Why is Tim Dillard on the roster?

[brwrsfan]

Anyone else wondering this? He's the 12th man on the staff, so I know he isn't going to pitch much but this is getting somewhat silly. He could have been used in the 9th today with a 5 run lead, but we brought in Axford. So we clearly don't trust him in close games or blowouts.

He pitched in a game on June 29th, then another one on July 18th....and nothing since. That's 2 games pitched in over a month. He's clearly not needed on the roster at this point in time. I think he can be useful, but they're just not using him. If he's only going to pitch once a month, why not send him down? I have a very hard time believing his roster spot wouldn't be better served with another position player....pretty much anybody.

They could have left Caroll or Ferris up for defense, maybe bring up Gamel/Green for their bats or maybe even carry a third catcher. I just don't get it. It's basically like playing with 24 guys for over a month.

[berniebrewer4life]

Well, somebody has to get the Veggie Burgers ready for Prince for the post game meal. Tim knows how Fielder takes them.....

[adambr2]

Yeah, considering how woeful the bench is, I think we could get more value in having the extra bat on the bench. You can always bring him back up if you need him, and in 4 weeks, it won't matter anyway, you can bring in all the extra bullpen depth you want.

 

Sometimes I forget that he's still on the roster.

[Invader3K]

Yeah, considering how woeful the bench is, I think we could get more value in having the extra bat on the bench. You can always bring him back up if you need him, and in 4 weeks, it won't matter anyway, you can bring in all the extra bullpen depth you want.

 

Sometimes I forget that he's still on the roster.

Honestly, until people were talking about his yesterday, I thought he was hurt.

[RockCoCougars]

As I've said before, 7 RH relievers is a ton of overkill- especially when you have a solid starting rotation 1-5. I'd rather even have a 'professional bat' guy that can't play the field a la Jim Thome, than a guy who will pitch mop up maybe once or twice a week.

[monty57]

He could have been used in the 9th today with a 5 run lead, but we brought in Axford. So we clearly don't trust him in close games or blowouts.

 

I agree that Dillard is unnecessary on the roster, but I think we brought in Axford because we have a day off today and we were playing the Cardinals. Roenicke wanted to give the team the best chance of winning, and Axford is 100% assured of a day of rest today, so he'll be ready to go tomorrow if needed. I was actually behind Roenicke on that move. Many managers won't use the closer until it's a save situation.

 

As for Dillard, I hear he's a very funny guy. I also hear Kotsay is a funny guy. I hear Counsell has "veteran leadership qualities." I really think Roenicke/Melvin believe it's important to have those type guys on the roster.

[CheezWizHed]

The team needs good comic relief. So its his impressions that keep him on the team, not his pitching....

[brwrsfan]

As far as Axford goes, yes, it's good to get the win and have your closer in....but we still play the Cardinals 9 times in the next month or so and I just don't like giving the Cardinals players more at bats against Axford than necessary. The theory being that the more you see a guy, the more comfortable you get and more likely you eventually are to have success.

 

Probably doesn't make much difference, but in a 5 run game, we probably could have spared Axford.

 

That's not really the point though, the fact is that IMO Dillard has no place on the roster. We have 5 very good starters and several good bullpen options, that we don't need 12 guys in the pen. You could always bring him back up if you needed to, but if a guy is seldom going to be used, I'd rather it be a guy on the bench, even if he can't really play the field. At least he would have a purpose and play more than once a month. It's also to the point now that when Dillard does finally get into a game, he's likely to struggle as he can't possibly be anything close to sharp at this point.

[monty57]

I agree with you brwrsfan. I was surprised when they finally stopped carrying a 13-man staff. I'd be utterly shocked if they went to an 11-man staff, even though it may make sense.

 

As you noted, there have been times when Dillard could have been used, so it's possible that he's just not one of "Roenicke's guys." If that's the case, maybe Dillard should be sent down in favor of another reliever. I'd guess that if they brought up a reliever somewhere around 35-40 years old who doesn't necessarily have good stuff and can't get hitters out, but has "veteran presence," he'd probably find a role in the pen.

[mrpackersfan1]

Why not bring Flores up for a left hander?

[endaround]

Flores isn't any good. Arthur Rhodes at least has a small chance of being successful. Herrera would be a better use than Flores. But it will likely be Flores, he'll stink, might cost the Brewers a game and he'll be shipped out again.

[Crash2303]

well said endaround

[FVBrewerFan]

Dillard is there to serve as an innings-eater in a blow-out. 10-5 in the 9th is close, but doesn't qualify. The way that series was going, RR didn't want to take any chances and that's fine with me. But if a starter can't get through 3 innings, Dillard is your guy. He can give you a few innings, instead of blowing through the whole bullpen. That hasn't happened in a while, but both Marcum and Wolf were flirting with it.

 

So at least he does have a purpose...unlike say....Counsell or Wilson.

[Raw Biz]

Dillard is there to serve as an innings-eater in a blow-out. 10-5 in the 9th is close, but doesn't qualify. The way that series was going, RR didn't want to take any chances and that's fine with me. But if a starter can't get through 3 innings, Dillard is your guy. He can give you a few innings, instead of blowing through the whole bullpen. That hasn't happened in a while, but both Marcum and Wolf were flirting with it.

 

So at least he does have a purpose...unlike say....Counsell or Wilson.

I thought that was Estrada's role? Considering Dillard is really only effective against righties, I don't think he'd make a good LR just because he can go multiple innings. If the team is all RH then sure. I think he should be used as a 6th/7th inning option against righties, especially if we're up by a few runs. He's not going to stay sharp if he doesn't get any work in.

