Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Our text for today:

Willium: Well sir, it's like this, you see... ten men jump out and wallop me on my head. I turn round to see who it was, and "wallop, wallop" on my head again. I stood up, you see, have a quick vada, no one there, and "wallop, wallop, wallop" all on my head. As I took out me notebook, all official like, "wallop, wallop, wallop" on my head, all wallop all over my head. And then I...

Ned: Yes, yes, yes. But did you notice anything about these men?

Willium: Yes...I noticed they kept walloping me on the head.

It struck me, all of a sudden - why is it that I persist in believing that Josh Towers is still a useful major league starter? Here's one reason.

I missed all of his 2006 starts.

Very strange. It was just one of those things, of course. For some reason, six of his first nine starts last season were on the road. And I just wasn't in the house for the other ones. I didn't even see him working after his return from Syracuse.

Which means that, until yesterday, the last time I had actually seen him pitch was when he was putting the finishing touches on his very fine 2005 campaign.(When for some reason, I saw him work at least ten times.) No wonder I still persist, and no wonder those of you who saw him up close last season (surely a traumatizing experience) think I'm in the grip of some massive delusion. It all makes sense to me now.

But I was in the house yesterday, and so was the Towers I remembered from 2005. Although I wasn't sure about that at first. His first fastball was 85 mph, which was disturbing; even more ominous, he wasn't hitting his spots. He wasn't even hitting the strike zone - just 13 of his first 28 pitches were strikes. These problems seemed to have most of Towers' attention, too, as he made a serious defensive lapse in each of the first two innings. With Granderson and Sheffield on base in the first, he made a pickoff throw to second base, and his Evil Luck kicked in. The throw hit Granderson - that was the error. It bounced off him into shallow left field, which was the evil luck. With the shortstop Clayton coming over to take the throw, it meant there was no one within 80 feet of where the baseball went rolling, and the runners merrily took not one but two bases.

In the next inning, Rodriguez led off with a single. He was caught stealing, but Towers walked Sean Casey to bring Craig Monroe to the plate. He hit a crisp comebacker to the mound. Towers fielded it, made a leisurely, deliberate toss over to the first, and turned to jog towards the dugout. Oops. It's not often a pitcher loses track of how many outs there are.

So naturally he didn't give up another hit until the seventh inning. Towers is most effective when he's got some kind of chip on his shoulder, and I think by this point he was pretty fed up with himself and his own bone-headed plays in the field. At any rate, for the rest of the day, he was throwing his fastball 88-89 and his slider 83-84 and working ahead of everybody. Like the guy I remember.

Nice to have you back. Do stick around.

He got some fine defense - Vernon Wells made three nice plays in centre field: cutting off Ordonez' first inning fly ball in the right-centre gap, an excellent play to come charging in to pick off Guillen's little looper at his shoetops in the fourth, and going back to haul in Ordonez' seventh inning drive to the warning track leading off the seventh. Rios made a fine running catch along the track in right-centre on Granderson's drive leading off the sixth. Towers was using the whole ball park, as they say. And two batters later, after the Tigers finally got someone on base again, when Towers drilled Polanco, Johnny Mac started a nifty 543 twin killing to end the inning, and all three infielders distinguished themselves. Polanco had a terrific jump off first, but McDonald unloaded the ball in a hurry, Hill made a tremendous pivot with Polanco sliding in on him, and Overbay picked the relay out of the dirt.

And then there was the go ahead run. Royce Clayton lined a double to left to lead off the seventh. Lind flied out to shallow centre, but John McDonald lined a base hit to right in front of Sheffield. Clayton came rolling around third to see Brian Butterfield, who's been burned a couple of times already this season, holding up his arms. Clayton didn't exactly charge through the stop sign - he hesitated, making a kind of stutter step, and then resumed his dash. I thought maybe he had deked the cutoff man, that Casey had taken a peek, saw the coach holding up his hands and the runner breaking stride, and cut off the throw. But Clayton said he saw all the way that the ball was going to fall in, and Casey said the throw was off-line and they had no play at home. Why he then froze up and allowed McDonald to make it to second is another story.

