Jeremy Guthrie in 2008 Predictions

[TyCobb]

Maybe some, but not much. Greg Maddux has had a typical BABIP over his career and he's probably been ahead of more hitters than anyone in history.

I see Guts increasing his K%. That is why I think he is going to be a better pitcher with a 3.25-3.50 ERA.

[TyCobb]

Why?

He has 10 starts that were total abnormal to what he did the rest of the year(as a whole) and his MiL career and he deserves the benefit of the doubt???

Take away his last 10 starts and he has a 2.88 ERA. Don't see your logic.

You can make a case that we should take his last 10 starts away since he never pitch this many innings before and got hurt.

[DrungoHazewood]

I wouldn't compare Guthrie to RLo. RLo had a finer margin for error to be effective, Guthrie has better stuff. If he can keep his velocity up and his fast ball down(both a function of stamina IMO) he should be fine.

He also has to keep his walks in check, which he didn't always do in the minors.

I'm not nearly as down on Guthrie as Sports Guy. I see him as a 4.50-ish ERA guy, with the caveat that any pitcher is going to be +/- 1.00 run a game off his true ability in any given season.

[TyCobb]

He also has to keep his walks in check, which he didn't always do in the minors.

I'm not nearly as down on Guthrie as Sports Guy. I see him as a 4.50-ish ERA guy, with the caveat that any pitcher is going to be +/- 1.00 run a game off his true ability in any given season.

So you think he is going to be in the 3.50 - 5.50 range? Way to go out on a limb

[DrungoHazewood]

Take away his last 10 starts and he has a 2.88 ERA. Don't see your logic.

You can make a case that we should take his last 10 starts away since he never pitch this many innings before and got hurt.

Or you could argue that he's 28, his arm is mature, and that he might be one of those pitchers who fades after 100, 125 innings.

It's not like he set a career high in innings by that much. From '04-'06 he pitched 160, 142, and 142 innings. He was only pushing the envelope his last 3-4 starts.

[DrungoHazewood]

So you think he is going to be in the 3.50 - 5.50 range? Way to go out on a limb

It's kind of funny, but yea, that's what I'm saying. Anybody who tells you they can nail down a pitcher's ERA to within a quarter run or something is either very lucky or making stuff up. Even HOFers vary year to year by a couple runs. Greg Maddux had a 3.50 one year, a 1.50 a few years later. Clemens would oscillate back and forth from a 2.40 to a 4.40. Mike Mussina went from a 2.54 to a 4.46 to a 3.06 to a 3.29 to a 4.81 in consecutive years of his prime.

There's just too much out of a pitcher's control, and too many injuries to rely on a consistent ERA year to year.

[tywright]

Why?

He has 10 starts that were total abnormal to what he did the rest of the year(as a whole) and his MiL career and he deserves the benefit of the doubt???

I'm not going to get into this discussion again. He had 11-12 good starts in a row....end of story. He has the talent to be a successful pitcher....that's all that matters.

[TyCobb]

Or you could argue that he's 28, his arm is mature, and that he might be one of those pitchers who fades after 100, 125 innings.

It's not like he set a career high in innings by that much. From '04-'06 he pitched 160, 142, and 142 innings. He was only pushing the envelope his last 3-4 starts.

Could you tell me his IP/9 as a starter for those seasons? A pitcher will generally hit a wall after he goes past the innings he could handle. Maybe 150 was a wall.

[DrungoHazewood]

After pitching Winter Ball..

And was that a negative or a positive? Did he keep his arm in shape by doing that, or did he overtax it? Did he learn bad habits there, or did he pick up a little edge from somebody? Did he avoid a dead arm period early on in the season, only to wear down early, and how did that effect his overall numbers?

[DrungoHazewood]

Could you tell me his IP/9 as a starter for those seasons? A pitcher will generally hit a wall after he goes past the innings he could handle. Maybe 150 was a wall.

Here you are.

[TyCobb]

It's kind of funny, but yea, that's what I'm saying. Anybody who tells you they can nail down a pitcher's ERA to within a quarter run or something is either very lucky or making stuff up. Even HOFers vary year to year by a couple runs. Greg Maddux had a 3.50 one year, a 1.50 a few years later. Clemens would oscillate back and forth from a 2.40 to a 4.40. Mike Mussina went from a 2.54 to a 4.46 to a 3.06 to a 3.29 to a 4.81 in consecutive years of his prime.

There's just too much out of a pitcher's control, and too many injuries to rely on a consistent ERA year to year.

I definately agree with that. The reason I have such a low number is because I see the defense improving and Guts improving his K%.

[El Gordo]

Or you could argue that he's 28, his arm is mature, and that he might be one of those pitchers who fades after 100, 125 innings.

It's not like he set a career high in innings by that much. From '04-'06 he pitched 160, 142, and 142 innings. He was only pushing the envelope his last 3-4 starts.

Gutherie may have a mature arm but he started professional ball 2 years late. I wonder if we would evaluate his development differently if he had been 26 last year instead of 28. As for his BB 9, I counted 56.1 IP out of 780 total where his rate was over 3.50.

[whatdoiget000]

So what if his first ten starts were normal and the last ten were the aberration? Could be. I see him with a 3.60 this year.

[hoosiers]

For the same reason people don't say silly stuff like "people can't fly - as opined by currently accepted scientific methods used today."

There is no dispute, there are only people who look at facts and evidence and people who choose to ignore them.

The continued representation of the statistical interpretation of what did happen happen in baseball history as a factual or final interpretation is enormously misleading, IMO.

Have not the tools of sabermeticians improved over the past 15 years? Have not these tools changed previous statistical interpretations of what happened? If so, why do the statisticians post here and elsewhere with such certainty that their "interpretation" today is fact?

I am not saying these tools are not extremely useful since they clearly are. My issue is with the presentation of the statistical interpretation of baseball events as factual when it is not.

[square634]

So what if his first ten starts were normal and the last ten were the aberration? Could be. I see him with a 3.60 this year.

Yeah, it could be, but as the tiebreaker I think you have to look back at his minor league numbers, which are more in line with his second half than his first half.