The Anthony Reyes thread

TGantz · Post by **TGantz** » April 11 07, 10:40 pm

-He has pitched in one start in the regular season.

-The only way we can see if he can start going into the six and seventh inning is when he gets a few more starts.

-From what I have seen, he has been throwing his fastball a few mph faster, has life on his change-up, but is struggling with command. I am encouraged by the velocity, I have always loved his fastball/change-up combo, and I think the poor command is coming from the fact that it's really early in the season. I bet after a start or two, his command will be a lot better. Maybe he takes awhile to get into the groove of things...

I guess what I'm trying to say is, let the guy pitch more than one start before we start considering him a mediocre #3 or give him the title of a potential #1.

Post by **Michael** » April 11 07, 10:47 pm

TimmyG wrote:I guess what I'm trying to say is, let the guy pitch more than one start before we start considering him a mediocre #3 or give him the title of a potential #1.

To be fair he has a much larger body of work than the 1 start he's had this season.

TGantz · Post by **TGantz** » April 11 07, 10:58 pm

Michael wrote:
TimmyG wrote:I guess what I'm trying to say is, let the guy pitch more than one start before we start considering him a mediocre #3 or give him the title of a potential #1.
To be fair he has a much larger body of work than the 1 start he's had this season.

I understand, and I'm not saying that it's not fun to speculate. But I'm saying, I don't think anyone is right until he gets many more regular season starts. Last year he was a rookie trying to change everything he knew before, because Duncan wanted to help him out. That's fine, and I understand what Duncan was doing.

But what matters to me is what he is going to do for us, right now, when we need him most. I don't know if he'll be a #1 in a few years or if he'll be a #5. But right now, we need him to be on his game. I think this is a big test as to what he can do, now that he has a season under his belt, and his arm is stronger. I won't be pessimistic about him until he gives me a reason to.

skmsw · Post by **skmsw** » April 12 07, 7:55 am

Thank you for tolerating my "different perception" of Reyes. Really, that means a lot to me.....

Glad to hear it. Your ability to read numbers on a scoreboard means a lot to me, too. Except that's not where I got mine. Anyhow, Reyes sat closer to 93 in 2005, and he sat more like 89 in 2006, and is really about that now too (hitting 93 three pitches in a start is not "sitting" there, as you have often pointed out). So I'm still gonna say, I disagree with you. If you want to decide I'm wrong, instead of simply disagreeing, that's obviously your perogative (and as you've already figured out, you don't need my permission).

I project Reyes to finish the year with an ERA+ between 110 and 120 placing him in the top 25% of National league starters. I would not call that "dominant," but I'd still call it a damn good starter. I still think he could push out some Cy Young type performances 2-3 years down the road . . . So to answer your question, I do not think he will be dominant in '07 but I do think he could be dominant in a few years.

OK, for this paragraph I intend no attitude -- honest question: How close is that to how you were projecting him in 2004 and 2005? Seems to me you had him pegged as pretty much an impact pitcher and ready in 06. You've downgraded your projections for him. Why the change, if he isn't any different?

BW23 · Post by **BW23** » April 12 07, 8:03 am

I think the closest he ever gets to a Cy Young will be sitting next to Carpenter on the bench.

longhornbaseball · Post by **longhornbaseball** » April 12 07, 9:29 am

skmsw wrote:Glad to hear it. Your ability to read numbers on a scoreboard means a lot to me, too. Except that's not where I got mine. Anyhow, Reyes sat closer to 93 in 2005, and he sat more like 89 in 2006, and is really about that now too (hitting 93 three pitches in a start is not "sitting" there, as you have often pointed out). So I'm still gonna say, I disagree with you. If you want to decide I'm wrong, instead of simply disagreeing, that's obviously your perogative (and as you've already figured out, you don't need my permission).

Actually I've stated that he's sat 90-93 with his 4 seamer (but I can see why you'd only mention the 93). I don't have the numbers for his first start but in his final ST game in Memphis he hit 93 15 times.

skmsw wrote:OK, for this paragraph I intend no attitude -- honest question: How close is that to how you were projecting him in 2004 and 2005? Seems to me you had him pegged as pretty much an impact pitcher and ready in 06. You've downgraded your projections for him. Why the change, if he isn't any different?

You seem wrong. I didn't make '05 projections for him (I like a pitcher to get significant time at AAA before I do that) but in 2006 I projected this line:

Code: Select all

ERA   ERA+  k9   whip  hr9
3.82  111   8.4  1.12  1.3

And for 2007, this one:

Code: Select all

ERA   ERA+  k9   whip  hr9
3.78  112   7.9  1.22  1.1

They're almost identical.

skmsw · Post by **skmsw** » April 12 07, 9:33 am

I didn't expect that you'd made performance projections for 05, I didn;t necessarily mean statistical projections; but I remembered you being very high on him -- untouchable blue chip prospect high. Not sure if you'd agree with that recollection or not.

Your 06 projections are not as sparkly as I recalled; I stand corrected.