Fantomas
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2012
- 13,543
- 7,043
Coming from someone who doesn't care if his arm explodes as long as the Jays win a World Series.
I'd rather have a healthy ace for the next 5-10 seasons.
I'll take the World Series. Thanks.
Coming from someone who doesn't care if his arm explodes as long as the Jays win a World Series.
I'd rather have a healthy ace for the next 5-10 seasons.
Aaron pitches 200+ this yr, gets hurt, never pitches again, and all of you cry.
Aaron goes to the bullpen. becomes an elite 7/8 inning guy instantly, saves arm, still valuable, you cry.
No win. ever.
I'll take the World Series. Thanks.
Coming from someone who doesn't care if his arm explodes as long as the Jays win a World Series.
I'd rather have a healthy ace for the next 5-10 seasons.
Riiiiiiiiiight.... because throwing him into the pen guarantees he will be perfectly healthy and will continue to pitch at this level until 2026.
Riiiiiiiiiight.... because throwing him into the pen guarantees he will be perfectly healthy and will continue to pitch at this level until 2026.
I'm not implying anything. It's a gamble. Even if it's 50/50 of fatiguing or not, it's still best to take the 50% that he is and have him in the bullpen. Having Sanchez in the bullpen is better than not having Sanchez at all.
Aaron pitches 200+ this yr, gets hurt, never pitches again, and all of you cry.
Aaron goes to the bullpen. becomes an elite 7/8 inning guy instantly, saves arm, still valuable, you cry.
No win. ever.
Well what's the point of ever signing a free agent? They can get hurt at any moment. Why tie up the money?
Nothing is guaranteed either way. I don't think many people think that. Whichever decision they make will have plenty of risk involved, but they obviously believe they're doing what's best for his long term health.
Those who remember '92 and '93 should remember how important this guy was to the team and both World Series championships (especially 1992):
IMO, Aaron Sanchez is exactly this same guy, over 20 years later. Without Guzman as a starter, the Jays don't even make it past the 92' or 93' ALCS. Beeston, Gillick and Gaston would've laughed in the face of anyone suggesting moving Juan to the bullpen. He was electric, exactly how Sanchez is now. He declined in performance severely after 1992, but they don't have their back-to-back World Series championships without him.
Agreed, but they're doesn't seem to be any evidence to back that. And how often do pitchers even throw complete games anymore?
I also think it doesn't send the best message to the team.
Juan Guzman already threw 200 innings in a season before the '92 and '93 championships. There was never going to be an inning restriction for him.
I fail to see the correlation. They seem like vastly different pitchers and vastly different development paths.
yes, anyone who questions whether its a good idea to remove the Cy favorite from the rotation is a nitwit casual fan.
only true baseball lifers realize the genius of it.
I fail to see the correlation. They seem like vastly different pitchers and vastly different development paths.
yes, anyone who questions whether its a good idea to remove the Cy favorite from the rotation is a nitwit casual fan.
only true baseball lifers realize the genius of it.
Yeah, if you're picking one guy from those years, its Pat Hentgen.
1992: 70.1 IP (AAA/MLB)
1993: 225.1 IP (MLB incl playoffs...19-9, 3.87 ERA, 6th in AL Cy Young voting)
Hentgen was incredibly inconsistent after that (of course, the highs were rather significant with ASG appearances in '94/'97 and a Cy Young in '96), but didn't have an arm blowout until 2001 when he was 33 years old.
Yeah that was a rather glib statement. The overarching notion that wanting Sanchez in the rotation means that you're rooting for him to blow out his arm for personal enjoyment is...rather odd to say the least.
Yeah, if you're picking one guy from those years, its Pat Hentgen.
1992: 70.1 IP (AAA/MLB)
1993: 225.1 IP (MLB incl playoffs...19-9, 3.87 ERA, 6th in AL Cy Young voting)
Hentgen threw 188 as an 18 year old. My god, things have changed.
I believe Woodrow was referring to those who have based their stance on the "I dun care what happens next year" rather than those who have said "there's no evidence to prove that this will be safer for the pitcher". At least, that's how I interpreted the post.