Originally Posted by Brutus
Mike Leake is what he is, but yet Homer Bailey, after 1,000 innings and three years of regression/static pitching, isn't?
Bailey also is what he is. It's not impossible he improves, but it's time to start facing the reality this is who he is too. Good pitcher, decent strikeout rate, improved control, but sometimes erratic.
The idea is that whichever one you keep, at bare minimum you're going to get the same pitcher, but Bailey has more to offer potentially.
As to why, I think just think Mike's stuff is going to keep his ceiling in the middle of the pack, and he's pretty much hit it. He's a softer tosser in a game where pitchers are throwing harder than ever and will continue to throw harder. Guys like him that rely so heavily on fine control will pretty much always be prone to getting blown up more often than other pitchers. He's a fine piece to have, he's basically an exactly average pitcher to have and that's pretty useful. But so is Homer, and his stuff raises his ceiling just a bit higher.