Huntington: Jeff Karstens' Durability A Concern
-P- Some interesting comments from Neal Huntington regarding Jeff Karstens:
"We'll be putting (Karstens) out there a little more frequently so we can evaluate how he can help us," Huntington said. "Later, we can either push him deeper into games (as a starter) or get him more prepared to come out of the bullpen."
The issue with Karstens, 28, is durability.
"Sometimes, he got to the sixth or seventh inning and seemed to hit a wall," Huntington said. "Can he put up 180-200 innings (in a season)? That's a question we've got to answer."
No, you really don't have to answer that question. Karstens did have a problem getting deep into games last year. He tended to fall apart after 50 pitches, as hitters slugged .600 against him from pitches 51-75. They also batted .370/.416/.710 when they faced him for the third time in a game. The patterns weren't all that similar in 2008 or 2009, however.
I don't have any problem with Karstens as a long reliever, or the guy you stick in there when things get really hopeless - he's a better option than, say, Hayden Penn or Ryan Vogelsong were. But durability really isn't the key question here. It doesn't really matter whether he can get through six innings or not. He shouldn't be starting, since there just isn't any upside. Charlie Morton and Brad Lincoln have upside. Even with Scott Olsen, if you're on the right mixture of psychedelic drugs, you can kind of imagine how he might return to his 2006 form. With Karstens, no. Or, to put it another way, I would rather run the risk of Morton completely blowing a game and having Karstens clean it up than to just let Karstens start the game in the first place.
Also, regarding Karstens' ability to pitch 180-200 innings in a season, there's also the fact that there are only about 1,450 innings per year to distribute to a team's pitching staff. Giving Karstens 200 of them would be a little like consuming 2,000 calories a day, 500 of which come from soda. Yes, you'd survive, but you probably wouldn't feel especially good, so if there's any nutritious food around at all, you should probably eat that instead.
Anyway, Huntington also says Karstens is "on the outside looking in," so it could take continued hamstring issues from Olsen and Morton doing whatever it is Morton does for Karstens to get a clear shot. I'm relatively confident in Karstens as a long reliever, and hopefully they just leave it at that.
-P- Tony Sanchez talks about pretty much the only upside of having multiple Pirates prospects get injured at the same time:
Sanchez was kept sane [during his injury last year] only by the company of his roommate Brock Holt, who had sustained a season-ending knee injury just a few weeks earlier.
"If I didn't have Brock, I would have gone crazy," Sanchez said. "If he didn't have me, he probably would have gone crazy. We played a lot of video games. I carried a lot of bags for him, and I watched him eat a lot of meals.
"We had our naps scheduled. We had our shows scheduled. We had our video games scheduled. We had a lot of time."
Sanchez and Holt will hopefully both be at Altoona this year, where they'll have baseball to keep them busy.
-P- The Pirates (or at least half of them - the other half will be playing the Rays) will face pitchers Brad Bergesen and Chris Tillman when they play the Orioles on Monday. The Bucs play an exhibition against Manatee on Friday, then face the Rays on Saturday and Sunday before their Rays/Orioles split-squad day on Monday. All the games are at 1:05, except the Manatee exhibition, which is at 12:05.
49 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I carried a lot of bags for him, and I watched him eat a lot of meals
sanchez is going to be a great soundbite when he becomes a pirate.
I'm sorry
but a GM who seems satisfied with a 5 ERA guy as a possible starter with out kicking the tires on a guy like Chris Resop appears possibly in over his head with due respect on maximizing a major league rosters wins.
Huntington seems to have done well in the draft by your guys opinions and time will bear if you are correct on that but many of his statements and team manuevers are questionable in my humble opinion.
I love the young talent on this team but dont much love the management nor ownership as of yet.
I think Resop is to valuable to the bullpen to try an experiment by making him a starter again. He threw well last year and will probably be the 7th inning guy like Meek was at the beginning of the year. Look how valuable that turned out. I agree karstens shouldn’t be considered a starter but I would prefer to see Resop stick to his role in the bullpen after his success last year.
I agree with you. I wasn’t trying to say that. I was saying i think it would be better to leave Resop in the bullpen because if they try to make him the 5th starter and he fails he is set back and can’t go back into the bullpen right away after spending all spring preparing to start. I think Olsen, Morton, and Lincoln are all better options than Resop. And if Resop were to contend for a spot then who goes into that 7th inning role? The bullpen is already pretty thin I wouldn’t want to take out another decent option for an experiment at 5th starter when I believe we already have better options even if it works.
Probably would have been a better idea...
to consider him in the rotation before all of the bullpen options dried up in FA. Though there are some guys in the minors who could surprise and snag a spot in the pen.
I just don’t like the idea of giving up a legitimate bullpen guy to duplicate what we already have in Morris and the other young starters. Resop has only started for a half of a season which i agree was good but why risk a 7th inning bullpen guy to get a potential 5th starter when we already have guys just like him with Morton Lincoln and Morris all RH staters. With the limited number of options in the bullpen why take one away to get a duplicate of those guys? And a duplicate with a history of a half of aaa season starting. And i think Morris lincoln and Morton all have higher ceilings than Resop.
depends on whether he can be legitimate starter or not
I just don’t like the idea of giving up a legitimate bullpen guy
If he can be a legit starter, he’s more valuable than a legit bullpen guy.
If you have too many of them, you can trade them. We can find plenty of guys to be legit 7th inning guys. Veras may become one. Ascanio/Hart may become one. Heck, Morton may become one!
by BurgherKing on Feb 23, 2011 12:29 PM EST up reply actions
I agree all of those guys could become one. Resop showed last year he is one. So why take a guy that showed at the major league level he could be a 7th inning guy and try to make him into a starter when we already have guy that have more potential than him as a starter. I just don’t see the value in losing a bullpen guy for a duplicate Lincoln Morton or Morris.
Because neither Lincoln nor Morton
have duplicated their AAA “success” in the big leagues. Morris is a long shot to be in the major leagues this year at all.
Resop’s success in AAA was pretty spectacular. I don’t know if he can be successful in MLB. But there’s a possibility he can better than those guys- it bothers me that he is not getting the chance. He can always go back to 7th inning guy if he is not performing or if one of the others really turns it on.
by BurgherKing on Feb 23, 2011 12:42 PM EST up reply actions
If you make him a starter then who becomes the new 7th inning guy? Are you just going to throw a former starter in there and hope he can adapt? And if you prepare to start all spring and then at the end they say you didn’t win the job now go back to the 7th inning guy you arm wont be ready. Pitchers prepare differently the bullpen has to throw back to back days or get loose quickly in a jam and as a starter in the spring you just don’t prepare your arm for that. Its not that easy to just switch from one to the other.
then who becomes the new 7th inning guy?
Veras, failing which Morton, failing which Olsen, failing which Watson, failing which Crotta, failing which Hughes… you see where I m going here. Or you can have your starter go 6, then use a combination of Beimel, Olsen, Morton to get matchups for the outs.
Are you just going to throw a former starter in there and hope he can adapt?
Yeah. Heck of a lot easier pitching the 7th than starting. Failing which, there are a plethora of options out there.
And if you prepare to start all spring and then at the end they say you didn’t win the job now go back to the 7th inning guy you arm wont be ready.
Why wont the arm be ready? Resop sure managed to be ready after starting for half the year last year. I m guessing he can do it again, maybe with a small break in between.
You are way overestimating the role of a 7th inning guy. If your starter is gonna give up a bunch, it doesnt matter who pitches the 7th. It’s pointless having shutdown 7-8-9 guys, if your starter is gonna give up 4-5 runs every time.
I m not even saying Resop should necessarily start. I m saying, check him out and give the best guy the #5 slot. If the best guy is Resop by only a little bit, then maybe you have him as a 7th inning guy. But if it seems like his AAA numbers were legit, he’s gotto be the #5. (Well, if those numbers are legit, he’s gonna be a #3 on this team, but that’s a diff story)
Why do we need
to move Resop into a starting role? We already have Owens, Morris, Wilson and Locke potentially knocking at the door this summer. Resop has no proven success as anything more than a relief pitcher at the Major League level. Yes he pitched well last year in his relief role, but that doesn’t mean he should be in consideration for a starters position.
What I think we’ll most likely going to see this summer is a rotation of McDonald, Ohlendorf, Maholm, Correia and Olsen/Morton. If Olsen/Morton seem successful and Owens is brought up, Maholm will be traded at the deadline. If Olsen/Morton fail, Owens will come up and take the spot in the rotation. Why throw Resop into the mix when theres little chance of making the roation and even if he does, Owens will come up and assume the spot once he’s ready?
by PuncSpeedChunk on Feb 23, 2011 10:48 AM EST up reply actions
Well Resop has as much major league success starting as...
