PDA

View Full Version : Taylor Buchholz - Astros



cincinnati chili
04-22-2006, 10:42 PM
not a bad 2nd major league start

8.2IP [corrected], 2 hits, zero walks, O runs

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=260422118&date=20060422

OnBaseMachine
04-22-2006, 10:56 PM
Just a little minor correction - he failed to get the complete game. He gave up a two out single to Jack Wilson, prompting Phil Garner to bring Brad Lidge in to face Jason Bay and strike him out looking on a 3-2 fastball.

Buchholz looked pretty good; he's not an overpowering pitcher but he's does a solid job of spotting his pitches and changing speeds. His stuff and minor league stats suggest he could be a solid 4 starter in the major leagues.

I'm starting to think the Astros could win this division. The offense is as good, if not better than the Cardinals offense; the pitching staff isn't as good as the Cardinal staff, however, that could change if Roger Clemens decides to return to Houston.

Falls City Beer
04-22-2006, 11:00 PM
I'm starting to think the Astros could win this division. The offense is as good, if not better than the Cardinals offense; the pitching staff isn't as good as the Cardinal staff, however, that could change if Roger Clemens decides to return to Houston.

Now who would've seen that coming?

:party:

The Astros are the Atlanta Braves of the Central: they just find ways to get it done. I predict that they run away with the division (Buchholz and Wandy upgrade the back end of the rotation much better than Backe).

RBA
04-22-2006, 11:04 PM
The Astros must just have the Pirates number. ;)

Remember -- They were playing the Pirates.

Aronchis
04-22-2006, 11:04 PM
The Astros offense is probably going to have a correction soon, a 8-9 game losing streak wouldn't surprise me with their weaker pitching, that means decline............

Falls City Beer
04-22-2006, 11:06 PM
The Astros must just have the Pirates number. ;)

Remember -- They were playing the Pirates.


And the Brewers, and the Nats, and the Giants...

(I had Buchholz tagged preseason as the ROY--I think I'll stick with that prediction).

Rex Argos
04-22-2006, 11:10 PM
The Pirates are just a miserable team so far, it just seems incomprehensible to hit so poorly in the Juice Box.

Falls City Beer
04-22-2006, 11:11 PM
The Astros offense is probably going to have a correction soon, a 8-9 game losing streak wouldn't surprise me with their weaker pitching, that means decline............

Maybe, but if MVP voting were conducted today, there would be three names and three names only on the ballot: Berkman (my MVP pick, btw), Ensberg, Pujols.

Astrobuddy
04-23-2006, 11:02 AM
On Base.... Taylor Buchholz throws a 94-95 MPH fastball and has a great curve. He has 4 pitches and can be overpowering. He has control now and thats why he is with the big club. He has Roy Oswalt type stuff. He is an extreme groundball pitcher and that is a good thing in MMP.

Please dont make it sound like he is a soft tosser who needs to nibble at corners. He is a power pitcher.


Their is nothing wrong with the Pirates offense. They arent great, but they can hit.


Aronchis....The Astros wont be going on any 8-9 game losing streaks.

Patrick Bateman
04-23-2006, 11:16 AM
Maybe, but if MVP voting were conducted today, there would be three names and three names only on the ballot: Berkman (my MVP pick, btw), Ensberg, Pujols.

For hitters, yes.

But there are a number of pitchers who, if you extrapolate their stats, are going about 32-0 with low ERA's.

What's good for the hitters.....:laugh:

OnBaseMachine
04-23-2006, 11:16 AM
On Base.... Taylor Buchholz throws a 94-95 MPH fastball and has a great curve. He has 4 pitches and can be overpowering. He has control now and thats why he is with the big club. He has Roy Oswalt type stuff. He is an extreme groundball pitcher and that is a good thing in MMP.

Please dont make it sound like he is a soft tosser who needs to nibble at corners. He is a power pitcher.


Their is nothing wrong with the Pirates offense. They arent great, but they can hit.


Aronchis....The Astros wont be going on any 8-9 game losing streaks.

I never said he was a soft tosser, I complimented him on his ability to throw strikes and mix in a good breaking pitch. He does not throw four pitches as you said. He throws three pitches, two of which are very good(fastball and curveball) and an average changeup.

