Stephen Strasburg (1 Viewer)

[Doctor Detroit]

Shutting down Strasburg was absolutely the right decision.

One part of the equation that no one is talking about: the most Strasburg had pitched before was 120 innings, and that was at San Diego State a few years ago. All over baseball, teams carefully build up the innings of the young arms so they can ultimately pitch 200+ innings a year. They don't go out and do it the first year as a pro. So one of the goals was to get Strasburg UP TO 160 innings so that next year there would be no restriction. If the Nationals tried to "save" 3 starts for Strasburg for the Championship and World Series and they don't make it that far, you are looking at Strasburg only pitcing 140 innings this year AND having an inning limit next year.

Also, the Medlin comparision is not appropriate. Medlin did not make Atanta's starting rotation coming out of spring training. If he did and stayed healthy, Atlanta would have been in the same position. Medlin only pitched 144 innings this year, so there could be some restrictions on him next year.

You would have thought the way the NLDS played out would have put an end to the Strasburg shutdown debate. No game result would have changed if he'd started. Gio would still have been the Game 1 starter- he had a better season and a better second half by far. Zimmermann and Jackson still would have gotten starts. Strasburg would have taken Ross Detwiler's place in the rotation ... and Detwiler actually had the best start of the series by a Nat. In fact you could legitimately argue that they could have been worse off with Strasburg, given the way Detwiler pitched in his spot.

But no, people like Ken Rosenthal and John Feinstein still can't let it go. Feinstein's column was my favorite ... he asked if you could honestly see the team blowing a 6 run lead with Strasburg on the hill in Game 5, ignoring (1) that Strasburg probably wouldn't have pitched Game 5; (2) that the bullpen alone gave up 6 runs; and (3) that the team blew a 9 run lead with Strasburg on the mound as recently as July. He also didn't note that the starter that the Nats blew up early in Game 5 was another elite guy one year removed from Tommy John surgery. A coincidence, maybe, but one that should be noted if you want to write a credible column.

Some people just shouldn't write about baseball. Feinstein is an example.

How can you say this when Gio allowed four runs in game 5 basically allowing the Cards back in the game? I really can't believe you Nats fans stick to this story like it is science, you would have won that series with Strasburg. No doubt about it. If he had been managed properly he would have started games one and five, that's the point!!!!!! Really can't believe you guys are discounting the potential impact of a player like Strasburg, you draft a guy like that to pitch in the playoffs someday.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Shutting down Strasburg was absolutely the right decision.

One part of the equation that no one is talking about: the most Strasburg had pitched before was 120 innings, and that was at San Diego State a few years ago. All over baseball, teams carefully build up the innings of the young arms so they can ultimately pitch 200+ innings a year. They don't go out and do it the first year as a pro. So one of the goals was to get Strasburg UP TO 160 innings so that next year there would be no restriction. If the Nationals tried to "save" 3 starts for Strasburg for the Championship and World Series and they don't make it that far, you are looking at Strasburg only pitcing 140 innings this year AND having an inning limit next year.

Also, the Medlin comparision is not appropriate. Medlin did not make Atanta's starting rotation coming out of spring training. If he did and stayed healthy, Atlanta would have been in the same position. Medlin only pitched 144 innings this year, so there could be some restrictions on him next year.

You would have thought the way the NLDS played out would have put an end to the Strasburg shutdown debate. No game result would have changed if he'd started. Gio would still have been the Game 1 starter- he had a better season and a better second half by far. Zimmermann and Jackson still would have gotten starts. Strasburg would have taken Ross Detwiler's place in the rotation ... and Detwiler actually had the best start of the series by a Nat. In fact you could legitimately argue that they could have been worse off with Strasburg, given the way Detwiler pitched in his spot.

But no, people like Ken Rosenthal and John Feinstein still can't let it go. Feinstein's column was my favorite ... he asked if you could honestly see the team blowing a 6 run lead with Strasburg on the hill in Game 5, ignoring (1) that Strasburg probably wouldn't have pitched Game 5; (2) that the bullpen alone gave up 6 runs; and (3) that the team blew a 9 run lead with Strasburg on the mound as recently as July. He also didn't note that the starter that the Nats blew up early in Game 5 was another elite guy one year removed from Tommy John surgery. A coincidence, maybe, but one that should be noted if you want to write a credible column.

