Banny, we're breaking up
by NYRoyal on Aug 17, 2008 2:32 PM EDT
96 comments
Banny, sit down we need to talk. You know I've had a man-crush on you for a long time which turned into true man-love. When they told me your BABIP was unsustainable, I told them they were wrong (kinda). When they told me your stuff wasn't good enough to succeed as a major league starter, I told them they just didn't know you like I did. You're so smart, and I thought your pitching intelligence would be enough to carry you through. But it's just not working. You had a great April, but then things just started coming apart. I kept expecting you to right your ship, but it never happened. The occasional 5 ip, 2 er start would be followed by multiple games where you got shelled. And then the start in New York. To do that to me...in New York of all places (sniffs)...that's just too much.
So I'm going to have to end it, Banny. No more man-love. No more man-crush. I know, it hurts me even more than it hurts you. But we can still be friends, if you get your shit back together on the mound. I don't want you completely out of my life. You can still be the fifth starter next year.
via www.buzzle.com
3 recs |
96 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Banni, we still love you. We just need results.
I posted this in the game thread. I’ll repost it to see what you guys think. We need to find the root of the problem and diagnose it to solve the problem. Here’s my attempt.
Bannister is the victim of his success last year. He got ahead a lot using his fastball and cutter, worked off of that, and got a lot of GBs and easy FBs. At times he was hit REAL hard and he developed this complex in his head that he has to get better at that and NOT give up so many hard hit balls.
He is a very studious guy, so that being his nature, he is overworking/overanalyzing himself trying to get better. It’s a great thing but a fault at the same time. By doing this while he was having success, he become deathly afraid of the “hard” hit baseball. Even though he had success last year, he decided that he needed to make some changes this offseason in order to have success this year.
That being the case and him being an overanalyzer, he decided that he needed to limit the hard hit baseballs. This is all a good thing. However, the attempt he made to limit them hasn’t been the best thing. By having this hidden fear in his mind of the hard hit baseball, he’s been trying to nibble corners as that is the easiest way to become a successful pitcher. This a true in part. But what he is missing this year is the getting ahead early with his fastball/cutter part.
Look around the league at pitchers who are having success. The biggest key to those guys is their ability to challenge hitters early and work from inside the zone to outside the zone. Most of those guys work thirds of the plate. Outer third, outer edge, off the plate, inner third. That is a simple pattern that could be used.
This is an easy concept to teach, but when you have an inferiority complex about hard hit baseballs, it becomes a phobia. (Someone who has a medical background needs to name it) This is now Bannister’s problem. This hardhitballphobia. (Again, someone name it) When Bannister can learn to get ahead again and ignore the little feeling inside that says first pitch fastballs get hit hard, he’ll be the Bannister we had last year. Until then, we cannot give up on him. He has the ability, movement, and enough velocity to be a successful big league pitcher. Let’s get that sports psychiatrist some work. How do we break that phobia? We need to find out now before he becomes damaged for good.
Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.
by 306008 on Aug 17, 2008 3:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The root of his problem
I think it is his stuff. He doesn’t have very good stuff, which makes him hittable and hard for him to miss bats. And he doesn’t have the kind of pitches which give him a disproportionate amount of groundballs. So I think it is as simple as his pitches aren’t good enough. It isn’t the analyzing, micro-analyzing or over-analyzing. The analysis he does is what has helped him to have as much MLB success as he has had. But, in the end, especially after MLB hitters have seen him multiple times, his stuff isn’t good enough to get batters out often enough.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 17, 2008 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He Has No
Out pitch. None of his breaking pitches have much downward movement, so if he comes much above the knees with them they lingerin the zone on one plane too long. It’s hard to miss bats that way. Davies, on the other hand, snapped off a slider down and in to a LH hitter the other day that broke down so hard I thought it might be a splitter. Maybe Banny could learn a knuckleball.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Aug 17, 2008 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
finally coming around....
first teahen, now banny….at least we found this out this year rather than being tricked again and being short a starter next year when you sucked ass.
