Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Beerleaguer for breakfast: Phillies bear disruptions | Main | Game chat: Blanton, Phillies back in business »

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Comments

"I am simply disagreeing with Tray and BAP and Jack and BedBeard etc. etc. who say that it is "probable" that Park will be a failure as a 5th starter."

I've said several times, I actually think it's "probable" that he'll be ok. What I said was simply that, IF he gets off to a very bad start, he will not be given the usual half year to get it straightened out. The Phillies will give him a quick hook and rightly so.

While I'm in a small minority on Beerleaguer in saying I don't think Marson is as good a prospect as Russell Martin and Brian McCann were, I do think he'll eventually be a major league catcher. Whether he'll be an everyday catcher depends on his defense.

FYI - Paulino is 3-8 in three games for Florida so far with a double, triple, two RBIs and two runs scored. His two starts have both been against lefties, whom he's 3-6 against.

I think at the prospect level Marson can draw a lot similarities with Matin, probably not McCann though.

"The Phillies will give him a quick hook and rightly so."

I agree.

I think the catcher of the future is D'Arnaud, I'd love to see Marson play well and up his value for a second half trade.

Anyone going to tonight's game in DC? I'll be headed there and may stop at RFD for a pre-game pint.

(surprised these kind of questions don't come up more on bl)

gotta love that the phillies asked for Clay Buchholz.... I bet that was a quick conversation.

actually, believe it or not it seems like the consensus up here in MA (I am a transplanted Phillies fan) is that Buchholz is a headcase...

"I think the catcher of the future is D'Arnaud, I'd love to see Marson play well and up his value for a second half trade."

The catch with that thought is that if Marson plays well, the Phillies won't trade Marson. They would trade D'Arnaud.


Phils are 3-0 in Coste's starts, and in their other win they didn't take the lead until after Coste came in the game...

(Yeah, I know about faulty cause and effect logic and small sample sizes).

The guy the Phils really wanted was their relief pitcher, Bard, whom the Sox are not going to move. The guy the Sox really wanted for Buchholz was Saltalamachia (sp?)

From last thread:

AWH, don't insinuate that I want Park to fail as a regular season starter. That's just not substantive to the argument at hand. Of course I don't want Park to fail, if it means the Phillies lose games. If you're enough of a Phillies fan to be a regular poster on an internet blog (no offense, JW), I think it's pretty safe to assume we're all rooting for the Phillies to win, no?

Don't act as though a negative predicition means that I'm hoping for it to happen. If we started doing that, no one could predict anything negative happening for fear of being considered less of a fan. It's much more interesting, when engaging in substantive debate here, to try and view things objectively, and to know that doing so does not mean others think you wish for it to happen.

If I would rather be right as an anonymous poster on an internet blog than see the Phillies win, that would make me a pretty pathetic fan. And, I assure you, I am not.

Woo, boy...Yankees' BP looks more like the Mets from last season.

They just gave up 9 runs in the 7th inning.

Jack: I stand by my previous statement that Happ (and his > 40 innings of ML experience) is as big or bigger of a question mark than Park.

Park has proven that he can pitch successfully at the major league level. Happ has not.

If I'm given the choice between an inexperienced rookie with minimal ML experience and an experienced veteran who had a few rough seasons (95% of which took place in the American League, I might add), but a potential to strike out 150-200 and an encouraging rebound the previous year, I'll take the veteran and put the kid in the bullpen for some ML seasoning.

Dear Clout,

I think it's probable that Park will put up a really high ERA; I can't predict how the team will do in his starts. We have a tendency to score a ton against other teams' fifth starters. As you'll recall, for quite a long time last year you were defending Eaton as a fifth starter, despite the fact that he was pitching fairly horribly, because we did okay in his starts. And there's a certain logic to that, so no, I'm not going to predict that he'll be a failure as a fifth starter, just that he won't pitch very well and that Happ would pitch better.

At this point in their careers, Happ misses more bats and probably has better stamina. Just give Park 2-3 more starts before making a move.

We need Park in the pen. Condrey is not a reliable option with a lead in the 7th inning.

Mac: I guess I would say that Happ is 26, not a kid, and thus the age at which it's time to give him that experience. You'll notice that Park's best seasons came in his 24-29 seasons. If you think at 36 he'll suddenly pitch like that again, well, that's your opinion. But I think you're more likely to get that performance from an actual 26 year old, who's put up very solid numbers in the minors and in his brief time in the majors.

Just out of curiosity, what has inspired this confidence that Happ would pitch better despite all the evidence to the contrary?

How many times has Happ gotten through the 4th inning of a MLB start? Once? Twice? This isn't the next Hamels we're talking about. Even if Park duplicates his 2006 season, I have seen nothing out of Happ at the major league level that makes me believe he'd perform any better.

