Guthrie

by notsince48 on Jun 15, 2007 12:09 PM EDT

Not sure if this has been discussed, but does anyone have any thoughts on Guthrie's success with Baltimore? Just wondering what (if any) adjustments he has made and whether Leo Mazzone can be credited with this. His last eight starts are as follows.

IP H R ER BB SO

6 6 1 1 0 2

8.1 3 1 0 2 2

7 4 1 1 0 10

7 7 3 3 2 3

7 3 2 2 1 3

8 3 2 1 0 4

8 6 2 2 1 6

7 4 1 1 2 5

Tweet Comment 81 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Re: Guthrie

Mazzone is a miracle worker and Guthrie is in his wheelhouse-good stuff mixed with inconsistent approach mixed with a certain flappability on the mound. Maybe I'm just talking out of an incorrect perception but that seems like exactly the kind of guy that Mazzone has succeeded with in the past: Jaret Wright springs to mind.

I'm happy for Guthrie. There was no room at the inn in Cleveland and I'm glad he's found a new home where he can succeed. It was time for the organization and he to part ways and it's worked out well for everyone.

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 12:12 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Well, everyone except for Cleveland, who invested millions of dollars and years of attention and work to try to develop him, only to be forced to give him away for free just at the point when he was ready to actually fulfill his potential but for somebody else.

Or something like that. But I'm happy for him as well - I've actually used the mlb.com archive video to watch a couple of his starts (takes about a 1/2 hour of fast forwarding) and he's looked great. Same stuff he had here, but under control. He's a horse.

by mcrose on Jun 15, 2007 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

would you rather be the orioles who have the 'luxury' of seeing if they can develop a pitcher at the major leauge level or the indians who can't 'wait and see' because they have to get busy competing for a championship this year?

if guthrie came to this point in his career in 04 or even 05 the indians could have kept him and seen, but he didn't so they really couldn't (knowing what they knew at the time).

by Brick. on Jun 15, 2007 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Would I want to change places with the Orioles? No way - I like being in first place! I'm just saying from Cleveland's perspective, the Guthrie saga did not work out well. If he was never heard from again you could say that. The fact that he's pitching great and suddenly (and for the time being) is a part of the rarest and most sought after commodities in baseball, ie "good cheap young starting pitching", makes it sting even more.

Note I am not assigning blame. It was pretty clear what the rotation was going to be going into the spring, and there was no place for Guthrie.

Unlike Davis, I've always considered Guthrie a good pitcher waiting for it to come together. I was bummed we ran out of time with him. I think one of my first posts on this site over the winter advocated bundling Byrd for an OF and using the #5 slot for giving the younger pitchers a chance to prove themselves, beginning with Guthrie since it was his last shot. But I have a hunch he did need to be somewhere else to start having success.

by mcrose on Jun 15, 2007 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Money post.

by Jay on Jun 15, 2007 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Cleveland's good and the farm is stocked. Guthrie wasn't part of the future for the Indians.

It always hurts to lose a pitcher who turns out to be really good but his success was, in my opinion, caused by the change of organizations and, especially, Mazzone. Things have worked out well for the Orioles because Guthrie is a bright spot in another sinkhole of a season. Things have worked out for the Indians because they're atop the division with talent locked up for years.

Just because a player is a win for another team doesn't mean that he has to be a substantial loss for the team that gave him away.

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

I . . . I . . . asked you nicely (Jan. '07)

by ploni on Jun 15, 2007 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Just think what Mazzone could do for Cabrera!

by LAIndianfan on Jun 15, 2007 12:30 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Guthrie

He's got his own Cabrera that he hasn't been able to fix yet.

"The hibachi is coming to a city near you. I'm cooking chicken and shrimp, but if you want to throw a double team my way, filet mignon gets cooked too"

by Rayman @ Let's Go Tribe! on Jun 15, 2007 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Guthrie's success seems to be predicated on his knewly found incredible control. (he's only giving up walks in 4.3% of his PAs). His control was something that seemed to come and go for him while he was in the Cleveland organization.

by APV on Jun 15, 2007 12:33 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Is it just me or does this beg the question whether the pitching coaches throughout the system may need to be looked at a little more closely?

The talent evaluation guys have to be happy though.

by JK in CBus on Jun 15, 2007 12:57 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Guthrie

I'm not big on blaming hitting/pitching coaches for player success/failure unless there's an overwhelming amount of evidence. Guthrie's just one data point for an organization that, like most, produces a mixed bag on prospects.

The glut of near-ML ready relievers says good things about the Indians pitching coaches.

Guthrie says bad things.

What are we supposed to believe? Neither. It's about observing the process of coaching and if it's line with the philosophy from on-high. Whenever fans start blaming hitting/pitching coaches I always try to figure what exactly they know those coaches are doing. Oftentimes, nobody knows what they're doing day to day. So I don't really see how we're in any position to judge them unless it's obvious that they're great (Mazzone) or terrible.

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

It is kinda frustrating to see a pitcher go somewhere and do better, but I don't think our staff is bad or even below average. Just wish they had a little of the Mazzone magic.

by JK in CBus on Jun 15, 2007 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

If Guthrie can beat some of the contenders, he can still provide some value to the Indians. That remains to be seen.

by palcal on Jun 15, 2007 1:05 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Guthrie

i like

by Brick. on Jun 15, 2007 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

If the Indians hadn't agreed to the negotiations that put Guthrie straight on the 40 man roster form the get go, he'd most likely still be under our control.

But that's how the cookie crumbles. I wish Guthrie well, especially against the Yankees and Red Sox. But here's hoping we torch him if we face him.

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 1:09 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Already did.

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Nice, but I was referring to future starts, not that relief appearance.

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Take away those 6ER in 1-1/3IP and he has a 1.87 ERA vs. the rest of the league. For what ERA is worth...

by JK in CBus on Jun 15, 2007 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

After last night, Guthrie now has 8 straight quality starts since becoming a full-time starter May 8; however, he has only a 2-0 record to show for these games, given Baltimore's ineptness.

He gave up 1 ER in 16 1/3 innings against the Red Sox and Angels (the 2 contenders he has faced) but neither resulted in a decision.

by palcal on Jun 15, 2007 2:09 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Mismanagement of Brandon Phillips and Guthrie has caused us to miss out on some excellent major league talent. This front office seems to be excellent at picking up talented players on the cheap or through the draft but has a terrible time helping these players make the transition into the major leagues. Eric Wedge can also be blamed in this manner as well. Andy Marte could yet be another in the ever longer growing list of players this organization has mismanaged. Some times it is better for a player to have success in the minor for a whole year before bringing them to the show, while others should be put in the majors very early (i.e C.C Sabathia). I am not saying that judging this is easy only that the perception is growing that we are very poor at developing our players at the major league level.

Champion of the Kelly Shoppach for Catcher campaign.

by E5 on Jun 15, 2007 2:31 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Guthrie

POTW.

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Seconded. The signature puts it over the top.

by dgcambridge on Jun 15, 2007 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

I dunno; I kind of liked it when he was using "Governor's Cup in '07!"

by Fiddlesticks on Jun 16, 2007 12:12 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

I miss his original, "Swing and a big miss," even though I used to tease him about it. Now I just add it mentally myself at the end of his posts.

by Jay on Jun 16, 2007 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

i love this site.

by emil minty on Jun 16, 2007 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

I hate it when that happens.

by fleerdon on Jun 15, 2007 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Again, this is a slightly revisionist history if you ask me.

BP never proved himself at the ML level to deserve a shot at playing everyday. And when he went back to AAA, he wasn't hitting that well either. Now that may have been a personality conflict between him and Wedge/FO, and that should not happen. But he didn't produce, thus we had to let him go.

Guthrie also never produced like this for us. Every shot we gave him, he did not exhibit this control. Mainly with him, I think it was mental. Since he was signed to a ML deal right off the bat, he kept trying to pitch like that to "prove" himself. Now that he is with another organization, he does not have to live up to that expectation, and thus is more relaxed and performing pretty well.

While I agree the FO has not done an awesome job with some of out upper level prospects, they have been pretty good overall. The numbers speak for them (Vic, Grady, Jhonny, CC, Jake, Raffy, Garko).

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

I know this is immature, but guys like BP and Guthrie who were given a shot here, screwed it up, and are now doing well elsewhere?

I don't cheer for those guys. Or wish them well in any way.

by dgcambridge on Jun 15, 2007 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

I don't cheer for BP at all, Guthrie on the other hand, I hope he pitches lights out against everyone else but us. He seemed like a decent guy, never really caused a fuss; he just got caught in the numbers game (some of his own doing I might add).

But I am not sure how your comment relates to my previous comment in any way, shape, or form.

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

I just stuck the comment here, Dean, for no reason except that you explained the Phillips and Guthrie tenures well enough. And their performances do not encourage me to cheer for them, relating to earlier comments in this thread.

I always cheer for former Indians that contributed, as long as they didn't screw the team on the way out. If they were a net negative and then become productive elsewhere, boo. Regardless of attitude. On a unrelated note, I'm probably still bitter about the Finals.

by dgcambridge on Jun 15, 2007 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

i still don't get this notion of wishing well of players on other teams. screw thome - not because he left the indians, but because he plays on another team, specifically in the division. i also get peaved by the 'he's on my fantasy team' thing. i play a lot of fantasy baseball, but i just assume finish dead last if i've got a bunch of yankees and white sox on my team. if santana is my pitcher, i hope he looses every single game if it helps the indians make the playoffs...

by Brick. on Jun 15, 2007 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

A perfectly statement of the correct attitude toward fantasy baseball. I've played for years too, and you've got it exactly right. This should be in the Ground Rules.

by dgcambridge on Jun 15, 2007 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

"i just assume finish dead last if i've got a bunch of yankees and white sox"

That is your prerogative. But by limiting yourself to not drafting those players, you are putting yourself at an extreme disadvantage. May as well just donate your $$ to the pot and call it a season.

Do I go out of my way to draft Yankees or White Sox? Not usually, but I did draft Abreu this year. Not because he's a Yankee, but because he is normally a fantasy stud.

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

when did i say i didn't draft those players?

i said "IF" i have them i basically don't care if they do bad if it's good for the indians.

by Brick. on Jun 15, 2007 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

I cheer for BP, but this is because the Reds are my NL team, so I kind of have to.

Disclaimer: this post doesn't mean what you think it means.

by AngG on Jun 15, 2007 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Not immature. That's just baseball.

by DixonCayne on Jun 15, 2007 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

I don't think you need to expend any more energy on this. All but maybe 3 people who know much about the Indians are with you. And you're not changing their minds.

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

He's got a point though. Guthrie's BB/9 rates are out of this world right now, especially when compared to what they were throughout his minor league career. Phillips stopped being a legitmate prospect 3 years ago.

Marte has so much more promise than either of those guys did. The organization will not give up on him as easily because they know how foolish that would be.

Phillips and Guthrie's upsides are such that we will never completely kick ourselves for giving up on them. They're just good enough. Marte, contrastingly, has so much talent that giving up on him would be managerial blunder of epic proportions. Seeing him hit 40 HR's as a 3b while playing GG defense is going to bother me much more than seeing an slightly above average second basemen or an at best above average 4th starter.

by Joe. on Jun 15, 2007 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

You're right. So is he.

But we've been fighting this fight against a handful of people for a year now and it doesn't look like we're even going to get a pyrrhic victory.

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

They're just good enough = they're just not good enough.

by Joe. on Jun 15, 2007 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

yeah, poor indeed. you know they really mucked up grady, peralta, victor, cc and all those other guys' careers - it's a wonder they win any games the way they just ruin the few prospects they have...

by Brick. on Jun 15, 2007 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Yep, opposing pitchers and hitters have nothing to do with making the transitioning players fail. Its ALL on ERIC Wedge. YUM TAsTY kOOL-Aid. FIRE his A**. FIRST place isn't GOOD enough

by JK in CBus on Jun 15, 2007 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

FADE IN.

INT - PETE AND DEWEY'S - NIGHT.

It's Pete and Dewey's, all right, but there's something ... darker ... about it on this night. This rainy, unpredictable night.

ANGLE ON a gnarled hand POUNDING on a corner table. This dark, unpredictable corner table.

OLD MAN (o.s.)
You there!

ANGLE ON the OLD MAN, a sorry sight dressed like Parma Heights in April. But darker.

OLD MAN
Sit here, will ye? I've a cautionary tale for them that's wise enough to hear it.

He coughs; a hacking, unpredictable cough.

OLD MAN
I know what ye must be thinkin. Who's he that's sunk to the bottom of this barrel to tell me what ter do? But listen, while you're young! Are ye an Indians fan, boy?
(beat)
Well, I were an Indians prospect, once!

He hacks again, removes his cap, beats the dust from it until a faded Chief Wahoo appears.

OLD MAN
Aye, a prospect. Highly touted, I tell ye. Ranked by some as thought they knew the sport. Kinston! Akron! Buffalo! I were the best of 'em all. Be warned, lad!

He leans back, swings his leg onto the table ... and there is only a stump, and a Louisville Slugger for a peg.

OLD MAN
'Tis true! The front office and Eric Wedge mismanaged me transition to the major leagues! I were supposed to be brought up QUICKLY, I SWEAR to ye!

He hacks again, harder this time, and falls forward onto the table. He starts to gasp for breath.

OLD MAN
My time's come, lad! Before I pass, let me tell ye the secret of player development, known only to this old overdeveloped farmhand. 'Tis...

The Old Man freezes mid-sentence. His eyes glaze over, and he collapses to the floor with a shuriken-shaped Treo lodged the back of his neck.

ANGLE ON the Treo's screen. It reads: "Never speak of this again if you value your life. PS - Fireworks at the ballpark this Friday! Bring the whole family! - M.S."

FADE OUT.

by fleerdon on Jun 15, 2007 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

He hacks again, removes his cap, beats the dust from it until a faded Chief Wahoo appears.

yesyesyesyesyes

ghahahahaha

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

you worked the dreariness of parma hts in there beautifully

by hans on Jun 15, 2007 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Awesome. But I think the bar's name should be Frank and Duffy's.

by mcrose on Jun 15, 2007 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Or Larvell's and Blank's.

Where you come to get your Charlie Spiked!

Turf Toe -- Sports skewered weakly (and weekly.)

by emd2k3 on Jun 15, 2007 10:39 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

If the Indians come up with a 5th starter that gives them a decent chance to win, Guthrie's performance will not matter much. The Indians are done with Baltimore for the year (for better or worse) and the Orioles aren't going anywhere, yut if he could help the Orioles win some games against contenders, he could end up helping the Indians this year.

by palcal on Jun 15, 2007 4:42 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Guthrie

That is poor logic. Lets just trade away, release all our prospects in hopes that they will help us by playing for a poor team that might beat our chief rivals. Guthrie has loads of talent and we mismanaged his career now we are going to pay the price when he makes an All Star team and we lose out on a real #2 or #3 but instead have to deal with the maddening inconsistencies of the Cliff Lee and Jake Westbrook's of the world.

Champion of the Kelly Shoppach for Catcher campaign.

by E5 on Jun 15, 2007 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

New POTW.

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

How exactly did we mismanage his career? Please elaborate.

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Humm, I don't know we released him. I would say we mismanaged his options and we let him decied his future. As an organization you have to make tough but sound decisions regarded prospects options and at what level players, play at. We did not develop him in the correct way and let a future All Star pitcher go for nothing.

Champion of the Kelly Shoppach for Catcher campaign.

by E5 on Jun 15, 2007 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

You don't know anything about options do you?

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

And again I will point out to you that due to his agent forcing us to put him on the 25 man roster with a call-up forced us to burn his first option in that first year when he was not ready. This is partly his (or his agent's) fault as well.

