I think he should have been in the bullpen long before he came to Cincinnati.Originally Posted by GAC
The bullpen needs help, if Paul can pitch, that is where he should be.
Lose Hammond, put Dave Williams in his role. Move Belisle to #5, and Wilson to the pen.
Done?What's the word on Wilson?
Finished?
Retired?
ERA+
2001 - 92
2002 - 92
2003 - 92
2004 - 92
He's as consistently below average as any pitcher in history. He doesn't have an above average bone in his body.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
And yours is?Thats a very unfair and insane statment to make.
Any number with a Minus sign in front of it indicates that the number is "below average"
Code:PAUL WILSON YEAR TEAM AGE W L PCT G GS CG SV GF IP H R ER BB SO ERA RSAA 1996 Mets 23 -3 -4 0 0 -7 -24 -19 -16 -3 -1.15 2000 Devil Rays 27 -2 -1 0 0 17 10 9 5 4 1.57 2001 Devil Rays 28 -1 -1 -1 -2 -9 -12 -7 2 11 -0.40 2002 Devil Rays 29 -5 -1 -1 0 -21 -9 -8 3 -24 -0.37 2003 Reds 30 -1 -1 -1 0 -23 -11 -7 13 -30 -0.36 2004 Reds 31 1 4 0 0 -7 3 -1 6 -20 -0.05 2005 Reds 32 -2 -2 0 0 -21 -17 -18 0 -4 -3.54 TOTALS -13 -5 -4 -2 -71 -60 -51 14 -66 -0.48 YEAR TEAM HR H/9 BR/9 SO/9 BB/9 SO/BB SHO WP IBB HBP BFP BK NW NL 1996 Mets 1 -0.43 -1.70 -0.18 -0.96 -0.50 0 3 -6 -5 -34 -2 2000 Devil Rays 6 2.96 3.48 0.79 0.93 0.83 0 1 -1 -2 19 0 2001 Devil Rays -2 -0.53 -0.74 0.63 0.14 0.30 0 -1 2 -6 -19 1 2002 Devil Rays -5 -0.99 -1.06 -1.10 0.14 -0.27 -1 3 3 -5 -14 0 2003 Reds -4 -1.24 -0.53 -1.62 0.72 -0.08 0 5 1 0 -9 1 2004 Reds -3 -0.32 -0.05 -1.00 0.30 -0.13 0 -1 2 0 -2 1 2005 Reds -5 -4.12 -4.53 -0.74 -0.01 -0.23 0 -1 1 -2 -24 0 TOTALS -13 -0.68 -0.75 -0.63 0.13 -0.11 -3 9 1 -21 -83 0
I agree...if his arm would even hold up to be a middle relief guy or a specialist like Merker that would be something but you gotta wonder after all the "trauma" to the arm is there really anything there.
"Sometimes, it's not the sexiest moves that put you over the top," Krivsky said. "It's a series of transactions that help you get there."
Wow that is consistent
Back to following MiLB; there's always hope for tomorrow!
WOY,
Any comparision of like pitchers instead of just the league average ie starters who throw 170 or so innings a year. Let's compare apples to apples if we are going to compare.
All those comparisons are based on ALL the pitchers in the league, and park normalized, anyway you cut it he's a tad below the average.
I don't think he'll ever throw 100 innings much alone 170.
I don't either I think he's probably done. But it was stated that at his best he was a below average pitcher and he was not. With the way managers situationally(if thats a word) use the BP you cannot just lump their stats in there with league averages and compare them to starting pitchers averages.
No, it was stated that he was a below average pitcher and proved conclusively that he was. What you're offering up here is a plate of red herring.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
You cannot compare a pitcher that throws 160 innings in a season to a closer that pitches 50 times and only pitches 45 innings. That would be like comparing Sirius radio to FM radio. Sure its still "radio" but its not comparing the same thing.
Maybe you can't because you're lazy and numbers-averse and have no real idea as to what you're talking about. So make any baseless claim you want because you and I both know you'll never produce an ounce of evidence to back it up.
Meanwhile if Paul Wilson returned to 100% of what he was in 2001-2004 he'd still only be 92% of an average pitcher.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
LOL.. Again.. you cannot compare a closer to a starting pitcher, to a middle releif pitcher. The rolls are different and defined. Look how great David Weathers' numbers have been this year until today. I guess coming into today he was well above average maybe one of the best, huh??
Yep, just keep saying the same thing with no evidence to back it up. Unsupported repetition, that's sure to make your point for you.
Re: Weathers - It's painful how little you understand about how to use simple statistics. Honestly, anyone who'd attempt to use a pitcher's ERA 11 games into the season to represent something is hopelessly lost.
Last edited by M2; 04-16-2006 at 10:06 PM.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
In 2004 Paul Wilson posted some pretty good numbers. His ERA was ranked number 53, just ahead of Barry Zitto and Mark Mulder. Considering the number of starting pitchers, what, at least 150 (5 X 30 teams) i'd say that's above average. Here's his stats from 2004:
2004 Cin 29 29 1 0 184.2 192 93 89 26 63 117 11 6 0 0 -- 4.36
His career might be over or maybe it isn't, but I'd take that line any day of the week over pulling a random starter out of the hat. Granted, that's just one year, but Wilson was a pretty good pitcher at his best.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
