Diffusion

Williamson and Eyre pitched the 6th. Williams goes 7-9. Wuertz, Howry and Dempster are available in case Jerome implodes. If you take the blowout long reliever strategy, is the difference between Williams going three innings spotted to a six run lead and him going four with a seven run lead big enough that it's worth burning Williamson and Eyre then? I mean, you seem to be taking the argument that it was unnecessary that Eyre pitch another inning, Howry and Dempster pitch at all, give those frames to Williams. Why draw the line there? Why have Williamson and Eyre pitch at all? Also, if Williams goes three/four innings on Monday, what do you do if there's a blowout Wednesday? I think your argument is reasonably sound, but I'm playing devil's advocate here. And there's no justification for completely overreacting either. It's one outing, a bit early to start talking about systematic pitcher abuse or whatever it is you're worried about. Who is completely overreacting? When I noted the problem yesterday I acknowledged that it was nitpicky in nature. You're overreacting, and don't try and play if down by retroactively talking about "nitpicking". You were the one in this thread using the "absolutely no justification" absolutes. But, for all you know, Williams wasn't even available to pitch yesterday. Yes, it's not ideal that Eyre threw 37 pitches yesterday, but it doesn't necessarily mean that Dusty's going to overextend and overuse Eyre all the time regardless. Given the exceptional nature of what happened yesterday, with the Cubs having burnt two pitchers through the first five innings, Dusty's very poor track record isn't necessarily applicable. In the spirit of Opening Day, I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt. You may very well be right, that he's going to "abuse" Eyre, but right now, on the basis of just one appearance, it's far too early to say.

I disagree. 10-5 with the bases loaded and no outs is the best chance you're ever going to get of killing the game off. With the umpire's small zone, in that ballpark, against a very potent Cincinnati offence, a five run lead isn't as big as it sounds (indeed, the Cubs had already blown a five run lead in the game, and they blew at five run lead in the last Spring Training game too, for what that's worth). Ohman's the first pitcher you've used out of the bullpen, so you've got another five if you need them. You can afford to burn Ohman, go for the jugular with the best pinch hitter you've got, and the worst case scenario then is that you need to bring in another pitcher, you have one less pinch-hitter to use later and you still have a five run lead. The best case scenario is that the game is absolutely over and the Reds have no chance of recovering from a eight, nine, ten run deficit. You send Ohman up to bat and tell him not to swing, yes, there's an outside possibility that the pitcher you're facing can't throw a strike and he manages to walk him, or he hits him, or he throws a wild pitch. But I don't think the chances of that are particularly high. A lot more probable is that Ohman strikes out or pops-out (in which case the Reds are a double play from getting out of the inning, and, for what it's worth, Barrett did hit into a double play!), or he hits a weak groundball somewhere. Maybe that's good enough to get a run home, or maybe with the infield in there's a play at the plate and it's not. Or maybe the infield can turn a double play, conceding the one run but very much stopping the big inning in its tracks. That's a very interesting and persuasive argument, and you're right that I did overlook it. However, on the flip side, I think an argument can be made that getting all your pitchers into a game just to get a feel for proper competitive baseball again is worth something. Also, Jerome Williams doesn't deal with who should be pitching the bottom of the sixth (or would you bring him in there maybe?), and when you consider how bad Williams looked in Spring Training, and that the Reds' offence is predominantly left-handed, I don't think it's necessarily as obvious that Williams can pitch three or four innings without giving up six or seven runs. Sure, he should, but it's not always that simple. And there's no justification for completely overreacting either. The Cubs have an off-day today, Eyre didn't throw on Sunday either, the Cubs have another off-day coming up on Thursday. In five days then, he'll have thrown 37 pitches, plus any that he throws tomorrow. It's not ideal that so many come in one outing, obviously, but it's not as though Eyre hasn't done it before - from 2003-05, he exceeded 30 pitches in an appearance 10 times. It's one outing, a bit early to start talking about systematic pitcher abuse or whatever it is you're worried about. The circumstances yesterday, with the offence batting around without making an out with the other bullpen lefty on the mound, were somewhat exceptional.

I love the Diamondbacks. They're going to be so so good if they can just find some pitching. Right now they've got Brandon Webb and Jose Valverde, but the rest, with only a few half-projectable exceptions, is utterly useless. This upcoming offseason is a big year for free agent starting pitching, they need to make the most of it, and if or when they have to trade Chris Young, they need to be getting back some quality arms.

Dusty does it all the time. He double switches and moves the pitcher's spot in the wrong direction. Did it all of last season, still doing it this season. Anyway, let's look at the moves he made yesterday: Bottom fifth, 5-5 game, 2nd with 2 outs, Javier Valentin at the plate: Dusty pulls Zambrano (4.2 IP, 7 H, 5 R/ER, 2 HR, 5 BB, 5 K, 105 pitches), the right call. The pitcher's spot is due up fourth in the next inning. Jacque Jones made the final out of the top of the fifth. So Dusty replaces Zambrano with Angel Pagan, playing right field, and Jacque Jones with Will Will Ohman. Pitcher's spot now due up ninth in the next inning, and Angel Pagan can play defence and is hot at the plate. Javier Valentin is a switch-hitter, but his splits mean he's a lot less effective against lefties. Very good tactical move. It pays off as well, as Ohman retires Valentin to end the inning and Pagan singles in a run and scores in the top half of the sixth. Top sixth, 10-5 game, bases loaded with 0 outs, pitcher's spot up, RHP Mike Burns pitching: The Cubs have batted around, meaning that even though Dusty just double switched, the pitcher's spot is up. A real opportunity to blow this game wide-open, absolutely finish it, so you have to pinch-hit. On the mound for the Reds is a right-handed pitcher with apparently normal splits, so here someone that hits righties better than lefties would be suitable. And someone that hits period, of course. On the bench, Dusty has lefties Freddie Bynum (speed, on-base skills, but inexperienced at major league level) and John Mabry (normal splits, but maybe saving him for later), plus Jerry Hairston (not much of a split) and Henry Blanco (emergency catcher, can't hit, can't run). Any of the first three options would be fine here, right? Erm, nope. Dusty goes for Neifi Perez as his pinch-hitter, the very same Neifi Perez that's a career .254/.283/.339 hitter when not on teams playing their home games in Coors Field, and that's weaker against right-handers. Nice. Dusty gets away with it, as Neifi does what he always does and slaps at a pitch, resulting in a routine groundball. Fortunately, the infield is playing way in, and it gets past a despairing dive for a basehit. Mid sixth, 12-5 Cubs Having pinch-hit for the pitcher, Dusty needs to make a pitching change. With a pinch-hitter (righty Chris Denorfia as it turned out), lefty Tony Womack (better vs righties) and switch-hitter Felipe Lopez (better vs righties) due up, Dusty goes for Scott Williamson. Fair enough, I guess, because having unfortunately had to burn Ohman, and with Griffey, Dunn, Hatteberg all lefties, probably better to save Eyre for them than burn him here, and Williamson's good enough that you shouldn't have to worry about lefties and righties etc. But getting Williamson into the game, Dusty makes a dumb move. The pitcher's spot is due up sixth the next time the Cubs bat, so double-switching isn't imperative, Williamson probably isn't someone you want to stretch to two innings anyway, and Ronny Cedeno, who made the last out of the top of the sixth, plays good enough defence that you don't need to replace him. So just put Williamson in for Neifi Perez the pinch-hitter and be done with it. Nope, instead Dusty puts Wiliamson in for Todd Walker, due up third the next time the Cubs bat, and leaves Neifi Perez in the game, now playing second base. Upgrade on defense (though nothing that wouldn't have been achieved just by bringing Neifi in for Walker after the top of the seventh), big hit on offence, and very bad strategy, because he'll up having to burn players to correct the mistake. Bottom sixth, 12-5 Cubs, bases loaded with no outs, Griffey and Dunn due up Williamson didn't have it, managed to load them up with no outs. With the two big lefty hitting Reds up, this is the moment for Scott Eyre. Dusty correctly goes to him, and realising his previous mistake, brings him in for Ronny Cedeno, moves Neifi Perez to shortstop and replaces Williamson with Jerry Hairston Jr. It's the right corrective move but it burns Cedeno and Hairston as a pinch-hit option later in the game. In the end, with only five batters hitting in the top of the seventh, moving the pitcher's spot down from up sixth to up ninth ultimately didn't make a difference, but Dusty used the opportunity to stretch Eyre to two innings anyway, somewhat unnecessarily I'd argue. Top eighth, 12-7 Cubs, man on 1st with 2 outs, pitcher's spot up facing RHP Todd Coffey Oh, so now Dusty pinch-hits with John Mabry, replacing Eyre who'd thrown 37 pitches. Mabry grounds out. Now, with the exception of Freddie Bynum and Henry Blanco, there's no-one available on the bench. Mid-eighth, 12-7 Cubs Dusty needs a new pitcher, pitcher's spot due up ninth, he goes for Bob Howry. Fair enough, I guess. Mid-ninth, 16-7 Cubs Howry pitched an inning and the pitcher's spot is due up next if the Cubs ever have to bat again, like that was ever going to happen. Murton made the last out of the top of the inning, so Dusty pulls him for the hell of it (ah, come on, you can't expect young kids to play nine innings!) and brings Ryan Dempster in to close out a 9 run game. Erm, okay. Freddie Bynum replaces Howry, playing left field. Double switch. So pointless, but I guess he just wanted to Bynum some PT. Still, what would have happened, hypothetically, if an outfielder had injured himself at some stage in the bottom of the ninth, with only Henry Blanco on the bench? Can you bring pitchers in to play the outfield? Overall, 5/10 for Dusty, I say. His pitcher usage was fine, pulled Z at the right time, brought in Ohman, right move, Williamson, no problem with that, brought in Eyre at the right time, Howry's fair enough and I don't really even have a problem with him using Dempster, but would have preferred it if he'd given Mike Wuertz the inning instead, because I think he needed it more with the ST he had. Extending Eyre to 37 pitches was excessive, but I don't really see the alternative, because if you bring Howry in to pitch the seventh, you need to use both our remaining available pitchers (Wuertz and Dempster) to pitch the eighth and ninth between them. We'd have been in a pretty bad situation then if there were any snags, such as a pitching injury, or one of the two being so ineffective that the game all of a sudden becomes close again. But the blown double-switch and the pinch-hitting with Neifi decisions, plus not letting Cedeno and Murton finish the game, didn't like that. I think it sends out the wrong message to the two youngsters, especially to Cedeno, who was pretty much lifted at the first opportunity.

