Soria as a starter? Not everyone agrees
For most Royals fans, the question isn't whether Joakim Soria should become starting pitcher, it is when and how. He's got multiple plus pitches, good control and sound mechanics. I am in that majority and I think the Royals should use Soria as a reliever and spot starter this year to get him up to about 95-100 IP. Then, in 2009, he could spend most of the season as a starter, getting his IP up to about 130.

Soria's best tool is the golden aura that surrounds him
However, the "experts," commentators and analysts don't necessarily agree that Soria should ever become a starting pitcher. Here are a few comments I've run accross on these lines:
BL (Bozeman): The notion of moving Joakim Soria to the rotation... do it now, do it never, or do it later?
Christina Kahrl: He's had some problems in the past, and when you're as good as he's been initially in a relief role, as Jonathan Papelbon demonstrates, it becomes very hard to move past the automatic instinct to not fix what isn't broken. -- February 28, 2008 from a Baseball Prospectus chat session
Huh? What problems? His shoulder inflammation that put him on one 15-day DL stint? I haven't read anyone say that this was significant or worrisome. And shouldn't they move past the "automatic instinct"? This seems to fly in the face of the more common sabermetric analysis that a starting pitching is much more valuable than relief pitching, regardless of role.
Joe Posnanski: Joakim Soria is the closer - and he's fun to watch. I was messaging with Rob [Neyer] about this: I cannot remember a young pitcher who started out his career as a closer and then became a good major league starter. I bring this up because the Royals keep talking about making him a starter down the road ... I don't think so. Seems to me the decision is made.
Rich Lederer: Jonathan Papelbon? Oh, that's right. That only last a couple of starts in spring training last year. Hmmm... I can think of some pretty good pitchers who started as relievers (Orel Hershiser, Fergie Jenkins, Pedro Martinez, Dave Stewart, Bob Welch, and David Wells to name an Antonio Alfonseca handful), but I guess it would be unfair to call them "closers." I don't know, Joe, you might be on to something here. The closest one that I can think of would be Charlie Hough. As a knuckleballer, maybe he doesn't qualify. Or maybe you don't think he was a "good major league pitcher?"
Joe Posnanski: Well, Charlie Hough doesn't qualify in my mind because he wasn't especially young when he came up as a closer (he was 28 in his first full season) and while he did become a good starter at 34, I'm suspecting that's probably not the career arc the Royals are hoping for with Soria. Knuckleballers are indeed a whole other thing. And yes, the Cardinals are trying to do it with Braden Looper, but you couldn't call that a success story yet. ... The closest I've been able to find is actually Scott Garrelts, who wasn't exactly the closer with the Giants -- he was sort of a co-closer with Craig Lefferts -- and then he had one really good year as a starter, another so-so year, and then he got hurt and was done. Again, not exactly the model I think anyone is hoping for. -- March 11, 2008 from BaseballAnalysts.com
Joe, I like you but sometimes, I don't know... Is he trying to say that because Soria was a closer in his rookie season that we should expect that he'll never be a good starting pitcher? First, that's silly and unsupported. Many good starting pitchers started their MLB careers as relievers. In addition to those named above, Johan Santana, Kelvim Escobar, and Curt Schilling all started as relievers and turned into very good starting pitchers. Second, he started as a reliever because he was a Rule 5 acquisition. If he had stayed in the Padres system, they would have developed him as a starter. If the Royals had the luxury of keeping him in the minors, they would have used him as a starter. He was used as a reliever in his rookie season out of the necessity caused by the Rule 5 draft acquisition. Third, he was a closer as a rookie (for part of the season) because of injury to Dotel and because he's so damn good. None of the above is a sound argument for him never becoming a good starting pitcher.
While I don't think they have made up their mind on Soria's future, the Royals organization sees him as a possible/likely future starter.
"I think we all would like to see what he can do as a starter," pitching coach Bob McClure said. "When that is, I don't know. But after watching him start last year in spring training, that's something we have in the back of our minds." -- February 7, 2008 Royals pitching coach Bob McClure in the KC Star
But clearly they think the time for Soria to start is not now.
Joakim Soria, the Rule 5 Draft steal from the Padres, stepped in brilliantly for Octavio Dotel, who was first injured and later traded. Soria saved 17 games in 21 chances as a rookie and is looked upon as the full-time closer this year. There's been scant consideration given of switching him to a starter.
"We haven't even discussed that because we all like him as a closer so much," manager Trey Hillman said. "If we were really serious about doing that, we'd have been more aggressive about going after someone to fill that closing role." -- February 6, 2008 KCRoyals.com
The Royals situation with Soria is mirrored by the Yankees quandry with Joba Chamberlain. He dominated as a reliever and scouts think he has the stuff to be a very successful starting pitcher. Many commentators think the Yankees should keep in the bullpen and groom him to be Mariano Rivera's successor as closer.

Joba can't wait to become a starter and have more opportunities to throw at Kevin Youkilis
Chris Russo: Why mess around with a sure thing?
Mike Francesa: Why has everyone come to the conclusion that he's a better pitcher as a starter than as a reliever?
Sweeny Murti: Because of his tools including multiple plus pitches
Mike Francesa: But the only success he's shown in the majors is as a reliever...The idea that that job [setup man and heir to Rivera as the closer] isn't more important [than starting] then no one has paid attention to what has gone on here for the last decade or so...The Red Sox won last year more for any other reason than that Okajima and Papelbon were the best bullpen in baseball. -- March 5, 2008 WFAN Radio
Russo and Francesa aren't the average sports talk radio guys. They aren't just reactionary guys trying to stir things up. They are intelligent and thoughtful in their analysis, although definitely not at all progressive. I think they and those that agree with them are way off. If he can be a good starting pitcher, he's worth a lot more to his team than a very good setup man or closer. The numbers are pretty clear on that.
Our friends at Baseball Prospectus disagree Russo and Francesa and their analysis of Chamberlain.
I worry about a Dave Righetti scenario here. It's very easy to imagine Chamberlain pitching well in the pen and the Yankees saying, "We don't want to mess with success." To invoke Nate [Silver] for about the umpteenth time this chat, last year he did a good bit of analysis (on Unfiltered, I think) trying to find the break-even point for Jon Papelbon-as-starter vs. as-reliever. We need to ask him to do that again for Chamberlain. My guess is that the threshold for the reliever argument has got to be pretty high -- Joba has to be spectacularly good in the pen, not just really good -- to justify giving up the high-side expectations of what he can do in the rotation. -- February 27, 2008 Steven Goldman Baseball Prospectus
So with Chamberlain, the Yankees can afford to waste him in the bullpen. But with Soria, they should "fix what isn't broken." Seems like a contradition. But of course BP, sabermetricians and baseball analysis isn't one big monolith with only one opinion and perspective. Perhaps others at BP disagree with Kahrl -- who, in my opinion, is usually dismissive of the Royals. But it is clear that some, perhaps many, commentators think Soria should stay in the bullpen indefinitely.
What do you think? Is there anything to the theory that Soria will pitch best as a closer, so let's just keep him in that role? Can we expect him to succeed as a starting pitcher? Should the Royals give him a shot in the rotation? And if so, when and how?
0 recs |
71 comments
Comments
I think I am in the closer camp
by buddyball on Mar 12, 2008 9:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The value of innings
by NYRoyal on Mar 12, 2008 9:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
whatever joakim soria is

by slayor on Mar 13, 2008 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
WOW
by RoyalsRetro on Mar 14, 2008 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've heard the Yankees are going
by royaldaddy on Mar 12, 2008 10:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
A quick comparison of two 2009 pitching staffs
POS Pitcher IP ERA
SP Meche 200 4.00
SP Greinke 200 4.00
SP Bannister 180 4.25
SP Hochevar 150 4.75
SP Soria 180 4.00
RP Peralta 70 4.00
RP Yabuta 70 3.75
RP Gobble 55 3.50
RP Nunez 70 4.25
RP Bale 95 4.6
RP Mahay 60 4.25
RP Braun/Musser 55 4.5
P POOL 60 6
TOTAL 1445 4.07 ERA 653.6 Earned Runs Allowed
POS Pitcher IP ERA
SP Meche 200 4.00
SP Greinke 200 4.00
SP Bannister 190 4.25
SP Hochevar 150 4.75
SP #5 starter 150 5.00
RP Soria 70 3.25
RP Peralta 70 4.00
RP Yabuta 70 3.75
RP Gobble 55 3.50
RP Nunez 70 4.25
RP Bale 110 4.60
RP Mahay 60 3.75
P POOL 50 6.00
TOTAL 1445 4.26 684.6 Earned Runs Allowed
I know that Soria wouldn't be ready to throw 180 innings in 2009, but this is merely an illustration of the different value of Soria as a full-time starter, vs. as a closer.
The 31 fewer runs allowed amounts to about 3 more wins for the Royals.
by NYRoyal on Mar 12, 2008 10:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
but can you balance that
by buddyball on Mar 12, 2008 10:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It is true that all innings are not equal
So, long story short, I don't think Soria as closer would be facing a great deal of high leverage innings. Nor do I think his replacement would be significantly worse in save situations.
by NYRoyal on Mar 12, 2008 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the "closer"
to me is someone very much overrated. the game is on the line at least as many times in the 7th and 8th as it is in the 9th.
While obviously not spectacular in any way, Todd Jones and Borowski manage to "close" games. I know its not a great example, but it does show something.
by RoyalJHWKR on Mar 13, 2008 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
oops
i didn't mean "someone", i meant as a spot or position in the bullpen it is overrated.
by RoyalJHWKR on Mar 13, 2008 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 12:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Middle Path
by philofthenorth on Mar 12, 2008 11:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That's a great idea, but...
In short, it is a great idea. I fully support it. It would help the Royals win more games because the Royals best reliever would get more high leverage innings. And it is never going to happen.
Actually, it might happen if they do want to stretch him out later in the season for some spot starts, but they haven't yet shown any desire to do that this season.
by NYRoyal on Mar 12, 2008 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If there was a manager, Hillman would be the guy.
by BlownSave on Mar 12, 2008 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a really good idea.
by stuckinstl12 on Mar 12, 2008 11:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Woops...
by stuckinstl12 on Mar 12, 2008 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You Can't Win
by philofthenorth on Mar 12, 2008 11:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think we should leave Soria
by hardyguy on Mar 13, 2008 12:05 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Winning games
probably isn't the best comparison. I would even say that many pitchers who "saved" 40 games weren't particularly exceptional pitchers when compared to the best in their league.
by RoyalJHWKR on Mar 13, 2008 12:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think this is one where I defer to scouts
by royalsreview on Mar 13, 2008 12:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The scouts
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 12:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
wholeheartedly about the dismissive nature as you call it of JoePo and BP as being odd.
I like your idea that we should increase Soria's innings 25-30% and get him ready to pitch 150-175 in 2009.
Yeah from everything I've heard he has at least 3+ pitches, and command of a fourth. That has starter written all over it. Like you said, 160+ IP from a starter at 4.00 ERA is more valuable than 70 IP of 3.00.
With GMDM's continued acquisition of pitching talent the role of "closer" can be filled rather easily from my perspective.
by RoyalJHWKR on Mar 13, 2008 12:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think JoPo is arguing from
by stuckinstl12 on Mar 13, 2008 12:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
what exactly would you be willing to tolerate
soria was 2.48 ERA last year, 75/19 K/BB, and pitched about 70 innings.
would you consider a soria a couple years down the road at 4.5 ERA, 200 IP, and maybe 1.5/1 K/BB to be a success? that'd be close to league average (i guess, without looking), which is worth how much a year? (i'm guessing $10m.) whereas soria as closer, doing 70 IP even at 2.5 ERA, is never going to be harder to replace than $5m a year, right? what does billy wagner get?
again, in short, what would be a successful switch?
by Sean O Se on Mar 13, 2008 12:33 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That's the key question
But there are a lot of variables at play. If two of Hochevar/Cortes/Pimentel/Rosa become at least average major league starters, then having Soria in the rotation as an average starter doesn't gain you anything. Similarly, if someone like Nunez/Cortes/Pimental/Rosa/Davies can step in and be a pretty good closer, then you don't need Soria to close. That's a long way of saying a key part of the analysis of value of Soria in different roles depends on who would replace him in his old role and who would he be replacing in his new role.
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 12:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You must have missed the Fransisco Cordero
by royaldaddy on Mar 13, 2008 12:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's why a small market team should never...
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 12:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
does anyone else think JDLR
by royalsreview on Mar 13, 2008 12:56 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't know...maybe
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 1:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
He does not have an effective secondary pitch against righties. His 1-7 curveball tends toward 2-8 more than 12-6, so it often has the effect of speeding up a righty's swing by moving in on him. The best adjective to describe his change up is "scattershot," in terms of location, break, and velocity (he throws too many in the mid-80s, which provide little separation from his inconsistent fastball that sometimes drops into high-80s).
Right now, however, he might be 80%-90% of Jimmy Gobble.
by Gopherballs on Mar 13, 2008 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
wait and see
--Say "the big 3" do close to as they are expected, and one of Hochevar and Davies steps up to be a league average type starter. In this scenario, we have four average to above average starters in addition to Rosa/Pimentel/Cortes/Wood all knocking on the door as high upside pitchers. Thus, keep him in the back of the bullpen.
--However, if we find out (for example) that Bannister or Greinke just isn't going to get it done, and we have only one or two known quantities going into 2009, we should have Soria make the transition into the rotation. Because quite frankly, if we only have one or two known quantities going into 2009, we're not going to be competing for anything and could quite easily be careful with his innings/pitch counts.
I think I said this before...best case scenario...Davies and Hochevar grab onto spots in the rotation and don't let go. Not only that, but one of Wood/Pimentel distinguishes themselves as elite prospects aside Cortes. That way, we seemingly have the rotation set for years, AND have an elite closer (Soria) to boot.
Flame away...
by doublestix on Mar 13, 2008 1:17 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I mostly agree
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 1:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
greinke is on a one-year deal
by royalsreview on Mar 13, 2008 1:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This was his first arb. eligible year
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 1:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope we lock him up long term
by wildthang on Mar 13, 2008 2:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think i've said this before
I would need him to be probably a 4.00 ERA guy to honestly be sold on him in the rotation because I do think he has the stuff to be a top flight closer and unlike Chamberlain I'm not sure if he has enough of a background as a starter to rely on minor league data.
by wildthang on Mar 13, 2008 2:54 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
how many perfect games does Soria have as closer?
If scouts believe that he doesn't possess the stamina or build to be able to handle a full load, then perhaps he should be left in the pen. But if scouts think that eventually he'll be able to pitch 200 innings a year without injuring himself, we'd be dumb not to try it out.
Of course, I'm not suggesting we give him 200 innings right now, as that would foolishly increase his risk of arm problems, but there's no reason not to gradually increase his workload as NYRoyal suggested so that he can eventually get to that point.
I'm a little surprised by the discussion above by some of the experts quoted by NYRoyal.
One, I don't see how performing well in a closing role should make you less likely to succeed than someone who performed well in a less demanding role in the pen. If anything, it should be a better sign if you're able to succeed in that role. The reason you rarely see closers advance to starter is because teams are often loathe to mess with success, even if it would end up being better for the team. Closers that are shifted to starter and fail usually were shifted to that role because the team found a better closer, not because they needed a starter. That's actually more of an indictment of the player than anything.
Two, to compare how the Sox have handled the Papelbon situation and how the Yankees will handle the Chamberlain situation to what the Royals should do with Soria seems a bit silly to me. To the credit of the guys quoted above, I don't think the majority were really doing that.
If the Royals had Jon Lester as a 5th starter, then sure, go ahead leave Soria in as closer. But when we're staring at Davies, DLR, and even a minute chance of Hideo Nomo as a possibility there, it's pretty clear we're not in the same situation as Boston. Soria could eventually fix a major problem there.
