What are your thoughts on the starting rotation?
I am curious what everyone is thinking about the A's starting rotation? I like the young talent that the A's have, however I am very concerned when Dallas Braden will most likely be our opening day starter. I do like what Sean Gallagher and Dana Eveland do for the most part, I do not like that they walk a ton of batters. It does not seem as if our young studs are ready right now, so what would do all of you want the A's to do? And I did not forget about Gio and Duke, I have a hard time counting on Duke when he gets hurt all the time and Gio obviously is still learning; both are injured right now.
0 recs |
74 comments
Comments
Alot of hope
Its going to be hit or miss. We are going to have some real good games and then some real bad games in blow outs. I have faith in Curt Young of pulling it together but we need some luck too.
by Arcman on Mar 29, 2009 12:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Mar 29, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
9-8s here we come...
Hopefully were on the better side
by Playball on Mar 29, 2009 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It looks terrible
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 29, 2009 12:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
In a word...
AACKKK!
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Mar 29, 2009 1:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It is what it is
Most people don’t realize just how weak a typical teams fifth starters are (the fifth spot in the rotation averaged a 76 tRA+ in 2007 and 2008). The A’s have several pitchers who project to be better than that. Ultimately, I’m not as concerned as some.
I am, however, annoyed that the Holliday trade has pushed the team into a position where placing Anderson and Cahill in the rotation becomes the expedient thing to do, while remaining a very poor long term decision.
by CapgrasDelusion on Mar 29, 2009 2:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
What I wonder is,
Which is better: to have #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5 level starters, or to have five #3 level starters? The A’s could very well have the latter, give or take a little. If all our guys pitch well enough to be “#3 worthy,” but none pitches well enough to be better, how good a rotation is that?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 29, 2009 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mathematically, it’s even between having a No. 1 starter all the way to a No. 5 starter and to have five No. 3 starters because you’re dividing up, five ways, the number 15. Having five No. 3 starters pretty much means to be that you have average or above average starting pitching and you’ll consistently need five, probably six runs, to win games. I like our bullpen, though, and think they can hold down the fort late to win some 6-5 or 5-4 games.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Mar 29, 2009 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right - it's the same average but in a different form
One way, you get more 2-3 run games and more 6-7 run games, while the other way you get a ton of 4-5 run games.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 29, 2009 2:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and with that being said
it would be more beneficial to have a 1-2-3-4-5 rotation than five 3’s.
if you have five 3’s, you basically need to score 5 or 6 runs everyday to win.
throw in a 1 and a 2, and you’ll have the chance to win 20 or so games scoring 3 runs or less.
who the hell puts a signature above their screen name???
by ANti-dentite on Mar 29, 2009 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say if you have a good offense (MIL, TEX, etc.)
you might be better off with 5 #3s because you just need pitchers to keep you in the game and you’ll have a good chance to win every night. With a poor offense, I’d say it’s the opposite. With a medium offense…?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 29, 2009 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Holliday trade?
If you’re referring to the loss of Greg Smith, check out today’s game.
Let’s give the kids a chance— no one could have forseen injuries to both Duke and Gio— or that virtually all of the other contenders save possibly Outman would do so poorly.
I’m new here, but I have hope for these kids. Anderson looks like the real deal and Cahill is not far off— let’s hope he can learn at this level without hurting himself or the team so much.
by jasonthea on Mar 29, 2009 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Anderson and Cahill have the ability to become #1's or #2's
at least. Although it’s early to start predicting. Gallaghe and Brader can definitely be a solid #3 guy and the rest of those guys are #4’s & #5’s in my opinion.
Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox
by mrod on Mar 30, 2009 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have to take playoffs into account here too
much better to have the ace and #2 come october
by Keze on Mar 29, 2009 4:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How many of those #5 starters with the 76 tRA+ were projected that badly?
How many of them were projected in the team’s preseason rotation before injuries?
How many #1 starters are the A’s projected to have by your prognostications? #2’s? Anyone? Anyone?
I stand by “terrible”, I’m not going to say “Oh goody! We have more than 2 guys projected with a better than 76 tRA+”.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 29, 2009 4:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was more or less my point
The A’s have enough depth to absorb a few losses to the rotation, and keep a steady flow of guys who do project to be better than that in the number five spot. Is the number five spot as important as the number one or two? No, but if it amounts to something like 25-30 starts over the course of the season, then it’s nothing to dismiss either.
As for the other spots in the rotation, Braden, Gallagher, and Eveland would have to perform well below their projections to be anywhere near a 76+ tRA.
by CapgrasDelusion on Mar 29, 2009 6:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess if you're saying the #5 spot in the rotation should be OK because they've got a lot of
depth there, I guess I agree.
The problem is that the Nos 1 and 2 spots aren’t filled with guys in the 130 and 115 ERA+ range.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 30, 2009 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
1999
1999
More Rajai Davis & less mount Davis
by Athletics fan and runner on Mar 29, 2009 3:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
We are going to party like our team ERA is 19.99
Free PT Now!
by OptimistPrime on Mar 29, 2009 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is even ONE of them considered a Major League #3 starter right now? I don't think so.
by henduisabadboy on Mar 29, 2009 4:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Eveland probably is.
Gallagher probably is for the time he pitches.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 29, 2009 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree with even that
Eveland, well, it’s apparently easy to forget now, but this dude was sent to AAA last year for being crappy.
And Gallagher? Who knows. He has the potential to be a 3 or better, sure, but I don’t know why he would necessarily be projected like that.
RagingHarden: Yeah if you get 20 starts out of me I'll be shocked. Like, I'll wreck my drawers.
by walk off bunt on Mar 29, 2009 5:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here are the ranges of projections by PECOTA (Wtd Mean), ZiPS, and CHONE for the A's starters:
Eveland: 4.13 – 4.83
Braden: 4.15 – 5.06
Gallagher: 4.23 – 5.27
Cahill: 4.54 – 4.95
Anderson: 4.71 – 5.17
Gio: 4.59 – 5.82
Williams: 4.39 – 6.49
Outman: 4.70 – 6.21
Mazzaro: 4.80 – 6.23
Edgar: 5.14 – 5.69 (and 3.67 as a reliever)
Simmons: 5.31 – 5.60
Webb: 5.70 – 7.10
It looks like Eveland is something like an average (4.50 ERA) guy, Braden is a bit worse, Gallagher a bit worse than that and everybody else is worse or much worse.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 30, 2009 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My impression is that PECOTA is always extremely pessimistic about young players
I don’t know the other systems as well.
Also, if any of these systems fail to park-adjust (and defense-adjust) then the results are way too high.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Mar 30, 2009 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ya, CHONE is generally, but not always, the most optimistic figure listed and
ZiPS and PECOTA less optimistic for these guys. It could also be a matter of run environment assumptions.
It looks like they all make some sort of park adjustment, but don’t defense-adjust.
It does give us a general idea though - we seem to have a #3 in Eveland, some #3#4s in Braden, Cahill and Gallagher, a couple of #4-#5s in Gio and Anderson and a bunch of #5-#7 guys.
So potentially we could have 4 #3s and 2 #4s which would likely be good enough given the defense if the pen is good and the position players stay somewhat healthy.
On the other hand we could have a disaster.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 30, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe, but who cares if they are #3s and #4s in "true talent"
If the actual non-predictive counting stats like ERA (rather than ERA+) are likely to be better than their true talent suggests.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Mar 30, 2009 7:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
braden certainly has a shot at being a legit #3
"True fact: In a global thermonuclear war, the only human who would survive would be David Eckstein" -PT
by travdog6 on Mar 29, 2009 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, so do Anderson and Cahill. But how likely is it?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 29, 2009 4:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, i'm crazily optimistic/man crushing on braden so i guess i won't answer
"True fact: In a global thermonuclear war, the only human who would survive would be David Eckstein" -PT
by travdog6 on Mar 30, 2009 1:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Optimistically?
The glass is half full….and we are going to drown in it.
Free PT Now!
by OptimistPrime on Mar 29, 2009 5:05 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
New sig line!
"Warm Springs Infernal" - FSU, 2/6/09 DLD
by doctorK on Mar 29, 2009 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
uhh - try again
OK – that’s better
"The glass is half full….and we are going to drown in it." - OptimistPrime
by doctorK on Mar 29, 2009 5:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I feel immortalized
Free PT Now!
by OptimistPrime on Mar 29, 2009 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You should probably feel used
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Mar 29, 2009 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, we do have a fun little parallel universe going don't we :)
Free PT Now!
by OptimistPrime on Mar 30, 2009 8:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn't seem we would be much better off with last year's rotation either
Gaudin is sucking, Harden, well, is Harden. Gerg Smith showing today was a travesty. Duke is hurt and Blanton is the only one doing well this spring. He would have been the opening day starter.
Free PT Now!
by OptimistPrime on Mar 29, 2009 5:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Q: What are your thoughts on the starting rotation?
A: It sucks.
who the hell puts a signature above their screen name???
by ANti-dentite on Mar 29, 2009 5:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
My Thoughts are
Anderson and Cahill with all their inexperience cannot be any worse than the others (All of them)
by Trainman on Mar 29, 2009 6:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
And they could be the best of them
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 30, 2009 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
in an ideal world
cahill/anderson would start the yr in AA
braden would be in that swing start role like a dinardo/saarloos or at worst a 2nd bullpen lefty
eveland the 5th starter
gallagher working out his issues in AAA or a 5th starter, i put gio in the same boat
once you think about it, we’ve been spoiled with good to great rotations the past 8-9 yrs, so that above group seems ridiculous to start the season with
by Asfan4ever723 on Mar 29, 2009 6:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
We certainly were spoiled with some great starters
But if you remember in 2000 our starters were not all that great we had Dr. Gil, Huddy, Appier, a crappy mulder and Zito came on late. I am kinda hoping that maybe Cahill or Anderson would be ready sometime midseason to make an impact. Perhaps that is too optimistic.
by Athletic on Mar 29, 2009 8:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It Sucks
For the last 20+ years, the A’s have been obviously better than the Giants well over 90% of the time. This year … ouch. It could be really, really ugly.
The good news: I’m going to show up last minute a lot this year and buy tickets from scalpers for $3 a pop…
by solotar on Mar 29, 2009 10:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
wait you're talking about the whole team, not just the rotation, and you're saying the a's are at the same level as the giants?
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05
by xbhaskarx on Mar 30, 2009 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like our rotation...
I’m not yet sold on our offense or our bullpen, but I like our rotation.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 29, 2009 10:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Someday that might be a really good rotation.
But that day is not going to happen this year IMO.
by IM4Oakgal on Mar 29, 2009 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
ye of little faith in Billy
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 29, 2009 10:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
ooops...
to Oakgal
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 29, 2009 10:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
Danny boy, I think we are both getting a little too old for the blind hero worship stuff. But Billy has my respect always for the way he deals with the situation of little money to spend and a less than desirable facility to attract players. He’s aces in my book.
by IM4Oakgal on Mar 29, 2009 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
old? Moi? I’ve got a 3-year old and a 5-month old! And, you call me old?

Okay, I am old and they’re making me older, but on a more serious note, I really do like our rotation, especially if both Anderson and Cahill are in it.
I’ll like our bullpen more if Bailey is in it.
I’ll like our offense more if Giambi, Chavez, Ellis, Cabrera and Buck stay healthy all year.
See, I’m optimistic!
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 29, 2009 10:42 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
damn, I thought I hit the "reply" button that time...
:-)
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 29, 2009 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your son is adorable.
I am babysitting tonight for my 5 month old grandchild. I have the baby monitor on and can hear her slightly fussing. I can tell I am really really old because I feel half dead at work after getting up with her at 3 AM for feedings.
BTW? I like that you are optimistic. It beats pessimism any day . I wish your optimism was contagious and I’d catch it .
by IM4Oakgal on Mar 29, 2009 10:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
3 AM feedings would do me in, no doubt...
good thing Baby Rand can just roll over and latch on.
My optimism is contagious!
So much so, Galt is getting a Green & Gold mohawk for Opening Day this year. Look for him on the JumboTron. LOL
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 29, 2009 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seems like most everyone expects Cahill and Anderson to be bad this year. Also not much respect for Gallagher and Eveland.
Let’s not forget that this is only spring training.
Yes, they may not be that good this year but they also may have a few ok and bad games and some really good games and more that they pitch in the majors the better they will become.
You need to put things into perspective. You may be old to your kids but I am 58 yrs old and so you are a youngster to me. By the way… great eyes on this one!