Some people just shouldn't write about baseball. Feinstein is an example.

How can you say this when Gio allowed four runs in game 5 basically allowing the Cards back in the game? I really can't believe you Nats fans stick to this story like it is science, you would have won that series with Strasburg. No doubt about it. If he had been managed properly he would have started games one and five, that's the point!!!!!! Really can't believe you guys are discounting the potential impact of a player like Strasburg, you draft a guy like that to pitch in the playoffs someday.

Because Gio would have been the Game 1 starter even if Strasburg was active, and thus would have been the Game 5 starter as well. Gio was the better pitcher for the second half of the season. The numbers aren't even really close- Gio's OPS against for the second half was nearly 100 points better than Strasburg's. Strasburg's WHIP for the second half of the season was 1.243; Gio's was 1.147. Strasburg's ERA was 3.73; Gio's was 2.86. I watch and read about the team as much as anyone, and I'd say that if both were still active in October I would have been absolutely floored if they went with Strasburg in Game 1.I understand that you're a Tigers fan, so you hear "ace" and you think Verlander. Strasburg hopefully will get to that level some day, but he wasn't there yet by a longshot, not in the rehab year from TJ surgery. The control wasn't there. He frequently got behind in counts and had to groove his fastballs, leading to 7 HRs against him in his last 60 innings. And he was trending downward, too. His walk rate was climbing and his K rate was dropping. In July is K/BB ratio was 5.33. In August it was 2.91. In September it was 2.75.

He still would have been good enough to be the #2 starter, but all that would have done is bump Detwiler- the only guy who had a good start in the postseason- from the rotation.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Shutting down Strasburg was absolutely the right decision.

One part of the equation that no one is talking about: the most Strasburg had pitched before was 120 innings, and that was at San Diego State a few years ago. All over baseball, teams carefully build up the innings of the young arms so they can ultimately pitch 200+ innings a year. They don't go out and do it the first year as a pro. So one of the goals was to get Strasburg UP TO 160 innings so that next year there would be no restriction. If the Nationals tried to "save" 3 starts for Strasburg for the Championship and World Series and they don't make it that far, you are looking at Strasburg only pitcing 140 innings this year AND having an inning limit next year.

Also, the Medlin comparision is not appropriate. Medlin did not make Atanta's starting rotation coming out of spring training. If he did and stayed healthy, Atlanta would have been in the same position. Medlin only pitched 144 innings this year, so there could be some restrictions on him next year.

You would have thought the way the NLDS played out would have put an end to the Strasburg shutdown debate. No game result would have changed if he'd started. Gio would still have been the Game 1 starter- he had a better season and a better second half by far. Zimmermann and Jackson still would have gotten starts. Strasburg would have taken Ross Detwiler's place in the rotation ... and Detwiler actually had the best start of the series by a Nat. In fact you could legitimately argue that they could have been worse off with Strasburg, given the way Detwiler pitched in his spot.

But no, people like Ken Rosenthal and John Feinstein still can't let it go. Feinstein's column was my favorite ... he asked if you could honestly see the team blowing a 6 run lead with Strasburg on the hill in Game 5, ignoring (1) that Strasburg probably wouldn't have pitched Game 5; (2) that the bullpen alone gave up 6 runs; and (3) that the team blew a 9 run lead with Strasburg on the mound as recently as July. He also didn't note that the starter that the Nats blew up early in Game 5 was another elite guy one year removed from Tommy John surgery. A coincidence, maybe, but one that should be noted if you want to write a credible column.

Some people just shouldn't write about baseball. Feinstein is an example.

How can you say this when Gio allowed four runs in game 5 basically allowing the Cards back in the game? I really can't believe you Nats fans stick to this story like it is science, you would have won that series with Strasburg. No doubt about it. If he had been managed properly he would have started games one and five, that's the point!!!!!! Really can't believe you guys are discounting the potential impact of a player like Strasburg, you draft a guy like that to pitch in the playoffs someday.

Strasburg was 7-7 down the stretch. What makes you think he would have been an automatic 2-0? And while playing "what if", you must factor in that the Nats then lose the Detwiler start because he would have gone to the bullpen if Strasburg was pitching.

 

[Raider Nation]

Shut him down.