Mac: In 4 starts last year, Happ pitched past the 4th in every one of them, never giving up more than 2 earned runs. Admittedly, this is the type of small sample that I've railed against when evaluating Park, so it's not very useful, but I just thought I'd disprove your wildly inaccurate claim that Happ hasn't shown anything at the major league level.

Listen. With Bill James pulling the stings up there in beantown there's probably more than meets the eye of most scouts. Most likely his OBP which Major league scouts continue to dismiss with disdain.

Lou may not be the next Greek god of OBP (Euclis) but his plate discipline in a line up of hackers is a nice addition.

Let me get this straight:

We can have the confidence that Moyer can pitch until he's 50, but we can't believe that a 36 year old who has had 4 bad seasons in a 14 year career can't build on the improvements he's made last season to be a #5 in the rotation?

The fact that Happ is beginning the season at the major league level at age 26 should tell you something. He's not a can't-miss kid. Hell, Nick Swisher put up solid numbers on a major league mound, if we're going to use such a small sample to decide who's effective.

The general consensus seems to be that one is a gamble while the other is not. They're both gambles, however, I feel that the upside of Park (and an extra lefty in the pen) outweighs the gamble of allowing Happ to start.

Ask yourself this: If Happ were given the 5th spot and pitched poorly in his first time out (along with everybody else in the rotation), would we beat the drum that Park should replace him?

I could see if it were down to Blanton/Park or someone who has proven themselves capable of starting ballgames, but Happ has proven very little, and in his opportunity to shine and earn the role, he was unable to do so. Why the double standard?

"Ask yourself this: If Happ were given the 5th spot and pitched poorly in his first time out (along with everybody else in the rotation), would we beat the drum that Park should replace him?"

I did. The answer is no.

"Hell, Nick Swisher put up solid numbers on a major league mound, if we're going to use such a small sample to decide who's effective."

Yeah, because one inning in a blowout loss is the same thing as four starts in the middle of a pennant race. I know you were being facetious, but still thats hardly the same degree of "small sample size."

People are rooting for Happ because he stepped up and pitched well some very important starts last year. They want to see if he can do it for a full year. Park, on the other hand, has had a pretty mediocre career, so unless he's going to be surprisingly good this year people would rather see Happ have his shot. I think thats reasonable, and at the very least, I can't see why it boggles the minds of the Park supporters.

D'Arnaud is a few years away at best so Marson will have a chance to be the starter.

Marson has a very strong arm but a long release (a product of his HS QB days most likely). He's got great strike/ball recognition so I think he'll be effective at the plate.

I didn't say he hasn't shown anything. I say he has shown very, very little. Compared to what Park has shown at the Major League level, Happ has shown next to nothing.

Happ has had two good starts against Atlanta and one against the Cardinals, neither of whom were much of a threat throughout the 2008 season.

In his debut against the Mets, he walked 4 and gave up 3 hits in 4.2 IP.

He hasn't even sniffed the grass in Coors Field, yet we're comparing him favorably to an experienced veteran with 10 successful seasons (out of 14) in his career.

Am I missing something here?

I think that park is what he is...a 5th starter. He's out there to give you innings and a shot to win. The risk with using an inexperienced guy the is that you may not get many innings out of him, and kill your bullpen. The other nice thing with a guy like park is that you can stick him in the pen or cut him loose if a guy like halladay suddenly becomes a realistic possibility at mid-season.

Mac: You're kind've all over the place there. But as to your last point, "in his opportunity to shine and earn the role, he was unable to do so"... I would consider last year starting games in a playoff race his chance, and he had a 2.28 era in 23.2 innings pitched in 4 starts. How much more did you want him to shine? I think the major objection people have is that the Phillies are banking on a 36 year old who's had 1 good year in the past 7 before they do a 26 year old who's given every indication he's ready for his first real opportunity. No one says they're not both gambles, they're just pointing out which bet has better odds.
I understand the circumstances of Park's signing complicate things, but in a world free from those influences there is no doubt that Happ would be starting and Park would be in the bullpen.

mikes77
Phils won't trade D'Arnaud. There are never enough catching prospects.

Yo...New Thread.

Well, in any case, I suppose it's a good problem to have.

Beats the hell out of Eaton/Benson.

"We can have the confidence that Moyer can pitch until he's 50, but we can't believe that a 36 year old who has had 4 bad seasons in a 14 year career can't build on the improvements he's made last season to be a #5 in the rotation?"

I mean, those 4 bad seasons are kind of the ones that happened most recently. '08 was a nice season but he didn't start much. You could say the same thing about Geoff Jenkins, and in his case he's coming off a bad season that followed a merely mediocre one, and before that all his seasons were pretty good. I'm sure you don't imagine Geoff is going to revert to his All-Star form.

MC T said, "Ask yourself this: If Happ were given the 5th spot and pitched poorly in his first time out (along with everybody else in the rotation), would we beat the drum that Park should replace him?
Why the double standard?"

You've been reading beerleaguer long enough to know the answer to that.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG