Glenn Clark: Are The 2017 Orioles Actually Better Than They Were In 2016?

[Il BuonO]

Just now, Frobby said:

Feels like we say something similar every year, until someone new screws up.   We'll have some crappy starts.   The team went 12-11 when Gallardo started, so they survived him.   

Barely, but you're right. I'm sure the trio of Miley, Jimenez and Nuno will provide enough crappy starts.

[wildcard]

1 hour ago, Il BuonO said:

Higher ceilings than Tillman.

I would not expect Bundy to achieve his higher ceiling than a healthy Tillman this year.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Il BuonO said:

I've always liked Chris, but I can't imagine with the Orioles history of scrutinizing the health of players they're considering extending him since the shoulder discomfort is now a recurring problem. 

I think the health of Gausman and Bundy is much more important to the team's success.

I think it's almost a non sequitur to say one starter's health or performance is more important than another's.    They all have about an equal opportunity to impact the team through making their starts and then whether they improve, stay the same or decline.         In terms of positive impact on improvement, I could argue that Miley and Ubaldo could have the biggest impact, as either could improve their ERA by more than a run this year, which none of the other three are likely to do.    The performance of Gausman and Tillman was very important last year and any changes in their performance for better or worse are equally important to the team.    Bundy's ability to soak up more innings and improve his 4.52 ERA as a starter is also very important.    It's very hard to weigh their importance in the abstract.    The "importance" of Tillman's health depends on whether we're talking about him missing 5, 10 or 20 starts, and how he does when he pitches.    They're ALL very important and so is the performance of the other guys who inevitably will get called upon.   

[FanSince88]

If Ubaldo can just be Good Ubaldo for half a season like he was in 2014, it would be huge for us.  And good for him too, in his walk year.  Fingers crossed.  

At least he's not the guy we're counting on as our featured SP, like Danny Cabrera was back in the day.  

[Tony-OH]

54 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Bundy's ability to soak up more innings and improve his 4.52 ERA as a starter is also very important.  

Bundy should be much better because that ERA was hurt by his last eight starts of the year when he looked out of gas. From Aug 17th to the end of the season, Bundy put up a 6.00 ERA (26ER/39IP) with a 36/22 K/BB ratio and batters slashed .272/.372/.494/.865. In his six starts prior he put up a 2.76 ERA (10ER/32.2IP) with a 36/8 K/BB ratio and batters slashed .174/.226/.374/.600. So basically he wore out after 70.2 IP last year which is why the Orioles were hoping to keep him around 75-90 IP going into the season.

Hopefully after logging 109.2 IP last year, Bundy can get to 150-175 innings this year. I really think Tillman's injury will make this harder to do because I could have seen the Orioles limit Bundy's starts in April in order to make it easier to keep him in that range this year. Bundy average 5.1 IP a start last season  so even if he improves to around six innings a start this year, they could keep him in that range by limiting him to 29-30 starts this year. 

Either way, I think Bundy could easily put up Gausman's number from last year this season. That would be a huge improvement over Gallardo/Wilson/Wright. Add in the fact that Miley's FIP last year was 3.79, and you can realistically expect him to improve markedly next season as well. I could see him in the 4.10-4.40 range next season while giving the team close 190-200 innings. 

Ubaldo of course is the wild card, but it is an odd year, and he always pitches better in those odd years for some reason. I'd be happy with 2015 Jimenez.

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Bundy should be much better because that ERA was hurt by his last eight starts of the year when he looked out of gas. From Aug 17th to the end of the season, Bundy put up a 6.00 ERA (26ER/39IP) with a 36/22 K/BB ratio and batters slashed .272/.372/.494/.865. In his six starts prior he put up a 2.76 ERA (10ER/32.2IP) with a 36/8 K/BB ratio and batters slashed .174/.226/.374/.600. So basically he wore out after 70.2 IP last year which is why the Orioles were hoping to keep him around 75-90 IP going into the season.

Hopefully after logging 109.2 IP last year, Bundy can get to 150-175 innings this year. I really think Tillman's injury will make this harder to do because I could have seen the Orioles limit Bundy's starts in April in order to make it easier to keep him in that range this year. Bundy average 5.1 IP a start last season  so even if he improves to around six innings a start this year, they could keep him in that range by limiting him to 29-30 starts this year. 

Either way, I think Bundy could easily put up Gausman's number from last year this season. That would be a huge improvement over Gallardo/Wilson/Wright. Add in the fact that Miley's FIP last year was 3.79, and you can realistically expect him to improve markedly next season as well. I could see him in the 4.10-4.40 range next season while giving the team close 190-200 innings. 

Ubaldo of course is the wild card, but it is an odd year, and he always pitches better in those odd years for some reason. I'd be happy with 2015 Jimenez.

