Ok so let's talk starting rotation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msstate7

True, but the 5 ip was his previous start. He's gone 5 and 9 in last 2

---

He deserves a start, but not sure which game, 125 pitches is a lot.

Plumlee has been really good out of the pen.

You never know who will step up, crazy overachieving year indeed.

Gotta swing the bats with clutch hitting now as pitchers we face from here on out will be tough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

The problem with this for me is that if you don't finish it off in 2, you're in serious trouble for Game 3. McQuary and Gordon both struggle to throw strikes and miss bats. I want Plumlee and Billingsley both starting, and you determine who comes in behind them based on what is happening in the game.

I don't really understand the hesitancy in starting Plumlee over McQuary. Here are their overall numbers:
McQuary - 54 IP, 4.67 ERA, 6.7 K/9, 7.8 BB/9, 1.61 WHIP
Plumlee - 72.1 IP, 3.61 ERA, 6.7 K/9, 3.7 BB/9, 1.37 WHIP

As a SP (both with 8 starts):
McQuary - 35 IP, 5.66 ERA, 27 K/35 BB
Plumlee - 35 IP, 2.57 ERA, 28 K/12 BB

Last 5 appearances:
McQuary - 23.2 IP, 5.70 ERA, 15 K/21 BB
Plumlee - 15 IP, 3.60 ERA, 12 K/5 BB

I want our best pitchers to maximize their innings. Plumlee is better than McQuary, he has been better as a starter, and he has been better recently. I just don't see why we would start McQuary. You're guaranteeing yourself that he will have to struggle to get through innings while minimizing the impact of baserunners. I would rather have him available if necessary but to go with Plumlee and let him try to get you through at least 5-6 IP.

---

All true but do you want to mess with what is obviously working with Plumlee out of the pen? When is the last time he started a game? He's found his groove as the long reliever I'm not sure I want to mess with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ifyouonlyknew

All true but do you want to mess with what is obviously working with Plumlee out of the pen? When is the last time he started a game? He's found his groove as the long reliever I'm not sure I want to mess with that.

---

He actually pitched better as a starter than he has as a reliever, even recently.

He has proven he can do both well, and he has actually performed better as a starter, so I don't get the fear that if you move him back to a starting role, he suddenly won't be as effective.

I mean, McQuary has been worse as a starter recently than he was before. So if we're scared of anything, to me it's that McQuary will continue to do what he has done all year, but especially recently. I just don't know why you would want him starting a game in the SR if you can avoid it. And I think we can avoid it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ifyouonlyknew

All true but do you want to mess with what is obviously working with Plumlee out of the pen? When is the last time he started a game? He's found his groove as the long reliever I'm not sure I want to mess with that.

---

I agree.

Pilk
Mcq
Jb

Pilk
Billingsley
Plumlee

And to the guy that said CB had a ton of hard hit balls at people that is false. He had something like 15 ground balls outs. We go Pilk, Billingsley we might not even need game 3. I was asking for JB all last week and he just threw a CG for us. He absolutely gets the start game 2 and he's going 7-8 innings again. Pilk is game 1 starter no doubt.

I want Denver against poche. Poche is the most vulnerable pitcher they have. Walker is going to fill up the zone and not get rattled if we can get to a game 3. Billingsley needs the rest as well. Pilk game one of course.

And I promise you cann is mind****ing mainieri right now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

The problem with this for me is that if you don't finish it off in 2, you're in serious trouble for Game 3. McQuary and Gordon both struggle to throw strikes and miss bats. I want Plumlee and Billingsley both starting, and you determine who comes in behind them based on what is happening in the game.

I don't really understand the hesitancy in starting Plumlee over McQuary. Here are their overall numbers:
McQuary - 54 IP, 4.67 ERA, 6.7 K/9, 7.8 BB/9, 1.61 WHIP
Plumlee - 72.1 IP, 3.61 ERA, 6.7 K/9, 3.7 BB/9, 1.37 WHIP

As a SP (both with 8 starts):
McQuary - 35 IP, 5.66 ERA, 27 K/35 BB
Plumlee - 35 IP, 2.57 ERA, 28 K/12 BB

Last 5 appearances:
McQuary - 23.2 IP, 5.70 ERA, 15 K/21 BB
Plumlee - 15 IP, 3.60 ERA, 12 K/5 BB

I want our best pitchers to maximize their innings. Plumlee is better than McQuary, he has been better as a starter, and he has been better recently. I just don't see why we would start McQuary. You're guaranteeing yourself that he will have to struggle to get through innings while minimizing the impact of baserunners. I would rather have him available if necessary but to go with Plumlee and let him try to get you through at least 5-6 IP.

---

It's not always about the numbers little lady. But good book

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I seen it dawg

It's not always about the numbers little lady. But good book

---

I don't have a problem with this. But if that's what you think, then just explain what it is about McQuary starting and Plumlee out of the pen that you like. Because past performance indicates that starting Plumlee is the best move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

I don't have a problem with this. But if that's what you think, then just explain what it is about McQuary starting and Plumlee out of the pen that you like. Because past performance indicates that starting Plumlee is the best move.

