What's Going on With Brian Bannister?
by Freneau on Feb 4, 2009 4:15 PM EST
in Kansas City Royals News
Email
PrintPrior to the 2008 season, there was a brief sabermetric and internet fascination with Brian Bannister, who in 2007 had enjoyed a relative measure of success despite low strikeout totals and a general scouting consensus that his stuff was average to below average. So was Bannister lucky or was he using his intellect and guile to find success? To make the story more compelling, Bannister admitted that he didn't fit the evidence shown by numerous sabermetric studies, and showed an awareness of a number of advanced stats -- I guess he lives in his mom's basement too -- and what they meant for him going forward.
Well, 2008 was a victory for those who said he was lucky in 2007. Despite a hot start, Bannister quickly fizzled, and ended up with a 5.76 ERA, up from his 3.87 mark in 2007. Compounding the matter, the league average dropped nearly half a run in '08, which meant his ERA + skyrocketed, from 121 in '07 (that is, 21% better than league average) to a 74 mark in '08. And yes, the batting average on balls in play number increased, from .266 in '07, to .316 in '08.
The odd thing is, this increase was paired with some improvement in Bannister's major weakness, his strikeout rate.
So was he actually a little bit unlucky in 2008?
In a kind of Greek way, this may make sense: lucky in 2007, unlucky in 2008, same guy somewhere in the middle. The one problem with just writing off 2008 as bad luck is that Bannister was also hit much harder in '08. So the issue isn't just that he allowed a few more singles past a diving Gload. (The Royals defense may have taken half a step back in '08, but more or less seems mostly comparable. The team's defensive eff. rank, a decent ballpark figure, were fairly similar for '07 & '08.)
| K/9 | BABIP | LD% | HR/9 | |
| 2006 | 4.50 | .254 | 15.2% | 0.95 |
| 2007 | 4.20 | .266 | 19.2% | 0.82 |
| 2008 | 5.57 | .316 | 22% | 1.43 |
What never quite got talked about enough in the emerging Bannister mythology of 2008 is that he was actually also pretty damn lucky in 2006, which then made 2007 look like something that he just knew how to do. A .254 BABIP? Johan Santana has never allowed a number that low. (stats) I guess he's dumb.
So obviously, returning to the lovely chart above, there's the strange matter of Banny's increasing LD% (imperfect, but not useless as a measure of how hard he's being hit) and the big jump in the HR total in 2008, against the fact that he set a new career high for strikeouts.
Especially odd is the fact that as Bannister's season went down the drain, he started striking out more people. I don't feel like calculating his K/9 by hand, but this increase is easy enough to see just looking at his monthly splits. For example, in 35.2 IP in April, Bannister posted a 4.04 ERA with just 21 strikeouts, basically a typical Bannister effort. In both July and August, Banny was blown up to the tune of 7.20 & 7.76 ERAs, but had relatively high strikeout totals those months (24 & 20) in more limited time on the mound. Now, there is a chance that a certain number of these increased Ks in less innings are to be expected, as Bannister was facing more men per inning, as he was getting shelled. When you zoom out however, and look at the overall season numbers, I think there's enough there to safely say he was a) striking out more guys and b) getting hit harder.
So where does Bannister go from here? The projection systems are fairly disparate, suggesting Banny remains a unique player. James sees a 4.26 ERA, Marcel 4.66 and Chone 5.01.
In 2008, when things started to go bad, did he change his approach and begin to go for a higher risk-reward scenario (more strikeouts, more homers) by putting more pitches in the heart of the zone? Did he make a modest improvement stuff-wise, only to see it mitigated by bad BABIP luck and an increased homer rate? Or did really nothing change, other than what we finally saw on the field?
66 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Devil_fingers did some good projection-based analysis on Bannister, so I'm going to steal it
Well… tRA* isn’t a big fan of Banny, but just doingn a 5-3-2 weighted average for his last three major league performances, and also to get next season’s AL RA, I have him as a .450 pitcher next season if he, or about 1.6 WAR ober 180 innings.. If this is his first year of arb, I think that’s 40% of market value. I have 1.5 WAR at $7.4, and 40% is abot $3M. Good deal for the Royals if that projection is right.
