Return of Bedard unlikely to help pen
DMZ · July 6, 2009 at 1:48 pm · Filed Under Mariners
Starts of 7+ innings, 2007: 14 of 28
Starts of 7+ innings, 2008: 4 of 15
Starts of 7+ innings, 2009: 2 of 11
Comments
27 Responses to “Return of Bedard unlikely to help pen”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Also, after Bedard’s last start a month ago, the M’s went to 28-29 and were 5.5 games out of first.
Fast forward to today and the M’s are 42-39 and 3.5 games out of first, and this is after completing the toughest stretch of the season thus far in which they went 5-4.
Bedard is nice, but the M’s managed without him.
Bedard will help the M’s in so far as his innings will be of a better quality than the innings thrown by the man he replaces in the rotation, but he will not rest the bullpen in a Roy Halladay fashion.
This pretty much pokes a serious hole in Baker’s argument that keeping Bedard will help the pen because Bedard goes 7 IP.
Agreed. Reading Geoff’s post today I was baffled by the logic. Bedard has been notorious for lack of durability during his tenure with the M’s.
No shit.
It’s a funny thing to argue after admitting Bedard has no real chance at being a type A FA.
OK, playing off Tek Jansen’s comment, how about this?
When a healthy Bedard leaves after 5-6 innings, the game should be more securely in hand than it would be if, say, a rusty RRS was pitching. So couldn’t his return still help the bullpen, since they would/might be holding a lead instead of hoping for a comeback?
@TekJansen – Really, does anyone aside from Roy Halladay rest the pen in a “Roy Halladay fashion”?
But Geoff’s a reporter! It’s in the ‘paper’ so it must be true!
I might be able to agree with the post if all things were equal, but Vargas is having trouble going 5 let alone 6 or 7.
If the argument is amount of innings picked up by the bullpen, then it won’t matter what the score is.
I might be able to agree with the post if all things were equal, but Vargas is having trouble going 5 let alone 6 or 7.
Yea, how dare he struggle in Coors Field and Yankee Stadium. I mean, seriously, a flyball lefty should just stroll right through those two environments.
What? It’s a bad idea to extrapolate from a small sample of games against good offenses in parks that our pitching staff is badly designed for?
Oh.
If the argument is amount of innings picked up by the bullpen, then it won’t matter what the score is.
Sure it will – in road games, it could make the difference of an entire inning per game.
Well, yes, but that wasn’t the question on the table.
I saw this comment a few times in the last post. I’m not saying that Bedard is going to be a savior.
But, if the team did good without Bedard AND without the player (whoever that’d end up being) that he could be traded for…then why does that end up being an argument FOR trading Bedard?
I can understand that trading Bedard for someone better, or someone who will be here next year is a good move. But, I don’t see how showing the team winning without either of those parties is a reasonable piece of evidence for the move.
No, I’m just being contrarian. I don’t know which Erik Bedard Baker’s been watching either.
If the argument is amount of innings picked up by the bullpen, then it won’t matter what the score is.
Sure, but looking at total innings pitched probably isn’t the best way to judge strain on a bullpen. A better metric is innings pitched for your top relievers. A more effective starter obviously helps in this regard, since you can be comfortable trotting out Corcoran or Batista more often.
5 innings from Bedard > 5 innings from Vargas/Olson/RRS. Either way the bullpen gets worked, but at least the team is more likely to have given up fewer runs with Bedard starting than any of his likely replacements in the rotation.
That being said, I think that Jack Z has to get something out of Bedard in a trade. Unless an extension or a new contract is in the works that none of us could know about, this team needs to get something of value. And given his injury history, I would rather move him for future pieces. Putz was a great closer, but we moved him for our CF and look, our bullpen is as strong as ever, and CF is solid for years. If the Z-Man can get our SS of the future next, move Bedard NOW!
Here’s a fun thought to ponder. Who will wind up going deeper into games? Erik Bedard or Brandon Morrow?
Dave, I think we would all prefer to only start a starter who had a favorable matchup against a given lineup/ballpark, but three out of 10 starts getting to the 6th does not seem acceptable (and if we are throwing out ballparks/lineups than Arizona and SF in Safeco omit his two 7 inning starts). If Bedard needs to go 7 innings to provide any bullpen relief instead of looking at what we are getting from our current starters I take back my earlier comment and agree that he will provide no relief to the bullpen.
Well, OK, but it still seems like having one or two pitchers hold the game for the last four innings is easier on the bullpen than using four pitchers in a tight game like we did in Boston once or twice.
I can understand that trading Bedard for someone better, or someone who will be here next year is a good move. But, I don’t see how showing the team winning without either of those parties is a reasonable piece of evidence for the move.
There’s a group of people (led by one beat writer, basically) who keep trumpeting the idea that the team can’t win without Erik Bedard, and therefore, they can’t trade him. We’re just showing how that isn’t true.
the idea that the team can’t win without Erik Bedard, and therefore, they can’t trade him.
… which is different from the idea of “the team’s better without Erik Bedard” (which is not what Dave, DMZ & co. are arguing) or “the Mariners wouldn’t get sufficient trade value that was useful during 2009 in return for Bedard, and they shouldn’t give up in a tight division race, so they should just invest in prayer wheels and hop his arm doesn’t fall off during the stretch run” (which, if it was true, which nobody knows except for Zduriencik and some other front office types, I don’t think any reasonable person would disagree with- nobody wants to trade Bedard for this year’s failed or B-level prospect unless the team’s toast on July 31 anyways).
I like the idea with everyone that Bedard can be traded and we can get some fairly good players in return. Has any team actually shown interest or even now that he is about to come off the DL?
When he’s healthy, he’s good. But, what are the chances we can get someone who can contribute soon? I think we’re better of just keeping him and lettimg him go at the end of the year. He has a better chance of making 12+ starts then us getting a decent player in return. Any thoughts?
The thing that I found most amusing about that piece is the alternatives that were suggested as trade bait. Batista? Clement? Wlad? Seriously? Is Bavasi our trade partner?
If Bedard’s velocity looks good and his limbs are still intact after his next start, teams will be interested. The potential upside of inserting a guy like Bedard, Ben Sheets, Rich Harden, Justin Duchscherer, etc into the rotation is too tempting for the pitching-starved, at least right up to the point where a physical reveals a small troll living in the player’s elbow.
Fortunately, our troll resides in his shoulder instead.
Seriously they can take their “4 Little Numbers” and put it where Morrow usually throws it…