PDA

View Full Version : Homer Bailey - what to do with him?



Pages : [1] 2

Vottomatic
03-31-2012, 07:31 PM
Latos, Cueto, Leake, Arroyo, Chapman, Francis, Bailey

Francis is a fringe starting pitcher who lacks velocity on his fastball.

Chapman has had a good ST, but probably needs to work on stuff at Louisville, namely his third pitch.

Bailey continues to be erratic.

Also, with all the off days in April, does a 5th starter really matter much at this point?

dougdirt
03-31-2012, 07:34 PM
Start him in the #4 spot and be done with it.

Bailey showed last year that everything is in place for him to be arguably the second best starter on the Reds 2012 roster behind Mat Latos.

mth123
03-31-2012, 07:49 PM
Start him in the #4 spot and be done with it.

Bailey showed last year that everything is in place for him to be arguably the second best starter on the Reds 2012 roster behind Mat Latos.

+1. Hope his arm problems are behind him and the Reds will have a solid major league starting pitcher.

The Voice of IH
03-31-2012, 07:55 PM
I really would like to dump Arroyo, but it ain't happening. Bailey is in the rotation, while Chapman is in the minors.

RANDY IN INDY
03-31-2012, 08:34 PM
Start him in the #4 spot and be done with it.

Bailey showed last year that everything is in place for him to be arguably the second best starter on the Reds 2012 roster behind Mat Latos.

:beerme:

hebroncougar
03-31-2012, 08:35 PM
At some point, someone's going to go down. You send the one you want to send to Louisville and be done with it. I don't like Arroyo at the price they have to pay, but someone's got to throw some serious innings. I hope he can get back to league average.

PuffyPig
03-31-2012, 08:36 PM
At some point, someone's going to go down. You send the one you want to send to Louisville and be done with it. I don't like Arroyo at the price they have to pay, but someone's got to throw some innings. I hope he can get back to league average.

Only Leake has options, besides Chapman.

So "someone" is limited.

Kc61
03-31-2012, 08:42 PM
I assume you guys all watch six innings and then shut off the TV.

Because the late innings will be very frustrating for Reds fans under your view.

You don't want Bailey in the bullpen. You don't want Chapman in the bullpen. You don't want any starter in the bullpen, except Francis who strikes out a guy every two innings, maybe.

The Reds have a problem. They have too many starters and too few relievers. Yet you want Bailey in the rotation, Chapman in the minors.

I guess it's Ron Mahay time. Or Andrew Brackman. Or Jeff Francis, a starter who doesn't fan anybody.

And there are two relief vacancies. So it won't only be one AAA reliever. It will be two.

Will be very interesting to see Chapman strike out 13 in a AAA game while the Reds give up five runs in the seventh inning with some AAA pitcher going. Louisville lost tonight in the final four; looks like they will have some excitement during the baseball season in the view of some posters.

Whatever. Maybe Reds will trade Arroyo.

Superdude
03-31-2012, 08:55 PM
I assume you guys all watch six innings and then shut off the TV.

Because the late innings will be very frustrating for Reds fans under your view.

You don't want Bailey in the bullpen. You don't want Chapman in the bullpen. You don't want any starter in the bullpen, except Francis who strikes out a guy every two innings, maybe.

The Reds have a problem. They have too many starters and too few relievers. Yet you want Bailey in the rotation, Chapman in the minors.

I guess it's Ron Mahay time. Or Andrew Brackman. Or Jeff Francis, a starter who doesn't fan anybody.

And there are two relief vacancies. So it won't only be one AAA reliever. It will be two.

Will be very interesting to see Chapman strike out 13 in a AAA game while the Reds give up five runs in the seventh inning with some AAA pitcher going. Louisville lost tonight in the final four; looks like they will have some excitement during the baseball season in the view of some posters.

Whatever. Maybe Reds will trade Arroyo.

We still have a decent bullpen. If Masset's out significant time, may be you reassess things later, but I don't think pushing the panic button is necessary yet.

reds44
03-31-2012, 09:00 PM
He'll be in the bullpen. Our thoughts on it really don't matter.

fearofpopvol1
03-31-2012, 09:06 PM
I don't want it to happen, but I could see Bailey traded for a reliever. He's out of options, so he will not be going to Louisville. I can't imagine him going into the pen either. So, either he starts or he'll be traded.

757690
03-31-2012, 09:07 PM
I assume you guys all watch six innings and then shut off the TV.

Because the late innings will be very frustrating for Reds fans under your view.

You don't want Bailey in the bullpen. You don't want Chapman in the bullpen. You don't want any starter in the bullpen, except Francis who strikes out a guy every two innings, maybe.

The Reds have a problem. They have too many starters and too few relievers. Yet you want Bailey in the rotation, Chapman in the minors.

I guess it's Ron Mahay time. Or Andrew Brackman. Or Jeff Francis, a starter who doesn't fan anybody.

And there are two relief vacancies. So it won't only be one AAA reliever. It will be two.

Will be very interesting to see Chapman strike out 13 in a AAA game while the Reds give up five runs in the seventh inning with some AAA pitcher going. Louisville lost tonight in the final four; looks like they will have some excitement during the baseball season in the view of some posters.

Whatever. Maybe Reds will trade Arroyo.

Last season, the 7th man in the pen, Matt Maloney, pitched in relief 4 times in April, all in blowouts. I agree the Reds need one more reliever, but it's not like whoever that is, will be pitching that many important innings. in fact, I would love to see a 6 man pen all year and use that spot for an extra bat off the bench.

Kc61
03-31-2012, 09:09 PM
We still have a decent bullpen. If Masset's out significant time, may be you reassess things later, but I don't think pushing the panic button is necessary yet.

Reds bullpen is five guys. Five.

One of them, Bray, has had an injured spring. Lecure isn't an every day reliever, more of a multi-inning guy. Has been injured every season.

Current bullpen will result in a massive burden on Ondrusek and Arredondo.
These guys will need a hospital by some time in May.

Filling obvious holes with existing talent isn't pushing a panic button. It's dealing with reality, rather than ignoring it.

757690
03-31-2012, 09:10 PM
I don't want it to happen, but I could see Bailey traded for a reliever. He's out of options, so he will not be going to Louisville. I can't imagine him going into the pen either. So, either he starts or he'll be traded.

That how I see it too. I think he starts, since it gives the Reds the option of keeping Chapman in AAA. Most likely, once the season starts, the Reds will need more starting pitchers than relievers.

WebScorpion
03-31-2012, 09:16 PM
Having too many qualified Major League starters is a good problem to have. I'd put Latos, Cueto, Arroyo, Bailey, and Leake in the rotation, send Chapman and Francis to AAA to await the first injury. I'm not sure what kind of contract Francis has, so I might try to trade him for a reliever if someone shows interest. Also, I'd consider having Leake start in AAA until we need a 5th starter to keep an extra bat in the early part of the season.

Always Red
03-31-2012, 10:00 PM
I really would like to dump Arroyo, but it ain't happening. Bailey is in the rotation, while Chapman is in the minors.

I think Arroyo is going to be a problem all season. He's the 6th best starter on the team. His salary pencils him in as a sure fire SP.

There will be injuries, and the Reds should and probably will do what the options will dictate, and keep everyone and postpone the decision making until real performance decides.

I also agree that the bullpen is a problem.

membengal
04-01-2012, 08:02 AM
I would still give Chapman a shot.

hebroncougar
04-01-2012, 08:45 AM
Would anyone put Arroyo through waivers? I was thinking about that last night, that's not a bad option either.

mth123
04-01-2012, 08:53 AM
Would anyone put Arroyo through waivers? I was thinking about that last night, that's not a bad option either.

If he's claimed, you'd need to pay all of his deferred money on his way to another team.

_Sir_Charles_
04-01-2012, 10:02 AM
You know, at this point don't the Reds already consider that money spent? Now its just about trying to get the most production for that money. If keeping him in the rotation over a more productive pitcher hurts the team overall...it wouldn't surprise me all that much to see them move Bronson (to the pen or another team). That money is spent either way. If moving him out and bringing in someone to replace him would end up costing even MORE money...then I could see the hesitation. But his "replacement" is already a sunk cost too in Chapman.

mth123
04-01-2012, 10:08 AM
You know, at this point don't the Reds already consider that money spent? Now its just about trying to get the most production for that money. If keeping him in the rotation over a more productive pitcher hurts the team overall...it wouldn't surprise me all that much to see them move Bronson (to the pen or another team). That money is spent either way. If moving him out and bringing in someone to replace him would end up costing even MORE money...then I could see the hesitation. But his "replacement" is already a sunk cost too in Chapman.

Well, paying $15 Million over the period from 2014 to 2021 is diffferent than paying it all right now isn't it? The cost of your house is money already spent. Why not just pay it off today? Its the same thing right?

_Sir_Charles_
04-01-2012, 10:15 AM
Well, paying $15 Million over the period from 2014 to 2021 is diffferent than paying it all right now isn't it? The cost of your house is money already spent. Why not just pay it off today? Its the same thing right?

No, of course it isn't the same thing. That's why it's still a choice you hate to make. But if you have the funds and it helps in the short and long run...sometimes you've got to bite the bullet.

That being said, I don't do it. I still think that Bronson bounces back.

mth123
04-01-2012, 10:18 AM
No, of course it isn't the same thing. That's why it's still a choice you hate to make. But if you have the funds and it helps in the short and long run...sometimes you've got to bite the bullet.

That being said, I don't do it. I still think that Bronson bounces back.

My assumption is they don't have the funds or they wouldn't have negotiated a deferred $15 Million in the first place.

MikeS21
04-01-2012, 10:22 AM
My assumption is they don't have the funds or they wouldn't have negotiated a deferred $15 Million in the first place.
That's the trap of deferred money. It is the gift that keeps on giving. Aren't the Reds still paying deferred money to guys like Junior and Larkin? Or have those deferred payments finally come off the books?

mth123
04-01-2012, 10:28 AM
That's the trap of deferred money. It is the gift that keeps on giving. Aren't the Reds still paying deferred money to guys like Junior and Larkin? Or have those deferred payments finally come off the books?

I think they are still paying Griffey, but Lindner was smart enough to insist on funding an annuity over the life of his contract so it shouldn't be a problem for the current budget. Don't know about Larkin, but I'd assume the same.

The problem with Arroyo's deal is that the contract is still going, so even if the Reds are funding as they go, its far from all funded.

Hoosier Red
04-01-2012, 10:29 AM
My assumption is they don't have the funds or they wouldn't have negotiated a deferred $15 Million in the first place.

Yes and no, they may not have the funds to pay him the deferred money + the salary he'll earn this year. They may have the funds for just the deferred money.

mth123
04-01-2012, 10:39 AM
Yes and no, they may not have the funds to pay him the deferred money + the salary he'll earn this year. They may have the funds for just the deferred money.

That's a good thought. If they funded say $3 Million last year and save $6.5 this year on the payroll, they would only need to come up with another $6 Million or so.

Still doubtful IMO. I still think Arroyo can be a solid but overpaid starter. Chapman hasn't proven anything as far as starting goes IMO.

kheidg-
04-01-2012, 12:00 PM
Start him in the #4 spot and be done with it.

Bailey showed last year that everything is in place for him to be arguably the second best starter on the Reds 2012 roster behind Mat Latos.

Over Johnny Cueto? That's a stretch.

I'd even say its a stretch to say he could be placed above Leake or Arroyo.

nate
04-01-2012, 12:06 PM
I would say put him in the rotation. I think he's likely to be a 4-ish FIP pitcher which is pretty useful depending on how many innings he throws.

nate
04-01-2012, 12:22 PM
Over Johnny Cueto? That's a stretch.

I'd even say its a stretch to say he could be placed above Leake or Arroyo.

I wouldn't. Outside of IP, I'd say over the past three years, Bailey is pretty much what a pitcher of league average skill looks like. Leake probably squeaks in there as well.

I'd say that's likely to continue.

Arroyo has been more "league below average."

I'd say that's likely to continue as well.

I think Cueto is a better pitcher than Bailey but he (Cueto) has league average to a bit better than league average skill.

RANDY IN INDY
04-01-2012, 12:40 PM
Cueto, league average? Really?

nate
04-01-2012, 12:52 PM
Cueto, league average? Really?

Yes, really.

I think that's pretty valuable. Especially for what he gets paid.

RANDY IN INDY
04-01-2012, 12:54 PM
You're saying Cueto's stuff is league average, right?

nate
04-01-2012, 01:03 PM
You're saying Cueto's stuff is league average, right?

I think the things he does that are solely within his control are league average to slightly better than league average.

This is a good thing.

RANDY IN INDY
04-01-2012, 01:05 PM
I think the things he does that are solely within his control are league average to slightly better than league average.

This is a good thing.

Just trying to get an idea of how you think.

dougdirt
04-01-2012, 01:10 PM
Over Johnny Cueto? That's a stretch.

I'd even say its a stretch to say he could be placed above Leake or Arroyo.

I don't. Most projection systems have Bailey, Leake and Cueto all pretty close to each other in ERA and one system (the one that was the best for the 2011 season) has Bailey behind only Latos in ERA for Reds starters (though Chapman also is ahead of Bailey but it comes as a reliever).

Bailey walks fewer batters and strikes out more than Cueto and Leake (he and Bailey are actually walking the same number of guys). That is a really good start towards being better.

_Sir_Charles_
04-01-2012, 02:08 PM
I agree with Doug here. I firmly think that most of RZ is highly underestimating what Homer will and can do. HIGHLY underestimating.

RANDY IN INDY
04-01-2012, 02:37 PM
I'm with you guys. I think Homer can put it together.

puca
04-01-2012, 03:00 PM
I assume you guys all watch six innings and then shut off the TV.

Because the late innings will be very frustrating for Reds fans under your view.

You don't want Bailey in the bullpen. You don't want Chapman in the bullpen. You don't want any starter in the bullpen, except Francis who strikes out a guy every two innings, maybe.

The Reds have a problem. They have too many starters and too few relievers. Yet you want Bailey in the rotation, Chapman in the minors.

I guess it's Ron Mahay time. Or Andrew Brackman. Or Jeff Francis, a starter who doesn't fan anybody.

And there are two relief vacancies. So it won't only be one AAA reliever. It will be two.

Will be very interesting to see Chapman strike out 13 in a AAA game while the Reds give up five runs in the seventh inning with some AAA pitcher going. Louisville lost tonight in the final four; looks like they will have some excitement during the baseball season in the view of some posters.

Whatever. Maybe Reds will trade Arroyo.

I'm much more worried who is going to be taking every 5th start come July/August than who is the 6th man out of the pen in April/May. There is no starting pitching depth sitting in AAA if Chapman or Bailey is sent to the pen. I would not be comfortable with either Chapman or Bailey being used as swing/long men to start the season and then being thrust back into the rotation when someone inevitiably gets hurt. For the same reason I would hate to see Bailey be traded. If you have to keep Chapman in the majors then it is Arroyo that shoudl be moved to the pen. He has the experience to bounce between rotation and bullpen.

Tony Cloninger
04-01-2012, 04:55 PM
I agree with Doug here. I firmly think that most of RZ is highly underestimating what Homer will and can do. HIGHLY underestimating.

And when he does it...I will be happy, but for now...all you have is someone who's "peripherals" are good thus he must be better than he actually shows....but he never really is.

dougdirt
04-01-2012, 04:59 PM
And when he does it...I will be happy, but for now...all you have is someone who's "peripherals" are good thus he must be better than he actually shows....but he never really is.

Better than what he shows? Do you mean ERA?

Tony Cloninger
04-01-2012, 05:42 PM
Better than what he shows? Do you mean ERA?

He is not a consistent ...from start to start ..you do not know which guy is going to show up. He reminds me of Bruce Bereyni...without the heavy bouts of wildness.

fearofpopvol1
04-01-2012, 06:00 PM
The number 1 problem with Bailey, point blank, is health. If he can stay healthy, he'll be a very good pitcher. But until he's able to stay healthy, he gets put below Cueto in my opinion.

dougdirt
04-01-2012, 06:02 PM
The number 1 problem with Bailey, point blank, is health. If he can stay healthy, he'll be a very good pitcher. But until he's able to stay healthy, he gets put below Cueto in my opinion.

I can certainly get on board with this.

Caveat Emperor
04-01-2012, 06:16 PM
Bailey in the rotation, Chapman to Louisville until he gets a couple 6+ IP outings under his belt to prove he can do it.

bucksfan2
04-01-2012, 08:07 PM
The number 1 problem with Bailey, point blank, is health. If he can stay healthy, he'll be a very good pitcher. But until he's able to stay healthy, he gets put below Cueto in my opinion.

I put Bailey behind Latos, Cueto, and Leake. I don't quite understand why people have always been so low on Leake. He doesn't have the live arm that Bailey does, but he knows how to pitch. I think for years we have been waiting for Bailey to put it all together. At this point I think the Reds are going to stick with Bailey, but Im not so sure he will ever put it all together.

nate
04-02-2012, 12:08 AM
I put Bailey behind Latos, Cueto, and Leake. I don't quite understand why people have always been so low on Leake. He doesn't have the live arm that Bailey does, but he knows how to pitch. I think for years we have been waiting for Bailey to put it all together. At this point I think the Reds are going to stick with Bailey, but Im not so sure he will ever put it all together.

What indicates Bailey hasn't "put it all together?"

What indicates Leake "knows how to pitch?"

757690
04-02-2012, 12:19 AM
What indicates Bailey hasn't "put it all together?"

What indicates Leake "knows how to pitch?"

From a statistical standpoint, I'd say the fact that Bailey has continually underperformed his peripherals while Leake has continually overperformed his peripherals. That likely is a sign that Bailey has better stuff than Leake, but Leake is better at utilizing his stuff.

Also, I think the most casual of baseball fans would draw that conclusion just from watching each of them pitch a game. Leake does a better job of keeping hitters off balance, while Bailey is better at just blowing hitters away. It's pretty obvious, even after just a few innings.

MikeS21
04-02-2012, 07:47 AM
IMO, Homer Bailey is just now beginning to show flashes of his potential. And I keep coming back to this, but 25-26 years old is a little premature to give up on him. I am willing to give him the 2012 and 2013 seasons before I ship him off.

bucksfan2
04-02-2012, 09:04 AM
What indicates Bailey hasn't "put it all together?"

What indicates Leake "knows how to pitch?"

My eyeballs and the overall results. Just looking at the basic ERA+ stat, Leake's was 101 and Bailey's highest was 91 two years ago. I don't think anyone who argue that Bailey has better raw stuff. Why is it that with lesser stuff Leake has been a better pitcher?

dougdirt
04-02-2012, 09:13 AM
My eyeballs and the overall results. Just looking at the basic ERA+ stat, Leake's was 101 and Bailey's highest was 91 two years ago. I don't think anyone who argue that Bailey has better raw stuff. Why is it that with lesser stuff Leake has been a better pitcher?

Well first, we need to address that you are using solely ERA to determine "better pitcher".

In 2010, Leake had a solid ERA, but his WHIP was 1.50. In 2010, Bailey had a similar ERA to that of Leake and a 1.37 WHIP.

Last year, the main difference between the two was likely just the randomness of when each of their home runs fell. They had the same home run rate per 9 innings and each had a good WHIP as well as very strong K/BB rates.

RANDY IN INDY
04-02-2012, 09:26 AM
The number 1 problem with Bailey, point blank, is health. If he can stay healthy, he'll be a very good pitcher. But until he's able to stay healthy, he gets put below Cueto in my opinion.

:beerme:Agree. I would like to see what happens when he is healthy for 3-4 seasons in a row.

The Operator
04-02-2012, 09:52 AM
Bailey's also never had the benefit of a full season to allow some of the randomness and ebbs and flows of the season to even things out on his stat sheet.

But even then, I think people undervalue what a 4.50 ERA pitcher who can strike guys out and doesn't walk a lot of batters can mean to a team. And I'd say that's Homer's floor. In my opinion he's already "arrived", he just needs to stay healthy. Here's to hoping...

nate
04-02-2012, 10:12 AM
From a statistical standpoint, I'd say the fact that Bailey has continually underperformed his peripherals while Leake has continually overperformed his peripherals.

Under/overperformed what? ERA?

I think Bailey and Leake, while being different pitchers, provide similar talent/skill/execution/whatever you want to call it.

Again, I think this is a good thing.

Kc61
04-02-2012, 10:23 AM
Under/overperformed what? ERA?

I think Bailey and Leake, while being different pitchers, provide similar talent/skill/execution/whatever you want to call it.

Again, I think this is a good thing.

I think all of this praise being given to Homer is a lot of wishful thinking.

He can't stay on the field. Mike Leake is no powerhouse but he was better last year in ERA, hits allowed per nine, walks allowed per nine, innings pitched, and virtually every category except strikeouts.

Somebody writes that Homer's "arrived?" I don't even think Homer believes that and he would probably say so.

IMO, Homer is a pitcher with great potential who has been impaired by injury. If he can be truly healthy for a full season, we may see a big improvement. My guess is he'll be in the rotation, my hope is that his shoulder, etc. is sound and he can improve going forward.

But his past performance hasn't been up to par.

nate
04-02-2012, 10:25 AM
My eyeballs and the overall results. Just looking at the basic ERA+ stat, Leake's was 101 and Bailey's highest was 91 two years ago. I don't think anyone who argue that Bailey has better raw stuff. Why is it that with lesser stuff Leake has been a better pitcher?

To me, it boils down to not thinking ERA is a good measure of pitching.

Anyhow, I think Bailey should be in the rotation.

Kc61
04-02-2012, 10:27 AM
To me, it boils down to not thinking ERA is a good measure of pitching.

Anyhow, I think Bailey should be in the rotation.

Homer had a 4.43 ERA and threw 132 innings.

Leake had a 3.86 ERA and threw 167 innings.

I don't find the difference meaningless.

bucksfan2
04-02-2012, 10:45 AM
To me, it boils down to not thinking ERA is a good measure of pitching.

Anyhow, I think Bailey should be in the rotation.

I used ERA+ because its more of a baseline comparison tool. Its not the best but it sure isn't the worst.

When you start to say Player X's peripherals say they should be better your getting into a dangerous game. In Bailey's case people have been claiming that he has arrived or next year is his year for a number of years now. I have a feeling your going to hear the same thing after this season and maybe even after the next.

_Sir_Charles_
04-02-2012, 11:25 AM
Homer had a 4.43 ERA and threw 132 innings.

Leake had a 3.86 ERA and threw 167 innings.

I don't find the difference meaningless.

How much is that from relievers being effective taking over or not for each guy? How much is that from instead of a 1 run homer it's a 3 run homer? How much of that is scorekeepers' decisions to rule earned vs unearned runs? To put is bluntly, how much of that difference is just flat out luck?

ERA is not a useless stat IMO...but it's not much better than W's or RBI's.

Kc61
04-02-2012, 11:40 AM
How much is that from relievers being effective taking over or not for each guy? How much is that from instead of a 1 run homer it's a 3 run homer? How much of that is scorekeepers' decisions to rule earned vs unearned runs? To put is bluntly, how much of that difference is just flat out luck?

ERA is not a useless stat IMO...but it's not much better than W's or RBI's.

On a teamwide, 2011 season basis, a 3.86 ERA (Leake) would get you between 14th and 15th place in MLB in ERA (between Arizona and Seattle).

On a teamwide, 2011 season basis, a 4.43 ERA (Bailey) would get you 26th place in MLB in ERA (Colorado).

The difference between Bailey and Leake was more than a half run per nine inning game. That is not chump change.

These guys didn't pitch 10 innings. Between them they pitched around 300 innings. The difference of over a half run per game is meaningful.

And Leake also had a better hits allowed rate and a better walks allowed rate. And he was more durable.

Over a long season, lots of innings, I'll usually take the pitcher with a better ERA (by more than half a run), better hit rate, better walk rate, and more innings.

_Sir_Charles_
04-02-2012, 11:47 AM
Okay, I'm not sure how this turned into a Leake vs Bailey debate...but regardless, I want BOTH in my rotation. Period. The only 2 starters that I have doubts about are Bronson due to age and recent performance (season) and Chapman due to lack of starting experience and inning workload. Due to contract issues...that means Chapman is the odd man out for me.

reds44
04-02-2012, 11:56 AM
How is inning workload as a concern a reason to keep him out of the rotation? He's still pitching innings in AAA. If you're truly worried about his workload starting him in the majors as a starter and then moving him to the pen when he approaches his innings wall makes a lot of sense.

Caveat Emperor
04-02-2012, 12:03 PM
How is inning workload as a concern a reason to keep him out of the rotation? He's still pitching innings in AAA. If you're truly worried about his workload starting him in the majors as a starter and then moving him to the pen when he approaches his innings wall makes a lot of sense.

Who takes over for him when he needs to go to the pen?

Homer Bailey won't be an option. He'll have been (if he's still on the team) in the bullpen for several months and won't have built the stamina and arm strength required to start.

The Operator
04-02-2012, 12:42 PM
If Homer Bailey ends up toiling in the bullpen this season to make room for Arroyo and/or Chapman, then I'm a lot less enthused about this season.

Seems an awful lot like when they tried to force feed Volquez to us as an "ace" by starting him Game 1 in the playoffs, and then Opening Day of all things. It's like they have to prove to the world that their investment, whether it be money (Chapman and Arroyo) or players given up (Hamilton for EV), was a good one.

I wish they'd just put the best players in the optimal spots for them to succeed and create wins for the team. But, whatever. They'll do what they're gonna do, they've yet to call me for advice, so, ya know.

_Sir_Charles_
04-02-2012, 05:13 PM
How is inning workload as a concern a reason to keep him out of the rotation? He's still pitching innings in AAA. If you're truly worried about his workload starting him in the majors as a starter and then moving him to the pen when he approaches his innings wall makes a lot of sense.

Sorry, I shouldn't have phrased it like that. I was referring to him not having been stretched out to full starters innings yet. I wasn't talking about his yearly innings total. My bad.

nate
04-02-2012, 10:56 PM
Homer had a 4.43 ERA and threw 132 innings.

Leake had a 3.86 ERA and threw 167 innings.

I don't find the difference meaningless.

Taking those same number of innings:

FIP
Bailey: 4.06
Leake: 4.21

xFIP
Bailey: 3.77
Leake: 3.65

tERA
Bailey: 4.75
Leake: 4.85

SIERA
Bailey: 3.78
Leake: 3.74

Basically, every defensive independent measure has them pretty close. To me, ERA is a pretty noisy measure.

The point is, I think Bailey and Leake should be in the rotation.

nate
04-02-2012, 10:59 PM
I used ERA+ because its more of a baseline comparison tool. Its not the best but it sure isn't the worst.

I think ERA has a lot of noise in it.


When you start to say Player X's peripherals say they should be better your getting into a dangerous game.

Only if you're trying to quantify it to ERA. I don't.


In Bailey's case people have been claiming that he has arrived or next year is his year for a number of years now. I have a feeling your going to hear the same thing after this season and maybe even after the next.

Arguing what "people" say is tilting at windmills.

I say, Bailey and Leake have similar pitching skill and both should be in the rotation.

RedlegJake
04-02-2012, 11:48 PM
I'll stick to the original topic - put Bailey in the rotation.

membengal
04-03-2012, 06:50 AM
Hope Bailey makes the most of this opportunity. I want nothing but the best for him, but its time to cash in on the years of apprenticeship and experience garnered to date and turn in 180 innings of sub 4.00 ERA.

membengal
04-09-2012, 07:22 PM
Bump.

Just getting a jump on the bumping.

Matt700wlw
04-09-2012, 07:24 PM
After that inning, I have a few ideas

Joseph
04-09-2012, 08:08 PM
Not a pretty start for the man they call Homer. I'm pulling for him to succeed big time though.

dougdirt
04-09-2012, 08:26 PM
Not the best game, but if he gets 4 more outs without another run, it isn't exactly a bad one either.

hebroncougar
04-09-2012, 09:00 PM
He was awful in the first. He showed some mental fortitude by bouncing back. I think the old Homer doesn't get out of about the 2nd inning. Plenty of room to improve, but let's not give up yet.

Redsfaithful
04-09-2012, 09:08 PM
Looked like a pretty typical Homer Bailey start to me. So often with the one bad inning, just happened to be the first tonight.

Kc61
04-09-2012, 09:14 PM
Not the best game, but if he gets 4 more outs without another run, it isn't exactly a bad one either.

You have got to be kidding.

edabbs44
04-09-2012, 09:15 PM
He just needs to flip around the chronology and then it would all be Dusty's fault.

Kc61
04-09-2012, 09:18 PM
He was awful in the first. He showed some mental fortitude by bouncing back. I think the old Homer doesn't get out of about the 2nd inning. Plenty of room to improve, but let's not give up yet.

Tell me when we should give up. Thanks.

hebroncougar
04-09-2012, 09:20 PM
He just needs to flip around the chronology and then it would all be Dusty's fault.

That's quality right there. :lol:

edabbs44
04-09-2012, 09:21 PM
Tell me when we should give up. Thanks.

Give the guy a few starts this season. Let's not overreact.

hebroncougar
04-09-2012, 09:24 PM
Tell me when we should give up. Thanks.

It's called baseball. There are good and bad days. With his track record, I'd give him 10 starts this year. There's 162 games, don't get too high with the highs or low with the lows.

Kc61
04-09-2012, 09:27 PM
Give the guy a few starts this season. Let's not overreact.

I think anytime your starting pitcher gives up three bombs in the first inning there will likely be some disappointment.

That disappointment is a bit greater after having been told all spring that he is the Reds second best pitcher, that his ERA is irrelevant, that he misses bats, that his terrible spring is meaningless, and that his peripherals indicate that he is a very good starter.

Homer is just too easy to hit. He doesn't fool the hitters. He "misses bats" for stretches of the game, but the opposition gets to him somewhere along the way.
He's not that effective and I always wonder if he is really healthy.

Sure, give him more time, maybe things will get better.

dougdirt
04-09-2012, 09:28 PM
You have got to be kidding.

His first start of the year turned out better than that of Mat Latos and wasn't really any different than that of Arroyo.

fearofpopvol1
04-09-2012, 09:29 PM
Not the best game, but if he gets 4 more outs without another run, it isn't exactly a bad one either.

I agree. I actually thought Dusty pulled him a little prematurely as he had really settled in after the first inning.

It wasn't a good outing, but I wouldn't say it was a horrible one either.

I am more concerned about the offense. They should've racked up some more runs tonight than they did against Westbrook. And in watching the 4 games so far this season, there needs to be much better plate discipline.

M2
04-09-2012, 09:30 PM
With his track record, I'd give him 10 starts this year.

With his track record, I'd send him out for milk and change the locks on the stadium.

dougdirt
04-09-2012, 09:34 PM
With his track record, I'd send him out for milk and change the locks on the stadium.

If that is your plan, you should probably trade him. If you 'lock him out', 29 other teams are gong to put in claims that he is theirs and you won't get a thing for him.

reds44
04-09-2012, 09:35 PM
Stat of the night:

Bailey gave up more homers in the first inning than Chapman has given up in his entire career.

Kc61
04-09-2012, 09:37 PM
His first start of the year turned out better than that of Mat Latos and wasn't really any different than that of Arroyo.

You know better.

Homer took the Reds out of the game in the first inning. He allowed three bombs and four runs before the Reds got a single at bat.

Latos didn't do that. Arroyo pitched six beautiful innings and was left in too long.

This performance was a disaster. The overall numbers do not tell the full story. The Reds were put in a position of using their secondary relievers because they were way behind from the outset.

The demise followed.

Fresh start for Homer next time. He always seems to find a way to give up too many runs at some point. I know, it's ERA, it doesn't count. Hopefully he'll do better next time.

kaldaniels
04-09-2012, 09:40 PM
You know better.

Homer took the Reds out of the game in the first inning. He allowed three bombs and four runs before the Reds got a single at bat.

Latos didn't do that. Arroyo pitched six beautiful innings and was left in too long.

This performance was a disaster. The overall numbers do not tell the full story. The Reds were put in a position of using their secondary relievers because they were way behind from the outset.

The demise followed.

Fresh start for Homer next time. He always seems to find a way to give up too many runs at some point. I know, it's ERA, it doesn't count. Hopefully he'll do better next time.

Devils advocate.

Arroyos first 6 were not beautiful.

Bailey went 1 IP longer than Latos.

Patrick Bateman
04-09-2012, 09:41 PM
You know better.

Homer took the Reds out of the game in the first inning. He allowed three bombs and four runs before the Reds got a single at bat.

Latos didn't do that. Arroyo pitched six beautiful innings and was left in too long.

This performance was a disaster. The overall numbers do not tell the full story. The Reds were put in a position of using their secondary relievers because they were way behind from the outset.

The demise followed.

Fresh start for Homer next time. He always seems to find a way to give up too many runs at some point. I know, it's ERA, it doesn't count. Hopefully he'll do better next time.

Are there actually stats that suggest that batters when down by runs early are less likely to succeed?

RedsManRick
04-09-2012, 09:44 PM
Are there actually stats that suggest that batters when down by runs early are less likely to succeed?

Probably not. But I think the runs count for double in the first inning.

nate
04-09-2012, 09:46 PM
I think anytime your starting pitcher gives up three bombs in the first inning there will likely be some disappointment.

That disappointment is a bit greater after having been told all spring that he is the Reds second best pitcher, that his ERA is irrelevant, that he misses bats, that his terrible spring is meaningless, and that his peripherals indicate that he is a very good starter.

I'm pretty sure I argued:

*He has similar skill to Mike Leake but Cueto and Latos are better
*There are much less noisy measures than ERA for evaluating pitchers
**Those same peripherals will measure him much more worse for this game than ERA
*His peripherals indicate he's average

And yes, it's one game.

nate
04-09-2012, 09:47 PM
Are there actually stats that suggest that batters when down by runs early are less likely to succeed?

Doubtful but I'd love to see them if they exist.

757690
04-09-2012, 09:53 PM
Are there actually stats that suggest that batters when down by runs early are less likely to succeed?

I would imagine that teams that give up 3 or more runs in the first inning lose much more often than teams that don't, and that is all that matters.

Kc61
04-09-2012, 09:55 PM
Doubtful but I'd love to see them if they exist.

What I do know is this. In 2011, the average ERA of an NL team was 3.81.

That means in a typical nine-inning game an NL staff usually allowed about four runs.

Homer tonight allowed the average number of runs/nine (four runs) in the top of the first. Put another way, before their first AB, the Reds were already required to score at least five to win.

I guess this early deficit impacts different players in different ways. But it can't be a plus to allow four in the first inning.

I'm sure there will be someone on RedsZone to argue that it's ok to allow four in the first. I think it is a bad thing.

dougdirt
04-09-2012, 09:57 PM
Stat of the night:

Bailey gave up more homers in the first inning than Chapman has given up in his entire career.

Secondary stat of the night:

Homer Bailey went more than twice as long tonight as Chapman has ever gone in the Majors.

Patrick Bateman
04-09-2012, 09:58 PM
I would imagine that teams that give up 3 or more runs in the first inning lose much more often than teams that don't, and that is all that matters.

Some of these posts have got to be baits.

I would imagine that any team's record while allowing 3 runs in any inning in a game is likely to lose.

Of course it's a bad thing.

But I don't think the batters go cry in their sandbox because it happend in the first inning.... but continue with the misrepresentation of position.

Tony Cloninger
04-09-2012, 09:59 PM
What I do know is this. In 2011, the average ERA of an NL team was 3.81.

That means in a typical nine-inning game an NL staff usually allowed about four runs.

Homer tonight allowed the average number of runs/nine (four runs) in the top of the first. Put another way, before their first AB, the Reds were already required to score at least five to win.

I guess this early deficit impacts different players in different ways. But it can't be a plus to allow four in the first inning.

I'm sure there will be someone on RedsZone to argue that it's ok to allow four in the first. I think it is a bad thing.


Too many people are still stuck on the 1996-2008 type of baseball that we were used to seeing....and 5-6 innings and 3 runs was actually great.
Now 5-6 innings and 3 runs is barely average ...when you have ERA's going down below 4 all over the place....but it seems not in Cincinnati.

Kc61
04-09-2012, 09:59 PM
Secondary stat of the night:

Homer Bailey went more than twice as long tonight as Chapman has ever gone in the Majors.

That's because Chapman has been a reliever. He is used for fewer innings.

But, of course, if you allow four in your first inning of work, it doesn't matter if you start or relieve. Your outing stinks either way.

kaldaniels
04-09-2012, 10:04 PM
I would imagine that teams that give up 3 or more runs in the first inning lose much more often than teams that don't, and that is all that matters.

I bet that goes for any inning, not just the first.

757690
04-09-2012, 10:07 PM
Some of these posts have got to be baits.

I would imagine that any team's record while allowing 3 runs in any inning in a game is likely to lose.

Of course it's a bad thing.

But I don't think the batters go cry in their sandbox because it happend in the first inning.... but continue with the misrepresentation of position.

Its not a misrepresentation of the position. Arguing whether or not hitters are more likely to give up when the team is down by a bunch of runs in the first misses the point.

Giving up a bunch of runs in the first is likely to lead to a lose. Nothing else is really relevant.

nate
04-09-2012, 10:10 PM
What I do know is this. In 2011, the average ERA of an NL team was 3.81.

That means in a typical nine-inning game an NL staff usually allowed about four runs.

No, it doesn't mean that.

It means the run prevention unit allowed four funs.


Homer tonight allowed the average number of runs/nine (four runs) in the top of the first. Put another way, before their first AB, the Reds were already required to score at least five to win.

No, it doesn't mean that either. The other team doesn't automatically normalize their run total to 9 innings just because of one bad inning.


I guess this early deficit impacts different players in different ways. But it can't be a plus to allow four in the first inning.

I'm sure there will be someone on RedsZone to argue that it's ok to allow four in the first. I think it is a bad thing.

It is but it doesn't excuse making up things that weren't actually said to fulfill one's confirmation bias.

162 games. Long season. A long way to go.

It's not football.

757690
04-09-2012, 10:11 PM
I bet that goes for any inning, not just the first.

Ask any player who has played the game. Being down a bunch if runs after the first inning is demoralizing. Sure, teams can bounce back, but it makes the game harder and forces a bunch of new issues that don't exist if the score is close.

I have no stats to back me up, but I would imagine that three or more runs scored in the first, is more likely to lead to a lose than in any other inning.

traderumor
04-09-2012, 10:21 PM
Secondary stat of the night:

Homer Bailey went more than twice as long tonight as Chapman has ever gone in the Majors.
Wow, that is about as far as a reach as I've seen in awhile for a bright spot in an ongoing dismal performer: "they keep on letting him start." He is a poster child for Chris Welsh's first round draft pick theory. He's gotten more rope than he deserves, and the main reason is because of sunk costs.

Since Volquez is gone and Masset is on the DL, I'll have to take out my frustrations on Homer for now and dub him the new full count king. He's just not going to be a solid contributor for the Reds. It's hard to watch.

dougdirt
04-09-2012, 10:23 PM
Oh nevermind. I know better.

Benihana
04-09-2012, 10:26 PM
I give Bailey 3 more starts. If he doesn't have at least 2 quality starts, he is out of the rotation, which he was lucky to make in the first place.

Kc61
04-09-2012, 10:27 PM
No, it doesn't mean that.

It means the run prevention unit allowed four funs.


.


Just how did the "run prevention unit" -- other than Homer himself -- cause the four runs in the first inning tonight?

Homer allowed a walk and three homers.

Please explain how other members of the "run prevention unit" caused the four runs given up in inning one tonight. Thank you.

OldRightHander
04-09-2012, 10:30 PM
Would this be a good place to insert the overused "marathon, not a sprint" line?

That was just plain brutal all around.

traderumor
04-09-2012, 10:32 PM
Would this be a good place to insert the overused "marathon, not a sprint" line?

That was just plain brutal all around.10 game spans, that's how I keep sanity. Enjoy the daily aspect of the game, but only evaluate about every 10 games. Keeps me off the anti-depressants :)

OldRightHander
04-09-2012, 10:33 PM
Please explain how other members of the "run prevention unit" caused the four runs given up in inning one tonight. Thank you.

Nothing that couldn't have been prevented by a 9 foot tall outfielder with a 50" vertical.

nate
04-09-2012, 10:50 PM
Just how did the "run prevention unit" -- other than Homer himself -- cause the four runs in the first inning tonight?

Homer allowed a walk and three homers.

Please explain how other members of the "run prevention unit" caused the four runs given up in inning one tonight. Thank you.

My point about ERA being a very noisy stat is made even more clearly by tonight's performance.

Peripherals and defense independent stats will measure Homer's night tonight much more negatively than ERA.

BCubb2003
04-09-2012, 11:07 PM
It's the manager's fault for leaving him in too long.

fearofpopvol1
04-09-2012, 11:10 PM
It's unbelievable how many overreactions there are here after ONE start in a young season.

I'm no Homer apologist. I think he can be successful if he's healthy, but he hasn't proven he can be. If he stinks up the joint for half the season, that's 1 thing. He hasn't done that yet.

Kc61
04-09-2012, 11:18 PM
It's unbelievable how many overreactions there are here after ONE start in a young season.

I'm no Homer apologist. I think he can be successful if he's healthy, but he hasn't proven he can be. If he stinks up the joint for half the season, that's 1 thing. He hasn't done that yet.

I think it's a bit unfair to say people are overreacting to one start.

There was a healthy debate about Homer this spring. That debate was based on his historical numbers and his poor spring. Many folks, myself included, were and are skeptical that he can be a winning starting pitcher at this stage of his career. (My own concern is whether he has ever become fully healthy.)

Now, in his very first inning, he gets bombed. Three homers and four runs.

So folks are naturally unhappy and concerned. It's hard to be a ninety win team with ordinary (or worse) starting pitchers.

Of course, he will get more opportunities. But after the long debate about Homer, it was disheartening to see him begin the year reflecting previous issues with his pitching.

reds44
04-09-2012, 11:20 PM
Secondary stat of the night:

Homer Bailey went more than twice as long tonight as Chapman has ever gone in the Majors.
This has to be a joke, right? I don't even know how to respond to that. Lets dig up the corpse of Eric Milton, he's thrown longer in games than Chapman too.

kaldaniels
04-09-2012, 11:20 PM
I think it's a bit unfair to say people are overreacting to one start.

There was a healthy debate about Homer this spring. That debate was based on his historical numbers and his poor spring. Many folks, myself included, were and are skeptical that he can be a winning starting pitcher at this stage of his career. (My own concern is whether he has ever become fully healthy.)

Now, in his very first inning, he gets bombed. Three homers and four runs.

So folks are naturally unhappy and concerned. It's hard to be a ninety win team with ordinary (or worse) starting pitchers.

Of course, he will get more opportunities. But after the long debate about Homer, it was disheartening to see him begin the year reflecting previous issues with his pitching.

Concerned. Disheartening.

I don't know that people take issue with those words. Sounds reasonable to me.

SirFelixCat
04-09-2012, 11:20 PM
It's unbelievable how many overreactions there are here after ONE start in a young season.

I'm no Homer apologist. I think he can be successful if he's healthy, but he hasn't proven he can be. If he stinks up the joint for half the season, that's 1 thing. He hasn't done that yet.

Agree.


Seriously, folks, chill the hell out.

traderumor
04-09-2012, 11:23 PM
It's unbelievable how many overreactions there are here after ONE start in a young season.

I'm no Homer apologist. I think he can be successful if he's healthy, but he hasn't proven he can be. If he stinks up the joint for half the season, that's 1 thing. He hasn't done that yet.I expect him to continue doing what he's been doing. Hopefully Chapman bumps him and the charade ends when the bullpen is full strength. Cueto/Latos/Chapman/Leake/Arroyo can probably get it done. Throw Bailey in there for Chapman and suddenly you have a rotation with 2 marginal number 5's. I don't think that will be enough to overtake St. Louis and Milwaukee.

Kc61
04-09-2012, 11:24 PM
Agree.


Seriously, folks, chill the hell out.

Here's a hypothetical question. You agree with a post saying that Homer should get half a season to prove himself.

What if Homer - or Arroyo for that matter - has say 7 bad starts in a row.

Would you still give each of them half a season?

Just testing your hypothesis.

alexad
04-09-2012, 11:26 PM
After the first he pitched well. I was at the game and watched batting practice. The wind was actually blowing in during the Cards BP. Maybe 3 balls were hit out. The ball died in the wind. But no lie when the Cards batted the wind was actually blowing out. When the Reds came to bat in the bottoms of the first the flags were not moving.

Strange yes indeed.

traderumor
04-09-2012, 11:28 PM
After the first he pitched well. I was at the game and watched batting practice. The wind was actually blowing in during the Cards BP. Maybe 3 balls were hit out. The ball died in the wind. But no lie when the Cards batted the wind was actually blowing out. When the Reds came to bat in the bottoms of the first the flags were not moving.

Strange yes indeed.
I don't know about the wind, but I would agree that he recovered well, a positive, for what its worth. But 4 runs on three homers is not getting it done in an outing.

kaldaniels
04-09-2012, 11:32 PM
Here's a hypothetical question. You agree with a post saying that Homer should get half a season to prove himself.

What if Homer - or Arroyo for that matter - has say 7 bad starts in a row.

Would you still give each of them half a season?

Just testing your hypothesis.

7 bad starts in a row would be extremely rare for any pitcher. Arroyo was the worst pitcher in the league last year and his worst streak of 4+ runs was 6.

Ghosts of 1990
04-09-2012, 11:34 PM
After the 1st inning he was good. He will be far from our problem this season, that's how I look at it. He has better stuff than Leake or Arroyo, you can't argue that. And they'll stick all season barring injury.

WVPacman
04-09-2012, 11:40 PM
7 bad starts in a row would be extremely rare for any pitcher. Arroyo was the worst pitcher in the league last year and his worst streak of 4+ runs was 6.

This is off topic but

WINNING!!! :D

When I see your avatar that automaticly comes to my mind.:p

fearofpopvol1
04-09-2012, 11:41 PM
I think it's a bit unfair to say people are overreacting to one start.

There was a healthy debate about Homer this spring. That debate was based on his historical numbers and his poor spring. Many folks, myself included, were and are skeptical that he can be a winning starting pitcher at this stage of his career. (My own concern is whether he has ever become fully healthy.)

Now, in his very first inning, he gets bombed. Three homers and four runs.

So folks are naturally unhappy and concerned. It's hard to be a ninety win team with ordinary (or worse) starting pitchers.

Of course, he will get more opportunities. But after the long debate about Homer, it was disheartening to see him begin the year reflecting previous issues with his pitching.

Do spring training games count for anything? Should they receive more merit than regular season games?

I like Chapman, but he's never pitched a full game at The Show. I'd much rather see him pitching in AAA until he gets stretched out. If he pitches well for 10 games and shows the improved control we think he has, great! And if Bailey stinks up the joint in the meantime, then I'd have no problem trading Homer in favor of Chapman.

Bailey had an attrocious first inning, but bounced back pretty nicely. It was a bad start, but it could've been worse.

The reality is that I would much prefer Chapman to Arroyo at this juncture. And further, I would prefer Bailey to Arroyo at this juncture. But we know that's not going to happen.

fearofpopvol1
04-09-2012, 11:42 PM
I expect him to continue doing what he's been doing. Hopefully Chapman bumps him and the charade ends when the bullpen is full strength. Cueto/Latos/Chapman/Leake/Arroyo can probably get it done. Throw Bailey in there for Chapman and suddenly you have a rotation with 2 marginal number 5's. I don't think that will be enough to overtake St. Louis and Milwaukee.

How do you define a #5 starter? Are you saying Bailey is a marginal #5 starter?

kaldaniels
04-09-2012, 11:43 PM
This is off topic but

WINNING!!! :D

When I see your avatar that automaticly comes to my mind.:p

Finally some sanity in here. :D

The Operator
04-09-2012, 11:49 PM
Homer Bailey is a big-time victim of having a fan base expect the world out of him. To hear people talk about him, you'd expect to go look at his numbers and see 6.50 ERAs each and every year.

He has actually been very solid the last three seasons, he just hasn't been healthy. People must really get his bad games stuck in their head because there have been quite a few really good ones the last three season that everyone has seemingly forgotten about.

Homer is far from the biggest problem in the rotation. That would be the tall lanky guy with long blonde hair, who can't break a pane of glass with his fastball and is usually gassed by 75 pitches. Do something about him before you even think about demoting Homer.

dougdirt
04-10-2012, 12:20 AM
This has to be a joke, right? I don't even know how to respond to that. Lets dig up the corpse of Eric Milton, he's thrown longer in games than Chapman too.

Yes, it was a joke. Kind of. Comparing what someone has done as a reliever to what someone has done as a starter is silly.

Chapman gave up 7 home runs in AAA in 2010. He has given up 2 since coming to the Majors (all as a reliever). Is that to say that AAA hitters are better than MLB ones? Of course not, but pitching out of the bullpen is an entirely different animal than pitching out of the rotation.

You kind of made my point.... I didn't really know how to respond to the original post. So I went out and found a stat that also said something that has next to no meaning to it.

reds44
04-10-2012, 12:23 AM
Giving up three homers in an inning has no meaning to it?

dougdirt
04-10-2012, 12:32 AM
Giving up three homers in an inning has no meaning to it?

In relation to Chapman in the bullpen, absolutely not.

kaldaniels
04-10-2012, 12:35 AM
Giving up three homers in an inning has no meaning to it?

3 home runs in an inning is bad. No argument. But is 3 HR in an inning a litmus test of some sort?

Homer Bailey gave up 3 home runs in an inning. Therefore Homer Bailey is ________?

Colby Lewis gave up 3 home runs in an inning. Therefore Colby Lewis is ________?

Y Gallardo gave up 3 home runs in an inning. Therefore Y Gallarado is ________?

kaldaniels
04-10-2012, 12:38 AM
Doug, I sense you are on my "side" here so what ever you say will probably be objected to...but in the game thread I was shut down when I mentioned that Chapman is not ready for the rotation. (regarding his stamina) What are your thoughts on the matter...I can't imagine today just sliding him on in (for arguments sake, Bailey's slot) and things going smoothly.

M2
04-10-2012, 12:41 AM
Homer is far from the biggest problem in the rotation. That would be the tall lanky guy with long blonde hair, who can't break a pane of glass with his fastball and is usually gassed by 75 pitches. Do something about him before you even think about demoting Homer.

The guy who has pitched more innings and won more games than any Reds pitcher since Jose Rijo is the problem child? Yeah, Arroyo had a bad 2011. Given the amount of good he's done in a Reds uniform, and that three times previously in his career people insisted he was finito only to be proven wrong, I'm perfectly fine with giving him some leash.

Meanwhile Bailey hasn't done squat. He's done nothing to earn an automatic slot in the rotation. As far as he knew, he was pitching for his job during spring training ... and he responded by soiling his boxers. If he doesn't get himself right then there's no justification for handing him a baseball and sending him out to start a ballgame. It's go time for the Reds and they can't afford to waste time on some ex-prospect who never arrived.

dougdirt
04-10-2012, 12:45 AM
Doug, I sense you are on my "side" here so what ever you say will probably be objected to...but in the game thread I was shut down when I mentioned that Chapman is not ready for the rotation. (regarding his stamina) What are your thoughts on the matter...I can't imagine today just sliding him on in (for arguments sake, Bailey's slot) and things going smoothly.

I think it would be a fools bet to toss Chapman into the rotation today and expect good results. I want Chapman starting, but I don't think he has shown that he can, yet. He has never thrown a change up/splitter to a Major League hitter. He has never gone 6 innings in back to back games. He leads all of baseball in walk rate over the last 2 years. I would send him to Louisville, give him 4 weeks worth of starts, see where he is, and then re-evaluate both him and the MLB guys and go from there.

dougdirt
04-10-2012, 12:46 AM
I wonder if Rangerszone is thinking of kicking Darvish to the curb after that egg that he laid today?

kaldaniels
04-10-2012, 12:47 AM
The guy who has pitched more innings and won more games than any Reds pitcher since Jose Rijo is the problem child? Yeah, Arroyo had a bad 2011. Given the amount of good he's done in a Reds uniform, and that three times previously in his career people insisted he was finito only to be proven wrong, I'm perfectly fine with giving him some leash.

Meanwhile Bailey hasn't done squat. He's done nothing to earn an automatic slot in the rotation. As far as he knew, he was pitching for his job during spring training ... and he responded by soiling his boxers. If he doesn't get himself right then there's no justification for handing him a baseball and sending him out to start a ballgame. It's go time for the Reds and they can't afford to waste time on some ex-prospect who never arrived.

I'm ok with giving Bronson a longer leash.

However, in their first starts, Bailey practically pitched Arroyo to a draw. (.2 more IP for Bronson, but he allowed 10 hits, equal number of ER). And Bailey outpitched Latos. So why are we coming down so hard on Homer after 1 start? Homer is not going to give up 3 HR in an inning again this year, I am 99 percent certain on that. But watching Bronson yesterday he wasn't fooling hitters all game long. To me, that is more concerning.

757690
04-10-2012, 01:08 AM
I'm ok with giving Bronson a longer leash.

However, in their first starts, Bailey practically pitched Arroyo to a draw. (.2 more IP for Bronson, but he allowed 10 hits, equal number of ER). And Bailey outpitched Latos. So why are we coming down so hard on Homer after 1 start? Homer is not going to give up 3 HR in an inning again this year, I am 99 percent certain on that. But watching Bronson yesterday he wasn't fooling hitters all game long. To me, that is more concerning.

Just for the record, Arroyo has never fooled hitters. He always gives up his share of hits. His biggest problem has always been home runs, and he not only didn't give any up on Sunday, he really wasn't close to giving up,any. His velocity was at 2006-10 levels, which resulted in 4 K's in 6 innings, on par for him whe he's healthy, and he didn't walk any. I was actually encouraged by his start.

As for Baliey, I'm willing to let him start more games, at least until the pen is completely healthy, and Chapman can go down for a few starts to get ready as a starter. I think he will actually have some decent starts in there. I'm just not convinced he will ever be consistent enough to beat out Chapman or even Francis for a full time spot in the rotation.

reds44
04-10-2012, 01:12 AM
I think it would be a fools bet to toss Chapman into the rotation today and expect good results. I want Chapman starting, but I don't think he has shown that he can, yet. He has never thrown a change up/splitter to a Major League hitter. He has never gone 6 innings in back to back games. He leads all of baseball in walk rate over the last 2 years. I would send him to Louisville, give him 4 weeks worth of starts, see where he is, and then re-evaluate both him and the MLB guys and go from there.
Talent is a wonderful thing.

dougdirt
04-10-2012, 01:16 AM
As for Baliey, I'm willing to let him start more games, at least until the pen is completely healthy, and Chapman can go down for a few starts to get ready as a starter. I think he will actually have some decent starts in there. I'm just not convinced he will ever be consistent enough to beat out Chapman or even Francis for a full time spot in the rotation.

Homer Bailey out-pitched Francis last year by a country mile aside from innings. And was quite a bit better in 2010 as well.

757690
04-10-2012, 01:27 AM
Homer Bailey out-pitched Francis last year by a country mile aside from innings. And was quite a bit better in 2010 as well.

They had very similar FIP the last two years, right around 4.00. I just think Francis is a better fit for GABP with his low walk, low HR rates.

AtomicDumpling
04-10-2012, 02:33 AM
I would leave Bailey in the rotation. His peripherals were good in 2010 and 2011, which means his 2012 performance is likely to be good. His SIERA in 2010 was 3.81 and in 2011 it was 3.78.

By the way, SIERA has been proven to be more accurate than ERA in predicting future ERA. In other words, Homer Bailey's 2012 ERA is likely to be closer to his 2011 SIERA of 3.78 than his 2011 ERA of 4.43. Any difference between SIERA and ERA is due mostly to random variation rather than pitcher skill, but team defense, ballpark and league have an effect. Very few pitchers perform significantly better or worse than their SIERA over a large sample size.

Mike Leake's SIERA of 3.76 is nearly identical to Bailey's. Bronson Arroyo's peripherals (and FIP, xFIP & SIERA) have been far, far worse than Leake's and Bailey's the last few years. Even Jeff Francis has better peripherals than Arroyo over recent seasons. If you want to make room in the rotation for Aroldis Chapman then Arroyo is very clearly the one to jettison despite the foolish contract they gave him.

I don't buy the argument that Arroyo should remain in the rotation because he eats innings. If one of the young starters runs out of steam and needs to be shut down you can always pull Arroyo or Francis or LeCure out of the bullpen and put him back in the rotation. It is not like the Reds don't have anyone to pitch those innings. You have your best pitchers pitch as many innings as they can before you resort to using the bad pitchers. Don't start the season with bad pitchers eating innings because you are worried your good pitchers might not be able to last the season. You won't know until you give them the chance. They can't prove they can throw 200 innings until they are given the chance to do it.

Bailey should be given a lengthy opportunity to prove he belongs in the rotation. He is not likely to be a stud, but he could be a pleasant surprise. He is likely to be near league average or at the very least decent. Bronson Arroyo is highly likely to be pathetic again this year. He had literally the worst FIP among all starting pitchers in the major leagues last year by a wide margin. Give somebody else the opportunity before giving up and running Arroyo out there for 200 awful innings again.

gilpdawg
04-10-2012, 04:00 AM
After the first he pitched well. I was at the game and watched batting practice. The wind was actually blowing in during the Cards BP. Maybe 3 balls were hit out. The ball died in the wind. But no lie when the Cards batted the wind was actually blowing out. When the Reds came to bat in the bottoms of the first the flags were not moving.

Strange yes indeed.
And, to be fair, two of those HRs were GABP specials. Especially the Freese one.
But that's ok. You live by the cheap home run (Bruce in the ninth Sunday) and you die by the cheap home run. Just the facts of life playing in a joke of a ballpark.

GAC
04-10-2012, 04:56 AM
It's the manager's fault for leaving him in too long.

:lol:

GAC
04-10-2012, 05:06 AM
I think it's a bit unfair to say people are overreacting to one start.

I agree. We've been witnessing this guy's inconsistencies, his "ups and downs", for the last few years now, and it is getting tiring.

Everyone keeps waiting to see this guy become the type of pitcher once envisioned when he was seen as a hot, young pitching prospect. And yet he continues to disappoint. So when is he gonna somehow start to put it together? Personally, I don't see it.

So some can make excuses for him all they want; but I don't see it coming.


After the first he pitched well.

So we got another Volquez on our hands? LOL

He's not going to win, nor lead this team to many victories, if he has to start out in a 4-0 hole before getting his act together.

Yeah, it was only one start; but I have no faith in this kid whatsoever.

oneupper
04-10-2012, 05:44 AM
Can we jiggle the rotation so that Homer pitches against Houston and Pittsburgh all the time?
4-0 1.60 ERA vs. Houston.
5-0 1.94 ERA vs. PIT.

membengal
04-10-2012, 06:37 AM
Here's my issue with Homer...and, yes, maybe it is unfair. But it's this:

He has really good stuff. Plus fastball. Sharp breaking ball. When he appears to focus, good command. He has all the ingredients. And he has, for years. I have, up until this year, been solidly on the "he will put it together" team. But with the stuff he carries to the mound, with the stretches of good pitching he puts together within a game, it is infuriating to see the lapses from him within games that doom him to "league average pitcher" and touch off the arguments around here. (and that's assuming "league average is a mid 4s era...I don't think that is necessarily the case anymore...which makes him now worse than league average)

If he had crap stuff, I would be thrilled with "league average". This isn't about him being a former #1 draft pick with me...it's about what I can see that he has in his pitching aresenal, and frustration that he has not, yet, despite now years of opportunity, figured out the mental part of it to be anything more than what he is.

And, no, I am not okay with what he is at this point as being a piece that this team can win consistently with. They need him (or someone in his spot) to be better than he has been.

membengal
04-10-2012, 06:46 AM
And, by the way, I hope I was wrong to hop off the "he will put it together" team, and that he finally does. But I no longer expect him to. Nor do I think he has "earned" the right to keep trying. If the Reds keep him in the rotation, I will hope, eternally, he figures it out. But it will be increasingly frustrating to watch as this unfolds if he keeps doing what he has always done, mix in good innings with innings where it inexplicably gets away from him.

mth123
04-10-2012, 06:53 AM
Here's my issue with Homer...and, yes, maybe it is unfair. But it's this:

He has really good stuff. Plus fastball. Sharp breaking ball. When he appears to focus, good command. He has all the ingredients. And he has, for years. I have, up until this year, been solidly on the "he will put it together" team. But with the stuff he carries to the mound, with the stretches of good pitching he puts together within a game, it is infuriating to see the lapses from him within games that doom him to "league average pitcher" and touch off the arguments around here. (and that's assuming "league average is a mid 4s era...I don't think that is necessarily the case anymore...which makes him now worse than league average)

If he had crap stuff, I would be thrilled with "league average". This isn't about him being a former #1 draft pick with me...it's about what I can see that he has in his pitching aresenal, and frustration that he has not, yet, despite now years of opportunity, figured out the mental part of it to be anything more than what he is.

And, no, I am not okay with what he is at this point as being a piece that this team can win consistently with. They need him (or someone in his spot) to be better than he has been.

I see the other side of this coin. If he had "crap stuff" and suffered these meltdowns frequently, I wouldn't be satisfied with a hope for league average, I'd say cut him loose because league average is the best we could possibly expect. In Homer's case, League average, or a little below as you point out, is practically a gimme. He's very capable of a whole lot more. I do agree that this is the season where he has to establish himself, and it needs to be within the next 5 or 6 starts, but to make a switch now on the basis of spring training of all the most meaningless things on Earth, to a guy who hasn't been able to even establish himself as a starter in AAA, seems foolish. Let Chapman go down and show he can work into the 6th and 7th while Homer gets those 6 or 7 starts to establish himself. If Homer spits the bit or Chapman knocks down the door, I'd say make the change. I just to refuse to buy into either of those things having happend in Spring Training or after one start or a couple of nicerelief outings of less than 2 innings.

traderumor
04-10-2012, 07:45 AM
How do you define a #5 starter? Are you saying Bailey is a marginal #5 starter?At best. Maybe he can start down the Matt Belisle career path and be of worth as an MLB pitcher.

traderumor
04-10-2012, 07:49 AM
And, to be fair, two of those HRs were GABP specials. Especially the Freese one.
But that's ok. You live by the cheap home run (Bruce in the ninth Sunday) and you die by the cheap home run. Just the facts of life playing in a joke of a ballpark.I keep on seeing Bruce's HR described as a GAB cheapie. It was opposite field, to the gap, where the fence is the highest. Yes it barely cleared the fence, but only because it was a line drive. But cheap?

GAB came into being in the height of the steroid era, it just can't shake a reputation even though there are other ballparks with higher HR rates now that the chemically induced muscles have been filtered from the game.

cumberlandreds
04-10-2012, 07:56 AM
IMO its time to cut ties with Bailey. At best he's inconsistent. He's not improved in the last three seasons. Make one good start followed by three shaky ones. Last night was very Volquez-like. Get your team behind by 4 runs in the first inning and fight uphill the rest of the night. I'm sorry but I have seen this story too many times in the past. He may just need new perspective from another team. Sometimes guys quit listening,go somewhere and hear the same thing in a different way and it clicks for them. This may be the tonic for Bailey to become a good consistent pitcher. It's not happening in Cincy though.
Put Chapamn in the rotation and see what happens. We don't know if he will be good or not. But I hate to see a Randy Johnson-like pitcher coming out of the bullpen two or three times a week for an inning or two at the most. The Reds are doing themselves and Chapman a disservice by not giving him a really good shot at starting. If doesn't work out, so be it. I know one thing I don't want to see him go to the Yankees or the Red Sox or where ever and pitch like Randy Johnson.

gilpdawg
04-10-2012, 08:05 AM
I keep on seeing Bruce's HR described as a GAB cheapie. It was opposite field, to the gap, where the fence is the highest. Yes it barely cleared the fence, but only because it was a line drive. But cheap?

GAB came into being in the height of the steroid era, it just can't shake a reputation even though there are other ballparks with higher HR rates now that the chemically induced muscles have been filtered from the game.
I was going by Hit Tracker's data which stated that Bruce's HR would have only been a HR in 17 out of 30 parks. It was an odd looking trajectory on TV, however, so maybe Hit Tracker was fooled. I was thinking gap shot off the bat, and the sucker just kept going.

Edited to add-the data from last night is out now. Freese's HR would have been a HR in 2 parks, and Holliday's in only 18. In almost every other park Freese's ball is caught on the track and we are out of the inning. Doesn't mean Homer didn't throw up a stink bomb last night, but it does make one wonder about the luck factor.

brad1176
04-10-2012, 08:11 AM
Here's what I see from Bailey, he's wild in the strike zone. Last night Hanigan was pleading with him to hit his spots and Bailey kept throwing it across the heart of the plate. Hanigan was constantly having to move and jump to catch Bailey. His fastball is straighter than the arrow tattoo on his forearm and he was throwing mid to low nineties, perfect storm for getting teed up. This is nothing new from him, which is what makes him frustrating to watch.

The Reds didn't handle Bailey correctly when he was brought up, I don't blame him for that. He was rushed in as a kid and he literally looked terrified out on the mound his first few years. I think Bailey would probably benefit greatly from a change in scenery.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-10-2012, 08:17 AM
Bailey in 2011:

132 IP

1.28 WHIP
7.2 K/9
2.2 BB/9
1.2 HR/9

Give me 200+ innings of this (for $2.5MM) and I’d take it every day from my 26-year old #4/#5.

The key to Bailey is him staying healthy. If he does, he’s a valuable asset to the rotation.

As for last night, I think the homeplate umpire (Buckner?.....dude is terrible) squeezed him a few times. I was happy that Bailey stayed somewhat composed at such a tiny/inconsistent strike zone. I would have snapped.

With all this said, I CAN understand the frustration some have with Bailey. This is his ninth year in the organization and he still has not seemed to put it all together. I have faith he will stay healthy this year and give us solid production out of the back of the rotation. IF he can stay healthy (and get to 200 IP this year), with his peripherals, he’ll be a very rich man come 2013 and beyond.

bucksfan2
04-10-2012, 08:30 AM
Here's my issue with Homer...and, yes, maybe it is unfair. But it's this:

He has really good stuff. Plus fastball. Sharp breaking ball. When he appears to focus, good command. He has all the ingredients. And he has, for years. I have, up until this year, been solidly on the "he will put it together" team. But with the stuff he carries to the mound, with the stretches of good pitching he puts together within a game, it is infuriating to see the lapses from him within games that doom him to "league average pitcher" and touch off the arguments around here. (and that's assuming "league average is a mid 4s era...I don't think that is necessarily the case anymore...which makes him now worse than league average)

If he had crap stuff, I would be thrilled with "league average". This isn't about him being a former #1 draft pick with me...it's about what I can see that he has in his pitching aresenal, and frustration that he has not, yet, despite now years of opportunity, figured out the mental part of it to be anything more than what he is.

And, no, I am not okay with what he is at this point as being a piece that this team can win consistently with. They need him (or someone in his spot) to be better than he has been.

I think that Homer has lapses in games which leads to his inconsistancy. I don't know how you fix that. I don't know how Homer becomes better than what he is. Three home runs in the 1st inning when he had pretty decent stuff just isn't acceptable. Then I just laughed when he had a chance to bunt players to 2nd and 3rd that he hit it in the one spot you couldn't.

I guess when you look at his peripherals from that game yesterday he was fine. His HR/FB ratio will even out. Hitting doesn't matter for pitchers. ERA isn't a good judge and it will regress to his norm. I do give him credit for hanging in there but it was still the same old same old Homer last night.

hebroncougar
04-10-2012, 08:59 AM
I was going by Hit Tracker's data which stated that Bruce's HR would have only been a HR in 17 out of 30 parks. It was an odd looking trajectory on TV, however, so maybe Hit Tracker was fooled. I was thinking gap shot off the bat, and the sucker just kept going.

Edited to add-the data from last night is out now. Freese's HR would have been a HR in 2 parks, and Holliday's in only 18. In almost every other park Freese's ball is caught on the track and we are out of the inning. Doesn't mean Homer didn't throw up a stink bomb last night, but it does make one wonder about the luck factor.

Sorry, but a ball that's a HR in 17 of 30 parks isn't cheap. Heck it's above average. :D

Kc61
04-10-2012, 09:05 AM
Here's what I don't understand. Why all the loyalty to Homer Bailey?

It's commendable, I'm sure the Homer loyalists are fine people, but there are so many pitchers out there. Yet we wait and wait and wait for Homer to put it together.

Arroyo is tied to the Reds by his contract, I understand the "loyalty" there.

But you have to ask the question whether fans are more interested in Homer Bailey's development or in the Reds winning.

I'm not saying drop Homer this minute, but at some point he needs to go into the bullpen or to another team. At the end of the game they don't count peripherals, they count runs, and he gives up too many of them.

There are only five spots in a rotation, critical spots on a team. What's the objective here? Winning the pennant or watching Homer grow?

dougdirt
04-10-2012, 09:10 AM
Here's what I don't understand. Why all the loyalty to Homer Bailey?

It's commendable, I'm sure the Homer loyalists are fine people, but there are so many pitchers out there. Yet we wait and wait and wait for Homer to put it together.

Arroyo is tied to the Reds by his contract, I understand the "loyalty" there.

But you have to ask the question whether fans are more interested in Homer Bailey's development or in the Reds winning.

I'm not saying drop Homer this minute, but at some point he needs to go into the bullpen or to another team. At the end of the game they don't count peripherals, they count runs, and he gives up too many of them.

There are only five spots in a rotation, critical spots on a team. What's the objective here? Winning the pennant or watching Homer grow?
At the end of the day, peripherals win out in 99% of the cases. Homer has the peripherals to suggest he is going to be a good pitcher. Homer Bailey has a chance to be a pitcher that is good enough to help you win a lot of games.

Sometimes I really hate the start of the baseball season because the overreactions are incredible. A guy has one bad start to begin the year and now, a year after posting a 1.28 WHIP and leading the team in K/BB, a whole bunch of fans want to cut him. Just incredible. (not directed at you KC, just a whole bunch of this thread and well, all over the internet)

bucksfan2
04-10-2012, 09:18 AM
At the end of the day, peripherals win out in 99% of the cases. Homer has the peripherals to suggest he is going to be a good pitcher. Homer Bailey has a chance to be a pitcher that is good enough to help you win a lot of games.

Sometimes I really hate the start of the baseball season because the overreactions are incredible. A guy has one bad start to begin the year and now, a year after posting a 1.28 WHIP and leading the team in K/BB, a whole bunch of fans want to cut him. Just incredible. (not directed at you KC, just a whole bunch of this thread and well, all over the internet)

If peripherals win out 99% of the time wouldn't they just be called stats?

Bumstead
04-10-2012, 09:20 AM
At the end of the day, peripherals win out in 99% of the cases. Homer has the peripherals to suggest he is going to be a good pitcher. Homer Bailey has a chance to be a pitcher that is good enough to help you win a lot of games.

Sometimes I really hate the start of the baseball season because the overreactions are incredible. A guy has one bad start to begin the year and now, a year after posting a 1.28 WHIP and leading the team in K/BB, a whole bunch of fans want to cut him. Just incredible. (not directed at you KC, just a whole bunch of this thread and well, all over the internet)

uh...I just re-looked at Homer's stats and I have to say, this is not about one bad start, this is about 79 starts ringing of mediocrity. Meanwhile we have a guy in the bullpen that belongs either in the Reds rotation or in AAA in Louisville's rotation. If Homer can't live up to some of the "hype" and his "peripherals" (which I have never seen win ballgames) then it's time for him to put on his big boy pants and learn to enjoy the bullpen. Put up or shut up time for Bailey IMHO and I have been a supporter of his for many years.

Bum

REDREAD
04-10-2012, 09:22 AM
He just needs to flip around the chronology and then it would all be Dusty's fault.

:lol: That's awesome.

Homer had a poor outing yesterday. Just like Bronson had a poor outing the day before.

Hopefully both of them will bounce back.

dougdirt
04-10-2012, 09:25 AM
uh...I just re-looked at Homer's stats and I have to say, this is not about one bad start, this is about 79 starts ringing of mediocrity. Meanwhile we have a guy in the bullpen that belongs either in the Reds rotation or in AAA in Louisville's rotation. If Homer can't live up to some of the "hype" and his "peripherals" (which I have never seen win ballgames) then it's time for him to put on his big boy pants and learn to enjoy the bullpen. Put up or shut up time for Bailey IMHO and I have been a supporter of his for many years.

Bum

You see peripherals win the ballgame all the time, you just don't pay attention to them being the reason as to why they won.

Frankly, I could care less about all 79 of Bailey's starts, especially his first 37 that really aren't even close to the last 42.

As for Chapman, I am with you. But he shouldn't be taking Bailey's spot at any point over the next month until he shows he can actually, you know, start. Which to this point, he hasn't.

dougdirt
04-10-2012, 09:25 AM
If peripherals win out 99% of the time wouldn't they just be called stats?

Peripherals aren't stats?

bucksfan2
04-10-2012, 09:35 AM
Peripherals aren't stats?

Peripherals are more like excuses to me. They try to explain why something happened or didn't happen. They try to take luck out of the equation. For example when you look at peripherals they would say that Homer's HR/FB ratio is out of whack. What it doesn't say is he left three pitches over the middle of the plate because he was frustrated and they got hammered.

Homer may have a great year this season, but I doubt it. Lance McAlister's blog he had this posted from Homer


"The wind blowing out like that, small park its going to happen. After the first, I just tried to get as deep into the game as I could.

At some point the excuses need to stop and the production needs to begin.

nate
04-10-2012, 09:40 AM
If Homer can't live up to some of the "hype" and his "peripherals" (which I have never seen win ballgames

You've never seen a strikeout, walk or home run win a baseball game?

I see.

Brutus
04-10-2012, 09:42 AM
Bailey in 2011:

132 IP

1.28 WHIP
7.2 K/9
2.2 BB/9
1.2 HR/9

Give me 200+ innings of this (for $2.5MM) and Id take it every day from my 26-year old #4/#5.

The key to Bailey is him staying healthy. If he does, hes a valuable asset to the rotation.

As for last night, I think the homeplate umpire (Buckner?.....dude is terrible) squeezed him a few times. I was happy that Bailey stayed somewhat composed at such a tiny/inconsistent strike zone. I would have snapped.

With all this said, I CAN understand the frustration some have with Bailey. This is his ninth year in the organization and he still has not seemed to put it all together. I have faith he will stay healthy this year and give us solid production out of the back of the rotation. IF he can stay healthy (and get to 200 IP this year), with his peripherals, hell be a very rich man come 2013 and beyond.

Thank you for this post. I certainly understand the frustration, and I also understand the preference of having Chapman in the rotation. However, at the end of the day, Bailey is still a pretty good pitcher. Not a great pitcher -- not even one that has lived up to his expectations -- but still better than many teams have as a debated fourth or fifth starter.

Bailey is frustrating. However, the biggest knock against him for this year is spring performance and one start. I was always under the impression we shouldn't read too much into spring performance. Roy Halladay had a noted terrible spring but he came out and got a shutout on the first day. Bailey had a terrible first inning, but wasn't too bad after that last night.

I don't understand the panic button on this. I hope Chapman replaces him, but that's more about Chapman being a possible stud than a knock on Bailey.

nate
04-10-2012, 09:42 AM
If peripherals win out 99% of the time wouldn't they just be called stats?

I typically find the peripherals listed on the "stats" page.

bucksfan2
04-10-2012, 09:53 AM
I typically find the peripherals listed on the "stats" page.

I often find them on the "excuse" page followed by a but, if/then, because, normalization, etc.

Bumstead
04-10-2012, 09:56 AM
You see peripherals win the ballgame all the time, you just don't pay attention to them being the reason as to why they won.

Frankly, I could care less about all 79 of Bailey's starts, especially his first 37 that really aren't even close to the last 42.

As for Chapman, I am with you. But he shouldn't be taking Bailey's spot at any point over the next month until he shows he can actually, you know, start. Which to this point, he hasn't.

He can't show he can, you know, start, from the bullpen, can he? I'm just saying Bailey needs to start living up to his billing or he will be gone regardless of his peripherals and hype. His gap for "getting a pass" is closing quickly. I was thinking that the object of this season was to win games and compete for the division title, not sit around and watch Bailey and Arroyo pitch like they have for quite some time...

Bum

durl
04-10-2012, 09:56 AM
Referring back to the thread title, the FIRST thing that he should do today is go back to using his birth name, "David."

I'll admit that I'm not looking at his stats in-depth and I'm going by my gut here, but I say give him a few more starts and see what happens. If he doesn't improve, move him to the bullpen or see if he can blossom in another city. Maybe he'll pull a "Moyer" for someone.

25-24 with a lifetime ERA of 4.91. Batters have hit .274 against him (.264 last year). Even his best season in 2009, he went 8-5 with an ERA of 4.53. Looking at his splits last year, when Bailey had runners on 1st and 2nd, batters hit .324. On 1st and 3rd, they hit .313. Scoring position? .272.

We've seen brief flashes of greatness over the years. They just get overshadowed by his inconsistency. We've seen 5 years of it...nothing seems to have improved, at least in my eyes. Something's just not clicking for Homer, er "David", in Cincinnati.

Bumstead
04-10-2012, 09:58 AM
You've never seen a strikeout, walk or home run win a baseball game?

I see.

Wow, thanks for raining the "knowledge." I will put this little nugget right there with all the other smart alec retorts from everyone's favorite poster. Your contribution was masterful as always!

Bum

nate
04-10-2012, 10:03 AM
I often find them on the "excuse" page followed by a but, if/then, because, normalization, etc.

Which one is the "rolling eyes" emoticon?

nate
04-10-2012, 10:04 AM
Wow, thanks for raining the "knowledge." I will put this little nugget right there with all the other smart alec retorts from everyone's favorite poster. Your contribution was masterful as always!

