Report: Ervin Santana to hold everyone by their testicles for a few days!

[Jim_Ackers_balls]

Stroman is built for relief work. Quit screwing around and sign Santana.

[glory]

I think the only way Hutchison starts the year in AAA is if 1) the Jays sign Santana, and 2) one of Happ or Romero proves to be "back to normal".

 

Otherwise, AA seems convinced that Hutchison can throw 200 MLB innings this season without his arm falling off.

[TwistedLogic]

In this thread: an analogy of being dragged around by your pubic hair.

[Smedley Butler]

 

Says Santana will decide between Blue Jays and O's tomorrow the latest.

 

Well that settles it then; he's signing with the Mariners in late May.

[jays4life19]

He should take the 3 year deal. lol.

[Abomination]

It almost feels like both teams (Jays and O's) are being played by his agent. He finally decides on a 1 year deal, so spew out a bunch of nonsense to target two teams with a need and cash to set the market, then choose a team with a good ballpark to pitch in once the bar is raised (*cough* Seattle).

[GD]

Seattle's more of a neutral team, just to nitpick.

[Stangstag]

Stroman is built for relief work. Quit screwing around and sign Santana.

 

This post is laughable

[Abomination]

Seattle's more of a neutral team, just to nitpick.

 

It's still a good ballpark to pitch in even if it is neutral (one year of data since moving the fences in probably isn't enough to tell - it is one year since they did, isn't it?). Also, the retractable roof and good climate add to the benefit.

[GD]

It's still a good ballpark to pitch in even if it is neutral (one year of data since moving the fences in probably isn't enough to tell - it is one year since they did, isn't it?). Also, the retractable roof and good climate add to the benefit.

 

Yes, you're right, I was mainly referring to the actual park factors. But Seattle's climate (and city in general imo) and roof definitely do make it nice.

[Jim_Ackers_balls]

This post is laughable

 

What's the funny part? That two starters that are 5'9 or less have 30 career starts since 1960?

[Jim_Ackers_balls]

You know this for certain?

 

Just going by the Baseball America Prospect Handbook 2014 edition.

 

If only two pitchers have combined for 30 MLB starts there is obviously a reason. To think the Jays organization can go against logic doesn't surprise me.

 

IMHO, Stroman is a closer type. Not a starter. I thought the Jays were drafting him to be their closer; he was going to be one of these types that gets drafted and quickly arrived in the bigs. Forcing him to be a starter is just dragging this process out longer. He'll flop and go back to the pen where he belongs.

[Abomination]

What's the funny part? That two starters that are 5'9 or less have 30 career starts since 1960?

 

What matters is stuff, not physical size etc. Would you say someone with great stuff should never be given a chance to pitch because they only have one hand, and only (to my knowledge) one person has ever done that? There's always people in life that are exceptions. It's stupid to never take advantage of those opportunities because of preconceived notions.

 

BTW, how many closers have there been 5'9 or shorter? If the answer is also 2, does that mean he shouldn't be a closer either?

[vic city]

What's the funny part? That two starters that are 5'9 or less have 30 career starts since 1960?

 

I agree that the potential success of a 5' 9" pitcher is low but that does not make it impossible, especially in 2014 with the natural progression of athleticism. Look at Theo Fleury and Martin St Louis in the NHL. Muggsy Bogues in the NBA, how many small NFL players have made it big? Ever heard of Royce Gracie? Baseball is no different. So let's not write this guy off just yet!

[Jim_Ackers_balls]

What matters is stuff, not physical size etc. Would you say someone with great stuff should never be given a chance to pitch because they only have one hand, and only (to my knowledge) one person has ever done that? There's always people in life that are exceptions. It's stupid to never take advantage of those opportunities because of preconceived notions.

 

I don't think you have allowed yourself to properly digest the information. 30 starts. Career. MLB. Two pitchers 5'9 or less. Since 1960. It's 2014. That is 55 years of baseball if you are counting 1960 as the first year.

 

You're trying to compare Jim Abbott with Marcus Stroman? Abbott was 6'3. Stroman 5'9. The ball comes in a much flatter plane the shorter you are. That is why a guy with a repeatable delivery like Randy Johnson only needed two pitchers primarily. The Big Unit was physically closer to the mound by the time he delivered the ball and it traveled much differently than a ball being thrown by someone like Tim Collins of the Royals.

 

We can probably agree that Craig Kimbrel has better stuff than Marcus Stroman. We can even say it is dead even for argument sake. Why isn't Kimbrel at 5'11 a starter instead of a reliever? His stuff is off the charts. His fastball is upper 90's. His slider is filthy. The Braves are a pitching factory. Are you saying they don't know what they're doing, yet AA does?

 

Anyways...sign Santana, AA. It's only a one-year commitment.

[Jim_Ackers_balls]

I agree that the potential success of a 5' 9" pitcher is low but that does not make it impossible, especially in 2014 with the natural progression of athleticism. Look at Theo Fleury and Martin St Louis in the NHL. Muggsy Bogues in the NBA, how many small NFL players have made it big? Ever heard of Royce Gracie? Baseball is no different. So let's not write this guy off just yet!

 

That's comparing apples to oranges. Plus some of your athletes are from 20 years ago.

 

There's nothing wrong with having a dominant closer. The Jays haven't had one since Henke/Ward days.

[fatcowxlive]

No, I just know enough to know that one spring training outing means nothing. Do you know that?

 

Hey how about you reread the damn quote you quoted then?

 

I really couldn't care less if they sign him or not.

 

We have many other options with our present players right now. Romero sure looked good the other day and so did Drabek and Hutch.

 

You're going to tell me that Romero didn't look the other day and neither did Hutch or Drabek?

[Chappy]

We can probably agree that Craig Kimbrel has better stuff than Marcus Stroman. We can even say it is dead even for argument sake. Why isn't Kimbrel at 5'11 a starter instead of a reliever? His stuff is off the charts. His fastball is upper 90's. His slider is filthy. The Braves are a pitching factory. Are you saying they don't know what they're doing, yet AA does?

 

This is just a terrible argument. No offence, but this proves nothing. I will give you that his height is a major hindrance, but you're sole argument is based on height, yet Stroman has had no problems to date in that regard.

[Abomination]

I don't think you have allowed yourself to properly digest the information. 30 starts. Career. MLB. Two pitchers 5'9 or less. Since 1960. It's 2014. That is 55 years of baseball if you are counting 1960 as the first year.

 

You're trying to compare Jim Abbott with Marcus Stroman? Abbott was 6'3. Stroman 5'9. The ball comes in a much flatter arc the shorter you are. That is why a guy with a repeatable delivery like Randy Johnson only needed two pitchers primarily. The Big Unit was physically closer to the mound by the time he delivered the ball and it traveled much differently than a ball being thrown by someone like Tim Collins of the Royals.

 

We can probably agree that Craig Kimbrel has better stuff than Marcus Stroman. Why isn't Kimbrel a starter? His stuff is off the charts. His fastball is upper 90's. His slider is filthy. The Braves are a pitching factory. Are you saying they don't know what they're doing, yet AA does?

 

You're completely missing my point. How many closers (or other major league relievers period) have been 5'9 or less since 1960 and pitched more than say 50 relief appearances? I don't know the answer, but it probably totals less than 10 or 15 - it'll be 'small' whatever it is. Does that mean he shouldn't be a pitcher at all because almost no one else that size is, even if he has lights out stuff? Sure a taller pitcher has an advantage with all else being equal (all else almost never is), but the only thing that matters at the MLB level is ability and results. No reason not the treat him as a starter until (if) he proves he can't handle it, which is the same for any pitcher regardless of size.

 

My point on Abbott was suggesting limitations on physical attributes. It has nothing to do with Abbott's size.

[GD]

Has anyone actually done a study on if the reason short pitchers failed is because they were all short?

[Abomination]

My guess is that there aren't many people who are 5'9" or under and can consistently bring it mid-90's over a number of innings with command and acceptable/plus secondary stuff, so that the limiting factor isn't height, irrespective of stuff ... but height not allowing for "stuff" ... which is your position, I believe.

 

Yeah, that's basically what I'm trying to say. Plane, movement, deception, etc really are part of "stuff". He either has it or he doesn't, and all signs point to him having it. The only real worry imo regarding his height is durability. So far it doesn't appear to be an issue, and even if it does later on in life he can move to the pen when it occurs.

 

Even guys like Tom Gordon who did eventually move to the pen put up good seasons as a starter first (and Gordon didn't have Stroman's command).

[Jim_Ackers_balls]

This is just a terrible argument. No offence, but this proves nothing. I will give you that his height is a major hindrance, but you're sole argument is based on height, yet Stroman has had no problems to date in that regard.

 

 

This is just a terrible argument. No offence, but this proves nothing. I will give you that his height is a major hindrance, but you're sole argument is based on height, yet Stroman has had no problems to date in that regard.

 

He is having problems.

 

Even in Spring Training Stroman is having some issues by not being able to throw on a downward plane. It is even more problematic due to Stroman's height:

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/keith-law/post?id=1968

 

 

As for the argument against Stroman as a starter based on height, there would have been a lot more starting pitchers in MLB if it wasn't a huge factor. Some of the other MLB would have given a player of his height/build/stuff a shot. It's not my argument. MLB executives as a whole are making the decision not to put a similar type player in a starters role.

 

Stroman still could wind up as a reliever. It's not uncommon to convert a starter from the minors into a reliever in the majors. I think the only reason why Stroman is being discussed as a reliever is because the upper levels of the system is thin and he's being put into a less than ideal situation. It's not as bad as making Ryan Goins a starting second baseman, but it probably will not help Stroman's confidence when the s*** hits the fan.

[torontofan]

"Has anyone actually done a study on if the reason short pitchers failed is because they were all short?"

 

I'd guess that a lot of the reasoning has to do with less opportunities and height bias in sports.

[fatcowxlive]

Kid, you need to re-read the quote, and learn how to comprehend what you read. Stop trying to be a tough guy and sit back and learn basic tenets of logic. He suggested the team had other options (outside of Santana), and as support for this, he mentioned how Drabek, Romero and Hutch looked the other day. Essentially he is saying that Romero, Drabek and Hutch are "other options," and evidence of this is how they looked "the other day."

 

Which is a monumentally stupid suggestion. Laughable. Which is why I made the "sense of humor" comment. Drabek and Romero are not "other options" and nothing they did in a particular spring training game changes this. Your comment about not watching the game was equally stupid, as it addressed nothing relevant, and added another layer of illogic.

 

Once again re-read the quote. You bolded the part where he said "Romero sure looked good the other day and so did Drabek and Hutch." and where you replied "I like your sense of humour". What I was saying is that you didn't watch the game because Romero did look good and so did Drabek and Hutch. I wasn't talking about the part before it.

[GD]

"Has anyone actually done a study on if the reason short pitchers failed is because they were all short?"

 

I'd guess that a lot of the reasoning has to do with less opportunities and height bias in sports.

 

Part of what I was alluding to.

[Smedley Butler]

To be honest, I really don't think that any man who is shorter than 5' 10" has any excuse for being alive.

 

Just f*** off and die already you selfish ****s. We don't need your hobbit asses polluting our gene pool.

[KingKat]

Yeah, that's basically what I'm trying to say. Plane, movement, deception, etc really are part of "stuff". He either has it or he doesn't, and all signs point to him having it. The only real worry imo regarding his height is durability. So far it doesn't appear to be an issue, and even if it does later on in life he can move to the pen when it occurs.

 

Even guys like Tom Gordon who did eventually move to the pen put up good seasons as a starter first (and Gordon didn't have Stroman's command).

 

Kazmir is another example of a guy who ran into durability issues but not before putting together good seasons as a starter. No one should be complaining if Stroman has a similar career to either of those.

[Jim_Ackers_balls]

You're completely missing my point. How many closers (or other major league relievers period) have been 5'9 or less since 1960 and pitched more than say 50 relief appearances? I don't know the answer, but it probably totals less than 10 or 15 - it'll be 'small' whatever it is. Does that mean he shouldn't be a pitcher at all because almost no one else that size is, even if he has lights out stuff? Sure a taller pitcher has an advantage with all else being equal (all else almost never is), but the only thing that matters at the MLB level is ability and results. No reason not the treat him as a starter until (if) he proves he can't handle it, which is the same for any pitcher regardless of size.

 

My point on Abbott was suggesting limitations on physical attributes. It has nothing to do with Abbott's size.

 

I knew you were going with some sort of discrimination angle. I got that. I have no clue how many closers have a similar build either.

 

I don't see the point of putting a player into a certain role just because he had success in the minors. They call it the minors for a reason. It's to polish and refine skills. There are plenty of players who have been great in the minors and complete busts in the bigs. Not saying Stroman is going to be that kind of player, but it doesn't appear the Jays are setting him up for success.

 

Yes, he has lights out stuff. Scouts have noted that Stroman's stuff plays out even better in a relief role where he can amp things up that much more. He has a solid build. My concern, as a fan, is more about effectiveness due to the smaller plane the ball will travel in a starting role, along with the reduction in stuff by being in the rotation.

[bendera3]

Kazmir is another example of a guy who ran into durability issues but not before putting together good seasons as a starter. No one should be complaining if Stroman has a similar career to either of those.

 

Ride the starting wave for as long as you can and if/when he shows issues with durability or he is no longer affective move him to the pen. Even Mo started out as a starting pitcher.

[Abomination]

Kazmir is another example of a guy who ran into durability issues but not before putting together good seasons as a starter. No one should be complaining if Stroman has a similar career to either of those.

 

Absolutely!