I've learned to really pay attention to Drayer. What she says, how she says it and what she doesn't say always seem to give indications. Too, they way she frames quotes are illuminating. I think that unlike Baker, she's trusted to not blab every single thing that they tell her. That, or her intuition is just darn fine. From her post on Lee's return today:
The question now is who comes out of the rotation once Lee is activated? Don Wakamatsu said that they are looking at a number of options. The odd man out of the rotation could find himself in the long role in the bullpen or possibly starting in Tacoma. After his outing last night, Doug Fister most likely does not have to worry about that option.
"He probably wouldn't be a candidate for that now," Wak said, "he could start or be the long guy."
If I were a betting man, I would lay odds on Fister going to the pen on that alone. Makes some sense if they want to give Snell and RRS some more rope.
I/O: Doesn't matter -- RRS, Snell, Fister, Vargas. They all have the same basic reality -- either too little data for comfortable assessment - *OR* -- too much contradictory data.
CRUNCH: Agree with Sandy and with every other M's fan: individually these guys are all very questionable bets. If your season were riding on Jason Vargas' back, you'd be in big trouble.
As a FIELD -- draw 5 to make 2 -- and with the M's superb coaching staff, the bet isn't nearly as funky, IMHO.
.
I/O: If you're gonna have a bunch of cheap nobody BOR guys -- you *NEED* to keep a large supply on hand. And if the league 'books' one -- or the magic spell ends -- you MUST have reasonable options to go to on hand.
CRUNCH: Every team needs #6 and #7 starters, no doubts there.
But that need is lessened when you have Felix Hernandez as your #1 starter, as opposed to having Rich Harden or Ben Sheets or Gil Meche as your #1. Whatever the Royals' need for a #7 starter is, Felix means that the M's need is less than KC's.
Felix is showing that right now: it's Felix and four guys from Hoboken, and the team ERA+ is 115. A staff anchor gives you margin for error.
.
CRUNCH: Cliff Lee is a second staff anchor.
True, the oblique has been annoying, but are you going to suddenly overthrow Cliff Lee's status as Cy Young workhorse because of April 2010? Do we now assign Cliff Lee a status alongside Bedard, Harden and Sheets as "Ferrari" type undependable ace?
From my standpoint, Lee's oblique actually gave his arm a much-needed month off. (Randy Johnson's back, not arm, reflected his 1995 overuse.) Assessment here is that Lee's body -- subjected to 500+ IP the last two years -- put the brakes on for a month, and that now he'll resume an arm-healthy rest of the decade.
But supposing it doesn't, then sure, that's what you have RRS in the bullpen for. And you can import pitchers from the other 29 orgs. The M's org isn't Cuba, embargo'ed to nobody in-or-out.
.
CRUNCH: After Felix, Lee, and Bedard we do need two cheap nobody BOR guys -- not a bunch of them -- and there do need to be 4-5 to pick 2 from.
The SSI way would be to outsource Snell, keep RRS in the pen, and use Fister and Vargas in the rotation. Those 3 guys on the 25-man would be backed up by the Rainiers pitchers and by Shawn Kelley.
You wouldn't want to get rid of all four, that's for sure, but in my judgment you can get rid of one.
.
CRUNCH: The bottom line is, if you can find out a way to hang on to Ian Snell, that's extra insurance, absolutely. SSI's reply to this, is that we don't expect Snell to help in any case. I'll take Kelley, Hill or Pauley as the #8-9 starter insurance based purely on performance.
But if you like Snell's chances going forward, and he is okay with being the long man, that's reasonable.
.
Cheers,
Dr D
Comments
Not wanting at all to be snarky, it seems to me that Drayer values being 'part of the team' so to speak... does not give offense whatsoever when around the players or coaches...
As a result, her own opinions tend to parallel the vibes she gets from the org... would agree that she is trusted not to "speak out of school" and so often gets hints others might not get...
Baker pointedly argues, again and again, that he believes he cannot do his job (tell the truth) if he is too close to the situation -- to the point that Zduriencik called Baker aside and good-naturedly asked him if he roots for the home team or not.
Ironic that Drayer's approach winds up giving her opportunties to report that are not available to Baker.
.......................
Interesting take on Fister. I guess I would have understood that excerpt to mean, "Fister's not going to get cut now that we've seen what we were looking for," as opposed to meaning that Fister's a bullpen guy. Could be, though.
Vargas to AAA, staying warm as the #6 SP, dilutes the LHP's.
There is a semi-opaque trap to including Vargas in the rotation after Lee's return...
That being the fact that when BEDARD returns, it will be almost impossible to keep Vargas (and RRS with Vargas, anyway) in the rotation then.
So what if Vargas pitches well for three weeks if you're doomed to relieve him of duty anyway?
If the afore is true, then you might as well drop Vargas THIS cut, so that the others can compete for the last job and provide you the most data possible.
Personally, I don't think RRS vs. Vargas is a done-deal. While sentiment in commentary seems to work under the assumption that RRS is a "fixture" -- I don't know that I've seen anything from the club itself to support this view. I think the club knew that RRS and Snell would both be in the rotation to begin 2009 -- and that the other decisions were very iffy. But, RRS and Vargas at this point have nearly identical innings UNDER Z.
IMO, the "fan" assumptions about RRS are pushing his status above what it actually is within the organization. Has RRS done any more to keep his job THIS YEAR than Snell? I don't think so. So, the club 'might' want to keep both Vargas and RRS in the lineup until Bedard returns, simply so they can make an informed decision about which lefty to move at the time.
I still think it more likely that the first guy to the pen is a lefty, because the pen doesn't have one. But, if that is the case - "today" the 'obvious' choice would be RRS, the pitcher with the team-worst K/BB ratio rather than Vargas, the guy with the team-leading K/BB.
Rob Johnson after catching Lee in ST, then hitting against him in a simulated game:
"It's always good standing in," Johnson said, "because you might think it is not such a good pitch from a catching standpoint but from where you are in the box, it is a different story. To see how good his change up is...When I am catching him I know it is coming but facing him you don't and how much it looks the same as his fastball. He looked really good. All of his pitches were right on."
After looking at it yesterday, I think RRS vs. Vargas is just within the margin of error, both in terms of which is better than the other going forward, and whether either is better suited to start or relieve given the situation. I don't think either one is clearly a "wrong" choice to keep in the rotation or move to the pen.
...RRS has a demoonstrated history of having a weak body for the rotation whereas Vargas can be an innings eater. RRS is the clear bullpen choice when you look at health concerns.
I think Vargas is more effective against LH, and thus is better suited for a situational role. So it's a question of what you think is more important.
Keeping as many of our MLB-effective replacement level (or better) pitchers healthy as possible is my #1 concern. And if you go with the starter who can eat innings...you don't need a lot of fancy bullpen management.
Not sure what to think about Vargas spotted vs LH's.
1. His splits have at times been reverse.
2. He does come sidearm, true, and throws strikes.
3. He's a 2-pitch guy now, and LH sidearmers are supposed to never throw changes to lefty hitters (the ball drops into their wheelhouses). Conventional wisdom is for FB-SL here.
But maybe. Tough to say.