373C34383D3C276264132A323B3C3C7D303C530 wrote: I think it's significant that Hutchsion-despite 74 MLB starts-has never proven to be an effective pitcher. Williams, Brault and Glasnow are in the same boat, just with less experience. I hope the "competition" is legit and not just a dog and pony show in which Hutchison will "win" in order to save face after the controversial trade that brought him here. ST stats can be misleading since it's a SSS and pitchers may be experimenting. But it's hard to ignore that whatever Hutchison is doing is not working and what he previously did in Toronto was also ineffective. But Hurdle cannot find a standout despite Williams and Brault being far more effective than Hutchison and Glasnow. That worries me.
It sounds like if Hutchison is named the 5th starter, you won't believe anything the management team says in their reasoning because you didn't like the trade?
No. If Hutchison is named the starter I won't believe their reasoning because of his history of ineffectiveness in Toronto, his horrible ST this year, and the fact that not one but two of the others supposedly competing for that role vastly outperformed him. The trade only provides a rationale for why the FO would like Hutchison to emerge as the winner of that 4-man competition. It shouldn't dictate that he wins the job. If he earned it, I would be 100% in favor of it regardless of whether I liked the trade or not. If he doesn't earn it then I won't believe their reasoning.
Keep in mind that Hutchison is not a reclamation project trying to regain a previous level of high performance. He was not an effective pitcher for Toronto despite winning some games due to great run support. The year he was 13-5 he did so with a 5.57 ERA averaging almost 11 hits/IP. To his credit, he did pitch some good games for the Blue Jays including 2 shutouts. But Jeff Locke pitched a few good games for the Pirates including a shutout and the FO chose not to retain him because of the total body of his disappointing work. Hutchison's career best ERA for Toronto was 4.48. Doesn't mean he can't improve (which is essentially the reasoning given for the trade). But by the same token Williams or Brault might also improve. The difference is that with 74 starts and 418 MLB innings under his belt, Hutchison has failed after ample opportunities. And his ST offers no reason to be optimistic that he can take his game to a higher level. So if the FO has given Williams and Brault the opportunity to demonstrate that they should be the #5 starter and they make good on that opportunity, it will be difficult to accept an explanation that says the guy who failed miserably in his opportunity gets the job.
Spring Training Baseball
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
Bobster21
Spring Training Baseball
535F5E050C050D00071802350 wrote: Possibly Brault will be named the number 5 starting pitcher and Hutchison will begin the season in the bullpen. It sounds a little like Huntington may want to bring two of the pitchers fighting for the number 5 slot north when they open the season.
Hutchison is out of options and has done nothing to win the #5 spot and should reasonably begin the season in the bullpen as a long reliever who can start in a pinch rather than calling up someone from AAA for 1 or 2 starts as needed. I think the #5 spot should go to Williams or Brault with the other going to AAA to get regular starts.
Hutchison is out of options and has done nothing to win the #5 spot and should reasonably begin the season in the bullpen as a long reliever who can start in a pinch rather than calling up someone from AAA for 1 or 2 starts as needed. I think the #5 spot should go to Williams or Brault with the other going to AAA to get regular starts.
-
fjk090852-7
- Posts: 3495
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 2:52 pm
Spring Training Baseball
I thought I heard Huntington say on his show yesterday that all four candidates for the number 5 starter have options remaining. So Hutchison could go to AAA if he did not make the starting rotation.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Spring Training Baseball
4B666B7A7D6C7B3B38090 wrote: I think it's significant that Hutchsion-despite 74 MLB starts-has never proven to be an effective pitcher. Williams, Brault and Glasnow are in the same boat, just with less experience. I hope the "competition" is legit and not just a dog and pony show in which Hutchison will "win" in order to save face after the controversial trade that brought him here. ST stats can be misleading since it's a SSS and pitchers may be experimenting. But it's hard to ignore that whatever Hutchison is doing is not working and what he previously did in Toronto was also ineffective. But Hurdle cannot find a standout despite Williams and Brault being far more effective than Hutchison and Glasnow. That worries me.
It sounds like if Hutchison is named the 5th starter, you won't believe anything the management team says in their reasoning because you didn't like the trade?
No. If Hutchison is named the starter I won't believe their reasoning because of his history of ineffectiveness in Toronto, his horrible ST this year, and the fact that not one but two of the others supposedly competing for that role vastly outperformed him. The trade only provides a rationale for why the FO would like Hutchison to emerge as the winner of that 4-man competition. It shouldn't dictate that he wins the job. If he earned it, I would be 100% in favor of it regardless of whether I liked the trade or not. If he doesn't earn it then I won't believe their reasoning.
Keep in mind that Hutchison is not a reclamation project trying to regain a previous level of high performance. He was not an effective pitcher for Toronto despite winning some games due to great run support. The year he was 13-5 he did so with a 5.57 ERA averaging almost 11 hits/IP. To his credit, he did pitch some good games for the Blue Jays including 2 shutouts. But Jeff Locke pitched a few good games for the Pirates including a shutout and the FO chose not to retain him because of the total body of his disappointing work. Hutchison's career best ERA for Toronto was 4.48. Doesn't mean he can't improve (which is essentially the reasoning given for the trade). But by the same token Williams or Brault might also improve. The difference is that with 74 starts and 418 MLB innings under his belt, Hutchison has failed after ample opportunities. And his ST offers no reason to be optimistic that he can take his game to a higher level. So if the FO has given Williams and Brault the opportunity to demonstrate that they should be the #5 starter and they make good on that opportunity, it will be difficult to accept an explanation that says the guy who failed miserably in his opportunity gets the job.
But you also know that Spring Training stats don't tell the whole story. He could be doing better work in the film room or in practice or in his sessions outside the games. If management said that, it won't be believed by most because people don't want to believe that.
Hutchison is only one year older than Brault and Williams. They all have pretty similar minor league numbers. Hutchison has four years experience in the majors (400 IP). Is it fair to compare Hutchison's major league numbers to other's minor league numbers? Is a 3.10 ERA in the minors better than 4.90 ERA in the majors?
If Hutchison never pitched in the majors, would you have a different opinion of him? Overall, how he was had is the main reason why people will be down on him more than the others if he doesn't pitch well. It is hard to deny that.
It sounds like if Hutchison is named the 5th starter, you won't believe anything the management team says in their reasoning because you didn't like the trade?
No. If Hutchison is named the starter I won't believe their reasoning because of his history of ineffectiveness in Toronto, his horrible ST this year, and the fact that not one but two of the others supposedly competing for that role vastly outperformed him. The trade only provides a rationale for why the FO would like Hutchison to emerge as the winner of that 4-man competition. It shouldn't dictate that he wins the job. If he earned it, I would be 100% in favor of it regardless of whether I liked the trade or not. If he doesn't earn it then I won't believe their reasoning.
Keep in mind that Hutchison is not a reclamation project trying to regain a previous level of high performance. He was not an effective pitcher for Toronto despite winning some games due to great run support. The year he was 13-5 he did so with a 5.57 ERA averaging almost 11 hits/IP. To his credit, he did pitch some good games for the Blue Jays including 2 shutouts. But Jeff Locke pitched a few good games for the Pirates including a shutout and the FO chose not to retain him because of the total body of his disappointing work. Hutchison's career best ERA for Toronto was 4.48. Doesn't mean he can't improve (which is essentially the reasoning given for the trade). But by the same token Williams or Brault might also improve. The difference is that with 74 starts and 418 MLB innings under his belt, Hutchison has failed after ample opportunities. And his ST offers no reason to be optimistic that he can take his game to a higher level. So if the FO has given Williams and Brault the opportunity to demonstrate that they should be the #5 starter and they make good on that opportunity, it will be difficult to accept an explanation that says the guy who failed miserably in his opportunity gets the job.
But you also know that Spring Training stats don't tell the whole story. He could be doing better work in the film room or in practice or in his sessions outside the games. If management said that, it won't be believed by most because people don't want to believe that.
Hutchison is only one year older than Brault and Williams. They all have pretty similar minor league numbers. Hutchison has four years experience in the majors (400 IP). Is it fair to compare Hutchison's major league numbers to other's minor league numbers? Is a 3.10 ERA in the minors better than 4.90 ERA in the majors?
If Hutchison never pitched in the majors, would you have a different opinion of him? Overall, how he was had is the main reason why people will be down on him more than the others if he doesn't pitch well. It is hard to deny that.