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Thats the job of his agent and himself. That is their right and we allowed this to be so. We had to know going in that he would have one less option and that we would have to manage him differently then other highly touted prospects because of it. I am very sick of this defense of the front office in the face of obvious mistakes. I am all for supporting the ownership and front office but when mistake are made I am not afraid to place blame on them. I don't know where this mentality of blindly sucking up to the front office has come from but when it blinds you to clear mistakes you might want to reconsider your point of view. This is not to say that I don't support or agree with the majority of our roster moves because I do but I am not so blind to be fooled into believing they are perfect or beyond mistake or failures. One of the toughest and also best aspects of being a fan is that you are allowed to second guess decisions. When you second guess the front office it will be a first.

Champion of the Kelly Shoppach for Catcher campaign.

by E5 on Jun 15, 2007 5:38 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Well I don't approve of all the FO work. I was not enamored with Oldberto's signing. But all in all, I trust Shapiro's judgment a lot more than yours or the other GMs in the league.

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Per the option rules: Once a player is added to the 40 man roster, he has to optioned down to the minors. For example we will use Guthrie's case. Please read this

specifically

Years 4-6. Once he's on the 40-man roster, you have another three or four years to bounce him between the majors and minors, hoping he'll stick in the majors eventually. These are called "option years." Once those option years are gone, you have to keep him in the majors, or you might lose him to the waiver wire.

Drafted in 2002, signed Oct 2002 (contract specified he be placed on 40 immediately with a call-up to 25 man roster before Aug 31 in 2004).

Year 1: 2003
Year 2: 2004 (option 1 used)
Year 3: 2005 (option 2 used)
Year 4: 2006 (option 3 used)

Even if we didn't call him up in 2005 or 2006, he had to stick to the ML roster in 2007 or be exposed to waivers. Each year he was called up the 25, he had to be optioned back down to the minors.

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Actually, if I recall correctly, if a player is on the 40, he has to be optioned to the minors coming out of spring training (to get down to 25), effectively burning an option each spring. So even if he didn't get called up for the one 2005 start, that option had already been burned at the end of spring training. But I'll let Jay/Ryan confirm this.

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

His contract did start with the 2003 season since it was signed after the end of the 2002 season -- that much you got right.

But it did not specify anything about the 25-man roster, and options aren't about calling a guy up, they're about sending a guy down. Once a guy is on the 40-man, if you send him down to the minors, you've used up an option -- and this includes sending him down at the end of Spring Training.

Meaning: The Indians used up an option in each of the four years of his contract, 2003-2006, since Guthrie optioned to Akron or Buffalo at some point in each of the four years.

So you're wondering: Four options, what? Yes, in some cases, a team can get four option years on a player, specifically, if after using three options, the player still has not played five full seasons in the minors. Alex Escobar and Andy Brown also got fourth option years, because they missed full seasons with injuries.

Because of this rule, a team will get four option years on any draftee who is signed to a major league deal, i.e., put on the 40-man. But the stakes are higher now, because the new CBA mandates an August 15 signing deadline -- so you can't do the four-starting-next-year deal anymore.

by Jay on Jun 15, 2007 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Thx Jay!!! I appreciate it!!

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 6:26 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Okay, per Jay's clarifications ...

Drafted in 2002, signed Oct 2002 put on the 40 per contract requirements:

Year 1: 2003 (option 1 used in ST)
Year 2: 2004 (option 2 used in ST, called up in Aug)
Year 3: 2005 (option 3 used in ST, called up in Aug)
Year 4: 2006 (option 4 used in ST, called up in April, June, Aug, and Sept).

Since he didn't show anything in any of those ML callups or in his AAA numbers, why on earth would we have him burn a spot on our 25 this year E5? More than likely he would have eaten Jason davis' spot, but you would have railed the FO on that as well.

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

My mistake, it wasn't year 1 of the deal but year 2 that he was forced onto the 25. He had pitched a "beautiful" 4.21 ERA in 21 starts at AA with a nice 1.43 WHIP and 2.23 K/BB ratio.

In AAA he had 7.91 ERA in 4 starts, a 2.12 WHIP and a sparkling 0.55 K/BB ratio.