If you look at our 2014 season, the key was that the back of the rotation wasn't horrible, and everyone else was solid.     That could be a good formula this year.  

[joeyc]

I don't feel we are better, pretty much the same. Problem is the redsox and Yankees are going to be a lot better than they were last year.

[Aristotelian]

Biggest improvement is the subtraction of Gallardo. That could be a pretty big improvement, actually.

[thezeroes]

20 minutes ago, joeyc said:

I don't feel we are better, pretty much the same. Problem is the redsox and Yankees are going to be a lot better than they were last year.

Mookie Betts had a career year in 2016.  Will he regress to his average or put up better numbers??

Jackie Bradley had a career year in 2016.  Will he regress to his average or put up better numbers??

Xander Bogarts had a career year in 2016.  Will he regress to his average or put up better numbers.

Dustin Pedroia and Hanley Ramirez will be into their age 33 seasons.  Will they regress to his aging factor (10% decline) or put up better numbers than 2016???

David Ortiz retired and took his 1.021 OPS with him.  Do they have that replacement level on the roster???

The Red Soxs won 93 Games in 2016 so to fall into
A Lot Better" they would need to win an additional 10 to 12 Games IMO.  I do not see this happening.

[PaulFolk]

9 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Biggest improvement is the subtraction of Gallardo. That could be a pretty big improvement, actually.

Not if the rest of the O's starters don't improve. Yes, Gallardo (5.42 ERA) was terrible. But so were Miley (6.17), Ubaldo (5.18 as a starter), Wright (6.22 as a starter), and Wilson (5.67 as a starter). Subtracting Gallardo doesn't magically improve the team unless the guys who replace him are actually better.

[PaulFolk]

5 minutes ago, thezeroes said:

Mookie Betts had a career year in 2016.  Will he regress to his average or put up better numbers??

Jackie Bradley had a career year in 2016.  Will he regress to his average or put up better numbers??

Xander Bogarts had a career year in 2016.  Will he regress to his average or put up better numbers.

Betts and Bogaerts are 24. Bradley is 26. I don't see any reason to believe they'll regress.

[bobmc]

2 hours ago, joeyc said:

I don't feel we are better, pretty much the same. Problem is the redsox and Yankees are going to be a lot better than they were last year.

If you want to "hide in the weeds",  as Buck likes to say, then you had better not improve much or you will be expected to win.  ;-)

[Il BuonO]

4 hours ago, Frobby said:

I think it's almost a non sequitur to say one starter's health or performance is more important than another's.    They all have about an equal opportunity to impact the team through making their starts and then whether they improve, stay the same or decline.         In terms of positive impact on improvement, I could argue that Miley and Ubaldo could have the biggest impact, as either could improve their ERA by more than a run this year, which none of the other three are likely to do.    The performance of Gausman and Tillman was very important last year and any changes in their performance for better or worse are equally important to the team.    Bundy's ability to soak up more innings and improve his 4.52 ERA as a starter is also very important.    It's very hard to weigh their importance in the abstract.    The "importance" of Tillman's health depends on whether we're talking about him missing 5, 10 or 20 starts, and how he does when he pitches.    They're ALL very important and so is the performance of the other guys who inevitably will get called upon.   

I was responding to WC. It was his assertion that the season hinged on Tillman's health. Arguing that the rotation hinges on Miley and Jimenez is the non-sequitur here, 4th and 5th starter types are used to 'soak up' innings. Bundy has higher expectations and Gausman could be an ace. This year will go a long way towards determining that.

I do agree the rotation as a whole needs to perform better but I see Gausman as more valuable than Tillman. Gausman and Bundy together is what the future will look like if they continue to improve, Tillman will have to show no ill effects of the shoulder or it's likely his days as an Oriole are numbered.

[Il BuonO]

2 hours ago, PaulFolk said:

Not if the rest of the O's starters don't improve. Yes, Gallardo (5.42 ERA) was terrible. But so were Miley (6.17), Ubaldo (5.18 as a starter), Wright (6.22 as a starter), and Wilson (5.67 as a starter). Subtracting Gallardo doesn't magically improve the team unless the guys who replace him are actually better.

Those numbers set the bar low, shouldn't be that difficult to improve upon them.

[thezeroes]

3 hours ago, PaulFolk said:

Betts and Bogaerts are 24. Bradley is 26. I don't see any reason to believe they'll regress.

Betts had two months of off the wall stats that carried his year (July/August).

Bogaerts had two months (May/June) of off the wall stats and the league adjusted to make him .863 OPS first half/.729 OPS second half.

Bradley had two excellent months (May and July) and basically was below replacement offensively three of the last four months.

The trio have shown flashes but not exactly consistent in there respective career years.  Could go either way as far as the career trend. IMO