The FIP FanGraphs derives from his CHONE projection is 4.76, which makes him a .470 pitcher, even better. Over 180 innings, that makes him 2 WAR pitcher. Wow… That seems really optimistic, but I think I’m doing the Pythag win % right…
CHONE’s own expanded page for Bannister has him as 1.6 WAR, for $7.4M.
Good deal for the Royals. If Banny really is a .450 or better pitcher, that would reallly help the Royals. No, it’s not a league average starter, but it is a #4 guy who’s clearly above replacement.
The immoderate moderator
Is it possible that...
the increased strikeout rate was influenced by bad outings where batters perhaps sensed that Banny was about to be (or in the process of) getting shelled, so they became overeager to add to the shelling, thereby swinging at more pitches than they otherwise would have, and therefore striking out more often? I’m not sure how you’d be able to prove that through stats (I’ll leave that to those who are actually qualified to attempt it).
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
Or was him getting shelled
a direct impact of him throwing harder in the strikezone to increase his K rate? The ball is going to flatten out if he throws harder, and since he doesn’t have dominant stuff, it’s going to get hit harder more often. But he’ll also pick up a few more Ks here and there.
At least that’s one possibility.
Don't Stop Believing!
Good point...
sounds like we could be entering a chicken/egg situation.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
by Sweep_the_Leg on Feb 4, 2009 4:52 PM EST up reply actions
His average FB velocity didn't increase last year
2007 89.1 mph
2008 89.0 mph
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 4, 2009 4:56 PM EST up reply actions
interesting... on one of the sites I looked at
it looked like he was throwing more fastballs in ’08
so maybe the stuff is the same, the approach was a little more aggressive, with both good and bad results?
Yes, I think that's it
Every approach has its pluses and minuses. You can always alter your approach to get more K’s, but there’s a downside that comes along with that.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 4, 2009 5:24 PM EST up reply actions
I think the increased strikeout rate was because he changed his approach
I think from his first start on, he was trying to get more strikeouts. He knew that in order to maintain success as a major league pitcher, he was going to have to strikeout more batters, so he altered his approach. To strikeout batters, you have to challenge hitters in the strike zone more, as well as nibble outside the strike zone to get hitters to chase. This approach predictably gave rise to more K’s, but also more BB’s, LD’s and HR’s.
Does this mean he shouldn’t have changed his approach? Not necessarily. He did need to get more strikeouts. He couldn’t have maintained success in 2008 with his 2007 approach. He just needs to strike the right balance. Can he make the adjustments and fine tune his approach enough to make him an average #4 SP? I think he can. We’ll see.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 4, 2009 5:09 PM EST up reply actions
damnit NY, i was about 15 seconds away of making this same argument
here is what i was gonna type:
i’ve seen several opinions that this can be caused by working up in the zone
Using the whole strike zone tends to lead to more strikeouts, but also causes more balls to be hit harder, i.e. home run rate and hit rate.
The theory seems to fit the facts, but I don’t know if he actually did this. Somebody want to pull up pitch f/x charts from 07 and 08 and compare? Or even somebody who watched a lot of his games over the last 2 years want to comment if he worked up in the zone more?
I don't really have the evidence ready to support this opinion ready to go
But from what I’ve read the last couple years both directly from Banny and from the analysis Mike Fast did, Banny operated primarily with a 4-seam fastball last year. For reasons he didn’t even seem to fully understand, his 4-seamer had always been effective despite having below-average velocity and lacking extraordinary movement. It didn’t result in a lot of strikeouts, but for whatever reason, hitters had trouble squaring it up, and it rarely was hit for home runs. He’d occasionally tried to work on a 2-seam fastball in the past with poor results. I think he said he could get a little bit better velocity, and it looked somewhat more promising as an out pitch, but for whatever reasons, it got hit hard even in the minors.
My theory is that he came into last year hoping to improve his strikeout rate, and was working on developing a fastball that could strike hitters out more often than the 4-seamer that he worked with in 2007. We know he talked a lot about developing new pitches last year, but I don’t know what these pitches were. My hunch is that he was trying to refine that 2-seamer to the point where he could mix it in as a high fastball as an out pitch. I’m guessing that the pitch wasn’t quite where it needed to be last year, and while he did add some K’s with it, it also got hit hard as it had in the past.
