Bo Porter Confuses Jeff Keppinger for Juan Pierre, Fish Still Win in Extras 9-8

[FishFF]

Right, all agreed on what kind of pitcher he is. I still don't see how you made those comments based on "if" he gives up xbh hits he is terrible, but if he doesn't then go Marlins. You think our starting rotation is a mess now, imagine if we traded Nolasco for a mediocre 3rd baseman like you wanted.

[nny]

And allow me to also make a self-promoting plug and say that since I cannot attend the game tomorrow, my seats are for sale on stub-hub at serious cut rate prices, and you can enjoy Nolasco's start in comfort, with waitress service.

Have (3) Friday tickets for sale?

[Fish and Chips]

can we give the astros and the natinals credit? they both have great lineup

[BigGameFish]

Yea i dont know what the fuck Bo Porter was thinking on that, the ball was about 30 feet out of the infield and CC was on deck!!! NO ONE IN BASEBALL HISTORY BEATS THAT THROW.

[FishFF]

Hermida did

[The_Godfather]

The most important thing about the game tonight IMO was us getting 'lucky' off Oswalt in the 6th. He still had dominant stuff and was pitching really, really well; we just got damn lucky that he was pulled early due to some fluky shit.

Great game though, what a huge win.

[Ice]

Remember when we were loosing and then we winned?

That might have been the best part of the game.

Marlins given me a hard on this week. Like no other.

[Chewford]

Remember when we were loosing and then we winned?

That might have been the best part of the game.

Yeah, I remember that part like it was yesterday.

The Marlins seem to be good at winning recently. I like that.

[McLevin]

I really want to know what makes it comical.

He's a roller-coaster of a pitcher. At the start of the season he was clearly not pitching well. I've maintained the whole time he's excellent at not walking guys and at striking people out. He gives up his fair share of extra base hits and his stuff is remarkably consistent. You can't even necessarily look at him and say "wow, his curveball is extra sharp tonight" because he almost always goes to the mound with the same stuff and the same control of that stuff. That his success is so dependent on two or three running grabs in the gap is concerning to me.

Quite honestly, it's the most transparent analysis I've ever made. There isn't some great underlying meaning to it, and, correct me if you disagree here, it's rather accurate. Nolasco is a great no-walk, high strikeout guy who seriously sucks when he's allowing extra base hits. There is nothing else to make of his success other than the XBH. He's never going to walk 7, he's never going to K just 1 or 2. That you're looking for some hidden meaning, or trying to assign value to what you feel to be between the lines vitriol I can often be known for is not my fault. Allow me, if you will, this instance of overly simplistic analysis. Should you so desire, we can continue this conversation further if you disagree with my analysis, but in a purely rudimentary discussion of a pitcher's worth, I hope we are all on the same page regarding Nolasco's strengths (no walks) and weaknesses (XBH).

And allow me to also make a self-promoting plug and say that since I cannot attend the game tomorrow, my seats are for sale on stub-hub at serious cut rate prices, and you can enjoy Nolasco's start in comfort, with waitress service.

But when ANY pitcher is giving up XBH they suck

And since he gave up a ton of XBH in April and May he's suddenly a pitcher who's prone to giving up XBH any more often than any other guy

He's been successful in 2008 and since the New Orleans experience because he strikes out guys and doesn't walk them (as you said), AND, more often than not, doesn't give up many XBH

I understand your point of Nolasco sucking when he gives up XBH, but so will your Josh Johnsons and Tim Lincecums of the world

[nny]

And since he gave up a ton of XBH in April and May he's suddenly a pitcher who's prone to giving up XBH any more often than any other guy

No, he's always given up a lot of XBH, has nothing to do with just his April and may, and no now it's not "as often as any other guy". Well, as often as any other FB-pitcher I'd guess. But FB pitcher = lots and lots of xbh. That's the reason why GB prospects are always rated higher.

[Bobbob1313]

I know Swift's whole thing is that when Nolasco is good he's the same pitcher as when he's bad, and that XBHs are solely to blame, but:

2008 when he sucked: 66 IP, 25 BB, 40 K. 3.41 BB/9, 5.45 K/9
2008 when he didn't suck: 146 IP, 17 BB, 146 K. 1.04 BB/9, 9 K/9.
2009 when he sucked: 43.2 IP, 13 BB, 37 K. 2.71 BB/9, 7.7 K/9
2009 when he didn't suck: 80.1 IP, 17 BB, 88 K. 1.91 BB/9, 9.9 K/9

I can't explain it, but at this point I'm not sure you can just chalk it up to "Well, he's exactly the same no matter what." He's shown to be two different pitchers, one with pretty good control and pretty good K rates who will get bombed occasionally. And then he's shown to be a pitcher with elite control and K rates who limits baserunners exceptionally well and is only hurt by the occasional long ball.

The key for him will be to get that latter pitcher to show up all year. I don't know why he hasn't so far, but I really don't think Swift's analysis of him is entirely fair.

Last year when he was clearly our ace and was just fucking mowing people down down the stretch, you maintained you're "He's not our ace" stance, and I don't seem to remember you making this argument then.