Morrow Feeling Tightness
Larry Stone lets us know that Brandon Morrow has been scratched from his next scheduled start due to some tightness in his forearm. It’s early in spring, and lots of guys deal with stuff while getting ready for the season, so don’t panic. However, the M’s are rightfully going to be very cautious with him – the conversion from the bullpen to the rotation is a taxing one, and they have to be careful not to push his arm too hard.
Stuff like this is why I only expect Morrow to throw between 120-140 innings this year. He’s going to need to be handled differently than the rest of the staff, and when his arm starts feeling things, they’re going to have to let him skip starts. This is why trading for guys like Garrett Olson and Jason Vargas was important – the M’s need to have guys around to take the hill on days when they want to be careful with Morrow’s arm.
Yes, let’s hope this is just the usual early season aches and pains and not an indication of anything more ominous. And certainly there’s no reason to push Morrow to make a full load of starts this season (if the team somehow manages to be in contention late in the season, you want him to still have something in the tank; and if it isn’t, why risk the Verducci effect for nothing?)
However, for the sake of intellectual consistency, I expect all the people who called Bedard names last year to do the same whenever Morrow skips a start this year. Either that or admit they were out of line with Bedard (but I’m not holding my breath on that).
It’s not worth it to blow out Morrow’s arm to win a few games in April/May… I’d rather we figure out something out, get our rotation set and work him into the rotation for July/August. Hopefully, some of the 120-140 innings we get outa’ him will be in the playoffs. Some guys are big on guys like Bedard and Morse. I am not ‘sold’ on either. But then again, I am a sock-puppet for sports radio.
It’s a little different. While the situation was not Eric Beddard’s fault, there were basically two opinions surrounding him: (1) he was going to be the difference maker that took the team to the play offs and (2) he was an overpriced item that would not take the team to the play offs. The first group was upset because he failed them. The second was upset because he did exactly what they predicted and the resented him costing so much while achieving so little.
However, for the sake of intellectual consistency, I expect all the people who called Bedard names last year to do the same whenever Morrow skips a start this year.
For the sake of intellectual development, I hope all such name-calling ends.
That, and the (1)’s weren’t critical at all of Bedard’s track record. Instead, it was a foregone conclusion that he was a staff ace, a shoe-in for 15-20 wins, a Cy Young, to the point of being ‘Felix-Who?’ once the opening day starter discussion got rolling. Group 1 assumed only the best case scenario. Joser still only assumes the best case scenario. I hope he’s right.
For the sake of this comment thread, let’s stick to discussing Morrow.
Could it be possible to have a platoon at SP? To keep innings down for both youngsters, could they platoon Morrow with RRS based on opposing team’s batting order?
Or just keep his limit to 4-5 innings every start and have RRS come in after Morrow is done each start?
Of course, that would make the staff at 12, and I have always liked the five-man bench…
Do we get as much benefit with shooting for Morrow out of the gate as a starter as we would if we put him in the pen, let him work some innings and step him up to start later in the season in a very controlled way? It’s a long season. Also, I worry about having to shuffle the rotation around constantly. Stuff happens, sure. However, I think we need to plan our match-ups and win series’. I also think we need give a little more consideration to the rest of the guys on the staff. As such, I think we need to make a decision yeah or nay on Morrow well before the season starts.
Platooning pitchers is an interesting concept, which is probably why I don’t ever remember seeing it. I remember the authors proposed pitching Moyer only at Safeco. I also remember Riggleman last year actually took my idea of using four relievers for a couple of innings each because he didn’t have a decent starter available. The whine you probably would get about platooning is that it would throw off their “taking the hill every five days” routine. I guess pitchers are big on that sort of thing.
