Should Detwiler (1.59 era) keep his rotation spot when Wang returns

[DPMOmaha]

Less because I think Detwiler is good than because I expect nothing at all from Wang.

Yeah, but it's still a 4 deep rotation plus you've still got Lannan who is very capable and would be a very solid #5. 

[aspenbubba]

you and Rachel Maddow.



She's a Sox fan and never been into Wang.

Very good,I am not sure everyone got it.

[aspenbubba]

for what?

Are you kidding me.? How about a bat? The white whale.

[zimm_da_kid]

Are you kidding me.? How about a bat? The white whale.

we won't have room in the OF.  we 'll have morse, harper, and werth.  the only way we could fit a white whale this season is if we trade our leading rbi man laroche.  i see getting a cf more likely this offseason after laroche becomes a free agent and there are options.

[Minty Fresh]

A nice, unbiased set of options for this poll

[Minty Fresh]

we won't have room in the OF.  we 'll have morse, harper, and werth.  the only way we could fit a white whale this season is if we trade our leading rbi man laroche.  i see getting a cf more likely this offseason after laroche becomes a free agent and there are options.

You could flip him for Trumbo and put LaRoche on the bench when Morse comes back.

[Lintyfresh85]

I would.

+1

[Baseball is Life]

Trade Jackson in a package (with Flores?) for the white whale leadoff CF. Lannan is our insurance if Wang breaks down again or to eat up the Stras innings in September.

When Morse comes back, put Harper in LF, white whale in CF, and Morse at 1B. Trade Laroche.

[Tyler Durden]

I would not trade Detwiler - he should be the 4th starter next year.  He's a good pitcher and is cheap and controllable.  Hopefully having a minimum salary pitcher as the 4th guy leaves room in the payroll for making whatever additions they need to make to improve the offense.

[Slateman]

- Strassburg will sit by the beginning of September.

- Go with a six-man rotation.

- Keep Detwiler, no matter what. He's better than Jackson.

- Why am I thinking about this?? The Nats need a hitter!

I like the six man rotation part. May tax the bullpen a bit, but rosters get increased anyways in September

[Sharp]

I don't really understand the six man rotation idea, unless it actually gets Stras to the playoffs.  Otherwise, he's pitching the exact same number of innings, just spread around a bit more.  I don't see how it helps the Nats win any more games, which is all that matters pre-playoffs.

[Baseball is Life]

The six man rotation is more far fetched than the white whale CF. Has any MLB team even tried it in recent memory?

[HalfSmokes]

I like the six man rotation part. May tax the bullpen a bit, but rosters get increased anyways in September

That would give you two pitchers (Detwiler and Wang) who Davey probably won't let go past 6 innings (6.1 now I guess) and 1 more (he does like going deep). If they did that, maybe sacrifice a bench bay for an extra long reliever

[Kevrock]

The six man rotation is more far fetched than the white whale CF. Has any MLB team even tried it in recent memory?

Uhh, yes?

[Kevrock]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/joe_sheehan/08/04/six.man.rotations/index.html

[JCA-CrystalCity]

Well, Detwiler could be used as a swing man, with frequent spot starts.  I would not mind seeing Davey give starters an extra day every 3d start, so when we play > than 10 games in a row, start slotting in a spot starter.  Detwiler has the most versatile arm (Stras too, but not this season), so it is logical you would use him this way if you did go to a 5+ rotation.

Sharp - ordinarily, a 6th starter costs several of your best starters innings, so it is unwise to use one. However, here we are talking about a staff with an innings-limited ace, and two must-start pitchers in Wang and Jackson who are not clearly better than the 6th starter and likely are worse.  If you assume Wang and Jackson are must-start guys, then plopping in a lot of spot starts from Detwiler really only takes innings away from Gio and JZ, and also takes as many innnings away from guys you don't necessarily think are worse than Det (CNW and E-Jax).  Keeping Det going multi innings sets you up for the end of the year, too.  finally, when det isn't due for a spot start for 4 or 5 days, you can use him and Stammen (or Gorz) as a multi-inning finisher of games (e.g., picking up in the 6th or 7th from Wang or the others), which saves wear on your short guys in the bullpen. 

[HalfSmokes]

Why are Jackson and Wang must start- both are on 1 year deals

[JCA-CrystalCity]

Read the Sheehan piece.  I'm not saying use a pure 6 man rotation, just a 5 man rotation with frequent spot starts by the swing man / men.  Sheehan envisions the 6th  starter as being used exclusively as a rotation piece. I'm not saying that for Detwiler.  Rather than straining the bullpen, using him (and Stammen) as a spot starter and multi-inning game finisher would rest shorter guys in the bullpen rather than overburden them and would not take innings away from your ace.

[Sharp]

Well, Detwiler could be used as a swing man, with frequent spot starts.  I would not mind seeing Davey give starters an extra day every 3d start, so when we play > than 10 games in a row, start slotting in a spot starter.  Detwiler has the most versatile arm (Stras too, but not this season), so it is logical you would use him this way if you did go to a 5+ rotation.

Sharp - ordinarily, a 6th starter costs several of your best starters innings, so it is unwise to use one. However, here we are talking about a staff with an innings-limited ace, and two must-start pitchers in Wang and Jackson who are not clearly better than the 6th starter and likely are worse.

Hm, I'll give you Wang, but do you think Jackson is likely worse than Detwiler?  He's been pitching very well from a peripherals standpoint and I suspect it's only a matter of time before his ERA catches up.  He's really the only one of our starters who's been "unlucky" so far.

If you assume Wang and Jackson are must-start guys, then plopping in a lot of spot starts from Detwiler really only takes innings away from Gio and JZ, and also takes as many innnings away from guys you don't necessarily think are worse than Det (CNW and E-Jax).  Keeping Det going multi innings sets you up for the end of the year, too.  finally, when det isn't due for a spot start for 4 or 5 days, you can use him and Stammen (or Gorz) as a multi-inning finisher of games (e.g., picking up in the 6th or 7th from Wang or the others), which saves wear on your short guys in the bullpen. 

I suppose.  So the primary argument for the six-man rotation is that it saves bullpen wear and tear, in this case?  I'm not sure I agree with that.  The six starters make for less bullpen flexibility prior to the end of the season, which means that the remaining relievers are going to be more heavily taxed.  The only real reason I can think of for doing this unless it does help the bullpen, I would think, would be if someone showed that pitching on six days' rest makes for more effective starter innings, but I don't know that there's any data at all to support that.

Read the Sheehan piece.  I'm not saying use a pure 6 man rotation, just a 5 man rotation with frequent spot starts by the swing man / men.  Sheehan envisions the 6th  starter as being used exclusively as a rotation piece. I'm not saying that for Detwiler.  Rather than straining the bullpen, using him (and Stammen) as a spot starter and multi-inning game finisher would rest shorter guys in the bullpen rather than overburden them and would not take innings away from your ace.

Oh, I see--you want to interchange bullpen and starter use.  Wouldn't that limit them in both roles, though, due to rest requirements?  I guess I need to read the article--I think I'm missing something obvious.

[HalfSmokes]

I think the team is better off not messing with him and trying to stretch him to 7-8 innings, that role does sound fine for Jackson though

[Sharp]

Reading that article actually makes me think that what I'd really like to see is someone going to a four-man rotation again.  I don't think there's ever been a study that concluded definitively that pitching on five days' rest had any benefits over pitching on four, either health-wise or results-wise, and you suddenly don't have the usual fifth-starter problem (the problem, of course, being that "there is no such thing as a fifth starter" because the average fifth starter is replacement level).  I'm sure the Nats won't be the team to try it again, though.

[JCA-CrystalCity]

they are must-starts because they cannot relieve.  It is a non-starter to talk about CMW in the pen.  You know it.  Jackson, I've not heard about relieving.  This is an innings-limited front of the rotation.  Optimizing use of Wang, Dewiler, and Jackson concentrates your innings in your better pitchers rather than having multiple starters hit walls in August and September and Lannan and Maya, or pulling Stammen out of the pen.  Sure, you could cut CMW since he's not a long term piece.  But you'd be giving innings to Lannan and Maya, or screwing your pen.  Also, of course, if any of CMW, Jackson, or Gorzo are going to be tradeable, they are going to have to pitch and show something.  If you expect to get anything of value, short or long term, out of CMW and Jackson, they have to start.

[sportsfan882]

Detwiler needs 30 starts in the Bigs this year, Wang can go freak himself.

[Kevrock]

Reading that article actually makes me think that what I'd really like to see is someone going to a four-man rotation again.  I don't think there's ever been a study that concluded definitively that pitching on five days' rest had any benefits over pitching on four, either health-wise or results-wise, and you suddenly don't have the usual fifth-starter problem (the problem, of course, being that "there is no such thing as a fifth starter" because the average fifth starter is replacement level).  I'm sure the Nats won't be the team to try it again, though.

There have been studies about rest periods done by ASMI.

[Sharp]

There have been studies about rest periods done by ASMI.

Can you link me to an article?  I can't find anything except stuff that reaffirms what I'd remembered, which is that there wasn't clear evidence for four vs. five man rotations (but there may be some for three).