Add new comment

IIRC, Kelley pitched multi-innings in 4 of his first 10 outings in 2009 and landed on the DL. 
In glancing at his 2009 results -- he wasn't particularly effective in most games where he threw more than 30 pitches, (the multi-inning affairs).
So ... did WAK state that Kelley was going to be a long guy this year, or is this just the way everyone is WANTING him to be used?  Because his quote after the game was pretty clear that Wak considers K-Tex the long man in the pen.
During first week of the season, I don't know of ANY manager who readily throws relievers into 3-inning stints, unless absolutely necessary. 
Every April baseball month I've ever watched has been like a high school chemistry experiment for the managers -- trying out lots of different combos until the optimal one eventually materializes some time in May. 
IMO, the bulk of the 11-man staff argument has been based around the (flawed) premise that everything always goes to plan.  Clearly, the CLUB has considerable confidence in the pitchers on the roster - else they wouldn't have opted for the 11-man pen.  In a baseball reality where *ACES* only throw 7 innings, you're running sky-high risk with a thin pen.  This is doubly true for a club specifically built to consistently be playing 3-2 games.  TIE games create mountains of uncertainty.  And the club started the season with TWO 7th-inning ties. 
Since the club plays 10 games before an off-day, I'd be shocked if there isn't some serious scrambling during these first couple of weeks.  But, when Lee returns, who gets sent down?  I think that choice is best served if you have ALREADY seen everyone in action as much as possible.  If K-Tex or Kelley or White implodes ... maybe Fister heads to the pen. 
It's not JUST about today's game - especially in April.  Good managers have to balance the long AND short-term concerns.  They have to balance personalities against stat sheets.  They have to balance actions against player X that might have effects on player Y.  For a real GM - *NO* decision is in a vaccuum that only applies to the immediate situation.  And for those Managers that DO mono-focus on this one moment without contemplating all those other variables and ramifications ... well, those guys typically end up coaching in places like Pittsburgh or Washington, blaming their 100-loss seasons on the GM.