Add new comment

In that a Garland over ERam decision isn't "crazy" in hte real sense. It's somewhere in the neighborhood, however. :)
Your idea as ERam as the fallback position, which doesn't exist with Garland, is interesting. But were that Z & W's play, here, I wouldn't understand that either. Why wouldn't you fallback position on an ERam collapse just be Maurer or Hultzen? By then you would have probably saved a year with them.
I think it was Robert E. Lee that once said an army was a beautiful thing and a commander had to be careful about being reluctant to use that beautiful thing for what it was designed for. That's a liberal paraphrase, I'm sure.
We have built this beautiful thing of young talent and now we seem reluctant to roll it out into battle where some of it might be destroyed. Perhaps ERam implodes this year....it won't be due to the fact that he didn't get 15 more AAA starts. On that, I am sure.
Ditto Hultzen, Maurer, Romero, etc.
Almost all young guys have some early struggles. Willie Mays went o'fer 24, or some such thing. I mentioned Maddux above. Harper had stretches of them last year. Man, it is part of the learning process. But that process exists whether a player is 22 or 25.
So roll them out early.
I appreciate your attempt to find a rational in the Garland over ERam issue. And perhaps the issue is all ours and not really something Wedge is contemplating. But if that is so, why wouldn't he just say, "Man, I'm really excited to see ERam in game 4! The kid looks great!"
I am quite sure we have the best stable of young starter-type arms in the game. Young arms aren't collectables, however. Their use isn't in polishing them and sitting them on the shelf for all to admire. Their true use is in trotting them out in Safeco and lfinding out what they've got. Tacoma is a nice place. But basically, it don't mean diddly in the development of a pitcher.
Sorry if I came across to aggressive in the last post. I do realize you had said you wouldn't walk down the Garland path were you the GM.
moe