Follow us as each week as our best writers from around the Bloguin Network take aim at each other and square off on anything and everything baseball from "who was better, Mays or Mantle" to "Should MLB have a salary cap?"

Pick a side and agree or disagree. Take part in the debate by posting a comment giving your own opinion. There are no holds barred and nothing is held back in the "The Great Bloguin Baseball Debate."

Today's Debaters are:

Joe Tetreault, TetreaultVision

Slanch, The Slanch Report

Today's Topic is:

Should Stephen Strasburg start the year with the Nationals?

Stephen Strasburgh SHOULD start the year with the Nationals

By Joe Tetreault, TetreaultVision: Joe Tetreault is a freelance writer and the proprietor of TetreultVision - a contrary thinking libertarian blog busily tacking against the gales of conventional wisdom in the fields of sports, culture, news and more.

Despite the expert skill of Dr. Andrews and Lewis Yocum and the fantastic orthopedic surgeons reconstructing the knees, elbows and shoulders of professional athletes, recovery can present obstacles. Any injury that necessitates surgery can just as easily end a career or end an athlete's effectiveness. The Nationals babied Zimmermann, and he still blew out his elbow. It's the consequence of the violent nature of the overhand delivery, even when practiced by players with perfect mechanics. Washington, ever in search of talent allows Zimmermann to expend nearly 200 innings in the minor leagues, when he could have been twirling dandies and taking lumps in the bigs. Regardless, the value of those innings was squandered, because it was spent on lesser stages, facing lesser talent and providing less return to the club. Making the same mistake with Strasburg would border on unforgivable.

That's where the two competing schools of thought come in. Does a pitcher benefit from being babied, or does challenging him produce better results? In the Darwinistic realm of professional sports one would assume the latter. In baseball the emphasis has shifted towards the former and statistics like pitcher abuse points and phrases like "the injury nexus" litter the process of pitcher development. Proponents of both systems believe theirs is the more effective. The Nats have a chance to chart a different course with a truly exceptional young pitcher.

Nolan Lets Them Throw

He took the hill 807 times, throwing 5386 innings. And when he hung them up he was the career record holder for both strikeouts and walks allowed. A big part of his high counting totals is his longevity. His 27 seasons in major league baseball are the most of any player in modern history. He also owns the lowest hit rate of any pitcher in the history of the game, attributable in part to his record number of low hit games. Ryan is now the President of the Texas Rangers having taken the job in February of 2008 and will be upon completion of the recently announced sale of the club will own a piece of the team on whom he is stamping his indelible mark.

A key aspect to that mark is the focus on pitching development by sending the pitcher out there to throw. Tyler Kepner of the New York Times describes that process:

With a full winter to implement his plans, Ryan summoned about 20 of the organization's best young pitchers for a minicamp in November and another in January. He explained the expectations for spring training and introduced Maddux.

Pitchers, Ryan said, would be expected to last deeper in games. To handle the Texas heat, they would train harder, emphasizing sprinting over distance running and throwing live batting practice all through camp. Pitchers would do more long-tossing and coaches would pay more attention to the stress of each outing, not simply the number of pitches.

"If guys are getting hurt throwing 90 pitches a game, why not see what happens when they're throwing 100 or 120?" said Matt Harrison, 23, who is 13-7 since his debut last July.

"Nobody's gotten hurt so far, knock on wood. Guys are getting stronger the more they throw. Later in the season, if they need a big out around 95 pitches, they still have the stuff they need to get it."

Ryan was on a pitch limit for one season, 1987, when the Houston Astros tried to keep him around 100 pitches every start. He led the National League in earned run average and strikeouts, but went 8-16 and swore off the concept.

To Ryan, teams have tried so hard to prevent injuries - and protect guaranteed contracts - that they have under conditioned pitchers. More injuries have resulted, he said, because pitchers cannot handle the stress of their job.

"The highways," Ryan said dryly, "are littered with good intentions."

Texas saw the rewards of that process not only with Harrison, but also with phenom Neftali Feliz, who broke into the big leagues with blazing heat and outstanding peripherals. Translating his success from the lower levels to the major leagues was a key component of Feliz' success. Advocates of Ryan's methodology attribute Feliz' competence at the big league level to the organizational philosophy of sending him out there to pitch without emphasizing pitch counts.

The Verducci Effect

The initial observation of Sports Illustrated writer Tom Verducci that pitchers under twenty-five who saw their workload increase by more than thirty innings pitched from the previous year were less effective the following season became codified as the Verducci Effect. Will Carroll of Baseball Prospectus corroborated Verducci's observation and added the element of increased risk for injury due to overuse. No single concept better defines the rationale for tight pitch counts, innings limits, and yes, Joba rules.

Even though the Verducci effect doesn't suggest a strict adherence to the rule of 30 and limiting pitches will best preserve young arms, the emphasis of the majority of teams is to go easy on their pitchers, eschewing building arm strength in favor of ensuring they are still healthy when their turn in the rotation arrives.

Case in point, the aforementioned Joba Chamberlain, who leapt to the big leagues after just 88.3 minor league innings. In establishing rules of engagement for Chamberlain, their aim was to preserve his arm, while utilizing his talent at the major league level. And despite fits and starts and an underwhelming 2009, he remains the odds on favorite for the final rotation slot in New York. Just twenty-four next year, his path embraces the ideals of maximizing value to the big club, while protecting the health of a long term investment.

That middle path is the one beckoning Washington to start Strasburg in the major leagues. His success in both college and the AFL provide no indicator of how he'll pitch in the major leagues. His talent is unquestioned. For Washington, a team that has been far too short on talent for too long, an infusion of a live arm at the big league level is smart all around. Strasburg has more talent than the other young kids they have in their rotation. He's arguably their most recognizable pitcher without ever playing a game. No free agent signing, trade candidate or minor league prospect can parlay those elements like Strasburg can. Leaving him in the minors to use his bullets proving he's your best pitching prospect, when there's no such thing as a pitching prospect, is wasteful. Talent like Strasburg's has more value in the big leagues than it does languishing down on the farm dominating other team's crop of has-beens and never will-bes. - Joe Tetreault, TetreaultVision

Stephen Strasburgh SHOULD NOT start the year with the Nationals

By Slanch, The Slanch Report - Presenting the best in off-beat sports news, mainstream sports idiocy, the choicest Doppelgangers and always plenty of baseball. Oh and hot chicks, lots of hot chicks.

Should he or Shouldn't he? He Shorn't

Stephen Strasburg is considered the best prospect to come up through the draft in decades but even with such high expectations, he still is not ready to start the season in the Majors. The road to the Majors is littered with prospects that flamed out because they weren't ready and never recovered. With a once in a lifetime type talent in Strasburg, the Nationals would be foolish to waste what is waste their already sizable investment in their future ace by rushing him.

Through their PECOTA system, the gents over at Baseball Prospectus have predicted an 82-80 record this year for the Nationals, which would be a phenomenal season for the otherwise hapless team. However, even with the predicted 23 more wins than last year, the Nationals are not going to sniff the playoffs -- not with the Marlins, Phillies and Mets ahead of them in the NL East. OK, so they won't have to worry about the Mets... but the Phillies are a legitimate 90-95 win team who have to still be considered favorites to go to a third straight World Series. No matter what the Nationals do, they aren't going to the playoffs in 2010.

With that fact set, there is no incentive to start the season with Strasburg in the bigs. He may be the best college pitcher ever, but recent history with similar prospects has shown that as talented as these players are, they weren't ready right away. In 2001 when Mark Prior came out of USC, he too was considered one of the best pitchers in college history. The scouts were enamored with Prior's high 90s fastball, excellent command of his secondary pitches and his competitive poise. There was no doubt that he would have success in the majors. When spring training ended and the Cubs broke camp, Prior went to western Tennessee and AA. A few weeks later Prior was in Triple-A and on May 22nd he made his major league debut. All told Prior pitched 51 innings before making his first appearance for the Cubs. Those innings were incredibly important.

After pitching minimally in college and after a very long offseason thanks in part to his delayed contract negotiations, there was too much rust on Prior's arm for him to be ready. In getting him the 50 innings in the minors, Prior was able to build up strength and confidence and he was properly prepared for the big leads. Throwing him into the fire right away would have been foolhardy and hurt his development. By breezing through the minors, practicing all his pitches and getting properly stretched out, when Prior came up, he was ready and raring to go.

David Price was considered one of the best left-handed pitchers in college history, he was considered as sure a thing as there was in his draft class. Price's spent his first season in professional baseball in Single, Double and Triple A. His second season began in AAA too. All told, Price ended up pitching 144 innings before coming up for good.

When Prior came up, he tasted success right away, going 6-6 in 116 innings with an astounding 11.3 K/9 ratio. Price's entree into the majors was less overwhelming, taking some time to adapt to his role in relief. By the end of the year, when he was coming in to close the Red Sox out in the ALCS, there was no doubt Price was going to be a force in the Majors. But, due to roster constraints and arbitration clock concerns, last year began with him Back to the Minors.

Even with his early success, Price's season as a starter last year was one of ups and downs, ending up with an ERA+ of 102 and a 10-6 record. While it is clear that the future is bright for Price, he still has work to do.

Strasburg's college career ended on May 29 when San Diego State lost in the NCAA regionals. He didn't sign with the Nationals until August 17. Between then, Strasburg didn't play in any organized games -- that's almost 3 months! In the Arizona Fall League, Strasburg got his first taste of the professional game, pitching a grand total of 19 innings. Finishing with a 4-1 record and 23 strikeouts, there was a lot to like with how Strasburg was throwing. However, he also allowed 3 home runs and 10 runs in total, in addition to 15 hits and 7 walks. So, there is also some work that needs to be done.

In college, Strasburg could get through an entire game almost solely using his fastball because college hitters aren't used to seeing 100+ mph gas whizzing by their faces and few can catch up to it. While Strasburg does have an excellent curve, his slider is under-used because he didn't need it and so he often has trouble commanding it. Giving him several weeks in the minors where he can fine-tune his delivery and work specifically on improving his command is an important and necessary step. In the minors, he can pitch a whole inning of just sliders, damn the consequences, but up in the Majors that won't fly, even on a team as accustomed to losing as the Nationals. With a few weeks to work out the kinks, adjust to hitters who are far more prepared and talented than any he's faced before and prove to himself that he can have success against them will give Strasburg the confidence he'll need at the major league level. Coming up too early might lead to failure and it will be the lead story for ESPN, MLB Network and all the newspapers; Strasburg is a confident kid, but when the entire sports nation is dissecting your every move it's hard to maintain one's composure.

The best plan is for Strasburg to begin the season in AA ball, giving him the chance to get his feet wet against some of the better prospects in the game. These days, teams are stashing major-league ready players in AAA, keeping players in reserve in case of potential injuries; AA is where the top prospects are plying their trade. At San Diego State last year, Strasburg pitched only 109 innings, which means that at most this year, he'll probably pitch 150 innings. That being the case, starting Strasburg in the majors is a waste. In the minors his team would be able to skip starts and give him extra days of rest so that, come June/July he would not be so fatigued that he'd need to be shut down.

As it is, there is a large amount of risk surrounding Strasburg, throwing a baseball puts unnatural stress on the shoulder and elbow to begin with, let alone at 100+ mph as Strasburg does. Ramping him up to pitch 200 innings is the most important step for the future of the Nationals, far more important than an individual win here and there during the 2010 season. The Nationals have 6 years of use with Strasburg before free agency and they need to maximize their investment in him. Starting him with the big league club is a publicity stunt and will instead stunt his development.

Look at the manner in which the Yankees have treated Joba Chamberlain. After only 84 innings in the minors in 2007, he was brought up to stay and he's yet to put together more than 150 innings pitched in a season. Had the team allowed him more time to build up arm strength they might not be looking at having to permanently move Joba to the bullpen.

Being able to throw 200+ innings year after year is a tough task, one that no young pitcher is adequately prepared for; it requires time and dedication to training, it requires restraint and maturity and it requires shrewd management to help keep the player from over exerting himself.

If the Nationals are ever going to become respectable, they have a long road to travel. Adding Strasburg was the first, very large step on this journey. Having the first pick again in the draft this year could be another major boon. Look at the drastic turn that the Rays organization took, helped in large part from their multiple high draft picks. Players like BJ Upton, Price, Evan Longoria and Delmon Young (who they flipped for Matt Garza) were key components to the Rays winning the AL pennant in 2008. With Strasburg, Ian Desmond, Drew Storen and potentially Bryce Harper (or whatever other phenom they select with the first pick) the Nats potentially have a similar firm foundation for a long, prosperous future.

