Shutting Guthrie Down

[Frobby]

It's not a terrible comparison, not in terms of overall upside of the player, but just generally what you can extrapolate from a couple of good months when a player was at his best. Obviously nobody would argue that Guthrie is likely to be as good a player as Markakis over the long haul.

[Sports Guy]

It's not a terrible comparison, not in terms of overall upside of the player, but just generally what you can extrapolate from a couple of good months when a player was at his best. Obviously nobody would argue that Guthrie is likely to be as good a player as Markakis over the long haul.

Sure it is...Markakis has the potential to be a consistent AS caliber guy and a possible HOFer(based off the whole Drungo article and whatnot)...Guthrie, at age 28, will be lucky to have Rlo's career.

The upside of the 2 isn't even close IMO.

[Frobby]

Sure it is...Markakis has the potential to be a consistent AS caliber guy and a possible HOFer(based off the whole Drungo article and whatnot)...Guthrie, at age 28, will be lucky to have Rlo's career.

The upside of the 2 isn't even close IMO.

I think you misunderstood me. I'm not saying the upside of the two players is close. I'm saying that even though Markakis has much more upside, judging what Guthrie is capable of based on 2-3 good months is the similar to judging what Markakis is capable of based on his 3 hot months last year.

I think you are wrong about Guthrie's chances of exceeding RLo's career, though.

[Mackus]

I think you misunderstood me. I'm not saying the upside of the two players is close. I'm saying that even though Markakis has much more upside, judging what Guthrie is capable of based on 2-3 good months is the similar to judging what Markakis is capable of based on his 3 hot months last year.

Not really, Markakis' 3 hot months also had the additional support of his great minor league numbers and his very young age for the league. Guthrie has neither of these things to fall back on as evidence that the 3 hot months weren't a fluke and were the real deal.

Every little piece of evidence that you use to predict if a guy will be good or not was working in Markakis' favor. Thats not the case with Guthrie. Basically all guthrie has going for him is his talent (1st round pick) and his hot months. His minor league numbers definitely suggest his hot streak was more of an aberration than the rule.

[Sports Guy]

I think you misunderstood me. I'm not saying the upside of the two players is close. I'm saying that even though Markakis has much more upside, judging what Guthrie is capable of based on 2-3 good months is the similar to judging what Markakis is capable of based on his 3 hot months last year.

I think you are wrong about Guthrie's chances of exceeding RLo's career, though.

Frobby...What should you look at when judging a player:

1) His career MiL stats, age and half of a season where he has pitched medicore at best.

2) His first half of a season where he had flukey stats and an amazing ERA.

Which is the better group to look at?

[Sports Guy]

Not really, Markakis' 3 hot months also had the additional support of his great minor league numbers and his very young age for the league. Guthrie has neither of these things to fall back on as evidence that the 3 hot months weren't a fluke and were the real deal.

Every little piece of evidence that you use to predict if a guy will be good or not was working in Markakis' favor. Thats not the case with Guthrie. Basically all guthrie has going for him is his talent (1st round pick) and his hot months. His minor league numbers definitely suggest his hot streak was more of an aberration than the rule.

It is almost as if people ignore his MiL stats, age and flukey numbers(like his BABIP and BB rate) early on.

[Mackus]

It is almost as if people ignore his MiL stats, age and flukey numbers(like his BABIP and BB rate) early on.

I still think he can be good based on his numbers from earlier in the season. Obvioulsy not a #1 type guy with a low-2.00's ERA, but I certainly think he can be a valuable member of the rotation, especially when you factor in how low his salary is gonna be.

[Frobby]

It is almost as if people ignore his MiL stats, age and flukey numbers(like his BABIP and BB rate) early on.

I don't think most people ignore it, but they also don't ignore what they saw Guthrie do for 3 months straight, and the kind of stuff that he has.

[Sports Guy]

I don't think most people ignore it, but they also don't ignore what they saw Guthrie do for 3 months straight, and the kind of stuff that he has.

But what they saw was largely a big fluke.

And his stuff, at least in terms of his secondary pitches, isn't that great.

His fastball is a plus pitch.

[Frobby]

But what they saw was largely a big fluke.

And his stuff, at least in terms of his secondary pitches, isn't that great.

His fastball is a plus pitch.

I think our assessments of Guthrie's stuff aren't that different. However, it's my view that when Guthrie has command of his fastball down in the zone, hitters have no choice but to sit on that pitch and that makes his secondary pitches much harder to hit.

[Sports Guy]

I think our assessments of Guthrie's stuff aren't that different. However, it's my view that when Guthrie has command of his fastball down in the zone, hitters have no choice but to sit on that pitch and that makes his secondary pitches much harder to hit.

But can that command be that good all the time?

It seems to me that it never was in the minors.

[Frobby]

But can that command be that good all the time?

It seems to me that it never was in the minors.

It seems unlikely to me that his command can be as good all the time as it was in the first 3 months of this year. But that's a pretty high standard.

It's interesting to look at his BB rates in the minors, which started off low and went up as the year progressed:

2003: 2.01 at AA, 2.79 at AAA

2004: 2.90 at AA, 8.38 at AAA (19 IP)

2005: 3.23 at AAA

2006: 3.50 at AAA

Kind of an odd trend there. I'd say if he can keep his BB rate below 3.00 at the major league level (which implies a certain level of overall command beyond just his BB rate), he will be pretty successful.

[Sports Guy]

It seems unlikely to me that his command can be as good all the time as it was in the first 3 months of this year. But that's a pretty high standard.

It's interesting to look at his BB rates in the minors, which started off low and went up as the year progressed:

2003: 2.01 at AA, 2.79 at AAA

2004: 2.90 at AA, 8.38 at AAA (19 IP)

2005: 3.23 at AAA

2006: 3.50 at AAA

Kind of an odd trend there. I'd say if he can keep his BB rate below 3.00 at the major league level (which implies a certain level of overall command beyond just his BB rate), he will be pretty successful.

Why is this strange? He became worse as he moved up the ladder...That isn't strange at all.

[Frobby]

Why is this strange? He became worse as he moved up the ladder...That isn't strange at all.

Look again. He had better command at AA in 2003 than he did in 2005. His command at AAA got worse from 2003 to 2005 to 2006. The only outlier is that 8.38 BB rate in 19 innings of AAA in 2004, which is a small-sample aberration.

[Sports Guy]

BB rates:

AA: 2.6

AAA: 3.5

Remember...Old for leagues and very good pitcher leagues too.