Why on earth did he get called up Aug 28 (and put up a pedestrian 4.63 ERA in 11.2 IP, 1.29 WHIP, 1.16 K/BB ratio) when he hadn't proven himself in AAA in 2004 (or 2003 for that matter: 6.52 ERA in 18 starts, 1.64 WHIP, 2.06 K/BB)? Because his contract said so.

We used up one option that year, one in 2005 (this one is debatable, he made 1 appearance for Cle), and one in 2006. His cumultive stats in MLB were a 6.08 ERA in 37 IP with a whopping 1.76 WHIP and a 1.04 K/BB ratio.

If we hadn't had to burn that first option in 2004, he would have been able to work in Buffalo this year, proving his craft for a shot at the rotation. As it was, his stats were not superior to Carmona, Slocum, or Stanford for that matter. We had to let him go.

by talonk on Jun 15, 2007 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

So you are ok with just out right releasing potential all star pitchers? Ok, just checking in that case lets release C.C before he signs with some other teams to spare us the use of him for this year and to save ourselves the ultimate pain of losing him to the Angels.

Champion of the Kelly Shoppach for Catcher campaign.

by E5 on Jun 15, 2007 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

why do you insist on taking a reasonable argument ("Given the number of players whose various contracts we need to manage, occasionally a player with the potential to be good will have to be traded or waived because of the restrictions of the 25/40-man or due to options") to its most ridiculous conclusion ("people who agree that the above is a reasonable course of action every once in a while if our hand is forced want us to release CC because we don't care about keeping talent ever")?

Disclaimer: this post doesn't mean what you think it means.

by AngG on Jun 15, 2007 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

The fallacy of your argument is that you're saying anyone we release is a "potential all star." Sure, anyone's a POTENTIAL all star. But there is NO WAY you can say a guy with a 40-36 career minor league record with a 4.40 ERA is a guaranteed future all star.

by zempf on Jun 15, 2007 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Jack Armstrong was an All Star once.

Turf Toe -- Sports skewered weakly (and weekly.)

by emd2k3 on Jun 15, 2007 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

By 2005 Guthrie was an organizational soldier. He had failed miserably in over 200 innings in Buffalo in three different seasons. I don't remember the exact circumstances but I suspect he was up to make a spot start because of an injury or something.

Considering the start was made on August 13th, in the midst of a nearly historic charge to put Cleveland in the playoffs, you can hardly fault the FO for trying to get one good start out of him as part of a playoff push.

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Those 200 innings are over the three seasons, not 200 each season.

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Guthrie was not called up in 2004 because of a contract requirement or the need for a spot-starter. He was called up only because the Indians knew his options clock was ticking, and they figured it couldn't hurt to expose him to the big-league environment and see how he responded. If they didn't call him up then, he'd have made his debut under more pressured circumstances.

by Jay on Jun 15, 2007 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

E5, it's clear you know nothing about how any of this works. I don't know if Guthrie is benefitting from Mazzone or low sample size or change of environment. I do know that the environment has changed, the sample is small, and Mazzone is without question the greatest pitching coach in the history of the game.

It may well be that only Mazzone could have helped this guy. We don't know, and we're not gonna know. What we know is that Guthrie never once said anything about how he was handled except to be highly complimentary, even once he was cut loose. And his agent Scott Boras, generally willing to criticize if a client is being mistreated, also never said anything critical.

Where exactly did the Indians do the wrong thing with this guy? Be specific.

by Jay on Jun 15, 2007 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Fine, Jay. We'll cut CC.

by afh4 on Jun 15, 2007 6:15 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Guthrie

Guthrie sucked the few times he came out of the pen for Cleveland last year, but he actually seemed to progress/return to form somewhat last year at Buffalo over twenty starts. I remember wanting them to call him up late to give him some September starts like they did Carmona, to give him a bit of a longer look at the role he was best suited for - starter.

But I think he was pretty much off their radar at that point - as long as they kept the rotation intact Guthrie really didn't have a spot.

by mcrose on Jun 15, 2007 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions