Jump to content

Who should start Th May 2nd vs the Yankees? Bradish or Irvin?


Who should start game 4 of the Yankees on Thursday May 2nd?  

42 members have voted

  1. 1. Bradish or Irvin?



Recommended Posts

Game 4 of Yankees series. It’s one game, but one game could be the difference in the division, having to play in the WC series, and home field advantage. 

Things to consider…

 How did games 1-3 go versus the NYY?

 Should we ease Bradish back in a lower pressure spot so he’s not too amped up for his own good?

Do we play matchups and go with a LH SP in OPACY?

What happens in Irvin’s start today?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Bradish is deemed ready then he’s ready.   I’m not delaying that on some kind of hope that Cole Irvin might do better against the Yanks.  The sooner we get Bradish settled in the better.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May need to consider piggybacking these guys, rather than throwing 5 innings and turning it over to bullpen. Thus far, Hyde seems to exclusively prefer 1 inning outings from relievers so the BP is racking up appearances.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Frobby said:

Let’s see how Irvin pitches tonight.  If he throws a stinker, I’m going with Bradish.  If he throws a good game, then I need to think about it harder.  

How about if Irvin pitches a 7 inning shutout today? 😉

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going to be tough to take Irvin and Suarez out if they keep throwing shutout ball.   Bradish has to get one spot when he’s ready.  I like the idea of Suarez in a Cano-like role.   Can we really demote Irvin for Means while Irvin is on a roll and Means is looking questionable?

Irvin and Suarez have really stepped up when we needed it.   They have, arguably, outperformed our #1 and #2 starters the last two turns.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Say O! said:

May need to consider piggybacking these guys, rather than throwing 5 innings and turning it over to bullpen. Thus far, Hyde seems to exclusively prefer 1 inning outings from relievers so the BP is racking up appearances.

The O's don't have the relievers with option to shuttle back and forth like last year.  Hyde seems to like to use Akin and Baumann in 1 innings appearances even though they have shown the ability to pitch multiple innings.  Going to be too much wear and tear on high leverage guys when the O's have to many close games back to back.  Prime example is what happened to Kimbrel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Natty said:

During the broadcast today Brown said that Hyde says Bradish's next start will be vs the Yankees.

I heard him quote Hyde as saying Bradish’s next start would be in the majors. I didn’t hear him say it would be against the Yankees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Natty said:

How about if Irvin pitches a 7 inning shutout today? 😉

The reason I said:

“If he throws a stinker, I’m going with Bradish.  If he throws a good game, then I need to think about it harder.”

is because it’s Oakland.  So is Irvin really pitching well suddenly, or is it because he’s facing the second most anemic offense in MLB?  That requires some thought. 

Anyway, it sounds like the O’s already decided Bradish would pitch in the Yankees series.   So the new question it whether it’s Suárez or Irvin who leaves the rotation.  And I’m guessing Suárez gets moved to the bullpen.   
 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Frobby said:

Anyway, it sounds like the O’s already decided Bradish would pitch in the Yankees series.   So the new question it whether it’s Suárez or Irvin who leaves the rotation.  And I’m guessing Suárez gets moved to the bullpen.   
 

It could be both. Means, Suarez, and Irvin will all be lined up to pitch Friday.

Grayson tomorrow. Kremer Tuesday.  Burnes Wednesday. Bradish Thursday. Means/Suarez/Irvin Friday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.
    • What if they don’t want to be extended?
    • I don't want the O's to lose much, but I do want there to be a massive streaming deal with Amazon or some other company the O's are left out of.  This blackout nonsense is bullsh!t. 🤬
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...