Axford's been outstanding

[HiAndTight]

No its that Axford is a better pitcher. Turnbow in 2005 had an FIP of 3.20. The last two seasons Axford's FIP has been 2.13 and 2.07.

65 IP, 58 IP and 35 IP.

 

I'd go on, but it just doesn't seem necessary.

[Funketown]

Axford's career FIP of 2.18 in 101 innings is far better than Turnbow's even in his one good season. It's probably not all that unlikely for Axford to lose his control and become somewhat ineffective, but I don't think I'd ever bet on any player collapsing as epicly as Turnbow.

 

I had my concerns at the start of the season when his fastball velocity was down, but he's obviously figured that out.

 

Edit: For the record, Turnbow did not throw much harder than Axford. Turnbow's fastball average from 2005 to 2007 was about 95.4; Axford's over the last two years has been about 95. He may not have better raw "stuff", but he certainly can locate pitches better than Turnbow.

[endaround]

And the point would be what? Axford has pitched significantly better than Turnbow. Yes its over a small amount of innings but thats still a huge difference between the two.

[HiAndTight]

And the point would be what? Axford has pitched significantly better than Turnbow. Yes its over a small amount of innings but thats still a huge difference between the two.

I would think the "point" would be obvious. Both come from similar backgrounds. And absurdly small sample sizes aside, both have incredible stuff, and have been incredibly wild in their past opening the door for Axford to potentially duplicate Turnbow's precipitous decline.

 

And the difference in the two thus far seems to be Axford's "ability" so to speak to not completely melt down when he puts someone on base and when he does walk people as Turnbow so often did.

 

I'm confident in Axford right now, but to not see the potential for him to suffer a similar fate seems to be a bit deluded.

[Funketown]

100 innings isn't an absurdly small sample, especially when his peripherals support his ERA.