The Yankees represent the other extreme. They already have a premiere guy filling the closer role, so it doesn't matter what they do with Joba at this point. Clearly, trying him out as a starter makes the most sense as there's very little to lose.
This is sort of like comparing apples with perenial 100 game losers. It's just not a valid comparison.
Now, I'm not sure that the guys quoted above were really arguing against using Soria in the rotation so much as describing what they thought would happen with him. There's a minor but important difference.
I'm not sure, but it does read however that Joe may have been advocating for leaving him in the pen, and it looks pretty clear Hillman (and by extension Moore) aren't really considering moving him. This is sort of a disappointing development, but maybe they're just saying what they need to say since there's no other real option to close right now.
by marbotty on Mar 13, 2008 8:07 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Parallels
So both teams have a need for the young phenom pitcher in the bullpen, but also have a need for him in the rotation as well.
Also, how do you feel about Nunez as a reliever vs. closer? I don't know if you've ever spoken to that issue but since you said:
If scouts believe that he doesn't possess the stamina or build to be able to handle a full load, then perhaps he should be left in the pen.
...then I would assume you are leaning towards keeping Nunez in the pen. I've heard that said about Leo a lot. I've never heard it about Joakim. I think the majority sentiment among Royals fans is that Nunez should get a shot as a starter. I don't think the scouts agree.
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like Nunez in the rotation
I'll have to defer to scouts when it comes to injury risk. My own belief is that he can probably succeed there, in the way that Pedro Martinez succeeded there as a small guy with a violent delivery.
Of course, Pedro got injured. That fate may befall Nunez, too, but I think in large part Pedro got injured due to mismanaged pitch counts and innings.
Fortunately, I also think Nunez would make a fine closer. For this reason, I'd support Soria over Nunez in the rotation (if it has to be an either/or situation), but as I've expressed before, I think it is worth giving Nunez a shot as a starter.
by marbotty on Mar 13, 2008 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In addition to injury risk...
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Something nobody has mentioned
by pet575 on Mar 13, 2008 12:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Elbow problems and surgery are common for SP's
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
still, important point nonetheless
by royalsreview on Mar 13, 2008 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
TJ surgery 5 years ago
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Value of closer
Starters pitch more innings--as a closer, Soria might be expected to pitch 70 innings this year, as a starter, he might be closer to 170. I don't know what the projections are for Soria as a reliever, but I'd imagine them to be around a 3.5 ERA. Starters tend to get up to a full point bump on their projections--what's the VORP on a 3.5 ERA for 70 innings vs the VORP on a 4.5 ERA for 170 innings?
Again, I haven't read the papers on high leverage/low leverage innings, and it makes perfect sense to me that the 9th inning, no outs and a 2 run lead is, mathematically a low-leverage inning. The odds of a team scoring 2+ runs in any given inning are pretty low. But I think for anyone who's ever watched team using a "closer by committee" approach for a season, it's evident that the 8th and 9th innings are not "any given innings" for most pitchers. They're people, there's pressure, they come out of their delivery, they throw 8 balls in a row in the dirt. Soria's tough--he makes the 9th inning just another inning. Successful closers make the 9th just another inning. Has anyone run numbers on this psychological aspect of the late innings? I don't know how you'd do it--possibly comparing a set of 'closers' 'late-inning ERA' minus 'non-late-inning ERA' vs 'non-closers' 'late-inning ERA' minus 'non-late-inning ERA.'
Lastly, having a solid guy at the back of the bullpen allows stability in the whole bullpen. The value of a great closer may show up in his teammates numbers, not just his own. Again, I don't know how you measure this, but any study that neglects this factor cannot be considered complete.
by kcdc on Mar 13, 2008 12:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
A different look at this
Here's what I haven't read anybody argue:
Instead of debating whether Soria contributing a 4.00 ERA over 180 IP vs Soria contributing a 2.50 ERA over 70 IP, ask yourself these questions:
- What if Soria is better than the norm, and his ERA only bumps up half a run when starting?
