PDA

View Full Version : Could Homer Bailey HAVE gotten this team over the hump?



Matt700wlw
09-28-2006, 04:30 PM
Think about how close this team was/is....

What if Homer Bailey had gotten the starts that were given to someone who was not deserving, say, Chris Machalak, or the 5th starter spot which was sometimes skipped or spot started.

Homer Bailey couldn't have won 4 or 5 games that these guys were unable to? 4 probably would have been enough...that's it...that's all it would have taken.

Hell, even if he got a no decision on 1 or 2 or there and kept the games within reach....

I think he could have.

edabbs44
09-28-2006, 04:33 PM
Think about how close this team was....

What if Homer Bailey had gotten the starts that were given to someone who was not deserving, say, Chris Machalak, or the 5th starter spot which was sometimes skipped or spot started.

Homer Bailey couldn't have won 4 or 5 games that these guys couldn't? 4 probably would have been enough...that's it...that's all it would have taken.

Hell, even if he got a no decision here or there and kept the games within reach....

I think he could have.

Agreed. The rejects they kept trotting out there in August and September have been embarrassing, at best. I hope this "veteran who knows how to win" thing gets trashed this offseason.

Danny Serafini
09-28-2006, 04:47 PM
No.

Let's take Michalak, since he was brought up. Michalak made 6 starts for the team. He got the win 9/22 vs. the Cubs. He left the 8/23 game vs. Houston with the lead. The bullpen blew it, but it wasn't his fault. The Reds were shut out during Michalak's loss to the Cubs on 9/16, so unless Homer could find a way to allow negative runs there's nothing he could've done there. That just leaves three starts (PHI 8/18, LA 8/28, FLA 9/27) where Bailey could've made a difference. With the Reds 3 1/2 back right now, they're not even close enough for that to have made a difference. Plus that assumes that Bailey would've helped win all three of those games, and not lost the game Michalak won. That's too much to assume, espcially from a 20 year old AA pitcher.

The Reds problem wasn't having one bad pitcher, it was having multiple bad pitchers.

Heath
09-28-2006, 04:47 PM
IMO, I think he could have been Brian Reithed and shell-shocked to the nth degree.

I think they are doing the right thing with the kid.

They just have to figure it out with the middle rounder pitching prospects.

Will M
09-28-2006, 04:54 PM
to get out butts kicked in a first round playoff sweep?

The Reds are very average this year.

I do feel very optomistic about the future.

Bailey, Votto,etc will be here when the team feels they are ready

RedsManRick
09-28-2006, 04:56 PM
Let's assume a few things:

1.) The best pitchers put you in a position to win 80% of the time.
2.) The worst pitchers do the same 20% of the time.
3.) Homer Bailey would've been one of these "best" pitchers
4.) He would've been replacing one of these "worst" pitchers

So given all of these things, Homer would have had to have taken 10 starts to make a 6 game difference. I think the only fair assumption there is point 4. The best pitchers (other than maybe Santana) aren't THAT good, and that the worst pitchers (even Michalak) aren't THAT bad. So saying 10 starts would've made that much difference is probably a stretch.

Even given 10 starts, you're probably talking 2-3 games at best. Absolute best case scenario the answer is yes, barely. Worst case scenario, let's not go down that road, but it's not good. Chances are, no.

jmac
09-28-2006, 05:30 PM
whether he could've helped,I dont know but it shows how much this team needs a "good..top tier" #3 starter to go with harang and BA.
if you want to call harang and/or BA #1's or #2's, that is up to you, but i think harang,BA and a pitcher of similar quality would have definitely won this division even with our problems scoring runs of late.

RedFanAlways1966
09-28-2006, 06:00 PM
This is a good question... in hindsight. However, no one expected the Cards to go on a major losing streak in the last two weeks of the season. Septemebr 17 and the REDS are 7 games back and most are rooting for their fav football teams or getting their leaf-blower ready for the season. Then... the Cards drop 7 in a row.

I am glad Homer and his confidence stayed put.

Always Red
09-28-2006, 06:40 PM
The Reds problem wasn't having one bad pitcher, it was having multiple bad pitchers.

That's the crux of the problem, right there.:thumbup:

If Homer had come up and pitched to MLB players like he did to AA players, it may have helped, certainly. But he can't pitch all the innings.

Jr's Boy
09-28-2006, 06:43 PM
Heck yeah he could have helped.

TeamSelig
09-28-2006, 07:01 PM
You never know, he could have made a huge splash. If he wasn't up there in IP, I would have been more for him coming up, but I don't think it would have been that great of an idea.

steig
09-28-2006, 09:15 PM
IMO...Bailey could have helped the team in september but he could not have gotten the team over the hump. This team is not on the verge of the hump, they need to win 3 games just to finish .500. A .500 team does not win championships and ususally has several holes to fill. Pitching a major problem with the Reds this year but offense was just as important after The Trade. Bailey could have pitched great but only gotten 1 or 2 runs of support and then lost the games. The Reds also gave up on the division long ago. They chose not to push Griffey back from the toe injury, shutdown Freel, and shutdown Milton. When you loose 3 big time players (Milton is borderline) you are going to be hurt. But the Reds chose to make that decision.

Bailey also probably isn't ready to pitch in the majors. Yes, he has the stuff to get big league hitters out but he doesn't know how to pitch. He rarely goes deep into the game in the minors before he hits his pitch count. Most of the box scores I've read have him coming out in the 5th and sometimes 6th inning at best. It's not unusual to see him leave the game in the 4th due to his pitch count. Big league hitters are going to be more patient, look at more pitches, and jump all over the mistake fastball spot. Not to mention the umpires will probably have a smaller strike zone than in the minors. All of this will contribute to how long into the game he can pitch. Bailey will always have a high pitch count per inning b/c he is a strike out pitcher but I don't believe you can bring him up to the big leagues until he can get through the 7th inning consistently in the minors. And let's remember he is having these short outings in AA not AAA. Bailey would have helped but not enough. I prefer to look towards next year and hope that Bailey will make a difference then.

Homer Bailey
09-28-2006, 10:40 PM
Yeah I would have helped...

IslandRed
09-28-2006, 10:50 PM
Just remembering a thread from earlier this year, it was argued that a pitcher making the show at age 20 is hardly without precedent. Which is true, but then it was pointed out that even the ones who went on to great careers typically weren't very good right away. It generally took them half a season or a season before they made the jump from surviving to thriving. Based on that, I think the Reds made the right call. Even if Bailey avoided anything that would set back his career, odds are he wouldn't have provided the immediate impact we needed.

Aronchis
09-28-2006, 11:01 PM
Considering the fatigue Bailey was going through(not necessarily physically either), it was best not to put anymore pressure on him that was needed. Simply to young.

Next year is a different story.

Superdude
09-28-2006, 11:49 PM
This is a bit off the wall, but what would things be like right now if Gardner hadn't completely fallen off the boat? Kind of sad. :(

dougdirt
09-29-2006, 01:38 AM
Heck superdude, what would have happened if Wayne hadnt traded the only guy in AAA worth a crap that steps on the mound for a middle reliever who is 40? Justin Germano probably could have helped this team more than Michalak and Cormier did.

crazybob60
09-29-2006, 02:24 AM
I am still going to point to the days of July 1 - 9 right before the All Star Break. Me, personally, I think a LOT about this team changed during that week and a half, where we could have easily made major strides in the division, and instead we just bit the dust, especially during that Milwaukee series where we should have swept them and instead they swept us. During that time period we went 1-8 and we seriously should have went 8-1. I think after that little flaky period there, just the whole demeanor and attitude of this team changed, at least from what I saw. Sure they showed some glimpses of not being in it, but in general....that was there downfall....Homer Bailey or not. And during that same week, wasn't that also when Todd Coffey also had his collapse? I can't remember right off the top of my head.

Remember back when the All Star Break came, people were saying that at the end of the season, if we were still near first, that they would point to that time period and remark at how poorly the Reds played, well, here it is.

Topcat
09-29-2006, 06:16 AM
I will say it every day till he is ready do not mess with this kid. He can be something that the Reds have not had for many years a true ace. Time and patience is best applied when it comes to special players. Any rational minded fan realizes the over use on this "young" kids arm late in this season is a pressure packed playoff run would have been detrimental to him.