Hunter Greene

[RedTeamGo!]

Oh?

I’m not going to speak for that poster but I read the bolder part as that is what the reds have done in the past. He said “em” not “him.”

Also, nowhere in that post does anyone say Greene is ruined.

[Tom Servo]

I think Vander is within his right to take a victory lap here, he took some crap and there was a lot of hyperbole being flung around even if 'ruined' wasn't explicitly repeated.

[Vander]

I think Vander is within his right to take a victory lap here, he took some crap and there was a lot of hyperbole being flung around even if 'ruined' wasn't explicitly repeated.

Thanks

And yeah, exactly what he said. If all you're looking for is the word "ruined", then yes. Only one person said it (which still qualifies as "someone"). But the entire first half of this thread was about how the Reds were impulsively rushing his development and how they are absolutely terrible at developing pitchers. Lets not parse words here and claim that everyone was cool-headed and not being impulsive.

And yes, I took a bunch of crap in this thread just because I didn't think a few bad starts were indicative of poor development. So yes, I'm gloating a bit.

[RedTeamGo!]

The reds are absolutely terrible at developing starting pitchers.

In what way is that statement false?

I will also point out the irony of the double standard you are putting out there by saying “the initial small sample size was irrelavent, but this small sample size is totally relevant.”

[Tom Servo]

The reds are absolutely terrible at developing starting pitchers.

In what way is that statement false?

The entire baseline here was centered around Hunter Greene's first 8 innings in Dayton.

[Vander]

The reds are absolutely terrible at developing starting pitchers.

In what way is that statement false?

I will also point out the irony of the double standard you are putting out there by saying “the initial small sample size was irrelavent, but this small sample size is totally relevant.”

You based this entire thread on 8 innings worth of data. Eight. And now you want me to pump the breaks because the sample is too small? You can't have it both ways.

And this is not about the Reds ability to develop pitching. This is about Hunter Greene being rushed. I have my own misgivings about how the pitching is developed, but I have yet to see any problem with how Greene has been handled, and the data trends seem to back me up.

Even if he has a string of bad starts, the basis for this thread will still be flawed. He has proven that he can compete at the low-A level, that he can adapt to adversity, and can make adjustments based on previous starts. That means he is definitely not over his head.

[RedTeamGo!]

The entire baseline here was centered around Hunter Greene's first 8 innings in Dayton.

And, again, multiple of his starts he didn’t make it out of the second inning.

- - - Updated - - -

You based this entire thread on 8 innings worth of data. Eight. And now you want me to pump the breaks because the sample is too small? You can't have it both ways.

And this is not about the Reds ability to develop pitching. This is about Hunter Greene being rushed. I have my own misgivings about how the pitching is developed, but I have yet to see any problem with how Greene has been handled, and the data trends seem to back me up.

Even if he has a string of bad starts, the basis for this thread will still be flawed. He has proven that he can compete at the low-A level, that he can adapt to adversity, and can make adjustments based on previous starts. That means he is definitely not over his head.

I never said to pump the brakes, I’m simply pointing out the hypocrisy.

[Vander]

I never said to pump the brakes, I’m simply pointing out the hypocrisy.

There's none from my end.

[mth123]

The entire baseline here was centered around Hunter Greene's first 8 innings in Dayton.

It was 8 innings spread over 5 starts. Run a guy out there 5 times and he can only manage to complete 8 innings and I think it's pretty valid. The entire it's only 8 innings thing is a huge oversimplification. As for rush 'em and ruin 'em, it's the Reds MO. They've absolutely rushed several guys who were given big league jobs just because and IMO it has set them back significantly. I'll start with Tony Cingrani way back in 2013. Since then we've seen fiascos with Cody Reed, Robert Stephenson and last year Amir Garrett. This year Sal Romano seems to be getting that treatment. I was actually in favor of promoting Reed, Garrett and Romano, but when it became obvious they'd been rushed, the Reds leave them dangle out there far past when it's become obvious it's doing more harm than good. They rush Bailey back from injury 3 times. They tried to rush Disco back They rushed to judgment on Finnegan calling him a lock this year. They've rushed and set guys back consistently. In fact, I think the entire fiasco with Bailey being slated to start in 2016 less than a year from his TJ surgery is why he was set back and IMO could have something to do with why he's completely worthless now.

Sticking a guy out there above his head and letting him dangle isn't a way to speed his development. I'm happy that Greene seems to be adjusting, but he's not going to pitch a ton of innings and going to be shut down anyway. What has actually been accomplished by taking this risk? For the innings load he should be pitching, he could have easily waited for Billings or Greeneville and gotten the work in and then been promoted later. He'd be in the same spot. I hope they aren't going to have him pitch the whole full season schedule coming off a season where he hardly pitched. He could have gotten the same number of innings in by waiting. I guess I'd err on the side of caution with such a valuable player. Even seeing what we've seen, if we had to do it all over again, I'd still believe waiting and letting him pitch in short season made the most sense.

[Vander]

Let no one tell me "no one said ruined" again...

[lollipopcurve]

I'm happy that Greene seems to be adjusting,

SEEMS to be? Have you watched him at all?

There is absolutely no way you can claim, based on current evidence, that the Reds have done Greene wrong this year. He is not overmatched. Rather, he's been having his way with some of the best lineups in the league. Like anyone, I was concerned after his first few outings, but look at what has happened since...

[Tom Servo]

It was 8 innings spread over 5 starts. Run a guy out there 5 times and he can only manage to complete 8 innings and I think it's pretty valid. The entire it's only 8 innings thing is a huge oversimplification. As for rush 'em and ruin 'em, it's the Reds MO. They've absolutely rushed several guys who were given big league jobs just because and IMO it has set them back significantly. I'll start with Tony Cingrani way back in 2013. Since then we've seen fiascos with Cody Reed, Robert Stephenson and last year Amir Garrett. This year Sal Romano seems to be getting that treatment. I was actually in favor of promoting Reed, Garrett and Romano, but when it became obvious they'd been rushed, the Reds leave them dangle out there far past when it's become obvious it's doing more harm than good. They rush Bailey back from injury 3 times. They tried to rush Disco back They rushed to judgment on Finnegan calling him a lock this year. They've rushed and set guys back consistently. In fact, I think the entire fiasco with Bailey being slated to start in 2016 less than a year from his TJ surgery is why he was set back and IMO could have something to do with why he's completely worthless now.

Sticking a guy out there above his head and letting him dangle isn't a way to speed his development. I'm happy that Greene seems to be adjusting, but he's not going to pitch a ton of innings and going to be shut down anyway. What has actually been accomplished by taking this risk? For the innings load he should be pitching, he could have easily waited for Billings or Greeneville and gotten the work in and then been promoted later. He'd be in the same spot. I hope they aren't going to have him pitch the whole full season schedule coming off a season where he hardly pitched. He could have gotten the same number of innings in by waiting. I guess I'd err on the side of caution with such a valuable player. Even seeing what we've seen, if we had to do it all over again, I'd still believe waiting and letting him pitch in short season made the most sense.

I think we share some similar concerns in regards to the pitching, but you conflated a lot of things here. I don't recall you in the past having an issue with how fast the Reds moved players, or pitchers specifically, from Billings to Dayton to Daytona or if they repeated levels, that sort of thing, but now you're comparing that to expectations for pitchers after injury or the jump from AAA to the majors.

You're basically saying you don't trust the Reds on anything. Which, okay, I see where you come to that conclusion. But digging your heels in and saying that, actually, those 8 innings (I don't think the 'starts' thing matters) were enough to make a legitimate determination is not really a compelling case.

[mth123]

I think we share some similar concerns in regards to the pitching, but you conflated a lot of things here. I don't recall you in the past having an issue with how fast the Reds moved players, or pitchers specifically, from Billings to Dayton to Daytona or if they repeated levels, that sort of thing, but now you're comparing that to expectations for pitchers after injury or the jump from AAA to the majors.

You're basically saying you don't trust the Reds on anything. Which, okay, I see where you come to that conclusion. But digging your heels in and saying that, actually, those 8 innings (I don't think the 'starts' thing matters) were enough to make a legitimate determination is not really a compelling case.

I haven't really said much about it in the past. It wasn't until the pattern became clear and the Reds had somebody worth watching at that level that I even paid much attention to it. But after the last three years, yeah, I'm watching. I'm excited about Greene. I hope he can move quickly because he's that good. IMO, the Reds probably aren't going to be any good until he's heading the staff. I just don't want them to move him fast because they need him, like they seem to have done a bunch lately. I'd be thrilled if he deserved a look before the end of next year. Realistically, I'd go slow. I'd have gone slow this year and I'd keep going slow. When he kicks the door down, move him up. He certainly didn't do that last year to justify a promotion this year. Looks like the Reds are correct so far, but it's been 11 starts, his ERA is still near 6 and it's only 36 innings. If 8 innings over 5 starts isn't enough, neither is 28 more over the next 6 (not even 5 per start). I'm still in wait and see mode. The most important thing this year is to get innings in as a foundation for next year and stretch him out a bit. I'd rather they treat him like a starter and shut him down early than the long reliever type outings he's been getting just to extend his season. But I'll take any approach that has him healthy at the end of the year.

[Boston Red]

From my standpoint, they ARE going slow with him this year. He's a "generational talent" playing in the Midwest League for God's sake. If he goes to the FSL next year and the Southern League the year after, is that too fast for a generational talent? Not if he's really a generational talent.

[Griffey012]

Hunter Greene has a 4.73 ERA/3.60 FIP with an 11.3 K/9 and 3.1 BB/9 in 53 IP in A ball as an 18 year old. His xFIP is 7th in the league of pitchers with 50 IP or more. Nobody in the top 30 is under 20 years old.

Just gonna leave that here and let that sink in for a minute.

The list of players since 2010 who have pitched 80+ IP in the midwest league with a K rate north of 10K/9 while under 20 years of age (all of these players were 19):

Taijuan Walker
Adys Portillo (6 BB/9)
Grant Holmes
Shelby Miller
Archie Bradley
Noah Syndergaard
Alex Reyes