If they had a straight platoon, they could still have a routine…RRS and Morrow could go every five days together…one starts the game, goes to his pitch count or inning limit, and then the other comes in…
It’s a weird thought that I had, and I just thought I’d throw it out there…
I don’t agree with the premise. He was a college starter, they had him starting last winter, and he’s been working exclusively as a starter since they sent him down to Tacoma last season. If he feels twinges that’s something to do deal with, but I don’t think it’s due to the conversion anymore. He’s a starter. Sometimes starters have twinges. Missing starts once in awhile is a good idea (how many of the 2003 “never missed a start” rotation are still fulltime major league starters? I think the answer is one: Jamie.). But let’s get off the idea that everything that happens to Morrow is based on his being converted from relieving.
I’ve wondered this in general and think Bakomariner is onto something. The only thing is adjusting the order so that not just one guy gets all the ‘wins’. Also, both gotta’ get chances for success and (controlled) failure. I like this idea, it’s weird but could work. Hell, we could platoon the entire staff… Each guy would only need to throw about 2 innings–Hilarious.
how many of the 2003 “never missed a start†rotation are still fulltime major league starters? I think the answer is one: Jamie
No. Gil Meche.
True, but then again he had already missed two full seasons with injuries and was injured again in 2004.
You don’t have to agree with the premise for it to be true. Go look through the history of bullpen to starter conversions.
The history has the same post hoc reasoning behind it that most of the things this blog exists to debunk do. You may as well say he’s got the twinge because the Dow is dropping.
how many of the 2003 “never missed a start†rotation are still fulltime major league starters?I think the answer is one: Jamie
That might change if Garcia comes back from surgery to play this year.
“Stuff like this is why I only expect Morrow to throw between 120-140 innings this year”
And you’re still projecting a career high in innings pitched
Which says nothing, given the markedly different usage patterns of college vs. major league pitchers.
Well, no, there’s a mechanism behind it. There’s some prima facie reasons there. Right now, you’re going to have to bring up some other mechanism that makes more sense than that.
As coastly points out, 120-140 innings pitched is a career high. That’s not something to be ignored.
As coastly points out, 120-140 innings pitched is a career high. That’s not something to be ignored.
Those numbers would also be career highs for RRS.
Not sure it supports your argument much coasty, but it does add a certain intrigue to your idea.
I’m pretty sure I read about or otherwise vaguely remember a rotation that had four regular starters plus two “swingman” long relievers (one LH, one RH) who more or less alternated as the 5th starter depending on usage or stacked lineups. Obviously if a couple of your other starters have meltdowns in the same week and you use both your long relievers you end up short a starter, but that kind of thing plays havoc with a pitching staff no matter how it is composed (remember that game in 2004 in which Moyer was forced to come in as a reliever?)
Maybe someone has a more concrete memory of this, or maybe I’ve got a LaRussa of blood to the head and am just hallucinating.
I’m not trying to argue anything. Just pointing out that Dave’s 120-140 projection (while realistic) is still somewhat optimistic. It seems like some people want to pencil Brandon in for 200 innings just because he’s a starter.
[no]
how many of the 2003 “never missed a start†rotation are still fulltime major league starters?
What’s the point? Many of the pitchers who started games five years ago are (for a multitude of reasons) no longer starting, whether they’d missed starts in 2003 or not.
Any other teams have to watch thier fragile pitchers that have already picthed at this level?
[shut up about Lincecum already]
The description of the tightness is in the forearm and probably caused from pressing too hard with his fingers to make his breaking stuff break. I like the idea of four starters with fill ins for the 5th one but based on how many pitchers are fighting for a spot that is not very likely.
Drayer mentioned in her blog that Bedard was a little frustrated that the high, dry air in AZ made his stuff break less. It’s possible Morrow is having the same problem and pressing. I seem to recall him having a short forearm issue last ST also. They seem to be pretty common early in the year (Felix had his early in the regular season a couple of years ago).
Someone teach him the knuckle curve…! and get those ball in the humidor! STAT!
We demand this kid hurry development of his spinners to be worthy of a starting role and then he hurts himself in the mad rush.
He SHOULD have been working on it in Tacoma last year as a starter! One more piece of fallout from the dark era known as the ‘Bavasi Years’.
Thank god they wont get the same chance on PhiPhi La Phew!