One less reliever
The Orioles found a surprising way to make room for rookie Garrett Olson on the 25- and 40-man rosters.
Sun beat writer Jeff Zrebiec just told me they designated reliever Scott Williamson for assignment.
Williamson is going to be one of those guys we'll barely remember pitching here. That's because he barely pitched here.
Williamson looked like a bargain free-agent signing if he stayed healthy, but he was a bad fit from the beginning. He kept insisting that he could pitch and didn't understand why he wasn't used more often. The Orioles kept insisting that he wasn't available when they needed him.
The bullpen learned to function without him, which should come in handy now that he's gone.
I hardly ever saw Williamson interact with teammates. He sat alone at his locker, a pinch of tobacco stuffed inside his bottom lip. I'm not sure that he ever smiled.
He usually talked to reporters when approached, which wasn't often. I had some nice exchanges with him, including one in the parking lot outside Fort Lauderdale Stadium when he was leaving with his family. He was kind enough to stop and answer my questions about an injury, and I appreciated the gesture. A lot of guys would have blown past me at that time of day.
Too bad I won't get the chance to say goodbye.
I'm sure he'll turn up somewhere. He might even pitch once in a while.
Comments
An interesting commentary, Roch, indicating how reporters indeed develop their own relationships, of varying degrees, with players, only to see those relationships almost invariably break off. To emotionally distance oneself from it all, I guess we say "it's business."
It is curious to me that Williamson languished out there, that the O's let him do that. What I saw of him wasn't that impressive (that was my take since spring) but, still, why put him out there if you're not going use him.
Posted by: Dimitrios (now in L.A.) | July 4, 2007 5:15 PM
I don't remember a player being handled as strangely as Williamson. There were a lot of games that were blown earlier in the season that may have been avoided if they used him instead of say Baez or Parrish.
If he's DFA'd does that mean he could be traded within ten days? maybe we could get Tex for him. hehe
Posted by: Anonymous | July 4, 2007 5:21 PM
Roch,
Wow, that is indeed surprising news about Williamson. I, too, thought he might be a very valuable bargain acquisition. Now, I wonder what went wrong. Perhaps you could elaborate on the phrases, "... bad fit from the beginning," and "... wasn't available when they needed him." Where was he? In the loo? Checking out Boog's BBQ? Just curious, is all, and wondering whether this might somehow be a case of addition by subtraction.
Keep up the terrific work, Roch! You're an information lifeline to some of us more distant fans.
Posted by: robsride | July 4, 2007 6:18 PM
Roch:
The 40-Man Roster linked to this site lists 43 players with 4 on the 60-day DL.
Why do the O's need to "make room" for Olson?
Posted by: AZRON | July 4, 2007 6:19 PM
I guess it's possible that even in the Big Leagues, there is favoritism. I know how Scotty feels...
My little league coach rarely used me as the set-up man to get to the kid with the mustache who closed for us. I had good stuff despite battling the obligatory "oblique strain." I was eventually relegated to nose-picker in right field.
I know EXACTLY how he feels. From one "nose-picker" to another, good luck Scotty.
Posted by: E in SC | July 4, 2007 6:24 PM
J Galt, I'm coming from you've got to give up something to get something train. I don't believe DCab is a bum. I do believe in 2-4 years he will be a good #2 or #3 pitcher for us or someone else.
The problem is we have a real need for a power hitting #4 and we have a lot of good pitchers in the minors(thanks to the FO). The O's best chance is to use some of that pitching to get the power hitter they need. It's either that or vastly overspend in the FA market to get one.
Posted by: OC Barry | July 4, 2007 6:24 PM
Forgot to mention fireworks in OC tonite cancelled resked for tomorrow. Just in case anyone cares.
Posted by: OC Barry | July 4, 2007 6:27 PM
Well so ends a waste of what could have been a very good pickup for the Orioles. I don't really comprehend any of the Williamson saga at all. Who knows what he could have achieved with regular work?
Posted by: Dylan | July 4, 2007 6:52 PM
I'm sure dollars were a factor in deciding who had to go. Personally, I would have also liked to see Baez & Parrish leave also but the O's have too much $$$ tied up in Baez.
I guess it came down to who was healthier and I suppose we can always DL Parrish if his pitching continues to deteriorate!
Posted by: TerryP | July 4, 2007 6:58 PM
he wasn't bad when he pitched. i often cursed his name, as in "why isn't he putting in scott f'ing williamson instead of baez" and that happened often. puzzling use of a pitcher i always thought.
Posted by: troy n | July 4, 2007 7:02 PM
Haven't been able to be on the blog for weeks. It sure is refreshing to get a taste of your wit and cynicism. I've really missed both. I'm sure Scott will show up somewhere, probably pitching against the O's and doing a marvelous job at it. That's what seems to happen whenever we play against a former Oriole.
As for the sparklers, I can't imagine giving one to my three year old granddaughter, as was done with us when we were little. Were our parents crazy or what???
Ok, how many ACL's can you have replaced? Or is Anita to the point where she is having the replacements replaced? Tell her I'll be praying for her. Not a fun operation to recover from, as I recall from my own turn at it.
I've really missed this blog. It's great to be back and read all the comments from TRUE O's fans.
Posted by: Lynne | July 4, 2007 7:44 PM
What the hell, Trembley? Why not let Olson complete 5 innings so he can get a win? I don't like the quick hook and the continued pattern of taking out effective starters too early (he did it to Guthrie 2 starts ago). Not that Olson was effective, but he was 2 outs away from qualifying for the win, had a 4 run lead and had thrown less than 90 pitches.
Posted by: Wooley | July 4, 2007 9:05 PM
Haven't been watching the game....just turned on Gameday on MLB.com....saw that Olson got pulled after 87 pitches after striking out Jim Thome.
What gives? Injury?
Not that I mind seeing that Rob Bell got 2 outs (including a strikeout) on 4 PITCHES.
The only thing that I can see wrong with Olson's performance is the 46 strikes/41 balls.
Posted by: RBF | July 4, 2007 9:12 PM
Just in case you forgot about this guy Roch:
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=324#S=324&F=2068&T=680965
Posted by: Jay | July 4, 2007 9:13 PM
Wow....really fun to watch Josh Fields given 5 strikes instead of 3 and jack one out on the 5th strike. Way to go, blue.
Posted by: RBF | July 4, 2007 9:36 PM
a note on grammar: when discussing something that is counted individually, such as relievers in a bullpen, one uses "fewer" not "less."
When discussing something that is not counted individually, such as rain, air, dirt, one uses "less."
I like Olson, also.
Posted by: Patrick | July 4, 2007 11:25 PM
Patrick, uh oh, faux pas, Roch's fragile ego can't stand being corrected.
Posted by: azim | July 5, 2007 10:57 AM