Stephen Strasburg, pitcher and Scott Boras client

Plus they didn't have to shut him down completely, just skip some of his starts so he would have ten days instead of five between starts once in a while. They could have worked it around some off days so they didn't even have to find anyone to take his spot in the rotation.

IMO the best thing would be to have pitched him every six or seven days and have the occassional spot start/start on short rest. Then again if they had come out doing this from Day 1, that would have gotten some raised eyebrows as all.

Sheehan has a long thing up, advocating that they do some juggling (and should have done more previously) to get him some playoff innings:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/joe_sheehan/08/14/stephen-strasburg-nationals-innings-limit/index.html?sct=mlb_t11_a0

"Not only would sending up a pinch-hitter have improved their chance of scoring, but it would have saved Strasburg from pitching a relatively low-leverage inning"

Strasburg is probably better than their pinch hitters I am thinking.

I think that's what the Braves are doing with Tommy Hanson! "Need a midseason break? We'll call it a back injury, stay in shape and be ready in two weeks."

― Romney's Kitchen Nightmares (WmC), Tuesday, August 14, 2012 12:26 PM (5 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This HAS to be the wave of the future, right? Try and run up a big lead in your division and start selectively using the DL to rest starters; cycle in your high risk/high reward prospects and see who sticks until the options are used up

there aren't that many teams that seriously make the playoffs year-in and year-out. while it definitely seems like the nats could have handled this better (and the innings limit they've named seems awfully arbitrary), it's probably a lot more important to teams like washington and pittsburgh to simply make the playoffs than go all out for a title right now. see also milwaukee driving cc into the ground in whatever year that was.

sort of different conditions tho bc CC wasn't going to re-sign/see you in hell fatbody

Driving CC made perfect sense for them since they weren't going to resign him after that half-season rental was done.

...and he sucked in the playoffs iirc

thats true, but right up until there he basically put up one of the most insane half seasons ever

It bears repeating that if the '06 Cards could survive the playoffs, any team can.

also, CC was kind of a veteran at that point, plus he's gigantic

all this is true -- my point was that it was more important for those brewers (and these nationals) to simply make the playoffs than to conserve themselves for a rather more random world series run

except if they get tossed in the Division Series, whining will be heard.

if they don't win the WS, whining will be heard.

i reaaaaally don't understand why they can't just skip a few starts for the remainder of the season and then use him a bit in the playoffs (maybe once per series). and as others pointed out above, even if they did the illogical thing and shut him down completely, the argument that "restarting" him after a few weeks would reinjure his arm doesn't make any sense.

it's going to be hilarious when he gets hit by a bird or something early next year and misses the entire year

According to the Washington Post, even Strasburg's father has asked Rizzo how appropriate the shut-down plan is in a pennant race.

"Mr. Strasburg, don't ask the question if you don't want to hear the full answer," Rizzo told Jim Strasburg, the Post reported. The elder Strasburg replied, "I want to hear it."

Rizzo told Jim Strasburg that the decision to sit Strasburg was "mine and mine alone."

"It's not on Davey Johnson or (owner Ted) Lerner. It's on me," he told the Post. "I know it may stain my reputation or my career. There's no way it can ever be proved if I was right. The easy thing for me is just to do nothing. But I'm hardheaded. The decision was made five months ago because it was the best decision for Stephen and the Nationals. And nothing is going to change it."

In response, Jim Strasburg consented and told Rizzo, "'That makes a lot of sense," the GM told the Post.

that conversation abridged:

How appropriate is the shut-down of my son?
I made the decision. I'm hardheaded. I made the decision 5 months ago. Nothing is going to change it.
That makes a lot of sense

alternate abridged version

Are you sure about this?
F*** you. And don't try to change my mind.
I guess that's that.

falling back on the "i'm stubborn" defense is the laaaaaaamest argument one can make

You can probably file this under Old Ballplayers Never Die, but it is pretty funny when the guy who your surgery is named after chimes in:

“I would hope the general manager has a degree in orthopedic surgery, or at least kinesiology or physiology, and I don’t think Mike Rizzo has any of that,” Tommy John said on ESPN Radio. “Here’s the thing, go back, Wikipedia ‘Tommy John’ and see how many innings I pitched in 1976, my comeback year.”

