MASN: Another look at Matusz & maneuverability
http://www.masnsport...verability.html

Reading this article, I get the impression that Buck is looking at Matusz in a relief role. I've seen some quotes from him that are the opposite of this, but I'm wondering where his thinking is on Matusz.

I do really love what they did last year with the last spot on the bench and the last spot on the bullpen. Basically had an open shuttle between Baltimore and Norfolk and could call up whatever they needed on any given day. They made more moves with the final roster spots last season than I ever can recall. So that really adds to the depth of the team, sort of making it an NFL-style roster where you can have a 28- or 29-man roster of which you can have only 25 guys active on a given day.

I'd prefer for us to sign a veteran SP and have Matusz begin the season in the bullpen. He'd be first in line to move into the rotation if there is an early-season injury or somebody is really struggling, assuming he's continuing to pitch well out of the bullpen.

I can't really tell what Showalter is thinking for sure but Duquette's quotes during the offseason suggest that Matusz will stay in the pen. Signing Saunders or another pitcher would seal his fate. Much is made of his splits but I'm pretty sure he was effective against RH hitters when he came back up in September. He was a different pitcher.

Yea, I think we should offer him up for Smoak(unless of course you can get Smoak for less).

I have said it before and I continue to believe that I do not think the Orioles will give him a real chance to win a starters job and because of that, i think he should be shopped.

Yea, I think we should offer him up for Smoak(unless of course you can get Smoak for less).

I have said it before and I continue to believe that I do not think the Orioles will give him a real chance to win a starters job and because of that, i think he should be shopped.

I understand your rationale here, but you do believe in Matusz being able to be an effective starter. Even if he begins the year in the pen, he could wind-up starting again during the year. Is his potential trade value really going to be reduced if he goes to the pen, and has success?

Won't someone else in the game, believe like you, that he could return to the rotation and be effective?

I understand your rationale here, but you do believe in Matusz being able to be an effective starter. Even if he begins the year in the pen, he could wind-up starting again during the year. Is his potential trade value really going to be reduced if he goes to the pen, and has success?

Won't someone else in the game, believe like you, that he could return to the rotation and be effective?

Someone will, but in trade instances the burden of proof is on the seller, not the buyer.

Also, he's never going to be a successful starter in THIS park, but teams know that. They are trying to get him for partial value as all teams should be trying to do.

I have heard that there was a promise that this BP move wasn't permanent and that Brian would get a really good solid shot at the rotation.

I understand your rationale here, but you do believe in Matusz being able to be an effective starter. Even if he begins the year in the pen, he could wind-up starting again during the year. Is his potential trade value really going to be reduced if he goes to the pen, and has success?

Won't someone else in the game, believe like you, that he could return to the rotation and be effective?

Sure...but they aren't going to give up starting pitcher value for him. He is a BP pitcher whose manager will use him a lot vs lefties...I don't care how successful he is in that role.. You can get those guys off the waiver every year.

I couldn't disagree more with Jeremy that he can't be a good pitcher in this park. I think the whole fb pitcher can't succeed in OPACY is really overrated.

Sure...but they aren't going to give up starting pitcher value for him. He is a BP pitcher whose manager will use him a lot vs lefties...I don't care how successful he is in that role.. You can get those guys off the waiver every year.

I couldn't disagree more with Jeremy that he can't be a good pitcher in this park. I think the whole fb pitcher can't succeed in OPACY is really overrated.

Not EVERY FB pitcher will fail in this park, but Brian will. He uses his secondaries too much trying to get the K, and the more you throw breaking pitches, the more you will hang. Not to mention it's not like he's throwing mid 90's so it doesn't take much of anything for a FB he needs to get over for a strike to be a meatball.

Not EVERY FB pitcher will fail in this park, but Brian will. He uses his secondaries too much trying to get the K, and the more you throw breaking pitches, the more you will hang. Not to mention it's not like he's throwing mid 90's so it doesn't take much of anything for a FB he needs to get over for a strike to be a meatball.

Yea, i think this is pretty much bs(not this post persay, just the concept that he cant succeed here).

Even if he gives up 30 homers a year, he can still be a sub 4 ERA pitcher.

Yea, i think this is pretty much bs(not this post persay, just the concept that he cant succeed here).

Even if he gives up 30 homers a year, he can still be a sub 4 ERA pitcher.

Man, I'd love you to find a sub 4 era pitcher that gave up 30 HR a year. (Trying to do some work so I can't look it up, but I can't imagine that ever happening)

Man, I'd love you to find a sub 4 era pitcher that gave up 30 HR a year. (Trying to do some work so I can't look it up, but I can't imagine that ever happening)

Happens just about every year, usually for multiple guys and even more close calls.

Last year Vargas (35 HR, 3.85 ERA) and Richard (31 HR, 3.99 ERA) did it. Plus Chen gave up 29 with a 4.02, Kenndy 28 with a 4.02 and Peavy 27 with a 3.37.

In 2011, nobody pulled it off, but Saunders gave up 29 with a 3.69, Lilly 28 with a 3.97, and Gallardo 27 with a 3.52 ERA.
In 2010, Lilly gave up 32 witha 3.62, Haren 31 with a 3.91, Arroyo 29 with a 3.88, and Garza 28 with a 3.91.
In 2009, Arroyo gave up 31 with a 3.84 and Danks 28 with a 3.77.

Happens just about every year, usually for multiple guys and even more close calls.

Last year Vargas (35 HR, 3.85 ERA) and Richard (31 HR, 3.99 ERA) did it. Plus Chen gave up 29 with a 4.02, Kenndy 28 with a 4.02 and Peavy 27 with a 3.37.

In 2011, nobody pulled it off, but Saunders gave up 29 with a 3.69, Lilly 28 with a 3.97, and Gallardo 27 with a 3.52 ERA.
In 2010, Lilly gave up 32 witha 3.62, Haren 31 with a 3.91, Arroyo 29 with a 3.88, and Garza 28 with a 3.91.
In 2009, Arroyo gave up 31 with a 3.84 and Danks 28 with a 3.77.

Wow. Never would have guessed that.

Man, I'd love you to find a sub 4 era pitcher that gave up 30 HR a year. (Trying to do some work so I can't look it up, but I can't imagine that ever happening)

http://www.fangraphs... ... position=P

Shields is usually mid to high 20s.

http://www.fangraphs... ... position=P

Schilling did it.

http://www.fangraphs... ... &sort=18,d

There are some from 2012...a few who either did it or were really close.

That kinda gives you some lists of guys to target and guys to avoid. If you have a guy that does well despite giving up 30 or so HR in a hitters park (Saunders). If you have a guy that puts up a 4 while giving up 30 HR and pitches half his starts in a pitchers park, you want to avoid them like the plague.

Thanks for the research, I'm attempting to be productive today.

1. I think Matusz can be an effective starter forthe O's but not 100% sure.
2. Smoak had a great September but was terrible for a long time before that. I'm less sure about him than Matusz.
3. Matusz might not get a shot to start to begin the year but what makes anyone so sure that Smoak would get a starting job handed to him?
4. As I see it now, McLouth in LF, Reimold at DH (listening to Buck talk about him), and Chris Davis at 1B. I don't see the O's feeling a need for Smoak or just handing him a job and putting one of those guys out of a job.

1. I think Matusz can be an effective starter forthe O's but not 100% sure.
2. Smoak had a great September but was terrible for a long time before that. I'm less sure about him than Matusz.
3. Matusz might not get a shot to start to begin the year but what makes anyone so sure that Smoak would get a starting job handed to him?
4. As I see it now, McLouth in LF, Reimold at DH (listening to Buck talk about him), and Chris Davis at 1B. I don't see the O's feeling a need for Smoak or just handing him a job and putting one of those guys out of a job.

So, Smoak shouldn't be handed a starting job but Reimold should?

So, Smoak shouldn't be handed a starting job but Reimold should?

I didn't say that. Do you think Smoak would be guaranteed a starting job on this team? The thinking on the O's should be "Do we trade a young arm like Matusz for someone who might not even start for us?" You don't trade Matusz for Smoak unless you are committed to Smoak. Unless the O's are really high on Smoak, I don't see them committing to him (starting him and giving him regular AB's even if he starts slow) that strong.

I didn't say that. Do you think Smoak would be guaranteed a starting job on this team? The thinking on the O's should be "Do we trade a young arm like Matusz for someone who might not even start for us?" You don't trade Matusz for Smoak unless you are committed to Smoak. Unless the O's are really high on Smoak, I don't see them committing to him (starting him and giving him regular AB's even if he starts slow) that strong.

Yes, if the Orioles made that trade, I think they do it with the idea that he is their starting first baseman.

Although, since he does have an option, he could be sent down.

Yes, if the Orioles made that trade, I think they do it with the idea that he is their starting first baseman.
Although, since he does have an option, he could be sent down.

What came first, the chicken or the egg? I agree. If they make that trade, it's with the intention that Smoak starts somewhere. However, they don't make the trade if there's a question about whether he starts here. So, what I'm saying is that if there is a question about it, they wouldn't make that trade.