How about Daniel Bard so far?

[Dojji]

Nope, I don't "have" to see your point because you don't have one. The Orioles' lineup is not elite, but the soft bottom of that lineup notwithstanding they're a capable offense.

[redsoxfan3]

I know Bard is under a lot of criticism every game he pitches. There have been a lot of valid points pointing out Bard's struggles and successes. We all knew going into the season that Bard is a work in progress as a starter. I knew that he was not going to come out and be an ace in our rotation after just a few starts. Bard has been an effective number 5 starter for us. Something that we really lacked last year. That has translated to helping us actually being able to reach .500 this year. He has given up a lot of walks and has not been that great for us, but he has been able to keep us in games this year. He will progressively get better. Once he reduces his walks and increases his strikeouts, he will become a solid starting pitcher. The problem is that we have to be patient with him. Would you rather have Bard or Lackey as the number 5 starter? One big problem with Bard is his velocity. That obviously was going to decrease due to him pitching more innings in a game, but it has decreased by more than most of us thought it would. He is not able to blow pitches by hitters like he was able to do as a reliever. He just has to find a pattern and an effective approach as a starter. I still think he has the potential to be a solid #3 or #4 starter for this team. I never once expected that he had ace potential as a starter. I do think that this team does need to keep him in the rotation, because he can be a quality starter for us every 5th game. I think there is more value out of that than him pitching in the pen. I guess that is just my opinion and I know some will agree and disagree with that.

[a700hitter]

Take our two best hitters away and our lineup isn't great either. I notice you didn't mention Adam Jones in your little soliloquy. I wonder why.

It's obvious why I didn't mention Adam Jones. He is one of the two good hitters in the O's lineup yesterday- the other being Markakis. Jones is good and getting better. Bard should have approached yesterday's game with the attitude that he wasn't going to let Jones or Markakis beat him and that he owned everyone else. Instead he is walking 4 guys, hitting another and he fed Nick Johnson a cookie. He did keep his team in the game against a weak lineup and he went 5 innings. That's the positive side of the ledger. On the negative side, yesterday he again showed that he is simply not developing as a starter. There has been no progress or improvement. If the long range plan with this conversion was to take a top end of game reliever-- a real weapon and turn him into a serviceable #5 starter, they have succeeded. He is a serviceable #5, and he is showing no signs that he is has the capability of being any more than that. If that was the plan, it was a very poor plan. We could have gotten a serviceable #5 elsewhere cheaply and easily. I thought the idea was to convert a special bullpen arm into a special starter. That appears to be a failure.

 

I expected bumps in the road in this conversion-- painful games where he would get lit up, but I also expected some flashes of exceptional potential. I have not seen any instances of that. I expected that he would have exceptional stuff-- a 95 MPH heater and a devastating slider. He has had very ordinary stuff. I expected that there would be slow but discern able improvement and progression. There has not been any of that either. They will continue this experiment mainly because it takes Cherries a long time to make decisions, but he is just wasting time on this experiment. I fear it will end with Bard on the DL.

[User Name]

It's just flabbergasting how some people can think that: A) Less than 10 starts is enough to judge whether or not the Bard "experiment" will or won't pay dividends. B ) The idea that just because the guy hasn't flashed "exceptional stuff" he will never be a decent starter, even though we know he has great stuff. Are you serious?

[Dojji]

More to the point, I've said this before and I'll say it again. The fact that he's won games, kept his team in the games he's lost, and has given us reasonably decent innings, these things are positives, and they're especially positive in the context of not having his A stuff from start to start. You've got to be mentally tough to pull that off, which was the one thing I thought Bard wasn't. And you've got to be able to pitch well to contact to even have a shot at what Bard is doing.

 

In other words, he's learning exactly the lessons a player like Bard would need to learn to round off his education as a pitcher. Once he gets his mechanics down this kid is going to make something of himself.

[a700hitter]

More to the point, I've said this before and I'll say it again. The fact that he's won games, kept his team in the games he's lost, and has given us reasonably decent innings, these things are positives, and they're especially positive in the context of not having his A stuff from start to start. You've got to be mentally tough to pull that off, which was the one thing I thought Bard wasn't. And you've got to be able to pitch well to contact to even have a shot at what Bard is doing.

 

In other words, he's learning exactly the lessons a player like Bard would need to learn to round off his education as a pitcher. Once he gets his mechanics down this kid is going to make something of himself.

He is proving himself to be capable of being a serviceable #5 pitcher, but absent are the flashes of brilliance, the stuff, or the progress toward being anything more.

[jacksonianmarch]

It's just flabbergasting how some people can think that: A) Less than 10 starts is enough to judge whether or not the Bard "experiment" will or won't pay dividends. B ) The idea that just because the guy hasn't flashed "exceptional stuff" he will never be a decent starter' date=' even though we know he has great stuff. Are you serious?[/quote']

 

you shouldnt be. The experiment wasnt to see if he could hang on in the rotation. The experiment was to see if he could put up ace level production or flash ace level stuff. He has done neither. His stuff and location have suffered. Even at the reduced velo, he has been effective enough to avoid getting creamed, but he cannot locate and he isnt striking anyone out. The plan wasnt for Bard to be a back end of the rotation starter. The plan was to see if he could be an ace. He hasnt shown any capability to be an ace and has regressed in the last month. The experiment is a flop

[a700hitter]

you shouldnt be. The experiment wasnt to see if he could hang on in the rotation. The experiment was to see if he could put up ace level production or flash ace level stuff. He has done neither. His stuff and location have suffered. Even at the reduced velo' date=' he has been effective enough to avoid getting creamed, but he cannot locate and he isnt striking anyone out. The plan wasnt for Bard to be a back end of the rotation starter. The plan was to see if he could be an ace. He hasnt shown any capability to be an ace and has regressed in the last month. The experiment is a flop[/quote']

Not only hasn't he flashed exceptional stuff over the course of an entire game, he hasn't flashed exceptional stuff in any innings within any of his starts. He has not demonstrated any ability to pitch himself out of jams by dominating the opponent. He has gotten help from DP balls, but yesterday those were line drives and not routine grounders. The guy is not improving over these 2 months. In fact, his stuff is diminishing. Maybe he turns this around and starts to progress. It just has not been there at all over the course of the first quarter of the season.

[Dojji]

you shouldnt be. The experiment wasnt to see if he could hang on in the rotation. The experiment was to see if he could put up ace level production or flash ace level stuff.

 

Umm what? In the first year? After not starting for 4-5 years? You're insane. If that was the expectation, than whoever put forward that expectation was also insane.

 

They didn't transfer Bard to the rotation for what he was going to do this year. If they had, it would have been a ludicrous decision. Everyone who was paying attention knew he would be a work in progress for at least this year and probably the next 2.

[a700hitter]

Umm what? In the first year? After not starting for 4-5 years? You're insane. If that was the expectation, than whoever put forward that expectation was also insane.

 

They didn't transfer Bard to the rotation for what he was going to do this year. If they had, it would have been a ludicrous decision. Everyone who was paying attention knew he would be a work in progress for at least this year and probably the next 2.

So, this is what they were looking for-- no progress or improvement over 10 starts, diminishing command and diminishing velocity with each start? Do you really think this was the blueprint?

[jacksonianmarch]

Umm what? In the first year? After not starting for 4-5 years? You're insane. If that was the expectation, than whoever put forward that expectation was also insane.

 

They didn't transfer Bard to the rotation for what he was going to do this year. If they had, it would have been a ludicrous decision. Everyone who was paying attention knew he would be a work in progress for at least this year and probably the next 2.

 

Dojji, blinders need to come off. Have you watched any of his starts? What have you seen? Maybe I can give you a recap....

 

If you move a power reliever into a starters role, you would expect to see some power numbers and some power stuff. You arent seeing any of that. You are seeing a guy who is striking out about 3 per 9 in his past month. You are seeing a guy who is walking nearly 6 per 9 in his last month. You are seeing a guy who is supposed to be throwing mid to high 90s who is sitting low 90s. You are supposed to see a power slider, when he isnt throwing it. You should see a difference between change and heater, when in reality, they are thrown at the same speed. For f***s sake Dojji, stop being a shill and please tell me what you are seeing.

 

For the Bard experiment to be considered a work in progress, I would have expected a 4.5 or higher ERA, a high walk rate, BUT a high K rate with good velocity. Those last 2 parts are critical. Bard is throwing like a #5 starter and is showing #5 starter stuff. That wasnt the expectation

[a700hitter]

Dojji, blinders need to come off. Have you watched any of his starts? What have you seen? Maybe I can give you a recap....

 

If you move a power reliever into a starters role, you would expect to see some power numbers and some power stuff. You arent seeing any of that. You are seeing a guy who is striking out about 3 per 9 in his past month. You are seeing a guy who is walking nearly 6 per 9 in his last month. You are seeing a guy who is supposed to be throwing mid to high 90s who is sitting low 90s. You are supposed to see a power slider, when he isnt throwing it. You should see a difference between change and heater, when in reality, they are thrown at the same speed. For f***s sake Dojji, stop being a shill and please tell me what you are seeing.

 

For the Bard experiment to be considered a work in progress, I would have expected a 4.5 or higher ERA, a high walk rate, BUT a high K rate with good velocity. Those last 2 parts are critical. Bard is throwing like a #5 starter and is showing #5 starter stuff. That wasnt the expectation

He couldn't put away Davis with 2 strikes and a runner on 3rd. That spoke volumes to me. Davis would miss a ball on a tee 40% of the time. He's a 200 k/ season guy. Bard couldn't reach back for something and blow him away to keep the run from scoring.

[User Name]

you shouldnt be. The experiment wasnt to see if he could hang on in the rotation. The experiment was to see if he could put up ace level production or flash ace level stuff. He has done neither. His stuff and location have suffered. Even at the reduced velo' date=' he has been effective enough to avoid getting creamed, but he cannot locate and he isnt striking anyone out. The plan wasnt for Bard to be a back end of the rotation starter. The plan was to see if he could be an ace. He hasnt shown any capability to be an ace and has regressed in the last month. The experiment is a flop[/quote']

 

Less than 10 starts. If it was a Yankees pitcher, you'd focus on the silver lining. You don't have a lot of credibility because of your obvious bias.

[jacksonianmarch]

Less than 10 starts. If it was a Yankees pitcher' date=' you'd focus on the silver lining. You don't have a lot of credibility because of your obvious bias.[/quote']

 

for you my friend. I dont need your credibility. I actually do not need you at all, but I do enjoy your continued need to respond to me. Might make me want to post even more, lol.

 

There is no silver lining here. Remember, I was pining for Hughes to go back to the pen and I ended up being wrong. He's not striking people out. He isnt missing bats. He is walking way too many. He isnt giving innings. He has shown a significant regression. 10 starts is 1/3 of the season, that isnt an insignificant sample size when you are seeing such a significant regression.

[User Name]

Hughes has been on the league as a starter for years, Bard has less than 10 starts. Apples and oranges.

 

Also, apparently you do need it since you're justifying yourself, but whatever. Post away. No wonder you got a chart describing your posts.

[mvp 78]

If he can only throw 92-93 as a starter, I'm not sure if he has enough offspeed stuff to get by longterm. It doesn't matter right now since they don't have a better SP option. I hope he gets better, but we'll have to see.

[jacksonianmarch]

nice retort. Hughes could be said to be in a similar wait and see boat as Bard since Hughes is coming off injury and had a lot of success as a reliever. Both are young and both had something to prove in the rotation

[jacksonianmarch]

Also, UN, Hughes didnt start seeing a resurgence until his fastball rebounded. He never had Bard's power, but Hughes was getting his tits lit when he was sitting 89-90. Now that he is in the 92-94 range, he is getting outs. Bard needs to operate in the 94-95 range to be effective, IMO. It separates his FB and change speeds which would lend some effectiveness to that pitch. Not sure where the slider has been, since that is a devastating pitch. I am not sure if he has the confidence in it since his command has gone to s***.

[User Name]

Yes, but Hughes has had a lot more time to prove himself. I bet you've been a big Hughes supporter regardless of his early struggles, hence your current point. Bard's speed could still rebound. And the slider should come back. Apples and oranges.

 

He's had a couple starts after being stretched out for the first time in years. Not nearly enough time to call the experiment a "failure". Wait and see.

[jacksonianmarch]

Yes, but Hughes has had a lot more time to prove himself. I bet you've been a big Hughes supporter regardless of his early struggles, hence your current point. Bard's speed could still rebound. And the slider should come back. Apples and oranges.

 

He's had a couple starts after being stretched out for the first time in years. Not nearly enough time to call the experiment a "failure". Wait and see.

 

Hughes hasnt had more time to prove himself this yr. He was moved to the pen in 2009, he was in the rotation but in the pen come the playoffs in 2010, he was moved to the pen again in 2011 and was in trouble of moving to the pen again this yr. He had just as much to prove as Bard did, and he is the anti-Bard right now. Instead of the FB velo dropping, his is rising and he is finding his curve. Bard's velo is dropping and his breaking ball has disappeared. This is a regression. Now obviously, you dont really have a better option right now, so you are stuck with him. Maybe this is just a little dead arm and he gets back to the 9K/9IP pace he was on in April. But with every passing start, it is pretty obvious that his stuff has dropping in the heavier starting role, and that looks more and more like a failed experiment.

 

Also, you have to look at what he was and what he is now. This isnt some middle reliever who monkeyed around the bigs and the sox are experimenting with. This is one of the best relievers in the game over the past 2 seasons whose power stuff was second to maybe Verlander, Strasburg and Chapman. You have taken a relief ace and turned him into a #5 starter.

[FredLynn]

Less than 10 starts. If it was a Yankees pitcher' date=' you'd focus on the silver lining. You don't have a lot of credibility because of your obvious bias.[/quote']

 

What you say would be valid if Jacko's comments were not spot on. Bard has shown nothing but mediocrity so far. Yes, its early, but its certainly not encouraging. He is not going to enjoy success with a straight fastball in the low 90s. There is absolutely nothing to be encouraged about with this experiment so far.

[Bellhorn04]

It's interesting to note that in the '1-5' thread, there is a strong consensus that Bard is our 4th best starter. What people really need to be figuring out is what to do about Buchholz.

[a700hitter]

It's interesting to note that in the '1-5' thread' date=' there is a strong consensus that Bard is our 4th best starter. What people really need to be figuring out is what to do about Buchholz.[/quote']He can't pitch out of the bullpen, so they probably have to give him a little more rope.

[Station 13]

He can't pitch out of the bullpen' date=' so they probably have to give him a little more rope.[/quote']

 

I think a lot have gotten sick of Buchholz. In 6 year he's been up and down in Boston, demoted, injuries, head cases, deer in headlight. Nothing change.

[User Name]

What you say would be valid if Jacko's comments were not spot on. Bard has shown nothing but mediocrity so far. Yes' date=' its early, but its certainly not encouraging. He is not going to enjoy success with a straight fastball in the low 90s. There is absolutely nothing to be encouraged about with this experiment so far.[/quote']

 

Aren't you a "sample size" guy? Do you consider 8 starts and 47 IP as a starter a significant enough sample for a judgment on the "Bard as a starter" experiment? Because it isn't

[User Name]

Hughes hasnt had more time to prove himself this yr. He was moved to the pen in 2009, he was in the rotation but in the pen come the playoffs in 2010, he was moved to the pen again in 2011 and was in trouble of moving to the pen again this yr. He had just as much to prove as Bard did, and he is the anti-Bard right now. Instead of the FB velo dropping, his is rising and he is finding his curve. Bard's velo is dropping and his breaking ball has disappeared. This is a regression. Now obviously, you dont really have a better option right now, so you are stuck with him. Maybe this is just a little dead arm and he gets back to the 9K/9IP pace he was on in April. But with every passing start, it is pretty obvious that his stuff has dropping in the heavier starting role, and that looks more and more like a failed experiment.

 

Also, you have to look at what he was and what he is now. This isnt some middle reliever who monkeyed around the bigs and the sox are experimenting with. This is one of the best relievers in the game over the past 2 seasons whose power stuff was second to maybe Verlander, Strasburg and Chapman. You have taken a relief ace and turned him into a #5 starter.

 

8 starts. You can be certain most of Bard's problems are mental and mechanical. The stuff is there.

 

47 IP as a starter is indicative of nothing.

[FredLynn]

Aren't you a "sample size" guy? Do you consider 8 starts and 47 IP as a starter a significant enough sample for a judgment on the "Bard as a starter" experiment? Because it isn't

 

Read my post again. I believe I said that "yes, its early" somewhere in there. I also said that so far there is little if anything to be encouraged about.

[FredLynn]

He can't pitch out of the bullpen' date=' so they probably have to give him a little more rope.[/quote']

 

The question is, how much more rope. He has had ONE good full season in his six years; thats it, one. I think that at the end of this year if he has not redeemed himself he should be traded or released. I doubt that he will be on this team past the end of the year.

[a700hitter]

The question is' date=' how much more rope. He has had ONE good full season in his six years; thats it, one. I think that at the end of this year if he has not redeemed himself he should be traded or released. I doubt that he will be on this team past the end of the year.[/quote']We all acknowledge that it is early in his development, but there are no signs that he is developing or translating his plus stuff to starting. He is in fact stagnant, not progressing and his stuff is diminishing. Those are just the facts. The "early" returns are not encouraging. I don't know how people can deny that.

[Bellhorn04]

We all acknowledge that it is early in his development' date=' but there are no signs that he is developing or translating his plus stuff to starting. He is in fact stagnant, not progressing and his stuff is diminishing. Those are just the facts. The "early" returns are not encouraging. I don't know how people can deny that.[/quote']

 

Pumpsie was referring to Buchholz there I think.