I’ve Come Around on 13 Pitchers

[Dr. FLK]

13 pitchers is nonsense. If you build an effective bench, it allows you to use players in a way to maximize their talent and hide their weaknesses. it gives you pinch hitters. You can play the hot hand. You can solid platoons. A 13th pitcher does nothing but give you an extra mop-up guy. It's not like we're deciding between Chris Ray, Sherril, or both...it's a decision between keeping one mediocre AAAA pitcher or 2. Year after year we refuse to build an effective bench, and instead we assemble a large, ineffective bullpen. I keep hoping that some year they will learn...but they don't.

[Moose Milligan]

This is a mindset and not a reason. 3-man bench is actually feasible provided you have the right personnel. You can say it's not for you, or not your preference, but that doesn't mean it's flat-out wrong. It does mean you can't carry one-trick positional ponies, which goes against what many teams do. I question why you need 13 arms, generally, but you can certainly do it and win in the process.

Great post that got overlooked.

Rep to Stotle.

[Sports Guy]

Montanez would be the 7th OF on this team.

But he could be a RH DH, especially against lefties.

It would allow you to sit Huff and Scott and play Wigginton and Montanez.

And if you want to rest BRob and start Scott at DH, you can put Freel at second and Montanez is your backup OFer, that way you don't have to bring BRob into the game after you have already rested him.

It is about tryign to keep your guys fresh and giving you options later in the game.

[Moose Milligan]

I also find it interesting that so many people love the whole "There's no such thing as too much pitching" and "Can't have enough pitching depth" mantras, yet crap their pants at the thought of having an additional bullpen arm.

Seriously, this is so overhyped.

[Sports Guy]

I also find it interesting that so many people love the whole "There's no such thing as too much pitching" and "Can't have enough pitching depth" mantras, yet crap their pants at the thought of having an additional bullpen arm.

Seriously, this is so overhyped.

Those matras are crap if the pitching isn't quality pitching...We aren't talking about holding onto quality.

[Moose Milligan]

Those matras are crap if the pitching isn't quality pitching...We aren't talking about holding onto quality.

So you'd be alright with 13 quality arms?

[Anonymous]

13 pitchers is nonsense. If you build an effective bench, it allows you to use players in a way to maximize their talent and hide their weaknesses. it gives you pinch hitters. You can play the hot hand. You can solid platoons. A 13th pitcher does nothing but give you an extra mop-up guy. It's not like we're deciding between Chris Ray, Sherril, or both...it's a decision between keeping one mediocre AAAA pitcher or 2. Year after year we refuse to build an effective bench, and instead we assemble a large, ineffective bullpen. I keep hoping that some year they will learn...but they don't.

Of course it's nonsense to keep a 13th pitcher, particularly if your pen features several long guys -- as will likely (hopefully) be the case for us this year ... IF you're solely focused on 2009. I'm not.

[Anonymous]

Let's just say that you are vastly overrating the "bubble guys" and leave it at that.

Most of these guys would make it through waivers and the ones who don't, you can easily replace.

I provided a list of pitchers who are younger and likely have better upside than all of these guys and that is just for the pen.

So, since you are talking about players who aren't good, I am inclined with going with what is best for the team right now.

If Freel or Wigginton miraculously show they can handle SS 20+ games a year, then keep Montanez.

But he could be a RH DH, especially against lefties.

It would allow you to sit Huff and Scott and play Wigginton and Montanez.

And if you want to rest BRob and start Scott at DH, you can put Freel at second and Montanez is your backup OFer, that way you don't have to bring BRob into the game after you have already rested him.

It is about tryign to keep your guys fresh and giving you options later in the game.

Montanez will likely be a better player and more valuable contributor to the big league club in 2010 if he spends a full year at Norfolk, playing full time and concentrating primarily on his LF defense, rather than serving this year as a part-time DH with the Orioles. Much as I dig Lou, this is what's best both for his development and for the team long-term.

[Anonymous]

Well, none of those guys have to be cut anyway.

Hill, Pauley, Guthrie, Uehera and Hendrickson

Baez, Walker, Penn, JJ, Sherrill, Ray, Sarfate

That's 12 and probably the most likely 12.

So, Penn, Hill and Pauley stay, as do the 3 vets.

Keeping a 13th would mean keeping another scrub...which is a bad idea.

The reason we have Pauley is because we were willing last year to endure the short-term sacrifice of keeping a Rule 5 guy, whom we then cashed in for someone with potential future value. Same concept here -- short-term pain, maybe (and I'm not even convinced of that), for future gain.

[sector7g]

We carried 13 pitchers for some time last year and guys like Aquino and later McCory spent weeks sitting around doing nothing so I really hope we've learnt from that.

We're also effectively going to be running two platoons this year, Trembleys bench management is going to be a lot more important and he'll need the extra body.

[DrungoHazewood]

I also find it interesting that so many people love the whole "There's no such thing as too much pitching" and "Can't have enough pitching depth" mantras, yet crap their pants at the thought of having an additional bullpen arm.

Seriously, this is so overhyped.

I think you can have too much pitching, especially when it's stashing a 13th arm in the back of the pen to pitch twice a month while handcuffing your offensive options in the late innings of every close game. Not to mention crushing your platoon options. SG is right in at least one sense - the 13th pitcher on any staff is almost certainly going to be a AAAA guy who every team has five or 10 of, or a project.

I find it interesting that all those folks who don't believe the majors is a tryout camp don't have a problem using one of 25 valuable roster spots as a hobby for bored coaches trying to turn guys like Alfredo Simon into real pitchers.

[Stotle]

I think you can have too much pitching, especially when it's stashing a 13th arm in the back of the pen to pitch twice a month while handcuffing your offensive options in the late innings of every close game. Not to mention crushing your platoon options. SG is right in at least one sense - the 13th pitcher on any staff is almost certainly going to be a AAAA guy who every team has five or 10 of, or a project.

I find it interesting that all those folks who don't believe the majors is a tryout camp don't have a problem using one of 25 valuable roster spots as a hobby for bored coaches trying to turn guys like Alfredo Simon into real pitchers.

I guess I can't get too fired-up without seeing what the actual 25 man roster is. As I said before, you can certainly build an effective team with 13 pitchers (though BAL may not be set to do that with their current personnel). Likewise, if you determine there is an arm you want to see, you can make due with one less bench spot if you have the right UTL guys.

If BAL is indeed stashing an arm to use twice a month, I agree it's silly. If all 13 arms will be used, I have no real problem with it.

[Sports Guy]

So you'd be alright with 13 quality arms?

No...Chances are that isn't going to happen at once anyway.

[Anonymous]

I guess I can't get too fired-up without seeing what the actual 25 man roster is. As I said before, you can certainly build an effective team with 13 pitchers (though BAL may not be set to do that with their current personnel). Likewise, if you determine there is an arm you want to see, you can make due with one less bench spot if you have the right UTL guys.

If BAL is indeed stashing an arm to use twice a month, I agree it's silly. If all 13 arms will be used, I have no real problem with it.

The bolded statement is eminently reasonable. The rest, I believe, is 2009-centric. This is a philosophical divide between me and a small number of other posters here vs. the clear majority that sees this almost solely in 2009 terms (with a slight nod to SG for couching his opposition to the notion not SOLELY on the basis of a 2009 view, but also based on his unshakeable conviction that every pitcher beyond # 12 is worthless).

It's just fascinating to me that so many of the posters (not necessarily Stotle) who don't really care how this plays out beyond 2009 are the same ones who are so anxious to make other moves for the future (like trading BRob for prospects) that indicate an interest in building for the future. I'm left massively confused by this bifurcated perspective, if I can talk dirty for a moment.

[Sports Guy]

The bolded statement is eminently reasonable. The rest, I believe, is 2009-centric. This is a philosophical divide between me and a small number of other posters here vs. the clear majority that sees this almost solely in 2009 terms (with a slight nod to SG for couching his opposition to the notion not SOLELY on the basis of a 2009 view, but also based on his unshakeable conviction that every pitcher beyond # 12 is worthless).

It's just fascinating to me that so many of the posters (not necessarily Stotle) who don't really care how this plays out beyond 2009 are the same ones who are so anxious to make other moves for the future (like trading BRob for prospects) that indicate an interest in building for the future. I'm left massively confused by this bifurcated perspective, if I can talk dirty for a moment.

LOL...Why you don't get this, i just don't know.

Let's try this one more time...The guys you are advocating keeping, ARE NOT GOOD. We have younger, better, higher upside guys for the long term.

So, this idea of worrying about the future here is bs because these guys aren't going to be apart of the future.

You haven't even responded to the point that most of these guys would slip through waivers, although that is probably because you think these guys are so good that teams will line up for their services.