Astrobuddy, please don't sit here and compare Taylor Buchholz to a bonafide ace like Roy Oswalt. Buchholz has a career minor league ERA of 3.85, 1.27 WHIP, 8.75 H/9, and a 6.93 K/9. Those are no where near ace caliber numbers, more in the mold of a No. 4 starter. For reference, here is what Oswalt did in the minors: 3.13 ERA, 1.17 WHIP, 8.05 H/9, and a 9.11 K/9.

Astrobuddy
04-23-2006, 11:21 AM
I didnt compare.... I said he had Roy Oswalt type stuff. Buchholz has a great curve though. Scouts think it could be top 5 in MLB.

I do however stand corrected on the pitches. You are correct he has 3 pitches.

Newman4
04-23-2006, 11:25 AM
The offense is as good, if not better than the Cardinals offense; the pitching staff isn't as good as the Cardinal staff, however, that could change if Roger Clemens decides to return to Houston.

I think it's arguable that the Cards pitching is better.

I would think Oswalt and Petitte are pretty much even with Carpenter and Mulder with the Cards having a little edge there. After that, the Cards have a bunch of Reds-esque pitchers in Suppan, Marquis and Ponson while the Astros have younger guys with much more upside. Take your pick. Lidge, Qualls, Wheeler and Co. are better than the Cards bullpen IMO. If Clemens comes back, they're definitely better.

SandyD
04-23-2006, 11:28 AM
From my memory, which isn't always that good, Buchholz was inconsistent in the minors ... at least the year he was with the Zephyrs (AAA) in 2004. Some games he was virtually unhittable, and others he was all over the place. He gave up runs in bunches.

Astrobuddy
04-23-2006, 11:41 AM
Sandy, he had control issues. The team says he has worked those out and so far this season there is nothing to dispute that.

He has a 0.85 WHIP

Oswalt and Pettitte are better than Carpenter and Mulder IMHO. I think the Astros are also a better overall team and the team to beat. It actually wouldnt surprise me to see the Cards finish at .500 or so and 10 games out. The Cards pitching is deep, but it isnt dominant when you get passed past Carpenter. The Cards offense aint what it once was either. Teams are going to figure out they can pitch around Pujols. Then who do the Cards have that can really hurt you? Scott Rolen is not what he once was either. While he is still a very very good 3rd baseman, he aint hitting the ball they way he was pre-injury. The Cards offense shouldnt be scary to anyone anymore.

MattyHo4Life
04-23-2006, 11:56 AM
After that, the Cards have a bunch of Reds-esque pitchers in Suppan, Marquis and Ponson while the Astros have younger guys with much more upside.

Reds-esque pitchers? What exactly is a Reds-esque pitcher? Marquis may have that breakout season this year we've been expecting for a few years. He has a lot of upside. As far as young pitching goes, the Cardinals have Reyes and Wainwright whom both have a ton of upside. Their rotation is just to good for the younger guys to crack it right now.

SandyD
04-23-2006, 12:04 PM
Sandy, he had control issues. The team says he has worked those out and so far this season there is nothing to dispute that.

He has a 0.85 WHIP


Yeah, if he has those issues under control, he could be very good. I just think it's too soon to tell.

PuffyPig
04-23-2006, 12:36 PM
Reds-esque pitchers? What exactly is a Reds-esque pitcher?

I'm not sure, but it's not pretty.:laugh:

PuffyPig
04-23-2006, 12:40 PM
Sandy, he had control issues. The team says he has worked those out and so far this season there is nothing to dispute that.


His minor league stats don't suggest control problems, just a big injury history.

tts1stros
04-23-2006, 03:36 PM
His minor league stats don't suggest control problems, just a big injury history.
Yeah, that's the HUGE thing nobody's mentioned yet. He's spent the last two season recovering from surgery.

When Wagner was traded to the Phillies, Hunsicker's insistence on Buchholz nearly made the deal fall apart. The other two guys (Brandon Duckworth and Ezequiel Astacio) were not particularly plus-prospects, and Hunsicker refused to trade unless he got an A+ arm as part of the deal.

He's been injured the last two years, but he's definitely considered a good prospect. His curveball is wicked.

cincinnati chili
04-30-2006, 06:23 PM
Remember -- They were playing the Pirates.

