PDA

View Full Version : Eric Milton pitched well tonight



dougdirt
04-21-2007, 09:34 PM
I just think with all the topics and threads about Milton that are so negative, I would start a good one and say that he pitched well tonight. Hopefully it can carry over.

Tom Servo
04-21-2007, 09:39 PM
Hopefully this is all part of a plot by Krivsky and Narron to keep his ERA down to get some sucker to trade for him.

TRF
04-21-2007, 09:45 PM
I grudgingly admit, yes. he did pitch well. On a side note, did I hear Marty say the game was a sellout?

For some reason that's very surreal to me.

Matt700wlw
04-21-2007, 09:47 PM
Don't tell Milton

TOBTTReds
04-21-2007, 09:52 PM
How many FB's did he throw tonight? I'll probably find out tomorrow at work but it had to be under 50%. I like his/Ross' pitch selections.

DeadRedinCT
04-21-2007, 10:34 PM
How many FB's did he throw tonight? I'll probably find out tomorrow at work but it had to be under 50%. I like his/Ross' pitch selections.

8 flyballs / 10 ground balls

Newman4
04-21-2007, 11:12 PM
Hopefully this is all part of a plot by Krivsky and Narron to keep his ERA down to get some sucker to trade for him.

Exactly :beerme:

jojo
04-21-2007, 11:16 PM
I just think with all the topics and threads about Milton that are so negative, I would start a good one and say that he pitched well tonight. Hopefully it can carry over.

I didn't get to watch the game tonight so it's good to hear. His line looked good from his last start but his velocity was very poor so his last outing wasn't as impressive as it may have looked in the box score.

Did you notice what his velocity was like tonight?

kaldaniels
04-21-2007, 11:18 PM
Milton is a great example of why the "quality start" is misleading. We need a "dominant start" stat...maybe 7 IP 2 ER???? Anyone?

remdog
04-21-2007, 11:19 PM
Milton was topping out at about 88 but he had a good change, 73-74.

Rem

Always Red
04-22-2007, 12:05 AM
He was spotting the FB well, didn't leave it out over the plate, changed speeds well, and was hitting his spots.

Welch did a good job of explaining why Milton pitched well with an 88 mph FB tonight, but got his brains beat in with it the last two years.

If Milton continues to evolve in his ability to pitch with a different approach, he will be able to continue his major league career after this year. But trying to blow folks away with 88mph heat does not work, of course.

Hamels pitched very well, of course, but he also does not blow folks away. His FB was about 91 tonight, but he has such a good changeup that it makes it look a lot quicker.

jmac
04-22-2007, 12:12 AM
Milton is a great example of why the "quality start" is misleading. We need a "dominant start" stat...maybe 7 IP 2 ER???? Anyone?

I think the term quality is start is okay. It basically is saying you keep your team in the game and give them a chance to win.
If a guy just allows 3 runs in 6 ip then you are giving your team a chance.

KittyDuran
04-22-2007, 12:22 AM
I grudgingly admit, yes. he did pitch well. On a side note, did I hear Marty say the game was a sellout?

For some reason that's very surreal to me.I was there and it was a sellout... looked like a lot of walk-ups... weather, perhaps? Could also be the promo (but only 20,000 received it). Usually, in my perch at the very top of the ballpark I'm pretty much by myself, but I was surrounded by people last night and tonight.

kaldaniels
04-22-2007, 12:30 AM
I think the term quality is start is okay. It basically is saying you keep your team in the game and give them a chance to win.
If a guy just allows 3 runs in 6 ip then you are giving your team a chance.

Thats true but if I recall...Harang and Milton were similar in quality starts last year...Milton may have even had the edge...I'm too tired to check. There needs to be a stat to separate the men from the boys (in between a shutout and quality start).

HumnHilghtFreel
04-22-2007, 12:34 AM
After tonight, our starters(if my calculations are correct)have gone 112.2 IP, 50 ER for a 4.01 ERA. And we're nothing more than a .500 team right now. It's an absolute shame that our offense is wasting this great pitching.

kaldaniels
04-22-2007, 12:40 AM
After tonight, our starters(if my calculations are correct)have gone 112.2 IP, 50 ER for a 4.01 ERA. And we're nothing more than a .500 team right now. It's an absolute shame that our offense is wasting this great pitching.

We will be banging our heads against the wall in September. :bang:

jmcclain19
04-22-2007, 01:38 AM
Milton's start tonight came against one of the only teams in baseball worse than the Reds at hitting lefties. I wouldn't put much stock in it.

Redlegs
04-22-2007, 03:08 AM
Milton has performed better than expected in all three starts this season. He could very well be 3-0 rather than 0-3. Like him or not, those are the facts.

Handofdeath
04-22-2007, 03:11 AM
Milton's start tonight came against one of the only teams in baseball worse than the Reds at hitting lefties. I wouldn't put much stock in it.

Interesting statement, too bad you never bothered to check your facts. The Phillies have an OPS of .777 against lefties this season. That's good for 6th in the NL. Redszoners are going to have to face facts. Eric Milton may be overpaid and the last two seasons haven't been really great for him. But, outside of the #5 starter for the Mets he's pitching as well as any back of the rotation guy in the NL. As a matter of fact his ERA is better than Harang's. If the results so far are any indication, the Reds have a very solid rotation from top to bottom. I think Dick Pole should be congratulated and I think that Redszoners might want to find another whipping boy.

Ravenlord
04-22-2007, 03:59 AM
when i saw Milton's ERA below 5 (currently 4.32), i nearly swallowed my cigar. Milton's last two starts have been great for the number 5 guy.

APR 16: 5 IP, 3 H, 3 R, 2 ER, 1 HR, 2 BB, 4 K, 99 pitches
APR 21: 6 IP, 6 H, 3 R, 2 ER, 1 HR, 0 BB, 1 K, 82 pitches


there's virtually no way Milty's worth his check, but if he can keep this up through two more starts, the Yanks might be a good way to go if Igawa keeps struggling.

savafan
04-22-2007, 04:18 AM
I think Dick Pole should be congratulated and I think that Redszoners might want to find another whipping boy.

Nope. As long as Milton is wearing a Cincinnati Reds uniform, I'll hope and pray that he will be able to put it all together and be a serviceable pitcher, but his career numbers over the last 10 seasons tell me that he is a bad pitcher. I'm not sure how much he's making this year, but last season, Milton was paid $9,833,333. That's not just overpaid, that's grossly overpaid for a guy with a career ERA over 5.00, especially for a team in a market the size of the Reds. The two most similar pitchers in the league to Milton are Darren Oliver who made $600,000 last season with the Mets, and Brett Tomko, who was paid $3,600,000 last year by the Dodgers. Milton, for his production, just isn't tradeable at his salary, and it doesn't make sense to keep running him out there (I don't care if he puts up a handful of quality starts when he gets bombed 75% of the time he pitches) when you have cheaper, better options in the organization.

jhiller21
04-22-2007, 04:59 AM
Milton did look pretty good out there tonight. More changeups and curveballs, and it seemed to work out well for him.

I liked what Chris Welsch said... Milton's never going to get his fastball back to where it was, if he wants to succeed as a #5 starter, he's going to have to use the off-speed stuff a lot more, instead of trying to gas that 88 mph heater by everyone on a 2-2 count.

Milton's changeup/breaking stuff actually looked decent tonight, I think he has the ability to pitch like a reliable #5 for the Reds this year. (and by reliable I mean keeping us in the game for 6 innings, let's not get carried away :))

GAC
04-22-2007, 05:56 AM
when i saw Milton's ERA below 5 (currently 4.32), i nearly swallowed my cigar. Milton's last two starts have been great for the number 5 guy.

