Who should Davis replace?

[Ennder]

Well that is why I say maybe Wolf. If you are using career statistics he is clearly better than the rest, if you think his bad 9 game stretch this year was him aging then he isn't, if you think it was just a bad stretch then he is probably clearly better than the rest at this point. Others like Parra might have more potential but they also have more question marks. I guess I'm not hung up on 9 games and I don't see how you remove Wolf from the rotation because of 9 bad games even if you ignore the fact he is signed for 3 years.

 

To me Bush is the only person who makes sense. Parra and Narveson have too much upside, Wolf and Gallardo are better pitchers than Bush. That leaves him the odd man out if they decided Davis is the better option.

[joepepsi]

Bush's trade value is highest if he remains in the rotation and continues his clever lucky streak of stranding runners, and keeping a reasonable ERA. So, if Davis MUST start, then I agree with Flood Pants. Put Narveson in the pen for a few weeks while a deadline deal for Bush or Davis can get done. By the end of the month either one or both of them will be gone, or Davis will be so terrible Narveson will be put back in the rotation.

[Polish Falcons]

To me Davis is the only person that makes sense. I'm sorry but this move tells me that the organization has not learned a lesson despite being repeatedly beaten over the head with roster management most of the season, particularly the first couple months. Going with Hoffman over Axford for too long, Suppan/Davis over Parra/Narv, not starting Lucroy until they were forced to, and etc cost the Brewers A LOT of wins this year in my opinion, perhaps as many as 8.5 or more.

 

Anyway, if I am forced to make a decision who to replace the first guy I would take out of the rotation is Narveson. Bush has had the best results so far. He has pitched well practially all season and by my observation he has really only had two bad outings out of 15 starts. By comparison Davis looked bad in almost 100% of his starts prior to injury.... Like others say Parra is the most talented of the bunch, he is the most important part of the Brewers future, he has looked pretty good all season, and we need to give him a good look as a starter. Narveson, by default, is the odd man out because, despite some greatness here and there, he really hasn't been that fantastic (5.17 era), and unlike Parra I don't see the future of the Brewers rotation riding on his skills. Like someone else said, someone like Loe could just as well take the 4/5 spot in the rotation instead of Narv. I like Narv-Dog and I want him to stay in the rotation but he is my reluctant pick. He deserves to start over DD though, no doubt about that.

[TooLiveBrew]

Great post, PF. I'm concerned about the roster management issue you highlight; had a similar thought yesterday when thinking about Davis. I also agree that the odd man out here should be Narveson, basically for the reasons you cited.

[sheethead]

So what if the Narv-dog goes 7 nice innings tonight and leads the Crew to victory? They pretty much need to stick Davis in the pen and release Capuano. Sorry to Cappy, nice come back and all, but he's gotta be the odd man out at this point.

[Never Outhustled]

Davis has been better than Bush every year, except his small sample to start this season. Bush is on track to have his 3rd straight season of being less than 1 win above replacement level. This is an easy decision. I still can't believe Melvin didn't non-tender Bush in the offseason.

[Baldkin]

Come on. He was at 1.8 WAR in 2008. Don't spout stuff that isn't true to make some point about how Melvin sucks.

[TooLiveBrew]

FanGraphs has him at 0.8 for 2008.

[Ennder]

Pitching WAR is very unreliable, I know fangraphs uses FIP which is going to give all kinds of goofy results. I'm guessing BR just uses ERA for its measurement which is even worse.

[Baldkin]

The difference between B-Ref WAR and Fangraphs WAR, B-Ref uses a

pitcher’s actual runs allowed with an adjustment for the team’s defense,

while Fangraphs uses FIP. This can lead to big differences between what

the two sites tell you about pitchers. I prefer to use WAR as a value stat, not as a predictive stat, so I much

prefer B-Ref’s version.

[logan82]

The difference between B-Ref WAR and Fangraphs WAR, B-Ref uses a

pitcher’s actual runs allowed with an adjustment for the team’s defense,

while Fangraphs uses FIP. This can lead to big differences between what

the two sites tell you about pitchers. I prefer to use WAR as a value stat, not as a predictive stat, so I much

prefer B-Ref’s version.

It makes more sense to me to use a WAR based on what a pitcher actually did. I really don't know how to properly articulate it but I don't like FIP based because two pitchers could have an equal FIP with drastically different results and, to me at least, WAR should be a result type stat. It seems to be for hitters. It isn't neutralized for for an average BABIP or defense. I know pitchers are very reliant on their defense for their results but I think FIP strips to much away.

