What's wrong with Homer?

[Tracy Jones]

I was talking to my brother the other day (an Indians fan) and we were discussing the Reds in general, and Homer in particular. He threw out the theory that his new contract has made him complacent...no longer hungry. I think there is some credence to this.

Think back to 2010-2011. Homer was pretty much labeled as an injury prone, over-hyped bust. His future with not only the Reds, but as a major league pitcher, was in serious doubt.

Then in 2012-2013, while still inconsistent at times, he put together some long dominant stretches where it appeared he had blossomed into the pitcher he was hyped to be in his MiLB time. He was pitching for his career the last 2 years, and of course, the big pay day that ultimately came last winter.

I think the complacency theory has merit because I find it hard to believe that if Bailey were still looking to become a free agent after this season, that he'd be pitching like this. There's no way to get inside his mind and heart to know the truth, but I do think that it's nearly impossible to keep that same hunger after you've hit the lottery, so to speak...particularly if you don't really LOVE the game or have the desire to actually be GREAT...and I'm not sure Homer does. He seems to enjoy his hunting and farm life far more than he enjoys baseball to me.

Could just be a "slump" that he's going through, but I think this theory needs to be considered, and we all need to hope that it's not true or the Reds are in big trouble going forward with the size and length of this contract.

[Kai Slater]

I've never been totally sold on Homer as a big contract worthy pitcher. Those two no-hitters have given him a lot of favor with the front office decision makers and feed the notion that he is worthy based on potential.

I do believe he does have ace-quality potential, however, his track record thus far has been inconsistent at best. Flashes of brilliance mixed with many disappointing starts. We often wonder which Homer Bailey will show up today. I won't pile all the blame on him as we've seen our anemic hitting and inability to consistently drive in runs in key situations this year along with a luke warm bullpen.

But, yeah, I agree with Tracy Jones on this one in that I hope the Reds don't end up really regretting Homer's big contract. Here's to hoping he gets things turned around soon!!

[Assembly Hall]

Didn't Homer have like 3 quality starts in a row before this last outing?

Although I think some valid points have been voiced along with some normal concerns it is only May 18th and I do believe he is 3-3. Maybe it is just me, but I think Bailey gets stronger as the season gets longer.

[Tracy Jones]

Didn't Homer have like 3 quality starts in a row before this last outing?

Although I think some valid points have been voiced along with some normal concerns it is only May 18th and I do believe he is 3-3. Maybe it is just me, but I think Bailey gets stronger as the season gets longer.

True, he does seem to get better as the season progresses, at least the last couple of years, but what if like I said, that hunger he appeared to have to improve is gone? It wouldn't be the first time this has happened to a player once he signed a huge deal, and it certainly wouldn't be the last. I just have a hard time believing he would be struggling like this if he were still a pending free agent looking for that big deal the Reds gave him.

I'm not ready to panic, but to me, this is worrisome. I really didn't expect this.

[Assembly Hall]

Maybe Homer doesn't like cold weather?

[Tracy Jones]

Maybe Homer doesn't like cold weather?

I don't think so. He actually had an excellent April last year, struggled in May (not like this) and was fairly solid the rest of the season.

[Assembly Hall]

Well as you get older the cold weather does affect you more. Right now I aint concerned about his contract, I am more concerned with Bruce and Votto.

[Tracy Jones]

Well as you get older the cold weather does affect you more. Right now I aint concerned about his contract, I am more concerned with Bruce and Votto.

Oh so am I, but I really expected great things out of Homer.

Maybe I'm just a victim of my own expectations, but I really expected him to take that final progression into a front line starter this year.

[NC-Red]

money got to his head and stopped working hard probably

[RedlegJake]

No, Homer hasn't stopped working. He is pretty much following his career pattern - inconsistent early results, getting stronger as the year goes. I'll worry if we get into June and July and he isn't stringing together several good starts. I AM watching with some concern because with that contract I think we tend to want dominant Homer all the time but at this point I'd call it a mild worry rather a concern really. I don't think it is complacency either. He seems to be throwing that cutter a lot, eschewing his hard fastball rather than mixing them up. It shows in his average velo - down a couple mph. Cueto excels because he mixes stuff up and no one knows what is coming. I think Bailey gets very predictable in his pitch pattern - something Hanigan seemed to push him to avoid.

[scotly50]

Maybe he is pressing thinking he has to throw better because of his contract and has become worse.

[PeteRoseDay]

He's honestly just not that great of a pitcher. Don't get me wrong. He's a solid #3, and even #2 on some lesser SP teams, but people expect way too much from him. His 2 no hitters set the expectations far too high. He does not have ace potential. He is what he is.

[RedTeamGo!]

money got to his head and stopped working hard probably

:laugh:

['69]

Homer has to learn how to pitch better in cooler weather. Without looking up his starts, I don't remember any in temps less than 50 degrees.

[NC-Red]

watching his game today it's evident that Homer fools NOBODY. The Cardinals have hit him hard and he's lucky the Reds have made some nice plays to save runs from piling up on him. He just is a bad pitcher this season no way around it

[SlimJim11]

Coming into tonight Homer actually had the 2nd best xFIP among starters on this team. I think he'll be ok. He's missing his spots a little too often and every time he does they seem to crush it. That will fix itself as the season goes on.

[dougdirt]

He's honestly just not that great of a pitcher. Don't get me wrong. He's a solid #3, and even #2 on some lesser SP teams, but people expect way too much from him. His 2 no hitters set the expectations far too high. He does not have ace potential. He is what he is.

I'd love to see the list of the 60 pitchers better than him that would make him a "solid #3" over the last two years.

[dougdirt]

watching his game today it's evident that Homer fools NOBODY. The Cardinals have hit him hard and he's lucky the Reds have made some nice plays to save runs from piling up on him. He just is a bad pitcher this season no way around it

Homer Bailey has 50 strikeouts in 57 innings. I wish a lot more of our pitchers could not fool guys like that.

Why is Homer struggling? .358 BABIP and a 17.3% HR/FB rate. Both of those are far higher than his career averages and even more high than his last three year averages since he went from an ok pitcher to the guy he is now. When those things even out, and they absolutely will, he is going to be the guy he was last year and the year before.

[757690]

Homer Bailey has 50 strikeouts in 57 innings. I wish a lot more of our pitchers could not fool guys like that.

Why is Homer struggling? .358 BABIP and a 17.3% HR/FB rate. Both of those are far higher than his career averages and even more high than his last three year averages since he went from an ok pitcher to the guy he is now. When those things even out, and they absolutely will, he is going to be the guy he was last year and the year before.

When those things even out, Bailey will be a 3.50-4.00 ERA guy. In other words, a #3 starting pitcher.

[Assembly Hall]

When those things even out, Bailey will be a 3.50-4.00 ERA guy. In other words, a #3 starting pitcher.

Absolutely.....on the Reds right here and right now! Put him on a lot of other teams and he would be a #2 or even a #1. As a lifelong Reds fan, I find it refreshing to be haggling about Homer Bailey.

[Bernie Carbo]

Homer Bailey has 50 strikeouts in 57 innings. I wish a lot more of our pitchers could not fool guys like that.

Why is Homer struggling? .358 BABIP and a 17.3% HR/FB rate. Both of those are far higher than his career averages and even more high than his last three year averages since he went from an ok pitcher to the guy he is now. When those things even out, and they absolutely will, he is going to be the guy he was last year and the year before.

I agree....when the season is over Homer will have similar numbers to previous seasons. A rough start does not necessarily define a season.

[Redeyecat]

Homer Bailey has 50 strikeouts in 57 innings. I wish a lot more of our pitchers could not fool guys like that.

Why is Homer struggling? .358 BABIP and a 17.3% HR/FB rate. Both of those are far higher than his career averages and even more high than his last three year averages since he went from an ok pitcher to the guy he is now. When those things even out, and they absolutely will, he is going to be the guy he was last year and the year before.

Without checking some of his other peripherals (e.g. walk rate, strike %), I think this perspective cuts to most of his "issues" so far. Give it some time and let's see where he is later in the year.

[dougdirt]

When those things even out, Bailey will be a 3.50-4.00 ERA guy. In other words, a #3 starting pitcher.

There are 60 starters in the bigs who are going to be better than that and throw 185+ innings? Heck, there were only 64 guys who even threw 180 innings last season.