I use the law of attraction in my life. In it they say don’t protest against something but rally for something. Like protesting against the war is actually giving energy to the war, but rallying for peace gives energy to peace. This actually has been tested and works.
So, I would rather look at the upcoming season with wonder and excitement that we are going to see some of our young pitchers get better and better and some really exciting games both with pitching and offensively.
Go A’s !
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on Mar 30, 2009 6:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Correct
Like protesting against the war is actually giving energy to the war, but rallying for peace gives energy to peace. This actually has been tested and works.
Yes, as John Lennon preached and sang, Give peace a chance.
Your team is your child...You love it no matter what.
by TheRaiderWay on Mar 30, 2009 8:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't expect Anderson and Cahill to both pitch like Vida...
in their rookie years. I just happen to think they’ll be better than the other available options. If they do both pitch like Vida, oh what fun this season will be.
Oh, and…
You need to put things into perspective. You may be old to your kids but I am 58 yrs old and so you are a youngster to me. By the way… great eyes on this one!
I’m younger than you, but hardly a youngster. At 58, you could be an older brother I never had, perhaps, since I’m 53… how’s that for perspective? LOL
Oh and thanks about the youngin’s eyes. Definitely his most striking feature. His baby brother’s are blue, but not quite as large.
Clowns to the left of me... Jokers to the right...
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 30, 2009 10:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I tend to think the rotation will be roughly the league average (aka not good) and the offense will actually be very good.
The A’s are in a good position to gain offense from every position in their lineup this year versus last.
Older Suzuki + better backstop at C.
G/Nomar/Barton at 1B is a clear upgrade
Ellis hopefully will rebound a little on O at 2B.
O-Cab at SS is a clear upgrade
Eric Garciahan at 3B is definitely an upgrade offensively at least.
CF – breakout candidate in Sweeney
OF – Holliday
OF – Buck/Cust
DH – Cust/Barton/Giambi
I cant wait!
I miss Chad God
by ChadGod on Mar 30, 2009 3:47 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Better backup backstop
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on Mar 30, 2009 6:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
for the Butter Battle Book?
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Mar 30, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm slightly optimistic on the pitching
Seeing Anderson and Cahill pushed to the majors so quick does worry me a bit, but I think the rotation will be decent to pretty good.
I think people are overreacting slightly to Spring Training numbers on guys like Braden, Galagher and Eveland. I expect all three to show some improvement on their numbers last year which should put them all at least at league average and hopefully better.
Anderson has good stuff and great poise on the mound, he will probably have to work through some rough patches against MLB hitters but I think he can do it. I think he’ll be a pretty reliable starter.
Cahill worries me the most. He definitely has the stuff to succeed at the highest level but I’m concerned that he is still learning to control all the movement on his fastball. More disciplined hitters are going to pick up on the sinking action and lay-off pitches that start in the strike zone but end up in the dirt. He’s going to have to learn to start the pitch higher up and trust that the natural movement will bring it down to bottome of the strike zone. Getting ahead early in the count will be especially important for Cahill and that means getting the sinker for a called strike consistently.
I’m still hoping that Gio isn’t hurt too bad and will be able to take Cahill’s place in a month or so if he is struggling.
by DiegoAsFan on Mar 30, 2009 8:54 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The next big three spotlighted in the baseball card blogsphere!!
This is really cool, and check out this guys collection. Awesome to say the least.
Here is the link.
http://themojohand.blogspot.com/
Green and gold in the freezing cold!!!
Buffalo NY.
by waxman on Mar 30, 2009 9:54 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
gaudin/niemann are being shopped according to mlbtraderumors
both out of options
by Asfan4ever723 on Mar 30, 2009 10:06 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
So Gaudin for Niemann!
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 30, 2009 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
On the job training
In a perfect world, Cahill, Anderson & crew would be the starting staff in AAA, and left there to continue to learn, then get their September cups of coffee. Unfortunately, since the rotation has imploded, we’re going to have to accept that we’re going to see them all before they are really ready, and accept the bad with the good. With Duke hurt (I wouldn’t count on him at all this year, I have a bad feeling about that elbow), Gio hurt and not yet reliable, and no other actual SOLID starters, it’s going to be a tough year for us fans. But you know what? Some of my fondest A’s memories are of watching teams that weren’t very good, but were filled with young kids full of potential playing hard and learning on the job. The Holliday trade looks odd now, since I really think we’re going to have a hell of a time getting to even .500 ball, but I’d rather see us trade him and load up on more prospects than to see Beane trade some of our farm for another team’s castoffs (starters).
by GreenOctober69 on Mar 30, 2009 10:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hopefully WHEN Holliday is traded,
the return will be better than what they gave up to get him….. And will be a stud 3b and/or SS. Another OF would be nice, as well!
by henduisabadboy on Mar 30, 2009 3:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Depressing? Frightening? Driving me to 2002 nostalgia?
While I like the idea of Dallas Braden and the person of Dallas Braden, I am highly unenthused by Dallas Braden as a pitcher. Him as the opening day starter is a terrifying. The only real SP value we have is going to be on the DL.
I really feel like we’re gonna see some young AAA studs come up and struggle, and it’s gonna hurt to watch.
I’m okay with Eveland, but I just can’t see him ever being higher than a #3-4. I think he’ll become a solid middle-rotation guy, but there’s just not a spark there. Watching games from the fourth- or fifth-inning onwards may be better for my blood pressure and sanity than actually watching the whole game.
"This must be heaven," he says.
"No. It's Oakland."
by Kyli on Mar 30, 2009 3:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
'Tis frightening to think about upon first glance.
Then again, have you watched the Warriors lineup all season long? Now that would put a real scare into a fan….
Zeigler to Geren…."A-Rod? He’s my bitch." -alox
by mrod on Mar 30, 2009 7:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bring in the kids
I don’t see a reason that Cahill and Anderson can’t learn on the job. They both pitched decent in the Olympics, and those are much bigger pressure games than AA or AAA starts. Didn’t one or both get playoff starts in AAA as well?
Why not give them a chance to show what they can do. The argument that rushing people to the majors ruins their long term potential is a myth to me. Keeping players who might be ready in the minors is purely economical.
The A’s have a very solid defense, and one of the best pitchers parks in baseball, so I cannot fathom a situation in which two future studs would thrive more. They are healthy, so why waste another 120 innings on minor league hitters?
by Thefirstletterofthealphabet on Mar 30, 2009 8:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I like the way you think,
even though I have concerns that Cahill isn’t quite ready. I’m all for Anderson getting the call for exactly the reasons you outline. Not sure what the A’s will do come August if C/A are going great guns but are approaching 150-160 IP, but that would be a nice problem to have.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 30, 2009 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If they're going great guns at 160 IP in a division race, they have to leave them out there, but
they could easily fade very fast. Hopefully Gio, Mazzaro and Simmons can pick up the slack then.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Mar 31, 2009 7:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like our rotation consisting of Braden, Eveland, Gallagher, Anderson and Cahill. Sure, not everyone thinks Braden should be starting on opening day; personally, I’d have Eveland start opening day. But I think the key is our bullpen. If our bullpen stays health (especially you, Joey Devine), we could have the group of Casilla, Ziegler, Wuertz, Springer, maybe Gio and Devine wrap up games instead of forcing these kids pitching into the 7th every time they are out there. I think Eveland and Gallagher have tendencies to fade significantly later into their starts and I’m confident that Cahill and Anderson would benefit from not being stretched out there. Would’ve been huge if we had been able to sign Beimel or Reyes.
I’d love to see Duke back on the active roster but with all the injuries, he may help the team best as a relief pitcher. Nothing more than two innings, which would be huge to get to our closers, Devine and Z. If something happens with any of the five guys above, then maybe Outman or Gio gets the call (although I’m not sure about his consistency) or we could see Mazzarro in the bigs. I’m excited to see these guys in Green and Gold!
by ATLDuck on Mar 31, 2009 9:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I kind of agree - basically I think with this rotation
you’ll see plenty of solid starts. You’ll just also see a high number of implosions, a la 2.2 IP, 7 hits, 6 ER, 3 BB, 2K. But in between implosions, you might see a lot of very well pitched games leading to a lot of wins. The stats might look ugly with the winning percentage looking pretty decent.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Mar 31, 2009 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 




















