PDA

View Full Version : Post-Hype Sleeper: Homer Bailey



Homer Bailey
10-13-2010, 06:47 PM
Figured it would only be appropriate if I posted it :cool:

http://www.rotoauthority.com/2010/10/post-hype-sleeper-homer-bailey.html


Bailey's work leading up to his DL stint wasn't amazing - 5.51 ERA, 1.48 WHIP, 7.3 K/9, 3.7 BB/9, 1.24 HR/9 in 50.6 innings across nine starts. But check out what he did after he returned: 3.55 ERA, 1.27 WHIP, 9.1 K/9, 2.9 BB/9, 0.62 HR/9 in 58.3 innings across ten starts. That included nine and ten-strikeout efforts.

Brutus
10-13-2010, 06:50 PM
Is this like tooting your own horn?

But yeah, after he came back, a case could be easily made he was the Reds' most consistent starter by far. If he extends those post-DL numbers into next season and beyond, he'll be a great pitcher.

Joseph
10-13-2010, 07:10 PM
I hope he does, but didn't he have a similar [actually even better] end of season performance in '09?

To me its not a question of talent, but of him figuring out how to do this consistently.

Griffey012
10-13-2010, 07:13 PM
Didn't he have a stretch similar or better than that at the end of last season? Hopefully its not a sign of inconsistency but actually just further proof his injury at the beginning of the year was what was really hampering him down. The reality is, he may have turned the corner.

Brutus
10-13-2010, 07:15 PM
I hope he does, but didn't he have a similar [actually even better] end of season performance in '09?

To me its not a question of talent, but of him figuring out how to do this consistently.

Very similar. Slightly fewer strikeouts and a few more walks.

This year, after the injury he had 61 Ks and 19 walks in 58 innings

Last year, in the last 58 innings, he had 53 Ks and 25 walks.

The ERAs were comparable, though the last 58 innings in 2009 was slightly better than this year. Better FIP, though, to end the year in 2010.

edabbs44
10-13-2010, 07:31 PM
Would be really nice, though I wish I could say that we haven't seen this movie before. Not that I don't think he can do it, but he needs to put it together for an extended perio of time.

The Operator
10-13-2010, 08:15 PM
I wish his fastball had a little more movement on it, but he's still got good pretty good "stuff", even with a somewhat straight heater.

Here's to hoping for a fully healthy 2011 for Homer, because if he can stay healthy the whole year, he could be a candidate for 12-14 wins IMO. He also seems to be a guy who can go up against The Cardinals and hold his own. That's certainly something to like.

VR
10-13-2010, 09:20 PM
Figured it would only be appropriate if I posted it :cool:

http://www.rotoauthority.com/2010/10/post-hype-sleeper-homer-bailey.html

Homer (the pitcher, not the poster :)), showed a tremendous growth in maturity the 2nd half of 2010. I don't know if he had some sort of divine intervention during his DL stint, but he came back looking like a major league pitcher, not just a kid with a great arm.

It was encouraging to see his velocity spike late in the year.....and even better to see that fantastic playoff appearance.

Griffey012
10-13-2010, 09:42 PM
Homer (the pitcher, not the poster :)), showed a tremendous growth in maturity the 2nd half of 2010. I don't know if he had some sort of divine intervention during his DL stint, but he came back looking like a major league pitcher, not just a kid with a great arm.

It was encouraging to see his velocity spike late in the year.....and even better to see that fantastic playoff appearance.

Worst case scenario he looks like he could be a pretty good closer. IF in some impossible way we were able to unload a good portion of Cordero's contract, it could become a real possibility since we already have a ton of guys aiming for the rotation.

dougdirt
10-13-2010, 10:20 PM
I hope he does, but didn't he have a similar [actually even better] end of season performance in '09?

To me its not a question of talent, but of him figuring out how to do this consistently.

My question is, was he not right all of that time from the start of the year until he went on the DL in May? We all were well aware that he was well over his 'limit' in innings from 2009 and sure enough, he came out flat in 2010.

edabbs44
10-13-2010, 10:43 PM
My question is, was he not right all of that time from the start of the year until he went on the DL in May? We all were well aware that he was well over his 'limit' in innings from 2009 and sure enough, he came out flat in 2010.

Just looked at the 2010 Verducci list. Had some huge misses this year.

Felix, Latos, Johnson, Scherzer, Davis.

dougdirt
10-13-2010, 10:51 PM
Just looked at the 2010 Verducci list. Had some huge misses this year.

Felix, Latos, Johnson, Scherzer, Davis.

Lets note that he isn't picking them out, its a purely numerical list.

Homer Bailey
10-13-2010, 10:53 PM
Lets note that he isn't picking them out, its a purely numerical list.

True. However, he did pick the "system", and his name is tied to it. If I invent some system based on my parameters, I can't take all credit when it's right, and blame the system when it's wrong.

dougdirt
10-13-2010, 10:57 PM
True. However, he did pick the "system", and his name is tied to it. If I invent some system based on my parameters, I can't take all credit when it's right, and blame the system when it's wrong.

I don't think that he does either of those things at all though. His name is on the system, but he is far from the only person who is a believer in it. Teams certainly abide by it for the most part as well. They do so because there is something to it.

edabbs44
10-13-2010, 11:00 PM
I don't think that he does either of those things at all though. His name is on the system, but he is far from the only person who is a believer in it. Teams certainly abide by it for the most part as well. They do so because there is something to it.

I wonder if they truly believe it or if they know that they want to limit someone and use this arbitrary number b/c they don't want to hear about this "known" threshold that they blew through.

kaldaniels
10-13-2010, 11:53 PM
Fair or foul?

It is bad to drastically increase the workload of a young pitcher from one season to the next.

However...

The Verducci Effect and its 30 IP increase is an arbitrary system and should not be viewed as an accurate theory.

OnBaseMachine
10-14-2010, 12:19 AM
Homer Bailey this season: 3.3 BB/9, 8.3 K/9. He's one of my breakout candidates for next season.

Assuming he stays healthy, I think he's capable of throwing 200 innings next season with an ERA around 3.50 and 180 K's.

dougdirt
10-14-2010, 12:20 AM
I wonder if they truly believe it or if they know that they want to limit someone and use this arbitrary number b/c they don't want to hear about this "known" threshold that they blew through.

Teams have been doing it for years, longer than Verducci came out with this theory.

dougdirt
10-14-2010, 12:23 AM
Fair or foul?

It is bad to drastically increase the workload of a young pitcher from one season to the next.

However...

The Verducci Effect and its 30 IP increase is an arbitrary system and should not be viewed as an accurate theory.

And yet the theory has certainly had some results to show it has some legs. Certainly there needs to be some leeway because no one is built the same. But teams have been limiting the increase of pitchers innings for years now, because they know that large increases from year to year tends to lead to injuries.

The Operator
10-14-2010, 12:28 AM
And yet the theory has certainly had some results to show it has some legs. Certainly there needs to be some leeway because no one is built the same. But teams have been limiting the increase of pitchers innings for years now, because they know that large increases from year to year tends to lead to injuries.I can't remember, but is there a certain age cutoff where these effects aren't as much of a risk?

One thing I've wondered about is a guy who goes from the bullpen one year to starting the next, which happens from time to time. For example, CJ Wilson's workload increased by 130 innings this year, but it's because he moved from the bullpen to the rotation. And, he's also 29 years old.

I want to say the cutoff was 25 years old but sometimes I remember things differently than how they actually happened. :p:

kaldaniels
10-14-2010, 12:33 AM
And yet the theory has certainly had some results to show it has some legs. Certainly there needs to be some leeway because no one is built the same. But teams have been limiting the increase of pitchers innings for years now, because they know that large increases from year to year tends to lead to injuries.

The theory has results because the first statememt I made is bound to be true. Of course, in the sense of the general population, drastically increasing the number of innings pitchers by young pitchers is bound to be a problem-causer.

But where in the world did this 30 IP number come from?

Brutus
10-14-2010, 12:52 AM
Teams have been doing it for years, longer than Verducci came out with this theory.

Actually teams are well beyond that theory (and that's all it is).

In fact, there are a lot of teams using advanced algorithms to try and predict injuries and analyze allowable workloads. I think they've gone well beyond the point where they're worried about plugging two sets of IP numbers into a spreadsheet and saying 30 is the magical barrier.

Brutus
10-14-2010, 12:56 AM
But where in the world did this 30 IP number come from?

It was just an arbitrary guess. He didn't run any regression analysis. He didn't do any statistical studies on it. Just purely picked a number out of his hat and showed whether or not the numbers fit. Now, he said he used it based on a "general rule of thumb" which, back in 1996 when he would have started it, was probably just that.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/tom_verducci/11/28/pitchers/index.html

It's entirely outdated and probably wasn't too accurate to begin with.

David Gassko actually put the "effect" to the test shortly after Verducci wrote about it in 2006.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/the-year-after-effect/

dougdirt
10-14-2010, 01:00 AM
Actually teams are well beyond that theory (and that's all it is).

In fact, there are a lot of teams using advanced algorithms to try and predict injuries and analyze allowable workloads. I think they've gone well beyond the point where they're worried about plugging two sets of IP numbers into a spreadsheet and saying 30 is the magical barrier.

I am sure that they are. But the fact is that teams are still well aware that certain increases in workloads that are likely to lead to injuries. Verducci just tried to put a set 'number' on it. Clearly its never going to apply to all guys because some guys are just different.

Brutus
10-14-2010, 01:04 AM
I am sure that they are. But the fact is that teams are still well aware that certain increases in workloads that are likely to lead to injuries. Verducci just tried to put a set 'number' on it. Clearly its never going to apply to all guys because some guys are just different.

I think teams are cognizant of the possibility, and as we know, they have to protect their investments. I don't think anyone has truly found (to this point) any evidence that there's a magical breaking point. As you say, each person is completely different.

I think if a common sense approach is used, and someone is stretched out and conditioned properly, an increase doesn't have to be a bad thing.

_Sir_Charles_
10-14-2010, 09:19 AM
Is it out of the question that it's something as simple as Homer not being a "cold weather" pitcher? He's struggled early in the season pretty much every year. Unless they started someplace warm (Florida/Arizona spring training). He's grown up in Texas and now he's pitching in 50 degree weather early in the year. In most of those first half starts, he got hit early and then settled in and acutally got stronger as the game wore on (he did this last season too). As he warms up...he goes back to normal. Just a thought.

Ghosts of 1990
10-14-2010, 10:06 AM
I wish his fastball had a little more movement on it, but he's still got good pretty good "stuff", even with a somewhat straight heater.

Here's to hoping for a fully healthy 2011 for Homer, because if he can stay healthy the whole year, he could be a candidate for 12-14 wins IMO. He also seems to be a guy who can go up against The Cardinals and hold his own. That's certainly something to like.

Homer is a good example of why wins shouldn't be such a counting stat for pitchers. We've blown at least a dozen of his wins the past two years, not exaggerating. Of all the guys on the staff he had maybe the hardest luck.

Scrap Irony
10-14-2010, 12:17 PM
I am sure that they are. But the fact is that teams are still well aware that certain increases in workloads that are likely to lead to injuries. Verducci just tried to put a set 'number' on it. Clearly its never going to apply to all guys because some guys are just different.

Not only are some guys different, doug, the theory itself isn't credible, as there have been advances to baseball analysis to pinpoint specific player (and team) workloads.

In short, the Verdicci Effect : Pitching injuries :: Fielding percentage : fielding prowess

It may tell you someting, but you don't really want to trust it.

edabbs44
10-14-2010, 12:27 PM
Homer is a good example of why wins shouldn't be such a counting stat for pitchers. We've blown at least a dozen of his wins the past two years, not exaggerating. Of all the guys on the staff he had maybe the hardest luck.

While I don't entirely disagree with your point, I would guess that Homer has been bailed out on a few of his losses as well.

Wins just have to be looked at in the proper manner.

dougdirt
10-14-2010, 12:46 PM
Not only are some guys different, doug, the theory itself isn't credible, as there have been advances to baseball analysis to pinpoint specific player (and team) workloads.

In short, the Verdicci Effect : Pitching injuries :: Fielding percentage : fielding prowess

It may tell you someting, but you don't really want to trust it.

The theory starts off with a solid premise that I think we all tend to agree on. Large increases in workload is going to lead to the likelihood of injury moving forward. The issue is, how large of an increase is ok? I, like you and many others, all agree that it just depends on the player at hand. I am not saying that 30 innings is the absolute cut off point. Clearly that isn't going to be the same for everyone. I am just saying as a general place for everyone being lumped into one group, its a solid 'average' number to use as a starting point for a player.

WebScorpion
10-17-2010, 03:10 AM
IMO, this is just the way pitchers develop. First, they flash a few innings of brilliance. Next, they learn to minimize mistakes for an entire game. Then they string together several games in a row. Finally, if they have enough talent, work hard enough, and exert enough will power, they put together a whole season to be proud of. Homer 2010 is a bit better than Homer 2009...I can't wait to see Homer 2011. ;)

REDblooded
10-17-2010, 11:11 PM
I'm DEFINITELY looking forward to seeing what Homer does to continue to advance as a pitcher... He seems to have already made one HUGE stride in his maturity... From there, it's just putting together a consistent season.

Count me in the group that expected this to be a down season for Homer due to the increased workload in 09... I expect Homer to make a huge stride this season, and become a 2-3 type of arm with 1-2 upside...

Caveat Emperor
10-18-2010, 12:56 PM
Worst case scenario he looks like he could be a pretty good closer. IF in some impossible way we were able to unload a good portion of Cordero's contract, it could become a real possibility since we already have a ton of guys aiming for the rotation.

I'd agree, except the numbers indicate that he becomes a better pitcher the later he gets into the game.

Over the course of his career, he's a .719 OPSa pitcher on the first 25 pitches he throws. He's an .827 / .835 OPSa guy in the middle of games (26-50, 51-75), but he's back down to a .729 OPSa at the end of his games 76-100.

That's exactly what you're looking for in a starter -- a guy who doesn't run out of gas at the end of the game. If he could become slightly more pitch-efficient and work on getting more out of his middle game, Homer would definitely turn the corner towards "hammer" material.