My favourite...

Olivo Astacio was the guy we got when we traded Remlinger to Boston, I think.

Join a shallower league? I play in a league where we drafted 520 players and we still managed to avoid these two deadbeats.

1) Fuentes isn't crappy. 2) Wells will be more useful this year than Magglio and Rowand put together.

Lawton's the Mariners' fourth outfielder, or at least he will be once he's served his 10-day suspension. Starting will be Ibanez, Reed and Ichiro from left to right, Lawton'll be the primary backup, and over the course of the year Joe Borchard, Chris Snelling and Shin-Soo Choo will fight it out for the fifth outfield spot.

My prediction: Wood comes back from the surgery, stays healthy and pitches solidly (ERA around 3.50-3.75). A contract extension is worked out before the season ends (sometime around about August), worth in the region of $33m/3yrs (2007-09), but with the Cubs having the option of voiding the third year ($11m) under certain circumstances and a chunk of the money in the first two years being tied to innings pitched. Both parties want to continue the relationship. Kerry wants to stay with the Cubs, and the Cubs want to keep Kerry, partially because Greg Maddux is leaving, partially because Rich Hill doesn't pan out and Sean Marshall got rocked at the beginning of the year, partially because the Cubs have already invested so much in Wood, partially because it'd be somewhat embarrassing. However, Wood knows that, even despite all that, the $13.5m option isn't going to be picked up. An average marginal cost of $9m a year if Wood's healthy strikes the right balance between 1) Wood's enormous upside, 2) the money he could command if he took the buyout and tested free agency and 3) his injury history and what that means his negotiating position.

Yeh, I'm going to have to take some pretty drastic insurance measures. Right now I'm thinking of adding a fifth and a sixth ace behind Prior, Wood, Beckett and Burnett, aces of a slightly more dependable kind, obviously. And I think that I can achieve that purely by dealing away excess pitching depth. Even right now, I think on upside alone my starting pitching is by far the best in the league, though my lineup is slightly old in places it should still absolutely rake top to bottom, and the bullpen's not a problem at all, I don't think. So if I can bolster my starting rotation, I think I'm going to good to go.

Co. Incidence.

Erm...

Don't know whether to laugh or cry...

