Mike Leake, Best of the Bunch?

[TRF]

If Leake pitched in Petco, he would never have an ERA over 3.25 because his one weakness, fly balls, would never hurt him. And no one, not even stats folk, would say he is a bottom of the rotation starter. That language would not be on their radar. This entire discussion has emphasized Leake's defense while almost entirely eliding the impact of GAB-which is substantial-on his otherwise efficient performances.

not really as their defense isn't all that great. Put him in Safeco where the D is even worse and see what happens. He won't be victimized by longballs, but because he's HISTORICALLY been so very hittable, that defense would destroy his numbers. That's why he's not a mid rotation starter. He's too defense dependent. Except for last night.

Leake is a 5 K/9 pitcher currently pitching near 7 K/9.

My mind can be changed about him. If he finishes this year at a rate above 7 K/9 then that's what would make me rethink. If he can be above 7 next year, I'll never harp on him again. But, history says by the end of the year he'll have a WHIP above 1.25, and a K/9 around 5.7. I really hope he proves me wrong. I really, really do.

You really want a current comp for Leake? it isn't Arroyo, It's Harang, without the ability to K guys consistently. Both are very hittable.

And all that said, last night, Leake was pitching as well as anyone in baseball. My sincerest hope is it is a change in approach, coupled with a few things Leake and Price said. Prica stated he's stronger now, throws his FB 93-94 more consistently. I'd need some data to back that up, but if so, that's a very good sign. Also Leake has stated he just knows more now. How to prepare for a season and a game. Also a good sign.

[Big Klu]

Lord, the guy pitches a gem and there is still bellyaching tha others aren't calling him Cueto, Latos, Kershaw and can't enjoy a good effort. Schleprock lives.

I've not seen anyone comparing him to Cueto, Latos, or Kershaw after this game--only Arroyo and Cingrani.

So to you sir, I say, "Shenanigans!"

Shenanigans! Shenanigans! Shenanigans!

[jojo]

I've not seen anyone comparing him to Cueto, Latos, or Kershaw after this game--only Arroyo and Cingrani.

So to you sir, I say, "Shenanigans!"

Shenanigans! Shenanigans! Shenanigans!

And for you not even bothering to read the thread let alone the thread title, to you sir, SHENANIGANS ON STEROIDS.

[westofyou]

Bucky Walters peripherals sucked, Vada Pinson didn't walk enough, Edd Roush got caught stealing too much, Buck Ewing is washed up, Jake Beckley has a crazy eye, Mr Red has big head...

[Big Klu]

Jojo,

I have read the entire thread, including the thread title. (Incredible, I know!) I also know that I specifically referenced my comment to this game, so evidently you did not read my post. In fact, your previous comment was also about this particular game ("Lord, the guy pitches a gem..."), so I cannot be sure that you even read your own comments.

I have also noticed that you like to pull out your favorite word whenever anyone disagrees with you, but you apparently do not enjoy having it thrown back at you. Your act is tiresome--it seems like you feel it is your duty to throw cold water on anyone who is upbeat or optimistic about something, even if they are being unrealistic. Guess what? It's baseball! Fans are allowed to be optimistic and sometimes unrealistic, even childlike, because baseball and its history is the thread that binds generations of fans together with an almost romantic hope.

But I'm sure that there is someone on the internet who is wrong, so I'll let you get back to work.

[Tom Servo]

If Leake pitched in Petco, he would never have an ERA over 3.25 because his one weakness, fly balls, would never hurt him. And no one, not even stats folk, would say he is a bottom of the rotation starter. That language would not be on their radar. This entire discussion has emphasized Leake's defense while almost entirely eliding the impact of GAB-which is substantial-on his otherwise efficient performances.

Watching him last night made me wonder how good he would look if he pitched half his games at AT&T Park. He is dominant in that stadium.

[Patrick Bateman]

Jojo,

I have read the entire thread, including the thread title. (Incredible, I know!) I also know that I specifically referenced my comment to this game, so evidently you did not read my post. In fact, your previous comment was also about this particular game ("Lord, the guy pitches a gem..."), so I cannot be sure that you even read your own comments.

I have also noticed that you like to pull out your favorite word whenever anyone disagrees with you, but you apparently do not enjoy having it thrown back at you. Your act is tiresome--it seems like you feel it is your duty to throw cold water on anyone who is upbeat or optimistic about something, even if they are being unrealistic. Guess what? It's baseball! Fans are allowed to be optimistic and sometimes unrealistic, even childlike, because baseball and its history is the thread that binds generations of fans together with an almost romantic hope.

But I'm sure that there is someone on the internet who is wrong, so I'll let you get back to work.

I agree with a lot of this sentiment.

To add on in expressing that voice to Jojo, I think it's perfectly fine for you to want to say your piece on Leake, and evaluate him how you see fit in response to what you might see as overly optimistic. But at what point is enough enough? I think at this point, everyone is clear on your stance regarding Leake. You've essentially repeated the same argument what feels like a dozen times. I think you're simply at am impasse if you are expecting others to see the "light". They've heard your argument, but quite frankly, they disagree, and there is nothing wrong with that (notwithstanding, I note that you have gone out of your way to say you believe that Leake is a success and a roster component, but seems your verbage beyond that appears to tickle many the wrong way).

[Falls City Beer]

It's not like I'm some sunny optimist or lily-gilder. I'm perfectly content to point out a clunker and take an unpopular position. But it makes no sense to me not to regard performance holistically. I'm sure if Leake pitched in Coors with puppies as defenders he'd probably suck, but that's a counterfactual that, luckily, as a Reds fan, I don't have to imagine. Life's tough enough taken as it is; no need to tell of an alternative universe to bedevil my dreams. This one's plenty.

[jojo]

Jojo,

I have read the entire thread, including the thread title. (Incredible, I know!) I also know that I specifically referenced my comment to this game, so evidently you did not read my post. In fact, your previous comment was also about this particular game ("Lord, the guy pitches a gem..."), so I cannot be sure that you even read your own comments.

I have also noticed that you like to pull out your favorite word whenever anyone disagrees with you, but you apparently do not enjoy having it thrown back at you. Your act is tiresome--it seems like you feel it is your duty to throw cold water on anyone who is upbeat or optimistic about something, even if they are being unrealistic. Guess what? It's baseball! Fans are allowed to be optimistic and sometimes unrealistic, even childlike, because baseball and its history is the thread that binds generations of fans together with an almost romantic hope.

But I'm sure that there is someone on the internet who is wrong, so I'll let you get back to work.

I get royalties every time someone uses the term----please use it more. Just use it appropriately.

I noticed something though-you like to talk about me. I'll assume it's because you can be taken at your word that you did actually read the thread and the argument is a harder thing than ad hominem.

[herbdizzle]

Mike Leake might be our #5 starter behind Cueto, Latos, Bailey, & this year Simon but that doesn't mean he profiles as a back end rotation pitcher. I believe the perception of him suffers because of his colleagues in the starting rotation. With the exception of maybe a healthy Nationals & Giants rotation I don't think there is a single rotation in all of MLB that Mike Leake wouldn't be at least a #4 starter in. The guy is just now coming into his own and should be applauded for continuing to improve at his craft. He's one of my favorite Reds and I hope they sign him to an extension at reasonable money.

[jojo]

It's not like I'm some sunny optimist or lily-gilder. I'm perfectly content to point out a clunker and take an unpopular position. But it makes no sense to me not to regard performance holistically. I'm sure if Leake pitched in Coors with puppies as defenders he'd probably suck, but that's a counterfactual that, luckily, as a Reds fan, I don't have to imagine. Life's tough enough taken as it is; no need to tell of an alternative universe to bedevil my dreams. This one's plenty.

First it's nice to see you shed eeyore if only for one issue.

But lets contempate the actual question posed by the OP. Is Leake the beat of the bunch? No, not even in front of the Reds defense. His body of work suggests he's been a below average starter compared to other starting pitchers. Take away the defense behind him, and he wouldn't be expected to suddenly become an above average pitcher.

No amount of calls to emotion changes what is a conclusion that isn't even controversial. Is there a member here doesn't doesn't enjoy watching the Reds win while on a leg of the schedule that traditionally portends doom? Lets not act like there are as part of an argument that Leake's era is the end all. There aren't and it isn't.

[OGB]

not really as their defense isn't all that great. Put him in Safeco where the D is even worse and see what happens. He won't be victimized by longballs, but because he's HISTORICALLY been so very hittable, that defense would destroy his numbers. That's why he's not a mid rotation starter. He's too defense dependent. Except for last night.

Leake is a 5 K/9 pitcher currently pitching near 7 K/9.

My mind can be changed about him. If he finishes this year at a rate above 7 K/9 then that's what would make me rethink. If he can be above 7 next year, I'll never harp on him again. But, history says by the end of the year he'll have a WHIP above 1.25, and a K/9 around 5.7. I really hope he proves me wrong. I really, really do.

You really want a current comp for Leake? it isn't Arroyo, It's Harang, without the ability to K guys consistently. Both are very hittable.

And all that said, last night, Leake was pitching as well as anyone in baseball. My sincerest hope is it is a change in approach, coupled with a few things Leake and Price said. Prica stated he's stronger now, throws his FB 93-94 more consistently. I'd need some data to back that up, but if so, that's a very good sign. Also Leake has stated he just knows more now. How to prepare for a season and a game. Also a good sign.

He's also 26 years old and still honing his craft. A lot of pitchers would be in the middle of their first, second, of third season at this age. Leake is unfairly viewed differently because of how he broke onto the scene. He was very raw in 2010 compared to now.

[jojo]

I agree with a lot of this sentiment.

To add on in expressing that voice to Jojo, I think it's perfectly fine for you to want to say your piece on Leake, and evaluate him how you see fit in response to what you might see as overly optimistic. But at what point is enough enough? I think at this point, everyone is clear on your stance regarding Leake. You've essentially repeated the same argument what feels like a dozen times. I think you're simply at am impasse if you are expecting others to see the "light". They've heard your argument, but quite frankly, they disagree, and there is nothing wrong with that (notwithstanding, I note that you have gone out of your way to say you believe that Leake is a success and a roster component, but seems your verbage beyond that appears to tickle many the wrong way).

What have I stated in the last couple pages that is controversial? Where have I indicated someone can't disagree?

[Patrick Bateman]

What have I stated in the last couple pages that is controversial? Where have I indicated someone can't disagree?

I'm more aiming to give some friendly advice here as it seems that you end up in the middle of arguments consistently (ie. there must be something about the way you are debating that a lot of the posters on the board are being rubbed the wrong way.

I think this is a good example. You've said your piece about Leake. You've said it a hundred times. I happen to sway more to your side of the argument. But when the argument falls on deaf ears, and you end up in the same cyclical argument every time the subject comes up, it may not be worth the time to proceed.

[jojo]

I'm more aiming to give some friendly advice here as it seems that you end up in the middle of arguments consistently (ie. there must be something about the way you are debating that a lot of the posters on the board are being rubbed the wrong way.

I think this is a good example. You've said your piece about Leake. You've said it a hundred times. I happen to sway more to your side of the argument. But when the argument falls on deaf ears, and you end up in the same cyclical argument every time the subject comes up, it may not be worth the time to proceed.

I thought it fair to assume some of the personalities involved, being some of the longest standing members, could reasonably be described as open minded.