With Jason Frasor having thrown some 30 pitches on Saturday, Shaun Marcum was called on to work the ninth. I was happy about that, because I badly wanted to see both Towers and Marcum in the same game. I just thought it would be cool, because they're practically the same guy. They live off the fastball-slider combination - Marcum may throw a tiny bit harder - and by throwing strikes. They both have other pitches, that they mostly haul out for show. Marcum started Polanco off with a curveball, but stuck to fastballs and sliders the rest of the way. Towers occasionally throws a changeup early in the count to left-handed hitters, and once or twice he essayed a curve ball himself. But mainly it's fastballs, sliders, and work ahead of the hitter.

Elsewhere: no less than five games were rained out yesterday (in Boston, Baltimore, New York, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh).... not a great weekend for the Yankees, who put Mike Mussina and Carl Pavano on the DL yesterday, where Chien-Ming Wang already resides. Who knows who'll be starting for them on Tuesday. And then their Jackie Robinson Day ended when the greatest closer ever, and the last player who makes Jackie Robinson's number his own, couldn't nail down a two run lead with two out and the bases empty. Marco Scutaro? Yup.... the Braves broke off their little two-game losing skid, and Tim Hudson is looking a lot like the pitcher we remember from his days in Oakland. They really haven't seen much of that guy in Atlanta, and it's not good news for the rest of the NL East.... Ted Lilly struck out 10 and held the Reds to just two singles, but the second one came with Brandon Phillips on second after a leadoff walk and a stolen base. That was the game's only run, and Ted the Tease was the Tough Luck Loser... Albert Pujols, hitting a lusty .158 out of the gate, shows signs of waking from his slumber, as he clubbed a pair of homers yesterday.

Coming up: the Jays finish off the homestand with three games against the Red Sox, and then they're off to Baltimore. Boston has a morning game at Fenway today against the Angels; after Toronto, they go back home and await with interest the arrival of the Yankees. The Bombers have three games at home against Cleveland before they head up to Boston, auditioning starting pitchers every step of the way.
16 April: Something Struck Me | 30 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Maldoff - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 08:57 AM EDT (#165922) #
Just heard Gibbons talking to the morning show guys on the Fan 590 in Toronto. Nothing too interesting, other than when discussing Brandon League, Gibbons said basically that League had worked his arm out too much over the summer, forcing him to lose the flexibility he had in the joint. That is what caused him to lose 8 MPH on his fastball.  Gibbons also said that they hope to have him back IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. That last line really scared me....
Chuck - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 09:10 AM EDT (#165923) #

I could easily imagine not seeing League at all this year. Not because of anything specific about League, but just because pitching injuries/ailments/mysteries have a way of lasting longer than one might imagine (except for TJ surgery, of course, which has been raised to an art form).

On a similar note, I could easily envision not seeing Ryan for a month or two. Maybe it's just pessimism. Maybe Dr. Andrews has some magic pills that will fix the problem. Go ask Alice...

Ryan Day - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 09:25 AM EDT (#165924) #

I was getting that sinking feeling over the first couple innings, and beginning to agree with those who had written Towers off. Even when Bad Josh shows up, he's not usually sloppy like that.

But he redeemed himself, and then some. It's too early to say if Josh 2005 is back, but he's earned at least a couple more starts.

Pistol - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 09:30 AM EDT (#165926) #
If it is a sprained elbow I would guess it'd be at least a month for Ryan.  Burnett and Chacin both missed more time than that last year with what sounds to be something similar.
jeff mcl - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 09:33 AM EDT (#165927) #
At some point soon a bunch of  folks are going to start chirping about trading for Brad Lidge.  I will not be one of them.
Pistol - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 09:34 AM EDT (#165928) #
Which means that, until yesterday, the last time I had actually seen him pitch was when he was putting the finishing touches on his very fine 2005 campaign.(When for some reason, I saw him work at least ten times.)

Sounds like someone is positioning themselves as a lucky charm to try and milk a free trip to Baltimore and NY for Towers' next starts!