10 team league, 52 round draft (!), 20 keepers from year to year, Yahoo universe, 23 scoring categories roughly reflecting real life. My team... C: Ramon Hernandez SP: Mark Prior 1B: Mark Teixeira SP: Kerry Wood 2B: Marcus Giles SP: Josh Beckett 3B: Adrian Beltre SP: AJ Burnett SS: Derek Jeter SP: Matt Clement MI: Jose Vidro LF: Manny Ramirez RP: Billy Wagner CF: JD Drew RP: Jose Valverde RF: Bobby Abreu RP: Armando Benitez OF: Brad Wilkerson RP: Brian Fuentes DH: Todd Helton RP: Ambiorix Burgos P: Joey Devine Bench/Prospects C: Johnny Estrada, Ronny Paulino SP: Daniel Cabrera, Wade Miller, Derek Lowe 1B: Casey Kotchman, Adrian Gonzalez SP: Scott Olsen, Scott Baker 2B: Jose Castillo SP: Edison Volquez, Josh Johnson, Tom Gorzelanny 3B: Mike Lowell RP: Frank Francisco, Mike Wuertz, Hong-chih Kuo SS: Stephen Drew, Russ Adams RP: Manny Delcarmen, Jermaine Van Buren LF: Raul Ibanez, Scott Hairston P: Aaron Heilman, Jonathan Papelbon, Juan Cruz CF: Rocco Baldelli, Joey Gathright P: Anthony Lerew CF: Mark Kotsay RF: Ben Johnson

Cordero. But pick Guardado off the waiver wire anyway if you can.

Dunn

Your wish is my command... 1987-2005, Round 2 onwards MLB career featuring ERA < 4.50 (min 150 IP) or OPS > .730 (min 500 PA) Adam LaRoche (2000, 29th round) Horacio Ramirez (1997, 5th round) Marcus Giles (1996, 53rd round) Wes Helms (1994, 10th round) Kevin Millwood (1993, 11th round) Jermaine Dye (1993, 17th round) John Rocker (1993, 18th round) Brad Clontz (1992, 10th round) Jason Schmidt (1991, 8th round) Tony Graffanino (1990, 10th round) Ryan Klesko (1989, 5th round) Turk Wendell (1988, 5th round) Mark Wohlers (1988, 8th round) Mike Stanton (1987, 13th round)

I like it for the Diamondbacks.

Very classy of the Red Sox to give Bronson Arroyo assurances that they wouldn't trade him this off-season, and then trade him this off-season.

The numbers only prove that you're wrong with respect to Wuertz's ability in 2005 to induce swings at pitches that crossed the plate outside of the zone. They do not however necessarily say anything about whether he's hurt more of less than others by control issues. Because, if you think about, getting hitters to swing at pitches outside the zone requires that you're able to trick them into thinking that the pitch will cross the plate inside the zone. Therefore, even a slider that drops out of the strike zone (and would, if taken, be a ball) can be representative of good control. So, statistically, it's extremely difficult to say whether or not Wuertz is more or less dependent upon other pitchers upon good control. Theoretically, at least, the better your stuff the harder it is to hit, regardless of where you locate it. Theoretically. And Wuertz's stuff is pretty good. Nay, extremely good. Anyway, this conversation is pretty irrelevant, because I think it's entirely clear that if Wuertz wants to succeed, he has to throw strikes, or at least pitches that hitters think are strikes. Limiting the number of walks he allows, if he can maintain the rest of his game, will undisputedly make him just flat out nasty. But there's something to be said for the observation that because Wuertz relies on hitters chasing sliders out of the strike zone to rack up his dominating strikeout numbers, and so throws sliders out the strike zone, pitches that would be balls were they not swing at, he's more likely than most to walk hitters, especially if they're patient.

Of course, none of that's to say that he doesn't have control issues.

And there's more involving Wuertz... Same source, just didn't notice it the first time... Third best reliever at inducing swings and misses in 2005? Fourth best reliever at inducing swings at pitches outside the zone in 2005? I'll say his stuff's just fine in a filthy sort of way. It's all the slider.

I don't think so. Wuertz's success is based on his control, as he constantly attacks the edges of the zone. It's not based on overpowering stuff. I'd expect him to start off ST like this until he fine tunes his control. I'd be more worried if he isn't sharper at the end of ST. Actually, Wuertz has pretty good stuff, especially his slider. Someone posted some interesting data about contact that Wuertz gets a tremendous amount of swings and misses. He does have good stuff, but he struggles when he doesn't hit his spots. what pitcher doesn't struggle when they miss their spots? Some guys are better than others at getting hitters to swing at stuff outside of the zone. Wuertz is not one of those... http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2006/03/pitchers_pitch_1.php Erm, fourth best reliever in all of baseball at it in 2005?

Thanks, Diffusion. Is there a site that has this information? If it's NSBB, I'll be :oops: Not that I know of. I worked them out. You just need to try and establish when they were purchased, and whether they've been optioned out in certain years. There are a few extra rules you need to know as well. But that's it. Ohman was a pain to work out, but the rest were relatively straight forward.