What the hell to do with Stephen Strasburg?

[Megatron]

There's been heavy discussion throughout this season that Nationals SP and ace Stephen Strasburg will be shut down this year after reaching a certain amount of innings, which has been said by General Manager Mike Rizzo as no more than 180. This storyline has me just so dumbfounded by the irresponsibility of the Nationals upper management.

First off, if the plan was always to keep Strasburg within the 160-180 IP limit, why didn't they A) Start his season later or B) skip him a few starts in April/May/June when there was still enough games where it wouldn't hurt you?

The first option really annoys me. I know they had him working since spring training, but there's no reason that they had to start him on opening day. While I'm sure they didn't expect them to be playing so well so quickly, isn't missing 5 April starts much easier than missing 2-3 starts in September and all of the postseason? He pitched 32 innings in April. You take them out and start him in May he'd be sitting at 101.1 IP, giving him anywhere from 60-80 innings for the last 9-10 starts of the year and the postseason. Give him 6 IP/S and potentially 3 or 4 postseason starts and you are in the 180 IP range (likely slightly over). Instead, if they go through with what they're saying, Ross Detwiler will likely take his spot. While Detwiler is having a good year, he's no Strasburg.

Anyways, to sum up, say you're Mike Rizzo. You're in Game 1 of the NLDS, your cities first postseason apearance in 89 years. Are you throwing SS in, even if he's likely to have surpassed the 180 IP threshold? Or are you sitting him out once he gets near that mark, even if it means you're hurting your chances for your first ever World Series to save him for the future? What are you doing?

 

[Harthan]

There's never been proven evidence that holding a young starter to an innings limit does anything for him, Tommy John surgery or not. It's just a stupid concept to say to a young man - listen, you're an ace, you've had a phenomenal year, here's a chance to stretch you out a bit and get postseason experience...so enjoy the bench. I mean, really? It's just moronic. Strasburg is completely capable of going an entire season and a postseason. It's an idiotic idea and nobody in the Nationals organization should give any credence to it. It's not going to do anything productive. It robs Strasburg of experience and ruins the team's chance at a World Series. With their current team less Strasburg, I figure they might manage to win the division - though the Braves will have a huge chance to overtake them. I figure they advance to the NLDS either way, but I can't see them getting out of one without Strasburg. Not to mention that without Strasburg, they could easily be forced to qualify as a wild card, leaving them without the opportunity to set their rotation, which would be of more value to them than arguably any other NL team except the Braves, and if they're forced to qualify as a wild card, then they be default turn that advantage over to the Braves.

In short? Don't put an innings limit on Strasburg, it's just dumb and ruins the Nationals' amazing, and frankly storybook season.

Anyway, if you must enforce this idiotic limit, shut him down now and have him throw bullpens, simulated games, etc., to stay loose until the playoffs, then reactivate him. It would be a shock if they didn't make the playoffs at this point, Strasburg or no, and he'll be of most value to them in playoff series. Just stop putting him out there at this point.

 

[shattered dreams]

I think you have to bite the bullet and sit him down. As far as the alternatives this was unavoidable. What he needed to do this season was get his work in. If he started the season later then if he had any setbacks he might not have got in enough innings this year to be ready for a full workload. Also, you can't really mess with how often he pitches because that just is likely to both increase his injury risk and decrease his effectiveness. I suspect there will be a decrease in effectiveness once he get in the range of innings they are looking at anyway, which will likely make the decision easier. Nationals were not expecting to be this good this year. They have reasonably good SP even without him (Gonzalez and Zimmerman), they will be ok and since they are playing with house money at this point they can just use this postseason as experience for the rest of the roster.

 

[Thriller Ant]

To me, the answer is simple, especially as the Nats close in on clinching a playoff spot. Go to a 6 or maybe even 7 man rotation, and/or skip every other of his starts. Washington is closing in on a position where the regular season doesn't mean much to them, so why waste innings there?

One the playoffs roll around, however, they would be absolutely insane not to trot him out every fourth game, or however it works out. This is shaping up to possibly be one of, if not the greatest seasons in franchise history, and if it takes 20, 30, or even 40 extra innings from Strasburg to accomplish it, the Nats need to do it.

 

[klunderbunker]

This is a tough one, but at the end of the day, and with a very limited knowledge of the science involved, I would pitch him on a relaxed basis. The Nationals have reached the point where making the playoffs is very likely for them (they're 5 up in the division and have the best record in the National League with less than 50 games to play). You could easily cut Strasburg out of the rotation every other time he's scheduled to pitch, or have him go no more than 4-5 innings per game. Think of it like this: when he gets to the postseason, if every series goes to the maximum number of games, he'll be pitching an extra 8 starts. If you cut out 3-4 of his starts down the stretch, that's not a huge stretch.

Overall though, the Nationals have everything they need to make a legit run at the World Series. You never know when that could happen again as this team came from almost nowhere to being the best team in the NL. I'd say go for it, but with a VERY close eye on Strasburg and at the first sign of trouble, put him on the bench, but until then, let him pitch.

 

[Megatron]

I think you have to bite the bullet and sit him down. As far as the alternatives this was unavoidable. What he needed to do this season was get his work in. If he started the season later then if he had any setbacks he might not have got in enough innings this year to be ready for a full workload. Also, you can't really mess with how often he pitches because that just is likely to both increase his injury risk and decrease his effectiveness. I suspect there will be a decrease in effectiveness once he get in the range of innings they are looking at anyway, which will likely make the decision easier. Nationals were not expecting to be this good this year. They have reasonably good SP even without him (Gonzalez and Zimmerman), they will be ok and since they are playing with house money at this point they can just use this postseason as experience for the rest of the roster.

I don't understand the 'happy to be there' mantra you're saying. I'd estimate 98% of the Washington fanbase has never even seen a playoff game in Washington, whether it be the Senators or Nationals. You're going to tell those fans that we're going to sit down our ace to save him next year due to an arbitrary innings limit, even though he could blow out his arm in the summer next year and never be the same pitcher, thus, blowing your opportunity to be a World Champion? I know you don't wanna listen to the fans to run the team, obviously, but if you have a legitimate chance to win a World Series, don't you wanna have your best out there instead of putting out your 5th best (which is Detwiler)? Especially with the randomness of baseball. An injury here or there, a new contender rises, and that could be it.

While I doubt the Nationals will only be making 1 postseason appearance in the Strasburg/Harper era, do you really want to take that chance? I know I wouldn't.

This is a tough one, but at the end of the day, and with a very limited knowledge of the science involved, I would pitch him on a relaxed basis. The Nationals have reached the point where making the playoffs is very likely for them (they're 5 up in the division and have the best record in the National League with less than 50 games to play). You could easily cut Strasburg out of the rotation every other time he's scheduled to pitch, or have him go no more than 4-5 innings per game. Think of it like this: when he gets to the postseason, if every series goes to the maximum number of games, he'll be pitching an extra 8 starts. If you cut out 3-4 of his starts down the stretch, that's not a huge stretch.

Overall though, the Nationals have everything they need to make a legit run at the World Series. You never know when that could happen again as this team came from almost nowhere to being the best team in the NL. I'd say go for it, but with a VERY close eye on Strasburg and at the first sign of trouble, put him on the bench, but until then, let him pitch.

That assessment I'd say is completely fair. If he is fine and isn't having any issues, is there a reason to shut him down? I'm not saying he has to run out there and throw 130 pitches a game and try and win it himself, but even if he can only go 5 or 6 innings, wouldn't you want and take that? I certainly would.

 

[shattered dreams]

I don't understand the 'happy to be there' mantra you're saying. I'd estimate 98% of the Washington fanbase has never even seen a playoff game in Washington, whether it be the Senators or Nationals.

If they have never even seen one, why would they get their panties in a bunch over who is pitching?

You're going to tell those fans that we're going to sit down our ace to save him next year due to an arbitrary innings limit, even though he could blow out his arm in the summer next year and never be the same pitcher, thus, blowing your opportunity to be a World Champion? I know you don't wanna listen to the fans to run the team, obviously, but if you have a legitimate chance to win a World Series, don't you wanna have your best out there instead of putting out your 5th best (which is Detwiler)? Especially with the randomness of baseball. An injury here or there, a new contender rises, and that could be it.

This would be an interesting question to ask the people who ran the 2003 Cubs. The way the MLB playoffs are set up you don't have to use a fifth starter anyway. Hell, if you are the top seed you may not even use a 4th starter. What I am advocating is sticking with what people that know more than I do believed was best before things "changed." If the team believed a certain amount of work was likely to increase his injury risk going forward then that should trump the possibility of a completely random injury in the future IMO.

 

[Big Sexy]

I have no problem with them monitoring him closely and trying to keep him from throwing over 100 pitches every game like Justin Verlander does, but I've never liked the idea of putting an inning cap on him for the season. He is a major league pitcher and injuries happen. Just like he's no good to the team if he's injured, he's no good to the team if he's sitting on the bench. Injuries happen and no inning cap is going to stop the guy if he's injury prone. If he isn't injury prone and this last injury was just more of a one time thing then you are doing him and the team a disservice by placing an inning cap on his season.

 

[CH David]

I think they could have done what they did as far as Chris Sale and the White Sox have done. I know Sale isn't coming off an arm injury like Strasburg but trying to keep his arm healthy for the future is fairly similar. Don't go with an innings cap, as the majority have said. What, he pitches all his starts until then and after that you sit him? Nah. They could've skipped starts throughout the season if he or his arm was getting fatigued. Come back after 9 or 10 days off, and be good to go. Injuries happen, freak or normal.

 

[MDizzle3000]

The guy is a stud. A bonafide star in the making. Right now he's sitting at a 15-5 record and looking to be closing in on a NL Cy Young award and his first playoff run. I'd bring up someone from the minors to start in place of him then bring him in for a few relief innings here and there so he doesn't go completely cold. Then by the time playoffs roll around he'll be ready to go every time his name is penciled in to take the mound.

I haven't gotten to enjoy much baseball this year being a Cubs fan ... but watching him and the Nationals take the baseball world by storm this year has been a nice change of pace from the Cards/Yanks/BoSox rotation that they seemed to have been doing the last few seasons.

 

[Mustang Sally]

It's ironic to see how the team's unexpected success has loused up their plans with Strasburg. The OP asks why they didn't start his season later or skip a few starts early......and those are valid questions. Of course, the answer is that they never figured to be in the running for a post-season berth this late in the season and it historically would make little difference whether the team started his season late or ended it early.

As to the issue of pitch-counts for young pitchers, there are opinions all over the place as to whether it makes a difference or not. Many folks insist you won't burn a guy out by pitching him too much early in his career, yet look at the number of highly-touted pitchers who were drafted and never made it to the majors. Did some of them have their careers routed because they pitched too much? Probably......it could be there's no general principle on this that applies to everyone......some can handle the load and others can't. Trying to determine who can and who can't is the job of team management.

Of course, it's a mixed blessing that the Strasburg situation actually has serious ramifications now. If Washington stunk, as they traditionally have, this wouldn't be an issue at all, would it?

 

[ajdb]

You have to throw Strasburg regularly and try to win the World Series, you can replace him if he breaks down, but a World Series is something you can't get very often.