Stroman back to AAA

[KingKat]

Hendriks turned 25 in February, why people keep calling him 26 is beyond me, I guess it just sounds that much better when brandishing a pitchfork?

 

I don't understand why anyone minds the Hendricks call-up. When you pick up a guy like this and he does well, there's no harm in giving him a shot. He could be Jesse Chavez 2.0. If it doesn't work out you can still give the shot to Stroman once he's stretched out. If they called up Hendricks and kept Stroman in the bullpen not stretched out, that would be a lot worse but this is pretty much exactly right. The mistake was calling up Stroman to be a reliever in the first place and they compounded that by keeping him there even after Janssen came back.

[ElNik2013]

I don't understand why anyone minds the Hendricks call-up. When you pick up a guy like this and he does well, there's no harm in giving him a shot. He could be Jesse Chavez 2.0. If it doesn't work out you can still give the shot to Stroman once he's stretched out. If they called up Hendricks and kept Stroman in the bullpen not stretched out, that would be a lot worse but this is pretty much exactly right. The mistake was calling up Stroman to be a reliever in the first place and they compounded that by keeping him there even after Janssen came back.

 

 

 

I think this is what pisses people off. I really don't think anyone minds Hendriks getting a start or 2, but we're all ticked off about calling up your top pitching prospect because of some blown leads by the bullpen when you're grooming him to be a starter. He clearly wasn't called up to "get his feet wet" like some have suggested.

 

Anyway, hopefully, he's given a shot in 18 days or so.

[TheHurl]

It's going to be embarrassing if the team misses the playoffs by a game and Stroman only gets 5-10 starts for them. What a waste.

 

I don't think we'll see him again until September.

[G-Snarls]

I don't understand why anyone minds the Hendricks call-up. When you pick up a guy like this and he does well, there's no harm in giving him a shot. He could be Jesse Chavez 2.0. If it doesn't work out you can still give the shot to Stroman once he's stretched out. If they called up Hendricks and kept Stroman in the bullpen not stretched out, that would be a lot worse but this is pretty much exactly right. The mistake was calling up Stroman to be a reliever in the first place and they compounded that by keeping him there even after Janssen came back.

 

Exactly right

[TheHurl]

If the Jays had waited until June to call him up, how would that have affected arbitration? Would you not have been eligible for arbitration until 2017 instead of 2016?

 

well likely July with the new CBA but it's still about service time so him being sent back down stops that clock in the same way. The top 22% of players that have accrued 2 years of service but not yet 3 years are awarded arbitration (so there is no exact set date it's always just an estimate). This isn't about Super two in my mind, as this team isn't looking towards the future at this point they are going for it (as they should be in a way). But they are way too stubborn with Happ IMO (and many fans opinions).

 

So much of what they plan on for Stroman depends on whether they have limits on him. If they want him to help as a starter later in the year...his innings will need to be controlled or he'll have to pitch out of the pen again in September. Nothing has changed really but it just seems like they tried to bring him up for the wrong reasons (which was to build hype around him IMO).

[ElNik2013]

well likely July with the new CBA but it's still about service time so him being sent back down stops that clock in the same way. The top 22% of players that have accrued 2 years of service but not yet 3 years are awarded arbitration (so there is no exact set date it's always just an estimate). This isn't about Super two in my mind, as this team isn't looking towards the future at this point they are going for it (as they should be in a way). But they are way too stubborn with Happ IMO (and many fans opinions).

 

So much of what they plan on for Stroman depends on whether they have limits on him. If they want him to help as a starter later in the year...his innings will need to be controlled or he'll have to pitch out of the pen again in September. Nothing has changed really but it just seems like they tried to bring him up for the wrong reasons (which was to build hype around him IMO).

 

 

Do you think they should also have limits on Hutchison if they have limits on Stroman?

 

I don't mind if they do on both, I just find it inconsistent that they'd cut loose a guy who's only 9 months older than Stroman and only pitched around 60 innings last year, yet would limit a guy who threw around 123.

[TheHurl]

Do you think they should also have limits on Hutchison if they have limits on Stroman?

 

I don't mind if they do on both, I just find it inconsistent that they'd cut loose a guy who's only 9 months older than Stroman and only pitched around 60 innings last year, yet would limit a guy who threw around 123.

 

Personally I believe that pitchers are fragile creatures no matter what and you should get everything out of them while you can...but I'd be a very unpopular guy with the fans, agents and pitchers (after they end up injured and everyone blames the number of innings). Do I think this F.O. puts limits on Hutch if they are close? Probably yes and for sure if they fall behind.

[Fearthedoc]

That's my mindset too. Use your pitchers while they're healthy. I also think preventing injuries is about pitch counts rather than innings counts. As long as you get a full four-month offseason of limited throwing, innings limits don't make sense.

 

And AA has reiterated about a dozen times that Hutch has no innings limit. He continually brings up the Marcum example (Marcum threw 195.1 innings coming off of TJS). They're going to let Hutch pitch. Also, with a ~110 pitch limit, he won't get past 210 innings and have people worry about that anyway.

 

I agree about pitch count. Going by IP is a stupid concept. There's a massive difference in potential innings based on how efficient a pitcher is.

 

Example:

 

Johnny Cueto throws 13.7 pitches per inning.

Zack Wheeler throws 17.8 pitches per inning.

 

Hypothetically, if they were both cut off at 180 IP -- it would be 2466 pitches vs 3204 pitches.

 

That would mean Cueto could throw 234 innings to equal the same number of pitches thrown.

[ElNik2013]

Stroman will start tomorrow's game for Buffalo.

[AngryBird]

We're going to wreck this kid like we wrecked Drabek. I just know it.

[Angrioter]

Stroman 3 scoreless, 4 K's

[NorthOf49]

My thing with innings is just that I think, if given enough time to recover between starts, the number of starts you make doesn't matter. I wouldn't consider a pitcher who makes 40 starts in a season, each five days apart and consisting of 100 pitches, to be prone to injury.

 

But I would be worried about a pitcher who starts 20 times in a season, each five days apart and consisting of 120 pitches.

[Angrioter]

Stroman 4IP, walk, 4 K's and 3runs-dinger

[Maahfaace]

My thing with innings is just that I think, if given enough time to recover between starts, the number of starts you make doesn't matter. I wouldn't consider a pitcher who makes 40 starts in a season, each five days apart and consisting of 100 pitches, to be prone to injury.

 

But I would be worried about a pitcher who starts 20 times in a season, each five days apart and consisting of 120 pitches.

 

John Gibbons says the same thing, its why the magical 100 pitch mark spooks him so much