Bum

Likewise.

bucksfan2
04-10-2012, 10:06 AM
Which one is the "rolling eyes" emoticon?

Actually Homer does that quite a bit when he leaves 3 fat ones over the middle of the plate.

Are those the same peripherals that said Matt Belisle was going to be a good starter? Or the same ones that said Edinson Volquez was worth the trouble?

nate
04-10-2012, 10:13 AM
Actually Homer does that quite a bit when he leaves 3 fat ones over the middle of the plate.

Are those the same peripherals that said Matt Belisle was going to be a good starter? Or the same ones that said Edinson Volquez was worth the trouble?

Well, some of these peripherals show Homer's last start in a worse light than ERA does.

Matt Belisle has actually turned into a pretty good pitcher.

Volquez' peripherals are pretty much in line with his ERA (if that's your reference.)

GoReds
04-10-2012, 10:15 AM
Discounting the game yesterday, what would be the over/under on the number of quality starts Homer provides in the next 10 games.

I'll start the bidding at four. Anyone want to go on record and project higher?

His fastball is straight and he can no longer be considered a power pitcher. He was consistently sitting at 91, 92 last night, touching 94 once or twice. He has no idea where his pitches are going right now. This could change, but Homer is giving the appearance of being disinterested.

KoryMac5
04-10-2012, 10:18 AM
Its been close to 8 yrs that the Reds drafted Bailey. Plenty of time for him to grow and develop his pitching arsenal. My problem with Bailey is that I just don't see enough growth season to season in his pitches and approach which leads me to feel he has reached his peak with the Reds. It may be time to look at a change of scenery deal for Bailey maybe a Hughes for Homer swap with the Yanks.

kaldaniels
04-10-2012, 10:23 AM
Discounting the game yesterday, what would be the over/under on the number of quality starts Homer provides in the next 10 games.

I'll start the bidding at four. Anyone want to go on record and project higher?

His fastball is straight and he can no longer be considered a power pitcher. He was consistently sitting at 91, 92 last night, touching 94 once or twice. He has no idea where his pitches are going right now. This could change, but Homer is giving the appearance of being disinterested.

We can guess to your question but it really is too small of a sample if you are looking for "bragging rights".

But I will answer regardless. Last year Bailey put up a quality start in 13 of 22 starts. So being an odds man, I will take the over on your projection of 4 QS in his next 10 starts.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-10-2012, 10:25 AM
Yep, I predict 6-7 quality starts over his next 10.

traderumor
04-10-2012, 10:36 AM
Here's one way of looking at it for me. If the Reds picked up Bailey in an acquisition, he would be looked at as "maybe we can catch lightning in a bottle, but..."

He certainly wouldn't be someone that RZ fans would scour the rosters and target for the infamous traderumors, other than "pick up an underachiever on the cheap" type of talk. Where the Votto draft posts obviously missed the boat, the Bailey draft talk was spot on. The one I remember the most was that "Bailey might end up succeeding in his career, but probably not for the team that drafted him." And I don't think that is anyone's fault AFTER he was picked, just the nature of the HS power pitcher draft pick.

wolfboy
04-10-2012, 10:41 AM
Thank you for this post. I certainly understand the frustration, and I also understand the preference of having Chapman in the rotation. However, at the end of the day, Bailey is still a pretty good pitcher. Not a great pitcher -- not even one that has lived up to his expectations -- but still better than many teams have as a debated fourth or fifth starter.

Bailey is frustrating. However, the biggest knock against him for this year is spring performance and one start. I was always under the impression we shouldn't read too much into spring performance. Roy Halladay had a noted terrible spring but he came out and got a shutout on the first day. Bailey had a terrible first inning, but wasn't too bad after that last night.

I don't understand the panic button on this. I hope Chapman replaces him, but that's more about Chapman being a possible stud than a knock on Bailey.

I hope Chapman eventually works his way into the lineup, but I doubt it will be at the expense of Bailey. It's Arroyo that I worry about.

Bailey is cheap, decent (with a chance to be great), and the team isn't relying on him to anchor the rotation. I guess I don't see the issue here.

Patrick Bateman
04-10-2012, 10:50 AM
I often find them on the "excuse" page followed by a but, if/then, because, normalization, etc.

Peripherals are things that have happened.

757690
04-10-2012, 11:03 AM
At the end of the day, peripherals win out in 99% of the cases. Homer has the peripherals to suggest he is going to be a good pitcher. Homer Bailey has a chance to be a pitcher that is good enough to help you win a lot of games.

)

Are you saying that peripherals correctly predict a pitchers future ERA 99% of the time? It only misses in one of every one hundred pitchers? I find that very hard to believe.

OldRightHander
04-10-2012, 11:26 AM
Is it kind of weird that the advertising I'm seeing on this page right now is for products to get rid of odors?

M2
04-10-2012, 11:44 AM
I'll take the under on 4 QS in his next 10 starts, largely because I'm not sure he's going to get more than a handful of starts the way he's been pitching in 2012. My expectation is that if he continues to struggle (and he's shown no signs that he won't) Bailey will be put the on DL and placed on a strengthening program for his shoulder muscles.

Kc61
04-10-2012, 11:54 AM
I'll take the under on 4 QS in his next 10 starts, largely because I'm not sure he's going to get more than a handful of starts the way he's been pitching in 2012. My expectation is that if he continues to struggle (and he's shown no signs that he won't) Bailey will be put the on DL and placed on a strengthening program for his shoulder muscles.

My only prediction is that when Masset comes back, if the Reds aren't winning the division, they will find a way to get Chapman into the rotation.

I know many of you think this requires a trip by Aroldis to the minor leagues. I'm not sure I agree.

But either way, I think Walt understands that to win pennants you need a superior rotation. Chapman has the ability to give them a superior rotation.

Whether it is Arroyo who would depart (contract still an issue) or Bailey or somebody else, I don't know. But Bailey is a candidate.

Captain Hook
04-10-2012, 11:55 AM
I'll take the under on 4 QS in his next 10 starts, largely because I'm not sure he's going to get more than a handful of starts the way he's been pitching in 2012. My expectation is that if he continues to struggle (and he's shown no signs that he won't) Bailey will be put the on DL and placed on a strengthening program for his shoulder muscles.

So far he's had one bad inning in 2012.

Patrick Bateman
04-10-2012, 12:00 PM
So far he's had one bad inning in 2012.

Well to be fair, from everything I heard he appeared to be very poor in spring training (not based on stats, he apparently just looked weak and ineffective), so it could be that he's not quite right.

wolfboy
04-10-2012, 12:11 PM
Paul Daugherty now weighs in with his reasoned expert analysis:

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/daugherty/2012/04/10/the-morning-line-410/

It looks like the Enquirer is really playing this up as Chapman v. Bailey. Again, why Bailey and not Arroyo? I didn't see the Enquirer calling for his head when he gave up 5 runs on Sunday. In fact, I read several accounts of how he "looked good." If we're really "all in" this year, why isn't Arroyo on a short leash?

Captain Hook
04-10-2012, 12:13 PM
Well to be fair, from everything I heard he appeared to be very poor in spring training (not based on stats, he apparently just looked weak and ineffective), so it could be that he's not quite right.

I hear the same as far as how Bailey pitched in ST but those games count for nothing.He wasn't the only guy in a Reds uniform last night that had a difficult time and he actually got his act together after a difficult start unlike like most of the guys trying to provide offense.By the way, those other guys were going against a lesser pitcher when compared to Homer so what's their excuse?I'm willing to give Bailey a few more starts before giving up on him.

Bumstead
04-10-2012, 12:19 PM
I hear the same as far as how Bailey pitched in ST but those games count for nothing.He wasn't the only guy in a Reds uniform last night that had a difficult time and he actually got his act together after a difficult start unlike like most of the guys trying to provide offense.By the way, those other guys were going against a lesser pitcher when compared to Homer so what's their excuse?I'm willing to give Bailey a few more starts before giving up on him.

I think if you actually looked at the numbers that Jake Westbrook's career numbers compare favorably to Bailey's. Just sayin.' I would rather have Bailey at this point but what you said is in fact wrong.

At some point Bailey has to show that he is as good as his defenders say he is. We are trying to win the division, sometimes good players ride the pine in those situations. Bailey may find this out sooner rather than later.

Bum

M2
04-10-2012, 12:24 PM
Well to be fair, from everything I heard he appeared to be very poor in spring training (not based on stats, he apparently just looked weak and ineffective), so it could be that he's not quite right.

Exactly. Bailey's a stuff pitcher and his stuff isn't there.

M2
04-10-2012, 12:25 PM
Paul Daugherty now weighs in with his reasoned expert analysis:

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/daugherty/2012/04/10/the-morning-line-410/

It looks like the Enquirer is really playing this up as Chapman v. Bailey. Again, why Bailey and not Arroyo? I didn't see the Enquirer calling for his head when he gave up 5 runs on Sunday. In fact, I read several accounts of how he "looked good." If we're really "all in" this year, why isn't Arroyo on a short leash?

Because Arroyo has a track record of being a much better pitcher than Bailey.

It's fine to argue that you expect Bailey to be better moving forward, but Bailey's doing nothing to aid people who want to make that argument. Based on their first starts of the season, the guy who limited BBs and HRs was Arroyo. Bailey was wild and got hit hard.

edabbs44
04-10-2012, 12:37 PM
There were a ton of discussions last year around why Travis Wood needed to be in the rotation over Mike Leake and I am sure there were tons of stats to back it up.

I have patience on this one.

wolfboy
04-10-2012, 12:53 PM
Because Arroyo has a track record of being a much better pitcher than Bailey.

It's fine to argue that you expect Bailey to be better moving forward, but Bailey's doing nothing to aid people who want to make that argument. Based on their first starts of the season, the guy who limited BBs and HRs was Arroyo. Bailey was wild and got hit hard.

Since 2007 when Bailey came into the league, Arroyo has a WAR of 7 to Bailey's 4.8. If you compare them side by side since 2009, which was the first year Bailey logged at least 100 innings, Bailey has a WAR of 4.7 and Arroyo has a WAR of 2. There's obviously room for disagreement, but I'm going with Bailey on both track record and future expectations.

Homer Bailey
04-10-2012, 12:56 PM
Since 2007 when Bailey came into the league, Arroyo has a WAR of 7 to Bailey's 4.8. If you compare them side by side since 2009, which was the first year Bailey logged at least 100 innings, Bailey has a WAR of 4.7 and Arroyo has a WAR of 2. There's obviously room for disagreement, but I'm going with Bailey on both track record and future expectations.

Total agreement from me.

Patrick Bateman
04-10-2012, 12:59 PM
Are you saying that peripherals correctly predict a pitchers future ERA 99% of the time? It only misses in one of every one hundred pitchers? I find that very hard to believe.

I think you are right to question peripherals, there are plenty of cases where a guy does not perform to the level of his peripherals for one reason or another (ie. Jeremy Bonderman).

The problem that I currently have in this thread are those (not you) that keep saying things like "periperhals did not happen, they are excuses, unlike ERA which did actually happen." It can be very frustrating to deal with posts like these that don't even comprehend what is going on to put down Bailey. The peripherals have happened and are evidence of past events. And as Doug pointed too, are a reasonable predictor of future (and present) ability.

As far as Bailey is concerned, because of his various ailments which have limited his innings, his sample size is certainly not to the point that proves that he is going to be one of those guys that underperforms his peripherals. There are many arguments that say book on Bailey is that he starts to pitch worse when there are guys on base, although that appears to be true, there are plenty of good pitchers that have gone through similar sample sizes where the same could be said. It really could just be coindence, and the fact that it fits the mold that some people have on Bailey because it fits their preconceived notions of the type of pitcher he is, does not necessarily mean that it's true.

There is a chance that it is, but (maybe not 99% of the time) the peripherals are likely right and do point towards him being roughly a league average pitcher if healthy. I'm on record as moving Arroyo to the pen in favour of Chapman.

Captain Hook
04-10-2012, 01:11 PM
I think if you actually looked at the numbers that Jake Westbrook's career numbers compare favorably to Bailey's. Just sayin.' I would rather have Bailey at this point but what you said is in fact wrong.

At some point Bailey has to show that he is as good as his defenders say he is. We are trying to win the division, sometimes good players ride the pine in those situations. Bailey may find this out sooner rather than later.

Bum

You'd be right if it was 2008.Right now?Not so much.Try looking at the last three years.Not really the point though.

Patrick Bateman
04-10-2012, 01:18 PM
I think if you actually looked at the numbers that Jake Westbrook's career numbers compare favorably to Bailey's. Just sayin.' I would rather have Bailey at this point but what you said is in fact wrong.

At some point Bailey has to show that he is as good as his defenders say he is. We are trying to win the division, sometimes good players ride the pine in those situations. Bailey may find this out sooner rather than later.

Bum

Did you watch Jake Westbrook last night?

I would have trouble you would be defending him after watching him last night (or looking at last year's stats). That guy is a ticking time bomb of suck.

M2
04-10-2012, 01:34 PM
Since 2007 when Bailey came into the league, Arroyo has a WAR of 7 to Bailey's 4.8. If you compare them side by side since 2009, which was the first year Bailey logged at least 100 innings, Bailey has a WAR of 4.7 and Arroyo has a WAR of 2. There's obviously room for disagreement, but I'm going with Bailey on both track record and future expectations.

Arroyo has four seasons in a Reds uniform of 200+ innings and an ERA+ of better than 100. Bailey has none and none. What you're doing here is using proving poorly assembled statistics can be used to argue for absurdity.

And which WAR are you using? On baseball-reference, Bailey's 2009-11 WAR is 1.4 while Arroyo's is 3.8. Ultimately it doesn't matter because Arroyo's 2009 and 2010 seasons dwarf anything Bailey has done during his lackluster time in the majors.

Kc61
04-10-2012, 01:43 PM
Arroyo has four seasons in a Reds uniform of 200+ innings and an ERA+ of better than 100. Bailey has none and none. What you're doing here is using proving poorly assembled statistics can be used to argue for absurdity.

And which WAR are you using? On baseball-reference, Bailey's 2009-11 WAR is 1.4 while Arroyo's is 3.8. Ultimately it doesn't matter because Arroyo's 2009 and 2010 seasons dwarf anything Bailey has done during his lackluster time in the majors.

The Arroyo/Bailey debate is unrealistic. Arroyo has one thing Homer lacks. A big contract with a couple years left on it. He's not tradeable. He is staying.

Homer is the pitcher "in play" because he is not weighed down by a big contract.

Arroyo has the more accomplished career. Homer has youth and better stuff now on his side. But it doesn't matter, the contract makes all the difference.

The real question is Homer v. Chapman. I have always wanted Chapman in the major league rotation. That is the move that will be made if Homer doesn't improve.

And I think the move will be made because, as somebody put it earlier, Homer is a "stuff" pitcher who doesn't seem to have the stuff right now to be a good 1-3 starter and maybe not even a "4" on a very good team.

Caveat Emperor
04-10-2012, 01:53 PM
Better get him out of Cincinnati quick before Walt & Bob decide to give him a contract extension (seeing how they're just handing 'em out these days).

Captain Hook
04-10-2012, 01:57 PM
Arroyo has four seasons in a Reds uniform of 200+ innings and an ERA+ of better than 100. Bailey has none and none. What you're doing here is using proving poorly assembled statistics can be used to argue for absurdity.

And which WAR are you using? On baseball-reference, Bailey's 2009-11 WAR is 1.4 while Arroyo's is 3.8. Ultimately it doesn't matter because Arroyo's 2009 and 2010 seasons dwarf anything Bailey has done during his lackluster time in the majors.