Homer Bailey is a lot better than people understand because they have some idea of what a "role" should be versus what reality tells us that it is. Homer Bailey is closer to being one of the 30 best pitchers in baseball than he is the 61st. Much closer.

[757690]

There are 60 starters in the bigs who are going to be better than that and throw 185+ innings? Heck, there were only 64 guys who even threw 180 innings last season.

Homer Bailey is a lot better than people understand because they have some idea of what a "role" should be versus what reality tells us that it is. Homer Bailey is closer to being one of the 30 best pitchers in baseball than he is the 61st. Much closer.

The fact that there were only 64 pitchers who threw 180 innings says it all. That make Leake, Scott Feldman and Lance Lynn all solid #2 pitchers too.

That's why counting how many pitchers are better than Homer a lousy way of determining how good he is. If you don't get hurt, and pitch a whole season or two, you're going to be in the top 50 starting pitchers or so. Many teams don't have a true #1 or even a true #2 starter on their staffs. There doesn't have to be 30 #1 starters, 30 #2 starters, 30 #3 starters, etc. in the majors in any one season.

A #1 starter has an ERA (or FIP, or xFIP, take your pick) below 3, and can go toe to toe with any other pitcher in the majors.
A #2 starter has an ERA (or FIP, or xFIP, take your pick) around 3.
A #3 starter has an ERA (or FIP, or xFIP, take your pick) around 3.5
A #4 starter has an ERA (or FIP, or xFIP, take your pick) around 4
A #5 starter has an ERA (or FIP, or xFIP, take your pick) around 4.5

There may be only 4 true #1 starters in the league at any one time, 7 #2's, and 15 #3's, but the definition doesn't change. The only thing that changes the definition of each type of starters is the run scoring environment each year.

So it's not inconsistent to call Homer a true #3 starter, and say that there are only 30 pitchers better than him in the league.

[kaldaniels]

Just who set those definitions 757690?

[757690]

Just who set those definitions 757690?

They are guesstimates. But that shouldn't matter much. We can argue about the accuracy of the numbers used, but it doesn't change the fact that when I say that a pitcher is a #2 starter, I'm saying that he will likely provide "X" amount of production, not that he's between the 30th and 60th best pitcher in the league.

[Assembly Hall]

They are guesstimates. But that shouldn't matter much. We can argue about the accuracy of the numbers used, but it doesn't change the fact that when I say that a pitcher is a #2 starter, I'm saying that he will likely provide "X" amount of production, not that he's between the 30th and 60th best pitcher in the league.

I understand your argument and agree with it to a degree. But doesn't IP figure into the equation somewhere? One of the most important things in the game is durability. I would also argue that your "definitions" don't factor in a curve. That is to say you are measured by the other pitchers that are out there and what they are doing.

[scotly50]

How 'bout he is just pressing from signing the big contract???

[PostaKlu56]

Could be one of the things wrong with Votto, too. So strange to hear a 32-year-old cautioning everyone that he probably would never reach again the kind of power numbers he had 6-7 years ago. Take a look at the great players like Willie Mays and Hank Aaron...They had power into their late 30s. Frank Robinson won the AL Triple Crown and MVP after being traded by the Reds as an "old 31", per the GM. Could it be that huge pay packages are a big weight to carry? No doubt that Votto would have had a fine year if he had not been run too aggressively on the base paths. But it is odd that he is tacitly lowering his power goals at age 32. Could be that he is trying to mute the huge expectations of a huge pay package. As to Bailey, you know that Price must have had major input on the package. If so, its another reason to question his judgment...at least at this stage. Just another troubling call to me....

['69]

Among 101 Qualified starters, Bailey ranks before tonight's game.

38th in K/9
77th in IP
97th ERA
100th in WHIP (.306 BAA)
97th in OPS against (.846)

IMO where he ranks high is grit and stones. Dials it up in later innings/pitch counts @95-97mph fastball.

In 2013 Bailey ranked in the top 30 in those categories and I believe he will close the gap into a solid #2 starter hierarchy.

[dougdirt]

The fact that there were only 64 pitchers who threw 180 innings says it all. That make Leake, Scott Feldman and Lance Lynn all solid #2 pitchers too.

