<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The 2010 Mariners Rotation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ussmariner.com/2008/11/03/the-2010-mariners-rotation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ussmariner.com/2008/11/03/the-2010-mariners-rotation/</link>
	<description>Seattle Mariners and general baseball discussion with David Cameron and Derek Zumsteg</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:17:03 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: philosofool</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2008/11/03/the-2010-mariners-rotation/comment-page-1/#comment-304227</link>
		<dc:creator>philosofool</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 18:36:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=6582#comment-304227</guid>
		<description>I would say that LokiForever&#039;s list proves Dave&#039;s point. We have Felix. In terms of actual MLB performance during the years that those series were won (not ceiling and upside, not performance in other years) only Pedro, Schilling, Beckett 2007, and Hamels 2008 can really be said to rival Felix now. All those other guys were worse in the years they had those rings than Felix was this season. Do teams that win world series have some really good pitchers? Yes. Do we? Yes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would say that LokiForever&#8217;s list proves Dave&#8217;s point. We have Felix. In terms of actual MLB performance during the years that those series were won (not ceiling and upside, not performance in other years) only Pedro, Schilling, Beckett 2007, and Hamels 2008 can really be said to rival Felix now. All those other guys were worse in the years they had those rings than Felix was this season. Do teams that win world series have some really good pitchers? Yes. Do we? Yes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MKT</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2008/11/03/the-2010-mariners-rotation/comment-page-1/#comment-304213</link>
		<dc:creator>MKT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:26:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=6582#comment-304213</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;I agree with Dave’s premise (you don’t have to have an “estabished ace” to win - the list lokiforever posted is proof of that, IMO), but I have a problem with the argument that, because 97% of “ace” pitcher seasons end without a title, that is somehow proof of the premise. &lt;/blockquote&gt;

Yup, LokiForever&#039;s approach is the correct way to prove or disprove Dave&#039;s hypothesis.  Finding a bunch of ring-less aces, as Dave did, only proves that having an ace is not a *sufficient* condition for a World Series title.  But the relevant question is whether an ace is *necessary* (not sufficient) for a title.

But in the third paragraph, Dave widens the argument by adding &quot;#1 starter&quot; to the list of potentially necessary conditions.  I&#039;d say that having a good #1 starter comes pretty close to being a necessary condition for winning a World Series.  An ace, probably not; a #1 starter, probably so.  Or if you don&#039;t have a good #1 starter, you better at least have a #1 starter who&#039;s having a good (or lucky) season.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>I agree with Dave’s premise (you don’t have to have an “estabished ace” to win &#8211; the list lokiforever posted is proof of that, IMO), but I have a problem with the argument that, because 97% of “ace” pitcher seasons end without a title, that is somehow proof of the premise. </p></blockquote>
<p>Yup, LokiForever&#8217;s approach is the correct way to prove or disprove Dave&#8217;s hypothesis.  Finding a bunch of ring-less aces, as Dave did, only proves that having an ace is not a *sufficient* condition for a World Series title.  But the relevant question is whether an ace is *necessary* (not sufficient) for a title.</p>
<p>But in the third paragraph, Dave widens the argument by adding &#8220;#1 starter&#8221; to the list of potentially necessary conditions.  I&#8217;d say that having a good #1 starter comes pretty close to being a necessary condition for winning a World Series.  An ace, probably not; a #1 starter, probably so.  Or if you don&#8217;t have a good #1 starter, you better at least have a #1 starter who&#8217;s having a good (or lucky) season.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: don52656</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2008/11/03/the-2010-mariners-rotation/comment-page-1/#comment-304211</link>
		<dc:creator>don52656</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:03:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=6582#comment-304211</guid>
		<description>The consistent theme in Dave&#039;s post is that we need to upgrade the defense.  A good defense can make a Carlos Silva look like a good pitcher.  A great defense, a la 2001 Mariners, can make pitchers like Paul Abbott, Joel Pineiro, etc, look above average.

I&#039;m hoping that Jack upgrades the pitching staff by first upgrading the defense.  It would be a wiser short-term allocation of resources and probably would have the quickest impact on improving the team&#039;s 2009 record.  Just look how much improving the Rays defense from 2007 to 2008 made their pitchers &quot;improve&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The consistent theme in Dave&#8217;s post is that we need to upgrade the defense.  A good defense can make a Carlos Silva look like a good pitcher.  A great defense, a la 2001 Mariners, can make pitchers like Paul Abbott, Joel Pineiro, etc, look above average.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m hoping that Jack upgrades the pitching staff by first upgrading the defense.  It would be a wiser short-term allocation of resources and probably would have the quickest impact on improving the team&#8217;s 2009 record.  Just look how much improving the Rays defense from 2007 to 2008 made their pitchers &#8220;improve&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wabbles</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2008/11/03/the-2010-mariners-rotation/comment-page-1/#comment-304209</link>
		<dc:creator>wabbles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 07:49:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=6582#comment-304209</guid>
		<description>OK, so Dickey and Morrow and RRS have more or less moved to the rotation. Are there any other potential rotation candidates in either the Mariners or Rainiers bullpen? Mark Lowe?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, so Dickey and Morrow and RRS have more or less moved to the rotation. Are there any other potential rotation candidates in either the Mariners or Rainiers bullpen? Mark Lowe?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rlharr</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2008/11/03/the-2010-mariners-rotation/comment-page-1/#comment-304208</link>
		<dc:creator>rlharr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 07:22:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=6582#comment-304208</guid>
		<description>If the defense is significantly upgraded (we hope), is there any hope of trading one of out PV (tm) (Proven Veterans) at mid-season?  Washburn, in particular, seems as if he could be made to look better.

This is to say, it might not be a bad thing to go with the PVs for a while and hope someone bites.  This also might allow the team to keep down the innings/pitches for some of the younger pitchers.  Still, by mid-season, one hopes the pitchers of the future are out there regularly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the defense is significantly upgraded (we hope), is there any hope of trading one of out PV &#8482; (Proven Veterans) at mid-season?  Washburn, in particular, seems as if he could be made to look better.</p>
<p>This is to say, it might not be a bad thing to go with the PVs for a while and hope someone bites.  This also might allow the team to keep down the innings/pitches for some of the younger pitchers.  Still, by mid-season, one hopes the pitchers of the future are out there regularly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Miller</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2008/11/03/the-2010-mariners-rotation/comment-page-1/#comment-304203</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Miller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 02:22:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=6582#comment-304203</guid>
		<description>Dave, in this &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/free-agent-bargain-randy-johnson/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Fangraphs post&lt;/a&gt; you call Randy Johnson a free agent bargain.  

I think it would be smart to offer such a $10-15 mil contract to solidify the middle of the rotation and because he would get more butts in the seat just for being RJ.  Not sure he&#039;d take it, but it makes sense. 

Actually, several people on your All Free Agent Bargain team would be a huge step toward potentially being in contention without sacrificing the future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave, in this <a href="http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/free-agent-bargain-randy-johnson/" rel="nofollow">Fangraphs post</a> you call Randy Johnson a free agent bargain.  </p>
<p>I think it would be smart to offer such a $10-15 mil contract to solidify the middle of the rotation and because he would get more butts in the seat just for being RJ.  Not sure he&#8217;d take it, but it makes sense. </p>
<p>Actually, several people on your All Free Agent Bargain team would be a huge step toward potentially being in contention without sacrificing the future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: niterunner</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2008/11/03/the-2010-mariners-rotation/comment-page-1/#comment-304202</link>
		<dc:creator>niterunner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 01:13:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=6582#comment-304202</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m not to keen on seeing Silva over Ryan Rowland-Smith.  What are the odds that Ryan learns another pitch?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not to keen on seeing Silva over Ryan Rowland-Smith.  What are the odds that Ryan learns another pitch?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SonOfZavaras</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2008/11/03/the-2010-mariners-rotation/comment-page-1/#comment-304200</link>
		<dc:creator>SonOfZavaras</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 23:03:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=6582#comment-304200</guid>
		<description>Dave,
      been reading your articles, must give kudos for the consistent excellence. Regarding current one, in the 2010 scenario...the Mariners drafted about 239 6&#039;3&quot;+ college right-handers in the &#039;07 draft, many with admittedly-marginal upside on paper...but some may have decent ceilings, and reach them quickly. And with such an emphasis in one draft on one commodity, doesn&#039;t law of averages say your chances are decent for one to break on through and be a contributor by 2010, a piece of the future by 2011?

Myself, I watch Brett Lorin and Aaron Pribanic closely....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave,<br />
      been reading your articles, must give kudos for the consistent excellence. Regarding current one, in the 2010 scenario&#8230;the Mariners drafted about 239 6&#8242;3&#8243;+ college right-handers in the &#8216;07 draft, many with admittedly-marginal upside on paper&#8230;but some may have decent ceilings, and reach them quickly. And with such an emphasis in one draft on one commodity, doesn&#8217;t law of averages say your chances are decent for one to break on through and be a contributor by 2010, a piece of the future by 2011?</p>
<p>Myself, I watch Brett Lorin and Aaron Pribanic closely&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Evan</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2008/11/03/the-2010-mariners-rotation/comment-page-1/#comment-304199</link>
		<dc:creator>Evan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 23:01:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=6582#comment-304199</guid>
		<description>Maybe we can trade Washburn for him...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe we can trade Washburn for him&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TrevorB</title>
		<link>http://ussmariner.com/2008/11/03/the-2010-mariners-rotation/comment-page-1/#comment-304198</link>
		<dc:creator>TrevorB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 22:46:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ussmariner.com/?p=6582#comment-304198</guid>
		<description>The decent news about Silva, courtesy of fangraphs:

Silva &#039;08 LOB % 61.1 %.  Silva career LOB % 70.2 %.

Silva &#039;08 BABIP an astronomical .347.  Silva career BABIP .313.

Silva &#039;08 WPA -3.73, Silva &#039;08 WPA/LI -2.13.  Meaning Silva&#039;s Clutch is -1.60, good for the 2nd worst in baseball, just behind Andy Pettitte.

Silva &#039;08 in a nutshell, a ton of batted balls went for hits and he pitched like crap in high leverage situations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The decent news about Silva, courtesy of fangraphs:</p>
<p>Silva &#8216;08 LOB % 61.1 %.  Silva career LOB % 70.2 %.</p>
<p>Silva &#8216;08 BABIP an astronomical .347.  Silva career BABIP .313.</p>
<p>Silva &#8216;08 WPA -3.73, Silva &#8216;08 WPA/LI -2.13.  Meaning Silva&#8217;s Clutch is -1.60, good for the 2nd worst in baseball, just behind Andy Pettitte.</p>
<p>Silva &#8216;08 in a nutshell, a ton of batted balls went for hits and he pitched like crap in high leverage situations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
