PDA

View Full Version : What would make Homer Bailey a success in your opinion?



EddieMilner
01-28-2007, 04:36 PM
I know we all think that Bailey is the second coming, but what realistically would you consider being a success and not a failure?

Handofdeath
01-28-2007, 04:40 PM
200 wins and a sub 4.00 ERA.

EddieMilner
01-28-2007, 04:41 PM
My personal opinion is that Homer will be a success if he is a solid 1 or 2 guy for this organization for at least 5 years. Anything more would be great. If he was a solid #3, I would be pretty disappointed.

lollipopcurve
01-28-2007, 05:06 PM
A solid starter, 1, 2 or 3. If he's an ace, great -- it's the jackpot. But if he's not, I'd like to see several years of 200 above-average innings.

HumnHilghtFreel
01-28-2007, 05:09 PM
I don't see why being a #3 would be a dissapointment. It wouldn't be living up to all the hype, but if he could be a reliable starter who stays off the DL for a whole bunch of years, I don't see anything unsuccessful about that.

George Anderson
01-28-2007, 06:16 PM
Considering the last quality starter the farm system has produced was Tom Browning, I would say the bar for what is a success and what is a failure is pretty low.

wheels
01-28-2007, 06:51 PM
Health.

Don't push the kid too hard. I don't care if they're in a pennant race.

If he stays healthy, he'll be what we think he'll be.

redsfan1966
01-28-2007, 07:12 PM
if you are asking about just this year...I would say a good 1/2 - two thirds of the season with the big club and anywhere from 7 - 10 wins....overall, if he can slide in anywhere for at least 5+ years as the 1 - 3rd starter, I would be ok with that...

Superdude
01-28-2007, 07:56 PM
I'm with Eddie. A #3 starter obvously has value, but the way Bailey has been hyped, there's no way I'm gonna get excited about him becoming a mid rotation innings eater.

Highlifeman21
01-28-2007, 07:57 PM
I know we all think that Bailey is the second coming, but what realistically would you consider being a success and not a failure?

We all think that?

Redlegs
01-28-2007, 08:11 PM
I think if Homer comes in and produces for 5 to 7 seasons with the Reds and gets us 15 wins per year, he'll be a success. Let's face it, the bar is pretty low right now for Reds farmhands.

redsmetz
01-28-2007, 08:18 PM
Considering the last quality starter the farm system has produced was Tom Browning, I would say the bar for what is a success and what is a failure is pretty low.

Would a career like Brownings be acceptable for Bailey? Twelve years 123-90, 1000 K's (Browning had exactly 1000 K's - interesting). Does he need to throw in the perfect game, but stay off of sitting on high buildings?

Seriously I would hope for more from him, but I would say a Browning career would make him a solid #3. Of course, I'd be happier if we grow about 4 or 5 solid pitchers over the next 5-6 years.

terminator
01-28-2007, 09:43 PM
For 2007, I'd be happy with no injuries and a sub-5.00 ERA. Almost all of the great ones need a year of MLB experience under their belts before they are ready.

Beyond that (assuming he's Red's property throughout his career) I'd say seven to ten years of Harang-like numbers would make me consider him successful enough to have lived up to the hype. I'll be thrilled and surprised if he ends up being the second coming of Clemens. That's too much to expect from any kid who hasn't thrown a MLB pitch yet. I'll be satisfied if he's at least a sub 4.50 ERA and healthy, because that's worth a lot too.

Dracodave
01-28-2007, 10:00 PM
I'd be happy if Bailey come out of the minors and pitched half as good as we all say he can pitch.

If he flops, he flops. Exactly what can we do about that? Its a success to me if he devolps and pitches league average.Thats a success.

Devolping a decent pitcher and not the dribble we've been spewing out.

Bigredfan#1
01-28-2007, 11:31 PM
I would be disappointed in anything but a dominating career. 1000 Ks, he could have that in 4 full years if he is what they advertise. The key to him is the same for many - health. Look at Prior, no more dominating pticher in the NL when he is healthy but he has not been!

RedsManRick
01-28-2007, 11:38 PM
2000 IP and a career ERA under 5.00 would make Homer Bailey a very very rich man by virtually anyone's standard. If money isn't your thing, I think success for a pitcher is being a guy who can be counted on 35 times a year and expected to win each and every time he goes out. Sure, there are shades of gray there, but I think simply becoming established as a "solid" major leaguer is a huge achievement.

George Anderson
01-29-2007, 12:16 AM
Would a career like Brownings be acceptable for Bailey? Twelve years 123-90, 1000 K's (Browning had exactly 1000 K's - interesting). Does he need to throw in the perfect game, but stay off of sitting on high buildings?

Seriously I would hope for more from him, but I would say a Browning career would make him a solid #3. Of course, I'd be happier if we grow about 4 or 5 solid pitchers over the next 5-6 years.

I would hope Bailey has a career better than Brownings. But if you were to tell me twenty years from now Bailey accomplished basically what Browning accomplished then yes I would be happy.

At this point its embarrasing that the farm system has not produced a quality starting pitcher since Browning debuted in 1985. Thats 21 freakin years!!! Look at it this way, the last time the Reds developed a quality starting pitcher (Browning) Michael Jackson was considered normal!!!!

Superdude
01-29-2007, 12:27 AM
Let's say you become GM for a day and find a bag of magic dust that contains sacred DNA samples from Jimmy Haynes, Scott Sullivan, and Pete Harnisch. If you sprinkle the dust on Homer Bailey's head, he's guaranteed to throw 200 innings of 2.50ERA baseball every year until we lose him to the yankees in free agency. You'll obviously take advantage of that, but at what guaranteed ERA do you stop and say, "I think I'll just roll the dice and see how he turns out?" I'll say anything above 4.30 and I'm gonna let destiny do it's thing.

dougdirt
01-29-2007, 01:45 AM
I just want to point this out to everyone.
Homer Bailey will begin the 2008 season at 21 years old.

Lets let the kid pitch...

toledodan
01-29-2007, 01:54 AM
with the hype surrounding him i expect #1 or #2 stuff.

if he starts with reds in april / may 07:
atleast 10 wins.
K per inning pitched
4.00 to 4.50 era

starts with reds after all star break:
5 to 7 wins
same k rate and era

career wise:
200 plus wins.
over 2500 strikeouts
sub 4.00 era.

i know i'm not being very realistic but i'm going by the hype surrounding him.

bianchiveloce
01-29-2007, 02:27 AM
Since Homer Bailey was our First Round pick (7th Overall) in 2004, I would expect nothing less than a #2 Starter, but hoping for a #1 Starter type career. If his performance is more indicative of a #3 Starter, then I would view him as an "underachiever " rather than a "failure." I don't believe he gets into the territory of "failure" until he touches the border of a #4/#5 Starter.

Success or failure are relative terms depending on the context of the draft. A 20th Round pitcher becoming a #4/#5 Starter may be viewed as a roaring success where as a 1st Rounder may be seen as a "failure."

For the coming 2007 season, taking into account Homer's youth and experience, if he can replicate what two other former First Rounders did last year after mid-season call ups in Cole Hamels and Chad Billingsley, I would would be extremely happy and call his season a tremendous success.

But, realistically, I could see Homer going 7-9 in 20 Starts with a 4.90 ERA. I believe a lot of what will determine his success or failure will depend on his control and limiting the number of walks he gives up. If he can continue his trend of reducing the number of walks he issues, then he will be more successful and avoid a Gavin Floyd type of beginning to his career.