GatewayRedbirds.com

Reyes' upside was never only that of a decent #2 at best. Huh?! The average #1 pitcher typically puts up a 121 ERA+ - easily within Reyes' upside.

A 22-year old pitcher with a mid-90's fastball, with a stellar change-up, average curve, and excellent command, who puts up a 12.35 K/9, 1.57 BB/9, 0.36 HR/9, 1.01 WHIP, and 2.91 ERA in Double-A is far, far more promising than "a decent #2 or good #3."

RC21 wrote:I think your'e reading about 10 times too much into what I said.

Fair enough. I don't think we disagree too much, anyway.

I think Reyes' hype peaked when he was in AA, and he's just not that kind of pitcher that everyone thought he'd be.

He threw a lot of 94 mph fastballs at the top of the strikezone in the minors. That same ball is something that will be, and has been, crushed by major leaguers. That's why Dunc wanted him to add to his arsenal, and he has failed to be consistent with that. And I'm not convinced he has enough to be successful that way.

I hope I'm wrong.

Socnorb11 wrote:Reyes was mostly outstanding in spring training, and solid in his first start.

I guess I don't understand all of the fuss. Maybe people were duped into thinking that he was the future ace of the staff, but his upside has typically been that of a decent #2 or good #3. I don't think that's changed.

In 2004 and 2005, Reyes was a dominant pitcher with dominant control. He threw hard and with a lot of life. Whether you looked at his minor league numbers or whether you watched him throw, he looked like a very high-end prospect.

In 2006 and 2007 Reyes has been a garden-variety workmanlike pitcher with average command, average velocity, and not a lot of life. Whether you look at the numbers or whether you watch him pitch, he looks like a decent pitcher, but nothing special. Not even a "decent two or good 3," frankly the Reyes we've seen in 2006 and 2007 is not that high in a contending rotation -- I don't think, anyway. 2's and 3's don't usually have only two pitches (one of which is a fairly straight fastball that sits 88-89 without great control or command), don't usually give up a lot of homers, and don't usually have ERAs of 5.

Personally, I *was* duped (if you want to call it that) into thinking that reyes was a potentially "staff ace" type of pitcher. Not because I bought any hype, but because in 2004 and 2005 I watched him sitting 93, going over 95 pretty much every start, and posting 5:1 strikeout:walk ratios and painting corners. He has not been that prospect since early 2006. Most elite prospects do not peak at age 22-23 unless some kind of injury is involved, and I've been saying that he looks different to me since mid-last year.

BW42 wrote:I think Reyes' hype peaked when he was in AA, and he's just not that kind of pitcher that everyone thought he'd be.

He threw a lot of 94 mph fastballs at the top of the strikezone in the minors. That same ball is something that will be, and has been, crushed by major leaguers. That's why Dunc wanted him to add to his arsenal, and he has failed to be consistent with that. And I'm not convinced he has enough to be successful that way.

I hope I'm wrong.

A high, hard, straight fastball is not a death mark when:

A) You have the type of command that Reyes displayed
B) You have a great off-speed pitch like Reyes' changeup which breaks down in the zone

Curt Schilling throws high, hard, straight but he has put together, at worst, a borderline HoF career because of stellar command and his splitter.

He allowed 37 homers in 2001 and still put up a 154 ERA+ because he only walked 39 guys and struck out 293. I'm not saying Reyes would be as good as Schilling - I don't think anybody would ever expect him to put up those monstrous K-rates - but the analogy is, in my opinion, essentially correct.

The same thing applies to Daisuke Matsuzaka right now - he throws a 94-95 MPH four-seamer up in the zone, but has command and good off-speed pitches that will allow him to be successful.

The problem, to me, isn't that Reyes is throwing high and hard - it's that he has, for whatever reason, lost the command that would allow him to be successful with that attack plan.

The Third Man wrote:Reyes' upside was never only that of a decent #2 at best. Huh?! The average #1 pitcher typically puts up a 121 ERA+ - easily within Reyes' upside.

A 22-year old pitcher with a mid-90's fastball, with a stellar change-up, average curve, and excellent command, who puts up a 12.35 K/9, 1.57 BB/9, 0.36 HR/9, 1.01 WHIP, and 2.91 ERA in Double-A is far, far more promising than "a decent #2 or good #3."

[

I tend to disagree. He only pitched 74 innings that year at AA, and he was almost 23. He put up a 3.64 ERA in his first "full" season at AAA. And, the arm worries have always been there.

Reyes has a four-pitch repertoire (4-seam fastball, changeup, slider/breaking ball, and now the 2-seamer).

Additionally, he was closer to sitting 91 the other night than 88-89.

The problem, to me, isn't that Reyes is throwing high and hard - it's that he has, for whatever reason, lost the command that would allow him to be successful with that attack plan.

. . . AND for whatever reason has lost some of the velocity that allows you to get some of those pitches by hitters, provides separation from the off-speed stuff, etc. And for whatever reason has lost some of the late-tailing action that allows medium-clock fastballs to pitch like high-clock fastballs.

Socnorb11 wrote:I tend to disagree. He only pitched 74 innings that year at AA, and he was almost 23. He put up a 3.64 ERA in his first "full" season at AAA. And, the arm worries have always been there.

"Only" 74 innings? You don't put up across-the-board dominant periphs like that by mistake. This wasn't some sample-size fluke.

And that 3.64 ERA came in a hitter's league and was, I believe, third in the league (behind a couple of Cardinal AAAA career minor leaguers whose names I don't remember). On top of which, many people (such as sksmw) believe that the jump from A to AA is much more significant than the AA-AAA one, because AA is filled with prospects, where AAA is abundant with career minor leaguers who have mastered that level but don't have what it takes to be in the bigs.

skmsw wrote:. . . AND for whatever reason has lost some of the velocity that allows you to get some of those pitches by hitters, provides separation from the off-speed stuff, etc. And for whatever reason has lost some of the late-tailing action that allows medium-clock fastballs to pitch like high-clock fastballs.

That, too, of course.

The Third Man wrote:

BW42 wrote:I think Reyes' hype peaked when he was in AA, and he's just not that kind of pitcher that everyone thought he'd be.

He threw a lot of 94 mph fastballs at the top of the strikezone in the minors. That same ball is something that will be, and has been, crushed by major leaguers. That's why Dunc wanted him to add to his arsenal, and he has failed to be consistent with that. And I'm not convinced he has enough to be successful that way.

I hope I'm wrong.

A high, hard, straight fastball is not a death mark when:

A) You have the type of command that Reyes displayed
B) You have a great off-speed pitch like Reyes' changeup which breaks down in the zone

Curt Schilling throws high, hard, straight but he has put together, at worst, a borderline HoF career because of stellar command and his splitter.

He allowed 37 homers in 2001 and still put up a 154 ERA+ because he only walked 39 guys and struck out 293. I'm not saying Reyes would be as good as Schilling - I don't think anybody would ever expect him to put up those monstrous K-rates - but the analogy is, in my opinion, essentially correct.

The same thing applies to Daisuke Matsuzaka right now - he throws a 94-95 MPH four-seamer up in the zone, but has command and good off-speed pitches that will allow him to be successful.

The problem, to me, isn't that Reyes is throwing high and hard - it's that he has, for whatever reason, lost the command that would allow him to be successful with that attack plan.

Tell Duncan, not me.

He's rooned.