- What if, after fretting over never having a #1 (apologies to Greinke and Meche aside), the Royals find out too late that they had one all along, and never realized it?
As for the Chamberlain and Papelbon arguments, I think we should NOT compare those situations to the Royals at all. My reason is the differences in payroll allow for both the Yankees and the Red Sox to have the luxury of making decisions like they have, whereas the Royals can not afford to find out if Soria could be an ace or not.
by loyal2s dad on Mar 13, 2008 1:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
My reason is the differences in payroll allow for both the Yankees and the Red Sox to have the luxury of making decisions like they have, whereas the Royals can not afford to find out if Soria could be an ace or not.
And yet, even with their payroll, the Yankees recognize the greater value of a good starting pitcher and that is why they are developing Chamberlain into a starter. And, quite frankly, if the Red Sox weren't so deep with good SP's, I have a strong feeling Papelbon would be moved to the rotation as well.
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another argument
A closer who can convert 80% of his save chances reliably,
OR
A starter who can post a 3.50 - 4.00 ERA
Without even accounting for the difference in innings pitched, I think the answer should be obvious.
by loyal2s dad on Mar 13, 2008 1:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Starter- no question
If he doesn't work at starter you can always move someone to the pen. What does an average starter cost on the market today? How about 8-12M a year. A great bullpen guy who is not a closer costs 3-6M. This team unfortunately must look at finances first. Leveraging innings per dollar is probably the most important attribute. A league average starter who only costs $400K is a HUGE advantage for a team that can't afford to buy an ace.
Maybe when our minor leaguers start panning out, we'll have the luxury of choosing who is the best candidate to start. Right now our #4 & #5 starters are pretty poor choices compared to league average. In that case proving a pitcher like Soria is a great starter, makes him a much more attractive commodity for trade.
Finally. Any team that loses 97 games doesn't have a use for a closer!!!! I don't care how good he is, you have to actually have a late inning lead before you worry about your bullpen quality.
by David Howards Legacy on Mar 13, 2008 2:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Agree with the entire post
Russo and Francesa aren't the average sports talk radio guys. They aren't just reactionary guys trying to stir things up. They are intelligent and thoughtful in their analysis,
Fail.
by RoyalsRetro on Mar 13, 2008 3:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Russo and Francesa
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mike and the Mad Dog
What makes them the best, though, is that they talk about the games. They talk about plays and players and analyze what happened on the field. They spend less time on peripheral crap than anyone else in the business. They're good.
by Billex Gordler on Mar 13, 2008 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Biggest question this year
I think the Royals should transition Soria to a starter by the '09 All-Star Break. I'm not sure exactly the best way to do that--maybe give him lots of two-inning close opportunities this year to get his innings up, maybe use him in long (but high-leverage) relieve...but I do think that the Rs would be crazy not to give him the chance to start.
The reason that JoePo can't find any successful Closers to Starters is that until like last season all relievers have been failed starters. Closers never became starters because they'd ALREADY TRIED TO BE STARTERS AND FAILED!! Anyway, what do the Rs lose by trying him as a starter? Perhaps there's an increased injury risk in the rotation, perhaps. But last I checked with Will Carroll, it's not clear whether the usage patterns of relievers (what with the short warm-up times, daily usage, etc) is less or more taxing, injury-wise. That's really the only risk I can see. And that risk is negligible.
Make him a starter.
by Billex Gordler on Mar 13, 2008 5:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Derek Lowe
Like Lowe, Soria is said to have about 4 quality pitches. Surely there is a Royal pitcher who is clearly better suited for relief with only two plus pitches somewhere in the farm system.
I am disappointed that the Royals did not try to sign or designate a different closer during the offseason so that Soria may start instead.
by Stat Ninja on Mar 13, 2008 6:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
subject
I really like Nunez and would like to see him get a shot as the closer if we try to transition Soria to a starter and give the long relief / spot start role to Bale (assuming he doesn't cut it as the #4 or #5).. I just don't think Nunez has the stuff / endurance to make it as a starter but that doesn't mean he can't be effective an inning at a time.