The answer is 207.

“From the time I came back until I quit in 1989, I never missed a start in 13 years,” Tommy John continued. “Here’s my take on the thing: There’s no guarantee that if you’re shutting Strasburg down, he’s going to be healthy down the road. You want him healthy. I understand that. He’s the franchise. But you know what? The golden ring only comes around on the merry go round maybe one time. There’s no guarantee that if you keep Strasburg out this year and keep him healthy for next year and the next and the next year, that you’re gonna win.”

Shut the hell up, Tommy John, I'm counting on this guy getting sat down.

“I would hope the general manager has a degree in orthopedic surgery, or at least kinesiology or physiology, and I don’t think Mike Rizzo has any of that”
- says a guy who doesn't have any of that

Really, the more former players who chime in and say that Strasburg shouldn't be shut down because that's not how the game was played in their time, the more confidence I have that Rizzo is making the right decision.

FUN FACTS: Tommy John was the National League player of the month in April 1974. March 1974 NL player of the month was... Davey Johnson!

I'm hoping that Mike Marshall, pitcher of 106 games in 1974 and possessor of a Ph.D. in kinesiology, joins in next.

Why did the NL have a player of the month in March?

oops I meant August 1973, which was the previous awarded month

The Nats slowly drove Strasburg crazy with all the shutdown talk until he was unable to focus on pitching, so they had to shut him down to take his mind off of the shutdown. Nice going!

crazy like Fox

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/nationals-journal/wp/2012/09/08/stephen-strasburg-says-shutdown-is-something-that-im-not-happy-about-at-all/

yeah, this is crazy. when you have your chance you have to go for it. the Nationals will probably not be relevant next year.

What makes you have that opinion.

The Nats assuming they'll be in the playoff hunt for the next (say) 5 or so years as justification for not going all out to win kind of ignores the way the MLB actually tends to work

unless you're loaded with young talent like the Nats.

Well they have two of the best prospects ever yes but it's not like they're loaded with great under-25 talent. According to Fangraphs they only have three prospects in the top 100, one of which is Harper.

Look at playoff history. you assume the Nats are pretty confident in, say, two more playoff appearances over the next five years. that's actually pretty tough to do unless you're A) incredibly loaded (hence why the Yanks make it every year), B) in a weak division (hence why the Cardinals made it so often in the mid-00's), or C) the stars align and you wind up with something like the ridiculous Smoltz/Glavine/Maddux rotation that Atlanta dominated with. They're 19th in payroll, are going to be competing with Altanta for some time, and they have a lot of guys having career years right now, such as Gio, LaRoche (who is 32), and Desmond (who was OPS'ing like .680 over 1200 PA's before this year). As a Milwaukee fan, I know...things change a lot year to year, even if the team looks basically the same. They may well go on a run and prove everyone wrong but again, unless you're the damn Yankees its so hard to say "oh well, we'll be in it next year"

also, I don't want to speak too soon on this but the fact that the Tigers have the 5th highest payroll and play in the weakest division (by far) and yet are still 2 games out says a lot about this kind of thinking. at the beginning of the season nobody would even consider that the Tigers would miss out on the playoffs. now B-P only gives them a 32% shot.

at the beginning of the season nobody would even consider that the Tigers would miss out on the playoffs.

I considered it. The only "big splash" active-roster change made between '11 and '12 was the signing of Fielder, who replaced Martinez -- not much difference. They're only three games worse than they were at this point last year, and their differential is better by 26 runs.

The White Sox are seven games better. That doesn't seem all that crazy, either.

You could say that the Rays had nothing to lose in 2008 because they were loaded with young talent and would have plenty of other chances to win. That might still be true, but you never know, the playoffs are a crapshoot.

Neyer on the Shutdown:

"One thing I keep noticing, though, is this bizarre belief that if only Stephen Strasburg is allowed to pitch, the Nationals will win the World Series, or probably win the World Series, or maybe they won't win the World Series but they'll have a lot better chance with Strasburg than without him.

It's just not true. With Strasburg, the Nationals' chances of winning the World Series are somewhere between 10 and 15 percent. Without Strasburg, the Nationals' chances of winning the World Series are somewhere between 10 and 15 percent. With him, maybe it's 12.8 percent. Without him, maybe it's 10.6 percent.

Most of the discussion seems to be centered around what the grounding of Stephen Strasburg means to the Washington Nationals. But I don't think all that many folks really care much about the Washington Nationals. I think most folks care about themselves; in this context, that means most folks really, really want to see Stephen Strasburg pitching in big games next month.

I want to see that, too. But not if it means I can't see him pitching next season, or if it means he won't be pitching brilliantly for the next 15 season. For a long time, the balance was swung far too much in favor of winning today. The Nationals probably haven't found the perfect balance. But if we have to swing a bit too far the other way, at least for a while, there are worse things."

http://mlb.sbnation.com/2012/9/12/3318308/stephen-strasburg-shut-down-washington-nationals

"Huh. Why is it that most people are neither as enlightened nor as selfless as me, Rob Neyer? You know, from time to time, I do think about these things." -- Rob Neyer

WHO said the Nationals WOULD WIN or PROBABLY WOULD WIN the World Series with Strasburg?

The negative reactions I've read have been no more complex than "The Nationals should use their best pitcher."

aside from the strawman, i mostly agree with Neyer.

With Strasburg, the Nationals' chances of winning the World Series are somewhere between 10 and 15 percent. Without Strasburg, the Nationals' chances of winning the World Series are somewhere between 10 and 15 percent. With him, maybe it's 12.8 percent. Without him, maybe it's 10.6 percent.

The numbers are probably right, but that's beside the point. The Angels could win the WS without Trout (if they make the playoffs), but why would they want to try? Any team could win a short series without their best player because baseball isn't basketball, one player doesn't make all that much of a difference especially over seven games.

Even using Neyer's numbers, you could say that even though their overall chances of winning the WS are low, the Nats chances are improved by 20 percent -- 100 x (12.8 - 10.6)/10.6 -- with Strasburg pitching, which is a LOT.

I think he might've been alluding to the Tim McCarvers of the world (is there more than one?).

Another big thing on Strasburg that I don't think is behind the paywall yet:

http://www.billjamesonline.com/shutting_down_strasburg/

i was gonna mention that pissing off your best player seems like a bad idea in general, the Nats should still be two years away from locking him up (if indeed they do)

This is easily the dumbest thing since Joba Rules.

Strasburg ERA: 3.16
Lannan ERA in one game replacing Strasburg so far: 0

clearly a disaster for the Nats

pissing off your best player seems like a bad idea in general

is Harper pissed off?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/nationals-journal/wp/2012/09/12/stephen-strasburg-pinch-hitter

Strasburg made his final start of the season five days ago, but already he has become antsy with no more starts to look forward to. During the Nationals’ series in New York, Strasburg has shagged batting practice in center field, mostly standing by himself.

“He’s been pestering (pitching coach Steve McCatty) about what he can do,” Johnson said. “Can I keep throwing off the mound? No. Can I play catch in the outfield? Yes. It’s pretty bad now, but it’s going to get worse. Because he’s going to be champing.”

Maybe he should get some reps behind the plate in case they need an emergency catcher! He could roll the ball back -- anything, as long as he doesn't use his arm.

Poor guy is going to Darren Baker himself during the playoffs.

https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSgta1rY33Sf3yR55Y4fFyweDYMVO8ytPKVxMMhqXZiPALNcNl5

Morse, Strasburg

id been wondering abt what hes actually been doing

perfect time to start a tidy lil drug habit imo

Jazayerli:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8369941/history-shows-washington-nationals-shut-stephen-strasburg-too-soon

That's a really great article.