Photo

Matusz


  • Please log in to reply
429 replies to this topic

#101 Adam Wolff

Adam Wolff

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,294 posts
  • LocationWaynesboro, PA

Posted 22 May 2012 - 08:23 PM

I'll take more of this B Mat, please.

Him pitching like this more this season could be a real game changer.

@AdamWolff


 


#102 SportsGuy

SportsGuy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,979 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 22 May 2012 - 08:41 PM

I'll take more of this B Mat, please.

Him pitching like this more this season could be a real game changer.

4 of his last 5 starts he has given up 3 runs or less and it was 0-2 runs in 3 of those 4 starts.

He was poor against Texas but had his luck and defense been better early on, his ERA would look a lot better.

#103 bnickle

bnickle

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,177 posts

Posted 22 May 2012 - 09:35 PM

Yes, good point about his luck. Definitely had some bad defense behind him in some of his starts. Tonight was an example of why some of us still believe he is the most talented SP on our 25 man roster. He was a stopper tonight. Felt like a W was pretty big tonight and he came through with 6.1 of his best innings of the year.

#104 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61,164 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 08:45 AM

Matusz was great last night. His curve may have been the best I've seen it. Hopefully this is a building block and he can start really commanding all of his pitches.

If the game wasn't so tight, I think we may have seen him go a full 7 innings. He still needs to work on his stamina and pitch efficiency a little bit.

#105 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 23 May 2012 - 09:47 AM

I've seen a few comments about the lack of him going deep into games based on last night. He got 9 K's. I feel like people are being a bit picky here. Would you rather he went 8 innings and got 3 Ks? If you want him going deep, that's fine, but don't expect a lot of K's. You use a lot of pitches getting those strikeouts. Not every starter can be a Justin Verlander(saw someone say Verlander can do both), there's a reason he won both the MVP and Cy Young. Matusz isn't that or atleast yet.
@levineps

#106 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61,164 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 09:59 AM

I've seen a few comments about the lack of him going deep into games based on last night. He got 9 K's. I feel like people are being a bit picky here. Would you rather he went 8 innings and got 3 Ks? If you want him going deep, that's fine, but don't expect a lot of K's. You use a lot of pitches getting those strikeouts. Not every starter can be a Justin Verlander(saw someone say Verlander can do both), there's a reason he won both the MVP and Cy Young. Matusz isn't that or atleast yet.

I want him to get his strikeouts and be able to go 7-8 innings when he's going well. He can do that if he can throw more strikes consistently, and not go to 2-2 and 3-2 counts with many foul balls. Pitch efficiency has always been an issue with Matusz. He has to nibble a bit since he's not a ground ball pitcher, but he's gotta get a bit better there to become a real #2 type starter or better.

He doesn't need to go 7+ innings every start, almost nobody does that, but when he's got his great stuff, he needs to be able to go 7-8 innings. If he can't even get through 7 when he's at his absolute best, then he'll have a very slim margin of error for continuing to be a successful pitcher. If it's <5 when he's bad, 5-6 on average, and 6-7 when he's on fire, then he's going to be a #4 type starter. Top of the rotation pitchers aren't limited to only 180 innings as a maximum.

Last night was a great step forward from Matusz. Just showing that he's still got that stuff and can command it at times is a great indicator for him. But it's not the end product, he's gotta be able to do that more consistently and do it a bit more efficiently on average.

#107 Pedro Cerrano

Pedro Cerrano

    I Miss McNulty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35,717 posts
  • LocationEllicott City, MD

Posted 23 May 2012 - 10:28 AM

One bad start in his last 5 with a few terrific ones.

Starting to get optimistic....

There is baseball, and occasionally there are other things of note

"Now OPS sucks.  Got it."

"Making his own olive brine is peak Mackus."

"I'm too hungover to watch a loss." - McNulty

@bopper33


#108 bnickle

bnickle

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,177 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 02:36 PM

One bad start in his last 5 with a few terrific ones.

Starting to get optimistic....

Honestly, you should be more optimistic about Matusz than just about all of our other starting pitchers right now.

#109 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 23 May 2012 - 02:55 PM

I've seen a few comments about the lack of him going deep into games based on last night. He got 9 K's. I feel like people are being a bit picky here. Would you rather he went 8 innings and got 3 Ks? If you want him going deep, that's fine, but don't expect a lot of K's. You use a lot of pitches getting those strikeouts. Not every starter can be a Justin Verlander(saw someone say Verlander can do both), there's a reason he won both the MVP and Cy Young. Matusz isn't that or atleast yet.

I want him to get his strikeouts and be able to go 7-8 innings when he's going well. He can do that if he can throw more strikes consistently, and not go to 2-2 and 3-2 counts with many foul balls. Pitch efficiency has always been an issue with Matusz. He has to nibble a bit since he's not a ground ball pitcher, but he's gotta get a bit better there to become a real #2 type starter or better.

He doesn't need to go 7+ innings every start, almost nobody does that, but when he's got his great stuff, he needs to be able to go 7-8 innings. If he can't even get through 7 when he's at his absolute best, then he'll have a very slim margin of error for continuing to be a successful pitcher. If it's <5 when he's bad, 5-6 on average, and 6-7 when he's on fire, then he's going to be a #4 type starter. Top of the rotation pitchers aren't limited to only 180 innings as a maximum.

Last night was a great step forward from Matusz. Just showing that he's still got that stuff and can command it at times is a great indicator for him. But it's not the end product, he's gotta be able to do that more consistently and do it a bit more efficiently on average.

This is the Orioles rotation you are talking about, we need MLB starters not so much of a focus on the slot number. We have problems even filling out a rotation. If Matusz pitches like this every time, he's above a number four rotation. Out of all the problems we have this is the least, if he gave us 9Ks and 1 ER and pitched 6 IPs each time, that's the least of our problems. O's need pitchers who can go 7-8 innings routinely, which they don't have, and those pitchers don't strikeout 9 a game for the most part. He can pitch to contact more but you are going to be much more reliant on the defense and then be complaining about that. This was the best start I've seen in a while with Matusz, I'd be pretty happy if I were you and hope he delivers similar ones and not get too greedy.
@levineps

#110 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61,164 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 03:55 PM

This is the Orioles rotation you are talking about, we need MLB starters not so much of a focus on the slot number. We have problems even filling out a rotation. If Matusz pitches like this every time, he's above a number four rotation. Out of all the problems we have this is the least, if he gave us 9Ks and 1 ER and pitched 6 IPs each time, that's the least of our problems. O's need pitchers who can go 7-8 innings routinely, which they don't have, and those pitchers don't strikeout 9 a game for the most part. He can pitch to contact more but you are going to be much more reliant on the defense and then be complaining about that. This was the best start I've seen in a while with Matusz, I'd be pretty happy if I were you and hope he delivers similar ones and not get too greedy.

Not sure you're getting what I'm trying to say.

Matusz was great last night, never said differently. The issue with him, will be can he pitch enough innings. If he's only capable of getting 19 outs when he's at his very best, which will likely only be 10-20% of the time or less, then how much if he going to be able to pitch when he's closer to his normal performance and not at his best? He'll probably struggle to get through 6, which is what he has been doing so far this year mostly.

When he's got his best stuff, he needs to be able to go 7-8 innings more often than not. Now, he's only had that best stuff once so far this year, and that one start doesn't prove that he won't be able to go deep when he's on with regularity. But, it's one sign to be concerned about among the otherwise fantastic and highly encouraging outing from him. He's still got a lot of work to do to prove he's someone we can rely on for big things.

#111 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 23 May 2012 - 04:58 PM

This is the Orioles rotation you are talking about, we need MLB starters not so much of a focus on the slot number. We have problems even filling out a rotation. If Matusz pitches like this every time, he's above a number four rotation. Out of all the problems we have this is the least, if he gave us 9Ks and 1 ER and pitched 6 IPs each time, that's the least of our problems. O's need pitchers who can go 7-8 innings routinely, which they don't have, and those pitchers don't strikeout 9 a game for the most part. He can pitch to contact more but you are going to be much more reliant on the defense and then be complaining about that. This was the best start I've seen in a while with Matusz, I'd be pretty happy if I were you and hope he delivers similar ones and not get too greedy.

Not sure you're getting what I'm trying to say.

Matusz was great last night, never said differently. The issue with him, will be can he pitch enough innings. If he's only capable of getting 19 outs when he's at his very best, which will likely only be 10-20% of the time or less, then how much if he going to be able to pitch when he's closer to his normal performance and not at his best? He'll probably struggle to get through 6, which is what he has been doing so far this year mostly.

When he's got his best stuff, he needs to be able to go 7-8 innings more often than not. Now, he's only had that best stuff once so far this year, and that one start doesn't prove that he won't be able to go deep when he's on with regularity. But, it's one sign to be concerned about among the otherwise fantastic and highly encouraging outing from him. He's still got a lot of work to do to prove he's someone we can rely on for big things.

I'm not counting on him going more than seven with his best start, more likely six like we saw yesterday. As you mentioned, he's not a ground-ball pitch, so he'll need more pitches to begin with. He could go Tommy Hunter and give you 7-8 innings, but that's not going to be his best stuff. Likewise, I'm not counting on him pitching this great every time, but I think he could give similar performances like we saw in September 2010. In essence, is he going to be top of the rotation, probably not. Can he be a solid #3 pitcher, I think that's possible. Get innings eaters at the end of the rotation to make up for his deficiencies.
@levineps

#112 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61,164 posts

Posted 24 May 2012 - 08:13 AM

I'm not counting on him going more than seven with his best start, more likely six like we saw yesterday. As you mentioned, he's not a ground-ball pitch, so he'll need more pitches to begin with. He could go Tommy Hunter and give you 7-8 innings, but that's not going to be his best stuff. Likewise, I'm not counting on him pitching this great every time, but I think he could give similar performances like we saw in September 2010. In essence, is he going to be top of the rotation, probably not. Can he be a solid #3 pitcher, I think that's possible. Get innings eaters at the end of the rotation to make up for his deficiencies.

If all he can be is possibly a #3 starter, then I'll be a bit disappointed. Certainly a good outcome given what he looked like last year, but not the best outcome considering where he was drafted and how he looked up until last season. I still think he has it within him to be a very good #2, with only his lack of great durability/stamina preventing him from being a fringy #1. I still think the things that are holding him back are things that he can fix. Step one is definitely just get back to being able to pitch well at all, which he has started to do nicely over the past 5 or so outings. After another couple months of this, then hopefully he can start moving on and getting better at the other things he needs to do to really hit his ceiling, or at least come close to it.

#113 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 24 May 2012 - 08:26 AM

I'm not counting on him going more than seven with his best start, more likely six like we saw yesterday. As you mentioned, he's not a ground-ball pitch, so he'll need more pitches to begin with. He could go Tommy Hunter and give you 7-8 innings, but that's not going to be his best stuff. Likewise, I'm not counting on him pitching this great every time, but I think he could give similar performances like we saw in September 2010. In essence, is he going to be top of the rotation, probably not. Can he be a solid #3 pitcher, I think that's possible. Get innings eaters at the end of the rotation to make up for his deficiencies.

If all he can be is possibly a #3 starter, then I'll be a bit disappointed. Certainly a good outcome given what he looked like last year, but not the best outcome considering where he was drafted and how he looked up until last season. I still think he has it within him to be a very good #2, with only his lack of great durability/stamina preventing him from being a fringy #1. I still think the things that are holding him back are things that he can fix. Step one is definitely just get back to being able to pitch well at all, which he has started to do nicely over the past 5 or so outings. After another couple months of this, then hopefully he can start moving on and getting better at the other things he needs to do to really hit his ceiling, or at least come close to it.

Yes, I agree with you that you don't draft a 4th overall pick to be a middle of the rotation starter, however it could be a lot worse given how unpredictable the MLB draft is. I think the things are somewhat fixable, I think what you saw the other night is close to the ceiling with him. Maybe he could get to 7, instead of 6.
@levineps

#114 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,386 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 24 May 2012 - 08:38 AM

Yes, I agree with you that you don't draft a 4th overall pick to be a middle of the rotation starter, however it could be a lot worse given how unpredictable the MLB draft is. I think the things are somewhat fixable, I think what you saw the other night is close to the ceiling with him. Maybe he could get to 7, instead of 6.


Actually, if you draft a 4th overall pick, you hope for that, because that means he didn't bust. LOTS of them never stick in the ML or end up in the pen, if he's still a mid rotation starter on a good team, you are doing well for yourself.

His strikeout style is what keeps him from getting to the 8th. He's a flyball pitcher, if he uses his D to get deeper into games, he's going to give up more HR, and get pulled sooner. It's a catch 22, and part of what was wrong last year I think.
@JeremyMStrain

#115 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61,164 posts

Posted 24 May 2012 - 08:50 AM

Actually, if you draft a 4th overall pick, you hope for that, because that means he didn't bust. LOTS of them never stick in the ML or end up in the pen, if he's still a mid rotation starter on a good team, you are doing well for yourself.

Sure, on average if you draft a top-5 guy turning into a #3 starter is a respectable return.

However, if that top-5 pick then dominates your minor league system, flying through from A-ball all the way to the majors in his first professional season and holds his own once he's at the MLB level, and then has a good to great second half of his first full MLB season...then your expectations rightfully go up a little bit.

I still think he can be the guy we really want him to be. And the good news so far this year is that worst case he looks like he'll be a guy who can at least hold down a mid- to back-of-the-rotation spot, which he clearly didn't look like he was capable of doing last year. Those fears have been put to bed at least temporarily, and now we can start trying to figure out if he can be even better.

#116 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,386 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 24 May 2012 - 09:11 AM

Actually, if you draft a 4th overall pick, you hope for that, because that means he didn't bust. LOTS of them never stick in the ML or end up in the pen, if he's still a mid rotation starter on a good team, you are doing well for yourself.

Sure, on average if you draft a top-5 guy turning into a #3 starter is a respectable return.

However, if that top-5 pick then dominates your minor league system, flying through from A-ball all the way to the majors in his first professional season and holds his own once he's at the MLB level, and then has a good to great second half of his first full MLB season...then your expectations rightfully go up a little bit.

I still think he can be the guy we really want him to be. And the good news so far this year is that worst case he looks like he'll be a guy who can at least hold down a mid- to back-of-the-rotation spot, which he clearly didn't look like he was capable of doing last year. Those fears have been put to bed at least temporarily, and now we can start trying to figure out if he can be even better.


It's all in the translation though. Any minor league pitcher with advanced secondaries is going to mow through competition, because in general they can't hit really good offspeed stuff until the ML level, so it was misleading success. Now he knows what works, and knows he can't use his defense to keep his counts down as much as he would like. Until he finds a pitch that will create groundballs or saw people off and pop them up, he's going to have higher pitch counts while he pitches away from contact. His FB just isn't good enough to get cheap outs with.
@JeremyMStrain

#117 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61,164 posts

Posted 24 May 2012 - 09:32 AM

It's all in the translation though. Any minor league pitcher with advanced secondaries is going to mow through competition, because in general they can't hit really good offspeed stuff until the ML level, so it was misleading success. Now he knows what works, and knows he can't use his defense to keep his counts down as much as he would like. Until he finds a pitch that will create groundballs or saw people off and pop them up, he's going to have higher pitch counts while he pitches away from contact. His FB just isn't good enough to get cheap outs with.

I agree with this.

To really reach his potential he's going to have to make changes that allow him to go deeper into games. I think right now we're looking at him becoming a 5-6 inning pitcher with good rate numbers. That's still quite valuable, but ideally he can figure a way, by attacking with his offspeed stuff in the zone more often or using his 2-seamer more to get GBs or something, to lower his pitch counts and allow him to get deeper into the game on a more regular basis.

#118 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,386 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 24 May 2012 - 09:37 AM

It's all in the translation though. Any minor league pitcher with advanced secondaries is going to mow through competition, because in general they can't hit really good offspeed stuff until the ML level, so it was misleading success. Now he knows what works, and knows he can't use his defense to keep his counts down as much as he would like. Until he finds a pitch that will create groundballs or saw people off and pop them up, he's going to have higher pitch counts while he pitches away from contact. His FB just isn't good enough to get cheap outs with.

