Master Index of Archived Threads


Bannister

Frayed Knot Apr 27 2006 04:25 PM

"Grade 1 Strain" Listed as (all with me now) "Day to Day" MAY be able to make his next start.

Rotblatt Apr 27 2006 04:30 PM

Coolio. Here's hoping . . .

Johnny Dickshot Apr 27 2006 04:39 PM

I'll go out on a limb and suggest he's not the guy we want out there if he's compromised in any way. Perhaps the wait and see thing also has something to do with how much rope Zambrano earns next time around.

Yancy Street Gang Apr 27 2006 04:42 PM

I don't think it would be so terrible if he missed a start or two. The guy who takes his place (I'm thinking John Maine) might show that he's a better option. Bannister's been sort of nice, but let's not kid ourselves: we can do better.

Frayed Knot Apr 27 2006 04:42 PM

Pretty weird if Bannister, who looked like he was stabbed in the back of the leg while rounding 3rd, winds up not missing a start (or even only getting pushed back a bit) while Beltran, who left a game with something that seemed precautionary at the time and remains something only he can feel, misses about a dozen days (and counting). Yeah, I realize that one has to run in his job description while the other really doesn't.

Edgy DC Apr 27 2006 04:44 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 28 2006 10:44 AM

Keith Hernandez (good Keith, not bad Keith) was making a good argument of how he was pitching from an upright position instead of dropping down and pushing off, and was blaming that for his throwing so many pitches above the belt --- a trait that, Hernandez argued persuasively, left Bannister very fortuanate that he wasn't battered. That may be his style or it may have been a symptom of tightness. I'm suspecting the latter.

Frayed Knot Apr 27 2006 04:45 PM

I'm guessing that if he needs DL-ing (they can wait a day or 3 before deciding that) we'll see Maine 2 or 3 times thru the rotation; he'd be on sked, is starting regularly, and is on the 40-man. If they choose NOT to DL him maybe Darren Oliver gets a start if it's just a one-time deal.

Rotblatt Apr 27 2006 04:48 PM

Edgy DC wrote: Keith Hernandez (good Keith, not bad Keith) was making a good argument of how he was pitching from an upright position instead of dropping down and pushing off, and was blaming that on him throwing so many pitches above the belt --- a trait that, Hernandez argued persuasively, left Bannister very fortuanate that he wasn't battered. That may be his style or it may have been a symptom of tightness. Keith made the same point in Bannister's previous start, so I think that's just how the kid pitches. ]Yeah, I realize that one has to run in his job description while the other really doesn't. Actually, Frayed, if Bannister keeps swinging the bat like he has, he'll be running an awful lot. Which makes me wonder if he'll go all Koo on us during his at bats from here on out . . .

Yancy Street Gang Apr 27 2006 04:49 PM

I wonder if he can play centerfield.

rpackrat Apr 27 2006 05:04 PM

]Bannister's been sort of nice, but let's not kid ourselves: we can do better. 2-0 2.89 is better than "sort of nice". I know he hasn't looked pretty doing it, but he's gotten the results. And, despite giving up yoo many walks, his 1.39 WHIP is not terrible.

Yancy Street Gang Apr 27 2006 06:59 PM

I'll stick with sort of nice. He doesn't go enough innings, and he's been skating on thin ice. I don't think that ERA will last. (But I hope I'm wrong.)

smg58 Apr 28 2006 10:41 AM

Bannister's been tough to figure. He's gotten where he is on his ability to consistently throw strikes, yet he's been doing anything but that the last couple of starts. Have his mechanics changed any since spring? I suppose it could be just mental; he'd hardly be the first rookie pitcher to get nervous on the mound or experience growing pains. I do hope he realizes that he can't expect to continue to regularly get himself in trouble and not have it blow up in his face.

Frayed Knot Apr 28 2006 11:01 AM

Aside from the walks - which could certainly be nerves and weren't part of his MO in the minors - I think Bannister's been both a bit lucky AND unlucky at the same time. The luck part is obvious; all those baserunners, particularly leadoff runners, and still the reasonable ERA. He's gotten the outs when he's needed them but a couple of fewer at-em balls with 2outs and RiSP (see; Zambrano, Victor) and that ERA could easily double. On the other hand I'd venture that an ungodly amount of his balls-in-play have been turned into hits. It seems that early in the inning he's rarely getting the at-em balls and, instead, almost everything is turning into a hit. Theoretically at least, you've got to figure that - *just by chance* - he'll become a little more efficient at keeping runners off base while at the same time probably not survive those tough situations at the same rate when he does get in them.

Nymr83 Apr 28 2006 01:11 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: On the other hand I'd venture that an ungodly amount of his balls-in-play have been turned into hits. It seems that early in the inning he's rarely getting the at-em balls and, instead, almost everything is turning into a hit. Ron Shandler (noted fantasy baseball big-wig) says that 30% of balls in play should be hits and that all pitchers will regress to this rate over time (absent considerations of defenders with no range.)

duan Apr 28 2006 01:21 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: On the other hand I'd venture that an ungodly amount of his balls-in-play have been turned into hits. It seems that early in the inning he's rarely getting the at-em balls and, instead, almost everything is turning into a hit. . Actually his BABIP is .230 BABIP definition: Batting Average on balls put into play. A pitcher's average on batted balls ending a plate appearance, excluding home runs. Based on the research of Voros McCracken and others, BABIP is mostly a function of a pitcher's defense and luck, rather than persistent skill. Thus, pitchers with abnormally high or low BABIPs are good bets to see their performances regress to the mean. A typical BABIP is about .290. By the way, I think McCraken's theories on BABIP is a tendency rather then an actual reality.

Frayed Knot Apr 28 2006 02:28 PM

What I'm trying to say (and prolly failing miserably) is that it looks to me like he's been getting [u:c8c7b49d2e]into[/u:c8c7b49d2e] trouble because (at least in part) he's been rather [u:c8c7b49d2e]UN[/u:c8c7b49d2e]lucky with BABiP at the beginning of innings; about as unlucky as he's been lucky later on dancing out of those jams. As things regress towards the norms we could see him get into fewer messes while perhaps not being as magical at making them disappear w/o damage.

duan Apr 28 2006 03:33 PM

I getcha now; with nobody/one on his BABIP is .500 but with two on it goes to .100 (or whatever). I hear where you're coming from and it's certainly a possibility that he's had some damn kooky starts!!!

Zvon Apr 28 2006 06:58 PM

Bannister goes to the DL- Diaz come up.

TheOldMole Apr 28 2006 08:51 PM

The way I look at it, he's shown that he doesn't get rattled.

Elster88 May 01 2006 09:37 AM

NY Times wrote: Willie Randolph implied that the right-hander John Maine would start Tuesday against the Washington Nationals, but he refused to confirm it. "You guys have probably figured it out already, anyway," he said during his pregame session with reporters Sunday. He said he would announce the decision Monday.