665458584C7E5D54595C5354350 wrote: i do hope that the silliness of this "hes not ready" argument is not being lost on people. his ERA is 1.70. he is giving up less than 6 hits per 9 and almost striking out 11. his walk rate is 4.9 per 9. if his walk rate were 3.6 per 9 and he was giving up 7.5 hits per 9 he would be allowing EXACTLY the same number of baserunners and everyone would be fine with it. he would be ready lol.
its not that hes not ready, its more like hes not perfect. as Kuhl and now brault and his 1.40+ whip get called up as "ready "
Well don't you think that might mean they're seeing something we're not? They're not holding him down for fun. And it's not like they're being shy about calling up other guys. There are all sorts of convoluted theories one could come up with as to why they're keeping him down specifically, but the simplest one seems to be that they actually believe what they're saying.
Guess not.
Glasnow and Bell...
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3642
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Glasnow and Bell...
5F52536472727E77707F110 wrote: i do hope that the silliness of this "hes not ready" argument is not being lost on people. his ERA is 1.70. he is giving up less than 6 hits per 9 and almost striking out 11. his walk rate is 4.9 per 9. if his walk rate were 3.6 per 9 and he was giving up 7.5 hits per 9 he would be allowing EXACTLY the same number of baserunners and everyone would be fine with it. he would be ready lol.
its not that hes not ready, its more like hes not perfect. as Kuhl and now brault and his 1.40+ whip get called up as "ready "
Well don't you think that might mean they're seeing something we're not? They're not holding him down for fun. And it's not like they're being shy about calling up other guys. There are all sorts of convoluted theories one could come up with as to why they're keeping him down specifically, but the simplest one seems to be that they actually believe what they're saying.
Guess not.
What do you mean? They first called up everyone but.
its not that hes not ready, its more like hes not perfect. as Kuhl and now brault and his 1.40+ whip get called up as "ready "
Well don't you think that might mean they're seeing something we're not? They're not holding him down for fun. And it's not like they're being shy about calling up other guys. There are all sorts of convoluted theories one could come up with as to why they're keeping him down specifically, but the simplest one seems to be that they actually believe what they're saying.
Guess not.
What do you mean? They first called up everyone but.
Glasnow and Bell...
48454473656569606768060 wrote: i do hope that the silliness of this "hes not ready" argument is not being lost on people. his ERA is 1.70. he is giving up less than 6 hits per 9 and almost striking out 11. his walk rate is 4.9 per 9. if his walk rate were 3.6 per 9 and he was giving up 7.5 hits per 9 he would be allowing EXACTLY the same number of baserunners and everyone would be fine with it. he would be ready lol.
its not that hes not ready, its more like hes not perfect. as Kuhl and now brault and his 1.40+ whip get called up as "ready "
Well don't you think that might mean they're seeing something we're not? They're not holding him down for fun. And it's not like they're being shy about calling up other guys. There are all sorts of convoluted theories one could come up with as to why they're keeping him down specifically, but the simplest one seems to be that they actually believe what they're saying.
Guess not.
Right. The board roles just flipped on this one. The "they don't think he's ready and the FO knows better than anyone" crowd from 2 days ago, now I guess is going against the FO decision that he's ready? Obviously, 48 hours ago the FO thought he wasn't ready. He had a steak and some potatoes for dinner last night, and now he's ready.
Whether he gives up 10 runs or 1 tomorrow vs STL, this dude is exciting and he's ready to roll! ML debut of the best starting pitching prospect in baseball. Lets get it on
its not that hes not ready, its more like hes not perfect. as Kuhl and now brault and his 1.40+ whip get called up as "ready "
Well don't you think that might mean they're seeing something we're not? They're not holding him down for fun. And it's not like they're being shy about calling up other guys. There are all sorts of convoluted theories one could come up with as to why they're keeping him down specifically, but the simplest one seems to be that they actually believe what they're saying.
Guess not.
Right. The board roles just flipped on this one. The "they don't think he's ready and the FO knows better than anyone" crowd from 2 days ago, now I guess is going against the FO decision that he's ready? Obviously, 48 hours ago the FO thought he wasn't ready. He had a steak and some potatoes for dinner last night, and now he's ready.
Whether he gives up 10 runs or 1 tomorrow vs STL, this dude is exciting and he's ready to roll! ML debut of the best starting pitching prospect in baseball. Lets get it on
-
historyprof
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 2:56 pm
Glasnow and Bell...
He "wasn't ready" because he pitched Saturday. Not ready Tuesday, but ready Thursday. Not all that difficult.
-
Bobster21
Glasnow and Bell...
383923243F222920223F36500 wrote: He "wasn't ready" because he pitched Saturday. Not ready Tuesday, but ready Thursday. Not all that difficult.
Yeah, it's not that difficult. When they needed a starter they recalled Taillon. When they needed another starter they recalled Kuhl. Now that they need yet another starter, they recall Glasnow. Obviously, he wasn't their first or even second choice. Had they known last Saturday that Taillon would skip his next start, they could have scratched Glasnow's start that day and used him Tuesday. But once he had pitched Saturday, they had to go to the next option, which was Brault. Now Glasnow is on schedule for the weekend. It's not a ringing endorsement for Glasnow. But when they had to go 3 deep into the Indy rotation, he got the call. Hopefully, he does well and is here to stay.
Yeah, it's not that difficult. When they needed a starter they recalled Taillon. When they needed another starter they recalled Kuhl. Now that they need yet another starter, they recall Glasnow. Obviously, he wasn't their first or even second choice. Had they known last Saturday that Taillon would skip his next start, they could have scratched Glasnow's start that day and used him Tuesday. But once he had pitched Saturday, they had to go to the next option, which was Brault. Now Glasnow is on schedule for the weekend. It's not a ringing endorsement for Glasnow. But when they had to go 3 deep into the Indy rotation, he got the call. Hopefully, he does well and is here to stay.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3642
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Glasnow and Bell...
6D646C7D73090 wrote:
Right. The board roles just flipped on this one. The "they don't think he's ready and the FO knows better than anyone" crowd from 2 days ago, now I guess is going against the FO decision that he's ready? Obviously, 48 hours ago the FO thought he wasn't ready. He had a steak and some potatoes for dinner last night, and now he's ready.
How do you think? He could be both not quite ready and still the second or third best option, right? You can believe both of these things.
Right. The board roles just flipped on this one. The "they don't think he's ready and the FO knows better than anyone" crowd from 2 days ago, now I guess is going against the FO decision that he's ready? Obviously, 48 hours ago the FO thought he wasn't ready. He had a steak and some potatoes for dinner last night, and now he's ready.
How do you think? He could be both not quite ready and still the second or third best option, right? You can believe both of these things.
-
NCBuccofan
- Posts: 150
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 2:26 pm
Glasnow and Bell...
2E3235373B293F2C3B34295A0 wrote: Definitely think if they don't call him up pretty soon, they will hold him back until Sept and then until June 2017 to avoid Super Two. It won't be long until the "it's not worth losing the extra year of control over the 2 months of him being up" crowd comes out to play.
I'm part of that crowd, but I think the situation has changed. Our lineup is too good and the pitching has been too bad to wait long enough to avoid super-2, and Glasnow has had all this extra time now to work on his control. As soon as he shows he has the control he needs, we need to bring him up. Sometime this year would be ideal, to get him acclimated and ready to start next season.
However, if his control issues continue, I think we have 2 options : keep him down and continue to work with him, or bring him up and let the big club's staff work with him. The control issues aren't something we can handwave away, so the only thing that remains is how to deal with them. I wouldn't bring him up to 'take his lumps' until I thought he has all the tools he needed to succeed - then you can bring him up and let him work things out. I wouldn't bring him up to learn CONTROL unless they thought Searage and company can give him a different perspective that will click for him.
We need pitching. I hope Glasnow's last start with one walk is the beginning of good things, and we can bring him up soon, so he'll be a little seasoned for the beginning of next season.
How exactly is he going to show the control he needs this year? he would have to put together a string of starts where he only walks 2 batters or less. By the time he does that, it will be August.
The control issues are something you can hand wave away actually. There is a long history of pitchers that have had some success with high walk totals. Glasnow is not a pitch to contact pitcher with high walk totals. Guys are barely making any contact with his pitches, let alone solid contact.
Actually, that list is very short. According to BR there are a total of 5 pitchers from 1901 to 2016 with careers of a minimum of 100 career decisions, 90% of games as a starter, with a career ERA at or below 4.00, with a career BB/9 greater than 4.
But that's using 100 career decisions with an ERA under 4.00 to define success. You'll need a BR subscription to find the names, though it's obviously headed by Nolan Ryan.
Maybe the Pirates know what they are doing. Maybe they see the tremendous upside, but realize the risk, especially looking at the history of the metrics.
Not really sure why you went with career numbers or 100+ starts. Glasnow will not finish his career this year, or start 100 games this year. At best that would be 3 years from now.
Anyways, Drew Pomeranz and Danny Salazar are managing this year. Liriano did a few years ago. Locke made the All star team when he had over 4 walks per 9. Gio Gonzalez has a few seasons, so has Edinson Volquez.
And of course the Pirates probably wanted him throwing the change more, not worrying about the walks. If no one is hitting you, it does not matter.
I'm part of that crowd, but I think the situation has changed. Our lineup is too good and the pitching has been too bad to wait long enough to avoid super-2, and Glasnow has had all this extra time now to work on his control. As soon as he shows he has the control he needs, we need to bring him up. Sometime this year would be ideal, to get him acclimated and ready to start next season.
However, if his control issues continue, I think we have 2 options : keep him down and continue to work with him, or bring him up and let the big club's staff work with him. The control issues aren't something we can handwave away, so the only thing that remains is how to deal with them. I wouldn't bring him up to 'take his lumps' until I thought he has all the tools he needed to succeed - then you can bring him up and let him work things out. I wouldn't bring him up to learn CONTROL unless they thought Searage and company can give him a different perspective that will click for him.
We need pitching. I hope Glasnow's last start with one walk is the beginning of good things, and we can bring him up soon, so he'll be a little seasoned for the beginning of next season.
How exactly is he going to show the control he needs this year? he would have to put together a string of starts where he only walks 2 batters or less. By the time he does that, it will be August.
The control issues are something you can hand wave away actually. There is a long history of pitchers that have had some success with high walk totals. Glasnow is not a pitch to contact pitcher with high walk totals. Guys are barely making any contact with his pitches, let alone solid contact.
Actually, that list is very short. According to BR there are a total of 5 pitchers from 1901 to 2016 with careers of a minimum of 100 career decisions, 90% of games as a starter, with a career ERA at or below 4.00, with a career BB/9 greater than 4.
But that's using 100 career decisions with an ERA under 4.00 to define success. You'll need a BR subscription to find the names, though it's obviously headed by Nolan Ryan.
Maybe the Pirates know what they are doing. Maybe they see the tremendous upside, but realize the risk, especially looking at the history of the metrics.
Not really sure why you went with career numbers or 100+ starts. Glasnow will not finish his career this year, or start 100 games this year. At best that would be 3 years from now.
Anyways, Drew Pomeranz and Danny Salazar are managing this year. Liriano did a few years ago. Locke made the All star team when he had over 4 walks per 9. Gio Gonzalez has a few seasons, so has Edinson Volquez.
And of course the Pirates probably wanted him throwing the change more, not worrying about the walks. If no one is hitting you, it does not matter.
-
NCBuccofan
- Posts: 150
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 2:26 pm
Glasnow and Bell...
4D6B6A7D6B7B080 wrote: Randy Johnson had career walk rate of 3.3 per nine innings. But he didn't get below 4.8 until he was 29 years old. was 6.8 and 6.2 when he was 27 and 28.
who knows if his career would have been better or worse if Seattle waited until he had better control?
He would not have been in Seattle. Spending a few more months in AAA is not going to magically knock Glasnow's walks per 9 down to 2 or whatever number people seem to think it should be.
who knows if his career would have been better or worse if Seattle waited until he had better control?
He would not have been in Seattle. Spending a few more months in AAA is not going to magically knock Glasnow's walks per 9 down to 2 or whatever number people seem to think it should be.
Glasnow and Bell...
111C1D2A3C3C30393E315F0 wrote: Randy Johnson had career walk rate of 3.3 per nine innings. But he didn't get below 4.8 until he was 29 years old. was 6.8 and 6.2 when he was 27 and 28.
who knows if his career would have been better or worse if Seattle waited until he had better control?
He would not have been in Seattle. Spending a few more months in AAA is not going to magically knock Glasnow's walks per 9 down to 2 or whatever number people seem to think it should be.
yeah, that was my point, Johnson was a valuable major league pitcher even with high walk rates. When he reduced those rates he became great. Most likely it would have been senseless to keep him in the minors longer to reduce walks.
who knows if his career would have been better or worse if Seattle waited until he had better control?
He would not have been in Seattle. Spending a few more months in AAA is not going to magically knock Glasnow's walks per 9 down to 2 or whatever number people seem to think it should be.
yeah, that was my point, Johnson was a valuable major league pitcher even with high walk rates. When he reduced those rates he became great. Most likely it would have been senseless to keep him in the minors longer to reduce walks.
Glasnow and Bell...
My point is that it is pretty difficult to find a pitcher that was successful in the major leagues after having a minor league track record with a 4.0 or higher walk rate. I've done a good bit of research on this. Even the most erratic major leaguers almost always had a walk rate lower than 4 per 9'IP in the minors.