Owens, Morris, Wilson and Locke do. I also thinks it fair that at least half of those names won’t make it to Pittsburgh or won’t be very good. You can never have too many starting options. The argument for starting Resop was his AAA success last season before the Pirates picked him up. He was pretty dominant. Add that to the fact the no one currently on the major league roster except McDonald has enough upside to be excited about or at least blocking someone who does. Nobody said that Resop should be handed a job but at least considered given his past success (in AAA).
Correction...
Morton has upside but his floor is really, really low too. In fact at this point it’s probably easier to see him hitting his floor than it is his ceiling. I am pulling for him though.
I'm not sure Resop has the pitch-arsenal
To be a consistent, three-times-through-the-lineup Starting Pitcher.
I think his role as a 7th Inning, high-leverage relief pitcher is exactly where he should be.
by CabreraKilledMyChildhood on Feb 23, 2011 12:26 PM EST up reply actions
Actually I agree with you...
funny thing is that when I watch him I think of Brad Lincoln; two pretty good pitches – the rest not so much. But like Lincoln I’d prefer to know that he can’t be a successful starter before moving him to the pen.
Which is precisely what we seem to be doing.....
by CabreraKilledMyChildhood on Feb 23, 2011 1:57 PM EST up reply actions
WIth Lincoln yes...
but I meant Resop too. Obviously NH doesn’t agree and he has a much better eye than I do. He at least gets paid handsomely for his scouting eye anyway.
what Slick said
a. Resop has had more success in AAA as a starter than Owens/Morris/Lincoln/Wilson/Locke.
The question really is- can he be an average ML SP? Even an average #5 ML SP. If he can, he should be starting. If he can’t, you keep him in the 7th inning role. There’ll always be time to trade someone. You can’t have too much starting pitching.c. A league average starter is more valuable than a 7th inning guy.
by BurgherKing on Feb 23, 2011 12:27 PM EST up reply actions
not sure why that is in bold
The fact that it was preceded by (b.) may have had something to do with it
by BurgherKing on Feb 23, 2011 12:27 PM EST up reply actions
So karstens role is going to be in long relief. So basically throwing in games that the starter has to come out early or the bullpen is over used. Most of the time the game will pretty much be decided. I would much rather see a guy with some potential like Hart or Ascanio in that long relief role. I know that may be tough now with the injuries and they may start on DL but I would rather have then in that role than risk losing them through waivers. Kartens doesn’t provide much upside and these guys could turn the long relief role into a fifth starter in a perfect world or the more likely scenario into a solid late inning reliever. They could also flop and Hart could throw as bad as he did before surgery but then what are we really losing? A guy that throws mostly in blow outs….. I would prefer to take a risk and that one last shot at developing Hart or Ascanio.
Long-relief doesn't need upside
That’s why Karstens is there. I’d rather have the guy who can actually perform the role (Karstens) over the guys who can’t stay healthy OR perform.
If Karstens needs to pitch 180-200 innings...
this team is in DEEEEEEEEP trouble. Like 110 loss trouble.
Wondering whether Karstens is durable enough to pitch 180-200 innings is a bit like wondering whether your 1974 Gremlin is durable enough to finish the Daytona 500. Maybe, maybe not, but either way you’re pretty much fucked.
Again...
I think we have a nother pre-preseason situation that it much to do about nothing. I would guess that Karstens is 8th or 9th on the depth chart when it comes to starting pitching. If he starts it’s basically Morton implodes, Olsen gets injured or isn’t very good, Lincoln hasn’t broken through yet. Karstens is a starting option but only if something else has gone wrong: injury or poor performance. I also think NH is paying it lip service because Karstens has been a good soldier and performed admirably in tough situations. Karstens wants to stat so Huntington is saying things in interviews so as not to discourage Karstens by automatically delegating him to the bullpen…where we all know he will start the year.
This.....
I can’t fathom how this isn’t obvious to others. In addition, did anyone notice NH’s quote that Karstens is ‘on the outside looking in’? How clear can one be…..?
by CabreraKilledMyChildhood on Feb 23, 2011 10:07 AM EST up reply actions
I think we have a nother pre-preseason situation that it much to do about nothing.
It’s February. There just isn’t a lot of actual news right now. Most Spring Training news stories – the ones that appear in the papers – are “much ado about nothing,” or at least something ado about players trying for jobs they’re not likely to get. That’s just the way it is right now, and I’m going to be responding to those stories partly as excuses to talk about players we won’t talk about much during the year, hopefully while putting their actual chances in perspective, which I think I did a pretty decent job of above. In this case, I’m responding to what the GM is actually saying. If you want to dismiss that, that’s fine.
