Jump to content

A few things

bigbird

By bigbird
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

Eight Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

Eight

Posted
Posted
Yea, bad choice of words on my part...I think he needs to average 3.5 bb's per 9 innings or better and at that point, he may be able to be a 5th or better. Probably needs to be closer to the 3-3.25 range to be better than a #5 though.

But he also needs to couple that with a K rate over 6 and better HR rate....It looks like he can sustain the K rate...I think the others are up in the air.

Of course, in the AL, a pitcher with a 5 ERA is a borderline 4/5 starter...So i guess he could do that but that is certainly something i would want to replace as well.

Nah, not so much. A guy with a 5.00 ERA is more like an average 4 in either league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Eight Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

Eight

Posted
Posted
Yea...But neither was that good and nothing to be excited about.

Guthrie is better right now.

If they both had the same walk rate, i am not so sure Guthrie ends up with better numbers though.

And if they both had the same strikeout rate, Guthrie would easily be the better of the two. But there's little reason to think they will have the same walk rate seeing that Guthrie easily outperformed him in the high minors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sports Guy Hangout Grand Counsel

Sports Guy

Posted
Posted
And if they both had the same strikeout rate, Guthrie would easily be the better of the two. But there's little reason to think they will have the same walk rate seeing that Guthrie easily outperformed him in the high minors.

Based on what? Burres gives up fewer homers and K's more.

So unless you just look at the radar gun and ignore stats, how can you think that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eddie83 Hangout Grand Counsel

eddie83

Posted
Posted
Well, what indicated Guthrie would have good command coming into this year?

Career MiL BB/9IP:

Burres: 3.58

Guthrie: 3.18

Not a huge difference...About 10 walks over the course of 200 IP.

Guthrie's stuff is much better than Burres. If MILB stats are so important then why do teams waste money on scouts when they could just look at the numbers. Guthrie is a power pitcher, Burres stuff at the major league level is good but not great. You can't tell me there isn't a big difference in talent and plate disicpline between AAA and MLB. The fact that Burres has more walks at the MLB level than AAA based on his stuff IMO would be predictable. I think Garret Olson's walk ratio will go up at the MLB level as well. Guthrie can afford to challenge hitters a lot more than Burres can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eight Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

Eight

Posted
Posted
Based on what? Burres gives up fewer homers and K's more.

So unless you just look at the radar gun and ignore stats, how can you think that?

Wha? I said if they had the same strikeout rate Guthrie would be the better pitcher. Guthrie had a lower walk rate and a lower homer rate in the minors

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lucky Jim Hangout Grand Counsel

Lucky Jim

Posted
Posted
Guthrie's stuff is much better than Burres. If MILB stats are so important then why do teams waste money on scouts when they could just look at the numbers. Guthrie is a power pitcher, Burres stuff at the major league level is good but not great. You can't tell me there isn't a big difference in talent and plate disicpline between AAA and MLB. The fact that Burres has more walks at the MLB level than AAA based on his stuff IMO would be predictable. I think Garret Olson's walk ratio will go up at the MLB level as well. Guthrie can afford to challenge hitters a lot more than Burres can.

Bit of a logical fallacy here, no? I mean, if scouts are so important, why would teams look at stats?

The two need to be used together. That's what we're trying to do here.

Further, by your analogy, the walk rates of Mike [crap: edited to say GREG, lol] Maddux should have been far worse than those of John Smoltz. Wonder why they weren't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eight Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

Eight

Posted
Posted
Burres pitched most of his MiL career in much better hitters leagues.

.

Burres had a 0.92 HR/9 ratio in the EL and IL.

Guthrie had a 0.82 HR/9 ratio in the EL and IL.

And that's with Guthrie pitching in a much tougher environment at Akron than Burres had at Norwich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eddie83 Hangout Grand Counsel

eddie83

Posted
Posted
Bit of a logical fallacy here, no? I mean, if scouts are so important, why would teams look at stats?

The two need to be used together. That's what we're trying to do here.

Further, by your analogy, the walk rates of Mike Maddux should have been far worse than those of John Smoltz. Wonder why they weren't?

Mike Maddux was a reliever for one, not a starter. A starter can afford to pick his spots more than a reliever any day of the week.

Number two of course teams look at stats but how many people on this board had seen Guthrie or Burres pitch before they came to Baltimore. If you look at the numbers you would have no way telling the difference between the two. They are two entirely different pitchers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lucky Jim Hangout Grand Counsel

Lucky Jim

Posted
Posted
Mike Maddux was a reliever for one, not a starter. A starter can afford to pick his spots more than a reliever any day of the week.

Number two of course teams look at stats but how many people on this board had seen Guthrie or Burres pitch before they came to Baltimore. If you look at the numbers you would have no way telling the difference between the two. They are two entirely different pitchers.

Yeah. Typo corrected above. Greg, I meant.

Again, you're falling into circularity. If the numbers are the same, then they're not "entirely different" pitchers.