If this is the case, we still don’t know a lot. It would be great to know whether he used the same 2007 4-seamer in 2008, and whether it was successful. My guess is that hitters were able to figure out the deception a little bit better, and the 4-seamer was less effective. If not, it could still be a great pitch in 2009, and we might see something closer to 2007 Banny in 2009. It would also be interesting to see how the new fastball developed and whether it did improve over the course of the year. If the 2007 4-seamer wasn’t getting the job done, maybe the new fastball will have developed to the point where it’s a plus pitch in 2009. If so, we might see a totally different pitcher than we saw in 2007 or 2008. I’d love to read a pitch-fx breakdown comparing Banny’s 2007 to his 2008.
Josh Kalk's work
Bannister 2007 v. Bannister 2008.
At first glance, it shows Bannister’s FB velocity jumped by 1+ MPH, but it might just be that 2008 separates the cutters from the fastballs and while 2007 lumped them together as fastballs.
If Bannister was working on a 2-seamer, it should have a speed a little below the 4-seamer.
But you CAN find quotes from him
saying that he wanted to increase his K total. Presumably, he attempted to do this and (marginally) succeeded.
I would caution at concluding that a pitcher with below avg ML velocity would conclude that increasing his FB speed would be the BEST way to increase Ks. Perhaps he concluded that he would try to throw “perfect” breaking pitches to finish off hitters instead?
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
I personally would rather he have a lousy K rate
and get more wins and have a lower ERA.
"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell
Just ran Banny's PECOTA projection through the quick-FIP formula
Like before, assuming a lgERA of 4.4, and Banny’s FIp being 4.86 (an approxiamation without having the exact league FIP and ERA), he’s a .440 pitcher, or again, about 1.7 WAR.
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
Release him!
HoRam and Duckworth need a shot
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 4, 2009 6:00 PM EST up reply actions
dang you, sarcasm font mystery man!
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 5, 2009 11:05 AM EST up reply actions
Wow
That is tremendous! He might even have some appeal with the youth now…
by cookierojas73 on Feb 4, 2009 6:27 PM EST up reply actions
Guy Hansen.
Who remembers Guy Hansen?
I expect to see a lot of hands.
In 2005, the Royals brought in pitching genius Guy Hansen. He was billed as somewhat revolutionary, and came billed as being a man with fresh ideas, and a new approach to old problems.
So, how did Guy fare for our fair Royals? He almost single handedly destroyed the career of one of the best young pitchers the Royals have ever produced: Zack Greinke. Sure, after the season, much of it was blamed on his anxiety issues and the like. But let’s be real – what was the actual variable that changed between 2004 and 2005? The pitching coach. It is also worth mentioning that Greinke was young, and had no doubt tremendous pressure from management to listen to Hansen.
I’m big on the statistical nature of baseball, etc., but I also believe if you anticipate failure, you are much more likely to fail. This season, Brian Bannister anticipated failure, changed his approach to compensate, and failed more miserably than one could possibly have imagined. There you go: Brian Bannister ‘Guy Hansen’d’ himself. You have to wonder – if he had just stayed pitching the same way he had always pitched, would 2008 have been so bad for him? I have to doubt it.
If you’re smart, you’re smart, but you also have to be smart enough to know when it isn’t broke. I realize the stats did not look kindly upon him, but changing your entire approach, when your approach IS YOUR ENTIRE METHOD OF SUCCESS, that is, you have no stuff, was probably not a great idea. Guys that throw 89mph without a lot of movement, deception, plus control, or a plus plus offspeed pitch don’t strike out a lot of batters. The end.
realistically speaking
I'm sorry, but I don't buy the "don't think about it and don't tinker" philosophy to pitching
Brian Bannister has always succeeded precisely because he was always thinking about how to make himself a better, more successful pitcher. He never got by on his physical abilities. He can’t just clear his mind, rock and fire. Thinking, analyzing and tinkering is how he got to the majors and achieved the success he has achieved.
If you’re smart, you’re smart, but you also have to be smart enough to know when it isn’t broke
If it wasn’t broken in 2007, it was at least in need of some repair. While he had some success, he also had things he needed to work on. A significant part of his success came from BABIP luck, HR/FB luck and he understood that he needed to get more K’s. Smartly, he worked on those things. The tinkering didn’t work. The answer, going forward, is not less tinkering, but more tinkering. Hopefully it will work in 2009.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 4, 2009 7:43 PM EST up reply actions
I had a huge response typed up but it got deleted when I posted "Coco Crisp".