I do think it’s at least somewhat likely that, for example, Garrett Atkins makes the team, and I do think Karstens is legitimately at least a contingency plan in the rotation, but if that’s not interesting to you, that’s fine. I agree that the fifth rotation spot is likely to come down to Morton and Olsen, and ultimately very likely to go to Morton.
by Charlie Wilmoth on Feb 23, 2011 2:06 PM EST up reply actions
Thanks for the correction; I'm a pretty terrible writer [not sarcasm].
I have no problem with your post because I’m well aware they came from newspapers that need something to write about. I read a couple of posts that had people condeming NH and announcing Karstens as the 5th starter so my post was more a response to them. Also, I was just pointing out that we should be aware that this is the time of year that newspapers force stories because they need something to write about. That’s what I meant with the pre pre-season comment. Additionally, I read your “outside looking in” quote so I took it that you pretty much understood that Karstens starting the year in the rotation was unlikely. So long story short, I wasn’t dissing your post. I guess I could have made that more clear.
while putting their actual chances in perspective, which I think I did a pretty decent job of above. In this case, I’m responding to what the GM is actually saying. If you want to dismiss that, that’s fine.
I agree that you did a good job. I was dismissing what the GM was saying as GM speak, not what you were writing.
I do think it’s at least somewhat likely that, for example, Garrett Atkins makes the team, and I do think Karstens is legitimately at least a contingency plan in the rotation, but if that’s not interesting to you, that’s fine.
I agree about Garett in that there is a non-zero chance; maybe better than that because of his ties with Hurdle. I just decided I wasn’t going to get more worked up about it until it looked like there was a reason too. I already wrote above that I agree with your take on Karstens. My opinoin is that he is currently 8th or 9th on the depth chart, IMO, which would make him an option or contigency plan. Again, I wasn’t disagreeing with you.
Anyway, didn’t mean to get you all fired up. Especially since I enjoy your posts and come to this blog, I don’t know, 3-4 times a day to see if you put a new one up. I never once said your writing, or topic, was uninteresting. So it kind of bothers me a little that you interpreted it that way since I don’t think I have ever had anything negative to say about your writing. I also find it kind of funny that you picked my post to get fired about since I’ve been recently on record defending you to someone else who has been much more vocal about not liking your writing style. Oh well. I’ll try to be more clear in my message in the future.
Fair enough. I apologize for misinterpreting you. Thanks for the clarification.
by Charlie Wilmoth on Feb 23, 2011 5:31 PM EST up reply actions
We should have a collection of ST stories.....
Under the title, “Alarmingly Early to be Alarmed”.
As with the Yates aticle, as with Atkins article, this recent ‘story’ is a non-story.
The season can’t get here soon enough, geesh….
by CabreraKilledMyChildhood on Feb 23, 2011 10:06 AM EST reply actions
SIDE NOTE:
“We had our naps scheduled. We had our shows scheduled. We had our video games scheduled. We had a lot of time.”
Sounds like a grueling regiment.
Moreover,
Are they more akin to Call of Duty or Madden battles?
by TheLizardKing on Feb 23, 2011 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
"All My Children"
For Melissa Archer:
http://soaps.sheknows.com/onelifetolive/actor/245/Melissa_Archer/
"psychadelic drugs"
Another weird line from Charlie? Ive said Olsen is better than Morton. Hes three months younger, and at least from the one time I seen him last season, he wasn’t hit nearly as hard as Mr. M. Lefty plays a bit better in PNC.
by Adam Reynolds on Feb 23, 2011 11:37 AM EST via mobile reply actions
I'm not a big fan of Olsen...
and haven’t been for a while. I think Morton has a lot more upside and should get a final shot in the rotation. That said it’s not too difficult a scenario to see Olsen having a much better than year than Morton when it’s all said and done. He pitched pretty well last year and regained his some of his 2006 velocity. He was a pretty nice pick up on a minor league deal.
Why is this a weird line? It had very little to do with the comparison of Olsen to Morton. It was about the unlikelihood of Olsen reacquiring his 2006 form. That is unlikely, yes?
And for the record, I’ll take Morton over Olsen, assuming that Morton shows some glimmer of hope in camp. Morton’s stuff is much better, and he’s under team control far longer.
by Charlie Wilmoth on Feb 23, 2011 2:11 PM EST up reply actions
I think another 4.0 ERA is unlikely, but I could see something south of 4.50.
by Adam Reynolds on Feb 23, 2011 9:12 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

by 























