I've been working through the layout of the starting rotation for April.  I am presuming that Santana pitches every 5th Day.  Bonser and Ortiz can/will also pitch every 5th Day.  A funny thing happens with the 4th (Ponson) 5th (Silva).  I have (1)Santana 6 Starts, (2)Bonser 6 Starts, (3)Ortiz 6 Starts (4) Ponson 4 Starts, and (5) Silva 4 Starts.

Here is how it looks to me:

2 -- Santana
3 -- Bonser
4 -- Ortiz
5 -- off
6 -- Ponson
7 -- Santana
8 -- Bonser
9 -- Ortiz
10-- Silva
11-- Ponson
12-- Santana
13-- Bonser
14-- Ortiz
15-- Silva
16-- off
17-- Santana
18-- Bonser
19-- Ortiz
20-- Silva
21-- Ponson
22-- Santana
23-- Bonser
24-- Ortiz
25-- Silva
26-- Ponson
27-- Santana
28-- Bonser
29-- Ortiz
30-- off

So it looks like Silva (5) and Ponson (4) would flip when Silva's 1st start would have to fall on the 10th, because that would only be 3 days rest for Ponson.  With Ponson starting on the 11th, his 5th day would fall on the off day (16th) so unless everyone was pushed back 1 day, his start would be skipped.

Presuming no one is dropped from the rotation, are there any other likely ways for this to lay out?

There was an interesting article in yesterday's Washington Post "BaseBall 2007" special edition, on the apparent change in philosophy of trading "top" prospects for Big Players at the trading deadline.

First, at last years trading deadline, I had not found the Twins Blogosphere, so while the following is new to me, it is probably well known to you folks.

The example that interested me was an analysis of the Alfonso Soriano dance at the trade deadline.  The article states that the Twins were probably the most ardent suitor (I'm reading a bit between the lines there).  The Nationals demanded prospects headed by either Garza or Perkins.  I was interested that the Twins offered prospects headed by Slowey.

What struck me most was when Stan Kasten, National's President, long with the Braves, was asked his thoughts on that offer now, he stated flatly that he would do the same thing today.  Basically, give up Soriano for 2 draft picks, rather than someone who would possibly be #2 in this years rotation.

Any thoughts?

Regards,