I think we need to be worried about Chen.

[Mashed Potatoes]

Will Chen regain his 2005 form?

I think so. I was more confident at the start of the season, but I still put my faith in Bruce and Leo.

Well according to our stats guys he is pitching in his 2005 form (obviously he wasn't this bad), only without the luck. The DIPS showed that last year was not much different than the rest of Chen's career.

[McLovin]

I'm not worried. He's our fifth starter and he's on a one year deal. If he can't get the job done, we cut bait. I can't imagine Penn would do any worse.

I'd rather Chen show his true colors now than after we give him a 3/24 deal...

[Sports Guy]

But no one else was nearly as boisterous (the wrong word to use here, but I'll stick with it since my mind isn't functioning) about it as Bryan - therefore he should be given credit for it, based on what has happened thus far.

Well Bryan said he should not even be in the rotation. That is where he differed from everyone and no matter what Chen does, that was still wrong.

[Sports Guy]

I think that's wrong also, but it won't be wrong if he has 4 or 5 more horrible starts.

Sure it would be.

He was very good last year, had a solid spring and a solid WBC.

Nothing he had done prior to OD said he should not be in the rotation.

So no, there is nothing that says that was or will be correct.

[Sports Guy]

That's your take and my take. Byran, I guess, had a different take. I know Bryan predicted he'd be bad. I don't recall him saying whether he should be traded or whatever. I do remember that Bryan pointed to his stats as a predictor that he would stink. So far Bryan looks right. If you say, no one could have predicted this, then you are wrong. Bryan predicted this.

Give the kid credit. For now.

Again, many of us felt Chen would be much worse this year. I believe he carried a 3.8 ERA this year and many felt it would be more around 4.5 or so this year...Bryan said something in the area of 4.9(so, if he carries an ERA more around 5, that is what Bryan would be correct on more than anyone else).

But, AGAIN, the idea that Chen should not have even been in the rotation was and is wrong, no matter what happens.

Just like the DBat/JGrim trade will always be bad, no matter how DBat turns out.

[Sports Guy]

I agree with your post. Just what was Bryan's position. Did he want to trade Chen, put him in the bullpen, release him? I don't remember.

Well, i think he was with alot of us that said to trade him while his value was high BUT he also said that if he is here, that he should not be in the rotation.

Now, i did want to trade him but i also did ackowledge, as did MWeb(off of the top of my head) that his value was likely not high enough to justify trading him, meaning we would not get back that much in return.

[NewMarketSean]

Basically what it comes down to is that Chen needs to start for now because we don't have anyone else ready to fill in for him. Penn is rehabbing, Loewen is up and down, Johnson is probably still too green and no one else is good enough to start in the majors yet. Chen deserves another month of starts to get back to last year's form and if he can't do it by then, then hopefully someone will step up in the meantime. But we don't have any other options. It's going to be Chen for now.

[Three Run Homer]

Is it possible that Chen is tipping his pitches? A junkballer like Chen relies on keeping hitters off balance...if batters know what's coming then Chen comes a batting practice pitcher.

[McLovin]

Is it possible that Chen is tipping his pitches? A junkballer like Chen relies on keeping hitters off balance...if batters know what's coming then Chen comes a batting practice pitcher.

Only if the tip is 'fastball, upper middle of the plate, right in the middle of the sweet spot'.

[bryanman8]

But, AGAIN, the idea that Chen should not have even been in the rotation was and is wrong, no matter what happens.

Can I ask why?

There's this crazy idea that if someone does well for you one year, it's unthinkable to want them replaced because it's a slap in the face to them.

If you're convinced that a pitcher is not going to perform well, regardless of what he had done the year before, why do you have to put him in the rotation? To make yourself look good to the rest of the team?

It's like Al Leiter. He had a 3.21 ERA in 2004, the 10th best in the league, but a 4.84 DIPS. Being that he was close to 40, yea, I would not have even put him into my rotation for next year, and this is the guy who had the 10th best ERA in baseball. Sure enough, the Marlins gave him a pretty big contract even, and he had a 6.13 ERA.

My contention was that Bruce Chen wasn't that much different from his previous not very good self despite the very good ERA. I felt that he was much closer to a 5 ERA pitcher, and I could care less what a guy did last year when projecting my team from next year. If I think a guy is going to have an ERA near 5, I don't put him in my rotation. If you thought he'd be 4.5, that's around average and fine, but I think he's going to be much worse, and so far I've been right, but I certainly agree that it's too early too call.

I would have made Chen the long man in the pen, where he'd have been fine. If he comes away with a 4.90ish ERA this year, why wouldn't it have been wrong to save us from what was impending and do better?

[AgentOrange]

Can I ask why?

There's this crazy idea that if someone does well for you one year, it's unthinkable to want them replaced because it's a slap in the face to them.

If you're convinced that a pitcher is not going to perform well, regardless of what he had done the year before, why do you have to put him in the rotation? To make yourself look good to the rest of the team?

It's like Al Leiter. He had a 3.21 ERA in 2004, the 10th best in the league, but a 4.84 DIPS. Being that he was close to 40, yea, I would not have even put him into my rotation for next year, and this is the guy who had the 10th best ERA in baseball. Sure enough, the Marlins gave him a pretty big contract even, and he had a 6.13 ERA.

My contention was that Bruce Chen wasn't that much different from his previous not very good self despite the very good ERA. I felt that he was much closer to a 5 ERA pitcher, and I could care less what a guy did last year when projecting my team from next year. If I think a guy is going to have an ERA near 5, I don't put him in my rotation. If you thought he'd be 4.5, that's around average and fine, but I think he's going to be much worse, and so far I've been right, but I certainly agree that it's too early too call.

I would have made Chen the long man in the pen, where he'd have been fine. If he comes away with a 4.90ish ERA this year, why wouldn't it have been wrong to save us from what was impending and do better?

What is this based on?

Before the offseason, that was your intention.

Or.

The day before opening day, you make your 25 man roster show Chen in the BP?

[Sports Guy]

Can I ask why?

There's this crazy idea that if someone does well for you one year, it's unthinkable to want them replaced because it's a slap in the face to them.

If you're convinced that a pitcher is not going to perform well, regardless of what he had done the year before, why do you have to put him in the rotation? To make yourself look good to the rest of the team?

It's like Al Leiter. He had a 3.21 ERA in 2004, the 10th best in the league, but a 4.84 DIPS. Being that he was close to 40, yea, I would not have even put him into my rotation for next year, and this is the guy who had the 10th best ERA in baseball. Sure enough, the Marlins gave him a pretty big contract even, and he had a 6.13 ERA.

My contention was that Bruce Chen wasn't that much different from his previous not very good self despite the very good ERA. I felt that he was much closer to a 5 ERA pitcher, and I could care less what a guy did last year when projecting my team from next year. If I think a guy is going to have an ERA near 5, I don't put him in my rotation. If you thought he'd be 4.5, that's around average and fine, but I think he's going to be much worse, and so far I've been right, but I certainly agree that it's too early too call.

I would have made Chen the long man in the pen, where he'd have been fine. If he comes away with a 4.90ish ERA this year, why wouldn't it have been wrong to save us from what was impending and do better?

Bryan, with the money involved, your idea is just not realistic.

Chen has had one of the best ERA's in the AL since joining the Orioles and as Drungo has pointed out, he is a league average pitcher(which most of us agree on).

If you sent every league average pitcher to the BP, you would have 1-2 starters in each rotation, for the most part.

It just is not realistic.

Penn and Loewen are not quite ready yet, at least to come here and give you the production that you assume Chen gives you, which was not expected ot be as good as last year.

So, keeping Chen in the rotation TO START THE YEAR was a total no brainer and a move you HAVE to make.

Now, the best thing would have been to trade him but that didn't and wasn't going to happen, so the next best thing is put him in the rotation to start with and see how he does.

Obviously he has been bad so far and maybe he will turn that around and maybe he won't.

Personally, with so many WBC pitchers struggling so bad, i will give him until mid May- June to figure it out.

By then, Penn and/or Loewen should be ready to go and at that point, you replace him if hs struggles.

But to start the year, after the success he has had from August of 2004 until April of 2006, in the BP would be foolish.

[Sports Guy]

What is the average AL 5th starters ERA anyway?

[Tx Oriole]

Not at all. I believe he will work things out. He has Mazzone to help him. He will get it together.

[PaulFolk]

There's this crazy idea that if someone does well for you one year, it's unthinkable to want them replaced because it's a slap in the face to them.

Yes, it's a "crazy idea" to treat your players with class and respect instead of demoting them after a strong season. There would've been absolutely no justification for yanking Chen out of the rotation after he had the best ERA of the '05 O's starters. All it would've done is alienate the entire clubhouse. You try explaining that "I demoted him because I think he'll be bad" and see where that gets you. It won't get you much respect, that's for sure.

It's like Al Leiter. He had a 3.21 ERA in 2004, the 10th best in the league, but a 4.84 DIPS. Being that he was close to 40, yea, I would not have even put him into my rotation for next year, and this is the guy who had the 10th best ERA in baseball. Sure enough, the Marlins gave him a pretty big contract even, and he had a 6.13 ERA.

You keep bringing up the Al Leiter comparison with Bruce Chen. A couple more numbers to consider: 39, and 28. That's Leiter's age going into the '05 season, and Chen's age going into 2006. If you really think it's valid to make a comparison between guys more than 10 years apart in age, I don't know what to tell you.

Sports Guy is right on this one. Chen HAD to open the '06 season in the rotation after what he did in 2005, even if a decline was likely. You give him the ball unless/until he proves that he can't cut it.

To suggest that he should start the season in long relief, barring the acquisitions of five better starters, is ridiculous. No sane GM would do such a thing, unless he was trying to get fired.