That's why counting how many pitchers are better than Homer a lousy way of determining how good he is. If you don't get hurt, and pitch a whole season or two, you're going to be in the top 50 starting pitchers or so. Many teams don't have a true #1 or even a true #2 starter on their staffs. There doesn't have to be 30 #1 starters, 30 #2 starters, 30 #3 starters, etc. in the majors in any one season.

A #1 starter has an ERA (or FIP, or xFIP, take your pick) below 3, and can go toe to toe with any other pitcher in the majors.
A #2 starter has an ERA (or FIP, or xFIP, take your pick) around 3.
A #3 starter has an ERA (or FIP, or xFIP, take your pick) around 3.5
A #4 starter has an ERA (or FIP, or xFIP, take your pick) around 4
A #5 starter has an ERA (or FIP, or xFIP, take your pick) around 4.5

There may be only 4 true #1 starters in the league at any one time, 7 #2's, and 15 #3's, but the definition doesn't change. The only thing that changes the definition of each type of starters is the run scoring environment each year.

So it's not inconsistent to call Homer a true #3 starter, and say that there are only 30 pitchers better than him in the league.

The definition needs to change. People are still working on the same set of criteria to define a #1, #2 and so on starter that they used when baseball had 14 teams. That doesn't work anymore. There are 30 teams. Each team uses a 5 man rotation. That means there are 150 starter positions available in the game of baseball at any given time.

I'm not Frank Einstein or anything, but math tells us that the top 30 guys, evenly distributed to each team would be #1 guys, then the next 30 are #2 guys, the next 30 guys are #3 guys and the next 30 are #4 guys and the last 30 are #5 guys.

When ideas don't jive with reality, then it's time to change the ideas. There may only be a handful of aces out there, but there are 30 #1 starters out there. It's math.

[goreds2]

All of a sudden he is 6-3.

[rgslone]

He's honestly just not that great of a pitcher. Don't get me wrong. He's a solid #3, and even #2 on some lesser SP teams, but people expect way too much from him. His 2 no hitters set the expectations far too high. He does not have ace potential. He is what he is.

I think this is pretty spot on, except for the connotations of the statement that Homer is "just not that great of a pitcher." I think Homer is a very good starting pitcher, but I still think he's best defined as a solid #3 in one of the top level rotations. That's nothing to discount, and I'm very happy the Reds have him. My only concern would be if signing Homer was at the expense of Cueto. Homer is not, has never been, and will never be the pitcher Cueto is and has been. But I still really like Homer on the staff - you certainly don't have to hate one to love the other.

[kaldaniels]

If you want to hem and haw about the definition of a #1, #2, etc....ok.

But fill in the blank...

Homer Bailey is the _____th best pitcher in baseball.

[Assembly Hall]

What was the question again? 7-3 and picking up steam. There is not a team in all of baseball that wouldn't love to have him.

[marcshoe]

He gave up a run today and only pitched eight innings. That's just not acceptable given the contract he signed.

[757690]

If you want to hem and haw about the definition of a #1, #2, etc....ok.

But fill in the blank...

Homer Bailey is the _____th best pitcher in baseball.

Coming into today, according to Fangraphs WAR, Homer was between the 112th and 132nd best pitcher in baseball. All of those nineteen those rankings had the same WAR: 0.3.

I imagine that ranking went up today.

Because pitchers we so volatile and injured so often, we really should only go year by year. There were only 79 pitchers who averaged 150 IP over 2012 and 2013. Do we really want to say that Bud Norris is a #2 pitcher simply because he didn't get injured over that period?

Going by WAR, Bailey was a #1 last season, a #2 the season before, and a #4 the two prior seasons. He's around a #4 this season, but moving to be a #3.

Personally, I would go by xFIP, which would make him a #3 or #4 every year, but I respect using WAR, even if. I don't like it personally.

[SlimJim11]

His xFIP was 43rd in 2012 and 18th in 2013. He was 42nd in xFIP this year coming into today.

[kaldaniels]

His xFIP was 43rd in 2012 and 18th in 2013. He was 42nd in xFIP this year coming into today.

So the question to 767690 (who states he uses xFIP) is...

In 2013, Homer Bailey was the _____ best pitcher in baseball and would be labeled as a #____ starter for 2013.

Fill in the blanks with a single whole number. This is Redszone, no one said the questions are easy. ;)

[757690]

His xFIP was 43rd in 2012 and 18th in 2013. He was 42nd in xFIP this year coming into today.