In short, Brian Bannister is not a very good pitcher. He has below average stuff, average control. Yes, he needs to up his k-rate, up his g/b ratio, etc., but I am not sure that is even possible. Trying to strike out more guys was quite obviously not the solution.
realistically speaking
No, I don’t think he’s very good. But he could well end up being an above average #4 SP innings eater, which has some real value. I think trying to strike out more guys was a good idea. Perhaps he tried to do that too much or maybe not in the best way. He’ll undoubtedly tweak his approach in 2009 and we’ll see what happens.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 4, 2009 8:00 PM EST up reply actions
BABIP got all the press
but his HR/FB rate also regressed last year.
2006 7.1% HR/FB
2007 6.8% HR/FB
2008 11.5% HR/FB
Most starters regress to a HR/FB rate around 11% (although the K might knock that down slightly). As a flyball pitcher, home runs will always be a concern, but if he can edge his K/BB rate up to 2.0 (whether by increasing his K rate or decreasing his BB rate), there is no reason he cannot be an adequate back of the rotation starter.
A better OF defense will help him this year
Obviously that won’t help him avoid HR’s, but it will help turn some singles, doubles and triples into outs.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 4, 2009 7:46 PM EST up reply actions
Yup
Guillen should get the day off whenever Bannister or Davies starts.
Or when the opposing team decides to put a pitcher on the mound.
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 4, 2009 7:49 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Wouldn't that be smart
Instead, Hillman and Moore will agree that the Royals lineup can’t handle being without Guillen’s power any more than is absolutely necessary.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 4, 2009 7:52 PM EST up reply actions
They'll make up for it
by making sure Butler doesn’t play 1b that day
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 4, 2009 7:54 PM EST up reply actions
(and field Jacobs there instead)
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 4, 2009 7:54 PM EST up reply actions
Torriiii would scale the wall and get that average down to 9%, at least
Moore should have offered 6/140. Screw bUZR and the whole “Torii Hunter wasn’t even one of the top 3 CFs in Central” thing.
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 4, 2009 7:49 PM EST up reply actions
7%!
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 4, 2009 7:53 PM EST up reply actions
Do I hear 5%?
We keep talking about this long enough and we’ll get the Royals runs allowed down to 600. Maybe the Royals will be in contention after all.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 4, 2009 8:01 PM EST up reply actions
I will talk it down to 575
Teahen alone should save 25 at 2B and when he plays in RF instead of Hoagie.
question
D.A.R.Y.L. May threw 660 big league innings in his career
Bannister is at 385.
Will Banny pass D.A.R.Y.L.?
Yes, midway through this season
INNINGS EATER
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 4, 2009 11:11 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, I think he will end up pitching more innings than May
I agree with the projections that his most likely course for 2009 is to be a #4-quality SP innings eater. And those don’t grow on trees. You can have a long career pitching like that. But even if he’s not quite that good, I could see him staying in the majors for several more years, unless he completely fails, which I don’t expect. And then there’s the possibility that he pitches in the #3 SP range.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 4, 2009 11:17 PM EST up reply actions
if he's so damn smart
why doesn’t he teach himself to pitch left-handed? Then his FIP, ERA, trl or whatever other made up stat you throw out there won’t matter… he’ll pitch until he’s at least 35
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 4, 2009 11:19 PM EST up reply actions
Isn't Tyler Lumsden ambidextrous?
Maybe he should switch to the right and see if he has any talent. But that’s Houston’s problem.
See Pat Venditte
NY Yankees minor leaguer former Creighton switch pitcher.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
When i first heard of him a few years ago
I thought he was a bit of a stunt. But his numbers in S-A were pretty damn awesome. Yankee or not, it would be kind of cool if he makes it, and doesn’t drop an arm along the way.
The Allard Baird of incisive internet discourse.
And then once they get old enough, craft pitchers also become "wily"
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 4, 2009 11:37 PM EST up reply actions
I Saw Bannister
Nibbling, missing and coming in with way too fat pitches in 2008. In 2007 he got ahead then nibbled. The big difference seemed to be that his fat pitches came at less expected times in ‘07 and weren’t struck with as much authority as in ’08. No stats, just what I thought I saw.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
What happened with Bannister?
