PDA

View Full Version : Aaron Harang Total Loses for 2010



NastyBoy
04-22-2010, 02:21 AM
I did the same poll last season... but Harang season ended early and he did on lead the league in losses two years in a row. He ended up second in the league losses last year only due to injury. Otherwise, I am sure he would have lead the league.

This poll is based on the premise that a manager and club president is stupid enough ignore the previous two seasons and keep running this out there every fifth day.

I am going with 19 losses because I believe we will never see a 20 loss pitcher ever again because the manager will sit him or move him to the bullpen the last 2 weeks of the season.

double21d
04-22-2010, 06:42 AM
I'm going with 10. I think eventually Harang will have to right the ship.
Also, didn't we recently have a 20 game loser in major league baseball? I remember the Tigers having a terrible season one year...did anyone lose 20 on that team?

muddie
04-22-2010, 07:40 AM
Mike Maroth lost 19 if I recall correctly. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

NastyBoy
04-22-2010, 08:22 AM
Mike Maroth lost 21 and Jeremy Bonderman lost 19 on the 2003 Tigers team.

muddie
04-22-2010, 08:29 AM
I saw the Tigers in for a series in Baltimore that year and it just so happened that the two starters I saw were Bonderman and Maroth. The Tigers were shut out both games.

gilpdawg
04-22-2010, 08:38 AM
IF...and I mean if, Harang can start containing the home run balls, he's got a chance to rebound. He's actually been more of a groundball pitcher, and there's no way his HR/FB rate will stay at 23%. The more alarming stat is the fact that his K/9 is down to 6.23, from a career number of 7.52. For some reason he's throwing a slider more, according to fangraphs.

Also, he appears to be pressing. In low leverage situations he's been fine. He just falls apart in higher leverage situations. Check the splits.

http://www.fangraphs.com/statsplits.aspx?playerid=1451&position=P&season=2010

All that said, I think he just doesn't have the stuff right now, but there are some signs that he could rebound looking at the numbers. Also, in every season except for 2007, he's gotten better as the season goes on, peaking in May and June, and fading a little down the stretch.

redsfan2128
04-22-2010, 09:04 AM
wtf are we doin we have carlos fisher throwin the ball great he did well for us last year in the majors we need to cal him up send down ondrusek cause he sucks also we need to get dickerson in the lineup every day send down stubbs n get him some time in the minors n move scott rolen into the 4 hole and brandon in the 5 hole also possibly trade hernandez hanigan is a lot better defensivley n hes hittin great too

mattfeet
04-22-2010, 11:58 AM
wtf are we doin we have carlos fisher throwin the ball great he did well for us last year in the majors we need to cal him up send down ondrusek cause he sucks also we need to get dickerson in the lineup every day send down stubbs n get him some time in the minors n move scott rolen into the 4 hole and brandon in the 5 hole also possibly trade hernandez hanigan is a lot better defensivley n hes hittin great too

Periods and commas. Use them.

-Matt

Griffey012
04-22-2010, 12:14 PM
I am going with another 17 losses for Harang, he will probably be about 3-12 by the time he gets it going, which will be too late. And finish up about 5-5.

cbowen2112
04-22-2010, 07:33 PM
30 losses.... :(

No, but seriously he is not good.

Let's say 13 losses. 10-13, I think he gets it eventually, once he is not going out against 1 and 2 starters. They need to adjust him to face a #5 starter next.

FlyerFanatic
04-22-2010, 07:38 PM
how many did he have last season? like 15? prob right around there again

TheBigLebowski
04-22-2010, 07:41 PM
Last guy to lose 20 was our beloved Cubbies' Anthony Young, I believe.

texasdave
04-22-2010, 10:56 PM
10 losses...because if he keeps on stinking on ice he is going to be pulled from the rotation.

The Operator
04-23-2010, 01:11 AM
Sorry but I'm not gonna pin his W-L record from 2008 and 2009 on his performance. Yes, he was below his expectations, but his run support was putrid in both '08 AND '09. If he had even league average run support those years, he'd have been at least a .500 pitcher, no doubt in my mind.

This year, his losses are definitely on him. But let's not act like he's stunk the joint up since '08 because that's not the case. Wins and losses mean almost nothing when evaluating a pitcher.

That being said, I think he's hiding an injury. He still is throwing 93-94, yet he's lost the bite on his slider and he has no command inside the strike zone. Sounds a lot like Ryan Dempster when he was a Red. The guy was throwing 94 and his elbow was confetti. Remember Volquez last year? He was throwing 96-97 every game and his elbow was toast too.

When your velocity is fine but your command vanishes, it's probably TJ time.

NastyBoy
04-23-2010, 02:41 AM
Sorry but I'm not gonna pin his W-L record from 2008 and 2009 on his performance. Yes, he was below his expectations, but his run support was putrid in both '08 AND '09. If he had even league average run support those years, he'd have been at least a .500 pitcher, no doubt in my mind.

This year, his losses are definitely on him. But let's not act like he's stunk the joint up since '08 because that's not the case. Wins and losses mean almost nothing when evaluating a pitcher..

So how did Bronson Arroyo win 15 games last year and Zack Greinke win 16 games with virtually the same run support?

The Operator
04-23-2010, 04:14 AM
LOL. Zach Greinke? Really? Yes, let's hold Harang to those standards.

But anyway, they did not recieve the same run support in 2009. Harang received 3.4 runs per game in '09, Bronson got 3.7 and Greinke got 4.1.

I'd say the fact that Greinke is a Cy Young winner coupled with the fact that he got .8 runs more per game than Harang probably has something to do with the fact that his record was better last season. Just a hunch.

As for Bronson, his run support was better, albeit marginally. The explanation there is that - if you've ever watched a full season of Bronson Arroyo, you know he has stretches where he's unhittable and other stretched where he's a batting tee. The last two times the Reds played Toronto he was an embarrassment. So, his inconsistency has a major role in how he manages to get wins despite recieving only marginally better support than Harang. You'll notice Bronson also had 13 losses last year. I guarantee you he earned quite a few of them.

So yes, Aaron Harang was not as good as Zach Greinke last year. You are correct.

Kingspoint
04-23-2010, 04:53 AM
If Harang had been given more runs he would have found a way to give up even more runs himself.

NastyBoy
04-23-2010, 11:55 AM
LOL. Zach Greinke? Really? Yes, let's hold Harang to those standards.

But anyway, they did not recieve the same run support in 2009. Harang received 3.4 runs per game in '09, Bronson got 3.7 and Greinke got 4.1.

I'd say the fact that Greinke is a Cy Young winner coupled with the fact that he got .8 runs more per game than Harang probably has something to do with the fact that his record was better last season. Just a hunch.

As for Bronson, his run support was better, albeit marginally. The explanation there is that - if you've ever watched a full season of Bronson Arroyo, you know he has stretches where he's unhittable and other stretched where he's a batting tee. The last two times the Reds played Toronto he was an embarrassment. So, his inconsistency has a major role in how he manages to get wins despite recieving only marginally better support than Harang. You'll notice Bronson also had 13 losses last year. I guarantee you he earned quite a few of them.

So yes, Aaron Harang was not as good as Zach Greinke last year. You are correct.

My comment was specifically about run support. I was looking at ESPN stats... average run support.

6 Zack Greinke KAN 4.83
7 Aaron Harang CIN 4.93
8 Ted Lilly CHC 4.98
9 Bronson Arroyo CIN 5.02

Actually Greinke winning more games than Harang had more to do about his ERA being 2 runs less per game.

Yeah... I think we can hold to those standards because he is getting paid a sh*tload of money to be the number one starter....

Griffey012
04-23-2010, 12:24 PM
If Harang had been given more runs he would have found a way to give up even more runs himself.

Exactly why eventually his W-L record begins to reflect his own pitching and not just run support. And this is exactly what is the worst part of his pitching of the last few seasons.

Griffey012
04-23-2010, 12:25 PM
So how did Bronson Arroyo win 15 games last year and Zack Greinke win 16 games with virtually the same run support?

If you even out the bullpens, the Reds being good and the Royals being atrocious outside of Soria...it would probably be more like Greinke winning 20 games and Bronson winning 15 with the Reds pen, or Greinke winning 16 and Arroyo winning 11 with the KC pen.

texasdave
04-23-2010, 01:29 PM
If a pitcher is being paid premium bucks then he has to make however many runs his team can muster stand up. If Harang needs five or six runs a game to post a W, then he isn't worth all that jack. He has always struck me as a pitcher who pitches just well enough to lose.

The Operator
04-23-2010, 03:12 PM
My comment was specifically about run support. I was looking at ESPN stats... average run support.

6 Zack Greinke KAN 4.83
7 Aaron Harang CIN 4.93
8 Ted Lilly CHC 4.98
9 Bronson Arroyo CIN 5.02

Actually Greinke winning more games than Harang had more to do about his ERA being 2 runs less per game.

Yeah... I think we can hold to those standards because he is getting paid a sh*tload of money to be the number one starter....

Yes I saw those numbers on ESPN, I got my numbers from Baseball-Reference. Which ones are right? I don't know, but I just went back to BR to check and if you expand their pitching stats then my numbers (RS/GS) are right.

Even if the numbers you posted are correct, I'm still not gonna hold Harang to the expectation of putting up Zack Greinke numbers. That's absurd. He's one of the best pitchers in baseball and he won the Cy Young Award last year.

Yes, Greinke makes less money than him FOR NOW but that is going to change very soon.

Harang had a 4.21 ERA last year. It's safe to say, in my mind, had he really got 4.93 runs per game in support his record would have been a tad bit better. Even if he did, I don't care - he's not Zack Greinke and I don't ever expect him to be.

For that matter, maybe every team in baseball who doesn't have a Cy Young winner at the top of their rotation should make their opening day starter take a pay cut. The expectations around here are absurd sometimes.

Like I said earlier, Harang has sucked this year. He's probably hurt. But he didn't pitch nearly as bad as his record would indicate the previous two seasons. And that's a fact.

Griffey012
04-23-2010, 03:24 PM
Yes I saw those numbers on ESPN, I got my numbers from Baseball-Reference. Which ones are right? I don't know, but I just went back to BR to check and if you expand their pitching stats then my numbers (RS/GS) are right.

Even if the numbers you posted are correct, I'm still not gonna hold Harang to the expectation of putting up Zack Greinke numbers. That's absurd. He's one of the best pitchers in baseball and he won the Cy Young Award last year.

Yes, Greinke makes less money than him FOR NOW but that is going to change very soon.

Harang had a 4.21 ERA last year. It's safe to say, in my mind, had he really got 4.93 runs per game in support his record would have been a tad bit better. Even if he did, I don't care - he's not Zack Greinke and I don't ever expect him to be.

For that matter, maybe every team in baseball who doesn't have a Cy Young winner at the top of their rotation should make their opening day starter take a pay cut. The expectations around here are absurd sometimes.

Like I said earlier, Harang has sucked this year. He's probably hurt. But he didn't pitch nearly as bad as his record would indicate the previous two seasons. And that's a fact.

Once I get some time on my hands I am going to look up the correlation of run scored while Harang was pitching, and run Harang gave up. I bet there is a pretty close correlation with Harang usually giving up 1 or 2 more than we scored. Something does have to be said for the fact he always seems to pitch just outside of pitching good enough to win. When we score, he turns right back around and gives runs up.

The Operator
04-23-2010, 03:28 PM
Seeing as he had what, 17 losses last year, you're probably right. Generally he would have given up 1 or 2 more runs (at least) than The Reds scored. It doesn't really prove a thing.

If the Reds get shutout, and Harang goes 7 innings of 2 run ball, he gave up two more runs than The Reds scored. Meaningless.

Griffey012
04-23-2010, 03:45 PM
Once I get some time on my hands I am going to look up the correlation of run scored while Harang was pitching, and run Harang gave up. I bet there is a pretty close correlation with Harang usually giving up 1 or 2 more than we scored. Something does have to be said for the fact he always seems to pitch just outside of pitching good enough to win. When we score, he turns right back around and gives runs up.

Upon reviewing the box scores from last year Harang gave up 74 ER and had 57 RS when he was in the gave, or in the bottom of an inning if he pitched the top.

However I didn't even need to look further his run support was just atrocious. He started 25 games, and 21 of those runs were scored in 3 offensive outburts (8 rs, 8rs, 5rs) That leaves an average run support of 1.63 in his other 22 starts. That is just downright awful.

Now this year has been a different story thus far, as he is pitching just bad enough. Later I might exam the 08 season.

Griffey012
04-23-2010, 03:48 PM
Seeing as he had what, 17 losses last year, you're probably right. Generally he would have given up 1 or 2 more runs (at least) than The Reds scored. It doesn't really prove a thing.

If the Reds get shutout, and Harang goes 7 innings of 2 run ball, he gave up two more runs than The Reds scored. Meaningless.

What I was referring to was that from what I remembered about last season we would get him a lead, whether it was 5-4 or 2-1 or whatever then the very next time he took the mound he would give it right back up. Or we would tie the game and he would turn right around and lose the lead.

However if it were the case and there was a strong correlation, that would mean he would typically give up say 1 or 2 runs more that would prove something, that would prove he was typically just bad enough. He wasn't like Arroyo who was usually good and had some atrocious starts sprinkled in.

It's pretty much not relevant because he was literally just a victim of horrid support, as I came across.

The Operator
04-23-2010, 06:10 PM
And the truth is somewhere in the middle, as usual. Thanks for looking those numbers up.

If Harang had received a more consistent amount of run support over his other starts I think he would have easily been a .500 or better pitcher last year.

This year, it's clear to me he's hurt. Still throwing 93-94, but with no bite on his slider, no command of the strike zone and less movement than we've been accustomed to from his fastball. That screams torn UCL to me.

I do think Harang is probably in a steady decline for his career, I just don't think he's this bad. He's either a)hurt or b) having an anomoly-type rough patch. My money's on the former.

Kingspoint
04-24-2010, 04:09 AM
Exactly why eventually his W-L record begins to reflect his own pitching and not just run support. And this is exactly what is the worst part of his pitching of the last few seasons.

That statistic about "run support" is also not indicative of the runs he got while he was in the game.

That's a completely different stat. After he left the game, we didn't rally for runs, so he would get the losses, but we gave him enough runs to win games. He just couldn't keep the opponent to less runs than he was giving up while he was in the game.

I posted this on another Harang thread. It comes from baseball-reference.

It doesn't really matter any more.

Harang is biding his time here in Cincy and will be gone soon if he doesn't change things by June.

Kingspoint
04-24-2010, 04:10 AM
Harang is not hurt.

He wasn't hurt last year, either.

He's said as much himself.

Griffey012
04-24-2010, 04:21 AM
That statistic about "run support" is also not indicative of the runs he got while he was in the game.

That's a completely different stat. After he left the game, we didn't rally for runs, so he would get the losses, but we gave him enough runs to win games. He just couldn't keep the opponent to less runs than he was giving up while he was in the game.

I posted this on another Harang thread. It comes from baseball-reference.

It doesn't really matter any more.

Harang is biding his time here in Cincy and will be gone soon if he doesn't change things by June.

Kingspoint, I was on the same side as you until I did the research myself. As I mentioned in a post above, last season Harang got 57 runs of support, and 21 of those came in 3 different games. Otherwise on average he received 1.63 runs of support a game. Which is unfair, to even Pedro in his prime.

As much as I thought Harang gave up the lead/lost the lead, last season, he was never really ahead, because we didnt score runs.

I ask you to look at the box scores themselves, they are pretty sad.

The Operator
04-25-2010, 03:39 AM
Harang is not hurt.

He wasn't hurt last year, either.

He's said as much himself.

Right, and players never hide injuries.

The Operator
05-03-2010, 12:52 AM
To illustrate my earlier point about wins and losses being a stupid stat for a pitcher:

Zack Greinke is 0-3 this season with a 2.27 ERA.

Apparently he's been pitching "just bad enough to lose."

Griffey012
05-03-2010, 01:14 AM
To illustrate my earlier point about wins and losses being a stupid stat for a pitcher:

Zack Greinke is 0-3 this season with a 2.27 ERA.

Apparently he's been pitching "just bad enough to lose."

When you have a 2.27 ERA no other stats matter. When you have a 4.7 ERA and go 6-17 and the next year you go 6-14 with a 4.21 ERA, people begin to wonder. The "pitching just bad enough to lose" that you mention stems from the fact that over the past 2 season Harang has lost his ability to get big outs and avoid the longball. After researching it appears to just be an illusion, but I definitely get where people are coming from with that comment.

GIDP
05-03-2010, 01:16 AM
Apparently stats matter when they support one side of an argument.

The Operator
05-03-2010, 01:21 AM
Obviously I don't think Greinke really deserves to be 0-3.

But someone earlier in this thread posted that Harang should have more wins than he does because Zack Greinke, of all people, makes do with similar run support to what Harang received.

I'm merely illustrating the fact that even Zack Greinke is not immune to being victimized by poor run support.

But comparing Harang to Zack Greinke is akin to comparing Pete Harnisch to Greg Maddux. Of course Harang can't compare to arguably the best young pitcher in all of baseball.

Kingspoint
05-03-2010, 02:17 AM
Right, and players never hide injuries.

It's time you stop making excuses for the guy.

He sucked last season.

He sucked the season before.

He has sucked so far this season.

He has finally pitched "almost as well as an average NL starter" the last two games.

There's nothing wrong with him physically.

All of his problems are between the ears and have been for the last 2+ years now.

If Bryan Price can't turn him around, then nobody can.

He's shown signs the last two games (as was hoped for and expected by me) that Bryan Price's work with him would begin to pay off.

Harang should continue to show signs of improvement (because of the work with Price) over his next 5 starts.

After that, the rest is on Harang. Price can't help him anymore. It's sink or swim for Harang beginning in June. He either gets it going mentally and stops giving up the gopher balls, or he continues to be the stubborn person he's been the last few years and his career will be at it's end.

If he turns it around here over the next 6-8 weeks, then Harang has the potential to pitch effectively in the Majors for another 5 years. But, it's all up to him and his stubbornness (willingness to learn and change what he's been doing the last few years).

Kingspoint
05-03-2010, 02:26 AM
It doesn't frickin' matter how many runs of support Harang got.

Who cares!!!!?

We're talking about how much he sucked as a pitcher. The fact that he can't hit worth crap might have hurt his run support and that Dusty refused to pinch-hit for him all the time, even in the 6th and 7th innings with runners on base. That matters, and that's Harang's fault on the Offensive side of the ball.

But, just looking at his pitching only is all that really matters.

He sucked as a pitcher each of the last two seasons and so far this season, too.....AS WAS EXPECTED AND PREDICTED.

Griffey012
05-03-2010, 02:36 AM
Apparently stats matter when they support one side of an argument.

When you have a 2.27 ERA you are doing nothing wrong as a starter. When you have an ERA in the mid 4's and losing 2/3rds of your games you are doing a lot wrong. W-L aren't an important stat to gauge pitchers from but they shouldn't be completely thrown out. Say you have:

Pitcher A: 231 GS 87-85 W-L 1489 IP 1020 K's 4.28 ERA 1.335 WHIP
Pitcher B: 219 GS 76-83 W-L 1367 IP 1144 K's 4.30 ERA 1.331 WHIP

Pretty similar pitchers with similar lines. One has a winning career record, one has a losing career record. Which one do you choose?

Any guesses as to who these 2 pitchers are?

Kingspoint
05-03-2010, 02:48 AM
Looking at only National League Starting Pitching stats last season, this is where Aaron Harang ranked in some of catgories.

Of the 48 pitchers who qualified for an ERA title, 44 had lower OPS-Against than Harang, and one was only .001 higher. That is horrible any way you put it. That has nothing to do with "run support". I don't care how many wins or losses Harang had. I care only about how he pitches.

Of the 48 pitchers who qualified for an ERA title, 41 had better markov NPERA's than Harang (Cueto's was .01 worse). [= what the pitcher's ERA "should be" (NPERA) given his raw statistics NORMALIZED to composite major league play of 1946-1999] versus his "actual ERA" of which 35 of the 48 pitchers had better one's.

33 Starting Pitchers in the NL had a higher percentage of Quality Starts of those that had at least 25 starts. Harang had 26 starts.

33 Starting Pitchers in the NL had a higher average Game Score of those that had at least 25 starts (53 total Pitchers).

Kingspoint
05-03-2010, 03:04 AM
If you want to talk about wins or losses, then talk about our bench last season. It was horrible.

Not once in Micah Owings' 19 starts or Matt Maloney's 7 starts did our bench come back to tie or take the lead. That's 26 failed rallies.

Only once in Homer Bailey's 20 starts and only once in Johnny Cueto's 30 starts did our bench come back to tie or take the lead.

Our bench sucked badly last season.

So, when you look at the fact that only once in Harang's 26 starts did our bench come back to tie or take the lead, that was par for the course for most of our starting pitching staff.

Our bench came back to tie or take the lead in two of Justin Lehr's 11 starts and three of Edison Volquez' 9 starts.

Bronson Arroyo got the most from our bench, where they rallied to tie or take the lead in 4 of his 33 starts.

Contrast that with this season, where our bench has come back to tie or take the lead in 8 out of 24 starts this season (not counting today). Of course, none of those have been for Harang (3 for Bailey, 3 for Leake, and 2 for Cueto). We only did that 12 times all of last year. Everyone is going to benefit from our improved bench this season. This pitcher's are going to have the confidence to try to keep us in games this season, and not try to win it by themselves.

The Operator
05-03-2010, 03:09 AM
It's time you stop making excuses for the guy.


So the fact that I wasn't willing to DFA him after a rough start means I'm making excuses for him? If you say so.

I still say he could be hiding an injury. His prior run of high velocity with little command DOES indicate elbow problems. He may not have them, but you cannot deny those are signs of injury - unless you have never watched a pitcher who ultimately had TJ surgery pitch before eventually succumbing to the DL.

Maybe he was going through a dead arm period, I dunno.

All I know is that he was not nearly as bad as you would like to make it seem LAST season. Griffey012 did some NICE research to help prove that theory. If you want to take the simpleton approach of pointing to his W-L record and saying he sucks, have at it. I'm glad you're not running my favorite baseball team.

Caveman Techie
05-03-2010, 09:27 AM
But yet somehow Kingspoint in both of the seasons that you say he "sucked" he still had an ERA that was either slightly better than or right at MLB avg. for starting pitchers. Harang got off to a rough start this year but the last two games he has pitched quite well and I hope that is a sign that he has turned the corner.

And your stats of OPS against showing him in the bottom tier of the top 48 pitchers in the NL. Well that number is a little inflated by his playing almost half his games GABP. But even if we throw that fact out, there are 16 teams in the NL, with him being on the list in the 40's means that even durring the years that he has "sucked" he has been the equivelant of a number 3 starter for the Reds.

Griffey012
05-03-2010, 10:28 AM
If you want to talk about wins or losses, then talk about our bench last season. It was horrible.

Not once in Micah Owings' 19 starts or Matt Maloney's 7 starts did our bench come back to tie or take the lead. That's 26 failed rallies.

Only once in Homer Bailey's 20 starts and only once in Johnny Cueto's 30 starts did our bench come back to tie or take the lead.

Our bench sucked badly last season.

So, when you look at the fact that only once in Harang's 26 starts did our bench come back to tie or take the lead, that was par for the course for most of our starting pitching staff.

Our bench came back to tie or take the lead in two of Justin Lehr's 11 starts and three of Edison Volquez' 9 starts.

Bronson Arroyo got the most from our bench, where they rallied to tie or take the lead in 4 of his 33 starts.

Contrast that with this season, where our bench has come back to tie or take the lead in 8 out of 24 starts this season (not counting today). Of course, none of those have been for Harang (3 for Bailey, 3 for Leake, and 2 for Cueto). We only did that 12 times all of last year. Everyone is going to benefit from our improved bench this season. This pitcher's are going to have the confidence to try to keep us in games this season, and not try to win it by themselves.

You mean our offense sucked badly. When we pull the starting pitchers, the starters stay in the game.

GIDP
05-03-2010, 10:46 AM
Would you guys care if Harang was getting 10 runs of support per game and winning 35 games a year? What would you say?

Win and losses for a pitcher barely mean anything. Nolan Ryan went 8 and 16 with a league leading ERA of 2.76 in 1987. Livan Hernandez once won 13 games with an ERA over 6.

Yes run support matters in every case. To say Harang sucks because he doesnt get wins especially when hes getting league low in run support is wrong.

GIDP
05-03-2010, 10:49 AM
A league average pitcher with a below average offense behind him is going to lose a lot of games its simple logic that should tell you that. A league average pitcher with an above average offense is going to win more games. Its as simple as that. Wins and losses mean very little.

Kingspoint
05-03-2010, 07:51 PM
So the fact that I wasn't willing to DFA him after a rough start means I'm making excuses for him?

Who said anything about DFA'ing the guy? I'm talking about not making excuses for his poor pitching the last 2+ years and move on.

The only thing that matters about Harang right now is whether or not he's going to take the advice he's getting from Bryan Price and turn his career around (or not and be out of baseball in 2 years).

Why DFA him? Is that your black-and-white, either-or suggestion?

I've been saying to have patience with him and let him have a couple of months (April and May) under real conditions to let the effects take root of working with Bryan Price. I've been saying to have patience until this is done, and to watch what happens during Harang's June starts (about 5 or 6 of them), and we'll know then if he "listened and heeded" Bryan Price's advice. If he did, we may find ourselves in the playoff race come September 1st.

Kingspoint
05-03-2010, 07:57 PM
I still say he could be hiding an injury. His prior run of high velocity with little command DOES indicate elbow problems. He may not have them, but you cannot deny those are signs of injury - unless you have never watched a pitcher who ultimately had TJ surgery pitch before eventually succumbing to the DL.

Maybe he was going through a dead arm period, I dunno.


I do know. Harang was not injured the last year and a half, nor is he injured right now (not any more than any other pitcher that's thrown the innings he has in his career, as he's as healthy as he's supposed to be at this point of his life).

His issues have always been mental, not physical. He's really pretty stupid and stubborn when it comes down to it. He's still got good stuff. If he turns it around in June, as I'm expecting, that will be just more proof to you that it was nothing but mental for him. It's also really easy for him to go back to his old ways (it's called pig-headedness). So, personally, I'd trade the guy in July, if he shows success in June, and move him to the bullpen in July if he doesn't (because we couldn't get anything for him in a trade anyway).

Kingspoint
05-03-2010, 07:59 PM
If you want to take the simpleton approach of pointing to his W-L record and saying he sucks, have at it. I'm glad you're not running my favorite baseball team.

You're confusing me with someone else.

I have NEVER, NEVER, NEVER pointed to his won-loss record. If I "referenced" it, it would have only been to point out that he's no Jack Morris.

Kingspoint
05-03-2010, 08:03 PM
But yet somehow Kingspoint in both of the seasons that you say he "sucked" he still had an ERA that was either slightly better than or right at MLB avg. for starting pitchers.

NO IT WASN'T.

How do you get "average or slightly better than average" out of someone who ranked at the "15-percentile" under marpov NPERA and the "27-percentile" under regularly calculated ERA? That sucks under both scenarios. That's waaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyy below average. One would be an "F" and the other a "D" if grades were being passed out.

Kingspoint
05-03-2010, 08:04 PM
And your stats of OPS against showing him in the bottom tier of the top 48 pitchers in the NL. Well that number is a little inflated by his playing almost half his games GABP.


Get out of here. The GAB doesn't have that much of an effect for a player to be ranked 45th out of 48 pitchers. :D

Kingspoint
05-03-2010, 08:10 PM
But even if we throw that fact out, there are 16 teams in the NL, with him being on the list in the 40's means that even durring the years that he has "sucked" he has been the equivelant of a number 3 starter for the Reds.

That's not how it works.

You can't divide 16 teams by 5 starting pitchers and because Harang ranked 45th, say that he's at the bottom third of #3 starters.

Guys who suck don't get to pitch enough to qualify for an ERA title. That's why only 48 pitchers qualified (1 IP for every game their team has played has always been the rule). The only reason Harang was able to "hang around" and throw enough innings to qualify was because of his contract. They threw him out there every week even though he sucked. If he had a "Jimmy Haynes" contract, he'd have been treated like Jimmy Haynes and been released.

Kingspoint
05-03-2010, 08:11 PM
You mean our offense sucked badly. When we pull the starting pitchers, the starters stay in the game.

That, too. Usually, your bench gets two or three PH's in the 7th, 8th, and 9th innings.

Kingspoint
05-03-2010, 08:14 PM
A league average pitcher with a below average offense behind him is going to lose a lot of games its simple logic that should tell you that. A league average pitcher with an above average offense is going to win more games. Its as simple as that. Wins and losses mean very little.

True. True. True.

and, there's a stat for that.

It's called "Cheap Wins" (Wins in starts with < 6 IP or more than 3 ER; or, wins in non-quality starts).

The only RED to have one of those this year is Mike Leake.

The Operator
05-04-2010, 12:00 AM
I do know. Harang was not injured the last year and a half, nor is he injured right now (not any more than any other pitcher that's thrown the innings he has in his career, as he's as healthy as he's supposed to be at this point of his life).

I guess you've been exposed to certain medical records that I haven't then, kudos to you.

I'm done dealing with you - you're as stubborn as a mule and you aren't going to listen to anyone's opinion no matter what so there's no point.

Caveman Techie
05-04-2010, 08:50 AM
NO IT WASN'T.

t.

YES IT WAS! See I can state an opinion just as loudly as you, still doesn't make it true or not. Here is the proof for my opinion.

Per Baseball Prospectus:

# LG YEAR ERA
1. AL 2009 4.45
2. NL 2009 4.19

Aaron Harang's ERA in 2009 was 4.21.

# LG YEAR ERA
1. AL 2008 4.35
2. NL 2008 4.29

Aaron Harang's ERA in 2008 was 4.79

Kingspoint
05-04-2010, 06:01 PM
YES IT WAS! See I can state an opinion just as loudly as you, still doesn't make it true or not. Here is the proof for my opinion.

Per Baseball Prospectus:

# LG YEAR ERA
1. AL 2009 4.45
2. NL 2009 4.19

Aaron Harang's ERA in 2009 was 4.21.

# LG YEAR ERA
1. AL 2008 4.35
2. NL 2008 4.29

Aaron Harang's ERA in 2008 was 4.79

You're inconsistent in your own posts. In this post, you list the AL and NL averages of ALL pitchers. In your other post (and the only subject of this conversation), you said that Harang had an above average ERA for "NL starters".

So, yes. You are again wrong. You can't even look up a stat, correctly. Once you get that down, then come back and post something worthwhile to read.

Try looking up the average ERA for "NL starters only" of those who qualified for an ERA title. I'd give you the link (I've posted it many times), but you clearly need the practice looking things up.

Kingspoint
05-04-2010, 06:02 PM
I guess you've been exposed to certain medical records that I haven't then, kudos to you.

I'm done dealing with you - you're as stubborn as a mule and you aren't going to listen to anyone's opinion no matter what so there's no point.

I'll listen to anyone's opinion. Yours just happens to be wrong, and there's been tons of supporting evidence that says your opinion is wrong, including Aaron Harang's own comments. But, apparently Harang's opinion about himself isn't good enough for you. You, somehow know more about his own health than he does.

Caveman Techie
05-04-2010, 09:35 PM
You're inconsistent in your own posts. In this post, you list the AL and NL averages of ALL pitchers. In your other post (and the only subject of this conversation), you said that Harang had an above average ERA for "NL starters".

So, yes. You are again wrong. You can't even look up a stat, correctly. Once you get that down, then come back and post something worthwhile to read.

Try looking up the average ERA for "NL starters only" of those who qualified for an ERA title. I'd give you the link (I've posted it many times), but you clearly need the practice looking things up.

LOL, Ok so obviously Harang stole your girlfriend or something you just have an axe to grind and won't even admit you were wrong. Yes I looked up all pitchers with over 100IP so yeah I guess I don't have all day to look

Kingspoint
05-04-2010, 09:41 PM
LOL, Ok so obviously Harang stole your girlfriend or something you just have an axe to grind and won't even admit you were wrong. Yes I looked up all pitchers with over 100IP so yeah I guess I don't have all day to look

Since when did the Majors start playing 100 games during a season?

Starters have to pitch a minimum of an inning for every game their team has played to qualify for the ERA title. That's why relief pitchers can't win ERA titles.