One metric is quantifiable. One is not. The former is generally going to be much more reliable in predicting future results than the latter. Subjective valuation is frequently biased by both context (i.e., competition) and by the viewer-bias.

That's why combining the two is important. Sure, they're entirely different pitchers to watch. But if they give you the exact same results, what does it matter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sports Guy Hangout Grand Counsel

Sports Guy

Posted
Posted
Burres had a 0.92 HR/9 ratio in the EL and IL.

Guthrie had a 0.82 HR/9 ratio in the EL and IL.

And that's with Guthrie pitching in a much tougher environment at Akron than Burres had at Norwich.

Yea, i thought Burres pitched in the PCL....Their career HR rates were basically the same in the minors.

Both have been old for their leagues as well.

Of course, one thing not shown in your numbers is the age difference for each at their levels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eddie83 Hangout Grand Counsel

eddie83

Posted
Posted
Yeah. Typo corrected above. Greg, I meant.

Again, you're falling into circularity. If the numbers are the same, then they're not "entirely different" pitchers.

One metric is quantifiable. One is not. The former is generally going to be much more reliable in predicting future results than the latter. Subjective valuation is frequently biased by both context (i.e., competition) and by the viewer-bias.

That's why combining the two is important. Sure, they're entirely different pitchers to watch. But if they give you the exact same results, what does it matter?

I agree 100% with your last comment. My point is you cannot judge based on MILB numbers and say that that will translate to the majors. How many times yesterday would Olson of gotten a hitter to swing at a pitch just off the plate at AAA that a MLB player let go.( I know we have no way of knowing) A pitcher with lesser stuff has to dance around the plate more than a power pitcher generally speaking at this level. If you look at a huge sample size than sure the numbers would work better than an opinion. Here we are dealing with different human beings, who bring different skill sets to the Major League level. Everyone is different, that is all I am saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • interloper
      Offense is down in MLB this year — but not in Baltimore

      By interloper · Posted

      A lot of teams are pretty injured and have worse depth than us. I'm not saying that's the reason, but it's a reason to believe maybe we can maintain our offense throughout the season better than other teams. 
    • Frobby
      Offense is down in MLB this year — but not in Baltimore

      By Frobby · Posted

      This is probably as close to clicking on all cylinders as most teams get.  In any given 24-game period, some guys will be up and others down.  We have 9 players with an OPS+ of 116 or higher.  The four guys you mentioned will have hotter periods, and someone else will be cold then.  That’s baseball.  But the ratio of hot players to cold ones is really good right now. 
    • Sports Guy
      2024 NFL Draft Discussion

      By Sports Guy · Posted

      I don’t see it.  Project guy.  Good upside but can’t see that in the first round. I think they go corner with the first pick unless someone unexpectedly drops. The assumption has been Oline but I think the draft is so deep and so many teams will be taking tackles that the Ravens will elect to wait until later in the draft to get Oline and WR help. Its not a deep corner draft, so getting one early makes sense. If they trade up, I wouldn’t think they trade anything higher than a 4th..could move up 3-6 spots. Trade back will likely get them a pick for next year.
    • Sports Guy
      Who Should Be Extension Priority #1?

      By Sports Guy · Posted

      Gunnar is our Kyle Tucker but at a more premium position.  
    • Moose Milligan
      Who Should Be Extension Priority #1?

      By Moose Milligan · Posted

      I said Gunnar earlier. Before this season, I could have seen a case for Adley.  And I love Adley, great hitter (I don't think he's ever going to be a big power guy, but plate approach, contact, key hits, he's great) leader, heart and soul, etc.   But it's clearly Gunnar.  I didn't expect him to be this good, this fast.  He's separating himself from the rest of the pack, not only on this team but throughout the league. Whether or not an extension can happen is a different story altogether.  But Gunnar's the guy I'd go with first.
    • DirtyBird
      Who is "selling" this year?

      By DirtyBird · Posted

      It is early, but the O's have some clear holes that will prevent a World Series run this season. And it looks like there are some teams playing there way out of contention already, barring a massive improvement in performance, making them likely sellers. At a quick glance, here are the teams that already could be looking to sell at the deadline. Some teams on the list made some offseason moves that signaled they are looking to compete. But early returns aren't looking good, and now they have an old team with pieces someone may find helpful, and without much talent in the pipeline. Tier 1 Losers Rockies White Sox Marlins Tier 2  - Not Looking Good Oakland Giants Angels Astros Cardinals Nationals I haven't really taken much look at the rosters to see what pieces could help us. So, who is selling? And Which of their pitchers have a chance to be on the market?  
    • Bahama O's Fan
      Offense is down in MLB this year — but not in Baltimore

      By Bahama O's Fan · Posted

      I still feel like our offense isn't clicking on all cylinders yet. Santander has been down, Adley hasn't found alot of extra base power, Holliday has been a black hole so far, Hays was bad and now injured, Urias hasn't hit well.

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...