Tomko to pen, Kuo to start?

by Yakker on May 24, 2007 2:39 PM EDT Comment 17 comments

From today's LA Times, it looks like Brett "Bombko" Tomko is being moved to the bullpen again. If his next start in Vegas "goes well," Kuo is the candidate to replace Tomko in the rotation, not Billingsley. Not entirely clear who will get the start if Kuo pitches poorly.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb/dodgers/la-sp-dodrep24may24,1,5589268.story?coll=la-headl ines-sports-mlb-dodger&ctrack=2&cset=true

0 recs | Comment 17 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Kuo

The Dodgers never seem to amaze me with their stupidity. Your moving a guy with a history of arm problems into the starting rotation? I bet he doesnt last a couple weeks before he goes down with an injury but, hey who ever said the Dodgers were smart? I don't know what organization is ran worse the Dodgers or Giants.

by nate050904 on May 24, 2007 2:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

speaking of stupidity.....

by bleedjaxblue on May 24, 2007 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

lame comment

I think this comment is fairly ignorant. Let's rephrase it somewhat:

"The Cardinals never seem to amaze me with their stupidity. You have a guy - Chris Carpenter - in the starting rotation. I bet he doesn't last a couple weeks before he goes down with an injury..."

Kuo started last year and did great. His DL stint this season was pretty minor and he has his velocity back. Not sure why this makes LA so stupid.

by count sutton on May 24, 2007 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

hey, let me ask you a question

and it's an honest question, i'm not trying to be sarcastic or anything.

why do you think it is more of an injury risk to have a guy in the rotation than in the bullpen? what evidence is there to support this idea?

by jpahk on May 24, 2007 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

I don't agree with the post, but there is at least some empirical evidence to suggest this, if you look at the recent Papelbon situation. Of course, for each of those sorts of examples in recent years (Papelbon, Wood, arguably Gagne), there's probably a counter-example (Smoltz).

by Yakker on May 24, 2007 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Injury

There is little to no evidence that starting is a greater injury risk than coming out of the bullpen.

by marcello on May 24, 2007 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

considering they tried him in the pen last year and he was terrible I don't think it is such a bad idea. Especially if you consider the fact that after he was far and away a better starting than relieving and even said that he prefers starting because he has more time to warm up it would actually make less sense to use him out of the pen.

by neutralluke on May 24, 2007 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Dodgers seem indecisive, not stupid

I think a better question regarding the Dodgers is why bring Kuo up to the major league bullpen to pitch 2 2/3 innings over two outings then send him back to AAA to become a starter?

Here is how things appeared, at least to me(of course I don't have insider information or claim to read anyone's mind): They called up Kuo to relieve as Billingsley had had a string of success in the bullpen and was clearly proving himself ready to take over for Tomko, who suprised no one by stinking the joint up. Kuo goes out for his first assignment and gets bombed and can't finish the inning. Billingsley follows with a terrible outing of his own. Suddenly, Kuo can't relieve and is sent back to the Las Vegas rotation and Billingsley isn't ready to start so he'll remain in the bullpen.

If this is what is actually going on in Ned/Grady's minds, it's pretty silly. Make a decision that isn't based on one outing.

I make this comment because it is also in connection to the Abreu call-up. If Betemit isn't the answer at 3B, give the job to LaRoche and live with the lumps. Why give your (potentially) future 2B experience at a position you're never going to want him to play while keeping your future 3B on the bench? Little said he's looking for a hot bat.

It seems to me that they're yanking these guys around into different roles based on extrememly short term bases. They clearly believe in these players potential, but are afriad of a two week slump that might be caused by youthfull inexperience.

I would also like to say that this does not mean that Colletti or Little is 'dumb' or 'stupid.' The smartest and most proffessional can make mistakes. Last year Terry Ryan looked like a baffoon for two months, then got all his ducks in row and his team was the best in the game for the remainder of the season. The key is seeing if they keep making the same mistakes over again. I don't see that from the Dodgers brass.

by sanchez101 on May 24, 2007 7:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Kuo has already shown the inability to relieve...