That's among qualified pitchers. I like to use all starting pitchers, as I explained earlier, since pitchers get injured so often, I don't penalize a pitcher for not getting a certain amount of starts in a season.

Among all starting pitchers, here's Homer's ranking based on xFIP:

2012: 89
2013: 37
2014: 68

- - - Updated - - -


So the question to 767690 (who states he uses xFIP) is...

In 2013, Homer Bailey was the _____ best pitcher in baseball and would be labeled as a #____ starter for 2013.

Fill in the blanks with a single whole number. This is Redszone, no one said the questions are easy. ;)

...37... #2 if you use the formula that Doug uses.

I don't.

[757690]

So the question to 767690 (who states he uses xFIP) is...

In 2013, Homer Bailey was the _____ best pitcher in baseball and would be labeled as a #____ starter for 2013.

Fill in the blanks with a single whole number. This is Redszone, no one said the questions are easy. ;)

I don't buy into the argument that there are 30 #1 starters, 30 #2 starters, 30 #3 starters, etc, each season.

Just like there aren't 30 true starting SS's, there aren't 30 true #1 starters, or 30 true #2 starters, etc. Just like not every team has a true starting SS, not every team has a true #1,2, or 3 starter. Some teams have nothing but #5 starters (2001-2005 Reds for instance). Some teams have 3 #1's, like the Dodgers might have this year. A pitcher is a true #X starting pitcher, not based on where he pitches in a team's rotation, or a how many starters are better or worse than him, but on how good he is.

My definitions for these spots are more qualitative than quantitative, based on things like who I want in to start a playoff game, how many times a year the pitcher keeps the team in the game (some version of quality starts), how confident I am the team will win when he starts a game, etc.

I think Homer Bailey profiles as a #3 pitcher. I don't want him to start a one game playoff. He keeps the team in the game around two thirds of the time that he starts, and I'm never confident that the team will win when he starts, since I never know which Homer will appear. Last year was his best year, and he was closer to a #2, but this year he's been a #3 or #4 so far.

I doubt that will satisfy Redszone, but it's the best I can do. Unless you want me to argue something I don't believe, just for argument's sake :devil:

[SlimJim11]

That's among qualified pitchers. I like to use all starting pitchers, as I explained earlier, since pitchers get injured so often, I don't penalize a pitcher for not getting a certain amount of starts in a season.

Among all starting pitchers, here's Homer's ranking based on xFIP:

2012: 89
2013: 37
2014: 68




That's kind of a joke. 10 of those pitchers last year that you are using had under 30 IP. 4 of them had under 10 IP. Are we really using those guys to say Homer isn't a #2 or whatever you are saying he isn't?

[757690]

That's kind of a joke. 10 of those pitchers last year that you are using had under 30 IP. 4 of them had under 10 IP. Are we really using those guys to say Homer isn't a #2 or whatever you are saying he isn't?

We're talking about skill level, not production when we define pitchers by rotation spot. If a guys is that good for one game, he's that good. Period.

Btw, that's one reason I don't use that system.

[dougdirt]

We're talking about skill level, not production when we define pitchers by rotation spot. If a guys is that good for one game, he's that good. Period.

Btw, that's one reason I don't use that system.

Tom Browning has a perfect game. Pedro Martinez doesn't. One game doesn't mean jack.

[757690]

Tom Browning has a perfect game. Pedro Martinez doesn't. One game doesn't mean jack.

Which is why I don't like using that system.

Using qualified only pitchers incorrectly favors guys who were healthy, and penalizes guys who got hurt, or who were on a team with a deep rotation. For instance, Johnny Cueto was a #1 starting pitcher last year, but didn't pitch enough to qualify. He was good enough, and should count, but he's excluded. Tim Lincecum counts as #1 if you use qualified only pitchers, but only because there weren't that many pitchers that qualified. Bud Norris is a #2 for the same reason.

No system is perfect, but I like mine, and respect you for liking yours better. I know most people don't agree me on this, and I'm fine with that.

[NC-Red]

Homer has corrected himself and looks like a solid pitcher again. Latos cant come back soon enough and get Cingrani the hell out of here, i dont even want him in the bullpen or he'll just walk guys left and right. He has ALOT of work to do in AAA