Stephen Strasburg

C

cjb56

Well-known member
Thoughts on him being shut down for the season, with no post-season innings?

I think it's ridiculous. The Nats might look like they are going to contend for several years, but baseball has proven that is not guaranteed. The only guarantee is THIS year, and he should pitch as long as the Nationals season lasts...even if it's all the way to game seven of the World Series. He's a baseball pitcher. That's what he does. The ultimate goal of an MLB team is to win the World Series, and the Nats have a good chance to do it with Strasburg. It's a slap to the fans and Nats players that he won't be out there doing his job in the part of the season that is most important. If the Nats wanted to strictly enforce his innings, they should have held him out until May or June before letting him pitch this year.
 
 
Idk about the decision, but honestly Strasburg has come off like a bit of a pssy IMO. If I were in that situation I'd be saying publicly how badly I want to continue to pitch.
 
Strasburg has said that he plans to argue his point to let him continue pitching this season and doesn't want to be shut down. Maybe if Washington would've done better at controlling his innings earlier in the season they wouldn't be stuck with shutting him down right before clinching their first playoff berth as the Nationals franchise.
 
Decision makes sense coming off Tommy John surgery. I just don't know why they wouldn't have skipped his rotation turn using off days. If they even do that once a month, that's six extra starts saved. 3 would have gotten him through the regular season and 3 in the playoffs gets you into the NLDS and maybe 2 starts in the NLCS.
 
With the size and length of his contract it would be stupid to go against the doctors recommendations and risk his career for the playoffs. Washington has a good pitching staff without him and will only need three starters for the playoffs with all of the off days.
 
Why is this good for the Reds? The only way it's good is if we square off in the NLCS. I'm not confident that we even win a series.
 
How was it dumb? Obviously the Reds stand a better chance of beating the Nats without Strasburg, but you guys are assuming we make it to the NLCS. I'm not sure that we win a series in the postseason again.
 
recently said:
How was it dumb? Obviously the Reds stand a better chance of beating the Nats without Strasburg, but you guys are assuming we make it to the NLCS. I'm not sure that we win a series in the postseason again.
Click to expand...

Because you're unsure why it's good for the Reds.

Recently is dumb.
 
I know exactly why it's supposed to be good for the Reds and every other potential playoff team. Without Strasburg, the Nats may not win a playoff series at all - they're way more beatable. But the Reds likely won't win a playoff series either, so it won't matter.
 
Recently, the Reds chances are better at beating the Nationals the only team to handle the Reds this year, the Nats have a strong rotation. W/o Strasburg that's one less arm the Reds have to face if they meet in the playoffs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top