[brwrsfan]

I think Estrada would be more likely to come into a game in the third inning than Dillard as well. He HAS come into a couple of games when that happened, and he was brough in in extras the other day, presumably to pitch a few innings. Dillard was being used regularily in June, usually for an inning at a time, but then he just fell off the map.

 

If Dillard is in fact that long guy/blowout type, the last month would indicate that we really don't need a guy like that on the roster, he's just simply not used. You could always bring him back up if you needed if if the pen got destroyed at some point.

[FVBrewerFan]

You would need both in a game like that. Each would pitch 3-4 innings. Otherwise, you're blowing through Loe, Saito, Hawk, etc. since none of our relievers can pitch more than one inning. Now one bad game gets worse, because you've blown through the bullpen.

 

I know it HASN'T happened recently, but it has happened earlier and could certainly happen again. Don't get me wrong, I would rather have an effective LHP in his place, but until one exists he is basically insurance for a starter getting blown out really early in a game. For that matter, there may come a point where the pen is really taxed and you need an inning out of him. This is how he was used earlier in the year. We just went through a stretch where the bullpen could be used almost exactly as you want to use it, and that usually doesn't last too long.

[Raw Biz]

You would need both in a game like that. Each would pitch 3-4 innings. Otherwise, you're blowing through Loe, Saito, Hawk, etc. since none of our relievers can pitch more than one inning. Now one bad game gets worse, because you've blown through the bullpen.

 

I know it HASN'T happened recently, but it has happened earlier and could certainly happen again. Don't get me wrong, I would rather have an effective LHP in his place, but until one exists he is basically insurance for a starter getting blown out really early in a game. For that matter, there may come a point where the pen is really taxed and you need an inning out of him. This is how he was used earlier in the year. We just went through a stretch where the bullpen could be used almost exactly as you want to use it, and that usually doesn't last too long.

I highly doubt you need 2 relievers to throw 3-4 innings each. Even if the starter only lasts 1 inning, Estrada could pitch 3 and Dillard 2 and that gets you to the 7th. That being said, I think Dillard could handle pitching 2-3 innings even if he pitched 1 the day before. We're not saying he should pitch every game or even every other game. But it would be nice for him to get more than one appearance a month.

It seems like Roenicke lost all confidence in him after he was roughed up by the tough AL lineups of Tampa, Boston, and NY. And after looking at the box scores from those games, it looks like all RBI against him were from lefties/switch-hitters except for one. Obviously he shouldn't be pitching to those hitters because of his delivery. I agree he could be used as insurance as a long-reliever but I also think he could handle an inning or even a couple batters twice a week to stay sharp.

 

[brwrsfan]

He is a good insurance policy, yes, I'll buy that. But he could always be called back up if the pen gets fried.

 

I'm not saying I want him pitching every game (I sure don't) but one inning a month is somewhat absurd. How is he supposed to stay sharp/effective throwing one inning in over a month? If he does come into a game and we're down 5-6 early, we're going to want him to keep it like that, not give up more runs. He needs to get an occasional inning for this to happen. If this isn't going to happen (and it sure looks like it won't), then he should be replaced with someone that they will actually use. They could always bring him back up if they needed to.

[MNBrew]

He is a good insurance policy, yes, I'll buy that. But he could always be called back up if the pen gets fried.

 

I'm not saying I want him pitching every game (I sure don't) but one inning a month is somewhat absurd. How is he supposed to stay sharp/effective throwing one inning in over a month? If he does come into a game and we're down 5-6 early, we're going to want him to keep it like that, not give up more runs. He needs to get an occasional inning for this to happen. If this isn't going to happen (and it sure looks like it won't), then he should be replaced with someone that they will actually use. They could always bring him back up if they needed to.

The only thing is, if they send Dillard down, they'd have to know they won't need him for 10 days (time required in minors before recall to MLB is possible). If the thinking is that he's mainly here for "insurance" purposes that have yet to come into play over the past 2 weeks, all I can figure is they don't want to run the risk of being without him.

 

I'm not saying I agree with keeping him around in favor of a 14th bat (and we know now it can't be Carroll since he chose FA). I'm only trying to guess why he's still here

[reillymcshane]

Dillard's around in case they need someone to pinch hit for Craig Counsel.

[derflotr]

We've gotten used to 6+ innings from our starters lately...they're in a very good stretch of starting pitching but eventually someone will have a clunker. Considering the positional versatility of the bench I don't think the 6th option off the bench will see much playing time.

[GAME05]

uh, i'm pretty sure Dillard was released last year and retired or something. i thought we were going with a 24-man roster since Kameron Loe takes up the space of two men. sure, next thing you'll be telling me is that Matt Stairs didn't retire five years ago.

[Raw Biz]

We've gotten used to 6+ innings from our starters lately...they're in a very good stretch of starting pitching but eventually someone will have a clunker. Considering the positional versatility of the bench I don't think the 6th option off the bench will see much playing time.

I'm not saying I want a 6th option but it would probably be better than Kotsay, Counsell, and Wilson. If it was Gamel, it could be the best option period. I just don't understand why Dillard couldn't pitch a 6th/7th inning here and there. We want Saito and Hawkins healthy and rested down the stretch so I think he could fill in when we have comfortable leads (at least 3) instead of pitching those guys multiple days.

[logan82]

Dillard is on the roster so we have somebody to send down when we need to bring in a pitcher.

[The Truth]

i thought we were going with a 24-man roster since Kameron Loe takes up the space of two men.

Loe takes up the space of two men, but he can only pitch to right-handed batters, so he counts as one man. We call him "Lurch" at our house