Can The Reds Win With Bailey and Cueto?

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_

You're reading too much into it. The original topic was about the last 3 or 4 starts. I was pointing out the fact that Cueto had one monster game and Bailey had one stinker of a game in those 3 (4 for cueto at the time...before today's game). Take out those 2 starts and their numbers are very similar. I wasn't talking about all year, or their whole careers...but these past 3 starts (now 4).

As for a pot full of excuses...I'm not making excuses

Ugh, I thought we've been over this a million times with the Drew Stubbs argument. In a game of statistics and averages, you cannot cherry-pick days or weeks or even months. The full body of work is the full body of work. It speaks for itself. I don't believe you can EVER look at the last three starts made by a pitcher and claim that he has bucked any kind of trend. You DEFINITELY can't do it if you are going to remove one of those three starts from the record to try to prove your point. That's just ridiculous.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Originally Posted by Benihana

Ugh, I thought we've been over this a million times with the Drew Stubbs argument. In a game of statistics and averages, you cannot cherry-pick days or weeks or even months. The full body of work is the full body of work. It speaks for itself. I don't believe you can EVER look at the last three starts made by a pitcher and claim that he has bucked any kind of trend. You DEFINITELY can't do it if you are going to remove one of those three starts from the record to try to prove your point. That's just ridiculous.

Wow. I wasn't cherry picking. I was talking SPECIFICALLY about the numbers in the post by Brutus. You might want to re-read some. I was talking about how Homer has been raked over the coals here (especially after that previous bad start) and was pointing out that he had just previously had 2 pretty darned GOOD starts, that were strikingly similar to Cueto's during that same stretch. It's starting to make me wonder what you think my point was because you're reading WAAAAY too much into this. And I've never claimed he's "bucked" a trend.

[TRF]

Originally Posted by Benihana

Ugh, I thought we've been over this a million times with the Drew Stubbs argument. In a game of statistics and averages, you cannot cherry-pick days or weeks or even months. The full body of work is the full body of work. It speaks for itself. I don't believe you can EVER look at the last three starts made by a pitcher and claim that he has bucked any kind of trend. You DEFINITELY can't do it if you are going to remove one of those three starts from the record to try to prove your point. That's just ridiculous.

Really? So the full body of work is all that counts? Chris Carpenter says hi.

[Mario-Rijo]

Originally Posted by RANDY IN CHAR NC

Good and bad. It's what you get, a lot of times, with young pitchers. I'm surprised that more people can't understand it before they are ready to jump off the ledge.

Well I don't really look at the production perse' if I did I wouldn't have been such a staunch defender of Todd Coffey or Matt Belisle just off the top of my head. You have to look beyond the numbers and at the actual performance. Homer is alot like Belisle in my estimation I think they are/were sometimes both victims of self doubt and aren't always sharp mechanically speaking. I am watching Belisle pitch now and hearing about how his turn around was due to gaining confidence in himself at AAA being thrust into the closers role and told he had to get "this attitude". His pitching coach then said it wasn't a stuff issue but a self confidence issue. I think Homer has bouts of this which leads to his control issues, well that and his long lanky mechanics. The difference in them I think is stuff more specifically their fastballs and I still wonder if Homers is too straight. Belisle's isn't better but I think he just always used it better i.e. located it better and threw it with some movement. I think Baileys is fine and has enough movement when it's 91-92 but when he fires it up there consistently as hard as 94-95 he gets rocked and he just keeps trying to throw it harder due to that lack of confidence. As I said I think he could become an effective 3 or 4 but I just don't see him being a TOR starter. Now can we win with him sure but not at what we thought he could be IMO.

Cueto OTOH when he stays within himself and doesn't also try to overdo it and gets away from his mechanics he's a pretty good arm. I just attribute his struggles to youth strictly. Homers struggles are more complex and more plentiful as to reasons why and therefore makes him less likely of the 2 to figure it out, at least as a Red. Now I'm no pitching coach this is just what I think I see based on observations and I may be wrong but until I hear or see something that makes more sense this is what I will believe.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Last season is a pretty decent example of why I consider Cueto & Bailey to be similar at this stage.

Cueto had basically 3 seasons last year. He started out on fire and went 6-4 with a 2.17 era (32/13 k/bb ratio). He then followed that up immediately with a stretch of stinking the place up to the tune of 2-6 with an era over 8.00 for about 2 months. He then did another about face and finished the year up going 3-1 with about a 3.50 era over the last month or so.

