PDA

View Full Version : Arroyo and Harang



Kc61
09-29-2006, 10:38 PM
I can't remember the Reds having two starters of this caliber. They both had all-star years. To me, they are the co-MVPs of the team by any measure. The team ERA last year was 5.15, it is dramatically better this year, largely due to these two.

Old fashioned pitchers, don't need a reliever in the sixth inning. Harang leading the NL in strikeouts. Both guys with over 200 innings -- which I view as a big positive (I know others disagree).

If the Reds had one more starter like Arroyo/Harang they would have won the Central this year. If they get two more to go with them, they will be a very serious team.

Ravenlord
09-29-2006, 10:39 PM
Both guys with over 200 innings -- which I view as a big positive (I know others disagree).who on Earth would disagree with that?

Kc61
09-29-2006, 10:40 PM
who on Earth would disagree with that?

People who think Arroyo and Harang are overused.

Falls City Beer
09-29-2006, 10:43 PM
People who think Arroyo and Harang are overused.

I don't think you fully understand what pitcher abuse is. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but pitcher abuse has next to nothing to do, fundamentally, with innings pitched.

Cooper
09-29-2006, 11:32 PM
Pitcher abuse has some thing to do with innings pitched --i know pitch count is the end all now, but the total number of innings pitched ahould be part of the equation: it takes effort to get 3 outs in an inning, there's extra effort in warming up for between innings, etc....it's like saying runners who run a marathon just show up and run without factoring the need to train and stretch --those things take effort....you can manage the effort (pitch count),but you need to factor in any kinds of info you can get your hands on. Innings pitched fills in the gaps. FCB, I don't think you took into account all that goes into evaluating use.

westofyou
09-30-2006, 12:45 AM
I don't think you fully understand what pitcher abuse is. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but pitcher abuse has next to nothing to do, fundamentally, with innings pitched.
Tell that to Billy Martin.

reds44
09-30-2006, 01:48 AM
I don't think you fully understand what pitcher abuse is. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but pitcher abuse has next to nothing to do, fundamentally, with innings pitched.
Pitches thrown.

Doc. Scott
09-30-2006, 02:08 AM
And I haven't seen too many people worrying about either pitcher. Scrawny Bronson Arroyo was leading baseball in innings pitched, and Harang is surely near the top of the league in Pitcher Abuse Points (tm BPro).

BCubb2003
09-30-2006, 02:29 AM
It stands to reason that the best pitchers are going to pitch the longest. Some of the really good, really young ones flame out, like Pryor and Wood. Arroyo and Harang both slumped a little, but it doesn't seem like they're suffering now. Maybe we're just not used to having a couple of starters who can go that deep into games.

RedsBaron
09-30-2006, 07:06 AM
Pitcher abuse is primarily a factor of pitches thrown in a game. Studies have shown that the potential risk of serious damage to a pitcher's arm greatly increases after 120 pitches in a game. A pitcher may rack up 200-240 innings a season without undue risk if his pitch count per game is held to the range of 100-120. His risk of injury can actually be greater if he pitches fewer innings but in the games he does pitch he has a pitch count of 125-140.
There is a good discussion of this concept at pages 866-867 in "The New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract" (it is in a brief article discussing Don Sutton and the advent of the five man rotation). Keith Woolner also wrote a good article about this issue, entitled "Five Starters Or Four," which is found at pages 74-94 in "Baseball Between The Numbers."
This isn't to say that some pitchers cannot pitch many more innings, with much higher pitch counts, without evident ill effects. They are extremely rare though under present playing conditions.

Tony Cloninger
09-30-2006, 08:43 AM
Case in point of a pitcher who cannot throw more than 100 pitches per start....or barely throw 100 is Eric Milton.

I have no problem with 200-240 IP......if it is an effective IP....not just IP for the sake of it. The so-called "innings eater" who relaly just sucks as a pitcher.

Effective innings eaters that eliminate the need for crappy midle relievers are gold.

Hopefully next year though the need for Harang and Arroyo to throw more than 120 pitches in a game will be eliminated by either better pitch eficiency (which in the case of harang is doable) or better bullpen guys to go in the 8th.

Falls City Beer
09-30-2006, 09:25 AM
Tell that to Billy Martin.

Innings pitched tells part of the ends, but not the means. Sure, there's a relationship between the two, but not a necessary one.

Strikes Out Looking
09-30-2006, 10:22 AM
I love Harang and Arroyo. I just wish the Reds had a couple more starting pitchers with their attitude and game, as well as a few more outfielders that had it as well.

max venable
09-30-2006, 12:50 PM
Next year we'll get Claussen and Wilson back....:rolleyes:

oneupper
09-30-2006, 01:22 PM
Next year we'll get Claussen and Wilson back....:rolleyes:

Wilson not coming back...contract over.

Kc61
09-30-2006, 02:34 PM
This thread wasn't about abusing pitchers. (I wonder what Bob Gibson would think of that phrase.) Any true Reds fan who has been paying attention knows that the Reds have generally been challenged in the pitching department. In 2004 and 2005, the pitching was just unacceptable.

This year, the team has two starters that any team would want. That's an exciting development. If they concentrate their efforts on getting two more, this team will be a force.

The Reds have shown over the years that you can acquire offense fairly easily. Ron Gant, Greg Vaughn, Kevin Mitchell, Dave Parker, even Rich Aurilia were picked up pretty cheaply and provided much offense. And the Reds are good at developing young hitters, always have been.

Top pitching is much harder and I'm very happy the Reds finally are showing something in that department.

So the thread was intended to congratulate these two pitchers for a terrific year. Now you can continue debating pitching abuse.

Falls City Beer
09-30-2006, 02:42 PM
This thread wasn't about abusing pitchers. (I wonder what Bob Gibson would think of that phrase.) Any true Reds fan who has been paying attention knows that the Reds have generally been challenged in the pitching department. In 2004 and 2005, the pitching was just unacceptable.

This year, the team has two starters that any team would want. That's an exciting development. If they concentrate their efforts on getting two more, this team will be a force.

The Reds have shown over the years that you can acquire offense fairly easily. Ron Gant, Greg Vaughn, Kevin Mitchell, Dave Parker, even Rich Aurilia were picked up pretty cheaply and provided much offense. And the Reds are good at developing young hitters, always have been.

Top pitching is much harder and I'm very happy the Reds finally are showing something in that department.

So the thread was intended to congratulate these two pitchers for a terrific year. Now you can continue debating pitching abuse.


You invoked the issue.

RedFanAlways1966
09-30-2006, 02:59 PM
This long-suffering REDS fan liked having pitchers like Harang & Arroyo this year. :thumbup:

Abuse? Nah. Harang avg. 106 pitches per start. Arroyo avg. 110 pitches per start entering tonight. ML starters should be able to go 110 pitches each start. Harang avg. the same pitches/start in 2005 as well. Looking at their stats in the month of September shows that they are not worn out:

* Harang: 47.0 IP, 42 H, 20 ER, 41 K, 4 BB, 0.98 WHIP, 3.83 ERA.
* Arroyo: 44.1 IP, 26 H, 11 ER, 34 K, 14 BB, 0.90 WHIP, 2.23 ERA.

120 pitches or more this year for starters? Happened 8 times (4X Harang ; 3X Arroyo). Most pitches in a start this year was 135 by Harang in his last start before the ASB (got an extra day of rest before his next start).

Falls City Beer
09-30-2006, 03:04 PM
The pitcher abuse issue is like most defensive issues: unverifiable either way.

What IS verifiable is that they threw a ton of pitches, two of some of the highest in all of baseball. Also, what is true is that both pitchers suffered a terrible, terrible stretch of ineffectiveness in July and August.

Cause and effect? I don't know. No abuse at all, par for the course management of starters' arms? Not sure.

But no certainty either way, that's for sure.

But it's fairly smart to err on the side of caution with the two most important commodities this team has had in a decade.

Kc61
09-30-2006, 03:12 PM
To protect these guys the Reds simply need a solid, deep bullpen. They haven't had one all year. I am a little concerned that neither Schoenweis nor Weathers has been re-signed. Can you imagine the current bullpen without them?

Right now, I have some confidence in Bray and Coffey, much confidence in Stormy and SS, and that is basically it.

It took workhorse type pitchers like Harang and Arroyo to succeed with a sub-par bullpen.

Chip R
09-30-2006, 03:32 PM
Wilson not coming back...contract over.

Don't bet on it.

VR
09-30-2006, 03:39 PM
Pretty safe (and sad) to say the current pitching staff is the best they've had in a long time.

GAC
09-30-2006, 03:42 PM
Pretty safe (and sad) to say the current pitching staff is the best they've had in a long time.

That is still not saying much though. After Harang and Arroyo, what have we got? ;)

VR
09-30-2006, 03:44 PM
That is still not saying much though. After Harang and Arroyo, what have we got? ;)

Prayer

RedsBaron
10-01-2006, 07:51 AM
At the moment Harang is tied for the NL lead with 16 wins, but both Brandon Webb and Derek Lowe, who also have 16 wins, are listed as starting pitchers today. I hope neither Webb nor Lowe pick up a 17th win today, so that Harang can finish the season tied for the league lead in wins.
Harang appears to have locked up the NL strikeout title and Arroyo has the NL innings pitched title. Harang and Arroyo are the Reds best one-two starting pitching combo since Rijo and Browning were in their prime.

VR
10-01-2006, 10:45 AM
At the moment Harang is tied for the NL lead with 16 wins, but both Brandon Webb and Derek Lowe, who also have 16 wins, are listed as starting pitchers today. I hope neither Webb nor Lowe pick up a 17th win today, so that Harang can finish the season tied for the league lead in wins.
Harang appears to have locked up the NL strikeout title and Arroyo has the NL innings pitched title. Harang and Arroyo are the Reds best one-two starting pitching combo since Rijo and Browning were in their prime.

Smoltz is 10 back...starts today.

mbgrayson
10-03-2006, 11:03 AM
I think serious consideration should be given to Aaron Harang for the Cy Young award.

He led the National League in strikeouts. He tied for the league lead in wins. He is 11th in ERA. He had a great K/BB ratio: 216/56.

These feats were accomplished while pitching in HR friendly Great American Ball Park, for a team that finished under .500, and had a weak overall team defense.

Think ball park doesn't matter? Look at Harang's Home/Road splits (http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/stats/individual_player_splits.jsp?c_id=mlb&playerID=421685&statType=2):

Home: Innings 113, ERA 4.61, HR allowed=20
Road: Innings 121, ERA 2.98, HR allowed=8

If Harang pitched in a less HR friendly park, he would be the Cy Young favorite. Most of the other Cy Young favorites were better in ERA in their home park. Carpenter had a 1.81 ERA at home, and only 4.70 on the road. Arroyo pitched better in Cincinnati (2.60 vs 4.00). Smoltz was far better in Atlanta: 2.92 vs. 4.91. Glavine was much better at Shea: 2.88 vs. 4.72.

Zambrano was hurt somewhat by Wrigley, and Chris Young inexplicably pitched worse in San Diego than on the road.

The point is simply this. If we neutralize ball park factor, I think Aaron Harang is one of the best, if not the best, pitcher in the National League.

Heath
10-03-2006, 11:07 AM
The one thing I never noticed this year, was that Arroyo didn't really get de-railed with the so-called "Second Time Around The League Bashing". I am interested in how he responds/starts out next year.

klw
10-03-2006, 12:08 PM
Arroyo and Harang ended the year 1, 2 in pitches thrown. There is a link in the RedsLive thread about this http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51595.
Most of the same names come up in the top ten in this category over the past 7 years. A quick review notes that with a few exceptions, ex Ryan Dempster, this doesn't seem to correlate with arm injury in the years ahead.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/pitching?split=0&league=mlb&season=2006&seasonType=2&sort=pitches&type=pitch3&ageMin=17&ageMax=51&state=0&college=0&country=0&hand=a&pos=all

RedsBaron
10-03-2006, 12:24 PM
I think serious consideration should be given to Aaron Harang for the Cy Young award.

He led the National League in strikeouts. He tied for the league lead in wins. He is 11th in ERA. He had a great K/BB ratio: 216/56.

These feats were accomplished while pitching in HR friendly Great American Ball Park, for a team that finished under .500, and had a weak overall team defense.

Think ball park doesn't matter? Look at Harang's Home/Road splits (http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/stats/individual_player_splits.jsp?c_id=mlb&playerID=421685&statType=2):

Home: Innings 113, ERA 4.61, HR allowed=20
Road: Innings 121, ERA 2.98, HR allowed=8

If Harang pitched in a less HR friendly park, he would be the Cy Young favorite. Most of the other Cy Young favorites were better in ERA in their home park. Carpenter had a 1.81 ERA at home, and only 4.70 on the road. Arroyo pitched better in Cincinnati (2.60 vs 4.00). Smoltz was far better in Atlanta: 2.92 vs. 4.91. Glavine was much better at Shea: 2.88 vs. 4.72.

Zambrano was hurt somewhat by Wrigley, and Chris Young inexplicably pitched worse in San Diego than on the road.

The point is simply this. If we neutralize ball park factor, I think Aaron Harang is one of the best, if not the best, pitcher in the National League.
Good post. Harang didn't have the best supporting cast either. The Reds defense was shaky at best, the offense was inconsistent, and the bullpen was generally poor.