The Great Tillman Debate

[Stotle]

From Jim Callis a few minutes ago on his ESPN chat:

I disagree and doubt he knows anything about the problems with Tillman's mechanics, but I thought people might want to see this.

Yeah, some of the reactions on here were absurd. Regardless of the mechanics issue, this wasn't that big of a deal.

Devil's Advocate -- Baltimore is pulling a Tampa/Price and wants to regain that year of control over Tillman by sitting him at AAA for 2 months (counteracting the clock running at the end of last year).

Not claiming this is the case. But just as people are claiming it's silly to jump all over the FO for decisions, it may be equally silly to simply take whatever comes out of a Trembley/MacPhail interview as gospel.

[mweb]

Devil's Advocate -- Baltimore is pulling a Tampa/Price and wants to regain that year of control over Tillman by sitting him at AAA for 2 months (counteracting the clock running at the end of last year).

Not claiming this is the case. But just as people are claiming it's silly to jump all over the FO for decisions, it may be equally silly to simply take whatever comes out of a Trembley/MacPhail interview as gospel.

I was good with the decision before the mechanics issue was mentioned for reasons similar to what you were saying. So I'm not taking what they say as gospel, although I tend to believe them.

[Stotle]

I was good with the decision before the mechanics issue was mentioned for reasons similar to what you were saying. So I'm not taking what they say as gospel, although I tend to believe them.

As I said, just Devil's Advocate. If mechanics aren't the issue, there are good arguments for this being the wrong move for a FO to make.

[mweb]

As I said, just Devil's Advocate. If mechanics aren't the issue, there are good arguments for this being the wrong move for a FO to make.

Sure, but I don't think there are good arguments for thinking it would be an awful move that elicits huge reactions.

[Stotle]

Sure, but I don't think there are good arguments for thinking it would be an awful move that elicits huge reactions.

Eh, you may disagree with the passioned argument, but it can still be a good argument.

We all interact with people who feel strongly about a particular issue. My college roommate now helps run his family business and has lots of strong opinions on various issues that don't affect me. I couldn't care less about most of them, and often times thinks he overreacts, but that doesn't mean there isn't a solid basis for his disgruntled stance.

I mean, we all spend time here talking about the intricacies surrounding a baseball team that has been a loser for 12 years. At some point, it's all just degrees of silly fixation, no?

[mweb]

Eh, you may disagree with the passioned argument, but it can still be a good argument.

We all interact with people who feel strongly about a particular issue. My college roommate now helps run his family business and has lots of strong opinions on various issues that don't affect me. I couldn't care less about most of them, and often times thinks he overreacts, but that doesn't mean there isn't a solid basis for his disgruntled stance.

I mean, we all spend time here talking about the intricacies surrounding a baseball team that has been a loser for 12 years. At some point, it's all just degrees of silly fixation, no?

Well this isn't an issue where one person really cares about something and the other doesn't like you example.

I'll stick with what I said in my last post. Some people who disagreed with the move were wise enough to realize it wasn't that big of a deal either way. Callis is an example from the national perspective.

[Stotle]

Well this isn't an issue where on person really cares about something and the other doesn't like you example.

I'll stick with what I said in my last post. Some people who disagreed with the move were wise enough to realize it wasn't that big of a deal either way. Callis is an example from the national perspective.

Well, I guess the tradeoff you get from having a board where you can debate every intricacy about your favorite team is that it's going to attract some strong personalities.

I'm not disagree with your general thoughts here, I just don't honestly see much difference between:

1. This is a terrible move -- makes zero sense to send Tillman to AAA where he won't be able to work on anything; and

2. Both pitched about the same last year and Hernandez had the better spring training, so he should get the first shot at the rotation.

I don't think either is really showing a strong engagement with the intricacies of roster management or, in particular, player development. And there were a lot more people stating the latter.

But, it's not a big deal (as you say).

[mweb]

Well, I guess the tradeoff you get from having a board where you can debate every intricacy about your favorite team is that it's going to attract some strong personalities.

I'm not disagree with your general thoughts here, I just don't honestly see much difference between:

1. This is a terrible move -- makes zero sense to send Tillman to AAA where he won't be able to work on anything; and

2. Both pitched about the same last year and Hernandez had the better spring training, so he should get the first shot at the rotation.

I don't think either is really showing a strong engagement with the intricacies of roster management or, in particular, player development. And there were a lot more people stating the latter.

But, it's not a big deal (as you say).

Interesting, I see a big difference between those two statements. You're right about what you say following your examples.

[osfan83]

Eh, you may disagree with the passioned argument, but it can still be a good argument.

We all interact with people who feel strongly about a particular issue. My college roommate now helps run his family business and has lots of strong opinions on various issues that don't affect me. I couldn't care less about most of them, and often times thinks he overreacts, but that doesn't mean there isn't a solid basis for his disgruntled stance.

I mean, we all spend time here talking about the intricacies surrounding a baseball team that has been a loser for 12 years. At some point, it's all just degrees of silly fixation, no?

Very well said. The difference between DH and CT in the rotation may be the difference of winning 72 or 74 games this year one way or the other, and probably has less of an effect on wins for 2011 and 2012. I'll start worring about this stuff the year after we fall short of the playoffs by a game or two.

[Sports Guy]

Very well said. The difference between DH and CT in the rotation may be the difference of winning 72 or 74 games this year one way or the other, and probably has less of an effect on wins for 2011 and 2012. I'll start worring about this stuff the year after we fall short of the playoffs by a game or two.

Huh? Tillman is far more likely to be a fixture in the rotation for years to come.

The players that are going to be part of the long term need to be gaining experience for that time.

How many times have we heard people talking about how great it is that players go their feet wet last year and that they are more ready now because of it?

Same thing applies.

[osfan83]

Huh? Tillman is far more likely to be a fixture in the rotation for years to come.

The players that are going to be part of the long term need to be gaining experience for that time.

How many times have we heard people talking about how great it is that players go their feet wet last year and that they are more ready now because of it?

Same thing applies.

And I think Tillman's feet will be plenty wet by the end of this season. Plus I'm not so sure that DH won't be part of the long term. When Guthrie is sporting a 6.00 ERA on May 15th, Tillman will be in the rotation, the team will win 74 games and Tillman won't be any worse off this time next year as we gear up for 2011.

[mweb]

And I think Tillman's feet will be plenty wet by the end of this season. Plus I'm not so sure that DH won't be part of the long term. When Guthrie is sporting a 6.00 ERA on May 15th, Tillman will be in the rotation, the team will win 74 games and Tillman won't be any worse off this time next year as we gear up for 2011.

Yep, that makes total sense. Not sure that Guthrie will struggle that much, but a starting spot will very likely open up somewhat early in the season.

[Icterus galbula]

This has to be a classic hangout thread by now, yes?

If someone wanted to get a sense of the hangout, they should read this thread. Its got a little bit of everything, good and bad.

[tilgaham]

Will keeping him in AAA have any effect on Tillman's future FA eligibility?

[Mackus]

Will keeping him in AAA have any effect on Tillman's future FA eligibility?

If we don't call him up until mid June, we'll get an extra year of service time (assuming he doesn't spend any more time in the minors once he's called up).

He'd have to have 181 total days of service or less to be at only 0.181 years as opposed to 1.000 years after 2010. He had 68 days of service last year, so if he gets 113 days of service or less this year, we'll get an extra season before he's a free agent. Oct 3rd is the last day of the season, so 113 days before that is June 13th. So if we call him up on June 13th or later, we'll get an extra year. June 12th or earlier, and his status won't be affected.