---

Starting Plum is not the best move....It's not necessarily I like one or the other starting. It's about where we are in the season and roles and what the players are used to. Hell I think it's obvious to everyone Denver scares the living shit out of me and I trust him least out of him, Pilk, Plum and JB. But I digress...

Denver has been starting. Plumlee has been relieving. At this point in the season you are more likely for Denver to have a good performance and not need plum early by keeping it that way because they are settled into their roles.

If you flip them at this point you potentially **** them both up by making them switch roles. Not something you do at this time. Too much of a gamble.

Now Cann and henderson know their players and if it's already been discussed and the players makeup enables them to do it easily then ok. I highly highly highly doubt that is the case though.

Just start Self...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg61

Pilk
Billingsley
Plumlee

And to the guy that said CB had a ton of hard hit balls at people that is false. He had something like 15 ground balls outs. We go Pilk, Billingsley we might not even need game 3. I was asking for JB all last week and he just threw a CG for us. He absolutely gets the start game 2 and he's going 7-8 innings again. Pilk is game 1 starter no doubt.

---

Smoot sold you oceanfront property in Arizona...hope you kept your receipt

Y'all just let me handle this damn...didn't I do a good enough job in the regional

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I seen it dawg

Starting Plum is not the best move....It's not necessarily I like one or the other starting. It's about where we are in the season and roles and what the players are used to. Hell I think it's obvious to everyone Denver scares the living shit out of me and I trust him least out of him, Pilk, Plum and JB. But I digress...

Denver has been starting. Plumlee has been relieving. At this point in the season you are more likely for Denver to have a good performance and not need plum early by keeping it that way because they are settled into their roles.

If you flip them at this point you potentially **** them both up by making them switch roles. Not something you do at this time. Too much of a gamble.

Now Cann and henderson know their players and if it's already been discussed and the players makeup enables them to do it easily then ok. I highly highly highly doubt that is the case though.

Just start Self...

---

Thanks for the response. I get that argument, but again, McQuary hasn't been performing well, so you're not risking messing him up. The only issue is whether or not Plumlee could effectively switch to being a starter, and considering that he hasn't been as good in relief as he was as a starter, I don't know why we'd be that concerned that he would suddenly become less effective if we switched him back now.

I just think fans become too fearful that any little tweak will totally mess with a player when, in reality, I don't think it makes much of a difference. Obviously some guys are just better suited for relief, which is a different discussion. Plumlee has proven he can be an effective starter.

Anyway, we obviously disagree, but I'll be fine with whatever the coaches decide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

Thanks for the response. I get that argument, but again, McQuary hasn't been performing well, so you're not risking messing him up. The only issue is whether or not Plumlee could effectively switch to being a starter, and considering that he hasn't been as good in relief as he was as a starter, I don't know why we'd be that concerned that he would suddenly become less effective if we switched him back now.

I just think fans become too fearful that any little tweak will totally mess with a player when, in reality, I don't think it makes much of a difference. Obviously some guys are just better suited for relief, which is a different discussion. Plumlee has proven he can be an effective starter.

Anyway, we obviously disagree, but I'll be fine with whatever the coaches decide.

---

I'm just going to agree to disagree here. Once again the stats don't tell the whole story. Especially at this time of the year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I seen it dawg

I'm just going to agree to disagree here. Once again the stats don't tell the whole story. Especially at this time of the year.

---

That's fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

Game one- McQuary followed by Plumlee.
Game two- Pilkington
Game three- Billingsley

---

This is it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

As a SP (both with 8 starts):
McQuary - 35 IP, 5.66 ERA, 27 K/35 BB
Plumlee - 35 IP, 2.57 ERA, 28 K/12 BB

Last 5 appearances:
McQuary - 23.2 IP, 5.70 ERA, 15 K/21 BB
Plumlee - 15 IP, 3.60 ERA, 12 K/5 BB

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I seen it dawg

Smoot sold you oceanfront property in Arizona...hope you kept your receipt

---

Looks like Denver has been hitting the ocean from Arizona while he pitches too. 35 walks compared to 12 walks in the same amount of innings in the same amount of games as a starting pitcher solves the debate for us. We don't have to argue it. It's clear as day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarius

I would throw Pilk game 1 and Plumlee game 2. Billingsley had a great outing, but he had a ton of balls that were crushed right at people all night. I think Plumlee has better stuff and is more likely to get LSU out consistently.

---

We have to win game one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg61

Looks like Denver has been hitting the ocean from Arizona while he pitches too. 35 walks compared to 12 walks in the same amount of innings in the same amount of games as a starting pitcher solves the debate for us. We don't have to argue it. It's clear as day.

---

It is clear as day. But you're looking out the wrong window. A window covered in mud.

Smoot, The reason Plumlee isn't starting is Bc he did so bad as a starter after a strong OOC start, that he lost his job. Now, he's our best long reliever, and has been getting us out of jams....why would you take him out of a role he is excelling at, and put him back into a role that he lost due to performance? Makes no sense. Plus, as a long reliever you can use him multiple games if needed.