PDA

View Full Version : Reds Trade Coutlangus to Arizona



reds44
04-07-2008, 07:36 PM
From the Reds:


Perales, 23, was selected by Arizona in the 22nd round of the June 2006 first-year player draft...last season at Class A South Bend he hit .282 and led the Diamondbacks organization with 92rbi while ranking among the Midwest League leaders in hits (156, 1st), extra base hits (58, 1st), doubles (32, 5th), runs scored (80, 3rd) and triples (10, 3rd)...he has been assigned to FSL Sarasota.
Coutlangus, 27, was designated for assignment as 1 of 11 roster moves on Opening Day.

Joseph
04-07-2008, 07:40 PM
Well, at least we got something rather than just letting him go free.

Highlifeman21
04-07-2008, 07:43 PM
Had Coutlangus been traded before the Opening Series, he would have magically found command and control to beat us.

Hopefully this Perales kid turns out to be something.

Chip R
04-07-2008, 07:47 PM
No more Coutlangus jokes. :(

RedEye
04-07-2008, 07:53 PM
Not a bad return for a 27 year-old reliever who didn't make the team.

WMR
04-07-2008, 07:53 PM
No more Coutlangus jokes. :(

I'll have to take him out of my stat-wank-bank.

RedsManRick
04-07-2008, 07:53 PM
Hey, look at the bright side. At least we have an older, more expensive of him who has a cool beard thingy.

Cyclone792
04-07-2008, 07:57 PM
FWIW, Perales was 24th in OPS and 39th in RC/27 in the Midwest League last season.

Baseball Cube has him listed at 5' 11" ... and 165lbs. If that's true, then this guy is a rail; I weighed about 165lbs when I graduated high school. Hopefully that listing is dated a few years and he's put on some beef.

Perales has played most of his OF games in LF, but I honestly have no idea how he rates defensively. If he's a good all around defensive outfielder who can chase balls down in center, then he may be interesting to follow.

Bill
04-07-2008, 08:15 PM
USC site has him at 6'1" 195. From the scout site article, sounds like a possible 4th OF. Haven't posted anything in some time so I hope it is ok to post the link:

http://diamondbacks.scout.com/2/709994.html

MartyFan
04-07-2008, 09:20 PM
Not a bad return for a 27 year-old reliever who didn't make the team.

My thought exactly.

lollipopcurve
04-07-2008, 09:27 PM
Looks to be the kind of kid who, if he develops, could be a LH bat off the bench and a solid backup defender at all 3 OF spots -- for a marginal lefty reliever, that seems about right

Tom Servo
04-07-2008, 09:31 PM
I still wonder what exactly made the Reds brass suddenly turn sour on Coutlangus. I know the walks were a bit of a problem, but it was his rookie year...

johngalt
04-07-2008, 10:07 PM
I still wonder what exactly made the Reds brass suddenly turn sour on Coutlangus. I know the walks were a bit of a problem, but it was his rookie year...

Maybe he didn't take his demotion too well and they felt he didn't work hard in the spring. It has to be something in terms of his attitude because otherwise he'd be good insurance to have at AAA in case Mercker falls apart and Bray doesn't turn things around.

Having said that, I think it's a solid deal. Perales hit pretty well with a ton of extra-base hits in the MWL last season (albeit as a 22 year old). If he hits the ground running in Sarasota, maybe he's in Chattanooga the second half. And honestly, despite the presence of Jay Bruce in Louisville, this organization could use another outfielder or two coming up in the system.

wheels
04-07-2008, 10:20 PM
Maybe he didn't take his demotion too well and they felt he didn't work hard in the spring. It has to be something in terms of his attitude because otherwise he'd be good insurance to have at AAA in case Mercker falls apart and Bray doesn't turn things around.

Having said that, I think it's a solid deal. Perales hit pretty well with a ton of extra-base hits in the MWL last season (albeit as a 22 year old). If he hits the ground running in Sarasota, maybe he's in Chattanooga the second half. And honestly, despite the presence of Jay Bruce in Louisville, this organization could use another outfielder or two coming up in the system.


Good take.

I just wish he was right handed. Other than that, it's a decent little deal.

WebScorpion
04-07-2008, 11:15 PM
Maybe they didn't really sour on him as much as he became redundant:

LHPs = Affeldt, Mercker, Stanton, Maloney, Bray, Pelland, Pettyjohn

I know they dumped Stanton, and Maloney is a starter, but I see Affeldt's move to the 'pen as the one that pushed Cout out. Even then, they might have tried to hang on to him if it weren't for Bray, Pelland, and Pettyjohn in AAA. He was just the odd man out. He didn't really get any worse, the Reds just got better. ;)

REDREAD
04-07-2008, 11:57 PM
I still wonder what exactly made the Reds brass suddenly turn sour on Coutlangus. I know the walks were a bit of a problem, but it was his rookie year...


I just had the feeling Wayne never really liked him. Remember when they optioned him last year and the board was scratching their heads (due to the other bad relievers that were on the roster).

I don't get it. It's not as if the Reds are so loaded with talent that they couldn't have kept him on the 40 man roster. Unless maybe he had to be on the 25 man roster?? Still, I thought he was worth keeping.

A 23 year old that played A ball last year who might be a 4th OF doesn't really excite me. Not a good return, IMO, but obviously I think more of Coutlangous than Wayne does.

johngalt
04-08-2008, 12:24 AM
I just had the feeling Wayne never really liked him. Remember when they optioned him last year and the board was scratching their heads (due to the other bad relievers that were on the roster).

I don't get it. It's not as if the Reds are so loaded with talent that they couldn't have kept him on the 40 man roster. Unless maybe he had to be on the 25 man roster?? Still, I thought he was worth keeping.

A 23 year old that played A ball last year who might be a 4th OF doesn't really excite me. Not a good return, IMO, but obviously I think more of Coutlangous than Wayne does.

Look at the other relievers. He's already behind Affeldt and Mercker who are with the big club. Then the Reds also have Bray and Pelland at AAA and Viola at AA as young left relievers - all of whom are younger and with more potential than Coutlangus.

I thought he pitched well last year too and wouldn't have minded if we DFA'd one or two other guys beside him to clear a 40-man spot, but he's clearly behind some guys on the depth chart and very expendable.

Sea Ray
04-08-2008, 01:04 AM
The fact that Krivsky didn't like Coutlangus should surprise no one. He's made it very clear that he doesn't like guys who can't find the plate. For that reason he's jettisoned the likes of Joe Valentine, Luke Hudson, Brad Salmon, Allan Simpson and Chris Booker. My guess is that Homer Bailey is on thin ice for the same reason.

I like Cout as well and I would have cut him some more slack since he was so late in being switched to pitcher, but in Kriv's defense none of these other guys he's cut has ever found their command.

Patrick Bateman
04-08-2008, 01:11 AM
I think that's an excellent point Ray.

RedlegJake
04-08-2008, 09:08 AM
SeaRay's point well taken. Team's have to make decisions on who will and who won't develop. Sometimes they're wrong. Thing is someone has to move to make room for guys that are still considered on track. Roster rules ensure that players will get moved if they aren't in immediate plans. With Bray, Pelland and Viola, Cout was simply the 4th in line. I hope he makes it in Arizona and pitches well against everyone but the Reds.

princeton
04-08-2008, 10:15 AM
SeaRay's point well taken. Team's have to make decisions on who will and who won't develop. Sometimes they're wrong. Thing is someone has to move to make room for guys that are still considered on track. Roster rules ensure that players will get moved if they aren't in immediate plans. With Bray, Pelland and Viola, Cout was simply the 4th in line. I hope he makes it in Arizona and pitches well against everyone but the Reds.

he's lefthanded. He can't help but pitch well against the Reds.

maybe the Reds had preseason deal worked out, but delayed announcement to avoid facing him in the first series and to scout the Arizona guy a little bit.

redsmetz
04-08-2008, 10:36 AM
he's lefthanded. He can't help but pitch well against the Reds.

maybe the Reds had preseason deal worked out, but delayed announcement to avoid facing him in the first series and to scout the Arizona guy a little bit.

He's not going to be getting any major league batters out right now - he's been assigned to AAA Tucson. I'm sure he'll pitch for Arizona some time this summer.

I agree with those who have suggested this was more about Coutlangus being redundant and down on the depth chart than it was about the club having a dislike for him. Webscorpian said it best - we've gotten better, making Coutlangus expendable and picking up a servicable piece that may help later on.

TRF
04-08-2008, 10:41 AM
The fact that Krivsky didn't like Coutlangus should surprise no one. He's made it very clear that he doesn't like guys who can't find the plate. For that reason he's jettisoned the likes of Joe Valentine, Luke Hudson, Brad Salmon, Allan Simpson and Chris Booker. My guess is that Homer Bailey is on thin ice for the same reason.

I like Cout as well and I would have cut him some more slack since he was so late in being switched to pitcher, but in Kriv's defense none of these other guys he's cut has ever found their command.

He also acquired Josh Fogg, Yan, Maj, Woo, Stanton and a host of other dreck.

Salmon was just fine finding the plate.

When it comes to the pen, Krivsky is a throw it against the wall and see what sticks kind of GM. Then he blindfolds himself and throws darts at whats left.

IslandRed
04-08-2008, 10:47 AM
The fact that Krivsky didn't like Coutlangus should surprise no one. He's made it very clear that he doesn't like guys who can't find the plate. For that reason he's jettisoned the likes of Joe Valentine, Luke Hudson, Brad Salmon, Allan Simpson and Chris Booker. My guess is that Homer Bailey is on thin ice for the same reason.

