I seriously can’t take anymore of this Joba “bullpen or starter” debate. I can’t. I’m afraid that if I open up espn.com one more time and find another headline related to this issue, my head will explode.
So Posada thinks Joba is “built” for the bullpen. What does that even mean? He’s built like a pitcher. He’s huge. If Pedro Martinez and his ballerina body can be a starter, Joba sure as hell can too.
I’m sorry that all these current and former players have no idea how the game they play/played works. But Joba wants to start. And what else? He was a GREAT starter! The debate is over! He did it! A little tendinitis can happen to any 22-year old pitcher, starter or reliever. During last night’s game, Michael Kay noted that Joba had a sub-3 ERA as a starter and “gave them a good chance to win every night.” That’s it, right? Why even continue the conversation? That’s checkmate. It’s over.
But then Kay says “This is a great debate because there is a good argument for both sides.” What? The only way there could be any debate is if Joba struggled as a starter. He didn’t. He dominated the Red Sox and outpitched Beckett in Fenway.
It’s like promoting a bench player in basketball who is playing great in a limited role. He continues playing great even with extended minutes, showing that he is one of the best players on the team. So now you argue whether or not he should be moved back to the bench and have his minutes limited because maybe he’ll get hurt. Huh? Am I missing something here?