Morrow to start next week versus Yankees
DMZ · August 26, 2008 at 6:02 pm · Filed Under Mariners
w00t!
Once rosters expand, it is on. I would love to see a Joba v Morrow matchup just for the “here’s a couple guys who’ll be facing off in the 2012 ALCS” angle.
Hilarious quote from that article:
”He’s a great late-inning reliever,” one AL scout said this week. ”Why would you risk that to make him a starter? I don’t see it.”
You don’t, really?
Of the top, say, thirty pitchers in terms of value contributed to their teams last year, how many were starters? I count thirty.
But maybe this AL scout has a point. Babe Ruth was a pretty decent pitcher. I still don’t understand why they converted him to a full-time position player.
Comments
20 Responses to “Morrow to start next week versus Yankees”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Let me guess: the scout works for the Mariners.
And by AL scout they mean Lincoln/Armstong.
That AL scout is Miguel Batista
Wow, look how many people already beat me to the “Hey, at least there’s one team in the league that’s dumber than us – oh, wait, maybe not….”
And by AL scout they mean Lincoln/Armstong.
That’s not entirely fair. If HowChuck wield as much power as we assume they do, surely they had a hand in Morrow being sent to Tacoma to get him stretched out.
Yeah, a year and a half late.
When we signed him we had trouble in the bullpen and they already had a rotation so they had no room for him in it and so they sent him to the pen and he has done really well in there.
“When we signed him we had trouble in the bullpen and they already had a rotation so they had no room for him in it and so they sent him to the pen and he has done really well in there.”
Uhhhh…. Really? Our starting pitchers with the most innings from ’06 were Meche, Felix, Washburn, Moyer and Piniero. Turning Morrow into a starter would’ve helped quite a bit. Imagine if he was able to start right now.
The Chef might not be on the team.
Who do you project as the Mariners closer in 2009 and beyond ? I accept the premise by the writers that Morrow has great potential as a starter. But I am curious as to whether or not Morrow is more valuable in the pen, if JJ Putz is no longer a viable option as closer. Please note that I included the word “IF” in my last sentence. I think it’s fair to question the effectiveness of Putz moving forward.
Doesn’t matter. Closers are a dime a dozen. Just look at the M’s of the last couple years. Wheee, we’re doomed, no closer, hey, look, we found a closer, let’s overpay him hugely, oh no, he’s injured, hey, it’s another closer…
Fair enough, I can’t argue with your logic.
The scout has the same mindset as a vast majority of people in baseball…the same people who think that a pitcher who throws 80 late innings is somehow more valuable than a starter who throws 200+. The same people who think saves are important, the same people who think that K-rod having 50 saves should earn him Cy Young consideration.
80 high leverage innings could be more valuable than 200. Unfortunately, no one uses their closers that effectively, since *most* managers pitch to the save statistic, meaning 10-15 of those 80 innings occur with a 3 run lead and are essentially valueless.
Jim Caple (whom ESPN ostensibly retain for his humor, but who contributes more wisdom than most of their ‘straight’ analysts) wrote a nice little attack on the concept of the “proven closer” earlier this year. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=caple/080805
and our friend Jonah Keri backed it up for good measure
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=krod/080805&sportCat=mlb
Okay, it’s preaching to the choir…
I’m going to go out on a limp and say more than 10-15 innings occur with a 3 run lead in the 9th, but your point more than stands.
And, yes, Morrow did get moved a year and a half later than he should have. However, the fact that SOMEone up top is willing to look at him as a starter is kinda nice.
I look at ESPN.com about once or twice a year. The last time I looked at it I actually stumbled upon those two articles. Both are fantastic. Nice work, Colm.
Morrow’s line tonight:
Player IP H R ER BB SO HR ERA
Morrow 4.2 5 6 6 3 3 2 11.57
I was at the game tonight and I was certain there would be no chance he’d come up for his next start. He had poor control with a 1.5 / 1 strike to ball ratio. I guess they feel he’ll learn more pitching to major leaguers.
Wouldn’t worst case scenario be we turn him back into a relief pitcher?
“Jim Caple (whom ESPN ostensibly retain for his humor, but who contributes more wisdom than most of their ’straight’ analysts) wrote a nice little attack on the concept of the “proven closer†earlier this year.
and our friend Jonah Keri backed it up for good measure.”
ZOMG an ESPN article quoted WPA! This is why Keri is awesome, and why mainstream save-worshiping journalists are dumb.
Jim Caple is my second-favorite ESPN writer behind Keri, mostly because he’s one of the few ESPN guys that actually pays attention to Seattle sports.
The easiest way to make the point in this “debate” is simply to take it to the extreme. If we want to use our best pitchers in relief, why not make Felix a closer. I’m sure he’d be outstanding at it.
Or Pedro in his prime.
Or the Unit.
Lots of starting pitchers get their feet wet in the bullpen and it used to happen more often than it does today. Before the game started being managed around a ‘stat’, you’d never think of using your next horse as a lights out reliever. Lights out relievers are valuable, but there’s a reason why suggesting Pedro or Unit as a closer would get laughed at. It amazes me how people don’t use the same logic with respect to Joba or Morrow. Yeah, they haven’t proven it yet, but how can they if you trap them in a role they’re great at? And it’s a role they *should* be great at. Why it’s easier for some to move RRS to starter when he’s good at relief than it is to move Morrow when he’s great at relief is beyond me. Logic doesn’t apply to that case in my eyes.