It's happened time and time again, not sure why they continue to try and work him in the pen. Now granted, I think it's a good way to break a young arm into the majors, but Kuo has shown he can't perform as a reliever and has shown he can excel as a starter.

So, not sure what they were thinking by bouncing him around and stuff.

by beastball on May 24, 2007 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree

Further support for this view is that the job apparently belongs to Kuo, if the LAT can be believed, only if he pitches "well," whatever that means.

by Yakker on May 24, 2007 7:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

only thing I can say in defense....

....of that statement in terms of Kuo is that he does very obviously have "it" at certain times, while other times he couldn't retire a hitter with a pension plan and a gold watch. And, when he's not on, it's pretty futile to let him struggle through adversity until he finds his groove -- he never really seems to, despite his impressive stuff.

If I were the Dodgers, and Kuo didn't look good in the minors, I'd leave him there until he did figure it out, no matter how craptastic Tomko is in the meantime, simply because Kuo seems so fragile and unable to right the ship at the major-league level. Obviously, two starts (or however many he'll get) is a tiny sample to be judging if he's "pitching well" or not, but they have to use SOMETHING, since he's such a dichotomous pitcher, and you definitely don't want the crappy version of him to be the one that shows up in LA.

As for the rest of the moves/shuffling/restlessness/inanity with Dodger prospects -- no idea why they're doing it.

by bleedjaxblue on May 24, 2007 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fair enough

Although, if he's really that fragile, what's it gonna do to his psyche to say that his rotation spot depends on one start?

IMO the Dodgers, for all of their befuddling moves recently, have done some things quite well. Sticking Ethier out there on a fairly regular basis, for example. And moving Billz to the pen has worked out too--he's found some command, and when (not if) they reinsert him into the rotation, I really think he's going to be a much better pitcher than the kid we saw late last year.

by Yakker on May 24, 2007 7:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

agree on Either and Billz

and I definitely get your point about Kuo and them putting so much pressure on him.

I think I read the statement differently, which is why I don't think it's such a high-pressure start or two in the minors. The way I see it, Kuo will be in the rotation AS SOON AS he pitches well, whether that's next start or a month from now. They say "if" to the media in regards to the next start so that there isn't a backlash should he not be pitching well. This way, they can explain why they're sticking with Tomko ("Kuo just didn't show us what we needed to see") for the start next week, seeing as the average fan doesn't have the patience (or else the trust in the Dodgers front office) to see that Kuo will be there in a matter of time.

by bleedjaxblue on May 24, 2007 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

p.s.

I definitely do agree with you that, if it is the way you read it, it's a really bad idea -- not the way to get somebody who already has the tendency to overthrow to start to perform.

by bleedjaxblue on May 24, 2007 8:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

+1. I agree completely, right down the line.

by dodgem on May 24, 2007 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Kuo's 3A start

4IP 62 pitches 40 strikes, 0R 4H 4K 1BB, seems good enough. the very high fly ball ratio is scary though, but i suppose when you can strike 1 guy out per inning it's not that bad.

He was incrediable at times during last year's late stretch when he started 5 games with a result of 29.1 IP 28H *35*K *7*BB 1HR 10ER 3.07 ERA , his stuff is clearly great when he's on and he's clearly not a pure wild thing from start to finish.

The story last yaer from him was that he simply doesn't feel comfortable warming up on short notice. which does make some sense i suppose due to his repaired elbow , the numbers clearly back it up too as he walked almost 5 wooping times as many in nearly the same sample size of relieving last year.

is it a gamble? sure, but it might be worth it, and he's not much worth if he continues to be wild at relieving anyway

by RollingWave on May 25, 2007 10:56 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Cool

Thanks for the info. I agree the start was probably enough in Colletti/Little's eyes to justify bringing him back up, and I think it's high time to give this kid 5-10 starts in L.A. and see what he can do.

by Yakker on May 25, 2007 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs