Stephen Strasburg, pitcher and Scott Boras client

My understanding is, once they wind him down there's no restarting. That's what's been said.

really applaud the Nats for doing this

Kind of like the lawnmower I replaced a few years ago. (xpost)

though someone at Fangraphs (I think) made a good argument that you could probably skip 3 or 4 of his regular season starts, then get one or two out of him in the postseason. not sure why this isn't an option in Natcamp but it makes sense to me.

all things considered, it's certainly not the team-killing move many are seeing it as, the Nats rotation is great even without Stras, and he doesn't often go deep in games anyway. they'll be fine

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

I don't have any sense of how mature the Nats are, but here's hoping Stras throws a fit when he can't throw baseballs anymore, and drags the rest of the team down with bad morale.

This would be their first playoff appearance since 1981 (or ever, depending on how you look at it). To shut down your best pitcher when he isn't injured, given that history, takes some brass balls.

They're probably making a good choice, but the only two ways to keep people from second guessing it forever would be to either win the World Series this year without him in the playoffs, or win the World Series in the next 3-4 years with him. High burden of proof.

Can't help but think there is some Loria-shaped Expos/strike-of-'81 specter -- that the Nats will be eliminated in the NLDS and will never return, that Strasburg will get a WS ring the first year he is a Yankee.

nah I'm sure the Nats planted some sort of doomsday device during the surgery that they can trigger to injure him if he ever looks at getting traded

I can't tell if Eckersley's speaking disinterestedly, or if that's his own puzzlement/impatience with the Nationals:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/behindthemic/?eref=sinav#mlb/2012/08/08/0808.btm_eckersley_strasburg&sct=mlb_bf5_a4

If the latter, it is odd coming from a guy who got into the HOF primarily for a series of seasons in which he threw 75 innings.

They're probably making a good choice, but the only two ways to keep people from second guessing it forever would be to either win the World Series this year without him in the playoffs, or win the World Series in the next 3-4 years with him. High burden of proof.

They're probably making a good choice, but the only two ways to keep people from second guessing it forever would be to either win the World Series this year without him in the playoffs, or win the World Series in the next 3-4 years with him. High burden of proof.

I think this is more a fan issue than a competitive issue; the Nats rotation is solid without him (hell, he's not even the best starter on his own team right now!) and Stras only averages 5.2 innings a start, what are you really losing here?

Agreed that this "we're built for the future" talk is going to put a big burden on them going forward. Fans will always, always ask "what if...?"

He averages 6 innings per start because of the innings limit, I think. They've not been letting him pitch deep into games because they don't want to work him too hard.

Jayson Stark wrote a really good article about this last week too.

All this "they're still good enough to win without him" talk is besides the point. This isn't basketball, any baseball team can lose a player and still win a short series. You never know how long your window of opportunity will last, and it's presumptuous to assume that there will be more chances down the road because the team looks good on paper. Imagine making the same argument, say, with Tampa Bay and David Price in '08.

The Nats should have figured out a way to save Strasburg for October, probably by skipping 4-5 starts at various times during the season, once it became clear that they had a good shot at making the playoffs.

I don't know if that would make him more injury prone or what, none of us are sports medicine experts so it's hard to say exactly what they're afraid of (suffice to say they're not stupid, they've probably considered like, every possible option here).

What gets missed a lot is that the Nats were supposed to be like, a .500 team. Like I know the Phillies are on the downswing here but nobody could have predicted they'd be 18 games up on them in August! Now, it seems like the Nats are all but guaranteed a playoff spot, but they're still only 5.5 games up on a very good Atlanta team. Skipping his starts in the middle of a penant race doesn't seem right either, and I don't think anyone could have guessed they'd even be in this position. Either way I strongly suspect the Nats are making the right call here.

I think it's stupid move. An arm injury could happen if he pitches 180 innings or 200 innings this year. It's not like they overused him at all.

I don't blame them for making a decision in March when they thought they'd be, realistically, an 80-win team. But once they saw they had a chance to accomplish a lot more, they could have changed their strategy (they still might, but it's not looking like it).

Why does skipping starts in a pennant race seem less right than leaving him off the playoff roster? If they're good enough to win without him in the playoffs, aren't they good enough to make the playoffs even if he misses a few starts? It's not any less unconventional than shutting down a healthy pitcher when you have a chance for a championship.

xpost

That's what I suggested above, but according to Morbius, "My understanding is, once they wind him down there's no restarting." Why that is, physiologically, I don't know.

I read the same thing Morbs did, I think. I think the assumption is that once the arm starts to heal itself from the constant work of the season, it would take a whole 'nother spring training (probably a shorter one) to get him back in game shape for playoffs. If he took 3 weeks off and then had to go straight back to work, serious injury would be much more likely.

You want to hear something bizarre? Strasburg is ranked 9th on the Nats team in WAR...for batting. In 44 PAs, he's posted up a line of .316/.380/.500.

Anyway, the Nats were ridiculously careful with him last year, and he got Tommy Johnned. The way they see it, each 1 WAR is worth about $5m, right? So barring injury his rookie contract is going to provide $100m of value (and possibly a lot more) for only $26m. "Barring injury" is the big part here.

i wonder what rob dibble thinks about it

rob dibble smash shutdown

I think we're heading for a day when TJ surgery will be de rigeur. Work elbow #1 until it blows out, have it replaced, work elbow #2 until retirement. I hope James Andrews has a bunch of young apprentices ready to take over when he retires.

i'd say it pretty much already is that way.

what happens when Dr Andrews' arm gets overworked and then *he* needs TJ surgery? huh?!

xpost

That's what I suggested above, but according to Morbius, "My understanding is, once they wind him down there's no restarting." Why that is, physiologically, I don't know.

Orel Hershiser disagreed with that in Stark's article. He basically said that pitchers get hurt midseason all the time and nobody says they need to be shut down for the year once they haven't pitched for a few weeks.

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.

so, like, a pretend injury should do the trick then?

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."

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