How about he’s not very good. Lucky, unlucky, whatever… watch him pitch, he’s just not very good. He has to commit some sort of sorcery to out think the hitters all year long.
by Royal from Queens on Feb 5, 2009 12:54 AM EST reply actions
Well, he is a Wiccan
So I like his odds.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 5, 2009 1:48 AM EST up reply actions
followed by a 2 year, $12M contract for Doug Mirabelli
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 5, 2009 11:06 AM EST up reply actions
he can change into his uniform in the cab
between KCI and the K.
"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell
Bannister's Long-Term Viability
I really can’t get into advanced stats but I do have one prediction. I think Bannister will be traded before the 2010 season. He is now moving into arbitration years and with the money the Royals have committed to Greinke and Meche, it will probably be best for them to trade him so they can bring up younger, more talented, and cheaper pitchers to try and take his spot.
Hmmmm, I don't know
There might be some truth to that, but I don’t know that the Royals will be in a hurry to make room for anyone in 2010. Cortes might be ready by then, but that’s still up in the air. So far he’s never pitched above AA and his iffy third pitch means he’s not major league ready yet. Will he develop enough in 2009 to make him ready for the majors in 2010? Maybe, but probably not. He might pitch in the majors at some point in 2010 but I really doubt he’ll be ready to be counted on for a full season of starting pitching in the majors at that point. Blake Wood doesn’t seem any closer to being major league ready than Cortes. The Royals appear to have decided that Carlos Rosa is a reliever only.
And, if the Royals are trying to build a contender, a contending team needs at least six competent starting pitchers. If Bannister proves in 2009 that he is worthy of being a major league starter, then there will be no reason for the Royals to trade him, no matter what Cortes does. Even if Cortes dominates the PCL in 2009 and plays his way into the Royals rotation to start the 2010 season, the Royals should use the odd man out (Davies or Bannister) in a long reliever, 6th starter role. Usually SP’s outside of the top 5 end up making a lot of starts (the average was a little over 30 in 2007). So a contending team really needs that depth.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 5, 2009 8:26 PM EST up reply actions
I see your point . . .
. . . but how much money can the Royals commit to there rotation? 2010 we have $11 million w/ Meche and $8 million with Greinke right? (or in that range). As a second year of arbitration, how much can Bannister expect to be paid? $4 million, more or less. Kyle Davis will also be into another year of arbitration. I might be wrong, but it might be the Royals having to make a decision between those two guys. Of course, this is making the huge assumption that they both perform well enough to stay on a major league roster and that their performances are somewhat equal. If that is the case, doesn’t Davies have the “better stuff”?
I guess I see the Royals as an organization that has to operate within a budget. They probably would be willing to spend all the salary on the rotation if you can do it with 5 Meche/Greinke types. but how much can they spend on a 4/5 type starter if you don’t have an inexpensive top of the rotation?
In the end it looks like I have more questions than answers. I just think that if Banny has success next season the Royals will try and move him.
Besides, they’ll be dumping salary to make sure they have enough money to extend Bloomquist. (5/55 anyone?)
how much money can the Royals commit to there rotation?
I’m pretty sure they can afford another couple of million for Bannister (again, if he has a decent 2009 season).
I might be wrong, but it might be the Royals having to make a decision between those two guys.
If both Davies and Bannister prove that they are worthy of keeping around (which is still up in the air), then the Royals shouldn’t be choosing between them; they should make payroll room elsewhere, and there will be other opportunities. For instance, the Royals are paying two catchers nearly $3M each. Dump one of them before the 2010 season and that pays for most of the arbitration raises of both Bannister and Davies.
I guess I see the Royals as an organization that has to operate within a budget. They probably would be willing to spend all the salary on the rotation if you can do it with 5 Meche/Greinke types. but how much can they spend on a 4/5 type starter if you don’t have an inexpensive top of the rotation?
With a $75M+ budget, the Royals can afford a $3.75M #4 SP (Bannister) and a $3.5M #5 SP (Davies) [these are theoretical 2010 arbitration awards based on decent 2009 seasons]. Yes, the Royals have to operate within a budget. But that means keeping valuable players and paying them less than market rate (like the above numbers for Bannister and Davies) and casting off low value players who are getting paid more than their market value. After the 2009 season, the contracts of guys like Gload, Olivo, HoRam and others are coming off the books. I think the Royals can and should keep Bannister and Davies if they prove themselves worthy in 2009. It’s all about spending priorities.