-
Bobster21
Spring Training Baseball
4E454D4144455E1B1D6A534B4245450449452A0 wrote:
But you also know that Spring Training stats don't tell the whole story. He could be doing better work in the film room or in practice or in his sessions outside the games. If management said that, it won't be believed by most because people don't want to believe that.
Hutchison is only one year older than Brault and Williams. They all have pretty similar minor league numbers. Hutchison has four years experience in the majors (400 IP). Is it fair to compare Hutchison's major league numbers to other's minor league numbers? Is a 3.10 ERA in the minors better than 4.90 ERA in the majors?
If Hutchison never pitched in the majors, would you have a different opinion of him? Overall, how he was had is the main reason why people will be down on him more than the others if he doesn't pitch well. It is hard to deny that.
Kinda hard to believe Hutchison is a ball 'o fire everywhere but on the mound. And if he is, then whatever he's working on that's so darned impressive doesn't seem to be getting batters out in games. And I'm not comparing minor league stats. Brault, Williams and Hutchison are all relatively young and are all trying to establish themselves as competent major league pitchers. All were all given a chance to win the #5 slot. Of those 3, it's a bit surprising that Hutchison is performing so much worse than the other 2 since he's had a fair amount of major league experience (74 starts).
As for probable fan reactions:
If Williams or Brault get the job based on solid ST work in their "competition" and then struggle, fans won't be happy. If Hutchison get the job despite a terrible ST, fans will be upset that the FO handed him the job in hopes he would confirm NH's explanation that they traded 2 prospects and Liriano because they wanted Hutchison so badly. So you're probably right about that, Dog. I doubt anyone will buy your theory that he gets the job based on very impressive work in ST everywhere except when he faced batters.
But you also know that Spring Training stats don't tell the whole story. He could be doing better work in the film room or in practice or in his sessions outside the games. If management said that, it won't be believed by most because people don't want to believe that.
Hutchison is only one year older than Brault and Williams. They all have pretty similar minor league numbers. Hutchison has four years experience in the majors (400 IP). Is it fair to compare Hutchison's major league numbers to other's minor league numbers? Is a 3.10 ERA in the minors better than 4.90 ERA in the majors?
If Hutchison never pitched in the majors, would you have a different opinion of him? Overall, how he was had is the main reason why people will be down on him more than the others if he doesn't pitch well. It is hard to deny that.
Kinda hard to believe Hutchison is a ball 'o fire everywhere but on the mound. And if he is, then whatever he's working on that's so darned impressive doesn't seem to be getting batters out in games. And I'm not comparing minor league stats. Brault, Williams and Hutchison are all relatively young and are all trying to establish themselves as competent major league pitchers. All were all given a chance to win the #5 slot. Of those 3, it's a bit surprising that Hutchison is performing so much worse than the other 2 since he's had a fair amount of major league experience (74 starts).
As for probable fan reactions:
If Williams or Brault get the job based on solid ST work in their "competition" and then struggle, fans won't be happy. If Hutchison get the job despite a terrible ST, fans will be upset that the FO handed him the job in hopes he would confirm NH's explanation that they traded 2 prospects and Liriano because they wanted Hutchison so badly. So you're probably right about that, Dog. I doubt anyone will buy your theory that he gets the job based on very impressive work in ST everywhere except when he faced batters.
Spring Training Baseball
Frazier and Cutch both with homers in the first inning today. FYI, I think every ST game is on TV from here on out, either on Root, or the opposing team's feed, if you are an Extra Innings or MLB.tv subscriber.
Nice to see Cutch hit one out.
Nice to see Cutch hit one out.
Spring Training Baseball
Nova's looking good. 6 Ks through 4 IP. Only one mistake that Sano hammered.
-
fjk090852-7
- Posts: 3495
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 2:52 pm
Spring Training Baseball
Is it possible that the Bucs would have 5 lefties in the bullpen with Watson, Rivero, Bastardo, LeBlanc and Webb. Webb looked very good tonight and it may be tough to return him to the Yanks.
Spring Training Baseball
2A26277C757C74797E617B4C0 wrote: Is it possible that the Bucs would have 5 lefties in the bullpen with Watson, Rivero, Bastardo, LeBlanc and Webb. Webb looked very good tonight and it may be tough to return him to the Yanks.
As long as they can get guys out, I don't care what hand they throw with.
As long as they can get guys out, I don't care what hand they throw with.