Archive

ShareThis Page
Jordan Lyles could be Pirates’ answer to Ivan Nova void | TribLIVE.com
Pirates/MLB

Jordan Lyles could be Pirates’ answer to Ivan Nova void

Tribune-Review
| Wednesday, December 12, 2018 4:06 p.m
534480DuLEFvRXQAA9BPW
534480JordanLyles
Wikimedia Commons
Jordan Lyles

The Pittsburgh Pirates aren’t taking their pitching staff for granted this offseason, even though they felt comfortable trading workhorse starting pitcher Ivan Nova to the Chicago White Sox.

Nova’s vacant spot on the staff, if not the starting rotation, could be taken by Jordan Lyles, an eight-year veteran who has pitched for four major-league teams. Lyles and the Pirates have agreed on a one-year, $2.05 million contract, pending a physical examination, according to the New York Post.

Lyles, a first-round draft choice of the Houston Astros in 2008, split the 2018 season between the San Diego Padres and Milwaukee Brewers. Overall last season, he was 3-4, with a 4.11 ERA and 1.266 WHIP, recording 84 strikeouts and 28 walks and giving up 12 home runs in 87 2/3 innings.

Prior to last season, Lyles, 28, spent four seasons with the Colorado Rockies.

Lyles could pitch in long relief or in the starting rotation for the Pirates. He might even assume the role of opener. The Pirates are discussing the possibility of using a relief pitcher to start some games and pitch limited innings.

Jerry DiPaola is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Jerry at jdipaola@tribweb.com or via Twitter @JDiPaola_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.