Too Risky for Porcello and Perry?

by Ian Casselberry on Apr 8, 2009 3:00 PM EDT in Detroit Tigers News

Minor League Ball's John Sickels is still not down with the Detroit Tigers' decision to bring Rick Porcello up to the majors so early in his development.

**I think putting Rick Porcello in the Detroit rotation is batshit insane. In my opinion, even the best prospects need a good dose of Double-A. Most of them need Triple-A. Porcello is very talented, but he is NOT Dwight Gooden or Bob Feller. The wonderful spring training he had resulted in a 2.30 ERA, which is sharp, but also a 8/5 K/BB and 17 hits in 15.2 innings, hardly a dominant ratio set. Maybe it will work, but it is not a risk I would take if I was the Tigers braintrust.

I haven't had a chance to listen to it yet, but Sickels and RotoWire's Jeff Erickson apparently discussed this further on Erickson's Blog Talk Radio show yesterday. Regardless, I guess we'll find out soon enough if using Porcello is the right decision, beginning on Thursday.

Sickels is a bit more on board with bringing up Ryan Perry. But only a bit.

**The decision to put Ryan Perry in the Tigers bullpen is a bit more defensible, but still risky. Perry has a terrific arm, but was considered fairly raw for a guy coming out of college. He could follow a Brandon Morrow path.

Morrow was called up to Seattle in 2007 after only pitching 22 innings in the low minors the year before. After 128 innings the past two seasons, he's struggled with a sore shoulder as he and the Mariners try to figure out the ideal workload for him. (Diabetes might play a serious role with his stamina, however.)

However, doesn't necessity outweigh any potential risk? Porcello and Perry were probably the Tigers' best two pitchers in Spring Training, and were needed (almost desperately so) in the starting rotation and bullpen. And for what it's worth, I don't think anyone watching the Tigers (reporters, bloggers, or fans) thought it was a bad idea.

We've covered this territory already, but don't these two top prospects make the Tigers a better team? If they can help right now, why not utilize them?

Tweet Comment 5 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I don’t see what other option we have, especially with Perry. Lyon clearly demonstrated what a disater our bullpen is last night and Verlander looking like he did in 2008 instead of 2006-07 on Monday wasn’t a good sign either. The rookies may not be ready but who else have we got?

by Sutelc on Apr 8, 2009 4:34 PM EDT reply actions

No choice

The starters are a mess; the bullpen is a mess.

Keeping these 2 around will work fine if and only if the Tigers are smart about conserving these guys’ arms. We’ve seen enough young pitchers whose arms have been ruined because they were rushed up to the majors and forced to throw way more innings than they’ve ever thrown before.

by Glenn S. on Apr 8, 2009 5:12 PM EDT reply actions

and others who dropped boxes on themselves

beware of falling objects, P&P!

(anyone remember Pete and Pete?)

Mack Avenue Tigers

by Kurt Mensching on Apr 8, 2009 5:16 PM EDT up reply actions

Pitching is a problem

Tiger pitching is a major problem. I could be wrong, but I believe Porcello is ready for the big time. I think John Sickels is “batshit crazy” as he puts it. What does he know?

by Michigan and Trumbull on Apr 8, 2009 5:23 PM EDT reply actions

Long Term vs. Immediate Need

John can better speak for himself, but here’s why I agree with him. There’s a pretty established track record that most pitchers need to climb each rung of the ladder as part of the developmental process. It’s pretty rare to see a pitcher successfully jump from High-A to the majors, less so when he’s as young as Porcello. Granted, Porcello is a rare talent, which might make it possible.

But that he’s such a rare talent also works against the notion of jumping him up. It’s not as if he’s some fungible pitching prospect that can be cast aside if it doesn’t work out. Not only is it remarkably hard to find someone with his talent, they’ve also invested a ton in him up front. Isn’t it worth the wait until he’s fully ready? I know that there’s a lot of pressure to win right now, but if I’m the Tigers, I’d rather he have Jack Morris’ career, and not Mark Fidyrich’s career (and yes, I know that’s an extreme example – there’s plenty of data points in between.).

Thanks for the link to the show, by the way. Please feel free to call in and tell me why I’m wrong – I welcome the discussion.

by RotoJeff on Apr 8, 2009 11:21 PM EDT reply actions