That's a very good point, and it's also worth noting that those guys were in the mid to upper 20s in age. Bailey, of course, has a lot more time on his side. At 22, further refinement of command is expected; at 27, teams figure a guy is what he is.

It does make one wonder how Jeremy Affeldt fits into that philosophy, though.

Sea Ray
04-08-2008, 11:57 AM
He also acquired Josh Fogg, Yan, Maj, Woo, Stanton and a host of other dreck.

Salmon was just fine finding the plate.

When it comes to the pen, Krivsky is a throw it against the wall and see what sticks kind of GM. Then he blindfolds himself and throws darts at whats left.

But those are soft throwers who are not known to walk a lot of guys. That's the difference. He'll tend to discard pitchers who are wild regardless of what the radar gun says. I'm not saying that's a good philosophy but it is where Krivsky's coming from.

TRF
04-08-2008, 12:23 PM
Yan threw 96.

I can't remember about the rest, but the fact is kriv acquired these guys. I really don't see him having a bullpen philosophy at all.

Sea Ray
04-08-2008, 12:27 PM
Yan threw 96.

I can't remember about the rest, but the fact is kriv acquired these guys. I really don't see him having a bullpen philosophy at all.

His pitching philosophy is first and foremost: you better throw strikes. We won't tolerate wildness which is why they cut Cout.

TRF
04-08-2008, 01:24 PM
His pitching philosophy is first and foremost: you better throw strikes. We won't tolerate wildness which is why they cut Cout.

Josh Fogg throws strikes?

Well I guess he does, as they get hammered enough.

camisadelgolf
04-08-2008, 01:26 PM
Thank goodness. Between Drew Stubbs, Juan Duran, Tony Brown, Mariekson Gregarius, Donald Lutz, Chris Heisey, Brandon Menchaca, Justin Reed, Sean Henry, Brett Bartles, Alexis Oliveras, etc., I was really worried the Reds wouldn't have enough quality outfielders in the lower minor leagues. Now I am no longer worried.

KronoRed
04-08-2008, 01:35 PM
Thank goodness. Between Drew Stubbs, Juan Duran, Tony Brown, Mariekson Gregarius, Donald Lutz, Chris Heisey, Brandon Menchaca, Justin Reed, Sean Henry, Brett Bartles, Alexis Oliveras, etc., I was really worried the Reds wouldn't have enough quality outfielders in the lower minor leagues. Now I am no longer worried.

The 4 OF plan is going to need man power.

princeton
04-08-2008, 02:08 PM
Thank goodness. Between Drew Stubbs, Juan Duran, Tony Brown, Mariekson Gregarius, Donald Lutz, Chris Heisey, Brandon Menchaca, Justin Reed, Sean Henry, Brett Bartles, Alexis Oliveras, etc., I was really worried the Reds wouldn't have enough quality outfielders in the lower minor leagues. Now I am no longer worried.

you're easily satisfied

WMR
04-08-2008, 02:11 PM
Josh Fogg throws strikes?

Well I guess he does, as they get hammered enough.

PITCH TO CONTACT!!! :rockband: :party: :rockband: :party:

klw
04-08-2008, 04:18 PM
Well Coutlangus must have slipped in the mind of Redszone too if his trade is not Sticky-worthy.

REDREAD
04-08-2008, 05:35 PM
That's a very good point, and it's also worth noting that those guys were in the mid to upper 20s in age. Bailey, of course, has a lot more time on his side. At 22, further refinement of command is expected; at 27, teams figure a guy is what he is.

It does make one wonder how Jeremy Affeldt fits into that philosophy, though.

Belisle turns 28 this year ( born 1980) as well.. yet most of the board is very optimistic he willl still break through.

TRF
04-08-2008, 06:54 PM
Belisle turns 28 this year ( born 1980) as well.. yet most of the board is very optimistic he willl still break through.

In 2004 Aaron Harang turned 26. He pitched 161 innings for the Reds with a 4.86 ERA and 125 K's

In 2005 He tacked on 50 IP, 38K's and knocked a full run off his ERA


In 2007 Matt Belisle turned 27 in June, pitched 177 innings for the Reds with a 5.32 ERA and 125 strikeouts.

In 2008 ?

It's an interesting parallel, one that does not in any way guarantee the same result of course, but it does make one go hmmmm. All Josh Fogg has to offer is being Josh Fogg. He manages 30 starts a year despite having bad K rates, hit rates and despite averaging 32 GS a year, he's never managed to crack 200 IP.

Belisle is poised to make an Aaron Harang like step forward. Whether he can is up to him, his opportunity to do so is up to him AND Dusty/Krivsky.

Always Red
04-08-2008, 07:19 PM
In 2004 Aaron Harang turned 26. He pitched 161 innings for the Reds with a 4.86 ERA and 125 K's

In 2005 He tacked on 50 IP, 38K's and knocked a full run off his ERA


In 2007 Matt Belisle turned 27 in June, pitched 177 innings for the Reds with a 5.32 ERA and 125 strikeouts.

In 2008 ?

It's an interesting parallel, one that does not in any way guarantee the same result of course, but it does make one go hmmmm. All Josh Fogg has to offer is being Josh Fogg. He manages 30 starts a year despite having bad K rates, hit rates and despite averaging 32 GS a year, he's never managed to crack 200 IP.

Belisle is poised to make an Aaron Harang like step forward. Whether he can is up to him, his opportunity to do so is up to him AND Dusty/Krivsky.

I'm all for Matt Belisle making that next big step.

And I agree with you about Fogg- though Fogg did have a better year than Belisle last year.

Your comparison with Harang breaks down however, when you consider that Belisle posted the highest, by far, ERA of his career last year. He didn't improve, he slipped. And in that year 2005, Aaron Harang posted his best, by far, ERA (as you mentioned). Belisle's career WHIP is almost exactly identical to Fogg's, and Fogg's stuff is so poor that he is forced to be a nibbler. Belisle has much better stuff; but he won't be the first guy to not take advantage of it, if he fails.

I hope Belisle can take that next step forward this year. :beerme:

WMR
04-08-2008, 07:24 PM
Again, what defense was playing behind Josh Fogg last season?

Blitz Dorsey
04-08-2008, 10:03 PM
I'm really worried about losing a guy who just learned to pitch a few years ago and can't find the strike zone.

That said, I agree we don't really need to be in the market for more A-ball outfielders who are way behind the curve. By the age of 23, if you are still in A-ball, you aren't going to be a good MLB player. There are exceptions, but you better hope you're in the 1 percent. Drew Stubbs knows what I'm talking about.

KronoRed
04-09-2008, 12:13 AM
Again, what defense was playing behind Josh Fogg last season?

I'm not sure but I'm betting it was 7 guys

:D

Triples
04-09-2008, 09:51 AM
From the Reds:

Could this be a lead off guy in training?

TRF
04-09-2008, 11:49 AM
I'm all for Matt Belisle making that next big step.

And I agree with you about Fogg- though Fogg did have a better year than Belisle last year.

Your comparison with Harang breaks down however, when you consider that Belisle posted the highest, by far, ERA of his career last year. He didn't improve, he slipped. And in that year 2005, Aaron Harang posted his best, by far, ERA (as you mentioned). Belisle's career WHIP is almost exactly identical to Fogg's, and Fogg's stuff is so poor that he is forced to be a nibbler. Belisle has much better stuff; but he won't be the first guy to not take advantage of it, if he fails.

I hope Belisle can take that next step forward this year. :beerme:

There are parallels and a few differences. Belisle had been used mostly as a reliever and spot starter. Harang almost exclusively as a starter, but bouncing back and forth between AAA and Oakland before coming to Cincinnati. Nearly identical K rates, MB had the better BB rate, Harang the better hit rate and similar innings pitched.

And no, Josh Fogg did not have a better year than Belisle.



IP H R ER HR BB SO H9 HR9 BB9 K9 WHIP GB%
Belisle 177 212 111 105 26 43 125 10.74 1.32 2.18 6.33 1.44 44%
Fogg 161 194 99 91 23 59 94 10.54 1.25 3.21 5.11 1.53 41%


Belisle had the better K rate, BB rate, GB% WHIP, pitched more innings. Fogg was a tick better with the hit rate and HR rate, but Coors isn't the HR haven it used to be. All Fogg really had over Belisle was a better ERA and 2 more W's. Belisle has room to grow and evolve as a pitcher. All Fogg can do is be the same pitcher or worse than he was last year.

IslandRed
04-09-2008, 12:14 PM
There are parallels and a few differences. Belisle had been used mostly as a reliever and spot starter. Harang almost exclusively as a starter, but bouncing back and forth between AAA and Oakland before coming to Cincinnati. Nearly identical K rates, MB had the better BB rate, Harang the better hit rate and similar innings pitched.

TRF, I like your optimism here. Unfortunately, we have to remember that relatively few guys follow the Harang path. It's pretty rare for a pitcher who's still considered a fringe rotation guy at age 25-26 to turn into a staff workhorse.

Of course, the bar Belisle needs to clear right now isn't "as good as Aaron Harang," it's "better than Josh Fogg."

pahster
04-09-2008, 12:17 PM
Of course, the bar Belisle needs to clear right now isn't "as good as Aaron Harang," it's "better than Josh Fogg."

He did that last year.

RedsManRick
04-09-2008, 12:25 PM
We really have to learn to separate "how well a guy pitched" from "what was his ERA". Sure, they're related. But they are not the same thing. Matt Belisle pitched better than Josh Fogg last year. Josh Fogg had a lower ERA due to a combination of things, including but not limited to, team defense, better middle relief, and dumb luck.

Just look at reasonable projection system, and they'll have Belisle down for a likely better season than Fogg in 2008.

REDREAD
04-09-2008, 01:43 PM
In 2004 Aaron Harang turned 26. He pitched 161 innings for the Reds with a 4.86 ERA and 125 K's

In 2005 He tacked on 50 IP, 38K's and knocked a full run off his ERA


In 2007 Matt Belisle turned 27 in June, pitched 177 innings for the Reds with a 5.32 ERA and 125 strikeouts.

In 2008 ?

It's an interesting parallel, one that does not in any way guarantee the same result of course, but it does make one go hmmmm. All Josh Fogg has to offer is being Josh Fogg. He manages 30 starts a year despite having bad K rates, hit rates and despite averaging 32 GS a year, he's never managed to crack 200 IP.

I would use the same argument for keeping Coutlangous around. The guy started his pitching career later, so he's more likely to have a turn around.
This organization is very thin in relief pitching, especially for the long term.
IMO, he's worth more than what we traded him for.

I haven't written Belisle off yet, but many people bring up a similiar parallel any time a young pitcher struggles. There's always the example that Maddux really struggled in his first year, so there's hope. But when you play the odds, most young pitchers will not end up like Maddux.

Fogg has had 6 full seasons where he has started 26 games or more. Belisle has had one (last year). Foggs season at 27 years old (Belisle was 27 in his only full season) is actually remarkably similiar to Belisle's season.
In summary, I think Belisle has a much greater chance of being the next Fogg as opposed to the next Harang. Which is fine. Teams need guys like Fogg and Belisle to round out the staff. I would prefer to keep Fogg in the rotation and use Belisle in long relief. Belisle has a better chance of making a positive impact in long relief, in my opinion. Of course, due to injuries, his relief sample size is relatively small, but that's what I would do when Belisle is healthy.
Barring a total Milton-like implosion by Fogg (which I doubt will happen), I keep Fogg in the rotation all year -- unless Homer comes on like gangbusters in AAA and everyone else in the rotation is solid (again, I doubt that happens this year).










Belisle is poised to make an Aaron Harang like step forward. Whether he can is up to him, his opportunity to do so is up to him AND Dusty/Krivsky.[/QUOTE]

REDREAD
04-09-2008, 01:50 PM
We really have to learn to separate "how well a guy pitched" from "what was his ERA". Sure, they're related. But they are not the same thing. Matt Belisle pitched better than Josh Fogg last year. Josh Fogg had a lower ERA due to a combination of things, including but not limited to, team defense, better middle relief, and dumb luck.

Just look at reasonable projection system, and they'll have Belisle down for a likely better season than Fogg in 2008.

I'm not sure Belisle is going to be significantly better this year if you put him in the rotation. Maybe marginally better. The numbers are pretty close from last year, but obviously they played in different parks, different competition (unbalanced schedule, Matt had more games against the weaker NL Central)..
I think it's so close that it's hard to tell.

Not to mention, Fogg is healthy and Belisle had yet another injury this year which may hurt his performance. It wouldn't be the first time the Reds ran out a player before he was healed.

The most compelling reason to keep Fogg in the rotation, IMO is that Belisle is potentially an impact long reliever. I know that sounds silly, but that has value. Belisle has thrived in that role in the past. We need relief pitching.
IMO, if my assumption is true, then Belisle is more valuable in the pen as opposed to being a Fogg-like #5 starter.

puca
04-09-2008, 02:00 PM
Also, Fogg didn't have the displeasure of pitching to Javy ( Check out Belisle's splits between pitching to Ross and Javy sometime ).

Problem is that half of Fogg's starts will last 5 innings or less, that is pretty much guaranteed based on his history. That is a lot of innings for a bullpen to soak up - especially one that should be being used to protect two promising young arms.

I'd much rather Fogg in the role of a mop up man and take my chances that Belisle will improve upon his first season as a starter. The problem is which bullpen arm to displace. Of course Belisle must show he is healthy first.

REDREAD
04-09-2008, 02:30 PM
Also, Fogg didn't have the displeasure of pitching to Javy ( Check out Belisle's splits between pitching to Ross and Javy sometime ).

Problem is that half of Fogg's starts will last 5 innings or less, that is pretty much guaranteed based on his history. That is a lot of innings for a bullpen to soak up - especially one that should be being used to protect two promising young arms.

I'd much rather Fogg in the role of a mop up man and take my chances that Belisle will improve upon his first season as a starter. The problem is which bullpen arm to displace. Of course Belisle must show he is healthy first.

Last year, Belisle appeared in 30 games, all starts and only logged 177 IP..
That's an average of only 5.9 IP per start.

Last year, Fogg had 30 appearances, 29 of which were starts and logged 165 IP..

They are pretty close as far as expected innings per start, based on history.

puca
04-09-2008, 02:57 PM
Last year, Belisle appeared in 30 games, all starts and only logged 177 IP..
That's an average of only 5.9 IP per start.

Last year, Fogg had 30 appearances, 29 of which were starts and logged 165 IP..

They are pretty close as far as expected innings per start, based on history.

Fogg has a history. Belisle has one year.

Fogg is projectable based on that history. Belisle is not. With your logic, Aaron Harang would not have been in the roation in 2005.

RedsManRick
04-09-2008, 03:18 PM
I'm not sure Belisle is going to be significantly better this year if you put him in the rotation. Maybe marginally better. The numbers are pretty close from last year, but obviously they played in different parks, different competition (unbalanced schedule, Matt had more games against the weaker NL Central)..
I think it's so close that it's hard to tell.

Not to mention, Fogg is healthy and Belisle had yet another injury this year which may hurt his performance. It wouldn't be the first time the Reds ran out a player before he was healed.

The most compelling reason to keep Fogg in the rotation, IMO is that Belisle is potentially an impact long reliever. I know that sounds silly, but that has value. Belisle has thrived in that role in the past. We need relief pitching.
IMO, if my assumption is true, then Belisle is more valuable in the pen as opposed to being a Fogg-like #5 starter.

Belisle does have to pitch any better, that's really the point. It's that if he pitches exactly the same as he did least year, we'd expect an ERA in the mid 4's. Again, let's not confuse pitcher performance with ERA. ERA is one way to measure pitcher performance, but it's more suited as a historical measure.

I know it's not the be-all-end-all, but Belisle had a 4.54 FIP last year. Josh Fogg was at 5.17. That's instructive.

As for Belisle "thriving" as a middle reliever, while his ERA was a healthy 3.60 in 2006, his FIP was 5.18. His BB/9 in 2006 was double his 2007 figure. His K/9 was lower in 06 than 07. Especially when looking at small sample sizes, it's very important to make sure you're looking at the metric that really measures what you're trying to assess. ERA, while a good measure of how many "earned runs scored and were attributed to the pitcher", it simply is not a very good measure how well the guy pitched, nor a very good indicator of how he's likely to pitch in the future.

There's no evidence that Belisle is unusually more effective as a reliever than a starter (nearly every pitcher is better in relief) and there is evidence that Belisle is a better pitcher than Josh Fogg.

Again, I know it's not the Bible, but here are the PECOTA weighted mean projections:

Fogg
126.0 IP
22 GS (5.7 IP/GS)
5.21 ERA
1.48 WHIP
5.36 K/9
2.8 BB/9
1.5 HR/9

Belisle
156.7 IP
26 GS (6.0 IP/GS)
4.81 ERA
1.45 WHIP
6.1 K/9
2.6 BB/9
1.2 HR/9

The improvement is admittedly on the margins, but especially given Belisle's age and experience, he's clearly the better option. Why not go with the younger guy who misses a few more bats and gives up fewer walks?

TRF
04-09-2008, 03:49 PM
REDREAD, Belisle and Fogg were similar at age 27 in that they both were starters. Belisle K'd 2 more batters per 9, walked 1 fewer. There really is nothing similar about them.

westofyou
04-09-2008, 03:53 PM
There really is nothing similar about them.

Well they are well paid, white, right handed guys and put their pants on one leg at a time... I bet I can find some other stuff.

If I look that is, the above is off the top of my head.

KronoRed
04-09-2008, 03:55 PM
Matt and Josh are both 4 letter names.

TRF
04-09-2008, 03:55 PM
Well they are well paid, white, right handed guys and put their pants on one leg at a time... I bet I can find some other stuff.

If I look that is, the above is off the top of my head.

Right!

Both are Americans, and throw right handed. I think both have eaten hamburgers prepared by McDonalds. Not positive on that last one.

REDREAD
04-09-2008, 04:04 PM
Fogg has a history. Belisle has one year.

Fogg is projectable based on that history. Belisle is not. With your logic, Aaron Harang would not have been in the roation in 2005.


It depends.. Belisle is 28 this year. He's only had one full season. True, that makes him less projectable, but that also makes him less likely to break through and make a big leap in performance.

Belisle was pretty underwhelming last year.

I agree Fogg is pretty much "what you see is what you get".

Belisle might get a little better, I concede that. He also might have another injury plagued season or get worse.

If I had to put money down and bet, I'd say that Belisle will be nothing special this year (as will Fogg).

In any event, I'm not enamored enough with Belisle to cut Fogg and immediately plug Belisle in the rotation, as some want to.

Always Red
04-09-2008, 04:11 PM
Right!

Both are Americans, and throw right handed. I think both have eaten hamburgers prepared by McDonalds. Not positive on that last one.

OK, they both...suck.

BUT, as Belisle is a bit younger, and misses slightly more bats, he MIGHT, in the long run improve, but for poor Mr. Fogg, all hope is lost.

Do I have it right now? ;)

TRF
04-09-2008, 04:22 PM
It depends.. Belisle is 28 this year. He's only had one full season. True, that makes him less projectable, but that also makes him less likely to break through and make a big leap in performance.

Belisle was pretty underwhelming last year.

I agree Fogg is pretty much "what you see is what you get".

Belisle might get a little better, I concede that. He also might have another injury plagued season or get worse.

If I had to put money down and bet, I'd say that Belisle will be nothing special this year (as will Fogg).

In any event, I'm not enamored enough with Belisle to cut Fogg and immediately plug Belisle in the rotation, as some want to.

Belisle had almost exactly the same year Arroyo had. While it wasn't a great year, it was at least a league average one. Once you move away from ERA, you'll see that.


OK, they both...suck.

BUT, as Belisle is a bit younger, and misses slightly more bats, he MIGHT, in the long run improve, but for poor Mr. Fogg, all hope is lost.

Do I have it right now? ;)

Well, yes, Fogg does suck. Belisle not so much. And it isn't slightly more bats. It's a lot more.

REDREAD
04-09-2008, 04:24 PM
REDREAD, Belisle and Fogg were similar at age 27 in that they both were starters. Belisle K'd 2 more batters per 9, walked 1 fewer. There really is nothing similar about them.

Comparing their last 2007 seasons. Which isn't entirely fair, due to the unbalanced schedule.

Belisle gives up more HR per 9 IP.
Belisle gives up more hits per 9 IP.
This at least partially offsets the K and BB advantage.

Hitters hit .301 vs Belisle last year (343 OBP 482 SLG)
Hitters hit .293 vs Fogg last year (359 OBP 495 SLG)

Given that the unbalanced schedule, I don't see a clear difference.
Fogg had a slightly poorer OBP against, but a lower BA vs.
It's not too much of a stretch to say that Fogg played against tougher competition last year as well, but even if you call it even, the difference isn't much.

One can disparge ERA as much as they want. I know it's not perfect, particular as it is partially dependent on the bullpen.. but the bottom line is that the starting pitcher's responsiblity is to stop runs from scoring.
I do agree that ERA is less meaningful when comparing relievers, but for starting pitchers, they actually are directly responsible for most of the runs charged to them.

TRF
04-09-2008, 04:27 PM
And Fogg had a better defense BY FAR behind him turning hits into outs. the difference in their H/9 and HR/9 are minuscule while the BB/9 and K/9 are much wider margins. no, the tiny difference doesn't offset much at all.

RedsManRick
04-09-2008, 04:35 PM
Comparing their last 2007 seasons. Which isn't entirely fair, due to the unbalanced schedule.

Belisle gives up more HR per 9 IP.
Belisle gives up more hits per 9 IP.
This at least partially offsets the K and BB advantage.

Hitters hit .301 vs Belisle last year (343 OBP 482 SLG)
Hitters hit .293 vs Fogg last year (359 OBP 495 SLG)

Given that the unbalanced schedule, I don't see a clear difference.
Fogg had a slightly poorer OBP against, but a lower BA vs.
It's not too much of a stretch to say that Fogg played against tougher competition last year as well, but even if you call it even, the difference isn't much.

One can disparge ERA as much as they want. I know it's not perfect, particular as it is partially dependent on the bullpen.. but the bottom line is that the starting pitcher's responsiblity is to stop runs from scoring.
I do agree that ERA is less meaningful when comparing relievers, but for starting pitchers, they actually are directly responsible for most of the runs charged to them.

So where exactly are you accounting for the facts that:

1.) GABP is more homer friendly than Coors. Using a 3 year average, GABP has a HR Index of 127 (100 is average), Coors is at 112.
I'm happy to look at the entirety of park factors in accounting for the differences between them, but it certainly isn't in the HR.

2.) Colorado's defense was among the best in the league while the Reds was among the worst - on the order of the Reds defense allowing 5% more hits on balls in play.

As for the bolded comment, that's a misleading statement at best. It's the defense's job, including the pitcher (both pitching and fielding), to prevent runs. Yes, the pitcher has more impact on those runs than any other player, but that doesn't justify using ERA as your metric of comparison. We can and do have ways to isolate the pitcher's role in those runs scoring, and that's where Belisle comes out ahead.

REDREAD
04-09-2008, 05:29 PM
Belisle had almost exactly the same year Arroyo had. While it wasn't a great year, it was at least a league average one. Once you move away from ERA, you'll see that.

Not so sure .. let's move away from ERA

Batters vs Belisle: .301 vs Belisle last year (343 OBP 482 SLG).
26 HR in 177 IP

Batters vs Arroyo (who did slip last year): 280 BA 338 OBP 450 SLG, 28 HR in 210 IP

Belisle gave up more hits, baserunners, and a higher slugging percentage.
That's why his ERA was higher.






Well, yes, Fogg does suck. Belisle not so much. And it isn't slightly more bats. It's a lot more.

Belisle is closer to Fogg than he is to Arroyo and Harang.
I don't expect anyone to believe that at this point, as he's got the glow of youth on his side. It's kind of like arguing Deno wasn't that big of a loss when he was traded and that Freel wasn't that great of a player when he first arrived..

REDREAD
04-09-2008, 05:32 PM
And Fogg had a better defense BY FAR behind him turning hits into outs. the difference in their H/9 and HR/9 are minuscule while the BB/9 and K/9 are much wider margins. no, the tiny difference doesn't offset much at all.

It's hard to compare. That's kind of my point. They are too close to call.

IMO, the extra K's are overrated when Belisle gives up hits at a much greater frequency.

Belisle had a .301 BA against last year. That is not good.
That's very hittable. He is going to continue to struggle if he's that hittable.

RedsManRick
04-09-2008, 05:41 PM
It's hard to compare. That's kind of my point. They are too close to call.

IMO, the extra K's are overrated when Belisle gives up hits at a much greater frequency.

Belisle had a .301 BA against last year. That is not good.
That's very hittable. He is going to continue to struggle if he's that hittable.

Matt Belisle allowed fewer balls in play and yet gave up more hits. It shouldn't be difficult to figure out that the quality of defense behind them might have something to do with that...

MississippiRed
04-09-2008, 05:45 PM
Well they are well paid, white, right handed guys and put their pants on one leg at a time...

Of course, after Belisle puts his pants on, he makes hit records. Wait that's Bruce Dickinson. Belisle pitches unlucky.

REDREAD
04-09-2008, 06:14 PM
Matt Belisle allowed fewer balls in play and yet gave up more hits. It shouldn't be difficult to figure out that the quality of defense behind them might have something to do with that...

That's the BABIP argument, which I don't entirely agree with.

IMO, all balls in play are not created equal.

Marino Rivera in his prime was a classic example. Got tons of weak popups in play. That's why he had a low BABIP.

For the record, I do agree that Belisle might be marginally better than Fogg.

My entire argument is that given how thin the Reds' pitching staff is, it doesn't make sense to cut Fogg. Since Belisle has had some success in middle relief, it seems reasonable to put him there.

The Rockies played a tougher schedule, the Rockies had a better defense, etc. There's too many variables to clearly say which one had the better year. I agree on that point (if that's what people are saying).

Still. I think Matt's 301 BA against is pretty telling. It's not the fault of bad luck or poor defense entirely. He simply gives up a lot of hits.

RedsManRick
04-09-2008, 06:20 PM
REDREAD, you haven't seen me arguing that we cut Fogg, though I certainly would rather have Marcus McBeth, Pedro Viola, or Josh Roenicke on the staff. However, if both are on the 25 man, there should be no doubt which one deserves to be in the starting rotation. Somebody needs to be on garbage duty and it should Josh Fogg.

puca
04-09-2008, 06:31 PM
Coincidence or could Javy have something to do with the high BAbip and SLG of Matt Belisle? Not enough data to tell, but considering Javy's pitch selection has apparently come into question lately, I thought I'd post this interesting split.

Interestingly Matt gave up homers at a much higher rate when Ross was catching.


I Split G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR BB IBB SO HBP SH SF ROE GDP SB CS Pk BA OBP SLG OPS BAbip sOPS+ tOPS+
+-+------------+---+----+----+---+---+--+--+--+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--+--+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
D Ross 16 381 353 49 97 16 1 14 25 2 57 1 0 2 5 11 3 5 0 .275 .323 .445 .768 .292 97 86
J Valentin 11 281 250 42 87 20 1 7 13 2 46 5 7 6 1 2 7 1 0 .348 .383 .520 .903 .394 117 120
C Moeller 4 106 99 14 27 8 1 5 5 0 21 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 .273 .311 .525 .837 .297 107 100
R Hanigan 1 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 .333 .333 .333 .667 .500 114 66

REDREAD
04-10-2008, 09:48 AM
REDREAD, you haven't seen me arguing that we cut Fogg, though I certainly would rather have Marcus McBeth, Pedro Viola, or Josh Roenicke on the staff. However, if both are on the 25 man, there should be no doubt which one deserves to be in the starting rotation. Somebody needs to be on garbage duty and it should Josh Fogg.

Ok, sorry, it's hard to keep track of who says what. There was some posters who felt Fogg should've been cut after his first start or as soon as Belisle is ready. That is kind of absurd given how thin our staff is.

I would be ok with flipping Fogg into long relief, as I don't see a whole lot of difference between the two. However, I think Belisle has a future in the pen. Maybe it's unfounded, small sample sizes, etc.. but I think that's his future as a ML pitcher. He can carve out a good career as a long man that makes occasonal starts. I'm not sure he can make it as a regular starting pitcher... although in reality I guess pitching is so scarce, he could find work as a starter for quite some time (much like Fogg and other journeymen).