I agree with this.

To really reach his potential he's going to have to make changes that allow him to go deeper into games. I think right now we're looking at him becoming a 5-6 inning pitcher with good rate numbers. That's still quite valuable, but ideally he can figure a way, by attacking with his offspeed stuff in the zone more often or using his 2-seamer more to get GBs or something, to lower his pitch counts and allow him to get deeper into the game on a more regular basis.


Yeah I was hoping he was going to replace the 4S with the 2S, but it hasn't happened, that would probably be enough to get him through an extra inning or two. Right now he spends too much time getting them to 2-strikes so he can hit them with the curve or change for the K.
@JeremyMStrain

#119 Oriole85

Oriole85

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,321 posts
  • LocationNorthern VA

Posted 24 May 2012 - 09:51 AM


Yes, I agree with you that you don't draft a 4th overall pick to be a middle of the rotation starter, however it could be a lot worse given how unpredictable the MLB draft is. I think the things are somewhat fixable, I think what you saw the other night is close to the ceiling with him. Maybe he could get to 7, instead of 6.


Actually, if you draft a 4th overall pick, you hope for that, because that means he didn't bust. LOTS of them never stick in the ML or end up in the pen, if he's still a mid rotation starter on a good team, you are doing well for yourself.

His strikeout style is what keeps him from getting to the 8th. He's a flyball pitcher, if he uses his D to get deeper into games, he's going to give up more HR, and get pulled sooner. It's a catch 22, and part of what was wrong last year I think.

Let's put it this way if Bundy turns into a middle of a rotation pitcher would he be a failure?, I guess not. Would you be disappointed absolutely.

I guess another number four overall pick(it's a theme with the O's), Hobgood we would think the world of if somehow became a middle of the rotation or if he just made the rotation.

My point is it's all relative. But when you have a top draft selections year-after-year, you want to think they can reach their ceilings, doesn't always happen. I don't think when the Orioles drafted any of these top selections they were like hopefully he ends up in the 'pen or as a 4th OFer.

The whole slot thing is a bit confusing since we there are actually 30 "number one" slots, but I think for clairification purposes, you are usually talking about first division since it's always on a "good team" they are a ___ slot pitcher.
@levineps

#120 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,386 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 24 May 2012 - 10:04 AM

Let's put it this way if Bundy turns into a middle of a rotation pitcher would he be a failure?, I guess not. Would you be disappointed absolutely.

I guess another number four overall pick(it's a theme with the O's), Hobgood we would think the world of if somehow became a middle of the rotation or if he just made the rotation.

My point is it's all relative. But when you have a top draft selections year-after-year, you want to think they can reach their ceilings, doesn't always happen. I don't think when the Orioles drafted any of these top selections they were like hopefully he ends up in the 'pen or as a 4th OFer.

The whole slot thing is a bit confusing since we there are actually 30 "number one" slots, but I think for clairification purposes, you are usually talking about first division since it's always on a "good team" they are a ___ slot pitcher.


Again, you're getting caught up in hype an expectations. You have to realize that there is a very high bust rate on EVERY prospect, including Bundy, until they produce in the ML. Don't get caught up in that whole, this player is a number 10 prospect, or top 3 prospect in baseball. It means nothing until they deliver on that promise at the ML level. Yes, educated guesses say he will be a great ML pitcher, but that's all it is until he actually does it.

When they draft players they are always thinking, I'm pretty sure this guy is going to help our ML team in some way, and in many cases they are considering that floor you are thinking about now. This guy could be an ace, but at worst case should be a solid 4th starter, I'm sure that exact line popped up in 2009.

There aren't 30 no. 1 slots, there are slots 1-30 in the first round, and a "good team" is another way of saying first division, it's just semantics. BMat can be a solid #3 on a 1st division team, hopefully slotted behind an Ace and a #1/2 type. I think he ends up having a better year than Arrieta, and still think Jake is our Josh Bard. Serviceable in the rotation, but could be a standout closer.
@JeremyMStrain




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=