Would You Trade Matusz and Tillman or Arietta for Cahill?

[Sports Guy]

I think we're all sophisticated enough to know that Cahill's record is not that important. But yes, I think just looking at Cahill's age, the progress he has made in a year, his ERA and just watching him the couple of times he has faced the Orioles you can see he already is a pretty good pitcher. I think he spots his fastball better than Matusz, for example. His strikeout of Markakis was a thing of beauty.

Put it this way, Cahill is showing he already is a very good pitcher at a very young age. Matusz has the potential to be that good or perhaps better, but do you take the bird in the hand over the one in the bush?

Put Matusz in Oakland and Cahill in Baltimore, who do you think you would like more then?

[clapdiddy]

Put Matusz in Oakland and Cahill in Baltimore, who do you think you would like more then?

This kind of goes back to something I brought up in a thread a while ago.

Why is it so hard for this organization to bring up "polished" players? We seem to have a bunch of highly-touted pitching prospects who always have command issues and just don't know how to pitch.

[Frobby]

To be clear, you are making those moves if you are the Marlins/Royals GM?

I'm not sure if you are asking me about trading away your own guy, or whether you are asking me a question that has to do with finances. Assuming it is the former, my answer is that to me the difference between Strasburg and Johnson, and the difference between Lincecum and Greinke, is significant enough that I'd trade my own guy to obtain the guy I think is better. I don't consider those calls that close. But that's just my opinion.

[Mackus]

I don't think only watching how a pitcher does against the Orioles is a good way to gauge how good of a pitcher that guy is.

Cahill is really good, and him for Matusz would be an interesting discussion. They are very close, and Cahill is certainly ahead at least in terms of MLB production so far.

This is not directly about this comparison, but a general stance that needs to be followed:

A month ago many people thought that Arrieta was our best pitching prospect after his great debut. Now he's struggled since then. Making judgements based on such infinitesimally small exposures is the true sign of someone who doesn't understand baseball. I bet OldFan thought that Jeff Fiorentino was destined for the Hall of Fame after he started 5-for-5 or whatever it was. Let's see these guys for a while before making decisions on them.

[KurtCDavidson]

I don't like wading into stuff like this, but Matusz' contributions this year have been almost criminally under appreciated.

Matusz: 1.3 WAR

Cahill: 1.2 WAR

If Matusz didn't throw another pitch all year, he will have been worth $5MM for us.

If he doesn't improve AT ALL, we are talking about roughly a Top 50 pitcher in MLB as a ROOKIE.

[crowmst3k!]

This team doesn't need Cahill, they'll have Britton in the rotation soon enough.

[YardBirds13]

I don't think only watching how a pitcher does against the Orioles is a good way to gauge how good of a pitcher that guy is.

Cahill is really good, and him for Matusz would be an interesting discussion. They are very close, and Cahill is certainly ahead at least in terms of MLB production so far.

This is not directly about this comparison, but a general stance that needs to be followed:

A month ago many people thought that Arrieta was our best pitching prospect after his great debut. Now he's struggled since then. Making judgements based on such infinitesimally small exposures is the true sign of someone who doesn't understand baseball. I bet OldFan thought that Jeff Fiorentino was destined for the Hall of Fame after he started 5-for-5 or whatever it was. Let's see these guys for a while before making decisions on them.

Par for the course, I don't really need to respond, except to say "Mackus is right."

This is really a ridiculously maddening thread.

Look, Cahill vs. Matusz is an interesting discussion. I can see going either way. SG did a nice job arguing our guys case, and I think, gun to my head, I would keep Matusz rather than deal him straight up for Cahill. But, again, there is an argument to be made for that.

Dealing Matusz AND another one of our young arms for Cahill would be so stupid I can't even believe we are talking about it. That is ridiculous. Matusz and Cahill are close enough that to pull off a deal, you should be throwing in a D+ prospect, not freaking Chris Tillman or Jake Arrieta.

And why has no one talked about Old Fan suggesting we trade Matusz, Tilllman or Arrieta and Wieters for Cahill and KURT SUZUKI!!!! That might be the most insane thing he has ever posted, and as we all know, that is saying something.

[Stotle]

I'm not sure if you are asking me about trading away your own guy, or whether you are asking me a question that has to do with finances. Assuming it is the former, my answer is that to me the difference between Strasburg and Johnson, and the difference between Lincecum and Greinke, is significant enough that I'd trade my own guy to obtain the guy I think is better. I don't consider those calls that close. But that's just my opinion.

Sorry I wasn't clear -- not a loaded question. I'd have to look at the numbers to be sure (going off of my viewing), but it seems like with the Johnson/Strasburg combo you prefer the stuff, even if Johnson has a longer track record and better recent numbers (of course SS is limited in sample size).

With Lincy, it seems like you prefer the production of Lincecum, though Grienke has arguably comparable (if not a tick better) raw stuff. Greinke throws a little harder with more movement on his fastball. Timmy's curve is a bit deeper North/South but Greinke has almost an equal amount of depth tilted on the access across two planes. Greinke's slider is harder with more depth/break.

Now, maybe when I look up the numbers it's more clear-cut, but I don't see the questions as being as simple to answer as do you. And my gut is that I'd have a hard time giving up "my guy" (the guy in my system) for the other, considering I don't see a gigantic difference either way.

[Sports Guy]

Sorry I wasn't clear -- not a loaded question. I'd have to look at the numbers to be sure (going off of my viewing), but it seems like with the Johnson/Strasburg combo you prefer the stuff, even if Johnson has a longer track record and better recent numbers (of course SS is limited in sample size).

With Lincy, it seems like you prefer the production of Lincecum, though Grienke has arguably comparable (if not a tick better) raw stuff. Greinke throws a little harder with more movement on his fastball. Timmy's curve is a big deeper North/South but Greinke has almost an equal amount of depth tilted on the access across two planes. Greinke's slider is harder with more depth/break.

Now, maybe when I look up the numbers it's more clear-cut, but I don't see the questions as being as simple to answer as do you. And my gut is that I'd have a hard time giving up "my guy" (the guy in my system) for the other, considering I don't see a gigantic difference either way.

If you were to put Lincecum in the AL and in KC and you put Greinke in pitchers paradise, what is the difference then?

[El Gordo]

I think Matusz would be a much better SP if he didn't feel like he had to pitch a shutout every time out, and if he had confidence in his defense.

[Frobby]

I think Matusz would be a much better SP if he didn't feel like he had to pitch a shutout every time out, and if he had confidence in his defense.

I think he'd be a much better SP if he did pitch a shutout every time out!

While there may be some truth in what you say, I'm tired of making excuses for our players. I think Matusz's big problem is that his fastball isn't that fast and his command of it isn't that good. Frankly, I think he looked better at the end of last year than he has looked at any time this season. But, there's still a half-season to go.

[Frobby]

Sorry I wasn't clear -- not a loaded question. I'd have to look at the numbers to be sure (going off of my viewing), but it seems like with the Johnson/Strasburg combo you prefer the stuff, even if Johnson has a longer track record and better recent numbers (of course SS is limited in sample size).

With Lincy, it seems like you prefer the production of Lincecum, though Grienke has arguably comparable (if not a tick better) raw stuff. Greinke throws a little harder with more movement on his fastball. Timmy's curve is a bit deeper North/South but Greinke has almost an equal amount of depth tilted on the access across two planes. Greinke's slider is harder with more depth/break.

Now, maybe when I look up the numbers it's more clear-cut, but I don't see the questions as being as simple to answer as do you. And my gut is that I'd have a hard time giving up "my guy" (the guy in my system) for the other, considering I don't see a gigantic difference either way.

To be honest, you've probably watched these guys pitch and have thought about their "stuff," etc. a lot more than I have. With Strasburg, I just think there's a reason why he was the no. 1 overall pick, and why he has racked up a zillion strikeouts already. I honestly don't know if there's another pitcher I wouldn't trade to get him. As to Lincecum/Greinke, I just feel that Lincecum's performance has been very consistent from the day he stepped onto a major league field, and Greinke has been a bit more up and down. Lincecum strikes out more guys and gives up fewer hits, that's enough for me.

[Hank Scorpio]

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/blog?name=olney_buster&id=5347974

The question is: Is it sustainable?

Why A's starter Trevor Cahill beat the Orioles, from Puneet Nanda of ESPN Stats & Information: Hitters were 0-for-8 against off-speed pitches; 0-15 over last two starts. Hitters were 4-for-16 against fastballs (.211 BA for the season is second among AL starters). He kept over half of his pitches down in the zone, inducing hitters to go 1-for-12 (3-32 over last three starts). Hitters were 0-for-10 when they reached two strikes, 0-for-23 over last two starts.

Here's a list of lowest opponent batting averages versus the fastball this year:

1. Trevor Cahill: .208

2. Javier Vazquez: .211

3. Armando Galarraga: .214

4. Colby Lewis: .216

5. David Price: .216

[Stotle]

If you were to put Lincecum in the AL and in KC and you put Greinke in pitchers paradise, what is the difference then?

Fair question. I do not know the answer.

[cindyluvsbrady]

I think I would. This kid is young and has nasty stuff. Other than Strasburg he is the most impressive pitcher I have seen at such a young age. Now this is what a young potential "ace" looks like. We don't have anyone that good in our organization. Sorry.

I say NO!!!!!!!!!!