"“It won’t be first or second, and it won’t be fifth,”– Seattle Mariner pitching coach Carl Willis on Erik Bedard’s spot in the starting rotation"
A lot of times we get caught up in specific terminology. Terminology that we equate to one’s overall skill level or talent. Such as saying “he has a ceiling as a top-of-the-rotation starter” or “back-of-the-rotation starter” “he’s a number two starter”. We say these things because they’ve become the easiest expression in describing a talent level. I’m not against using them. But we have to understand that they are generic terms and that just because someone holds that rule it’s not an indication for true talent.
What I really don’t care for are things being said like “the guy can/can’t anchor a rotation” This is just fluff. What they are saying is the pitcher isn’t an “elite” pitcher. I would most likely rather someone else over him specifically but he’s still really good.
Even with Michael Pineda making the starting rotation, Erik Bedard is still likely the second best pitcher in the rotation in 2011. Of course you could make the argument that he most likely has lost “some” due to surgeries and lay off. But whatever, right? Point is he’s close.
Regardless of which day Bedard pitches, be it day 2 or day 5, it’s not going to affect the way he pitches or the general out come of the game. The day he pitches is not a direct reflection of his talent level. Oakland or Texas it doesn’t really matter.
I just saw a few things across the internet and caused this to come out. You might realize that he is still going to be a good pitcher for us. But some people just don’t grasp the fact that even 70% of old Erik Bedard out on the mound is still better than 100% of David Pauley or Luke French. End of discussion.