It's basically "is there anything left in the tank" vs. "will he ever figure it out" when deciding between Bronson and Homer.Numbers only tell half the story.At this point I think there's a better chance Bailey figures it out.

wolfboy
04-10-2012, 01:57 PM
Arroyo has four seasons in a Reds uniform of 200+ innings and an ERA+ of better than 100. Bailey has none and none. What you're doing here is using proving poorly assembled statistics can be used to argue for absurdity.

And which WAR are you using? On baseball-reference, Bailey's 2009-11 WAR is 1.4 while Arroyo's is 3.8. Ultimately it doesn't matter because Arroyo's 2009 and 2010 seasons dwarf anything Bailey has done during his lackluster time in the majors.

I use fangraphs.com, i.e., I'm not pulling this out of my rear end. I said in my post that there's room for disagreement here. That's me being respectful of your argument, even if I don't agree. I think it's fair of me to ask the same in return. Wouldn't you agree?

wolfboy
04-10-2012, 02:01 PM
Just a few short minutes ago, I received an email from City Cellars (great place BTW) with the following subject:


Immediate Clearance on ALL Homer Bailey Chardonnay!!!


I had to chuckle. I wonder if they're making room for the Aroldis Chapman Merlot?

Captain Hook
04-10-2012, 02:06 PM
The Arroyo/Bailey debate is unrealistic. Arroyo has one thing Homer lacks. A big contract with a couple years left on it. He's not tradeable. He is staying.

Homer is the pitcher "in play" because he is not weighed down by a big contract.

Arroyo has the more accomplished career. Homer has youth and better stuff now on his side. But it doesn't matter, the contract makes all the difference.

The real question is Homer v. Chapman. I have always wanted Chapman in the major league rotation. That is the move that will be made if Homer doesn't improve.

And I think the move will be made because, as somebody put it earlier, Homer is a "stuff" pitcher who doesn't seem to have the stuff right now to be a good 1-3 starter and maybe not even a "4" on a very good team.

The Reds seem serious about winning.I don't think it's unrealistic that they let the better pitcher stay in the rotation. I know that in the past maybe the team would've handled things the way your're suggesting but it seem things are different these days.

bucksfan2
04-10-2012, 02:08 PM
I think you are right to question peripherals, there are plenty of cases where a guy does not perform to the level of his peripherals for one reason or another (ie. Jeremy Bonderman).

The problem that I currently have in this thread are those (not you) that keep saying things like "periperhals did not happen, they are excuses, unlike ERA which did actually happen." It can be very frustrating to deal with posts like these that don't even comprehend what is going on to put down Bailey. The peripherals have happened and are evidence of past events. And as Doug pointed too, are a reasonable predictor of future (and present) ability.

As far as Bailey is concerned, because of his various ailments which have limited his innings, his sample size is certainly not to the point that proves that he is going to be one of those guys that underperforms his peripherals. There are many arguments that say book on Bailey is that he starts to pitch worse when there are guys on base, although that appears to be true, there are plenty of good pitchers that have gone through similar sample sizes where the same could be said. It really could just be coindence, and the fact that it fits the mold that some people have on Bailey because it fits their preconceived notions of the type of pitcher he is, does not necessarily mean that it's true.

There is a chance that it is, but (maybe not 99% of the time) the peripherals are likely right and do point towards him being roughly a league average pitcher if healthy. I'm on record as moving Arroyo to the pen in favour of Chapman.

The problem I have with peripherals is that they are just that peripherals. To me it also comes down to the macro vs the micro. They try to explain why the production isn't what it should be. But it looks at things in the macro when a lot of the issues happen in the micro.

Homer tends to lose focus or lets a mistake compound upon itself. If you going to use peripherals as a reason why a player is better than his numbers say then you also have to be ready to admit the limitations of those peripherals as well as aspects of that players game that are lacking.

fearofpopvol1
04-10-2012, 02:10 PM
At best. Maybe he can start down the Matt Belisle career path and be of worth as an MLB pitcher.

Wow, interesting. At best Homer is a marginal 5th starter? What is Arroyo then? And Leake? What is Chapman right now?

Patrick Bateman
04-10-2012, 02:13 PM
The problem I have with peripherals is that they are just that peripherals. To me it also comes down to the macro vs the micro. They try to explain why the production isn't what it should be. But it looks at things in the macro when a lot of the issues happen in the micro.

Homer tends to lose focus or lets a mistake compound upon itself. If you going to use peripherals as a reason why a player is better than his numbers say then you also have to be ready to admit the limitations of those peripherals as well as aspects of that players game that are lacking.

They are all numbers.
They are all types of production.
They aren't saying what should be.
They all tell a story about what actually happened.

The difference is interpreting which one tells the most appropriate overall narrative about a player's current ability.

M2
04-10-2012, 02:26 PM
It's basically "is there anything left in the tank" vs. "will he ever figure it out" when deciding between Bronson and Homer.Numbers only tell half the story.At this point I think there's a better chance Bailey figures it out.

I think you're right about the frame of the argument. As for chances of which pitcher does what: Arroyo's only one season removed from being a good pitcher and Bailey turns 26 in a few weeks. The conclusion that Arroyo's arm suddenly went poof never to return seems more than a bit hasty to me. I'd think everyone could agree that if Arroyo has something left in his arm, he knows how to make it work out on the mound. Meanwhile Bailey isn't a kid anymore. He should be well past his take-your-lumps phase. While some guys take longer to figure it out, it does not bode well that he's begun to have health issues creep into the mix. His stuff is even kind of meh right now. Add that his head/heart/health question marks and it's no small number of things he needs to overcome.

Chip R
04-10-2012, 02:28 PM
Not that Homer didn't have a bad outing last night but the Reds only scored 1 run against the mighty Jake Westbrook and Co.

MWM
04-10-2012, 02:37 PM
His stuff is even kind of meh right now.

That's what I keep coming back to. I hear about how good his stuff is and I just don't see it. Sure, he can throw 93-94, but does that really qualify as "stuff". Guys who can do that are a dime a dozen. I don't see anything in his arsenal that hitters go up there afraid of. Volquez had stuff, I don't see it from Homer.

dougdirt
04-10-2012, 02:50 PM
That's what I keep coming back to. I hear about how good his stuff is and I just don't see it. Sure, he can throw 93-94, but does that really qualify as "stuff". Guys who can do that are a dime a dozen. I don't see anything in his arsenal that hitters go up there afraid of. Volquez had stuff, I don't see it from Homer.
Homer Bailey had the 5th most effective slider of all starting pitchers in baseball last year.

pedro
04-10-2012, 02:53 PM
Homer Bailey had the 5th most effective slider of all starting pitchers in baseball last year.

I have a really hard time buying that. What is that based on?

fearofpopvol1
04-10-2012, 02:54 PM
He has a very good slider and I like his splitter too. I heard last night he's been working on a curveball, which didn't look consistently good last night, but it looked like it did have potential.

dougdirt
04-10-2012, 03:09 PM
I have a really hard time buying that. What is that based on?

Fangraphs Pitch F/X pitch values, which are based on everything that happened when each guy throws that specific pitch. Each result is work X runs.
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=130&type=7&season=2011&month=0&season1=2011&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&players=0&sort=10,d

Here is the top 5, without Wandy Rodriguez listed who threw a misclassified pitch a handful of times.

Runs above average per 100 thrown
Cliff Lee - 4.50
Luke Hochevar - 3.42
Charlie Morton - 2.76
Clayton Kershaw - 2.60
Homer Bailey - 2.44

M2
04-10-2012, 03:18 PM
I use fangraphs.com, i.e., I'm not pulling this out of my rear end. I said in my post that there's room for disagreement here. That's me being respectful of your argument, even if I don't agree. I think it's fair of me to ask the same in return. Wouldn't you agree?

I appreciate that you didn't make up those numbers (and I assumed you didn't). Without getting too deep into why I dislike WAR (which is the poorly assembled statistic in this case), this is an example of why it should be used sparingly. There is disagreement over what it is and the variances can be wide (as opposed to RC where the variances are generally small and adorable). And it should never be used to displace plain sight success.

I don't care what a pitcher's WAR is if he gives me 200+ IP with a quality ERA. Do. Not. Care. Nothing could interest me less. I especially don't care when said pitcher does it repeatedly. If you pitch a lot of innings and were stingy with the runs allowed, then I'm not looking for sugar substitute stats. That's all the sweetness I require. And no amount of trying to stand the numbers on their head is going to make a better season from a guy who didn't deliver the innings and who struggled on the run prevention side of things.

Homer Bailey has never had a good season in MLB. Bronson Arroyo inarguably had good seasons in 2004, 2006, 2007, 2009 and 2010 (and his 2005 and 2008 campaigns were better than Bailey's done too). That's their respective track records. And, sorry it if offended you, but it is absurd to pretend a guy with zero successful years under his belt has a better track record than a guy with multiple successful years under his belt. Arroyo gets a slaughter rule victory over Bailey when it comes to track record.

I get the argument that, based on last year's numbers and age, Bailey projects as the better pitcher in 2012. I don't agree, but I get where that argument is coming from. Yet you have to guard against projection turning into historical revision. I'll give you a for instance. When the Reds signed Cory Lidle in 2004, I was adamant that no way, no how was Lidle going to deliver anything like his 2001 and 2002 seasons with the A's. That projection turned out to be right, but I'd have gladly welcomed his 2001-2 seasons if I thought there was any significant chance of him replicating those numbers.

If Bailey delivers something like Arroyo's 2009 or 2010, we'll all be thrilled. If Arroyo delivers something like any Bailey season you want to pick, we'll all be unhappy and insistent that Arroyo was a horrible waste of money in 2012.

And this gets back to your question of why Arroyo isn't the guy on the chopping block: because he has put together quality seasons in the recent past for this franchise and this manager. Bailey hasn't. Homer's done nothing to warrant the trust of this franchise.

pedro
04-10-2012, 04:05 PM
Fangraphs Pitch F/X pitch values, which are based on everything that happened when each guy throws that specific pitch. Each result is work X runs.
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=130&type=7&season=2011&month=0&season1=2011&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&players=0&sort=10,d

Here is the top 5, without Wandy Rodriguez listed who threw a misclassified pitch a handful of times.

Runs above average per 100 thrown
Cliff Lee - 4.50
Luke Hochevar - 3.42
Charlie Morton - 2.76
Clayton Kershaw - 2.60
Homer Bailey - 2.44

Thanks, I guess I'll just say that pitching is about usage of your entire arsenal and if Bailey isn't able to be successful enough with his other pitches he's going to continue to struggle, regardless of the quality of his slider when he's lucky enough to get himself into a count where he can use it to his advantage .

dougdirt
04-10-2012, 04:15 PM
Thanks, I guess I'll just say that pitching is about usage of your entire arsenal and if Bailey isn't able to be successful enough with his other pitches he's going to continue to struggle, regardless of the quality of his slider when he's lucky enough to get himself into a count where he can use it to his advantage .

It is interesting.... in 2010, his fastball was a very good pitch for him. In 2011, his other pitches were all roughly average or better, but his fastball got crushed. If he can get back to whatever he was dong successfully with his fastball in 2010 while keeping his other pitches the same, he is going to be very, very good.

pedro
04-10-2012, 04:18 PM
It is interesting.... in 2010, his fastball was a very good pitch for him. In 2011, his other pitches were all roughly average or better, but his fastball got crushed. If he can get back to whatever he was dong successfully with his fastball in 2010 while keeping his other pitches the same, he is going to be very, very good.

I'd love to see it but I won't believe it until I do. He's going to have to produce sustained real world success for me to be a believer, he's well past the point of being able to be given the benefit of the doubt based on his pedigree or secondary statistical profile.

wolfboy
04-10-2012, 04:21 PM
I don't care what a pitcher's WAR is if he gives me 200+ IP with a quality ERA. Do. Not. Care. Nothing could interest me less.

Conversely, I generally don't care what a pitcher's IP and ERA is. IP is almost entirely dependent on the manager (Dusty) and ERA is dependent on the rest of the team. This board is littered with discussions on the value of ERA as a measure of a pitcher's performance, so I won't rehash it. I'll just say that we fall on different sides of that argument.

The way I look at it, even if you look past WAR, I'm comfortable saying Bailey has a better track record than Arroyo over the last few years. For every year that Bailey has pitched at least 100 innings (09-11), he's had an equivalent or significantly better FIP and xFIP than Arroyo. I don't imagine that holds a lot of value for you, but that's compelling to me.


That's their respective track records. And, sorry it if offended you, but it is absurd to pretend a guy with zero successful years under his belt has a better track record than a guy with multiple successful years under his belt. Arroyo gets a slaughter rule victory over Bailey when it comes to track record.

It would be absurd if I told you that Bailey wins out when you look at ERA, IP, or wins. I'm not doing that; therefore, I think it's unwarranted and counterproductive to the discussion to label my arguments as "absurd" and say that I'm engaging in "historical revision." That's just not the case here. Instead, we have a bona fide disagreement because different measures tell us different things. I'm okay with that.


And this gets back to your question of why Arroyo isn't the guy on the chopping block: because he has put together quality seasons in the recent past for this franchise and this manager. Bailey hasn't. Homer's done nothing to warrant the trust of this franchise.

I agree. Dusty is much more ideologically aligned with your view on Arroyo and Bailey, and Arroyo is probably safe. Still, even if you look at it that way, it puzzles me: the guy with the 5.68 ERA from last year who gave up 5 runs the other night is somehow immune from criticism, but the guy with the 4.43 ERA last year who gave up 4 runs last night is surrounded by pitchforks and torches.

bucksfan2
04-10-2012, 04:26 PM
Conversely, I generally don't care what a pitcher's IP and ERA is. IP is almost entirely dependent on the manager (Dusty) and ERA is dependent on the rest of the team. This board is littered with discussions on the value of ERA as a measure of a pitcher's performance, so I won't rehash it. I'll just say that we fall on different sides of that argument.

I think IP is one of the most underappreciated pitching stat. It depends little on the manager and how well the actual pitcher is. The manager decides when to pull the pitcher, but most of the time that is based upon a pitch count, tiring, or situational baseball later in the game. There are very few managers who are going to decided to pull a pitcher after 6 innings if they think he can go more.

wolfboy
04-10-2012, 04:30 PM
I think IP is one of the most underappreciated pitching stat. It depends little on the manager and how well the actual pitcher is. The manager decides when to pull the pitcher, but most of the time that is based upon a pitch count, tiring, or situational baseball later in the game. There are very few managers who are going to decided to pull a pitcher after 6 innings if they think he can go more.

I'll concede that there are a lot of factors that go into the number of innings a pitcher logs in a given year, but I strongly disagree that it is indicative of a pitcher's quality or performance.

Rojo
04-10-2012, 04:30 PM
ERA is dependent on the rest of the team.

Man, the Phillies have really been wasting their money.

wolfboy
04-10-2012, 04:37 PM
Man, the Phillies have really been wasting their money.

http://sports.espn.go.com/fantasy/baseball/flb/story?page=mlbdk2k12_componentsofera


Perhaps there's no greater example of that than last year's Philadelphia Phillies; they committed the second-fewest errors in baseball (74), but in terms of both UZR (Ultimate Zone Rating) and Defensive Runs Saved, they didn't crack the top 10 (they were 18th and 27th).

The Phillies' winter losses, however, might actually be their gains in the defensive department. Their worst defender from 2011, left fielder Raul Ibanez (minus-16 Defensive Runs Saved, minus-18.9 UZR), is now with the New York Yankees, and their second-worst defender, first baseman Ryan Howard (minus-9 DRS, minus-4.8 UZR), will miss a significant chunk of the season recovering from an Achilles' injury. With even slightly improved defense from either of those two positions, Phillies pitchers might benefit in terms of outs they might not have gotten last season, and those can have a profound impact upon a pitcher's ERA.

As I mentioned earlier, I'm not pulling this out of my rear end or even looking at fringe sources as a basis for what I'm saying. The link above is to a story on espn.com.

wolfboy
04-10-2012, 04:40 PM
Man, the Phillies have really been wasting their money.

And, FWIW, I did not say that ERA is entirely dependent upon the rest of the team

savafan
04-10-2012, 05:00 PM
Conversely, I generally don't care what a pitcher's IP and ERA is. IP is almost entirely dependent on the manager (Dusty) and ERA is dependent on the rest of the team. This board is littered with discussions on the value of ERA as a measure of a pitcher's performance, so I won't rehash it. I'll just say that we fall on different sides of that argument.



Many things in baseball are team dependent, including victories and championships. I don't care much about what a pitcher does isolated from his defense, because at no point in any given game is he out there on the mound pitching without guys on the field behind him trying to catch the ball.

wolfboy
04-10-2012, 05:18 PM
Many things in baseball are team dependent, including victories and championships. I don't care much about what a pitcher does isolated from his defense, because at no point in any given game is he out there on the mound pitching without guys on the field behind him trying to catch the ball.

I hear what you're saying, but two questions for you:

1) Which defensive lineup is more beneficial to Pitcher X's ERA?
(A) One that includes Adam Dunn, Johnny Gomes, Rich Aurilia, and Edwin Encarnacion.
(B) One that includes Chris Heisey, Jay Bruce, Brandon Phillips, and Scott Rolen.

2) Which ERA is indicative of Player X's true skill as a pitcher?
(A) The higher ERA Pitcher X receives when the relief pitcher that follows him allows the inherited base runners to score.
(B) The lower ERA Pitcher X receives when the relief pitcher that follows him ends the inning without allowing the inherited base runners to score.

savafan
04-10-2012, 05:32 PM
I hear what you're saying, but two questions for you:

1) Which defensive lineup is more beneficial to Pitcher X's ERA?
(A) One that includes Adam Dunn, Johnny Gomes, Rich Aurilia, and Edwin Encarnacion.
(B) One that includes Chris Heisey, Jay Bruce, Brandon Phillips, and Scott Rolen.

2) Which ERA is indicative of Player X's true skill as a pitcher?
(A) The higher ERA Pitcher X receives when the relief pitcher that follows him allows the inherited base runners to score.
(B) The lower ERA Pitcher X receives when the relief pitcher that follows him ends the inning without allowing the inherited base runners to score.

I see what you're saying as well, and I will agree that the answer to both questions is B. :)

M2
04-10-2012, 06:23 PM
Conversely, I generally don't care what a pitcher's IP and ERA is. IP is almost entirely dependent on the manager (Dusty) and ERA is dependent on the rest of the team. This board is littered with discussions on the value of ERA as a measure of a pitcher's performance, so I won't rehash it. I'll just say that we fall on different sides of that argument.

I care about innings because a team has to get through roughly 1,450 of them each season. A guy who can throw 200+ effectively is immensely valuable. A guy who throws 120 IP is leaving a lot of work for the rest of the pitching staff to cover, and in general those are innings going to marginal-to-bad pitchers. Team game.

As for ERA, it tells you what happened (albeit in a haphazard way) with the thing that matters most: actual runs. ERA isn't going to tell you a thing about why the run prevention worked out the way it did or whether the guy will repeat it in the future. But those are separate concerns.

So I suggest if you've got a choice between 215 IP with a 3.85 ERA and 120 IP with 4.50 ERA, you pick the former. Your team, literally, would give up fewer runs. I'm for fewer runs. I'm against more runs. Arroyo pitched more innings and allowed fewer runs. Nothing is ever going to change that.


The way I look at it, even if you look past WAR, I'm comfortable saying Bailey has a better track record than Arroyo over the last few years. For every year that Bailey has pitched at least 100 innings (09-11), he's had an equivalent or significantly better FIP and xFIP than Arroyo. I don't imagine that holds a lot of value for you, but that's compelling to me.

You'd lose a whole lot of games clinging to that kind of ephemera. Plus, Arroyo's ERA consistently outperforms his FIP. It's a pretty clear trend. Bailey's ERA consistently underperforms his FIP. More than a little something to that, IMO.


It would be absurd if I told you that Bailey wins out when you look at ERA, IP, or wins. I'm not doing that; therefore, I think it's unwarranted and counterproductive to the discussion to label my arguments as "absurd" and say that I'm engaging in "historical revision." That's just not the case here. Instead, we have a bona fide disagreement because different measures tell us different things. I'm okay with that.

Sorry, I think you've talked yourself into absurdity. Bona fide absurdity.


I agree. Dusty is much more ideologically aligned with your view on Arroyo and Bailey, and Arroyo is probably safe. Still, even if you look at it that way, it puzzles me: the guy with the 5.68 ERA from last year who gave up 5 runs the other night is somehow immune from criticism, but the guy with the 4.43 ERA last year who gave up 4 runs last night is surrounded by pitchforks and torches.

Arroyo gets plenty of criticism. If he pitches like he did last year he should lose his job at some point this season. He just isn't the guy who hasn't done bupkus. That's Bailey. In general that's the first guy to get the ax if he's pitching poorly. If Bailey ever managed to have an actual good year in his career he'd get more leash. Not really much of a puzzler.

If you want to focus on their first starts, Arroyo handled his peripherals pretty well while Bailey was a very naughty boy last night.

wolfboy
04-10-2012, 06:50 PM
Sorry, I think you've talked yourself into absurdity. Bona fide absurdity.

Well, I guess I'll just have to live with that. Fortunately, I'm not the only lunatic in the asylum.

M2
04-10-2012, 09:36 PM
I hear what you're saying, but two questions for you:

1) Which defensive lineup is more beneficial to Pitcher X's ERA?
(A) One that includes Adam Dunn, Johnny Gomes, Rich Aurilia, and Edwin Encarnacion.
(B) One that includes Chris Heisey, Jay Bruce, Brandon Phillips, and Scott Rolen.

2) Which ERA is indicative of Player X's true skill as a pitcher?
(A) The higher ERA Pitcher X receives when the relief pitcher that follows him allows the inherited base runners to score.
(B) The lower ERA Pitcher X receives when the relief pitcher that follows him ends the inning without allowing the inherited base runners to score.

Fair points, but I actually prefer when I know what to adjust for. Part of using stats well is finding the flies in the ointment.
Wire - I'm The Fly - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxjxIKdZL9c)

In this case Arroyo and Bailey had the same defenders behind them, so that's not an adjustment we need to make.

I remember reading something a number of years ago, I think it was on BP, looking into inherited runners. The two findings that stuck with me were that the anti-ERA argument using inherited runners is a bit of a red herring (it comes out mostly in the wash - in other words, there are far better critiques of ERA to be made) and that better pitchers strand fewer runners.

REDREAD
04-13-2012, 03:18 PM
Conversely, I generally don't care what a pitcher's IP and ERA is. IP is almost entirely dependent on the manager (Dusty) and ERA is dependent on the rest of the team. This board is littered with discussions on the value of ERA as a measure of a pitcher's performance, so I won't rehash it. I'll just say that we fall on different sides of that argument.


Wow. This is a bit of a surprise.
I can understand the debate about ERA. I don't really agree with all the arguments, but I know it is not the perfect stat.

But if you are looking in HINDSIGHT at which starting pitcher had the better year, how is runs allowed (essentailly ERA) and IP flawed?
Sure maybe Arroyo was luckier than another pitcher.. maybe the bullpen just worked better for him than the other guy and that helped his ERA..
But how can you discount 200 IP of quality innings.
Other than last year, Arroyo has been a godsend for cranking out quality starts.
I know QS is not perfect, but when a pitcher consistently cranks them out, he's valuable. That's the same reason Leake was valuable.. When the Reds have the second best offense in the league, often a quality start will at least keep them in the game. Sure, the staff should strive for better.

One of the things I don't like about Homer, is that the most IP he ever pitched in a season is 132.. Sure, he had health issues, but that puts strain on the bullpen, and puts strain on the team (requires them to use the 6th starter).

Arroyo in the past has been no Cy Young winner, but his quality 200+ IP are very valuable. To put it in context, today I expect Arroyo to go deep into the game to give the bullpen a much needed breather. That might mean Dusty leaves him out even if he is not at his peak.. Has anyone ever had similiar confidence in Homer? That Homer would be able to give us 7 IP on a given night to rest the pen? I don't think so.

Again, I am not totally pessemistic on Homer, but it's time for him to start making those peripherals translate into run prevention and IP.

wolfboy
04-13-2012, 04:42 PM
Wow. This is a bit of a surprise.
I can understand the debate about ERA. I don't really agree with all the arguments, but I know it is not the perfect stat.

But if you are looking in HINDSIGHT at which starting pitcher had the better year, how is runs allowed (essentailly ERA) and IP flawed?
Sure maybe Arroyo was luckier than another pitcher.. maybe the bullpen just worked better for him than the other guy and that helped his ERA..
But how can you discount 200 IP of quality innings.
Other than last year, Arroyo has been a godsend for cranking out quality starts.
I know QS is not perfect, but when a pitcher consistently cranks them out, he's valuable. That's the same reason Leake was valuable.. When the Reds have the second best offense in the league, often a quality start will at least keep them in the game. Sure, the staff should strive for better.

One of the things I don't like about Homer, is that the most IP he ever pitched in a season is 132.. Sure, he had health issues, but that puts strain on the bullpen, and puts strain on the team (requires them to use the 6th starter).

Arroyo in the past has been no Cy Young winner, but his quality 200+ IP are very valuable. To put it in context, today I expect Arroyo to go deep into the game to give the bullpen a much needed breather. That might mean Dusty leaves him out even if he is not at his peak.. Has anyone ever had similiar confidence in Homer? That Homer would be able to give us 7 IP on a given night to rest the pen? I don't think so.

Again, I am not totally pessemistic on Homer, but it's time for him to start making those peripherals translate into run prevention and IP.


I don't discount runs scored and/or ERA, but I do recognize that it doesn't tell the whole story. As I mentioned, ERA is dependent on other factors that are outside of the pitcher's control. The extent to which these other factors affect ERA is heavily debated, and I recognize that.

As to IP, I won't argue with you that the team benefits from 200 IP of Arroyo at say his '05-'08 level of productivity. At the same time, 200 IP of what he cranked out last year is unacceptable. Quite simply, there's no reason at all he should have had 200 IP last year.

Arroyo's 2011 was an abomination, and Bailey's was pretty decent. For that reason, I'm much more concerned with Arroyo as we go into this year than Bailey. The main concern I have is that if Arroyo stinks up the joint, he's going to get 200 IP no matter what, and he'll hurt the team in the process. If Bailey stinks up two or three starts, my guess is that he's gone.

FWIW, I think Bailey is trending in the right direction as far as IP. Arroyo has averaged about 6 1/3 innings per start with the Reds. Last year, Homer averaged right around 6. I'll take that.

wolfboy
04-13-2012, 09:18 PM
Great start by Arroyo tonight. Hope it lasts.

Kc61
04-14-2012, 05:06 PM
This thread poses a question. I have decided on my answer.

Please trade Bailey for a potent lefty bat. As soon as possible.

KronoRed
04-14-2012, 05:11 PM
This thread poses a question. I have decided on my answer.

Please trade Bailey for a potent lefty bat. As soon as possible.

Who would trade a bat for a guy who gives up a run an inning?

mth123
04-14-2012, 05:18 PM
Who would trade a bat for a guy who gives up a run an inning?

A team that thinks they can fix him. Bailey seems to be going down the Gavin Floyd/Edwin Jackson path. I still think he'll be a good starter eventually, but I'd deal him for a decent lefty bat. The A's try to fix guys on the cheap. I proposed Bailey for Seth Smith when the Rockies were shopping Smith. I'd make that same deal with the A's. Oakland's park may do wonders for Homer.

Captain Hook
04-14-2012, 05:27 PM
This thread poses a question. I have decided on my answer.

Please trade Bailey for a potent lefty bat. As soon as possible.

It would be fantastic if when you have two problems you could just trade one of those problems for the answer to the other problem.

HokieRed
04-14-2012, 05:56 PM
IMHO, Bailey had a solid start today throwing to an umpire whose strike zone is about eight inches wide and right in the middle of the plate. Anything outside that zone was a ball for Homer all day. The Reds hitters are so impatient/incompetent that they never got the advantage of this against Jackson.

Kc61
04-14-2012, 06:25 PM
IMHO, Bailey had a solid start today throwing to an umpire whose strike zone is about eight inches wide and right in the middle of the plate. Anything outside that zone was a ball for Homer all day. The Reds hitters are so impatient/incompetent that they never got the advantage of this against Jackson.

We are getting to the point where it's hard to evaluate pitchers. There's so much pressure on pitchers to throw a shutout every time because the team doesn't score any runs.

So I'll give Homer credit today. Maddening in the first three innings, but hung in there, pitching for this terrible offensive outfit that provides zero support.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 06:27 PM
Today was like opposite of his first start. Bailey pitched poorly today, but got ok results out of it. His first start he pitched much better and had iffy results.

Man, this offense is bad right now though.

Kc61
04-14-2012, 06:36 PM
Today was like opposite of his first start. Bailey pitched poorly today, but got ok results out of it. His first start he pitched much better and had iffy results.

Man, this offense is bad right now though.

Frankly, it's a little hard to worry about Homer or any pitcher when the offense is this pathetic. Homer can be maddening, but did decently enough. I would have liked to see him go another inning, even with the high pitch count.

dougdirt
04-14-2012, 06:40 PM
Frankly, it's a little hard to worry about Homer or any pitcher when the offense is this pathetic. Homer can be maddening, but did decently enough. I would have liked to see him go another inning, even with the high pitch count.

I honestly thought he was going to come out for the 7th. I wouldn't have blamed Dusty for it either, though I would have had someone in the bullpen ready.

Kc61
04-14-2012, 06:45 PM
Homer won me over a bit today. He hung tough, threw 110 pitches, like a real starter.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-14-2012, 07:06 PM
6 innings, 11 baserunners......to me, just another Volquez-like performance (see Matt Latos in his first two starts as well).

mattfeet
04-15-2012, 08:47 AM
Homer won me over a bit today. He hung tough, threw 110 pitches, like a real starter.

I agree.

MikeS21
04-15-2012, 09:04 AM
Anyone care to hazard a guess as to why Reds pitchers are getting squeezed by the umps?

There was talk during the game thread on how Homer was aggressive in the first inning, but appeared to nibble in the second innings. I am thinking it had to do with the fact that he was trying to be a little cautious to the meat of the batting order. But the umpire would not call a strike on those corner pitches. As a result, Homer had to keep moving towards the middle of the plate, and the Nats were connecting on those.

All in all, I am not as down on Homer has some are. The pitching, as a whole has been pretty good. The offense, well ... that's for another discussion.

HokieRed
04-15-2012, 10:04 AM
Anyone care to hazard a guess as to why Reds pitchers are getting squeezed by the umps?

There was talk during the game thread on how Homer was aggressive in the first inning, but appeared to nibble in the second innings. I am thinking it had to do with the fact that he was trying to be a little cautious to the meat of the batting order. But the umpire would not call a strike on those corner pitches. As a result, Homer had to keep moving towards the middle of the plate, and the Nats were connecting on those.

All in all, I am not as down on Homer has some are. The pitching, as a whole has been pretty good. The offense, well ... that's for another discussion.

I watched a lot of that game, and it seemed to me that Homer got very badly squeezed and in some key moments in the game. The plate was extremely small, not only on the corners but also high-low, with very little low strike. This made, IMHO, the Reds' super aggressiveness (and I happen to think there's a lot to Dusty's "hit your way out of a slump" philosophy) even more maddening. Homer's stuff was way better than Jackson's; in fact, it was distressing to see what mediocre stuff is capable of striking out some of the Reds' hitters--I won't name names.