A Gem!
in [Cincinnati Reds]
|
Prev: Catching position
Next: wow !
From: john smith on 13 May 2010 18:01 I wouldn't worry about Leake. He isn't particularly a hard thrower and doesn't put too much stress on his arm with his delivery. Leake is a clone of Arroyo and if that form holds true, we can look forward to 200 innings from him every year. You can't put a number on how many pitches some one should throw every year because everyone is different. Every pitcher should be evaluated accordingly. There are various factors that go into it. Body type, pitching delivery and stress put on your arm from the delivery. A guy like Leake doesn't strike out a lot of guys nor does he walk a whole lot of guys. I think he can handle the innings load this year...... regardless. Chapman on the other hand is a power pitcher and he just might have to be watched more closely.....
From: tom dunne on 13 May 2010 22:58 On May 13, 6:01 pm, eddyg...(a)msn.com (john smith) wrote: > I wouldn't worry about Leake. He isn't particularly a hard thrower and > doesn't put too much stress on his arm with his delivery. Leake is a > clone of Arroyo and if that form holds true, we can look forward to 200 > innings from him every year. You can't put a number on how many pitches > some one should throw every year because everyone is different. > > Every pitcher should be evaluated accordingly. There are various factors > that go into it. Body type, pitching delivery and stress put on your arm > from the delivery. A guy like Leake doesn't strike out a lot of guys nor > does he walk a whole lot of guys. I think he can handle the innings load > this year...... regardless. > > Chapman on the other hand is a power pitcher and he just might have to > be watched more closely..... I'm not sure I get the Arroyo comparison. He lives and dies with his curveball, he's toast if it's not on, and he can't do much with his change-up. Leake doesn't really have a dominant pitch, he just seems to be good at hitting his spots, but his change-up is a real plus. It's way to early to make this kind of comparison, but Danny already hit it - Leake on a good day looks like Greg Maddux. Good movement on his fastball, works fast, throws strikes. No pitch he throws will impress you, but he'll keep getting you out.
From: john smith on 14 May 2010 00:11 The reason I compare him to Arroyo is because he looks like him. But seriously, they both have nice easy deliveries that won't put alotta stress on their arms. They both pitch to both sides of the plate. They both have max out fastballs at 92. Well at least Arroyo did when he was younger. Keeping guys off balance is the key to both pitchers success. The one difference I see so far is that Leake can really paint just a little more and is able to locate his pitches inch by inch. This is really rare. Its like he can move the ball inch by inch up or down and side to side at will. The most important similarity is they both pitch quickly and if you ever played the game you know this benefits the defense immensely. You are always on your toes and it is a pleasure to play behind guys who speed up the game........ Note the Reds improved defense and the quickness of guys like Leake and Arroyo, it is no coincidence........... Two hour games are a pleasure to watch..
From: JustTom on 14 May 2010 09:13 On Thu, 13 May 2010 20:50:34 +0000, John Kasupski <w2pio(a)spamfilter.verizon.net> wrote: > >Earlier this year, the Red Sox discussed using a six-man rotation. Then they had >a sudden attack of common sense. > The sox issue is different. They believed they had 6 legit MLB starters and wanted to use them all year to rest everybody. We don't need to rest everybody. We just need to spread Leake's starts out so that he's available, healthy, and still sharp in September. >One way to look at it is that any starts you give to a sixth starter are lost to >the five other guys you have that are better than he is. Now, that's also pretty >much what Earl Weaver used to say about the five-man rotation. of course, his >Orioles had four 20-game winners in the rotation at the time so he could afford >to say that...but I don't think a six-man rotation would last in the majors >anyway - in either league. > >What happens when one of those six guys gets hurt? Do they put that guy on the >DL and call up another guy from AAA? Or will the manager just skip the sixth >guy's turn in the rotation, knowing that his other five starters are perfectly >capable of performing without the extra off day? > I'm not saying go to a 6 man rotation in the traditional sense that everyone gets extra rest and it reduces the number of starts for everyone. I'm saying treat Leake/Chapman as the 5th starter, and just rotate their starts. Maybe make them available for low pressure spot relief on their non-starting week as a substitute for throwing on the side. Or if you don't want to do that, option them for each other after a start and give them the week off. Send Fisher down for a spot. Or Cairo if you don't want to give up a pitcher's spot. And yes, Janish can pitch blowouts. He certainly isn't getting enough PT to be too tired. Cairo has more ABs for gawd's sakes. And yes, if one gets hurt, just keep using the other. I know that limits on pitches and innings are looked at as alchemy, and I'm skeptical myself when used as broad generalizations. But I'm pretty sure that an area where the evidence is pretty strong is that you need to limit the increase in the amount of innings a youngster throws from year to year and make it a gradual buildup. Even if it were to guarantee a playoff spot, I'm not willing to risk their futures and am more than willing to err on the side of caution. And the beauty of youngsters is their ability to adapt. They aren't "set in their ways" yet, so more rest in between starts shouldn't affect them like it maybe would for an aged vet. They're rookies. They'll do what they're told which is why you have to limit them. They'll throw until their arms fall off and never let on anything's bothering them, or they may not even know they're tired. That's why it's the organazation's job to put on the brakes. Anyway, it's just a notion. We have two guys only good for about 300 innings in a perfect scenario. But you can't split them up and let one do 1st half and one do 2nd, because L'ville still counts. So how do we solve it?
From: JustTom on 14 May 2010 09:23
On Thu, 13 May 2010 14:32:57 -0700 (PDT), tom dunne <dunnetg(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >I don't think there's any real chance the Reds will need to pitch >Leake in game six of the World Series, but I still would be incredibly >reluctant to risk extending him more than 180 IP. There is another aspect of this that needs consideration. Everyone who just says let the kid keep pitching, innings be damned is assuming that he stays as strong and effective the entire time. After he was drafted, I started following him at the end of his season last year. Did anyone see him in the CWS? I did, and I thought he was injured. No movement, velocity topping out 86-88, and he was getting hammered. He pitched 142 innings last year (117 in 2007,121 in 2008) and was totally spent by the end of the year with what looked like a dead arm. So, even if we were to say his arm can take it, let him pitch (I'm not), I'm not sure he could physically be effective anyway. |