Legit or Mirage?

Search

Back from the Ban
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Messages
3,606
Tokens
I want to help the forum. This thread will be used exclusively to identify pitchers who are;

1. Performing well and have poor traditional numbers (unjustified)
These pitchers are good fade material and will be overvalued.

2. Performing well and have good traditional numbers (justified)
These can be good to back, since people often think they are a fluke.

3. Performing poorly and have good traditional numbers (unjustified)
These are excellent candidates to back.

4. Performing poorly and have poor traditional numbers (justified.)
When this type is a veteran with a proven track record, an overblown reputation, and on a popular team, they are a great fade.

So, post your pitcher and we will try to determine what type they fit into. We will then track them throughout the year to see how they progress.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
2,942
Tokens
Another guy in the #1 slot and your favorite.... Fausto Carmona.

How about Zack Greinke? He is a personal friend of mine. Tell me about his numbers and whether or not they justify his early success. I imagine they do. Obviously not to the point of a .6 era but I imagine his stats show him to still be very solid.
 

Back from the Ban
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Messages
3,606
Tokens
#1 - Steve Traschel

Traschel is most definitely a 3. He has performed like shit, yet his ERA (Traditional metric) is 3.00. Further examination shows that he has twice as many walks as K's. If he gets another lucky outing, I will AUTOFade him in the proceeding start.

Carmona is also a 3, since he has a 2.2 ERA, and has pitched like complete shit. He has more walks than IP, and isn't striking anybody out. Will continue to fade him.

Grienke is a 2. Obviously, his .6 era isn't real. However, he is pitching very well, and is allowing a minuscule % of line drives. People think he is a fluke and a head case, neither of which I believe to be true.


Sabathia is a 4. His ERA of 11 is overblown, BUT, his K/BB ratio is bad (1.5/1), he's allowing 30% of balls to go for hits, and he isn't getting ground balls. Putting men on base and not compensating for it with twin killings or K's is a recipe for disaster. Fade.

SO, RECAP

1's. (Underrated, ERA falsely high) BACK
None.

2's. (Good ERA and supported by performance indicators) BACK
Grienke

3. (Good ERA, terrible pitching, ERA lifting off in 3...2...1...) FADE
Traschel
Carmona

4. (Bad ERA supported by garbage pitching so far) FADE
Sabathia

I think we should track these bets to see how they do. Let's add more pitchers if possible.
 

antigravity
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Messages
2,640
Tokens
I misunderstood the criteria. I thought it was bad ERA but had good numbers in the past. Which would give you the idea that they will rebound.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
2,942
Tokens
I think you got your #1s and #3s mixed up. I follow you but it might be confusing for someone just reading the first post and your "list" post.

In the original post, the 1s were good ERA but good fade material. The 3s were the candidates to back in the future because they are pitching better than their ERA would indicate.
 

antigravity
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Messages
2,640
Tokens
#3 Bedard Really struggling with his control lately but has been able to keep the runs down. With the news about the hip injury makes me wonder if the injury or poor pitching is to blame.
 

Back from the Ban
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Messages
3,606
Tokens
I misunderstood the criteria. I thought it was bad ERA but had good numbers in the past. Which would give you the idea that they will rebound.

Sabathia works as a 4 for a few reasons. First, his tremendous workload the last 2 years. Second, he has a great rep. Third, he has pitched horribly. I'm saying we fade him until he puts together a 7 ip, 6 k, 2 bb, 45% groundball type start or two in a row.

Gator,

you're right. I mixed up my own descriptions in the opening post. I'll get a mod to change it.
 

Back from the Ban
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Messages
3,606
Tokens
#3 Bedard Really struggling with his control lately but has been able to keep the runs down. With the news about the hip injury makes me wonder if the injury or poor pitching is to blame.

He had had hip trouble in the past. They messed with his motion in Baltimore in order to relieve pressure on the hip. They let it go however, since his stuff wasn't as good. he does have a funky motion, lots of lower body torque.

Bedard at this point is in Category 4. We will fade until he proves he is healthy and is again throwing strikes. He has a 50% spike in walks so far.
 

antigravity
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Messages
2,640
Tokens
He had had hip trouble in the past. They messed with his motion in Baltimore in order to relieve pressure on the hip. They let it go however, since his stuff wasn't as good. he does have a funky motion, lots of lower body torque.

Bedard at this point is in Category 4. We will fade until he proves he is healthy and is again throwing strikes. He has a 50% spike in walks so far.

what exactly is a good ERA? im getting confused.
 

New member
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
1,089
Tokens
Where would you categorize Bonderman?

I would think he clearly projects into the '4' category in that he has an "overblown reputation" and performs on a "popular team."
 

Back from the Ban
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Messages
3,606
Tokens
what exactly is a good ERA? im getting confused.

Shit, I am sorry. Numbers all jumbled up. Bedard is in the 3 Category (Good ERA, bad pitching).

My apologies. I am really not this sloppy normally, bad typing tonight.
 

antigravity
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Messages
2,640
Tokens
That was the main reason I went big on angels today. but bedards bitchass got scratched
 

Back from the Ban
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Messages
3,606
Tokens
Where would you categorize Bonderman?

I would think he clearly projects into the '4' category in that he has an "overblown reputation" and performs on a "popular team."

That is true, and he has been pitching very bad. However, his ERA is under 3. I would put him in the 3 or 4 category, but in any case would probably fade him.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
2,942
Tokens
I got a guy that I have no clue about. I have seen him pitch a couple innings and he looks to have pretty good stuff.

Wandy Rodriguez, Astros, SP
 

Back from the Ban
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Messages
3,606
Tokens
I got a guy that I have no clue about. I have seen him pitch a couple innings and he looks to have pretty good stuff.

Wandy Rodriguez, Astros, SP

There were rumors that he tips his pitches. He always got hit pretty hard (hits wise, not control stuff), and it was odd since everyone agreed that Ausmus called a great game. So far this year, his K's are up by 2 per game, and his walks have been cut by 2/3rd's. If he keeps this up, we have to consider him in the very good level, despite his high fly-ball tendencies.

Wait and See, but there has been steady improvement each year. 5.03, to 4.77, to 4.17, to 3.26, is definitely a pattern is steady development.

I am going to play him every time until he proves otherwise. As of now, he is a 2. Good ERA numbers and good performance numbers.
 

Back from the Ban
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Messages
3,606
Tokens
RECAP:

1's. (Underrated, ERA falsely inflated) BACK
None.

2's. (Good ERA and supported by performance indicators) BACK
Grienke
Wandy Ridriguez

3. (Good ERA, terrible pitching, ERA lifting off in 3...2...1...) FADE
Traschel
Carmona
Bedard

4. (Bad ERA supported by garbage pitching so far) FADE
Sabathia
Bonderman
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,106,898
Messages
13,439,313
Members
99,339
Latest member
billcunninghamhomeloans
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com