for the record, I'm very annoyed that Gibbons takes Litsch out on 70 pitches, absolutely in control, only 4 hits and 0 walks, and the only reason a man was on base was because Rolen was playing in so close and missed a playable ground ball.....and I don't care if he was giving up a bunch of flyballs tonight.

that is an awful, awful move by Gibbons.

not quite as bad as Gardenhire keeping Slowey in after that Rolen at bat, but pretty damn bad.

I don't like the move to take out Litsch either. 70 pitches and throwing ahead in the count on every batter. Could have been out of the inning too, I thought they turned that DP. You just pitched a double header. Carlson made his 19th appearance and Downs is making his 18th, having already complained of shoulder tightness 2 plus weeks ago. Don't burn out the pen in May.

On a side note, how unlucky must Edwin Jackson feel tonight? Tosses eight shutout innings against the Jays, Percival blows it. He tosses seven shutout innings against the Yankees and the same thing happens. Although I doubt any Toronto starter has sympathy for him.

If you don't want Litsh to face Morneau - which is fairly reasonable - just walk him and pitch to the righties after him.

And put a man into scoring position?  And the tying run on first?  I'm not walking him in that situation.  I like the move by Gibby.  Wins have been hard to come by - and we have a strong and underused 7-man pen.  Doc is going tomorrow.  And Litsch has been pretty awful from pitch 61 on.

Um, Mauer's grounder to Lyle (which he maybe could have turned 2 on without a bobble, haven't seen a highlight) moved the runner over to 2nd

Ah yes, forgot about that. (Was the "um" necessary?)

I didn't like Gibbons for his handling of the pitching staff last year, but I've had few complaints this year.  Bullpen decisions by any manager usually meet the approval of some of the fans only some of the time. 

With the exception of Ryan, I think Gibbons doesn't hesitate to pull a reliever if he is struggling. What this accomplishes is the inability of a particular reliever to do too much damage to his stats in any one "don't have it today" outing.

Therefore, I think a good portion of his relievers consistant success under his management can be attributed to him.

In 2005 the 7 guys who got the vast vast majority of the bullpen work posted these ERA+:

109, 134, 137, 173, 115, 103, and 126. Those last two are the ERA+ of Scott Downs and Pete Walker who made 13 and 4 starts each respectively. The rest of the bullpen which was below average didn't total more then 50 innings as a group.

In 2006, the 7 guys who got the vast majority of the bullpen work posted these ERA+:

333, 153, 70, 112, 106, 120, 180.

In 2007 i'm only going to post the top 6 as the next highest guy pitched 11 and 2/3rds innings:

209, 206, 190, 98, 129, 150.

In 2008, to date:

BJ hasn't allowed a run yet and doesn't have an ERA+, it would probably be one of those silly numbers like 800 or something.

Then:  252, 148, 62 (Accardo), 242, 93. Shawn Camp comes in at 73 and Brian Wolfe at 111.

For a bunch of guys who certainly didn't scream out as premium bullpen arms -

We're talking about: BJ Ryan, Jeremy Accardo, Scott Downs, Brian Tallet, Justin Speier, Jason Frasor, Vinnie Chulk, Pete Walker, Brandon League, Scott Schoeneweis, Miguel Batista, Casey Jannsen, Brian Wolfe, Jesse Carlson, and finally Shawn Camp.

Out of this batch of 15 pitches, I count 5 definite, maybe 6 "premium arms". My unofficial definition of a premium arm is someone with a proven established track record (Ryan, Speier, Schoeneweis), or great potential in the arm (Accardo, League).

To get consistant, above average production out of guys like Downs (what a great find by the Jays, seriously), Tallet, Frasor, Chulk, and young guns like Jannsen, and who the heck are they's Tallet, Wolfe, and Carlson, and say all this success is in spite of Gibbons bullpen handling, is pretty darn harsh on Gibbons.

Excluding 2008, out of the 3 full seasons Gibbons has managed, the top 21 bullpen guys (top 7 each year), he's had exactly TWO, come in with ERA+ under 100.

Stieb was certainly better, but Morris wouldn't be a horrible choice (although he is just about at the lowest rung of viable candidates in my view).   There's more to baseball than ERA+, after all. 

The problem with a Morris candidacy is that there are a number of pitchers who are comparable, who are also candidates, and who were better than Morris - guys like Tiant and Reuschel and especially Tommy John.  There are also guys who were just better in shorter but still significant careers, like Stieb or David Cone who I think is eligible now.  He should not come in before them.  There are also a number of guys who were every bit as good as Morris like Jamie Moyer; you'll have a hard time trying to convince me that Morris was better than Moyer is (but then I know that Moyer is terribly underrated - how many recent guys have had an eight-year run like he had from 1996-2003?  126-56 in those years, that is brilliant...)

What Jack Morris has a lot of to sell is durability, and in my mind that's interesting, and very nice, and indeed very valuable, but it doesn't turn my "Hall of Fame" crank like someone like Allie Reynolds, whose numerical candidacy doesn't really stack up even to Morris's but who screams "Hall of Fame" to me.  For some of these guys who are less into history, maybe Morris has the same "feel" to them but I can't see it.

Anyway, that's why they vote on these things.

"Well, if he wasn't going to be the guy, who was? Lind? "

I believe Stewie meant that he assumed Stairsy would get most of the starts in LF, but that now that Thomas is gone it's been frustrating for him that first they give the job to Lind and then he sees them pick up Wilkerson AND Mench. He clearly sees the writing on the wall, and it says that when Vernon gets back it's very likely that Stewart is the one to get the axe, if you assume they keep the 4 man bench of Mench, Barajas, McDonald, Scutaro.

"It is indefensible to pull a starter having a start like Jesse was having at 70 pitches."

Okay, I just looked ahead at the schedule and maybe realized something. Doc & DMac will probably be starting May 20-21 on 5 days rest, and if the Jays want to keep Burnett & Marcum on their regular schedules that means they pitch May 22-23. That leaves Litsch for the 24th, 11 days after his last start. Could it be that Gibbons was looking ahead and decided he wants to have Litsch throw an inning or 2 behind Purcey on what should be his throw day, to make sure that rust doesn't set in and he keeps the positives flowing? It would still be 7 days between appearances but that has to be better than 11, doesn't it?