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Aug 18, 2008 2:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Having patience in evaluating players in a rebuilding year is a good thing
There’s no need to rush to conclusions.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 18, 2008 2:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but how often does a player...
who doesnt have anything the scouts like…or anything the stats like, succeed?…in reality, we’d have been better off giving davies the entire year…just b/c he does at least have major league stuff…and is much younger….im still baffled as to why they sent him down to give banny more starts…hopefully this situation is rectified when Davies 10 days are up.
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Aug 18, 2008 2:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not true that he doesn't have anything the scouts like or the stat guys like
That is a wild exaggeration which is extremely inaccurate. For the most part, the scouts and the stat guys didn’t think he was going to fall off the cliff this year. They just thought he wasn’t going to come anywhere close to replicating last year.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 18, 2008 2:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly
who doesnt have anything the scouts like…or anything the stats like
quite an overstatement
scouting wise, he doesn’t have the pure stuff, but there has always been enough of a reason to believe he could be decent of the high 4’s era variety. which, as it turns out, is right where his FIP puts him from the stat side
by ZeppelinDZ on Aug 18, 2008 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It happens a lot
Lots of guys are given up on, then revive their careers.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 18, 2008 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just look at John Travolta.
We always did feel the same, We just saw it from a different point of view, Tangled up in blue.
-Bob Dylan
by Royal Kingdom on Aug 18, 2008 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or Neal Patrick Harris
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 18, 2008 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everyone had given up on Jack Cust by the time the A's came around on him last year
I remember not long before that, John Sickels (stat guy) saying “looks like the scouts were right on this one.” No more than a year later, Cust was OPSing .900 in the bigs.
Not saying that this proves anything in general, just an example of a guy surprising everyone by reviving his career.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Aug 18, 2008 2:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
you can only get burned by this year’s version of FREE ERUBIEL DURAZO so many times before it finally pays off.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Aug 18, 2008 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Erubiel Durazo had a .868 ML OPS over 4 years
and that includes his final year where he was dealing with an injury (career ending, it would seem) where he posted a .673 OPS in 150 at bats
This space intentionally left blank.
by marbotty on Aug 19, 2008 1:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but I get your point
This space intentionally left blank.
by marbotty on Aug 19, 2008 1:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow
I love the guy, but he has really sucked since about May.
Do we really have that many options other than him though? May as well let him figure it out. Its not like I really want to see Matt Wright or Roman Colon.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 17, 2008 3:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
No matter what happens, he should be in the rotation for the remainder of this season
I don’t care if he gives up 10 runs a game (well, I do, but…); he needs to be in there to try to figure things out as best he can. For next year, the SP depth chart might (sans Soria) might be something like this:
Greinke
Meche
Hochevar
Rosa
Bannister
Davies
I think Bannister is the default #5 SP with Davies as a long reliever (a role in which I think he could genuinely excel as long as “long relief” doesn’t usually exceed 3 innings)
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 17, 2008 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You sure a little Omaha therapy
wouldn’t be good for him?
OK, maybe mid-August is a bit late for that, but surely a little ego-boost against lower-level competition can’t hurt his mind-set, and maybe it gives him leisure to figure out his pitching skills again, as opposed to against major leaguers who won’t give him a breath.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
by cmkeller on Aug 17, 2008 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The odds are against him.
I understand the love for him because he seems like a stathead but lets be real his stuff is very very hitable. 5th starter maybe top of the rotation guy unlikely. It is hard to succeed in this game with his stuff.
Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin
by kcscoliny on Aug 17, 2008 3:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Punctuation is your friend.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Aug 17, 2008 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, NYRoyal does have a soft side
To be honest, dude, it was pretty obvious things just weren’t working out. You know you always see couples together a lot right before they break up? You cited Bannister’s FIP, defending him quite a few times in recent weeks. Sometimes, I guess, it just isn’t meant to be.