It wasn't the Pirates this time, but Major League Baseball's best offense. Even if the league catches up with this guy, His 3rd Major league start wasn't much worse than his second.

Astrobuddy
04-30-2006, 06:30 PM
I think he is the real deal. He is going to take his lumps, but he is going to be a good one.

MattyHo4Life
04-30-2006, 07:02 PM
I think he is too. I picked him up in my Fantasy keeper league after his first start. Out of all of your pitchers, he is the last one I want to see the Cardinals face. I don't think the league will catch up with him. He isn't some flash in the pan. He's always been a good prospect.

M2
04-30-2006, 08:13 PM
In August we'll all have a good laugh over the notion that Taylor Buchholz was going to have a big season. From where I sit, he ain't got nothing on Roger Salkeld or Mo Sanford.

Caveat Emperor
04-30-2006, 08:21 PM
I think he is the real deal. He is going to take his lumps, but he is going to be a good one.

I didn't hear him throw a breaking ball for a strike the entire game. He was getting all his called strikes on fastballs, and eventually teams are just going to lay off the breaking pitch until he can throw it reliably for strikes.

I'm at a loss about this guy -- his minor league numbers are thoroughly middling. I'm told that's due to injury, but at some point he should've recovered enough to dominate.

Whatever -- we'll see where he goes.

TC81190
04-30-2006, 08:36 PM
Reds-esque pitchers? What exactly is a Reds-esque pitcher? Marquis may have that breakout season this year we've been expecting for a few years. He has a lot of upside. As far as young pitching goes, the Cardinals have Reyes and Wainwright whom both have a ton of upside. Their rotation is just to good for the younger guys to crack it right now.

Jeff Suppan?


Sidney Ponson?

MattyHo4Life
04-30-2006, 09:01 PM
Jeff Suppan?


Sidney Ponson?

If Suppan and Ponson are considered Redsesque pitchers, then the Reds would have a good pitching staff.

cincyinco
04-30-2006, 09:06 PM
I didn't hear him throw a breaking ball for a strike the entire game. He was getting all his called strikes on fastballs, and eventually teams are just going to lay off the breaking pitch until he can throw it reliably for strikes.

I'm at a loss about this guy -- his minor league numbers are thoroughly middling. I'm told that's due to injury, but at some point he should've recovered enough to dominate.

Whatever -- we'll see where he goes.

Some think he's just now recovered, and thats why we're just now seeing the "dominating" results. He has been regarded as a very good pitching prospect in the past, from his days in the Philly org.

Falls City Beer
04-30-2006, 09:20 PM
In August we'll all have a good laugh over the notion that Taylor Buchholz was going to have a big season. From where I sit, he ain't got nothing on Roger Salkeld or Mo Sanford.

Nonsense.

And if there's an organization that will get the most out of this kid (and injuries certainly could sink him), it's the Astros.

The kid will take his lumps against good offenses on a few occasions this season, but he will consistently rebound as long as he's able to dial his fastball up to 92-93 with regularity because it's got a nice downward bite.

I suspect the bigger laugh will be on Wainwright.

MattyHo4Life
04-30-2006, 09:22 PM
I suspect the bigger laugh will be on Wainwright.

Why is that?

Falls City Beer
04-30-2006, 09:29 PM
Why is that?

His stuff isn't as good--and he doesn't have a great out pitch like Buchholz's curve.

He could be a great reliever, Wainwright. But he needs an out pitch.

MattyHo4Life
04-30-2006, 09:36 PM
His stuff isn't as good--and he doesn't have a great out pitch like Buchholz's curve.

He could be a great reliever, Wainwright. But he needs an out pitch.

Have you seen him pitch?

Falls City Beer
04-30-2006, 09:38 PM
Have you seen him pitch?

Yes, three or four times. People get dazzled by his height. But I was underimpressed on every occasion. He's fine. But not thrilling.

MattyHo4Life
04-30-2006, 09:43 PM
Yes, three or four times. People get dazzled by his height. But I was underimpressed on every occasion. He's fine. But not thrilling.

Then we must have watched two different Adam Wainwrights. :)

Falls City Beer
04-30-2006, 09:44 PM
Then we must have watched two different Adam Wainwrights. :)

He reminds me A LOT of Chris Reitsma. He could be a fine middle reliever, but he doesn't have the arsenal to be a starter.

Astrobuddy
04-30-2006, 09:46 PM
Cavaet, Taylor didnt have his best stuff today and he baffled the Reds hitters. I expect him to wear a little down the stretch, but he will be a solid ROY candidate.

Falls City Beer
04-30-2006, 09:49 PM
Then we must have watched two different Adam Wainwrights. :)

There are a ton of people on this site who love Wainwright's stuff, however. I just don't see it.

OnBaseMachine
04-30-2006, 10:27 PM
I'm with FCB on this one.

I've never been all that impressed with Adam Wainwright. He has been nothing more than average since coming over in the trade to St. Louis. He allowed 68 hits and posted a 1.51 WHIP and 5.37 ERA in Memphis in 2004, and then followed that up by allowing 204 hits in 182 innings last year while posting a 4.40 ERA and 1.40 WHIP in Memphis. Nothing impressive at all about that. Still, I think he could be a pretty good reliever for the Cards, or maybe a decent No. 4 or 5 starter, but not a great pitcher. JMO.

MattyHo4Life
04-30-2006, 11:01 PM
I'm with FCB on this one.

I've never been all that impressed with Adam Wainwright. He has been nothing more than average since coming over in the trade to St. Louis. He allowed 68 hits and posted a 1.51 WHIP and 5.37 ERA in Memphis in 2004, and then followed that up by allowing 204 hits in 182 innings last year while posting a 4.40 ERA and 1.40 WHIP in Memphis. Nothing impressive at all about that. Still, I think he could be a pretty good reliever for the Cards, or maybe a decent No. 4 or 5 starter, but not a great pitcher. JMO.

Keep an eye on Wainwright this year, and be prepared to be impressed.

SteelSD
04-30-2006, 11:11 PM
Nonsense.

And if there's an organization that will get the most out of this kid (and injuries certainly could sink him), it's the Astros.

The kid will take his lumps against good offenses on a few occasions this season, but he will consistently rebound as long as he's able to dial his fastball up to 92-93 with regularity because it's got a nice downward bite.

I suspect the bigger laugh will be on Wainwright.

Buchholz can't pitch effectively at 92-93. At his best today, he was at 90 MPH and when he tried to dial it up a notch he was all over the place. When teams figure out that he can't locate his sinker and lay off it he'll get dusted.

He's a location pitcher who feigns stuff. The only thing I was less impressed with today than Taylor Buchholtz were the Reds hitters who couldn't wait to hit pitches he couldn't throw for strikes.

Astrobuddy
04-30-2006, 11:15 PM
Steel, Buchholz has a devastating curve. He didnt have it nor need it today. Buchholz also didnt have the 93 MPH fastball either, buts its there.


Ask Greg Maddux about being a location pitcher. YOu say location pitcher like its a bad thing. Whats having gas done for Wood, Prior, Zambrano or Farnsworth? In MLB, its all about location regardless of how hard you throw.

Falls City Beer
04-30-2006, 11:16 PM
Buchholz can't pitch effectively at 92-93. At his best today, he was at 90 MPH and when he tried to dial it up a notch he was all over the place. When teams figure out that he can't locate his sinker and lay off it he'll get dusted.

He's a location pitcher who feigns stuff. The only thing I was less impressed with today than Taylor Buchholtz were the Reds hitters who couldn't wait to hit pitches he couldn't throw for strikes.

When I saw him in the minors he hit 92 with accuracy and regularity. I don't know, maybe he's incapable now or the surgery robbed him of his fastball. That's a possibility. All I know is that he's difficult for teams to hit so far in the majors. As well as pre-surgery in A and high-A.

SteelSD
04-30-2006, 11:29 PM
Steel, Buchholz has a devastating curve. He didnt have it nor need it today. Buchholz also didnt have the 93 MPH fastball either, buts its there.

Well, we agree on two things:

1. Buchholz has a curve. It's no better than Matt Belisle's curve, but Buchholz has one.

2. Buchholz had a 93 MPH fastball a couple times today. It was nowhere near the strike zone.


Ask Greg Maddux about being a location pitcher. YOu say location pitcher like its a bad thing. Whats having gas done for Wood, Prior, Zambrano or Farnsworth? In MLB, its all about location regardless of how hard you throw.

What has "gas" done for Carlos Zambrano? Are you joking? The answer, of course, is "it's augmented Zambrano's stuff and command". Problem is that Buchholz has little command and little actual stuff so he relies on location. Simply put, Buchholz cannot survive if hitters are laying off his 89-91 MPH sinker because he has little command of it within the zone. His curve, while decent, it's anything near a real knee-buckling yakker (see: Webb, Brandon).

And everytime some myopic fan sees a limited stuff location-dependent guy like Taylor Buchholz visions of Greg Maddux dance through the brain. Problem is that Greg Maddux had extreme stuff, impeccable command, and could actually bust it up to 95 when he needed to.

Falls City Beer
04-30-2006, 11:31 PM
Well, we agree on two things:

1. Buchholz has a curve. It's no better than Matt Belisle's curve, but Buchholz has one.

2. Buchholz had a 93 MPH fastball a couple times today. It was nowhere near the strike zone.



What has "gas" done for Carlos Zambrano? Are you joking? The answer, of course, is "it's augmented Zambrano's stuff and command". Problem is that Buchholz has little command and little actual stuff so he relies on location. Simply put, Buchholz cannot survive if hitters are laying off his 89-91 MPH sinker because he has little command of it within the zone. His curve, while decent, it's anything near a real knee-buckling yakker (see: Webb, Brandon).

And everytime some myopic fan sees a limited stuff location-dependent guy like Taylor Buchholz visions of Greg Maddux dance through the brain. Problem is that Greg Maddux had extreme stuff, impeccable command, and could actually bust it up to 95 when he needed to.


While I agree with your point about ill-conceived comparisons to Greg Maddux, Greg Maddux has never in his illustrious career thrown a pitch faster than 93 MPH. Never, ever, ever. And he hasn't touched 93 MPH probably in ten years.

Astrobuddy
04-30-2006, 11:33 PM
Maddux cant throw 95 and hasnt been able to in more than a decade.

Buchholz has a plus curve. It is a kneebuckler. I dont know where you get that.

Zambrano is a headcase. Whats you take on the guy? Big arm, no brain is my point. See Farnsworth.

Newman4
04-30-2006, 11:34 PM
If Suppan and Ponson are considered Redsesque pitchers, then the Reds would have a good pitching staff.

Redsesque?

Bronson Arroyo Career ERA 4.46 OPS Agnst .754

Brandon Claussen 4.80 .811

Aaron Harang 4.50 .783

Eric Milton 5.01 .779

Jeff Suppan 4.67 .786

Jason Marquis 4.18 .761

Sidney Ponson 4.78 .781

Anyone see any similarities?

SteelSD
04-30-2006, 11:36 PM
When I saw him in the minors he hit 92 with accuracy and regularity. I don't know, maybe he's incapable now or the surgery robbed him of his fastball. That's a possibility. All I know is that he's difficult for teams to hit so far in the majors. As well as pre-surgery in A and high-A.

I'd suggest that he's been difficult for teams to hit effectively thusfar because teams think his lower-velocity sinking fastball looks mighty tasty early in the count and swing at it. After the league figures out that he doesn't have enough command of it to throw it for strikes consistently, look for the smart hitters to leave his fastball alone and sit on a curve that'll hang with good regularity.

Astrobuddy
04-30-2006, 11:36 PM
Matty wont see any.

Astrobuddy
04-30-2006, 11:38 PM
Steel, how do you come up with this opinion?

SteelSD
04-30-2006, 11:47 PM
Maddux cant throw 95 and hasnt been able to in more than a decade.

Buchholz has a plus curve. It is a kneebuckler. I dont know where you get that.

Zambrano is a headcase. Whats you take on the guy? Big arm, no brain is my point. See Farnsworth.

1. I've seen Maddux throw a few 95 MPH fastballs up in the zone during his best seasons. It's one of the reasons he was the most amazing pitcher I've ever seen- he could be a different pitcher depending on who he needed to be at any particular time.

2. A "plus" curve is not a "kneebuckler". A "kneebuckler" is a plus-plus curve. It's something Tom Gordon and Brandon Webb possess. It's something Buchholz doesn't.

3. What does Zambrano being a "headcase" have to do with this discussion? Over the past three seasons, Zambrano has been nothing short of amazing and amazingly consistent. Nothing you can say could possibly denigrate how good the guy has been.

Astrobuddy
04-30-2006, 11:54 PM
Wow.. we will just have to agree to disagree and probably stop here.

But if you wish to research, read the scouting reports on Buchholz.

I will also add this... Zambrano hasnt been anywhere near amazingly anything, let alone just short of it. He has been good, but he hasnt been consistant. Being a headcase is the reason WHY. 7 runs one game, shutout the next. That isnt consistancy. PLUS, he WILL hurt someone someday losing his cool and hitting a batter.

Roy Oswalt is amazingly consistant, not Carlos Zambrano who by the way is the definition of a punk.

M2
05-01-2006, 12:01 AM
Steel and Caveat have pretty much covered my impressions of Buchholz. His stuff isn't that great and soon enough MLB hitters will learn to lay off the vast array of pitches he can't put in the strikezone.

I said it before and I'll say it again, Roger Salkeld and Mo Sanford had brief flourishes and they had benders every bit as good as Buchholz's. The best curve I ever saw belonged to Rod Nichols, which goes to the heart of what's wrong with Buchholz. The most gorgeous curve in the world doesn't mean squat unless you know how to throw the ace.

As for this Buchholz vs. Wainwright side topic that's arisen, I think it's hysterical that anyone would give Buchholz a waltz because of his injuries, but then ignore Wainwright's.

They were both highly-regarded prospects, Wainwright the more highly regarded. They both struggled with injuries around the same time. They entered pro baseball the same year, they're the same age and they've pitched roughly the same number of innings. Overall, Wainwright's pitched better. That may not be what folks who've got a burr in their butt about the Braves and/or the Cardinals want to hear, but it's true. Of the two, Wainwright's superior at making hitters swing and miss and he gives up less power.

Seems to me that if you think Wainwright's going belly up, then you should be convinced Buchholz is going to do it.

SteelSD
05-01-2006, 12:13 AM
Wow.. we will just have to agree to disagree and probably stop here.

But if you wish to research, read the scouting reports on Buchholz.

Ah, I'm wrong because you think I don't do research. That's rich considering how often you've been dead flat wrong around here.


I will also add this... Zambrano hasnt been anywhere near amazingly anything, let alone just short of it. He has been good, but he hasnt been consistant. Being a headcase is the reason WHY. 7 runs one game, shutout the next. That isnt consistancy. PLUS, he WILL hurt someone someday losing his cool and hitting a batter.

Roy Oswalt is amazingly consistant, not Carlos Zambrano who by the way is the definition of a punk.

Yeah? Here ya' go...Value Over Replacement Player (VORP):

Carlos Zambrano:

2003: 47.6 VORP
2004: 62.8 VORP
2005: 51.2 VORP

TOTAL: 161.6 VORP

Roy Oswalt:

2003: 33.3 VORP
2004: 51.1 VORP
2005: 65.1 VORP

TOTAL: 149.5 VORP

Imagine that. Zambrano is exactly as consistently productive as Roy Oswalt and has been more productive overall than Oswalt from 2003-2005. And no, the fact that Oswalt wasn't able to make all his starts in 2003 is not a point in his favor.

But if you wish to research "consistent", there are plenty of web sites with exceptionally reliable performance numbers so you may do so at your leisure.

Astrobuddy
05-01-2006, 12:17 AM
Easy Steel.

I am not accusing you of being wrong. I only asked you to read the scouting reports that state that Buchholz will have a top 4 of 5 Curve in MLB. Thats all.


Who would you rather have ? Oswalt or Zambrano? Zambrano is a good pitcher. I may have overstated a bit, but he is no Roy Oswalt. Oswalt won 20 games last season on a team with NO offense. Zambrano has the tools to be the best in the game, but his head gets in the way.

SteelSD
05-01-2006, 12:23 AM
Easy Steel.

I am not accusing you of being wrong. I only asked you to read the scouting reports that state that Buchholz will have a top 4 of 5 Curve in MLB. Thats all.

Who would you rather have ? Oswalt or Zambrano? Zambrano is a good pitcher. I may have overstated a bit, but he is no Roy Oswalt. Oswalt won 20 games last season on a team with NO offense. Zambrano has the tools to be the best in the game, but his head gets in the way.

Dude, you're the one who started with the Carlos Zambrano denigration and now we've determined that, between Zambrano and Oswalt, Zambrano has been the more productive pitcher recently.

If the pitchers' teams were reversed and Zambrano wore an Astro uniform, you'd defend him as "colorful" rather than calling him a "head case".

In the end it boils down to performance and Carlos Zambrano has been the better of the two over the past three years. And all before the age of 25 for about half the price. I don't say that to downgrade how good Roy Oswalt is. But you've severely underestimated exactly how good Carlos Zambrano has been.

Astrobuddy
05-01-2006, 12:39 AM
Ok, You have just lost all credibility. Oswalt is a back to back 20 game winner and you say that Zambrano has been more productive. Oswalt is arguably the best pitcher in the NL the last 2 seasons. Zambrano isnt even in the argument.

Zambrano has not been more productive regardless of what your VORP tells you. Are you claiming Oswalt won his games on the heels of that great Astros offense? Thats laughable.

Sorry man, but I imagine that most in here will agree with me on this one. Oswalt is the better of the 2.

I dont like Zambrano and wouldnt like him in an Astros uniform unless he got his emotions under control.


By the way... are you a Cubs fan? You actually seem insulted that I dont care for Zambrano.

M2
05-01-2006, 01:03 AM
Zambrano has not been more productive regardless of what your VORP tells you.

Wow, Steel's got his his own VORP!

Meanwhile, I guess we're supposed to ignore objective information because someone who calls himself Astrobuddy thinks Roy Oswalt's the bee's knees.

SteelSD
05-01-2006, 01:05 AM
Ok, You have just lost all credibility. Oswalt is a back to back 20 game winner and you say that Zambrano has been more productive. Oswalt is arguably the best pitcher in the NL the last 2 seasons. Zambrano isnt even in the argument.

Zambrano has not been more productive regardless of what your VORP tells you. Are you claiming Oswalt won his games on the heels of that great Astros offense? Thats laughable.

Carlos Zambrano has been more productive over the past three years than has Roy Oswalt. There's no question about it. The moment you say, "regardless of the facts" (and make no mistake- that's what you're saying), you're done.


Sorry man, but I imagine that most in here will agree with me on this one. Oswalt is the better of the 2.

Imagine a scenario in which multiple reasonable people are all wrong yet agree with a single unreasonable individual.

Doesn't make any of them right. Over the past three seasons, Carlos Zambrano has been more productive than Roy Oswalt. Them's the undeniable facts, and they're not going to change because an unreasonable individual claims that any number of reasonable people would agree with his erroneous premise.


I dont like Zambrano and wouldnt like him in an Astros uniform unless he got his emotions under control.

The moment he put on an Astros uniform, you'd eat him up like a starving feral cat scarfing a fresh can of tuna.


By the way... are you a Cubs fan? You actually seem insulted that I dont care for Zambrano.

You not personally caring for Carlos Zambrano on an emotional level isn't something I care about. You being completely wrong about Carlos Zambrano's performance is another matter.

At this point, it appears your argument is that Taylor Buchholz is really awesome because Carlos Zambrano isn't anywhere near as good as Roy Oswalt. This, of course, is what we call the "Chewbacca Defense".

Not a place you want to be when faced with someone who deals in facts.

SteelSD
05-01-2006, 01:09 AM
Wow, Steel's got his his own VORP!

Well, Raisor's got his own Pythag, so I gotta have something I guess.

MWM
05-01-2006, 08:59 AM
Ah, the old 20-game winner argument.

http://www.christiansportsminute.com/images/kent_bottenfield_2.jpg

MattyHo4Life
05-01-2006, 09:10 AM
Redsesque?

Bronson Arroyo Career ERA 4.46 OPS Agnst .754

Brandon Claussen 4.80 .811

Aaron Harang 4.50 .783

Eric Milton 5.01 .779

Jeff Suppan 4.67 .786

Jason Marquis 4.18 .761

Sidney Ponson 4.78 .781

Anyone see any similarities?


This is an instance of using only the stats that benefit your arguement and ignoring the rest. If you are asking me if Suppan was a Redsesque pitcher (whatever that means) before he became a Cardinall, then I would probably agree with you. His AL pitching stats leave a lot to be desired. In the last few years, he has become a much better pitcher. I couldn't care less what he did 8 years ago... how does that have anything to do with what kind of pitcher he is today? If you look at career stats, like you just did, then you would come to the conclusion that Matt Morris is a better pitcher than Jeff Suppan. That would have been true 3 or 4 years ago, but Matt Morris is a different pitcher now too. You and Astrobuddy can believe that the Cardinals pitchers aren't very good if you want. Bottom line is that the Cardinals pitching staff is the second best in the NL, and has been the one of the best for the last few years. The Reds would be unbeatable with the Cardinals pitching staff.

MattyHo4Life
05-01-2006, 09:57 AM
They were both highly-regarded prospects, Wainwright the more highly regarded. They both struggled with injuries around the same time. They entered pro baseball the same year, they're the same age and they've pitched roughly the same number of innings. Overall, Wainwright's pitched better. That may not be what folks who've got a burr in their butt about the Braves and/or the Cardinals want to hear, but it's true. Of the two, Wainwright's superior at making hitters swing and miss and he gives up less power.

Shhhhhhh...you aren't supposed to say anything good about a Cardinal here. ;)

flyer85
05-01-2006, 10:03 AM
After seeing Buchholz in person yesterday I am not drinking the kool-aid until he starts missing more bats. To this point his success has been built on being BABIP(below 15% at the moment) lucky which is going to normalize in the near future.

flyer85
05-01-2006, 10:06 AM
I'm at a loss about this guy -- his minor league numbers are thoroughly middling. He has simply been unbelievably BABIP lucky so far. No way anything close to the ~15% hit rate will continue.

OnBaseMachine
05-01-2006, 10:14 AM
Keep an eye on Wainwright this year, and be prepared to be impressed.

I'll do that, however, judging from his minor league stats, I suspect he'll leave me disappointed.

I'll say the same thing about Wainwright as I did with Buchholz - I just don't see either of them becoming anything more than No. 4 starters in the game. He's just been too hittable for my liking over the last two years. I'll tell you a pitcher who I do like in the Cards organization, is Anthony Reyes. I think he will eventually settle in as a very solid No. 2 starter in the major leagues.

As for Buchholz, I was more impressed by his start vs the Pirates, but then I went back and watched it again and came away less impressed. His curveball isn't as good as I thought it was. I would rank it on the level of Matt Belisle's.

flyer85
05-01-2006, 10:23 AM
right now as a reliever Wainwright has a k/9 of 8.49 and a BB rate of ~2.5. If he could keep those rates as a starter he would be successful. However, there will be a lot of doubt until he does it.

Right now Buchholz has a K rate of 4.79 and a BB rate of ~3. There is no way he continues his success without a sizeable bump in the K rate. His BABIP good luck is about to run out.

Falls City Beer
05-01-2006, 11:20 AM
Okay, a lot of you guys have seen Buchholz more recently than I have, and consensus seems to be that he's lost his pre-surgery fastball. I'll have to amend my opinion of him then; he looked great in high-A, when I last saw him in person. He must have lost a lot of it. So much for my prediction.

But I agree with OBM about Wainwright, whom I've seen live very recently: he could be a decent reliever, but until he gets an out pitch and a third pitch, he's all fastball, and a non-scintillating fastball at that.

Astrobuddy
05-01-2006, 11:51 AM
He's just fine Falls. You and Matty are dead on with your opinions.

MattyHo4Life
05-01-2006, 01:30 PM
He's just fine Falls. You and Matty are dead on with your opinions.

What? I've said all along that I like the guy.

Cedric
05-01-2006, 01:36 PM
I was at the game yesterday and I was quite impressed. He threw 91 regularly and his fastball jumps from his hand. A very stress free delivery. His control of his breaking ball was impeccable also. He pitched to the corners and low in the zone all game.