Um, I'll chip in $20.
Manhattan Mike - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 09:41 AM EDT (#165929) #

The loss of Ryan is bad news, of course, but how bad is it? I think that Dave Perkins's assessment (http://www.thestar.com/Sports/article/203416) that, if Ryan were gone for the year (combined with the absence of Reed Johnson), so too would the Jays' chance for post-season action is a little too much of a stretch, particularly with the pitching staff of the Yankees seemingly in no better shape (Mussina on the DL, Pavano being Pavano, Igawa not looking like anything special and Pettitte showing his age in terms of his durability).

Obviously, the Jays are far better off with Ryan than they are without him.  But if the Jays have the depth in the 'pen and in the minors that I believe that they do, then I'm not overly worried. The offense that they are fielding at present - with Lind's present value basically equivalent to, if not greater than, Reed Johnson's - is too good for them not to remain competitive simply because Ryan is out.

 

 

 

Jordan - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 09:48 AM EDT (#165930) #

I understand that Frasor wasn't available to close out yesterday's game, but I half-wonder whether Marcum might not be given more save chances over the next several weeks (which seems to be the minimum amount of time Ryan will miss). Partly that's because Marcum looked great yesterday -- mowing down the heart of the Tigers' order, with tremendous location down in the strike zone -- and partly because as I recall, Frasor hasn't dealt terribly well with 9th-inning pressure in the past. He appears to be thriving in the setup role, and that may be the place to keep him for now.

Marcum is throwing well enough to merit high-leverage innings, so if he can handle it mentally, why not make it the 9th rather than the 7th? Vermilyea can handle long relief duties with Janssen (at least until Janssen replaces Ohka in the rotation), leaving Accardo, Zambrano and Downs for the 6th and 7th and Frasor for the 8th. If Gibbons brings out Marcum in a save situation against Boston, you'll know the game's afoot.

Adam Lind looks not in the least overmatched out there -- he drove in the first run against a tough left-hander. With Johnson quite possibly out of commission for a few months, Lind should get a chance to show what he can do, which is considerable. JP's draft record is getting pillaged in a thread over at Baseball Primer -- if Janssen, Marcum and Lind can all step up and shine with all these injuries, that should go a long way to muting some of those criticisms. (Not to mention inspiring the team -- championship-calibre clubs almost always get unlooked-for contributions from less-heralded rookies.)

Last week, Robert McLeod in the Globe referred to the Tigers' starter as "Nate Robinson." In today's article, he referred to the team's likely new closer, "Brandon Frasor." Will someone please give him a copy of the Blue Jays' Media Guide?

Flex - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 10:03 AM EDT (#165931) #
Frasor hasn't dealt terribly well with 9th-inning pressure in the past

I don't know what makes you say that. He was 17 of 19 in save chances in his rookie year. Personally I think he's well-suited to the job, partly because he's had some adversity and learned how to handle it.
Jordan - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 10:23 AM EDT (#165932) #
Three save opportunities (and one save) in 67 appearances in 2005 is a more recent indicator of how the team felt he was best used in the pre-BJ years -- the Jays evidently were sufficiently unimpressed by Frasor's debut that they gave the closer's job to Miguel Batista. In any event, I don't have any stats to back up my pretty strong recollection that being designated "the closer" has had an adverse effect on Frasor in the past. If he can shoulder that load with no trouble in 2007, all the better for the team. For his part, Marcum looked unflappable in the 9th yesterday.
Hodgie - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 11:02 AM EDT (#165934) #

Personally, and feel free to pile on the moment I hit 'Submit Comment', I would have preferred for Gibbons to not have designated anyone as the defacto closer in Ryan's stead. I firmly believe that with Frasor, Marcum and Janssen all performing very well, that any and all of the three will do a commendable job in the role when required. By not having an assigned closer, Gibbons would have utmost flexibility in deploying his pen, without succumbing to the temptation to save one particular person only for the save.

All the more pity that League has struggled with his physical ailments; he would have given the Jays four pitchers that I would have the utmost confidence in to work these high leverage situations. 