APR 16: 5 IP, 3 H, 3 R, 2 ER, 1 HR, 2 BB, 4 K, 99 pitches
APR 21: 6 IP, 6 H, 3 R, 2 ER, 1 HR, 0 BB, 1 K, 82 pitches


there's virtually no way Milty's worth his check

Exactly. Milton has not pitched bad this year at all. Even his 4/8 game vs Pitt, in which we lost 6-3. Now if one looks solely at the boxscore of that game they'd disagree (10 hits - 4 ERs); but I watched that game, and it wasn't until the 4 inning that Pitt scored a run, and it was on a Dunn defensive blunder (misplay) that allowed the runner to score all the way from 1B. But they weren't teeing off on Milton. Of the 10 hits he gave up, 5 of them were pop up singles that were lucky enough to fall in no man's land behind 2B and in front of the Cfer. I was actually feeling sorry for Eric.

They finally pushed across a couple runs in the 5th on a Wilson linedrive Hr. But he also walked only one batter while in there. What pee'd me off was the bullpen after they pulled Milton in the 6th and we came back within a run and made it a 4-3 game. Coffey and Coutangus came in and gave up bombs that pretty much sealed the victory for Pitt. But Milton, even while pitching at GABP, has only given up 3 Hrs so far.

But if it wasn't for the BP, Eric could very easily be 2-1.

But I'm rooting for the guy. I'd love to see them be able to deal him to someone who will be looking for a pitcher at the trading deadline.

keeganbrick
04-22-2007, 06:04 AM
Nope. As long as Milton is wearing a Cincinnati Reds uniform, I'll hope and pray that he will be able to put it all together and be a serviceable pitcher, but his career numbers over the last 10 seasons tell me that he is a bad pitcher. I'm not sure how much he's making this year, but last season, Milton was paid $9,833,333. That's not just overpaid, that's grossly overpaid for a guy with a career ERA over 5.00, especially for a team in a market the size of the Reds. The two most similar pitchers in the league to Milton are Darren Oliver who made $600,000 last season with the Mets, and Brett Tomko, who was paid $3,600,000 last year by the Dodgers. Milton, for his production, just isn't tradeable at his salary, and it doesn't make sense to keep running him out there (I don't care if he puts up a handful of quality starts when he gets bombed 75% of the time he pitches) when you have cheaper, better options in the organization.

I see what you're saying but right now Milton isnt getting bombed by anyone. As long as he keeps pitching like he is or maybe even a little worse I say we stick with him. The only better option I think we have at the moment would be of course Bailey but he isnt coming up this year imo. Although if this bullpen keeps getting worse I wonder if they will ponder bringing him up?

savafan
04-22-2007, 06:18 AM
I see what you're saying but right now Milton isnt getting bombed by anyone. As long as he keeps pitching like he is or maybe even a little worse I say we stick with him.

But history says that he will. We talk a lot on this board about small sample size, well, that's exactly what we've seen from Milton so far this year, a small sample size. I don't trust him. Eric Milton is like that wife that keeps cheating on you behind your back, but you don't want to leave her because you love her, and you hope that eventually she'll be faithful to you.

mth123
04-22-2007, 06:20 AM
Thats true but if I recall...Harang and Milton were similar in quality starts last year...Milton may have even had the edge...I'm too tired to check. There needs to be a stat to separate the men from the boys (in between a shutout and quality start).

ERA? FIP? Ks? OPS Against? Plenty of stats to show that Harang was an ace (or a reasonable facsimile) and Milton was a "get a few innings and hope your not blown out" type starter last year.

Just about every rotation in baseball has starters of Milton's caliber. The trick is to keep it to one if you want to win. The Reds knew going in that Milton filled the quota and needed upgrades at the other spots. I hope Lohse keeps it up like many (not me) have predicted and that Belisle emerges like many (including me) have predicted. If so, Milton in the 5th spot is really not that big a problem. (But I'd still like the team to unload him somehow and move on.)

redsmetz
04-22-2007, 07:55 AM
I'm surprised no one mentioned this, but from where I was sitting last night (behind the near end of the Phillies dugout, Row X), it looked like this ump was absolutely squeezing Milton on the strike zone, particularly on pitches that seemed to be right on the edge of the plate towards the first base side. Then, late in the game, he was calling all of those. If he'd have been getting those calls, he would have been stellar. What a shame.