Homer didn't really come up until about mid-season, but he also had a jekyll & hyde season. His first 8 weeks up or so he struggled with an era over 6.00. But then turned it completely around with about a dominating of a stretch that I've seen in a while from a Reds starter. He went 6-1 with a 1.70 era over just under 60 innings for the past couple months.

I'll be honest, I wouldn't expect anything less than this kind of up and down from a young pitcher. Mike Leake right now is rolling along fantastically. But he's a young pitcher too...he's going to hit that bump in the road that'll de-rail him for a month or so. I hope that he's the exception to the rule, but Cueto & Homer aren't. Cueto's just had more consistency with his time up in the bigs and they've shown him much more patience than they have Bailey...as have the fans, being my main point.

[Mario-Rijo]

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_

Last season is a pretty decent example of why I consider Cueto & Bailey to be similar at this stage.

Cueto had basically 3 seasons last year. He started out on fire and went 6-4 with a 2.17 era (32/13 k/bb ratio). He then followed that up immediately with a stretch of stinking the place up to the tune of 2-6 with an era over 8.00 for about 2 months. He then did another about face and finished the year up going 3-1 with about a 3.50 era over the last month or so.

Homer didn't really come up until about mid-season, but he also had a jekyll & hyde season. His first 8 weeks up or so he struggled with an era over 6.00. But then turned it completely around with about a dominating of a stretch that I've seen in a while from a Reds starter. He went 6-1 with a 1.70 era over just under 60 innings for the past couple months.

I'll be honest, I wouldn't expect anything less than this kind of up and down from a young pitcher. Mike Leake right now is rolling along fantastically. But he's a young pitcher too...he's going to hit that bump in the road that'll de-rail him for a month or so. I hope that he's the exception to the rule, but Cueto & Homer aren't. Cueto's just had more consistency with his time up in the bigs and they've shown him much more patience than they have Bailey...as have the fans, being my main point.

Well sure Leake is gonna have his ups and downs no doubt about it. But he has a much better feel for pitching than these guys do and he has great confidence in his ability along with good stuff. He's not gonna have such low lows and especially not such prolonged bouts of it. Even Cueto doesn't go thru what Bailey does which is times when he just can't do anything right. Why has Cueto's stuff is better as well and that is the big difference between them IMO.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo

Well sure Leake is gonna have his ups and downs no doubt about it. But he has a much better feel for pitching than these guys do and he has great confidence in his ability along with good stuff. He's not gonna have such low lows and especially not such prolonged bouts of it. Even Cueto doesn't go thru what Bailey does which is times when he just can't do anything right. Why has Cueto's stuff is better as well and that is the big difference between them IMO.

IMO you've hit the nail on the head here. One word. Confidence.

Leake's never had a dent in his...ever, from what I can tell in his college career.
Cueto's only had one extended bad stretch (in the middle of last season) and he's rebounded.
Bailey's confidence has been repeatedly pounded on by Reds Management with their screw ups and poor judgment.

Of course, had Bailey been lights out each time he was brought up, the Reds wouldn't have demoted him repeatedly...but to expect that from a 20-23 year old is asking a bit much IMO.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by TRF

Really? So the full body of work is all that counts? Chris Carpenter says hi.

Didn't say that. Notice in my original post on this thread I talk about trends. Johnny Cueto's numbers have trended in a positive direction every year (also known as showing improvement.) Homer Bailey's numbers have not, (especially prior to today's outing- which was when this conversation started.)

[thatcoolguy_22]

Homer will be better, I said it.

Bringing Leake into this isn't really beneficial to the discussion either. He is on a hot start. It just happens that his hot start coincided with the beginning of his career. If say in July he has an 8 game stretch with an ERA around 7 then the Reds community will be screaming to send him to AAA, it just hasn't happened yet (but it will). Anyone remember when Cueto came onto the scene???

I think there are a lot of similarities between Homer/Cueto right now outside of the numbers, and I agree with a lot of what Sir Charles was saying. The cherry picking stats... not so much Beni, you can't compare these guys career for career with development. Many are the numbers of pitchers who spent their first few hundred innings getting shelled before learning how to pitch, while few are those that came in instantly to be league average or better. I wonder what a list of tall lanky guys look like on a development track vs a more compact pitcher? That would be interesting... I will give you Homer blew up until the last 8 starts or so of last season, but what does 2007 have to do with how he will pitch in 2010? He has progressed and gone through the ringer. Both are poised to start throwing the rest of this year effectively (even though I think Homer relied too heavily on his FB against the pirates). Just my .02