretty poor bunch of candidates that will most likely not include Cabrera and Burres heading into 2009.

[Crazysilver03]

Its just so amusing...Over the past year or so, anytime Baez's name was even mentioned, people would cringe...the first thing out of their mouth was, god why did we sign him.

Now, AM doesn't shut the door on the possibility of trying him as a starter and people think it is a good idea.

Amazing.

Oh I agree. I wish Baez was never signed.

But we are stuck with him so we might as well try to maximize his value.

[Hank Scorpio]

If Tillman, Arrieta and Matusz had a legitimate shot to make the team out of spring training, then I might have a different opinion on this.

We are in no position to laugh anyone off at this point. To do so would be irresponsible, just as COUNTING on Baez to be effective as a starter would be responsible.

If you think MacPhail is COUNTING on Baez to be an effective starter, then you're a friggin' space cadet, period.

[Sports Guy]

What if we do sign two starters but still try Baez as a starter, is MacPhail lazy then.

Right now, our starting options for 2009 are Guthrie, Cabrera, Burres, Bass, Waters, Simon, Penn, Olson, and Liz.

Even if we add two starters, we are still looking at a pretty poor bunch of candidates that will most likely not include Cabrera and Burres heading into 2009.

Yes because it means that he didn't acquire more depth...Because it means that he didn't get the right people in here to develop what we have and make it better.

I am actually still waiting for a good answer why this should be tried.

So far, we have these:

1) What is the harm in trying?

2) Starting pitching depth.

In regards to the first one, there is no harm is trying but that doesn't mean you should. There isn't harm in trying many things with different players on the team, that doesn't mean it should happen.

In regards to the second one, there are tons of players ahead of him who should get the innings and chance as a starter before Baez.

So please, someone, anyone..give me a good reason why this should be tried.

If this idea was suggested before this little article came out, people on here would have laughed at it...There is no way people would have defended this as a good idea.

[Sports Guy]

If Tillman, Arrieta and Matusz had a legitimate shot to make the team out of spring training, then I might have a different opinion on this.

We are in no position to laugh anyone off at this point. To do so would be irresponsible, just as COUNTING on Baez to be effective as a starter would be responsible.

If you think MacPhail is COUNTING on Baez to be an effective starter, then you're a friggin' space cadet, period.

BTW, this should shoot down your thought of JJ as a starter IMO.

IF this is attempted, it is because the back end is crowded and they won't be moving JJ.

[Hank Scorpio]

BTW, this should shoot down your thought of JJ as a starter IMO.

IF this is attempted, it is because the back end is crowded and they won't be moving JJ.

The back end will definitely be crowded with Ray, Hoey and Sherrill all back plus Liz possibly reporting to ST as a reliever.

Whatever, keep JJ as a reliever... I honestly don't care if the starting pitching is good. See if Baez is the joke you think he is, and if he is (and he very well may be) you punt him b/c there likely won't be any room for him.

The point is that you have to wait and see how the rest of the offseason plays out before you say, "Well, we have too many other reasonable, proven options to audition for the rotation."

Right now, even including Liz and Olson, we don't have that luxury.

[Sports Guy]

The back end will definitely be crowded with Ray, Hoey and Sherrill all back plus Liz possibly reporting to ST as a reliever.

Whatever, keep JJ as a reliever... I honestly don't care if the starting pitching is good. See if Baez is the joke you think he is, and if he is (and he very well may be) you punt him b/c there likely won't be any room for him.

The point is that you have to wait and see how the rest of the offseason plays out before you say, "Well, we have too many other reasonable, proven options to audition for the rotation."

Right now, even including Liz and Olson, we don't have that luxury.

We have enough options now that Baez shouldn't even be considered an option.

He threw 165 innings in 2002...He hasn't thrown more than 75 innings in any other season.

He is now 31...He is coming off of a major arm injury and he hasn't been good since 2005.

How on earth can anyone say this should even be tried?

[NewMarketSean]

Hey, I don't blame the guy. He sees the rotation we had last season. He probably thinks he can be better than most of them.

He's wrong.

Gotta love Baez. He came here in 2007 and wanted to be a closer. He stunk as a reliever. Now he wants to be a starter. He'll stink again as a reliever.

Baez won't be on this team come May.

[mweb]

Well, what ARE you saying then?

You're acting like MacPhail has just checked off his offseason to do list because Danyz Baez would like to be stretched out as a starter.

You're talking as if you know how the entire offseason is going to play out because MacPhail didn't respond with, "Are you crazy? You're horrible. You'll be lucky to even make the team, you old, washed up, waste of space has been."

Great series of posts.

As you've said multiple times, this was not AM's idea, nor is it something he's counting on whatsoever. Anyone who is presenting it otherwise is just out to bash AM.

Regardless of whether AM does a good job or not this offseason, we're likely to go into ST with at least 1 starting spot up for grabs. So if Baez can somehow be an effective starter, great, otherwise, no harm done. Don't see any reason for a debate here.

[Sports Guy]

Great series of posts.

As you've said multiple times, this was not AM's idea, nor is it something he's counting on whatsoever. Anyone who is presenting it otherwise is just out to bash AM.

Regardless of whether AM does a good job or not this offseason, we're likely to go into ST with at least 1 starting spot up for grabs. So if Baez can somehow be an effective starter, great, otherwise, no harm done. Don't see any reason for a debate here.

The idea that AM didn't just shoot it down is my issue.

There is no way this should even be a consideration.

[Anonymous]

Even the mere suggestion of trying this is beyond stupid.

The idea is horrendous.

It will never work and he is more likely to get hurt than to accomplish the feat.

ZERO CHANCE of this working!

Get the young guys the innings and work Baez back in the way he is going to be used...as a reliever.

If young guys getting insufficient innings is the essence of your argument against Baez, why would you want to give him ANY innings?