PDA

View Full Version : 1-2 punch: Harang and Arroyo



TOBTTReds
07-26-2006, 12:19 AM
Only one other team in the NL has two pitchers in the top 15 in ERA (Mets: Pedro (3.45) and Glavine (3.69))

Arroyo is 2.92 (3rd)
Harang is 3.72 (14th)

Pedro and Glavines ERA together is 3.58
Arroyo and Harang ERA together is 3.31

Although Pedro's other numbers are better than these three, he is still giving up more runs than Arroyo.

Does this make our two the best 1-2 punch in the NL?

Also, they have pitch a combined 280.1 innings compared to 238.1 for the Mets duo.

Too bad we don't have good 4 or 5 guys. The Lizard has a good ERA of 4.43 and is easily our number 3 starter these days.

I like this though, 2 ace-like pitchers on the Reds staff...who knew!?

kaldaniels
07-26-2006, 12:55 AM
I so much look forward to Harang and Arroyo's games, then I cross my fingers for the next 3.

RedFanAlways1966
07-26-2006, 07:47 AM
I like this though, 2 ace-like pitchers on the Reds staff...who knew!?

Good stuff, Aves. And what did it take to get these two starters? Hmmmm....

Uh, Jose Guillen. And, uh... Wily Mo Pena.

Anyone out there willing to admit that they were mad as a hornet's nest when the REDS traded Jose Guillen on July 29, 2003 (also Miley's 1st game as REDS manager) to the Oakland A's? And what has Jose Guillen done (not incl. temper tantrums) since then? I believe he has been on 3 teams and more-or-less was thrown off 1 of those teams.

Jose and Wily Mo who? Jose and Wily Mo what? :devil:

Pitching, pitching, pitching. Nice to have some decent pitching. Nice to be alive for a playoff spot as July comes to an end. :thumbup:

redsmetz
07-26-2006, 07:59 AM
The top two of our rotation plus the snake bit Elizardo is why I believe we stand good chances should we make it to the playoffs. Over a short series, you can get some good outings out of those arms. Likewise, depending on where we're playing away, Milton works as well too.

I was fine with the trade the first time Harang pitched. I just looked it up on Retrosheet - it was 8/9/03 and he went 5.2 innings 3 ER, 6 Ks in a winning effort.

[In a side note, while fishing for that this I saw a name on in the boxscores that I didn't recall at all - Mark Budzinski - he played with the Reds for a week (8/3 to 8/9) in four games. Disappeared after that. Probably in the witness protection program.]

oneupper
07-26-2006, 08:00 AM
Take out Harang and Arroyo and the REDS starters' ERA is 5.80!!!

That almost a run worse than the much maligned bullpen even BEFORE the trade.

1) Looks like the most pressing need was NOT addressed by said trade.
2) How can JN justify leaving starters 3/5 long into games?

M2
07-26-2006, 08:10 AM
The one thing Arroyo reminded me of earlier this year was the immense power of something big gone right.

A starter who can throw 200+ IP with a sub-4.00 ERA is an immensely powerful weapon. Harang might also become the first Reds pitcher since Jose Rijo in 1993 to top the 200 K mark.

Last night was a perfect example of what a quality pitcher can do for a team. If a team like the Astros puts forth a lineup as pathetic as the one it fielded last night, a pitcher like Harang wrecks it. It's not even a baseball game, it's a nine inning foregone conclusion.

One more guy like these two and, IMO, the Reds would be a shoo-in for the playoffs.

RedFanAlways1966
07-26-2006, 08:10 AM
I was fine with the trade the first time Harang pitched. I just looked it up on Retrosheet - it was 8/9/03 and he went 5.2 innings 3 ER, 6 Ks in a winning effort.

Yep... as a matter of fact Aaron Harang won his 1st 3 starts as a REDS pitcher in 2003.

In that 1st start on Aug. 9 @ San Diego:
* The infamous (and beloved here at RZ) Reggie Taylor hit a grand slam!
* The REDS struckout 15 times in the game (Oliver Perez started for the Pads).
* Larkin was 3-for-4, Casey 3-for-5, Larson 2-for-4 (2RBI), Jimenez 2-for-4 (3 runs). Who were these guys?!?

Harang's 2nd start was a game in which he outdueled Brandon Webb as the REDS won 3-2. His 3rd start was a game in which he outdueled some no-named pitcher (Randy Johnson) and the REDS won 2-0.

A nice trade made by the 2 asst. GMs at the time. Jimbo was fired the day before this trade was made... he only likes 5-toolers, right?

redsmetz
07-26-2006, 08:15 AM
It was clear almost right out of the shoot that we picked up two pretty good pitchers (Claussen and Harang) and that Harang was the top one. I keep hoping that Claussen will return to his promise, but it's been three years. But if he did, we'd have a very good staff of Harang, Arroy, Ramierez, Claussen and Milton (and Milton looks good as a 5th starter). Now, the last three are "ifs", but we can still dream, right?

15fan
07-26-2006, 08:59 AM
and Milton looks good as a 5th starter.

No sir.

Since signing with DanO, Milton has pitched 286.2 innings for the Reds. He has given up 338 hits, 59 HRs and 195 earned runs in those innings.

That's a 6.12 ERA over a season and a half of work.

The only time that "Eric Milton" and "good" should be used in the same sentence is:

Eric Milton is NOT a good pitcher.

The fact that Eric Milton is getting $9 million a year to "pitch" ranks up there with the Texas decision to give Chan Ho Park a million bazillion dollars and an 82 year contract as one of the worst pitcher signings ever.

redsmetz
07-26-2006, 09:12 AM
The 2006 Milton currently looks better than either Joe Mays or Dave Williams. If we had Claussen and Ramierez pitching at their best, Eric Milton this year looks superb as a 5th starter. This isn't to debate the initial signing which certainly was a mistake. But it's a mistake we're stuck with and I'd take the 2006 Milton (which is different than last year's version) as the #5 guy over the other two we've run out there thus far.

M2
07-26-2006, 09:21 AM
Wow, a 5.47 ERA now counts as superb. I've got to get down with this new math.

Steve4192
07-26-2006, 09:41 AM
The 2006 Milton currently looks better than either Joe Mays or Dave Williams.

... and pickled hog balls look more appetizing than a steaming pile of vomit. That doesn't make them a tasty treat.

Eric Milton has been horrid as a Red. He was craptastic in 2005 and he has been slightly less craptastic in 2006. In no way, shape, or form has Eric Milton ever been 'superb' in a Reds uniform.

redsmetz
07-26-2006, 09:49 AM
Wow, a 5.47 ERA now counts as superb. I've got to get down with this new math.

Compared to what we've had out there, yes it would be "superb"

Joe Mays 0-5 8.70 ERA (I'm not sure what the Royals/Reds breakdown is.
Dave Williams 2-3 7.20 ERA

Compare that to our division

Houston: Backe 1-1 4.50 ERA
Chicago: Marmal 3-4 4.50 ERA
St. Louis: Weaver 4-11 6.32 ERA
Milwaukee: Davis 6-6 5.01 ERA*
Pirates: Santos 4-7 5.28 ERA

* On the depth chart on MLB.com, they list Ohka as the #5 - that might be the order, but he's more likely their #2.

Elsewhere in the league:

New York Mets: Pelfrey 2-1 5.28 ERA
San Francisco: J. Wright 6-8 5.03 ERA
Arizona: Juan Cruz 3-5 4.95 ERA

Assuming that Claussen can return to what he's capable of doing (and I grant that is a BIG "if"), getting Ramierez some more support and luck, I'd take a rotation that I stated earlier with Milton as the #5. Perhaps "superb" overstates it (I'm backpedaling here), but it's better than what we've run out there.

15fan
07-26-2006, 09:52 AM
Milton's lines (IP / ER) from his last 5 starts:

6.0 / 3
6.1 / 5
6.0 / 3
7.0 / 7
6.2 / 4

That's 22 ER in 32 innings for a 6.19 ERA.

Back it up and go with Milty's last 7 starts, and you'll see starts of 4.1 IP / 6 ER and 5.1 IP / 6 ER. That brings him up to 34 ER in his last 41.2 IP, for an ERA of 7.35.

Let's take off those Milton goggles you're wearing and go get you a cup of coffee and something to eat. You're chasing the most heinous tail that has strolled into the bar in a looooooong time.

M2
07-26-2006, 09:57 AM
Compared to what we've had out there, yes it would be "superb"

Joe Mays 0-5 8.70 ERA (I'm not sure what the Royals/Reds breakdown is.
Dave Williams 2-3 7.20 ERA

Compare that to our division

Houston: Backe 1-1 4.50 ERA
Chicago: Marmal 3-4 4.50 ERA
St. Louis: Weaver 4-11 6.32 ERA
Milwaukee: Davis 6-6 5.01 ERA*
Pirates: Santos 4-7 5.28 ERA

* On the depth chart on MLB.com, they list Ohka as the #5 - that might be the order, but he's more likely their #2.

Elsewhere in the league:

New York Mets: Pelfrey 2-1 5.28 ERA
San Francisco: J. Wright 6-8 5.03 ERA
Arizona: Juan Cruz 3-5 4.95 ERA

Assuming that Claussen can return to what he's capable of doing (and I grant that is a BIG "if"), getting Ramierez some more support and luck, I'd take a rotation that I stated earlier with Milton as the #5. Perhaps "superb" overstates it (I'm backpedaling here), but it's better than what we've run out there.

So what you've found is that pretty much every team has a better #5 starter than Eric Milton. I'd say you need to pay attention to your own findings.

Cyclone792
07-26-2006, 10:02 AM
Eric Milton is a horrible, horrible pitcher. The only thing he excels at on the mound is giving up home runs, giving up loads of runs altogether, heavily diminishing your team's chances of winning with every start and sending Redleg Nation spiraling into a manic depressive state.


Milton 2005 vs. Milton 2006

2005 K/9 = 5.94 (ugly)
2006 K/9 = 5.47 (uglier)

2005 BB/9 = 2.51 (decent)
2006 BB/9 = 2.51 (decent)

2005 HR/9 = 1.93 (about as bad as it gets)
2006 HR/9 = 1.70 (almost about as bad as it gets)

2005 BABIP = .329 (unlucky)
2006 BABIP = .270 (lucky)

Milton's full run differential in ERA this season vs. last (5.47 in 2006 vs. 6.47 in 2005) is due almost entirely to BABIP hit luck. If that luck disappears, he'll be right back where he was last season, and that was about as ugly as it gets. Just think about that for a second: Eric Milton has been lucky to post a 5.47 ERA so far this season.

The chances of Eric Milton resembling anything better than lousy are about the same as the chances of Ken Shamrock ever knocking out Tito Ortiz. It just isn't going to happen.

It sure will be interesting if this team is able to make the playoffs, especially if the rotation doesn't see any significant changes. Harang or Arroyo plus our offense is an excellent formula for winning playoff games. Unfortunately, Milton on the mound during playoff games would just send out a search team for the lost treasure of white flags.

redsmetz
07-26-2006, 10:36 AM
Let's take off those Milton goggles you're wearing and go get you a cup of coffee and something to eat. You're chasing the most heinous tail that has strolled into the bar in a looooooong time.

Call it what you want, but the cold hard reality is that we're stuck Eric Milton. Yes it was a horrible signing, but we're not going to DFA an $8 Million salary as much as people dream day and night of that happening. Given his history particularly last year, but also this year, and given his salary level, there is little chance we're going to be able to trade him. That's not to say there is NO chance, but any chance is slim, to say the least.

Again, listen to what I'm saying. Given what we've sent out there this year (Williams and Mays), he's better than either of them. Regarding the later comment from another poster about proving almost everyone else has a better #5 starter, I wasn't saying they don't. I'm saying in some of the cases, he's not much worse, and in the case of St. Louis, he's better than their number #5.

People, we can talk on RedZone until we're blue in the face about how lousy Milton has been and what a lousy signing it was, he's here to stay for the duration of his contract. If we can say the staff is good enough that he's our Number 5, then the staff is markedly improved. They list him as No. 3 on the MLB.com depth chart. I'd say right now he's the 4th behind Ramierez. He's going to be in the rotation for the next year and a half. I'd like to think we can have a staff where he's the worst.

Steve4192
07-26-2006, 10:54 AM
Regarding the later comment from another poster about proving almost everyone else has a better #5 starter, I wasn't saying they don't. I'm saying in some of the cases, he's not much worse, and in the case of St. Louis, he's better than their number #5.

Which would be fine if Eric Milton were the Reds #5 starter. Problem is, he is the Reds #3 starter (and he is getting paid like a #1 starter). The fairy dust that someone sprinkled on Claussen last year has worn off completely, and the Lizard's supply of fairy dust is also running very short (6.03 ERA in last 6 GS). Arroyo and Harang have been spectacular in stabilizing the front end of the Reds rotation, but the back end is still a mess.

Krivsky needs to add a couple of arms to rotation before you can compare Milton to other teams #5 starters.

redsmetz
07-26-2006, 11:05 AM
Which would be fine if Eric Milton were the Reds #5 starter. Problem is, he is the Reds #3 starter (and he is getting paid like a #1 starter). The fairy dust that someone sprinkled on Claussen last year has worn off completely, and the Lizard's supply of fairy dust is also running very short (6.03 ERA in last 6 GS). Arroyo and Harang have been spectacular in stabilizing the front end of the Reds rotation, but the back end is still a mess.

Krivsky needs to add a couple of arms to rotation before you can compare Milton to other teams #5 starters.

No disputing that. I did begin my point about Milton with a significant caveat, the hope that Claussen can return to form and that Remierez might get a little luck/support (I still think Ramierez has the makings of a good starting pitcher). As I said in my last post, since Milton is likely not going anywhere,the goal for the next year and half is for the rotation to get to the point where he's clearly the Number 5. I absolulutely expect WK to address starting pitching in the off season. And the 2008 we can look at a Milton free rotation.

Steve4192
07-26-2006, 11:08 AM
the hope that Claussen can return to form
Unfortunately, I think he has.

IMO, last year was a mirage.

princeton
07-26-2006, 11:18 AM
Milton goggles you're wearing and go get you a cup of coffee and something to eat. You're chasing the most heinous tail that has strolled into the bar in a looooooong time.

I suppose.

yet I look at the matchups for the day and if it's Milton, I find that I am relieved that it's not Joe Mays/Dave Williams.

I guess it's that Milton is less apt to drown the bullpen too. Milton's a chronic pain; Mays is a ruptured aorta

registerthis
07-26-2006, 11:43 AM
I guess it's that Milton is less apt to drown the bullpen too. Milton's a chronic pain; Mays is a ruptured aorta

:laugh: OK, seriously, the analogies being used on this board are just...wow.

15fan
07-26-2006, 11:59 AM
I suppose.

yet I look at the matchups for the day and if it's Milton, I find that I am relieved that it's not Joe Mays/Dave Williams.

That's kind of like finding out you "just" have gonorrhea instead of herpes or syphallis.

redsmetz
07-26-2006, 12:02 PM
Unfortunately, I think he has.

IMO, last year was a mirage.

Sometimes the Redszone is just the sunniest place on the face of the earth.

redsmetz
07-26-2006, 12:09 PM
I thought I'd bring this back to the original point


Does this make our two the best 1-2 punch in the NL?

That is probably true and it's sweet to say it!

Steve4192
07-26-2006, 12:44 PM
Sometimes the Redszone is just the sunniest place on the face of the earth.
I'm not trying to be 'Debbie Downer', but I like to realistic about these things. I learned my lesson after drinking the Osvaldo Fernandez kool-aid in the spring of 2001 and the Luke Hudson kool-aid last spring.

I hope Claussen can turn into the league average starter that he was in 2005, but I am not holding my breath. Everything else in his MLB career and his post-surgery minor league career suggests 2005 was the outlier, not this year.

VR
07-26-2006, 01:35 PM
I suppose.

yet I look at the matchups for the day and if it's Milton, I find that I am relieved that it's not Joe Mays/Dave Williams.

I guess it's that Milton is less apt to drown the bullpen too. Milton's a chronic pain; Mays is a ruptured aorta

Eric Milton might be the best pitcher in the Major Leagues right now. Problem is, he might also be the worst pitcher in the majors right now.

By the time he gets to 60 pitches, opponents have ripped him for a
.189 average, .235 obp, and .350 slugging. That's a .585 OPS. Oh, and a .59 whip.

Problem is, he gets past pitches 1-60, and as you all can relive in your recent memories, it gets ugly, and fast.

Last year he was equally horrible in the beginning and the end, so maybe the guy has turned a corner with his legs this year.....he just hasn't turned it all the way.

It is time for Jerry to stop trying to stretch him out, however, and get the guy on the shortest leash of any starter. I'd take 5 strong innings and then the pen out of the #5 guy for now.....pretty good chance at w's.

M2
07-26-2006, 01:38 PM
I'm all for 5 IP and out with Milton, though I suspect he's going to start getting hit harder earlier.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-26-2006, 01:44 PM
Now that they no longer have to worry about what do long-term with Lopez and Kearns, the first order of business this off-season, better be locking down Harang for the next 4 years.

They would be smart to do it now, before he solidifies a season full of the traditional bean-counting number's (Wins, K's) and he's prices himself out of town.

4 years - 20 million? Is that doable?

It is nice to realize we have Harang and Arroyo through 2008 at the minimum.

Throw in a Bailey, another year or growth for Elizardo, a Milton trade sometime in 2007 (or move to the pen), a decent free agent signing of a quality #3 or #4 in the off-season, and we may have the makings of one of the better rotations in baseball.

Chip R
07-26-2006, 01:49 PM
Now that they no longer have to worry about what do long-term with Lopez and Kearns, the first order of business this off-season, better be locking down Harang for the next 4 years.

They would be smart to do it now, before he solidifies a season full of the traditional bean-counting number's (Wins, K's) and he's prices himself out of town.

4 years - 20 million? Is that doable?


Sure, for the Reds. If I were Harang and they came to me with a $5M per year deal, I'd laugh in their face. If he's your #1 starter he should be paid like one.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-26-2006, 01:57 PM
Sure, for the Reds. If I were Harang and they came to me with a $5M per year deal, I'd laugh in their face. If he's your #1 starter he should be paid like one.

Yes, I though that was a tad low as well. Ok, how about 4 years - 27 M?

He makes 2.3 M in 2006.

New contract pays:

5.5 M in 2007
6.5 M in 2008
7 M in 2009
8 M in 2010

Chip R
07-26-2006, 01:59 PM
Yes, I though that was a tad low as well. Ok, how about 4 years - 27 M?

He makes 2.3 M in 2006.

New contract pays:

5.5 M in 2007
6.5 M in 2008
7 M in 2009
8 M in 2010

I think he'd like that much better.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-26-2006, 02:00 PM
I think he'd like that much better.

Yes, and the Reds are paying a steep price for not being more proactive early in the game.

Could have had him much cheaper last winter.

Chip R
07-26-2006, 02:07 PM
Yes, and the Reds are paying a steep price for not being more proactive early in the game.

Could have had him much cheaper last winter.

Yep. But in their defense, you didn't know if last year was a fluke or his arm would fall off this year. Large revenue teams like BOS can sign a guy like Arroyo to a multi year deal because they bring in so much money, if Arroyo flopped it's nothing to them. Smaller revenue teams like the Reds have to be more careful. What I have been a proponent of doing is signing guys to 4-5 year deals and backloading the money after the 3rd year but make sure there's a club or mutual option after year 3 as well. That way if the guy's arm falls off or he stinks, you are only out the first 3 years and at a decent price too.

registerthis
07-26-2006, 02:13 PM
I think he'd like that much better.

That'd be fine with me as well...of course we're just making up numbers at this point, but we've heard for years how important it is for the Reds ot have a legitimate #1 starter. In Harang, it looks like we have found just that. Now we have to try to keep him, an dthe Reds will find out how much that legitimate #1 starter costs. I hope they're prepared to pay it.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-26-2006, 02:16 PM
And I have no problem with the gamble of throwing 27 M at Harang (over 4 years), considering we've paid Milton the same amount for one less year.

TOBTTReds
07-26-2006, 02:45 PM
Yep. But in their defense, you didn't know if last year was a fluke or his arm would fall off this year. Large revenue teams like BOS can sign a guy like Arroyo to a multi year deal because they bring in so much money, if Arroyo flopped it's nothing to them. Smaller revenue teams like the Reds have to be more careful. What I have been a proponent of doing is signing guys to 4-5 year deals and backloading the money after the 3rd year but make sure there's a club or mutual option after year 3 as well. That way if the guy's arm falls off or he stinks, you are only out the first 3 years and at a decent price too.

I'm sure the players would sign this in a second...

Obviously I like your idea, but BOS did the LT deal with Arroyo but it wasn't a HUGE price tag, you know? But I think Harang and Arroyo are two guys that look to have solid arms. Harang has flawless and effort less mechanics it seems, he is no Ryan Wagner. I'd be willing to offer him LT after his next loss (bid low)!