I thought it was intriguing to watch Greinke transition from starter to reliever and see how much more electric his stuff was coming out of the pen where he didn't have to hold back (at least that's how I saw it.. When he went back to starting was he hitting the same mph on the guns?) That's how I view Nunez and have my reservations the same will be true of Soria (although hopefully, as NY points out, that his multiple plus pitches will allow him to transition to an effective starter the third and fourth times through the lineup). My pessimism isnt from any evidence Soria has offered but more from 22+ years of Royals pitching projects not allowing me to be optimistic..
My long way of saying give the kid a shot at starting. What's the worst that could happen, we finish a few more games below .500 and he has to go back to his current role? Seems like a gamble we need to take...
by ctrell on Mar 13, 2008 6:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Moose
by ctrell on Mar 13, 2008 7:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Because Moose isn't a Royal
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 7:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree..
by ctrell on Mar 13, 2008 9:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Soria were in the minors, he'd be a starter
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But everyone missed
And besides, if it doesn't work out he goes back to the pen where he's been so good already.
by MarkH on Mar 13, 2008 11:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Mariao
As a starter, my friend and i noticed that he started to get rocked after the 4th inning...
I know it is not applicable to the original question but i figured i would throw it out there...
Anyone know if Muzzy Jackson is still with the club?
by munibroker23 on Mar 13, 2008 11:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
No he is not
by NYRoyal on Mar 13, 2008 11:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
muzzy
what do you probably disagree with me about?
by munibroker23 on Mar 14, 2008 8:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's just my signature
by NYRoyal on Mar 14, 2008 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
HAHAHAHA
BTW, Mellinger linked this discussion on his blog.
by MileHighKCfan on Mar 14, 2008 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bullpen
One thing I do want to inquire as far as this year's team goes is:
What makes us so sure that the Royals will have a good bullpen this year?
Our bullpen was good last year(After May, I think). A big part of that, though, came with three people that are not in it again this year: Greinke, Riske, and Dotel. I'm not worried about the loss of Dotel so much because Soria proved that he could take that spot. But, that is still three key bullpen members gone.
I just think it's way too early to say that we have a good bullpen. I've seen this before as a Royals fan. Going into a season, we as fans feel like one aspect of the team is golden, only to be made for fools when on May 1st, we are already 10 games out of first.
Thoughts?
by I need more Esteban on Mar 14, 2008 5:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Why I think the bullpen will be good
Yabuta - Dominated as a relief pitcher in Japan. Has good stuff which I think should translate well to the majors. But players new to MLB are never guarantees
Gobble - Was a mediocre pitcher until he changed his delivery to lefties and became a dominant LOOGY. His great season last year was no fluke. He changed his delivery so that now he dominates lefty batters. There's no reason to think that will change. And, given the fact that the bullpen is loaded with lefties, there's no reason to believe that he won't be used as a LOOGY again. There's no reason for him to be used any other way.
Mahay - He has been very good in 4 of the last five seasons including an excellent season last year. He might decline some with age, but he should still be good or even very good. The good LHP/RHP mix in the bullpen means that he will be able to face mostly lefty batters this year which will help his performance.
Peralta - He had yet another good season as a workhorse in the Royals bullpen last year and he's one of the best strike out pitchers in the Royals bullpen. There's no reason to expect a downturn from him.
Bale - He has good stuff and handles lefties well and gets a lot of strike outs. He's no lock to be a good pitcher in either the bullpen or the rotation, but I really don't think he'll be a negative in the bullpen.
Nunez - He has good stuff, particularly for a reliever. He's also a young, improving pitcher. He could give the royals good innings in either short or long relief.
Depth - Musser and Braun are major league ready prospects who could definitely help if needed. De La Rosa and Davies have great stuff and could be useful in the bullpen if they can't handle starting.
So, the Royals have a lot of talent and a lot of depth, as they did last year.
by NYRoyal on Mar 14, 2008 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You sold me
by I need more Esteban on Mar 14, 2008 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Soria as a starter
by MileHighKCfan on Mar 18, 2008 1:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs














