If you subscribe to the theory that a pitcher can only control three outcomes (strikeouts, walks and homeruns), Milton controls two of the three very well. The outcome he performs the worst in is the least important of the three.
Printable View
If you subscribe to the theory that a pitcher can only control three outcomes (strikeouts, walks and homeruns), Milton controls two of the three very well. The outcome he performs the worst in is the least important of the three.
At least they were "moves". I'm willing to hold judgement on O'Brien till the end of this year. Then you have a body of work and can see just what has become of the moves he has made.............
At least they were "moves" and they were spending ($$$$) from Lindner. Good or Bad? who knows?.....They were enough to give you some extra reason to believe.........as opposed to reason to look for new things to do this spring.
Ramon Ortiz's career averages in K/9, HR per 200 IP (which is what you want from a starter) and BB/9 are as good as or better than the Reds pitchers who started a significant number of games last year.
When the Reds re-signed Wilson, the hue and cry on this board was that the Reds shot their wad on that one deal and wouldn't make any other moves to improve the starting pitching. Well, lo and behold, the Reds traded for a starting pitcher and signed a FA starting pitcher (who woulda thunk that, I wonder), both of whom are better than Paul Wilson.
The Reds improved their starting pitching this offseason. No doubt about that. Will it be enough to contend in the NL Central? Maybe, maybe not, but it's sure going to be more interesting to watch now than it would have been without these moves.
Anyone who thinks Ortiz posts good K/9 numbers doesn't understand the concept. I don't see much point in comparing him to what's been pitching for the Reds of late. That's been awful. Though I fail to see what makes him a better pitcher than Aaron Harang.
Can we see some career stats! Well, I know Harang hasn't had much of one, but since you want to compare we might as well use the small sample size. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by M2
You could look them up. They're not hard to find and this isn't exactly a state secret I'm letting out of the bag.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds1
Ortiz - 5.94 K/9, 1.37 HR/9, 3.27 BB/9
Harang - 6.59 K/9, 1.25 HR/9, 3.34 BB/9
Quote:
Originally Posted by M2
Sorry M2. It was a joke! Hence the ;) We've seen this many times. You didn't catch my wink. Yes, I know how to use Google search. To tell you the truth I really don't care about the stats. I'm just glad to see a couple more pitchers in the mix. I'll wait and pass judgement when I see Ortiz pitch for the Reds in the NL.
Oh I know that. The point wasn't that giving up 40 HRs in a season made someone a good pitcher; it was a pitcher either had to have been good at some point or be thought to have "potential" to be allowed to pitch enough to give up 40 HRs.Quote:
Originally Posted by princeton
You have to be a decent pitcher to lose 100 games in your career; you have to be a good pitcher to lose 200; lose 256 or more and you are a Hall of Fame pitcher-----not because of the losses, but because you won't be allowed to pitch enough to lose all those games unless you have some ability.
Umm - Aaron Harang wasn't the only Reds pitcher who, "started a significant number of games last season".Quote:
Originally Posted by M2
Having Milton and Ortiz available to replace the starts made last year by Van Poppel, Acevedo and Lidle (combined for 62 starts) is a significant upgrade in the rotation. Wilson needs to be Wilson (who, BTW, lowered his ERA by 0.30 last season and increased his K/9 by 0.70), and two of the four kids need to step up and show they belong in a major league rotation (instead of having to hit on four out of four).
And what has Ortiz done as a starting pitcher the past two seasons? 5.28 ERA, 1.51 WHIP, 4.93 K/9
That's not an upgrade. It's just another horrible pitcher.
As for Wilson, either you understand park effects or you don't. He was just as sub-mediocre last year as he was the previous three.
I don't mind Milton. Of the three, he's the one with upside. Yet he hasn't had a good season since 2001. If the best you're going to get out of him is some mid-4.00s ERA then the only "improvement" you're going to see is a staff that's gone from hideous to butt ugly.
Hasn't ORtiz had some injuries the past couple of seasons? I can't quantify, but I had Ortiz on my fantasy baseball teams a few starts and he did very well. I think he had some blow out appearances and did very well through periods of time. If he is healthy again he can get back to what he did when he was pitching in the WS.
Cory Lidle had some good starts too, but as he amply demonstrated you don't get a 5.00+ ERA unless your failures far outweigh your flourishes. Over his last 46 starts, Ramon Ortiz has a 5.28 ERA. That can only be achieved by a consistently bad pitcher.
Or consistantly hurt!Quote:
Originally Posted by M2
Sorry, I thought we were talking about reality and not fiction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds1
I'll say it again. why pay ortiz 3.5 mil, when Luke Hudson is on the roster for 3 mil less?
moves like this simply drain my will to live. I'm not saying Hudson is all that, but he's at least likely to put up the same numbers as ortiz, and he misses bats, so he's likely to put up better numbers. And he can actually say he was hurt.
Ortiz=money wasted.