[Funketown]

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/brewers.html

 

Well, it's not going to be Bush. Looks like it will either be Narveson or Parra. Let's hope it's not the latter...

[JohnBriggs12]

Macha says: "so-so isn't good enough".

 

If that's true why is Davis replacing anyone? So-so would be an improvement for him.

[davego]

Why is Narveson getting the shaft?

[Flood Pants]

Why is Narveson getting the shaft?

If we were in the playoff hunt, I think Narveson in the rotation over Bush would be a no-brainer. But we're not, and they need to give Bush starts hoping that he'll catch the eye of a potential trade partner. And Parra is finally starting to find his stride, so it would be a shame to mess with him again. And it would reduce Narveson's innings pitched this year, which could be beneficial. It seems like the most logical move to make for the time being, but hopefully it would only be a short-term one.

[logan82]

Parra has a higher upside than Narveson. Unfortunately I was spot on with my guess. They look like they are going to keep trying for the playoffs this year.

 

I hope we do trade Bush as I think he is using smoke and mirrors so far this year. The only really encouraging thing in his peripherals is his increased GB rate. Maybe he is using a 2 seamer more instead of a 4 seamer. I havent' watched him close enough to tell. His walk rate is double his career and K rate is down by 2 per 9.

[naivin]

As usually seems to be the case, the decision is often made for them. Looks like Gallardo is probably going to be gone for a while, so there's your answer.

[Never Outhustled]

The difference between B-Ref WAR and Fangraphs WAR, B-Ref uses a pitcher’s actual runs allowed with an adjustment for the team’s defense, while Fangraphs uses FIP. This can lead to big differences between what the two sites tell you about pitchers. I prefer to use WAR as a value stat, not as a predictive stat, so I much prefer B-Ref’s version.

 

Great, I'll use B-Ref then, instead of the Fangraphs version I was using (thanks for pointing that out TooLiveBrew, I didn't know where the difference was coming from), because that only improves my argument. Since 2004, Davis has been 8.5 WAR better than Bush, and 3.1 WAR better since the start of last season.

 

Simply put, Doug Davis is better than Dave Bush, by wide margin, largley because Dave Bush is a bad pitcher.

[Invader3K]

Simply put, Doug Davis is better than Dave Bush, by wide margin, largley because Dave Bush is a bad pitcher.

Do you always have to talk in absolutes like this?

[greeg35]

Sith http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[Never Outhustled]

Sith http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

Possibly, and I blame Doug Melvin for pushing me to the dark side.

[Never Outhustled]

Simply put, Doug Davis is better than Dave Bush, by wide margin, largley because Dave Bush is a bad pitcher.

Do you always have to talk in absolutes like this?

 

Which part of my statement are you providing evidence for that supports your disagreement?

[Invader3K]

The whole thing. Davis has been bad this year (I guess you will argue he's been unlucky, but he has to be one of the unluckiest pitchers in the game this season), and while Bush hasn't been great, he's been OK. In fact, he's been fine as a #4/5 type starter, which is all he should be on a team trying to make the playoffs. It's obvious he isn't the same since getting injured last year, but I wouldn't just flat out say he's "a bad pitcher."

[viaarete]

I think the argument against Bush can be boiled down to this: Depending on the numbers you look at, Bush seems to be a somewhat average option for a 4/5 pitcher. However, his career numbers, as well as more advanced stats (particularly FIP and xFIP) indicate that he's probably not as good as he has appeared, thus far.

 

An almost completely opposite argument can be made for Davis: Davis has a miserable ERA and looks like an awful pitcher this year. However, his career numbers and advanced stats indicate that he should be playing at a much higher level.

 

Ergo, the decision of who is the better pitcher depends on which stats you're looking at, as well as how strongly you prefer to rely on past-performance and the projections yielded from them. I think most people have the tendency to see a player's above- and below-average performances as anomalies which will eventually regress toward their career numbers. As I am of that ilk, I see Davis as a superior pitcher to Bush, and believe that the numbers will eventually bare this out.

[FVBrewerFan]

The only stat that matters to me is whether the SP "got the job done" in each start or not. Either they get a plus, minus, or even. An even" would be very similar to the quality start stat. Any thing worse than that is a minus, anything better than that is a plus. This way, you eliminate the one or two best/worst games which can skew the numbers.

 

I look at it this way, because ultimately games are won and lost one start at a time. Either the SP did their job or they didn't. Doesn't matter much to me if the SP gave up 4 runs or 7 runs in a 3 inning outing for example. That's why I give more credence to the "quality start" stat than most here. While "quality" may not be the best term for it...maybe "acceptable" start.