Tuesday, February 28, 2012

On Brett Myers - Sunk costs and player development - An exercise in rambling

My first impression is that I don't like this move. Everything being equal, a pitcher that can give you 200 innings is much more valuable than one who can give you 60 innings.

But everything may not be equal. Myers' pitched better out of the pen in 2007 than he has at any other time.

So, even if he pitches as well as Myers did that one year in Philly, what business does Houston have paying $11M for a relief pitcher? In an ideal situation I'd like to think GM Jeff Luhnow would know better. But this isn't an ideal situation. After all, it's not like he signed Myers this off-season for $11M to be our closer. So once we accept the fact that Myers' money is a sunk cost, one that Luhnow has zero control over, it may put this decision in a better light.

The money's going to be paid regardless, so where is he of most help on the field  in 2012? Or maybe we should ask are there other pitchers we'd like to see in the starter role instead of Myers? For the long-term success of the franchise are we better off having an extra rotation spot for (hopefully) a young pitcher? And what effect does having a potentially stable bullpen that's not blowing every other lead it inherits have on a developing rotation?

Now, if we move Myers to the 'pen just to see Zach Duke turn in 120 innings of 4.80 ERA "pitching" then this decision just seems silly.

1 comment:

Terence said...

I agree with you on the Duke comment. If this means he pitches 100 innings of below replacement level baseball, then my cup will be crushed by the all-star break. I think Duke is gonna wind up in the long relief/spot starter role and this will open up a spot for the young pitchers to develop and prove themselves. With Lyles, Weiland, Sosa, Oberholtzer, Harrel, Clemens, and possibly Cosart at some point this season, there are plenty of young arms to start and observe.