I just think that if Banny has success next season the Royals will try and move him.
If we’re talking about what the Royals would likely do, I don’t think this is true. Moore values pitching very highly. He’s also in a hurry to contend. If Bannister proves himself to be a decent major league starter, there’s no way Moore moves him, opening up a spot in the rotation which would have to be filled by a prospect who may or may not be ready to perform well in the majors. That’s what teams fairly early in a rebuilding process do. The Royals aren’t at that stage, and Dayton Moore has been acting like he’s either at or near a win-now philosophy.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 5, 2009 9:13 PM EST up reply actions
Currency
If we’re talking about what the Royals would likely do, I don’t think this is true. Moore values pitching very highly. He’s also in a hurry to contend. If Bannister proves himself to be a decent major league starter, there’s no way Moore moves him, opening up a spot in the rotation which would have to be filled by a prospect who may or may not be ready to perform well in the majors. That’s what teams fairly early in a rebuilding process do. The Royals aren’t at that stage, and Dayton Moore has been acting like he’s either at or near a win-now philosophy.
NYR, on the other hand, DM also knows and says that pitching is the currency of baseball. If we have great strength in the rotation and Bannister occupying #5 but we still have too many hitting deficiencies in the positions we won’t likely be a legit contender anyway, right? So, he might choose to spend Bannister to try to get a bat or something?
Feb 13!!
It's a possibility
I just don’t think that Bannister (even as an average #4 SP innings eater making $3.5-4M) would get the Royals a lot in trade, but trading him would create a hole in the rotation that Cortes might not yet be ready to fill. It’s a lot easier to trade middle relievers and then replace them with competent pitchers than to do the same for starters. And if the Royals improve even to 79 wins, I don’t think Moore is going to behave as if the team isn’t close to contention. His moves this offseason were more “win-now” than rebuilding and they were a 75-win team.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 5, 2009 10:25 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe he thinks
he’s in the NL Central
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 5, 2009 10:27 PM EST up reply actions
Just a quick simplistic opinion on Brian
I think he made a mistake concentrating on strikeouts last year. He created more movement with his fastball but had to sacrifice control. Even with more movement his fastball is below average. He needs to realize what he is and that is an average inning eating starting pitcher. There are many successful pitchers with average stuff that get by with above average location and control. Brian could be a Paul Byrd type if he didn’t concentrate on the strikeout and movement so much. The longer he pitches with effective control the wider his strikezone should become allowing him to toss in the movement later in his career. With the addition of Coco Crisp to the outfield and a good home park to pitch in Brian should be a 200+ IP 4.5-5.00 ERA guy for a few years. All the data will point you to those being above average stats for a #5.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Brian should be a 200+ IP 4.5-5.00 ERA guy for a few years. All the data will point you to those being above average stats for a #5.
In fact, that kind of ERA is comfortably within the #4 SP level (and nudging into the #3 level). And that is well above average innings eating for a #4 as well. In short, if he can pitch that many innings with that kind of ERA, he’d be contributing more than an average #4 SP.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 6, 2009 4:07 PM EST up reply actions
Do you think he could be that type of guy?
His intelligence mixed with his stuff just reminds me of a longtime grinder like Byrd.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Yeah, I think he can be that kind of guy
In addition to my gut (which is entirely unreliable), the projection systems basically have Bannister pitching at the level of a #4 SP. And even in a down year like 2008, he could eat over 180 innings. So I think his stuff (probably below average) mixed with his control (above average) and his intelligence does sound like a #4 innings eating guy who could keep grinding it out and pitch as an effective starter into his late 30’s.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 6, 2009 4:31 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Royals Review
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Baltimore’s tradition of fans shouting ‘O!’ during national anthem sparks interleague feud
- Chris Perez follows rant against Cleveland fans with even better rant against Cleveland fans
- Pitcher Clayton Richard gets key pinch single in 13th after coming in 0 for 16
- Livan Hernandez welcomes ball boy to the bigs with shower of sunflower seeds (VIDEO)
- Man beaten by four others in Dodger Stadium parking lot
