Homer Bailey - what to do with him?

[RedsManRick]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Oh nevermind. I know better.