Trust the M's Bullpen for 2015?
.
Mighty fine article rat cheer by the erstwhile Royals reporter Bob Dutton. (Dr. D does not know what an erstwhile is, but he thinks it was a bass player. Or maybe an agent for Alan Rickman ... who gave up on Rickman after 20 years, just before Die Hard.)
Dutton relays several things about the way things are going inside the Mariners' heads:
- Yes, the tentative rotation is Felix-LittleBear-KPax-Elias-Taijuan
- They want 3 candidates for #6
- They'll likely do that by searching for next year's Wolf / Young /Scott Baker
- Hultzen will be pitching for that #6 spot. Fine, since he'll have limited IP in 2015
- The field manager is "disinclined" to let Wilhelmsen compete for that role
Off of those oysters, Dr. D cooks a thin potful of soup. Oh, let's throw some pepper in: here's another fine article, "How did anyone ever beat the Royals' bullpen?," by Mike Petriello. It looked like Friday night's ballgame caused some more evidence to tumble in on the side of "the Royals way," as Petriello put it.
Mighta been "the Mariners way," but for a Michael Saunders freezeout or two. Grumble.
.
Andrew Miller
He's certainly a thrilling pitcher to watch. If the M's grabbed him, we'd all be like, whoa. :: kung fu panda ::
The thing is, though, the Fab Five also deserve their action figures:
- Brandon Maurer, who is Luke Hochevar en embryo
- Tom Wilhelmsen, who is Scot Shields with better stuff
- Danny Farquhar, who fans 10-13 men a game and never gets chased off the strike zone
- Justin Leone, who led the M's in K/9 (and is a filthy ROOGY)
- Carson Smith, whose "violence" is extremely entertaining its ownself
- Charlie Furbush, who had 10.8 K's and, now, only 1.9 walks. I said, one-plus walks
- Hultzen or Elias, who, if there are no injuries, could be Taijuan'ing it out of the pen by June
- Actually, Rodney also, who saved 48-of-51 and led the entire AL (#1) in strikes taken
Nobody's excited about Yoervis Medina, Joe Beimel, or the other Luetge-type guys available. We're not saying that if John Buck props you, you rock. The above 7-8 guys are not good relievers; they're pretty much special relievers. Any one of 'em would have been the best Mariner reliever in 1997, or other years.
The M's have two bullpens' worth. Full pause, stop a sec, grok something. You really only need four real tough relievers to have a great bullpen. The best bullpens in history revolved around 3-4 guys. Our sister team in the World Series, the erstwhile Duttonites, use 3.
The fifth reliever is certainly a luxury. But eight? Or ten?
Not saying that Andrew Miller's "Get Out Of Inning Free" card is ... anything but a free inning.
........
Not to put too fine a point on this, but .... before I studied the issue, I thought "Faith" meant "believing a thing because an authority assured you that it was true." How do you know that a document was transmitted accurately across 20 centuries? "You just take it on faith," says the (lazy, overrated) expert. Actually not. There's a Dr. D website on the transmission of ancient literature, if you're interested. There's a Dr. D website on everything, up to and including "how to waste 20 years typing stuff about baseball." 'twas 1995 we got the bright idea of arguing about ... the Seattle Mariners?! Others move on. Dr. D wallows in persona non grata shtick.
Later, I studied the idea of "Faith" and found that quite fascinating. In ancient context anyway, it captured two ideas. You've got to have them both together:
- A conviction in something because you found the evidence compelling, and
- A reliance, a dependence, a trust in that belief.
You don't have faith in the Seahawks, not in a Greek/Latin sense. You're not relying on them for anything. Pete Carroll has faith in that new right tackle; Pete is both convinced the player is good, and is depending on him. If Carroll's wrong, he's out of a job. Well, you know. A trapeze artist has faith in a fellow performer. You have faith as a grain of mustard seed in SSI; you clicked the link to get here. Some faith will land your keister in a sling.
..........
We went into that slightly non-PC topic because:
(a) It's guaranteed to be outside our paradigms. ;- ) A right concept and use of "Faith" -- faith in a school bus driver, in an anesthesiologist that you won't wake up!, in a defense attorney, in a baseball General Manager -- a mastery of that idea is, in my view, one of the columns that holds up the rooftop of clear thinking.
(b) It's an important practical (life!) theme. What is worth depending on? Am I intelligently relying on it; have I decided to rely on it?, Do I have enough reason to believe that this attorney is good at his job?, A GM has to put his faith, or not, into a Felix Hernandez or a Jon Lester. At what point am I comfortable in taking a leap of faith?, and
(c) :: pinkfloyd getonwithit ::
It says here that the current Mariner relievers have earned our (ahem, the Mariners') faith for 2015. Especially seeing that it will be 10-to-make-4. Last year was the year McClendon had to figure out who could pitch. Next year, same RP's, same manager making the switches, they're logically way ahead of the game.
The M's relievers are no guarantee to be super-effective 2015. But is there enough reason to take that leap of faith? :: taps chin :: ... Absolutely. ... So, if I'm GM, I'll cheerfully bet my job on those guys and move on.
...........
I have as much fun watching, and talking about, Andrew Miller, as anybody. But it looks like the Mariners are staying on point. They're focused on RBI. I think they're right.
My $0.02,
Jeff