I’m afraid stats such as PERA and FIP do assume a base level of stuff to work their magic. I just don’t think we can assume Bannister is even “that” good any more.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Aug 17, 2008 6:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well, I think he isn’t awful, he’s just not mancrush material anymore. I think his FIP is meaningful. I think it shows that he should be an effective 4th/5th starter going forward. Of course, he’s the kind of pitcher who really needs a pretty good defense behind him. I think FIP and PERA are meaningful, regardless of a pitcher’s stuff. And his FIP has been decent (all though it sure as hell took a hit today). So, I don’t think he’s a worthless pitcher.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 17, 2008 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude, honestly...
don’t talk rationalize yourself back into this relationship. Banny ain’t good for you.
But yes, I agree. FIP is “meaningful,” still, but I don’t think we can rely on it that much in this particular case.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Aug 17, 2008 7:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just trying to be realistic about him
One can’t rely on any single statistic. But it has to be included in the mix with his ERA, LD%, BABIP and everything else. FIP is as reliable and meaningful of a statistic for Bannister as for any other pitcher.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 17, 2008 8:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I get that
FIP isn’t to be used on its own in general. But I have to say I don’t have much confidence in Bannister’s ERA regressing towards his FIP. His stuff isn’t good enough for us to say that he’s been “unlucky” IMO.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Aug 17, 2008 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
When a pitcher’s ERA is much worse than his fielding/defense independent stats, then he has been the victim of significant bad luck and bad defense. Now if the Royals defense overall had been good this season, I would be more suspicious. However, it has been atrocious. That’s going to really hurt a pitcher like Bannister who doesn’t miss a lot of bats. This all doesn’t mean that Bannister has been good this year. He hasn’t. His FIP isn’t even good right now, but it is a lot better than his horrible ERA. The truth for 2008 lies somewhere in between.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 17, 2008 9:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Response
When a pitcher’s ERA is much worse than his fielding/defense independent stats, then he has been the victim of significant bad luck and bad defense.
To some degree, yes. With a lot of pitchers, I’d say that bad luck and defense explain the gap altogether.
I think it is his stuff. He doesn’t have very good stuff, which makes him hittable and hard for him to miss bats.
Your words. With a lot of pitchers, if their BABIP or LD% is high, you can expect regression back to the mean. I’m not sure Bannister has the stuff where we can expect that much of a regression.
Now if the Royals defense overall had been good this season, I would be more suspicious. However, it has been atrocious. That’s going to really hurt a pitcher like Bannister who doesn’t miss a lot of bats.
It’s a good point, I’m just not sure it explains the entire difference between his FIP and his ERA.
This all doesn’t mean that Bannister has been good this year. He hasn’t. His FIP isn’t even good right now, but it is a lot better than his horrible ERA. The truth for 2008 lies somewhere in between.
Most likely it does lie “somewhere in between,” but I don’t see him as much other than a No. 5 barring some unforeseen improvement.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Aug 17, 2008 9:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your words. With a lot of pitchers, if their BABIP or LD% is high, you can expect regression back to the mean. I’m not sure Bannister has the stuff where we can expect that much of a regression.
I think his stuff explains his FIP, LD%, BABIP, etc., which are not particularly good. But his ERA has a lot to do with horrible defense and bad luck. As you know, FIP is more consistent and predictive than ERA which is all over the place because a lot of it is outside of the pitcher’s control.
It’s a good point, I’m just not sure it explains the entire difference between his FIP and his ERA.
I just don’t think I agree with your argument that FIP is less meaningful if the pitcher has poor stuff. I just don’t think it works that way, nor do I think there is data to support it.
Most likely it does lie "somewhere in between," but I don’t see him as much other than a No. 5 barring some unforeseen improvement.
I see him somewhere in the #4-#5 area. This has been a bad season, but I don’t think we should completely ignore last year either (ERA of a #2 SP, FIP of a #3 SP. The BABIP was flukey/lucky, but even if you normalized it to average, his ERA would have only been up to the #3 range). I think the whole picture adds up to somewhere between a pretty good #4 and an ok #5.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 17, 2008 9:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think his stuff explains his FIP, LD%, BABIP, etc., which are not particularly good. But his ERA has a lot to do with horrible defense and bad luck. As you know, FIP is more consistent and predictive than ERA which is all over the place because a lot of it is outside of the pitcher’s control.
Okay, yes. I am aware that FIP is a more consistent stat, as I think most people get now that ERA is hardly a be-all end-all statistic. I’m saying that with Bannister’s current trends, his ERA right now might not regress the way FIP suggests it should. Yes, that has to do with defense. I think it also has to do with Bannister’s stuff really not fooling very many hitters. As you say, this is manifested in his LD% and BABIP.
I just don’t think I agree with your argument that FIP is less meaningful if the pitcher has poor stuff. I just don’t think it works that way, nor do I think there is data to support it.
Then let me explain a little more because I know I was pretty vague. There are certain pitchers who year after year seem to outperform their DIPS stats, PERA or FIP, because their pitching style can “trick” the system. For example, Curt Schilling had a some years with the Red Sox where he gave up a high number of home runs, but so many of them were solo shots because he would challenge more hitters with the bases empty. He ended up significantly under what PERA predicted for him as a result. Matsuzaka this year should have a high ERA because he walks so many hitters, but he’s pitched very well with men on base. Is that a repeatable skill? Probably not to the degree he’s shown thus far, but I’m not sure FIP completely takes into account pitching styles.
Given this, isn’t it quite within the realm of possibility that stats such as FIP and PERA could miss the boat in the other direction sometimes when we have a pitcher whose stuff doesn’t fool anyone and he has no particular repeatable situational skill (challenging hitters with no one on, nibbling when there are men on base) to mitigate that? I think it is.
I see him somewhere in the #4-#5 area. This has been a bad season, but I don’t think we should completely ignore last year either (ERA of a #2 SP, FIP of a #3 SP. The BABIP was flukey/lucky, but even if you normalized it to average, his ERA would have only been up to the #3 range). I think the whole picture adds up to somewhere between a pretty good #4 and an ok #5.
I know we’re not supposed to take only the most recent season into account – I’m all about the three year trends. But I think we might have a case here where the more recent body of work - 2008- has to be weighted heavily. Why? I think the scouting report is out on Bannister, and I’m not sure he has the stuff/command to adjust.
Could he still be a useful back of the rotation guy? With better defense, I suppose, but I don’t know if it’ll be worth us shelling out the dough when arbitration comes around.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Aug 17, 2008 9:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
FIP
One of the base assumptions of FIP is that the pitcher is of major league quality — a non-major league quality pitcher is not going to regress toward league averages, so his FIP would tend to overrate him. A pitcher may not be of major league quality because of stuff or other reasons such as lack of control or command.
That said, it might be premature to put Bannister in that category. It appears that in an attempt to compensate for an expected rise in BABIP, Bannister this year attempted to increase his strikeout rate, which he did, but at the expense of more walks, less groundballs, and more hard hit balls (higher HR and line drive rates). He might be better off taking the Paul Byrd approach and focus on preventing walks at the expense of strikeouts, which may also help his command. If he can get his walk rate back closer to 2.0 BB/9 and his line drive rate to return to average, he can be a solid back of the rotation starter (and, yes, fixing the defense would help a lot too).
by Gopherballs on Aug 18, 2008 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Interesting comment on the "Byrd approach." Rec'd
But how does Banny compare to Byrd in terms of Groundball/Flyball ratio?
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Aug 18, 2008 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Byrd v. Bannister
Byrd 2008: 21.7% LD, 36.9 GB, 41.4 FB% (8.9% IFFB% — infield fly ball rate).
Bannister 2008: 22.5% LD, 38.8 GB, 38.8 FB% (11.5% IFFB%)
The problem is Bannister does not have Byrd’s walk rate (Bannister: 3.01 BB/9 in 2008, 2.40 in 2007; Byrd: 1.56 in 2008, 1.31 in 2007).
If Bannister could resurrect his sinker (he abandoned it at the end of his minors career and credited dropping it as part of his major league success, so easier said than done) and could get near the major league average of 43-44% GB%, he could fit the Jon Garland/Joe Blanton model.
by Gopherballs on Aug 18, 2008 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the fip doesnt really work much...
when you have his type of stuff…
i could go out there with my 85 MPH fastball and unreliable secondary pitches, and my babip is going to be through the roof as well. earlier, you’d have called me unlucky…it cant always be explained by lucky/unlucky…if you throw hittable pitches, they’re going to be hit harder, more often…which means more hits.
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Aug 18, 2008 2:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you know what FIP is?
FIP doesn’t have anything to do with BABIP. FIP is “Fielding Independent Pitching” which basically uses strikeouts, walks and HR’s allowed. Do you think you could manage a decent FIP with your 85 mph fastball and unreliable secondary pitches? Of course not. His decent FIP has come from his increased K’s and the fact that his BB’s and HR’s haven’t been awful.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 18, 2008 2:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i know what FIP is....
and it doesnt take into account how balls that arent those things are put into play….bad stuff/location is going to result in more hard hit balls in play
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Aug 18, 2008 2:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's why you have to look at more than FIP and ERA
LD% relates directly to that, and it must be part of a serious statistical evaluation of a pitcher, as well as BABIP, GB% and FB%. Banny’s stats this year have been a mixed bag, with more bad than good. But it would be folly to write him off as an awful pitcher merely because of his stuff and ERA.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 18, 2008 2:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's going to cheat on you again, you know.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Aug 18, 2008 7:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This breakup could really help him.
Juggling NYRoyal and JoPo probably left him tried and spent for GameDay.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Aug 18, 2008 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"tried"="tired"
Although “tried” is pretty funny when I think about it.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Aug 18, 2008 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was worried we were going to have to have an intervention. "NYRoyal, when you defend Banny after he gives up 10 hits (including 2 homers) in 2 innings, it makes me feel worried about your sanity."
To be honest, though this is for the best. All this juggling was driving you crazy. I still don’t see how you kept them apart all this time. Enough with the “friend,” it’s time to stay home.
From now on, Dayton needs to be your one and only.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Aug 17, 2008 6:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Thank god he has pals like us
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Aug 17, 2008 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Banny's game score for today
Negative 10
That’s the second lowest in recent memory. The lowest was Greinke’s -11 in 2005
Luke Hudson got -9 for his August 2006 start. Tom Gordon got -8 for a one inning start in October 1995.
by BHWick on Aug 17, 2008 8:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Looks like
I have a new candidates for this blog entry.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 18, 2008 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe Banni
has to work between two pitchers who aren’t his type. Power pitchers? Meche, Banni, Grienke, Davies, Hochevar? Maybe him being the 5th starter but putting him in somewhere else to protect him? It seemed like the Braves used to do that with Glavine.
Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.
by 306008 on Aug 17, 2008 8:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Banny's on the rebound!
Just joshin’ with you, 306008, but, from my amateurish amateur’s perspective, it seems like Banny’s going to need a little more than different “placeament in the rotation” to reach Glavine’s level.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Aug 17, 2008 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
IMO
We have tried to compare him to all of these different type of pitchers who have “unimpressive stuff” Glavine, Maddux,etc. The one thing he lacks that none of those pitchers did or do is pitch placement they could all control their stuff. Maddux, Glavine could always place the fastball on either side of the plate even in some of Brian’s best games he loses it and in games like these he is all over the place walking hitters and giving up big homers.
Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin
by kcscoliny on Aug 17, 2008 9:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Banny research finding
he threw at least 2 fastballs for every breaking pitch. And his fastball is low 90s.
In other words.. that sucks
by BHWick on Aug 17, 2008 9:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Now, NYRoyal...
…Weren’t you ruthlessly declaring Bannister a #3 starter throughout the offseason and preseason? No quarreling; I sorta agreed with you at the time. (I thought he was a definite #4, and possible #3).
by Royals Nation on Aug 17, 2008 9:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
He's hardly the only one whose perception has changed
recently. I thought Bannister would be a lot better than this, and I’m starting to question whether he’ll be in the organization in a couple years.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Aug 17, 2008 9:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, that is what I thought in the offseason
And this whole post is about how with additional information from this season, my opinion has changed. Should one’s opinion stay the same even in the face of wildly different new information?
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 17, 2008 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
You should still be insisting that the earth is flat, too.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Aug 18, 2008 7:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
NYRoyal is definitely not a member of the flat earth society
After giving an opinion, he continues to do his homework and is open to modifying or changing the next time (or the next time after the next time) the issue comes up, rather than sticking to it blindly in perpetuity.
by Gopherballs on Aug 18, 2008 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"The church has ordained that the earth is flat"
That should tell us something.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 18, 2008 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
he still hasn't changed his mind about Huber, though
heh
This space intentionally left blank.
by marbotty on Aug 18, 2008 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for destroying my obvious joke.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Aug 18, 2008 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's sort of the thing around here lately
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Aug 18, 2008 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
mr. obvious joker
The concept of progress acts as a protective mechanism to shield us from the terrors of the future. - Collected sayings of Muad'Dib
by buddyball on Aug 18, 2008 9:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think he was just making a point about me be willing to learn...
…both from additional data from player performance, and also learning from baseball research, sabermetricians and my fellow fans. I’ve learned a lot from intelligent baseball fans on this site and others. I think we all have a lot to learn from each other. We just have to keep our minds open.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 18, 2008 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
...which, you know, was the whole point...
oh, never mind.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Aug 18, 2008 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My bad for the abrupt tonal shift
although I would hope most people got the joke and its intent.
by Gopherballs on Aug 18, 2008 6:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do think
that it would behoove the Royals to send him down, not only to get his confidence back, but he is absolutely killing the bullpen. How we got through with only 3 pitchers today was some sort of divine intervention. Thank goodness we’ve got an off day tomorrow.
My solution would be to bring up some of the deadwood in the interim for a couple of starts apiece until AAA’s season is over, then bring Banny back.
The man’s got to get his head right. I realize that he doesn’t have the best stuff, but his inability to command his pitches is troubling.
One other question, cause I’m not exactly sure where to look, but how is this year’s defense vis a vis last year’s?
I hereby resign from this post.
by Home Run Tony Cogan on Aug 17, 2008 10:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This year's defense is much worse according to basically every advanced defensive metric
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 17, 2008 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't tell Trey and Dayton, though
I’m afraid that will result in Guillen permantly at DH, Gload at First, TPJ at SS, and a DDJ, Gathright, and Maier Outfield.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Aug 18, 2008 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
banny isn't dead to me the way tpj and gload are deat to me...
but, he’s dead to me.
where tpj happens.
by blue bandwagon on Aug 17, 2008 10:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
All the sudden
Melky Cabrera for Banni doesn’t look so bad. (I thought it was a great deal in the first place…)
Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.
by 306008 on Aug 17, 2008 10:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
it still looks bad to me
One’s in AAA, one is well, pitching like a AAA player
by I need more Esteban on Aug 17, 2008 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why? Melky sucks and plays a position we already have covered
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Aug 18, 2008 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That reminds me, Burgos is in the minors coming back from his TJ surgery last year
Rookie league GCL Mets, 5.40 ERA.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 18, 2008 2:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We have like 10 relievers better then him.
Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.
by doublestix on Aug 18, 2008 2:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe David Glass can give Banni a job after yesterday that really matters.
A job at Walmart. After yesterday’s game, the Royals pitching was just as bad as the imported items Walmart sells. (David Glass is the CEO of Walmart)
Philip Fitzsimmons says Padres rule,Dodgers suck!
by Philip Fitzsimmons on Aug 18, 2008 10:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
"(David Glass is the CEO of Walmart)"
I can’t decide which of two responses I would most like to make to this, so I am going to make BOTH, and then let the readership decide which one they like better.
1) “REALLY? Is he really? Wow, none of us Royals fans were even remotely aware that David Glass had any connection at all to Wal*Mart! We thought he was just some Jewish guy with money! Thank you!!!11”
2) “Actually, no, he is not the CEO of Wal*Mart, and has not been for almost eight years. He resigned that position when he bought the Royals.”
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Aug 18, 2008 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You don't get it
Glass is the CEO of Wal-Mart which sells cheap, shoddy made-in-China goods. And so Glass is a cheap owner who puts together a cheap, crappy team. [Tired, thought-free arguments are fun!]
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 18, 2008 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Too many Strikeouts?
I know it goes against all the conventional thinking, but it seems an odd coincidence to me that Banny’s problems seemed to coincide with an increase in his strikeouts. We’ve also heard mentioned several times about tinkering with pitches to try to get velocity up.
I’m not familiar enough with all the advanced metrics to fight off the wave of contradictory stats that will inevitably be thrown at me, but is it possible that this tinkering toward making him “look better” statistically has actually hurt his performance. Yes, all the predictions said if he continued to do what was making him successful, he’d eventually get shelled. But it appears to me that he’s no longer doing what was making him successful. Instead, he’s trying to be something he’s not.
I’ve seen this countless times with athletes in many sports. A recent local basketball example is JR Giddens of KU, who was a stud his freshman year with exceptional three point shooting. The coaching staff and media spent the entire summer talking about how he couldn’t handle or penetrate. So he worked on those things and when he came back his sophomore year, he was marginally better at handling and penetrating; but he couldn’t shoot anymore.
by Big Guy on Aug 18, 2008 10:57 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Seconding "Big Guy"
Bannister has said that he is intentionally trying to increase his K rate. I think that is the correct approach for 99% of pitchers – but maybe he is the 1% that it backfires on.
Watching him, and I hope this isn’t oversimplifying, nearly all of the hits yesterday were the result of him missing his spot BADLY. I don’t recall him doing that much last year – you could see the catcher’s glove, and Bannister would be near it on nearly every pitch.
Does it stand to reason that if he is working so hard to make his pitches unhittable, the tradeoff is less pinpoint control?
I’m relating this to my bowling. I throw the ball slower than most other good bowlers, and many have suggested I speed up. Whenever I’ve tried to incorporate that into my game, my accuracy suffers. Turns out, I’m a better bowler throwing the ball 20% slower than what is recommended by experts.
Something to think about. I’ll bet Bannister will give this some thought this off-season. If so, maybe NYRoyal is correct, and he can still contribute as a #5 starter with a high 4s ERA. He may have to go back to his 07 style of pitching and stop worrying about striking everybody out.
by loyal2sdad on Aug 18, 2008 11:17 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Historical Perspective Wanted
What do we know about the 3rd year performance of other MLB pitchers who have had two seasons like Banny (assuming this one continues as is)? What successful pitcher (HOF’er or otherwise) has had one decent first season, a second horrible one, and a third successful one? – TL
by timlacy on Aug 18, 2008 12:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Dad
Runs in the family I guess.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 18, 2008 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Wild Thing" Vaughn?
You know, of “Major League” fame? He really struggled with his secondary pitches once guys caught up to his fastball.
Being serious, I think you just described a “sophomore slump”, for which there are probably tons of examples of guys going on to successful careers.
The difference here is that the expectations around him were closer to what we’re seeing in the down year. So, the question is “which is the ‘Real’ Banny”?
by Big Guy on Aug 18, 2008 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The question now is
who will NYRoyals pick up on the rebound? TPJ? or does it have to be a pitcher? Jo-el?
The concept of progress acts as a protective mechanism to shield us from the terrors of the future. - Collected sayings of Muad'Dib
by buddyball on Aug 18, 2008 3:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Carolos Rosa is my new pitching man crush
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 18, 2008 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
good choice, but may break your heart
The concept of progress acts as a protective mechanism to shield us from the terrors of the future. - Collected sayings of Muad'Dib
by buddyball on Aug 18, 2008 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Baseball players are heartbreakers
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 18, 2008 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What's wrong with...
…Greinke’s boyish looks and Meche’s manly Christianity? – TL
by timlacy on Aug 18, 2008 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like championing guys who are good, but not the best
Greinke and Meche are definitely the Royals best starting pitchers. I liked Banny because he was unorthodox and succeeded in an unconventional way. It’s easy to root for a guy like that. Now Rosa’s my guy because he has impressive stuff, control and has had an amazing season in the minors. He’s also the Royals best MLB ready pitching prospect (second overall to Cortes) and should help the Royals a lot next year. I like getting in on the ground floor.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Aug 18, 2008 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
we need more eephus
This space intentionally left blank.
by marbotty on Aug 19, 2008 1:21 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Bannister
Lets face it, Bannister will only be useful next year because we don’t have enough good starters to replace him yet. He will need to throw strikes and eat up innings. If Tomko or Bale had worked out, Bannister would have already been replaced, so I think the odds of him being a starter next year are maybe 50/50 if we find another starter FA. That being said, still need him in the orginazation next year as insurance against injuries and so forth. He just does not have major leauge stuff, and will eventually be a AAAA player or on a team that really is hurting for starting pitching.
Go Royals!
by BabyBlues on Aug 19, 2008 3:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think it's a little too early to say that
Yes he’s been awful, but he could get closer to his old self next year and be a fine number 4 starter. It’s really more of a wait and see thing.
by I need more Esteban on Aug 19, 2008 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
If you suspect infidelity (or losing badly to the Yankees) in your relationship,
CHEATERS licensed agents will be able to help you with assistance.
Exercise your right to be informed.
http://www.cheaters.com
1-800-CHEATERS
CHEATERS is a Bobby Goldstein Production.
Philip Fitzsimmons says Padres rule,Dodgers suck!
by Philip Fitzsimmons on Aug 22, 2008 9:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Banny's post-game interview
Was one of the most depressing things I’ve ever listened to.
He basically explained that he was a mediocre pitcher, he would never be anything more than an innings eater, he has come to understand what he is and he will give up his dream of being an Ace.
Damn.
Banny being Banny.
by JobDDT on Aug 22, 2008 11:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
wow that totally sucks
but it would be good if he realized he is just getting punished for not being able to locate the whole game. 1 mistake is ok but 3-4 lead to runs with his type of stuff.
Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin
by kcscoliny on Aug 23, 2008 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
at least
he realized that the “new” banni isn’t working. I bet if he goes back to last years form with a good defense and a good offense, he is a perennial double digit winner.
Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.
by 306008 on Aug 24, 2008 7:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, but it sounds like he needs to be put on suicide watch
This space intentionally left blank.
by marbotty on Aug 24, 2008 8:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
is the interview up on video somewhere?
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Aug 24, 2008 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Meant to comment on this a long time ago.
I was at the game in New York when Banny got lit up for 10 runs in the first inning, and I was shocked to find out that they were all earned. How was that grounder to Gordon not considered an error? I didn’t get to see a replay, but from left field it sure looked like he botched a routine play.
Royals, NBA, Golden Hurricane, Hawkeyes, Chiefs, and KU basketball, in that order.
by Rowyal on Aug 29, 2008 12:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Royals Review
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- How a Chicago guy learned to love Albert Pujols of St. Louis
- Bud's All-Star tie tops our non-steroid controversies of decade
- D12: Revisiting the Twins decision of Mauer over Prior (again)
- After locking up of AL MVP, it's time for Twins to lock up Mauer
- November means R&R for Raiders fan CC Sabathia and others
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
