Why does Arrieta seem to get a pass?

[osforlife]

I was listening to Steve Melewski on Baltimore Baseball Tonight and a caller brought up Zach Britton and who would go down. Steve said if he was ready tomorrow that Hunter would go down. Hunter has the same amount of quality starts as Arrieta and has a better ERA. It just doesn't make any sense to me. I wish I wasn't at work or I would have called in and asked him about this topic.

Melewski said Hunter would go down over Matusz?

Yes

How does that make sense?

[CSPitt17130]

How does that make sense?

Matusz's upside is much higher than Hunter's. Matusz has shown that he's able to hold his own at this level and doesn't need to be sent down in order to put things together like he probably should have last year.

[osforlife]

How does that make sense?

Matusz's upside is much higher than Hunter's. Matusz has shown that he's able to hold his own at this level and doesn't need to be sent down in order to put things together like he probably should have last year.

Hunter has pitched better than Matusz. Period. Hunter has been a serivceable major league starter so far this season with bad location. Everything has been up this year and he still has kept us in almost every game. If he could just get the ball down, he would be so much more effective. So therefore, I guess you could say Hunter has alot of upside considering how much better he could pitch.

[CSPitt17130]

Hunter has pitched a lot better than Matusz. Period. Hunter has been a serivceable major league starter so far this season with bad location. Everything has been up this year and he still has kept us in almost every game. If he could just get the ball down, he would be so much more effective. So therefore, I guess you could say Hunter has alot of upside considering how much better he could pitch.

First, explain how you think Hunter has pitched much better than Matusz all year. Second, you could say the same thing ("If this pitcher could just do this, then he'd be more effective") about every pitcher. Just because Hunter's issue is easy to point out since he's given up 10 home runs already, that doesn't mean that it's easier to fix. Matusz has a higher upside than Hunter. You shouldn't be arguing that. Hunter could be a decent back-of-the-rotation innings eater if he can get the ball down in the zone. Matusz has already shown that he has #2 starter potential with the way he pitched at the end of 2010. Hunter will never be that good. Therefore, when those two options have been pitching roughly equally (and they have), you keep the guy with the much higher upside.

[osforlife]

Hunter has pitched better than Matusz. Period. Hunter has been a serivceable major league starter so far this season with bad location. Everything has been up this year and he still has kept us in almost every game. If he could just get the ball down, he would be so much more effective. So therefore, I guess you could say Hunter has alot of upside considering how much better he could pitch.

First, explain how you think Hunter has pitched much better than Matusz all year. Second, you could say the same thing ("If this pitcher could just do this, then he'd be more effective") about every pitcher. Just because Hunter's issue is easy to point out since he's given up 10 home runs already, that doesn't mean that it's easier to fix. Matusz has a higher upside than Hunter. You shouldn't be arguing that. Hunter could be a decent back-of-the-rotation innings eater if he can get the ball down in the zone. Matusz has already shown that he has #2 starter potential with the way he pitched at the end of 2010. Hunter will never be that good. Therefore, when those two options have been pitching roughly equally (and they have), you keep the guy with the much higher upside.

Coming into today's game, Hunter had a lower ERA, lower WHIP, more innings while less hits, lower BA against. From personal expierence, I believe it is alot easier to locate and pitch up-down wise then left-right wise. When pitches are up, the problem is usually that you're not getting on top of the ball and your elbow is dropping. If Matusz has shown he is #2 potential in 2010, what does Hunter's 2010 season mean?

[CSPitt17130]

Coming into today's game, Hunter had a lower ERA, lower WHIP, more innings while less hits, one more quality start. From personal expierence, I believe it is alot easier to locate and pitch up-down wise then left-right wise. When pitches are up, the problem is usually that you're not getting on top of the ball and your elbow is dropping. If Matusz has shown he is #2 potential in 2010, what does Hunter's 2010 season mean?

In the stats that are more indicative of future success (K/9, BB/9, and HR/9), Matusz is striking out more batters than Hunter and giving up fewer home runs. Regardless of which pitcher is currently pitching better (I would argue that neither is pitching significantly better than the other), Matusz has more upside. In 2010, Hunter wasn't striking out 5 per 9 innings. That usually indicates the stuff isn't there for high upside. Peripheral stats suggest the ERA under 4 (which I'm assuming you're using to conclude his upside) was partially luck-based. His strike out rate was very low along with a low BABIP.

[OriolesRedskins28]

I don't even think it's close in terms of upside, Matusz his WAY more potential than Hunter does. At this point I would greatly prefer Matusz to Hunter. Tommy has been terrible, for the second time against Boston the offense has put up a solid lead only to see Hunter give it right back.

Hunter and Gregg are really the only two pitchers on the team right now that I have a problem with. With Matusz I feel like it's a mental thing especially with repeating his delivery and not overthrowing. With Hunter it seems like he's just bad. I haven't seen anything good from him since he's been here. It seems like even when he has a quality start (ie. vs. Oakland earlier in the year) it is aided by nice defensive plays and hard hit balls that are right at defenders. I don't mind having Hunter as a AAAA pitcher that can fill in occasionally due to injury but he does not belong anywhere in a Major League rotation. He needs to go.

This is the issue the O's have right now. Their success thus far has been legitimate but what about the depth? If a pitcher gets hurt the O's are in deep trouble. There's very little margin for error with this team. They could really use a healthy Zach Britton, having him back will increase the talent level and improve the depth of the team. Can't depend on pitchers like Hunter who don't give them a chance to win.

[Matt P]

Even before tonight I think I would rather send down Hunter before Matusz. Matusz has been getting better and it seems like each game he is a couple of pitches away from having a quality start.

[osforlife]

Coming into today's game, Hunter had a lower ERA, lower WHIP, more innings while less hits, one more quality start. From personal expierence, I believe it is alot easier to locate and pitch up-down wise then left-right wise. When pitches are up, the problem is usually that you're not getting on top of the ball and your elbow is dropping. If Matusz has shown he is #2 potential in 2010, what does Hunter's 2010 season mean?

In the stats that are more indicative of future success (K/9, BB/9, and HR/9), Matusz is striking out more batters than Hunter and giving up fewer home runs. Regardless of which pitcher is currently pitching better (I would argue that neither is pitching significantly better than the other), Matusz has more upside. In 2010, Hunter wasn't striking out 5 per 9 innings. That usually indicates the stuff isn't there for high upside. Peripheral stats suggest the ERA under 4 (which I'm assuming you're using to conclude his upside) was partially luck-based. His strike out rate was very low along with a low BABIP.

He is striking out over 5 batters an inning this year. He has been a back-end rotation starter with horrible location. With lower pitches, he could be a middle rotation starter. Matusz does have more upside, but I guess I was taking into the fact that we are a first place team at the moment.

[OriolesRedskins28]

Coming into today's game, Hunter had a lower ERA, lower WHIP, more innings while less hits, one more quality start. From personal expierence, I believe it is alot easier to locate and pitch up-down wise then left-right wise. When pitches are up, the problem is usually that you're not getting on top of the ball and your elbow is dropping. If Matusz has shown he is #2 potential in 2010, what does Hunter's 2010 season mean?

In the stats that are more indicative of future success (K/9, BB/9, and HR/9), Matusz is striking out more batters than Hunter and giving up fewer home runs. Regardless of which pitcher is currently pitching better (I would argue that neither is pitching significantly better than the other), Matusz has more upside. In 2010, Hunter wasn't striking out 5 per 9 innings. That usually indicates the stuff isn't there for high upside. Peripheral stats suggest the ERA under 4 (which I'm assuming you're using to conclude his upside) was partially luck-based. His strike out rate was very low along with a low BABIP.

He is striking out over 5 batters an inning this year. He has been a back-end rotation starter with horrible location. With lower pitches, he could be a middle rotation starter. Matusz does have more upside, but I guess I was taking into the fact that we are a first place team at the moment.

I can see where you're coming from but I think Matusz has more upside NOW than Hunter. I mean that maybe a couple starts ago Hunter was a safer bet than Matusz but I think Matusz seems to improve a little bit with each start and within a month he will be a much more serviceable starter than Hunter.

But who knows, Buck seems to love Hunter for some reason. Every time he speaks about him he has good things to say about how "they love what he brings" or something to that effect.

[CSPitt17130]

He is striking out over 5 batters an inning this year. He has been a back-end rotation starter with horrible location. With lower pitches, he could be a middle rotation starter.

Striking out 5 per 9 innings is not good, but that's all you can expect from Hunter. That's his upside. In Matusz's first full season he was striking out over 7 per 9 with more expected. Matusz flashed enough stuff in the last 6 weeks of 2010 that in his prime he may have been a fringe ace. Hunter doesn't have that kind of stuff, and obvious from his season the control within the zone to make up for it. He hasn't pitched like even a back of the rotation starter for a team that would expect to contend for a playoff spot.

Matusz does have more upside, but I guess I was taking into the fact that we are a first place team at the moment.

What does this mean?

[ofahn]

Hunter has pitched better than Matusz.

IMO Matusz has the POTENTIAL to be a #3 starter on a winning team. At this point I see Hunter's upside as a #5 starter on a winning team. If I were DD I would be making future decisions about these two pitchers with that thought in mind.

[osforlife]

[/quote]I can see where you're coming from but I think Matusz has more upside NOW than Hunter. I mean that maybe a couple starts ago Hunter was a safer bet than Matusz but I think Matusz seems to improve a little bit with each start and within a month he will be a much more serviceable starter than Hunter.

But who knows, Buck seems to love Hunter for some reason. Every time he speaks about him he has good things to say about how "they love what he brings" or something to that effect.[/quote]

After Matusz's last start and Hunter's last start, I would definitly say Matusz is a safer bet to stay.

[osforlife]

He is striking out over 5 batters an inning this year. He has been a back-end rotation starter with horrible location. With lower pitches, he could be a middle rotation starter.

Striking out 5 per 9 innings is not good, but that's all you can expect from Hunter. That's his upside. In Matusz's first full season he was striking out over 7 per 9 with more expected. Matusz flashed enough stuff in the last 6 weeks of 2010 that in his prime he may have been a fringe ace. Hunter doesn't have that kind of stuff, and obvious from his season the control within the zone to make up for it. He hasn't pitched like even a back of the rotation starter for a team that would expect to contend for a playoff spot.

Matusz does have more upside, but I guess I was taking into the fact that we are a first place team at the moment.

What does this mean?

I know striking out 5 batters and inning isn't good. You just said Hunter didn't strike out 5 batters every 9 innings in 2010 so I mentioned that he is striking out 5 batters every 9 innings this year. I was taking into the fact that Hunter was pitching better than Matusz. Even if Matusz has more upside, I was saying to keep Hunter because we are a first place team.

[CSPitt17130]

I know striking out 5 batters and inning isn't good. You just said Hunter didn't strike out 5 batters every 9 innings in 2010 so I mentioned that he is striking out 5 batters every 9 innings this year. I was taking into the fact that Hunter was pitching better than Matusz. Even if Matusz has more upside, I was saying to keep Hunter because we are a first place team.

You mentioned 2010 for Hunter like it was an indication of his upside like 2010 was for Matusz. I was pointing out that although he racked up meaningless wins and had a good (and arguably lucky) ERA, he displayed no upside due to the fact that he was only striking out fewer than 5 batters per 9 innings. Yes, he's striking out 5.07 per 9 this year, but what does that have to do with 2010?

Again, I don't think (even before each of their last starts) that there was a significant difference in how well Matusz and Hunter were pitching (though it definitely looks like Matusz has safely surpassed Hunter). Even giving Hunter the slightest of edges, sending down Matusz would be short-sighted. Yes, the Orioles are in first place now (do you think they're going to be in first place in August?), but sending down Matusz when he's shown that he is able to work on getting better at the big league level is only looking at the short-term picture. Teams who are definite contenders should only make decisions like that. The Orioles need to continue to develop their upside players to see what they have in guys like Matusz, Arrieta, and Britton to decide how many pieces away from contention they really are. Pitching Hunter instead of Matusz just delays that process.