Had some typing to do, so slapped on Geoff Baker Live! in the background. In a 60-minute riff, I counted 14 points that hadn't occurred to me in quite the way that Geoffy made them.
Gotta love that ratio. You've gotta go through 60 SSI posts -- a full weekend's worth -- to get to 14 things worth reading. He did it in 60 minutes.
Radio / podcast / similar aren't too tough if you are working with a straight man who has a set of talking points, gives you a breath of air for 5-10 seconds every minute or two, to get your thoughts wound around the spool again.
To riff solo for 60 consecutive minutes, without a script, is exponentially tougher.
The show is rough-hewn, but substantial. He says he did show #13 of about 30 total this spring. Three cheers for da Baker. Moshing off him a bit:
.
=== Sizzler: Doug Fister ===
I/O: Geoffy points out that of the four realistic candidates for the #5 slot:
That Fister has one thing not-in-common with the other three pitchers.
It hadn't occurred to me that this might be important. But look again, and the "What! Three or Four Lefthanders!?" howl that does not apply to Erik Bedard, does apply to RRS, Vargas, and French.
Baker, following SSI, emphasized that if you were talking about bringing in another #2 or #3 starting pitcher, you wouldn't worry about it. But when you are talking about #5 starters -- you don't want them back-to-back against other lefties.
You might reply, well, Snell splits them at #4, but -- rotations don't stay in lockstep for long. Whoever your 5 starters are, the first time any pitcher catches a cold, you're going to be starting down the barrel of a Lee-RRS-Vargas weekend series, with Vargas having to pitch the last game against acclimated RH lineups.
You might agree or disagree with that, but it's a fact that ML teams prefer not to be in that situation. This, logically, makes Fister not a shoo-in, but perhaps a slight frontrunner in the #5 race.
.
CRUNCH: SSI's hope is that the M's will figure Snell out sooner rather than later -- that his FB is much too hittable, and the rest of his game doesn't work well to compensate -- and that more than one of those pitchers will start.
Or, better yet, has Washburned signed yet?
.
I/O: Geoff also mentions that in Fister's first start, his first inning (3 hits, 3 runs) isn't something he can afford to do too often...
But that his bounceback 2nd inning (struck out the side!) counted for more than you realize.
With #5 starters, BOR starters, sometimes they get hit early. And they've got to rally, get it together, give the club 5-6 innings when that happens.
.
CRUNCH: Huh. Good point. As to the dugout view of scrub starters.
At any rate, SSI remains very intrigued by Doogie, and failing a Washburn/other add, would have Doogie penciled in #4.
It sez here that the M's should add a starter.
.
I would feel a lot better with another starter as well. Washburn at $3-4mil would be a very solid add IMO.
RRS is a fragile, not even getting into Bedard... A solid SP limits innings not only from your #5, but from your #6/7 starters and fringe AAA pitching.
Right now we have too many innings potentially available for sub-marginal pitchers (negative numbers on the WAR stack will kill you if you're not presenting a team of all-stars...the Mariners, as currently constructed are a 25-solid-players roster...not a lot of mega-star power beyond King Felix, Lee, Ichiro and Gutierrez)...we need 160-180 of those innings to get eaten by someone we trust. Washburn makes too much sense...I don't understand the delay.
Because the 1-2 munch innings like Jughead at Pop Tates.
They could be seriously underestimating their 3-4-5 problemos here. The defense and park shouldn't create a mis-evaluation of pitchers who ain't very good :- )
I think you're being a little unfair to Snell. They've been working with him to change his mechanics, which is going to cause some bumps in the road. I understand they are trying to pitch inside more.
Maybe I am indeed underrating Snell's chances to improve amigo - the M's certainly think so -
But the good news for him is, my opinion doesn't change his opportunity to succeed. :- ) Ian Snell couldn't care less about what fairness SSI has, or hasn't, to offer.
The umps are the only ones he needs to be fair at this point. After all, the M's are already being unfair with him -- *in his favor.* He's getting a better place in line than is objectively deserved, IMHO. Good for him.
The Darwinian test of hits, walks and earned runs will be fair to him. Hopefully he proves Dr. D wrong.
Highly doubtful. As you know, that is a rare occurrence....