Welcome to the Orioles Nation Forums! Like most online communities, you must register to post on our message board. However, posting is free--it always will be--and registration is a simple process. Become part of the growing Orioles Nation community and register now!

Why is Zach Britton not considered a "lock" for the rotation?

Re: Why is Zach Britton not considered a "lock" for the rotation?

PostPost #16 by ofahn » February 6th, 2012, 4:21 pm

osforlife wrote:
ofahn wrote:
Zach wrote:Does this move make Britton a lock for the rotation? Hammel should be viewed as a downgrade from Guthrie.


I think Hammel takes Guthrie's spot in the rotation unless he collapses in the spring exhibition games. I also think the team is planning on giving Wada a chance to prove he is or isn't a starter. That probably leaves Britton in AAA to start the year.


I don't think this trade really effects Britton's chances of making the rotation as much as some people will think. I still think the rotation will come down to Chen-Hammel-Hunter-Britton/Arrieta/Wada.


IMO if Eveland out pitches the kids in spring training he gets the spot. The team doesn't have to eat his contract if they have options on the kids. I still think that all of the kids start the year in AAA unless some of the new blood completely collapse during the spring.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4399
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: Why is Zach Britton not considered a "lock" for the rotation?

PostPost #17 by osforlife » February 6th, 2012, 4:33 pm

ofahn wrote:
osforlife wrote:
ofahn wrote:I think Hammel takes Guthrie's spot in the rotation unless he collapses in the spring exhibition games. I also think the team is planning on giving Wada a chance to prove he is or isn't a starter. That probably leaves Britton in AAA to start the year.


I don't think this trade really effects Britton's chances of making the rotation as much as some people will think. I still think the rotation will come down to Chen-Hammel-Hunter-Britton/Arrieta/Wada.


IMO if Eveland out pitches the kids in spring training he gets the spot. The team doesn't have to eat his contract if they have options on the kids. I still think that all of the kids start the year in AAA unless some of the new blood completely collapse during the spring.


You're basically saying to the fans you don't want to win if you start Eveland over Britton/Arrieta. I dont know the exact number, but I'm pretty sure Britton's ERA would have been in the 3.80's without those two July starts. And Arrieta has plenty of upside. Where Eveland as had one average season in a pitchers ballpark in 7 seasons.
User avatar
osforlife
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1622
Joined: October 2011
Location: Southern Maryland
Reputation Score: 59

Re: Why is Zach Britton not considered a "lock" for the rotation?

PostPost #18 by ofahn » February 6th, 2012, 5:43 pm

You're basically saying to the fans you don't want to win if you start Eveland over Britton/Arrieta. I dont know the exact number, but I'm pretty sure Britton's ERA would have been in the 3.80's without those two July starts. And Arrieta has plenty of upside. Where Eveland as had one average season in a pitchers ballpark in 7 seasons..


No, I'm saying that winning is what we should be building to.

IF Eveland out pitches one of the kids then we should open the season WITH Eveland in the rotation. DD has been clear about two things. Our young players have been developed poorly and he has made rebuilding the development system a priority. As long as the newcomers can pitch effectively DD has a chance to expose the kids to a proper development process. Even if it's ONLY a couple of months these guys will be better prepared to return to the majors FOR THE LAST TIME.

Eventually, it's expected that Eveland, Wada, and Hammel will lose their spots to the kids but why not try to build some value in Eveland and Hammels to get a solid return when we trade them AS LONG AS THEY PITCH EFFECTIVELY. If they fail to establish themselves, then cut them loose when one of the kids are deemed ready to return. What difference does it make if only 120 of the 180 innings or more these kids pitch this year is in the majors as long as they are BETTER DEVELOPED?

A collateral benefit of this approach is that the kids we have in our system now will see that this team is no longer sending players to the big leagues without making sure they are properly prepared. If that doesn't motivate them to work harder not much else will.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4399
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: Why is Zach Britton not considered a "lock" for the rotation?

PostPost #19 by osforlife » February 6th, 2012, 9:28 pm

ofahn wrote:
You're basically saying to the fans you don't want to win if you start Eveland over Britton/Arrieta. I dont know the exact number, but I'm pretty sure Britton's ERA would have been in the 3.80's without those two July starts. And Arrieta has plenty of upside. Where Eveland as had one average season in a pitchers ballpark in 7 seasons..


No, I'm saying that winning is what we should be building to.

IF Eveland out pitches one of the kids then we should open the season WITH Eveland in the rotation. DD has been clear about two things. Our young players have been developed poorly and he has made rebuilding the development system a priority. As long as the newcomers can pitch effectively DD has a chance to expose the kids to a proper development process. Even if it's ONLY a couple of months these guys will be better prepared to return to the majors FOR THE LAST TIME.

Eventually, it's expected that Eveland, Wada, and Hammel will lose their spots to the kids but why not try to build some value in Eveland and Hammels to get a solid return when we trade them AS LONG AS THEY PITCH EFFECTIVELY. If they fail to establish themselves, then cut them loose when one of the kids are deemed ready to return. What difference does it make if only 120 of the 180 innings or more these kids pitch this year is in the majors as long as they are BETTER DEVELOPED?

A collateral benefit of this approach is that the kids we have in our system now will see that this team is no longer sending players to the big leagues without making sure they are properly prepared. If that doesn't motivate them to work harder not much else will.


Yes, our development with some of our pitchers have been handled poorly(Tillman, Bergy,Berken) but Britton is ready. He had a very servicable season for a rookie and needs to continue to pitch in the big leagues in order to continue his development. Same with Arrieta. He has nothing left to prove in the minor leagues. We need to see if he is a future big league pitcher. Matusz is a different story...
User avatar
osforlife
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1622
Joined: October 2011
Location: Southern Maryland
Reputation Score: 59

Re: Why is Zach Britton not considered a "lock" for the rotation?

PostPost #20 by Jordan Tuwiner » February 7th, 2012, 8:59 am

ofahn wrote:
You're basically saying to the fans you don't want to win if you start Eveland over Britton/Arrieta. I dont know the exact number, but I'm pretty sure Britton's ERA would have been in the 3.80's without those two July starts. And Arrieta has plenty of upside. Where Eveland as had one average season in a pitchers ballpark in 7 seasons..


No, I'm saying that winning is what we should be building to.

IF Eveland out pitches one of the kids then we should open the season WITH Eveland in the rotation. DD has been clear about two things. Our young players have been developed poorly and he has made rebuilding the development system a priority. As long as the newcomers can pitch effectively DD has a chance to expose the kids to a proper development process. Even if it's ONLY a couple of months these guys will be better prepared to return to the majors FOR THE LAST TIME.

Eventually, it's expected that Eveland, Wada, and Hammel will lose their spots to the kids but why not try to build some value in Eveland and Hammels to get a solid return when we trade them AS LONG AS THEY PITCH EFFECTIVELY. If they fail to establish themselves, then cut them loose when one of the kids are deemed ready to return. What difference does it make if only 120 of the 180 innings or more these kids pitch this year is in the majors as long as they are BETTER DEVELOPED?

A collateral benefit of this approach is that the kids we have in our system now will see that this team is no longer sending players to the big leagues without making sure they are properly prepared. If that doesn't motivate them to work harder not much else will.

I don't think Eveland should make the rotation, especially over Britton. Of all the young pitchers, Britton is the one that just does not need more minor league time. He's ready for the majors.
User avatar
Jordan Tuwiner
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 2588
Joined: September 2010
Location: Israel
Reputation Score: 57



Re: Why is Zach Britton not considered a "lock" for the rotation?

PostPost #21 by ofahn » February 7th, 2012, 10:03 am

Jordan wrote:
ofahn wrote:
You're basically saying to the fans you don't want to win if you start Eveland over Britton/Arrieta. I dont know the exact number, but I'm pretty sure Britton's ERA would have been in the 3.80's without those two July starts. And Arrieta has plenty of upside. Where Eveland as had one average season in a pitchers ballpark in 7 seasons..


No, I'm saying that winning is what we should be building to.

IF Eveland out pitches one of the kids then we should open the season WITH Eveland in the rotation. DD has been clear about two things. Our young players have been developed poorly and he has made rebuilding the development system a priority. As long as the newcomers can pitch effectively DD has a chance to expose the kids to a proper development process. Even if it's ONLY a couple of months these guys will be better prepared to return to the majors FOR THE LAST TIME.

Eventually, it's expected that Eveland, Wada, and Hammel will lose their spots to the kids but why not try to build some value in Eveland and Hammels to get a solid return when we trade them AS LONG AS THEY PITCH EFFECTIVELY. If they fail to establish themselves, then cut them loose when one of the kids are deemed ready to return. What difference does it make if only 120 of the 180 innings or more these kids pitch this year is in the majors as long as they are BETTER DEVELOPED?

A collateral benefit of this approach is that the kids we have in our system now will see that this team is no longer sending players to the big leagues without making sure they are properly prepared. If that doesn't motivate them to work harder not much else will.

I don't think Eveland should make the rotation, especially over Britton. Of all the young pitchers, Britton is the one that just does not need more minor league time. He's ready for the majors.


I won't argue that Britton is "shelf ready" but I think that DD is serious about giving the new guys an opportunity to establish some trade value. Here are some quotes I read after I posted yesterday.

DD
"I don't know how it's going to shake out in spring training," he said. "The pitchers we signed from the Japanese League do have options, some of our younger pitchers have options and some of them are out of options. Our goal was to get more pitching depth and be stronger and try to do the right thing in spring training for our team to give us the strongest chance to win. I do like the stuff of several of the pitchers we've added to the team.

"I think overall we've rushed pitchers to the big leagues in the past and that reflected in some of the rough patches that the pitchers hit in the big leagues. The reason they were put in the big leagues is because the need was there. Frankly, I think it's better to spend a little more time in the minors and let the pitchers acquire the skills it takes to be major leaguers. A 5-point ERA isn't good enough to be a competitive big league pitcher, and we've got numerous pitchers on the roster in that area. We're just trying to make the staff stronger so we can be more competitive."


Roch Kubatko
The Orioles weren't bluffing about the young starters having to earn a job. It's conceivable that Jake Arrieta, Zach Britton, Brian Matusz and Chris Tillman will be fighting for one spot. It's possible that all four of them lose out. They all have minor league options remaining.


There are advantages to having Britton start the year at AAA. One is that he gets more development time and the other is that his service time clock stops. This would allow us to postpone his first arbitration year and his eligibility for free agency.

I want to be very clear about this. If ANY of the kids substantially out pitch any of the veterans then the kid DESERVES the rotation spot. No arguments from me about that. I have had the opinion almost since DD's first day that he wanted to make the kids EARN their rotation spots and his pitching acquisitions seem to indicate that. I also wouldn't be surprised if we add another SP before we head north.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4399
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: Why is Zach Britton not considered a "lock" for the rotation?

PostPost #22 by CSPitt17130 » February 7th, 2012, 10:43 am

ofahn wrote:
There are advantages to having Britton start the year at AAA. One is that he gets more development time and the other is that his service time clock stops. This would allow us to postpone his first arbitration year and his eligibility for free agency.

I want to be very clear about this. If ANY of the kids substantially out pitch any of the veterans then the kid DESERVES the rotation spot. No arguments from me about that. I have had the opinion almost since DD's first day that he wanted to make the kids EARN their rotation spots and his pitching acquisitions seem to indicate that. I also wouldn't be surprised if we add another SP before we head north.


Not too many of the moves DD has made this winter have made it seem like he's working towards making the team better in the long run. I think the 2-to-3-year deals (with options) to Betemit, Wada, and Chen are the closest thing to that, but it's not exactly the type of longterm move we were looking for (trading Jones for prospects, for example). Having Britton, Arrieta, Matusz, and Tillman start the year in AAA for development and service time purposes will probably have the biggest impact on the longterm future of the team.
CSPitt17130
DSL Orioles
 
Posts: 181
Joined: December 2011
Reputation Score: 10

Re: Why is Zach Britton not considered a "lock" for the rotation?

PostPost #23 by birdwatcher55 » February 7th, 2012, 6:56 pm

osforlife wrote:
ofahn wrote:
Zach wrote:Does this move make Britton a lock for the rotation? Hammel should be viewed as a downgrade from Guthrie.


I think Hammel takes Guthrie's spot in the rotation unless he collapses in the spring exhibition games. I also think the team is planning on giving Wada a chance to prove he is or isn't a starter. That probably leaves Britton in AAA to start the year.


I don't think this trade really effects Britton's chances of making the rotation as much as some people will think. I still think the rotation will come down to Chen-Hammel-Hunter-Britton/Arrieta/Wada.


Would love to see Matusz have a monster spring and really mix things up 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: Why is Zach Britton not considered a "lock" for the rotation?

PostPost #24 by LA Detective » February 8th, 2012, 11:07 pm

I really believe that in a very unsual fashion, it really will come down to the best 5 in ST...few exceptions being ties where one of them has minor leauge options...unsure of the options for Chen or Hammell or Hunter but i think they would end up in the pen if outpitched by others...It will be a very competitive spring and I do believe Matusz will be strong and healthy, Arrietta will have better location with a good elbow and Britton will improve..
LA Detective
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 293
Joined: July 2011
Reputation Score: 14


Previous

Return to Baltimore Orioles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron