Add new comment

I have no objection to sending Noesi back down to AAA.
I have an objection to making that decision based on 12 innings of work since the season started. This dismisses what he did in the minors, (where he ran walk rates UNDER 2.0 ... which is off-the-charts good). This dismisses what he did in Spring Training. This dismisses whatever it was the club saw in him that had them judging him better than Nova.
I have no opinion on whether Noesi should be a starter or reliever. I have no opinion on whether 100 more innings in AAA would be adviseable.
My opinion is generically that - given ANY pitcher who ran sub-2 walk rates for multiple years in the minors that an analysis which purports that he has a CHRONIC problem with release point has no foundation. A "release point" problem for any pitcher running sub-2 walk rates for multiple years either MUST be transient --- or Seattle is attempting to get him to do something completely new - and decided to do that at the major league level.
Is it possible he is overmatched? Yes. That's certainly possible. But the very fact that people are pointing to an inconsistent release point problem supports the notion that he is NOT overmatched -- but rather he is just going through a pitcher slump. Just like Felix did his first three games in 2006. Just like Vargas did in the middle of 2009.
But ... even if I accept that he has a problem that cannot be fixed at the MLB level ... and I accept that the entire Seattle braintrust not only bungled this decision badly ... but that they are willing to admit freely and publically, (by acting after 12 innings) ... that they screwed up ...
Explain to me why Felix wasn't sent down after his bad 3 starts in 2006. Or why Vargas wasn't sent down in 2009?
If you send down a pitcher that you pegged to be a starter - and give up on him after 12 innings ... you've set the stage that EVERY pitcher who comes up thereafter will assume that they have 12 innings to prove they belong - or they're gone.
IMO, that is the kind of environment that breeds failure - not success.
GOOD organizations operate in ways that are acceptably FAIR to *ALL* players. ANY organization that picks a rookie as a starter - then gives him 20 ABs or 12 innings and sends him packing isn't being fair to the player. And after you prove you aren't going to be fair or reasonable with your players - you've lot them all.
Send Noesi down now --- and then every prospect -- hitter and pitcher - will suddenly be looking over their shoulder.
This goes back directly to the cumulative impact of veteran entitlement goes WAY beyond just the ABs you hand unfairly to the veteran. The truth of the matter is, if Noesi has a couple of more starts like this - then everyone, Noesi included will nod and say -- "yeah, he needs to go down." But the organization cannot appear to be making panic moves ... especially barely more than 2 weeks into the season.
In truth ... the standard "minimum" time for making significant (non-injury-induced) roster changes is 1 month. This is a fairly accepted norm. Maybe it's foolish. But it is what it is - and you break that covenant at your own risk.
Noesi may eventually get sent down. I'm just saying, send him down after April 30th, the entire organization benefits. Send him down today - all that is accomplished is proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that this organization is utterly and completely clueless about the realities of developing talent and should sell, move to another town, and Seattle fans can rally around the Sounders.