Let's hope this offense steps it up a bit. I hate seeing all of these good starts wasted.

jojo
04-22-2007, 09:41 AM
I think Dick Pole should be congratulated and I think that Redszoners might want to find another whipping boy.

I think 3 games is way too soon to be congratulating anybody.

Redlegs
04-22-2007, 09:57 AM
I think 3 games is way too soon to be congratulating anybody.I disagree with you, Jojo. When he's good, we should say he was good. When he's bad, we definately say he's bad. This notion of Reds fans, not suggesting you're one, wanting Milton to fail reallys perplexes me. If the Reds continue to get 5 or 6 innings out of him with 2 or 3 runs given up, it increases their chances of having a pretty good season. This is his last year in a Reds uniform. Why not hope for the best?

jojo
04-22-2007, 10:20 AM
I disagree with you, Jojo. When he's good, we should say he was good. When he's bad, we definately say he's bad. This notion of Reds fans, not suggesting you're one, wanting Milton to fail reallys perplexes me. If the Reds continue to get 5 or 6 innings out of him with 2 or 3 runs given up, it increases their chances of having a pretty good season. This is his last year in a Reds uniform. Why not hope for the best?

I don't disagree with you. However this:


When he's good, we should say he was good. When he's bad, we definately say he's bad.

Is dramarically different than the original quote I responded to:


I think Dick Pole should be congratulated and I think that Redszoners might want to find another whipping boy.

PuffyPig
04-22-2007, 11:50 AM
After tonight, our starters(if my calculations are correct)have gone 112.2 IP, 50 ER for a 4.01 ERA. And we're nothing more than a .500 team right now. It's an absolute shame that our offense is wasting this great pitching.

It's actually a 3.36 ERA.

PuffyPig
04-22-2007, 11:56 AM
Milton, for his production, just isn't tradeable at his salary, and it doesn't make sense to keep running him out there (I don't care if he puts up a handful of quality starts when he gets bombed 75% of the time he pitches) when you have cheaper, better options in the organization.

It's simply not true that he gets bombed 75% of the time. If he did, his ERA would be above 9.00.

An average start for Milton is about 5 innings, 3 runs, 5.40 ERA.

If Milton had given up one more run this season, his ERA would be close to 5.00. That would be pretty much Milton's career.

Handofdeath
04-22-2007, 05:09 PM
Nope. As long as Milton is wearing a Cincinnati Reds uniform, I'll hope and pray that he will be able to put it all together and be a serviceable pitcher, but his career numbers over the last 10 seasons tell me that he is a bad pitcher. I'm not sure how much he's making this year, but last season, Milton was paid $9,833,333. That's not just overpaid, that's grossly overpaid for a guy with a career ERA over 5.00, especially for a team in a market the size of the Reds. The two most similar pitchers in the league to Milton are Darren Oliver who made $600,000 last season with the Mets, and Brett Tomko, who was paid $3,600,000 last year by the Dodgers. Milton, for his production, just isn't tradeable at his salary, and it doesn't make sense to keep running him out there (I don't care if he puts up a handful of quality starts when he gets bombed 75% of the time he pitches) when you have cheaper, better options in the organization.

It sounds to me the major problem you have is with his salary. I agree with you that he is overpaid. I can name you at least half a dozen Reds that are as well. But as far as being a "bad pitcher" ? No. Inconsistent? Yes. Gives up too many homers? Yes. But Milton has had only two seasons that you could truly classify as being bad. His rookie season and 2005. And in 2005 there were still times he was flat out dominant. Out of 34 starts that season, 11 times he gave up 2 runs or less. But lets look at his career as a whole.

After a rookie season where he went 8-14 with a 5.64 ERA, he followed that up with a season where he went 7-11 with an ERA of 4.49. That doesn't sound like much but he went 7-11 for a team that lost 95 games that season and his ERA was a full half run below the league average. Look at the next three seasons with the Twins, skip 2003 when he was injured all season, and then look at 2004 with the Phillies. Over 200 IP in 3 of those 4 seasons. Over 13 wins in each of those seasons. ERA for those 4 seasons comes out to around the league average. All-Star in 2001, and he wasn't one of those charity picks either. He was Top 10 in these categories during those 4 seasons

Won-Loss %-2 times
WHIP-2 times
Hits allowed-1 time
BB/9-2 times
K/9-2 times
K's-2 times
Complete Games- 1 time
Shutouts-3 times
K/BB-4 times

Eric Milton hasn't done extremely well with the Reds but to discount his past seasons or to discount that, at times, he has been dominating with the Reds is not being fair. He is right now, as he did last year, pitching well for a bottom of the roation starter. I would hope that instead of people saying "Don't worry, Milton will go back to sucking soon," people would start saying "He's pitching like he used to with the Twins." He deserves it. BTW, when the Reds make the playoffs this season, Milton will provide some much needed playoff experience. 16 and 1/3 IP with an ERA of 1.65 in the playoffs during his career.

savafan
04-22-2007, 05:52 PM
I still say that a pitcher with a career ERA of 5.00+ is a bad pitcher. Call me crazy.

jojo
04-22-2007, 06:04 PM
Eric Milton hasn't done extremely well with the Reds but to discount his past seasons or to discount that, at times, he has been dominating with the Reds is not being fair. He is right now, as he did last year, pitching well for a bottom of the roation starter. I would hope that instead of people saying "Don't worry, Milton will go back to sucking soon," people would start saying "He's pitching like he used to with the Twins." He deserves it. BTW, when the Reds make the playoffs this season, Milton will provide some much needed playoff experience. 16 and 1/3 IP with an ERA of 1.65 in the playoffs during his career.

Here's the issue with Milton. You pretty accurately assess his early career. However, he suffered a catostrophic knee injury in 2003 and clearly he has not been the same pitcher since recovering (not even in 2004 where the warning signs were there but masked somewhat by some good swings in luck/unluck metrics-basically his FIPs with Cincy are dead on with his 2004 FIP). Unfortunately, the Reds are paying him like he's pre-injury Milton (solid #3) while they are getting a post-injury #5 arm struggling to keep his head above replacement level as a starter.

Handofdeath
04-22-2007, 07:11 PM
I still say that a pitcher with a career ERA of 5.00+ is a bad pitcher. Call me crazy.

In today's game especially with the offensive explosion I respectfully disagree. I do not think he's great but I do think he's decent and has accomplished a fair bit stats wise. Dave Williams is bad.

TRF
04-22-2007, 07:35 PM
In today's game especially with the offensive explosion I respectfully disagree. I do not think he's great but I do think he's decent and has accomplished a fair bit stats wise. Dave Williams is bad.


Last year he had the 174th best ERA for anyone that made a start.

blech. What about that tells you he's a good pitcher in any era?

savafan
04-22-2007, 07:37 PM
Dave Williams is bad.

For their careers, Williams and Milton don't seem too dissimilar to me.

Ravenlord
04-22-2007, 10:48 PM
For their careers, Williams and Milton don't seem too dissimilar to me.



Pitcher ERA IP BB/9 K/9 H/9 HR/9 WHIP BABIP
Williams 4.64 403.2 3.57 5.42 8.90 1.38 1.38 262
Milton 5.00 1544 2.57 6.41 9.41 1.54 1.33 281

M2
04-22-2007, 10:57 PM
there's virtually no way Milty's worth his check, but if he can keep this up through two more starts, the Yanks might be a good way to go if Igawa keeps struggling.

Excellent thinking. After watching four straight Red Sox hitters go deep against Chase Wright tonight maybe they won't even wait that long.

Big Daddy P
04-22-2007, 11:37 PM
Please. Uncle Milty clearly sucks. He stinks on ice.

Yes, he occasionally has a decent outing, but you must look at the entire body of work. If your era is well north of 5, you simply suck! No ifs, ands, or buts. Geez...I can't stand to look at him anymore.

I heard the Mexico City Reds need a body to throw some pitches down there. Maybe Krivsky can get a few barrels of Burrito sauce for him!

Adios muchacho!

savafan
04-23-2007, 01:45 AM
Excellent thinking. After watching four straight Red Sox hitters go deep against Chase Wright tonight maybe they won't even wait that long.

Moose and Wang should be back soon. I don't think Milton would survive too long in NYC.

Handofdeath
04-23-2007, 01:59 AM
Last year he had the 174th best ERA for anyone that made a start.

blech. What about that tells you he's a good pitcher in any era?

I said he was decent. I didn't say he was good. Milton's problem is inconsistency. Back to last season, the two best teams in the NL were the Mets and Cardinals. How many starters off those two squads had more quality starts than Milton? Three. Glavine, Carpenter, and Suppan. On the Reds squad there was Harang and Arroyo. Only thing about Harang is less than half of his starts were quality starts. More than half of Milton's were. That means last season, as good a season as Harang had, he was less likely to have a quality start than Eric Milton. Think about that.

savafan
04-23-2007, 04:52 AM
I said he was decent. I didn't say he was good. Milton's problem is inconsistency. Back to last season, the two best teams in the NL were the Mets and Cardinals. How many starters off those two squads had more quality starts than Milton? Three. Glavine, Carpenter, and Suppan. On the Reds squad there was Harang and Arroyo. Only thing about Harang is less than half of his starts were quality starts. More than half of Milton's were. That means last season, as good a season as Harang had, he was less likely to have a quality start than Eric Milton. Think about that.

I think that says more about quality starts being a useless stat than anything else.

Ltlabner
04-23-2007, 07:27 AM
That means last season, as good a season as Harang had, he was less likely to have a quality start than Eric Milton. Think about that.

I did think about it and come to one conclusion.

"Quality Starts" is a useless stat and any argument predicated on QS is a pretty weak one.

bucksfan2
04-23-2007, 10:17 AM
I did think about it and come to one conclusion.

"Quality Starts" is a useless stat and any argument predicated on QS is a pretty weak one.

I dont think "Quality Start" is that bad of an indicator. 6 innings and 3 runs should give your team a chance to win a game. That is what baseball is about, winning games. As a reds fan we come to expect more out of Harrang and Arroyo both in the runs and innings pitched department. But if Milton can go out and give me 6 innings allowing 3 runs or less I would be happy and realize that the more often than not the reds will win a game under these circumstances.

TRF
04-23-2007, 10:41 AM
I said he was decent. I didn't say he was good. Milton's problem is inconsistency. Back to last season, the two best teams in the NL were the Mets and Cardinals. How many starters off those two squads had more quality starts than Milton? Three. Glavine, Carpenter, and Suppan. On the Reds squad there was Harang and Arroyo. Only thing about Harang is less than half of his starts were quality starts. More than half of Milton's were. That means last season, as good a season as Harang had, he was less likely to have a quality start than Eric Milton. Think about that.

Except that of all the number 5 starters last year, Milton was the worst one. That's of the regular #5 starters. He was also worse than swingmen that made occasional starts. He was beyond terrible. And what is worse is he had a phenomenally better year than the year before. ugh.

In his last two outings, Milton has pitched better than Belisle, but I'd still take Belisle. Better upside, younger, and he misses bats. Milton puts a lot of balls in play, and that ain't too good an idea for a fly ball pitcher.

Handofdeath
04-25-2007, 05:01 PM
Except that of all the number 5 starters last year, Milton was the worst one. That's of the regular #5 starters. He was also worse than swingmen that made occasional starts. He was beyond terrible. And what is worse is he had a phenomenally better year than the year before. ugh.

In his last two outings, Milton has pitched better than Belisle, but I'd still take Belisle. Better upside, younger, and he misses bats. Milton puts a lot of balls in play, and that ain't too good an idea for a fly ball pitcher.

Pure conjecture especially when you give no proof. Here's some for you. 7 pitchers from last years Cardinals team had anywhere from 17-33 starts. 4 of those pitchers had an ERA higher than Milton. Mark Mulder, Jason Marquis, Jeff Weaver, and Sidney Ponson. Recognize those names? And I find it odd that a term used as often as "quality start" is nowadays that when Eric Milton's name is mentioned then suddenly that term loses it's importance. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't pitching deep into the game and giving up as few runs as possible the whole point of being a starting pitcher? Even if his ERA is not great, give credit where credit is due.

sonny
04-25-2007, 09:02 PM
Pure conjecture especially when you give no proof. Here's some for you. 7 pitchers from last years Cardinals team had anywhere from 17-33 starts. 4 of those pitchers had an ERA higher than Milton. Mark Mulder, Jason Marquis, Jeff Weaver, and Sidney Ponson. Recognize those names? And I find it odd that a term used as often as "quality start" is nowadays that when Eric Milton's name is mentioned then suddenly that term loses it's importance. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't pitching deep into the game and giving up as few runs as possible the whole point of being a starting pitcher? Even if his ERA is not great, give credit where credit is due.

Right on! For our fifth starter, Milton is very serviceable. I know its in fashion to bash him whenever he touches the ball, and I poke fun at him too (just for a cheap laugh, admittedly) but I'll take him over, say, Joe Mays.

Its too bad to see a player get on the wrong side of RZ, for a talent-for-money-spent reason. I wouldn't turn down 8+ million a year, even if I wasn't an all star caliber hurler. I doubt anyone of us would.

TRF
04-25-2007, 09:35 PM
Pure conjecture especially when you give no proof. Here's some for you. 7 pitchers from last years Cardinals team had anywhere from 17-33 starts. 4 of those pitchers had an ERA higher than Milton. Mark Mulder, Jason Marquis, Jeff Weaver, and Sidney Ponson. Recognize those names? And I find it odd that a term used as often as "quality start" is nowadays that when Eric Milton's name is mentioned then suddenly that term loses it's importance. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't pitching deep into the game and giving up as few runs as possible the whole point of being a starting pitcher? Even if his ERA is not great, give credit where credit is due.

minimum 140 innings pitched, 87th best ERA.
minimum 120 innings pitched, 95th best ERA.
minimum 100 innings pitched, 107th best ERA.

Considering the Reds top two starters had very good ERA's (top 20) that's a MIGHTY drop.

5.31 K/9. Ugh. for a guy that only goes 6 innings a game, that's abysmal.

BTW, QS is a silly stat. Look at the man's peripherals! He doesn't K a lot of guys, gives up homers at historic rates and is physically UNABLE to pitch deep into games.

He's monumentally bad, and it isn't a matter of if he'll start to suck, but when.

Dracodave
04-25-2007, 10:25 PM
BTW, QS is a silly stat. Look at the man's peripherals! He doesn't K a lot of guys, gives up homers at historic rates and is physically UNABLE to pitch deep into games.

He's monumentally bad, and it isn't a matter of if he'll start to suck, but when.

A)We know he can't use his knees.
B)When he tries to his mechinics are goofy.
C)He's relaying on speed still..except for one or two starts I've seen.

That to me means this...
Give him bullpen sessions with new mechinics. Try using his upperbody. He tops out at 88? So be it. Salvage. Then teach him to constantly throw his curve and change up. Stop trying to whiz past the batter. Keep the ball down low, etc.

He knitpicks the plate because he can't overpower batters, he just doesn't try to induce groundballs. He's a strikeout pitcher without a dominate pitcher. Thats redundant. Thats the gopherball for you, so why not try helping his mind out?

I'd be saying this with anyone but Milton needs a head-check as well as a mechinics check.