We have our #3: Guthrie

[snatch311]

Roy Halladay could strike more guys out too. I think Guthrie has a poor man's Doc thing going on. I would seriously be fine with an efficient 4.90 ERA.

[snatch311]

Well, that would be average now, wouldn't it? Maddux also had superb control and a low HR rate in his best years, which is why he did so well.

Like I mentioned above, if Guthrie gets his walk rate down and keeps his GB rate up, he'll be a very useful piece for us. But the walks will bite him eventually.

7 walks in 29.2 IP is more than acceptable for me.

EDIT:

Not sure I put that how I meant it. I mean, 7 walks in 29.2 is a low amount of walks, and if he keeps that up, he'll be a big contributor.

[rolliefingers]

7 walks in 29.2 IP is more than acceptable for me.

EDIT:

Not sure I put that how I meant it. I mean, 7 walks in 29.2 is a low amount of walks, and if he keeps that up, he'll be a big contributor.

Whoops, yeah I was looking at his career stats. He's doing fine this year, you're right.

[Leitch]

Greg Maddux is a career 6.18 k per 9 ip. So I don't put much weight into league averages.

What does that statement mean? That Maddux doesn't strike out a lot of guys or something? During his age-26 to age-32 run at the top of the game, he averaged 6.90 K/9, and during his insane two year run that was arguably one of the most dominant runs in history, he averaged 7.36.

This in leagues that averaged 6.48 and 6.52 per nine innings, respectively.

Greg Maddux was 5th in NL in strikeouts in 1998, 3rd in NL in strikeouts in 1995, 1994, 1993, 1992, and 2nd in strikeouts in 1991.

[TyCobb]

What does that statement mean? That Maddux doesn't strike out a lot of guys or something? During his age-26 to age-32 run at the top of the game, he averaged 6.90 K/9, and during his insane two year run that was arguably one of the most dominant runs in history, he averaged 7.36.

This in leagues that averaged 6.48 and 6.52 per nine innings, respectively.

Greg Maddux was 5th in NL in strikeouts in 1998, 3rd in NL in strikeouts in 1995, 1994, 1993, 1992, and 2nd in strikeouts in 1991.

That is what I am saying. Maddux was a great strike out pitcher(my favorite pitcher) and he "only" has a career 6.18 K's per 9.

[rolliefingers]

What does that statement mean? That Maddux doesn't strike out a lot of guys or something? During his age-26 to age-32 run at the top of the game, he averaged 6.90 K/9, and during his insane two year run that was arguably one of the most dominant runs in history, he averaged 7.36.

This in leagues that averaged 6.48 and 6.52 per nine innings, respectively.

Greg Maddux was 5th in NL in strikeouts in 1998, 3rd in NL in strikeouts in 1995, 1994, 1993, 1992, and 2nd in strikeouts in 1991.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I wouldn't call any of those ratios all that impressive. With that kind of K-rate, the reason he was so often among the league leaders in Ks is that he was so efficient and threw so many innings.

The only thing really superhuman about Maddux was his ridiculous control, and since he was average-to-good at everything else, his overall stats were very good.

What I got from Ty's post is that somehow because Maddux was never a dominant strikeout pitcher (despite his high totals), then K-rate doesn't matter for anyone. And that's totally wrong. K-rate is just one of several peripheral stats that measure how effective a pitcher really is. Some would argue it's the most important.

[Leitch]

That is what I am saying. Maddux was a great strike out pitcher(my favorite pitcher) and he "only" has a career 6.18 K's per 9.

But vintage Maddux's K rate is well above-average, whereas Guthrie is sitting at 4.86, which is awful. Thankfully he's been very stingy with the walks(1.83) and the extra base hits(.188 ISO against), and that's what he'll have to do with such a heinous strikeout rate.

I'm rooting for the kid to keep it up, but let's not get ahead of ourselves, this is the first time Guthrie has ever had acceptible command, much less a Maddux-type walk rate. If it's something Mazzone found and fixed, well you're looking at a Brown/Wang type until either he loses stuff or the league figures out how to lift it.

If it's my team, I ride him until the All-star break and then tell everyone we've got a walk-stingy worm killer available for top, top prospects.

[rolliefingers]

If it's my team, I ride him until the All-star break and then tell everyone we've got a walk-stingy worm killer available for top, top prospects.

Whew, thank God this ISN'T your team. Otherwise, you'd jeopardize our chances of finishing .500 by dealing our third-best pitcher for "suspects". We all know Guthrie's a sure thing - just look at his ERA and W-L record! Those previous five years of mediocrity were just a warmup.

[Leitch]

Maybe I'm wrong, but I wouldn't call any of those ratios all that impressive. With that kind of K-rate, the reason he was so often among the league leaders in Ks is that he was so efficient and threw so many innings.

The only thing really superhuman about Maddux was his ridiculous control, and since he was average-to-good at everything else, his overall stats were very good.

What I got from Ty's post is that somehow because Maddux was never a dominant strikeout pitcher (despite his high totals), then K-rate doesn't matter for anyone. And that's totally wrong. K-rate is just one of several peripheral stats that measure how effective a pitcher really is. Some would argue it's the most important.

Maddux wasn't Randy Johnson, but this notion that Maddux wasn't a strikeout pitcher is crazy. He was significantly better than league average for most of his dominant run. Obviously his hallmark was disgusting amounts of control, but that doesn't take anything from his ability to strike guys out at an above average rate.

[Rockbird]

If he keeps pitching like this, I couldn't care less how many strikeouts he throws. He throws real hard, they'll come. The thing I love about him is how efficient he is. 3 starts, 3 low pitch counts (granted he was pulled real early the 1st start). There's something to be said for attacking hitters and getting outs quickly rather than the Bedard style of trying to be perfect and get a strikeout every at bat, and in the end you rack up 10 Ks but you walk a few, and are out on pitch count by the 6th.

[TyCobb]

But vintage Maddux's K rate is well above-average, whereas Guthrie is sitting at 4.86, which is awful. Thankfully he's been very stingy with the walks(1.83) and the extra base hits(.188 ISO against), and that's what he'll have to do with such a heinous strikeout rate.

I'm rooting for the kid to keep it up, but let's not get ahead of ourselves, this is the first time Guthrie has ever had acceptible command, much less a Maddux-type walk rate. If it's something Mazzone found and fixed, well you're looking at a Brown/Wang type until either he loses stuff or the league figures out how to lift it.

If it's my team, I ride him until the All-star break and then tell everyone we've got a walk-stingy worm killer available for top, top prospects.

Thats all true. I never said he was going to put up a sub 2.00 ERA. I think Guts is a quality pitcher that will have a 3.5-4.5 ERA. Look at Wang he has a 3. something K/per 9 inning and he is a great pitcher.

[Leitch]

If he keeps pitching like this, I couldn't care less how many strikeouts he throws. He throws real hard, they'll come. The thing I love about him is how efficient he is. 3 starts, 3 low pitch counts (granted he was pulled real early the 1st start). There's something to be said for attacking hitters and getting outs quickly rather than the Bedard style of trying to be perfect and get a strikeout every at bat, and in the end you rack up 10 Ks but you walk a few, and are out on pitch count by the 6th.

There is definitely something to be said for throwing strikes and attacking hitters, but strikeouts are a necessary part of any great pitcher's arsenal. Throwing hard is not a guarantee of a good strikeout rate, as Guthrie throws hard and hasn't ever had one.

[TyCobb]

There is definitely something to be said for throwing strikes and attacking hitters, but strikeouts are a necessary part of any great pitcher's arsenal. Throwing hard is not a guarantee of a good strikeout rate, as Guthrie throws hard and hasn't ever had one.

Who is saying that Guthrie is going to be a great pitcher?

[Leitch]

Who is saying that Guthrie is going to be a great pitcher?

Nobody, I'm just saying he's not going to keep pitching like this with so little K's and the other dude is like "Hey, screw the K's"

[Rockbird]

Nobody, I'm just saying he's not going to keep pitching like this with so little K's and the other dude is like "Hey, screw the K's"

Ok, you're predicting something about the future. Im dealing with the present. Would you agree with the statement, as likely or improbable as it may be, if 9 out of 10 of Guthrie's starts remained 7+ innings, 3 or less runs, 2 or less walks but 2 or less Ks would you be fine with that, or still say "gosh darn it, hes not throwing enough strikeouts!" that's all I'm saying. There's so much to nitpick about this team that one of the few bright spots is not one I'm looking for flaws in.