Short-sightedly using Strasburg now is a mistake of epic proportions, one that we might reasonably expect from the previous management under Jim Bowden, but Mike Rizzo and his staff should know better.

Allowing Strasburg to remain in the minors also serves another purpose; while he signed a major league contract, Strasburg would need major league experience in order to be arbitration eligible. Say Strasburg is every bit as good as advertised; say that he bursts on the scene à la Tim Lincecum and Mark Prior, putting up ridiculous numbers to start his career. If that were the case, the Nats would be particularly well served to keep Strasburg down on the farm through the end of May. If he were to come up earlier Strasburg could find himself a Special-2 eligible player, and the Nats might find themselves in a situation similar to that of the Giants right now where they are likely going to have to pay $13 million for Lincecum's services this year.

Of course, no one is predicting that Strasburg will win 2 Cy Youngs in his first 2 full seasons, but even moderate success is going to cost the Nationals big dollars, and sooner rather than later. While players like Ryan Braun and Evan Longoria signed extensions soon after arriving for good in the bigs, both are position players and less likely to be injured and both signed deals that are widely considered to be more advantageous to their teams than the players. There's also one far more important factor that would preclude Strasburg from ever signing such a team-friendly deal; he's represented by Scott Boras who would sooner eat his own children than leave money on the table. Anything the Nationals can do to delay Strasburg's arbitration clock from starting will be worth millions in saved dollars in the long run and for a franchise with limited resources that can make all the difference.

Ultimately, leaving Strasburg in the minors for the beginning of the season will make him better and more prepared for his career and it will benefit the team's future. There are many pitchers who, called up too early, failed and never recovered. The Nationals have far too much at stake to allow anything to happen to the precious right arm of Strasburg. When he arrives in the Majors, Strasburg needs to know that it will be for good. If he began with the club he'd be forced to sit for weeks at a time in order to prevent wear and tear and that is lost development time and it's not as though the team has tons of extra starting pitchers just sitting around. Roster spots matter and the team can't operate on a 24-man roster while everyone else has 25, particularly in the NL and particularly on a team whose starters and bullpen can be, to put it nicely, an adventure. By premiering in the minor leagues he'll have time to build up arm strength, get accustomed to major league caliber hitters and work on his secondary offerings.

In the majors they feed off fastballs, 100 might intimidate the college kids but these are men and you cannot live on fastballs alone in the majors. Look at Kyle Farnsworth or Seth McLung or Matt Lindstrom, all throw in the 100s but all were reduced to middle relief because their secondary offerings aren't good enough. Big league hitters won't be fooled too long if all you're throwing is fastballs, no matter how fast they are. What if Strasburg comes up and needs more time, getting sent down to the minors could be even more damaging to his psyche and he might never recover. Why take the risk?

For the Nationals there is only one smart choice: keeping Strasburg on the farm for a few months will benefit him, the team, the city of Washington and ultimately, and most importantly to the team, their bottom line. There is no doubt that Strasburg will be in the bigs at some point this season, but the difference between coming up in June and April is gigantic and potentially worth millions of dollars, either in lost wages from an injury or increased wages from arbitration. If the Nationals are ever going to get back to respectability, they need to make smart choices and keeping Strasburg in the minors is the first and most important step. - Slanch, The Slanch Report

If you haven't voted in our poll on the site yet please do so. We are trying to get a feel for how our readers are looking at the game of MLB so we can write about things they want to hear. The poll question is, "Do you think that MLB should have a salary cap or something similar?"

Have a Fantasy Football or Rotisserie baseball question? Want to know who to pick up, who to activate and who the hot prospects are? Ask Dr. Roto. Let Dr. Roto guide your team to a league championship.

Comments (41)

...
written by Aken34, February 10, 2010

There is no way you can let this dude start the year in the show. What do you have to gain?

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Paul Bev, February 10, 2010

He's got nothing to prove in the minors. Let him pitch with the big boys. What do they have to loose?

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by MarvT, February 10, 2010

Wow! You guys leave no stone unturned!

• 
• +1
• 
• 

...
written by Yellow756, February 10, 2010

If you bring him up too soon and he gets hit hard it will set his confidence back

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Greg Pelahm, February 10, 2010

Slanch is right, He Shorn't.

• 
• +1
• 
• 

...
written by Henry Kohn, February 10, 2010

I don't know if he should start with the Nats of not, but Joe gets two points for using the word "eschewing" in a baseball piece. Nice job guys.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Michael Gemni, February 10, 2010

It's not prudent to let him start in the majors.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Ed Burns, February 11, 2010

I think the key point mentioned here is that they will keep him down and extending their rights to him as long as possible.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Alve Wang, February 11, 2010

Great, I got so caught up in this that I'm now late for work. Nice debate thought. Great points.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Gene Fener, February 11, 2010

I'm going to try and use "Shorn't" 10 times in a sentence today..... Great job guy's, I really enjoyed this.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Peter De Grasso, February 11, 2010

Joe, you are correct about Nolan Ryan. However, don't you think that if HE spent some more time in the minors he wouldn't have walked so many guys early in his career and could have avoided throwing so many pitches? Think what his career would have looked like if he came to the majors a more seasoned "pitcher." Would love to know your thoughts on this.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Aaron Hall, February 11, 2010

http://www.baseball-reference....no01.shtml
Look at the DRASTIC jump in Nolan Ryan's stats from 1971 to 1972 in his 2nd year as a full time starter

3.97 to 2.28
137K's to 329
6.9 BB/9 to BB/9
8.1 k/9 10.4 k/9

Strasburg would definitely be better in the minors.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Butch614, February 11, 2010

At the very least they will pull an Evan Longoria on him and not have him on the roster opening day.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Ranger18, February 11, 2010

I wouldn't pitch him in the majors at all this year. Why not push back the arbitration clock from starting as long as possible allowing the rest of the team to get better in the mean time? It's not like they are going to be a playoff team this year. And if by some strange turn of events the Nats get off to an absurdly hot 1st half, you can always bring him up.

• 
• +1
• 
• 

Answers
written by Joe Tetreault, February 11, 2010

@Aken34 - I think what Washington has to gain is a good starting pitcher. Of the players on their roster, not a one has the talent Strasburg has. My argument is he will do as good a job if not better getting outs that guys like Lannan, Balester, Stammen Martin and company.

@Yellow756 - confidence is one issue I considered. Specifically with how Seattle rushed Brandon Morrow and effectively shattered his confidence. I think if the Nats told him, you're a starter, we're gonna trust you with the ball. Don't worry about results, worry about hitting your spots and throwing the ball well and the results will come, I think even if big league hitters peg him at the beginning the team's initial confidence in him will buoy his own sense of determination to prove himself.

@Henry Kohn Grazie.

@Michael Gemni - A difference of opinion. I think it's imprudent to not get him to the big leagues as quickly as possible.

@Ed Burns - The difference between keeping him in the minors and letting him arrive on the scene immediately is negligible in my opinion. Whether they start the six year window in 2010 or 2011 it's still six years in the major leagues, the first three of which he'll get a guaranteed $7.5 million in salary and $7.5 million in signing bonus. Maybe they keep him in the minors and pay him two million to retire AA hitters next year and then in 2013 renew him at $750,000 or so, before he goes to arbitration the following year. That almost guarantees he walks as soon as his arbitration is up. Since he's locked in on a major league deal for the next three years, it's best for Washington to maximize the return on their investment, in my opinion

• 
• +0
• 
• 

once again...
written by El Matador, February 11, 2010

The Slanch Report has it's finger on the pulse of baseball. Strasburg must start in the minors if the Nats are taking their future seriously...

• 
• +1
• 
• 

...
written by Patrick Crim, February 11, 2010

Joe, that's some very interesting information I thought that there was more of an economic advantage for leaving him down.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

More answers
written by Joe Tetreault, February 11, 2010

@Peter De Grasso & Aaron Hall - I cited Ryan more to note that the idea that pitchers need to be treated with kid gloves is hardly universal. Ryan himself was not at all babied by the Mets, but he got his start in the minors like just about every pitcher out there. There is on occasion special pitchers who can make the jump. I believe Strasburg can make the jump. Do I think he would be better with a year in the minors, maybe. But that benefit I think is minimal, because the Nats don't have a competent pitching staff. The minute he was drafted he became the best pitcher in their system. My argument is based on Washington getting a return on their investment. Despite treating Jordan Zimmermann carefully, he blew out his elbow after 90 major league innings. If Strasburg can get big leaguers out, why waste his value in the minors, when the possibility of injury is not mitigated by that decision.

@Patrick Crim - There is plenty of advantage for players who sign a minor league contract when they are drafted. Without the guaranteed salary, the club can set a player's pay where it wants as long as it meets the league minimum. With a guaranteed salary the question becomes: does a club get a good return on its investment by leaving a talented player int he minor leagues. There are ways it can work to the club's advantage. If in Strasburg's sixth season the Nats were to demote him for two months or so, they could postpone his free agency by one season, but then they would be subject to an arbitration showdown, where Strasburg could not receive a pay cut, even if he played terribly the previous year. (See Conor Jackson's pay raise this year after his horrible, injury-marred 2009) By guaranteeing his first three seasons, Washington mitigated the advantage of holding salary control for his first three years of service time.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Hellen Smith, February 11, 2010

If you can avoid what the SF Giants are about to go through with "The Freak" it's in your teams best interest. He's going to own the team before he's done.

• 
• +1
• 
• 

...
written by Al Tino, February 11, 2010

If they start him in the majors he's be on a strict pitch count. If he's got to come out after the 4th or 5th inning and doesn't really have the chance to "win the game" what's the point. Let them count his pitches in the minors. When he's ready to "pitch to win the game", then bing him up.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Chris Evans , February 11, 2010

Most everything said here makes sense however the post above by Al is really what it comes down to. Pitching him like they did with Joba last year (taking him out in the 3rd or 4th because his pitch couldn't was at 80 is just wrong.

If you are on the MLB roster you should be able go full out. Getting up to speed is what the minors is for....

• 
• +2
• 
• 

...
written by Barry Creole, February 11, 2010

Slanch, I'm a bit of a novice when it comes to some of the lingo. Can you tell me what PECOTA stands for?

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Derek Seeme, February 11, 2010

Joe, are you advocating him starting the year with the Nats with no pitch count?

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Michael Carrigan, February 11, 2010

This is truly a debatable issue. I'm not sure there is a right or wrong way to go about this.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by slanch, February 11, 2010

@Barry Creole: Sure thing Barry, PECOTA is the "Player Empirical Comparison and Optimization Test Algorithm" as developed by Nate Silver and the guys at Baseball Prospectus. It is their way of predicting both an individual player's stats and a team's overall record. It has been proven pretty accurate of a prognosticating system, especially with the team records and is one I trust.

@Joe: I disagree with you about the confidence issue, the team having confidence in him is great and all, but when he gets out on the field and fails, that won't help him. The Padres were confident in Matt Bush when they made him the #1 pick, but that obviously didn't change the fact that he couldn't play. Ultimately, results are the only thing that matters.
Also, your point about Strasburg's free agency was incorrect. The delaying him until June this season works only for ARBITRATION, not free agency. Sending him down in his 6th year wouldn't stop his free agency from starting, and would be vehemently argued against by the union and Scott Boras and the Nationals would never get away with it. Look at how much money Lincecum is making this year, or Jonathan Papelbon, arbitration gets expensive FAST, especially for elite players, which clearly the team believes he will be.

@Al Tino: I totally agree, and forgot to mention pitch counts in my argument, you're 1000% right, letting him build up to 100+ pitch games, where he goes past the 5th, is incredibly important and he won't get that chance in the majors. Plus, with the state of the Nats bullpen, they'd lose plenty of those games after Strasburg came out and that would counter the point of having him up in the first place. Excellent point!

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Strasburg
written by Favre Dollar Footlongs, February 11, 2010

I think the Nats should pitch him if they will be better off. We have this mentally that we have to follow strict guidelines. We never used to have 5 man rotations, now everyone does it. If the Nats will be a better team by pitching him 3 or 4 innings then go for it. I don't see anything wrong with it. Of course they have to look toward their and his future, but if they think it's the right decision then I say go against the grain.

• 
• +1
• 
• 

...
written by slanch, February 11, 2010

@Favre Dollar Footlongs: I agree with the general truth about your point, but not the specifics you mention. Using him for 3-4 innings doesn't help him, or the team. You can't learn to pitch in the Majors, the hitters are simply too good. Trying to figure out the command of his slider against Chutley, Ryan Howard and Hanley is going to end up really bad, really quickly. The only way the Nats are better off with him in the lineup is in ticket sales, the franchise's baseball future would be immeasurably worse off.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Edward Hen, February 11, 2010

Let me tell you guys something; don't let anyone tell you that there is no place in the media for blogs. This was one of the most entertaining debates and interesting follow up discussions I’ve ever read. I love this new segment you guys have started. Both this one and the Albert Belle one were extraordinary!

• 
• +1
• 
• 

...
written by Mitch Foreman, February 11, 2010

I couldn't agree more. We had half the office arguing with Joe and the other half with Slanch! I can't wait for the next debate. Great job guys.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Chuck Wetherel, February 11, 2010

Same here, no work done at our place. All Strasburg talk, which was quite interesting and would have been fine if I DIDN'T OWN THE BUSINESS!

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by FavreDollarFootlongs, February 11, 2010

@slanch Why does using him 3-4 innings not help him? Whose to say it doesn't help him? No team has ever really tried it, except for Joba, and it actually worked out pretty well for him. He became a great pitcher last year. Had his ups and downs of course like any young pitcher. What if teams started using two starts for 3-4 innings at a time? Hitters couldn't could used to you and keeps you fresh more often.

I just think many teams just go with the norm, especially in baseball that is all about the history. What if teams would've never began shifting on the hitters like Barry Bonds and Ryan Howard? That strategy alone started helping out the defense. It's unorthodox moves like this that start trends. It's like the Wildcat in the NFL.

You take the right coaches and the right player who both have the correct mindset to do it and want to excel at it and you can do it.

Plus, like you said, even if it doesn't work it creates ticket sales. Like it or not, sports teams are businesses and they have to look at this factor, especially with the salary that they are paying him and a fan base that doesn't have much to foward to.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Mike Cardano, February 11, 2010

You know, when he was with the Pirates, Jim Leyland wanted to have his starting pitchers all throw two or three innings each and pitch every day or every other day, but he received so much flack from the players union about screwing up the traditional metrics that the players used for negotiating contracts that was pressured into scrapping the idea. Basically he was going to pinch hit for the pitcher virtually every time up.

I never understood why they messed around with Joba the way they did. It would seem to me that it would have made more sense to have brought him in for the 4th or 5th and if he was efficient he could have pitched through the 8th and if he had a high pitch count he could have come out after 7 and let Hughes pitch the 8th. Starting someone in the beginning of the game on a strict pitch count can screw up the entire bullpen.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

@Derek Seeme
written by Joe Tetreault, February 12, 2010

Not specifically. I'm refuting the argument that pitch counts and innings limits keep young hurlers healthy. That's why Zimmermann is on point. They did a fantastic job of keeping his outings short and limiting his pitches to get him tot he majors, but he still got hurt. If Strasburg shows good arm strength, I don't see why he shouldn't throw as much as he can reasonably. In fact I wouldn't consider the utilization of a six man rotation in Washington a mistake to ensure adequate rest. I'm not at all opposed to taking reasonable precautions with Strasburg, I just think he 1) is ready to play in the bigs and 2) squandering the outs he could be getting down on the farm is a lousy return on the club's investment.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

@Al Tino
written by Joe Tetreault, February 12, 2010

I think that's a huge misconception, Al. The idea that four effective innings doesn't help a team win a ball game is misguided. On a team like the Nationals with a number of very young starting pitchers, bullpen depth and overall pitching staff flexibility is a must. I would think four solid innings from Strasburg would be more valuable to Washington than six mediocre innings from Craig Stammen. Even if Strasburg is ineligible FTW (a little Intertube humor there for you) and Stammen does get one because Washington touches the other team's pitcher for five or six, that doesn't make Stammen a better pitcher. It makes him lucky.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

@Chris Evans
written by Joe Tetreault, February 12, 2010

The mistake the Yankees made with Joba in my opinion wasn't the pitch count limits, but dickering over what role he would play. I think a guy needs to be given a role, with the expectation that failure is possible, and with an acceptable failure tolerance. An example, though not a pitcher, but when Boston handed Dustin Pedroia the 2b gig he had a terrible April. The Red Sox considered the probability of that failure and stuck it out and were rewarded with a franchise cornerstone. It doesn't always work that way, but Pedroia proved he was ready by adjusting, and he was able to make that adjustment with confidence because the team spelled out for him, here's your role. With Joba, the Yankees allowed internal discussion about whether he was best suited to start or relieve to filter into public, undermining his confidence. When the pitch counts happened, it caused a greater regression. Young players need stability to find their niche. I believe that Strasburg can find his in the majors. I base that on his raw talent. With a heavy concern for eventual injury.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

@slanch
written by Joe Tetreault, February 12, 2010

On the demotion issue, I'll cite what Milwaukee did this past season with J.J Hardy as evidence that it can be done, that a team can be called out on it and that they'll still do it anyway. They had cause to demote him, but it was purely a play to retain trade value by increasing his time under club control.

The arbitration issue is slightly different. The previous year's salary is a factor in arbitration as a player cannot receive less than what he made the year before. (Things I've learned writing up transactions at Biz of Baseball) For the Nationals to avoid having his 2012 salary become a factor would be to leave him in the minors for the entirety of 2010, and pay him $2 million to retire minor league batters. That's fine, they can do that. The question is would they in his final year before arbitration eligibility renew him at $650,000 for 2013 after paying him $3 million in 2012. I would suspect that Boras would encourage Strasburg to hold out, or seek redress in the courts for unfair business practices rather than accept a dictated pay cut after his second year in the majors.

I see your point about arbitration being pricey. Since they bought just his three years of pre-arbitration team control out, they have an incentive to get the most for their money early. For them it would be better to go to arbitration after 2012 and negotiate a long term deal like the one Verlander or Hernandez got this offseason to buy out the arbitration years and a couple of free agency years, which is what I suspect the Nats will do.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

@Favre Dollar Footlongs
written by Joe Tetreault, February 12, 2010

You're making my point. That's exactly right. Washington has Stephen Strasburg under team control for the next six major league seasons, no matter what. If they think they benefit from starting the clock ticking on Opening Day, then they should do just that.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

@slanch (again) See it is a debate!
written by Joe Tetreault, February 12, 2010

I actually think three or four inning stints would make Strasburg more effective. By going just once through the lineup, the hitters have fewer opportunities to adjust their approach. Good hitters can make adjustments within the at bat, but those are the best hitters out there, and they'll be tough regardless. If the name of the game is to get outs, then getting 9 or 12 outs helps the team, especially when the rest of the starting staff has trouble doing that well.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

@Mike Cardano
written by Joe Tetreault, February 12, 2010

Tony LaRussa and Dave Duncan tried something like this for part of a year in Oakland. The idea was a rotation comprised of 9 or ten pitchers who worked three innings at a shot. So in a perfect world (specifically no extra innings) you pitch three innings on day one, rest the next two and then go for another three inning outing, rest two and repeat. Obviously, the union would be opposed because wins would not be distributed to starting pitchers, worse a true rotation would ensure that in a ten man staff, two guys would get 17 starts and the rest would get 16. And everyone would pitch a comparable number of innings. I'd love to see a team try something like that and be innovative with their young pitchers. It would also open up an extra bench spot or two, which could aid a club's offensive attack.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by mishy18, February 12, 2010

Whoa! Now that's a debate! And the comments were as interesting as the debate itself! Great job by all......

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by slanch, February 12, 2010

In terms of the pitching 3-4 innings, that means at the end of the year he's probably pitching, at most, 120 innings, that doesn't get him prepared for the rigors of a 200 inning season and that is where he is most valuable.

In actuality, I think Strasburg is probably the best pitcher the Nationals have right now, I certainly think he has the TALENT to succeed in the majors, but his innings will be severely capped and that hurts his development, and for the club theres a huge financial incentive to hold him back. Because of those two factors, it doesn't make sense to stat him up in the bigs. He'll be there soon enough, my guess is right around June 9th.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Add Comment