ESPN insider O's trades

[Frobby]

14 minutes ago, ISU94 said:

A mid 3 ERA is a #2? I really don't see it. His k rate is solid this year but in past years it wasn't amazing either. A good #3 is very valuable, but a #2 level starter I see as more than Sonny Gray. 

You must be one of these guys who has a much stricter definition of a no. 2 than is reflected in the real world.     Gray is just short of having enough innings to qualify, but if he did, his 3.43 ERA would be tied for 18th in MLB.     

[ISU94]

Just now, Frobby said:

You must be one of these guys who has a much stricter definition of a no. 2 than is reflected in the real world.     Gray is just short of having enough innings to qualify, but if he did, his 3.43 ERA would be tied for 18th in MLB.     

I would say I do. I view a #2 as a guy who can be an ace of some teams and still be fine. A guy that I would feel pretty damn confident giving the ball to in the playoffs and believe he can totally shut a team down. I just don't view that with Gray.

Never said he wasn't a #2, I said he was a fringe #2 imo. Very good #3 type in an ideal world.

[ArtVanDelay]

7 minutes ago, ISU94 said:

He's been good this year. K rate from 2014-2016 was in the mid 7's. FIP ranged from 3.46 to 4.67 in that span. Not putting those type of numbers as a #2 pitcher. 

His FIP has been:

2.70

3.46

3.45

4.67

3.24

One of those is not like the others.  I'm giving him a pass for his injured season.

[ISU94]

1 minute ago, ArtVanDelay said:

His FIP has been:

2.70

3.46

3.45

4.67

3.24

One of those is not like the others.  I'm giving him a pass for his injured season.

Yes, I don't view those numbers besides way back in 2013 with his k rate as a very good #2. I just don't. I've watched Gray pitch, he's a good arm. But I don't view him that highly. I said it ranged from mid 3 to mid 4's in a 3 season span...which it did. Doesn't matter if its an outlier and I'm not taking his injury riddled year into account very seriously. Still happened and I'm not going to toss it out the window though as it did still happen.

I'd happily take him here and love every second of it, but I don't think of him as a #2 with how I view a #2 starter as I've said above.

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, ISU94 said:

I would say I do. I view a #2 as a guy who can be an ace of some teams and still be fine. A guy that I would feel pretty damn confident giving the ball to in the playoffs and believe he can totally shut a team down. I just don't view that with Gray.

Never said he wasn't a #2, I said he was a fringe #2 imo. Very good #3 type in an ideal world.

Your definition is too strict for me. But that's the thing about slapping labels on players -- those labels mean different things to different people.  I only see three teams in baseball who actually have a 2nd best pitcher who has an ERA better than Gray's.

[ArtVanDelay]

10 minutes ago, ISU94 said:

I would say I do. I view a #2 as a guy who can be an ace of some teams and still be fine. A guy that I would feel pretty damn confident giving the ball to in the playoffs and believe he can totally shut a team down. I just don't view that with Gray.

Never said he wasn't a #2, I said he was a fringe #2 imo. Very good #3 type in an ideal world.

On which teams would Gray be a #3?

Nats for sure.  Maybe Dodgers. Mets, Red Sox.  Who else?

And who is your example of a good #2?

[ISU94]

Just now, Frobby said:

Your definition is too strict for me. But that's the thing about slapping labels on players -- those labels mean different things to different people.  I only see three teams in baseball who actually have a 2nd best pitcher who has an ERA better than Gray's.

Yeah, I don't tend to go for labels either. He just listed him as a #1/#2 type and I pointed out that he's definitely not an ace and I personally don't put him as a #2. To each their own.

[ISU94]

5 minutes ago, ArtVanDelay said:

On which teams would Gray be a #3?

Nats for sure.  Maybe Dodgers. Mets.  Who else?

And who is your example of a good #2?

Luis Severino comes to mind. Good k rate, solid ERA/WHIP, etc. Don't see him ever becoming an ace, but if you have a guy like him heading a rotation with a good staff behind him they'll be just fine.

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, ISU94 said:

Yeah, I don't tend to go for labels either. He just listed him as a #1/#2 type and I pointed out that he's definitely not an ace and I personally don't put him as a #2. To each their own.

I guess from my practical standpoint, of the 29 teams that could trade for him, he'd be at least the second-best pitcher on 26 of those teams (going solely on ERA, for now).     So for them, he'd be their no. 2 (or no. 1).    He'd be a no. 3 for the DBacks and a no. 4 for the Nats or Cardinals.    

[ISU94]

Just now, Frobby said:

I guess from my practical standpoint, of the 29 teams that could trade for him, he'd be at least the second-best pitcher on 26 of those teams (going solely on ERA, for now).     So for them, he'd be their no. 2 (or no. 1).    He'd be a no. 3 for the DBacks and a no. 4 for the Nats or Cardinals.    

Yeah, when I talk about an ace though there isn't 30 aces. I only view a select few pitchers as an ace. An ace is someone that I give the ball too and fully expect to go 7-8-9 innings and win you a ballgame if its on the line. Sure, bad starts happen once in a while, but still. Guys like Bum have proven to be one. Sale, etc.

My #2's don't go all the way to the 60th ranked arm.

[ISU94]

Back to Severino, I will say he has really been dominating lately and maybe we'll see. I'm more so talking about the damn good k rate, low/mid 3 ERA (in the 3.2's/3.3's) good WHIP, etc.

 

[ArtVanDelay]

4 minutes ago, ISU94 said:

Luis Severino comes to mind. Good k rate, solid ERA/WHIP, etc. Don't see him ever becoming an ace, but if you have a guy like him heading a rotation with a good staff behind him they'll be just fine.

Severino is an ace in my book if he continues to pitch like he has this year.

[ISU94]

Just now, ArtVanDelay said:

Severino is an ace in my book if he continues to pitch like he has this year.

He's on his way, but I still don't put him in the Bum/Sale convo yet. But he's at the least a #2 in my mind. He consistently goes 7 IP+ for the most part. Gray has had I thin 4 starts this year over 6/6.1 IP. Not getting deep enough.

[Frobby]

34 minutes ago, ISU94 said:

Yeah, when I talk about an ace though there isn't 30 aces. I only view a select few pitchers as an ace. An ace is someone that I give the ball too and fully expect to go 7-8-9 innings and win you a ballgame if its on the line. Sure, bad starts happen once in a while, but still. Guys like Bum have proven to be one. Sale, etc.

My #2's don't go all the way to the 60th ranked arm.

Are an "ace" and a "no. 1" synonymous by your definition?

[ISU94]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Are an "ace" and a "no. 1" synonymous by your definition?

By my definition, yes. Probably because I really like following/digging in on prospects. Every team has a #1 technically, but most are obviously not a #1 level starter. You see these scouting reports on prospects and there is guys in the top 30-40 of top 100 lists and they're viewed as a #3 level starter if they make the transition "with potential to be more if there stuff takes another step" for example. A #3 is a very good pitcher. A #2 is imo a guy who has the stuff to be an ace but either doesn't have the control/command or his 3rd pitch just is a tick behind and he can't consistently be trusted to do what an ace does but shows flashes of it.

Just depends on what you view things as. But there isn't that many aces/#2's in baseball in my opinion.