Chuck - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 11:23 AM EDT (#165935) #
I am in total agreement with Hodgie in not anointing anyone as closer. It's not that I worry that Gibbons will force the save issue, it's more so that those who are likely candidates to be closing games (Marcum, Frasor, Janssen) don't feel overly burdened. This does fly in the face of the commonly accepted wisdom that players much prefer to know their roles than to not know them, but sans Ryan, I am fully supportive of the, ugh, bullpen by committee. Ride the hot hand, whoever that is, and don't get boxed in by the ridiculous save statistic.
Rickster - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 11:25 AM EDT (#165936) #

Frasor was outstanding when he came up in 2004. He and Vinnie Chulk stepped up as the bullpen fell apart in the season from hell. It was especially impressive because he'd never pitched above AA before the season started. He's been a solid and durable contributer ever since. He'll do fine in the closer role and deserves the opportunity. At the same time, it keeps a bit of the spotlight off the rookies and allows the pitchers to know their roles every day and prepare accordingly.

Rickster - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 11:29 AM EDT (#165937) #

One other point:

If Frasor can rack up 10-12 saves over the next month, BJ comes back, and a few of the guys in Syracuse can step up, Frasor becomes expendable and a pretty valuable trade chip.

Mike Green - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 11:30 AM EDT (#165938) #
Frasor has pitched better in the 7th and 8th innings than in the 9th inning over his career.  The difference is small enough that it might be random chance. There is no obvious answer to the question of who should be closer.  Nonetheless, having a sense of calm about the bullpen, despite losing the club's anticipated set-up man and closer in the first two weeks of the year, is a good sign if you ask me.

I am pleased to see Marcum with a more important role on the club, whether that be as a closer, set-up man or starter.  It is true that he shares some qualities with Josh Towers, but his stuff and his K rate has always been better, both in the minors and in the majors. 

With one lefty in the pen, and one with the ability of Scott Downs, it makes no sense to use him as a LOOGY.  For instance, the Red Sox lineup usually has Ortiz, Ramirez and Drew in the power core.  If you've got a right-handed starter, you want Downs to go through the power core for 2 reasons:  Ramirez has a somewhat smaller platoon differential than Drew, and it's a more efficient use of the bullpen.



Mick Doherty - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 12:19 PM EDT (#165940) #

the team's likely new closer, "Brandon Frasor."

But he was so good in the "Mummy" films and in "Blast From the Past."

Actually, Brandon Frasor might BE a good interim closer for this team, in the same way Gance Mulliniorg was a fine ballplayer all by hissownself.

Paul D - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 12:26 PM EDT (#165941) #
With Boston's game yesterday having been rained out, is Dice K still scheduled to start the Tuesday game?
Lefty - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 12:28 PM EDT (#165942) #

Nonetheless, having a sense of calm about the bullpen, despite losing the club's anticipated set-up man and closer in the first two weeks of the year, is a good sign if you ask me.

I think the sense of calm is in relation to not knowing what Ryan's health status is. If for exmaple he is out until next August then the tone of the discussion would rightfully change. We will be back to that old debate of proven closers versus whoever most fits the bill.

But you are right, the pen has performed so well this year. I believe the importance of the pen is completely under rated in most instances.

Finally, not to be be a real downer, but since Duane Ward messed up his elbow this team has lurched from closer to bandaid to closer to band aid to closer. So I would try to keep expectations in check with regard to Marcum, Frasor  and all other worthy choices.

jjdynomite - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 01:14 PM EDT (#165946) #

Paul D, it's Dice K vs. Chacin, Wakefield vs. Ohka and Tavarez vs. Doc: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070415&content_id=1900068&vkey=news_bos&fext=.jsp&c_id=bos.  The latter appears to be mismatch of the week, although so seemed Scutaro against Rivera yesterday.

In good news, the Jays skip Beckett, who is on fire to start the season, and Shilling.  In better news, we get to see Dice K in action against the Beaten, Bruised but Still Fightin' Jays.  Ganbatte Kudasai Blue Jays!

ahitisahit - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 01:34 PM EDT (#165947) #
Any word on Glaus? I have had a quick look around and haven't seem much mention of him. I would love to take 2/3 from the Sox.
Mylegacy - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 02:03 PM EDT (#165950) #

We've got these two pitchers, both the same height, same weight, same experience, both throw from the right; Towering Towers and his evil twin, Faulty Towers. Yesterday they both showed up, the arm and skill and determination of Towering and the mind of Faulty (at least on two very glaring occasions).

I'm confused. What does this guy throw? A fastball? Or a Whole bunch of different fastballs with different sinks, fades and speeds? Does he throw a slider? Or a whole bunch of different sliders with...you get the idea... The KEY to the Towers Twins is CONTROL. But how do they CONTROL stuff that by design is going all over the place?

I've searched the net for a good analysis of Towers "stuff" and can't find any that seems to catch the essence of the guy...Has anyone found a good breakdown of exactly HOW this overachiever does it? (On those occasions he does it.) OR...does anyone actually know what the hay he throws, and how he throws it?

I agree with the writer who said that Towers pitches better under immediate pressure (or something like that) SO, I've got the answer, put itching powder in his jock, and see if his fast balls have more movement. 

 

zaptom - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 02:18 PM EDT (#165951) #
http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070416.wsptreed16/GSStory/GlobeSportsBaseball/home

Johnson is having surgery. Hopeful return in July.

BaseballNorth - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 02:36 PM EDT (#165952) #

Am I the only one who is concerned with Butterfield this year?

It seems as though Butters has no idea how fast any of our players are?  I've been to 2 games this year (Opener and Towers return to glory Sunday) and Butters has made BAD decisions in both of them.  This isn't even counting trying to hold up Clayton on the winning run.  On Sunday he waved home Overbay on the same play that scored the Big Hurt and Lyle was out by a good 5 steps - he didn't bother attempting to slide.

If I remember correctly - the a similar wave home happened in the opener where our baserunner was gunned out by a mile.

I know that we have 2 new starters this year and gauging their speed on the bases can lead to problems - Thomas lumbers around the bases - plus Glaus has lost a step or five with his wonky foot - but I don't remember Butters being wrong by such a large margin this often...

Is there a possibility he's testing the OF arms early in the season since there's likely more poor throws in April, or is he just making bad decisions?

Am I crazy worrying about this or is Butters asleep at the switch?

chips - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 02:40 PM EDT (#165954) #
The same Globesports article mentions that Troy Glaus was placed on the DL. Did we miss something here?
Maldoff - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 02:41 PM EDT (#165955) #
BaseballNorth, I think your first inclination is correct. It's early in the season, so Butterfield is probably testing outfielders arms/accuracy, and the cutoff plays of other teams. It's definitely a high-risk proposition, but can lead to some cheap runs, like Clayton's game winner yesterday.
A - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 03:28 PM EDT (#165960) #

Troy Glaus took some groundballs early this afternoon so I'm not sure what that says about him coming back to the line up but at the very least his heel/hamstring/whatever isn't so bad that he can take a light workout.

Glaus, along with Aaron Hill and JP Riccardi, stuck around to watch Phillippe Aumont, the 18 year-old from Quebec who Bob Elliot gushed about in this today's column. The kid had a tough first inning when it looked like he was overthrowing (threw a number of pitches in the dirt) but the Ontario Blue Jays never got good wood on his pitches. In the second inning Aumont came out and showed why Keith Law says he'll go #6. His fastball touched 95mph seven times with a lot of life and the curve was really biting (he missed up with it a few times but generally he could throw it for strikes.) The intriguing part about Aumont is that he's 6'8 and throws the ball from about 10 o'clock so it's hidden pretty well and gets in on hitters in a hurry. Phillippe Aumont is a name to remember.

Ryan Day - Monday, April 16 2007 @ 03:42 PM EDT (#165962) #
The Globe article has been amended to note Glaus is merely day-to-day.
Geoff - Tuesday, April 17 2007 @ 12:14 PM EDT (#166018) #
With Boston's game yesterday having been rained out, is Dice K still scheduled to start the Tuesday game?

I understand that Boston beat the Angels 7-2 yesterday. No rainout.
16 April: Something Struck Me | 30 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.