Gibson + Change-up + Confidence = Ace?

[h2oface]

 

If you think a team's ace dominating them to a title is common, I encourage you to go research that.  You'll find it's simply not true.

 

In fact, Bumgarner is the exception, not the rule.

Well, let's see if these count..... already mentioned, Madison Bumgarner (2014), and Randy Johnson (2001)...... Chris Carpenter (2011), and going back some years now.....Lew Burdette (1957), and Sandy Koufax (1965, remember him? Drysdale didn't hurt as #2, and in 1963), and Bob Gibson (1967 and almost '68) and Mickey Lolich, a #2 (1968 as Bob Gibson beats Detroit's #1 Denny McClain twice but loses to Lolich in game 7 as Lolich goes 3-0), and Jack Morris (1991, 1.17 ERA, 2-0, can't forget that one.... and 1984), Whitey Ford (1961, and almost 1960), - in the 60's it was more like a rule, and with a 4 man rotation - Orel Hershiser (1988), Bret Saberhagen (1985)............ there are more, especially the further you go back in history, and I guess some of the more could be debated..... but I don't know that it ever hurts to have great Ace pitchers going into the playoffs. I don't know that there is really an exception to the whatever rule here. Sure, anything can happen once you get in, and nothing is guaranteed, but it never hurts to have top of the line instead of innings eaters.

 

Someone else mentioned that May can battle Sale just as well in the playoffs as in the regular season. I would not bet on that. The pressure of the playoffs shows you who is really the Ace, and who can step up and into the pressure and shine. Kershaw is yet to even do that (at least in the later innings). It is a different ballgame in the playoffs, and I cannot compare those games to regular season games, at all.

[h2oface]

I wonder if Madison Baumgartner watches Wimbleton? I best ax him. Nothing wrong with getting it write. Curious minds want to no.

[h2oface]

 

I feel a little vindicated on my comment a while ago about Gibson.   He was considered lucky because his strikeout total was so low and I pointed out that maybe his success was real but his low strikeout total was unlucky.    Of course the vindication can easily disappear with two lousy outings.  Such is the cycle of baseball.

Gibson seems to always get pinched by the umpires, especially with his sinkers. He has low strikes that are consistently called balls. Pitch f/x shows us. Perhaps they umpires will get better, or when the machines call balls and strikes it will finally be corrected. 2-1 counts become 1-2 counts, as they should, and the whole at bat changes.

[TheLeviathan]

 

but I don't know that it ever hurts to have great Ace pitchers going into the playoffs. I don't know that there is really an exception to the whatever rule here. Sure, anything can happen once you get in, and nothing is guaranteed, but it never hurts to have top of the line instead of innings eaters.

 

Of course it doesn't hurt to have great players, but that wasn't the point.  Dave, correctly, said it's more valuable to have a depth of good #2/#3 pitchers than a top heavy rotation of one ace and a bunch of meh.  

 

The poster I replied to suggested Bumgarner proves that wrong and then you managed to find 3 examples in 15 years.  (A whopping 20% of the time an ace, arguably, made THE difference)  Look, it's always nice to have dominant players but the "you need an ace to win the title" is a meme that is ridiculous and demonstrably false.  

 

What you need is good pitching in the playoffs, but that frequently does not come from aces but instead from guys exactly like Kyle Gibson.

[Twodogs]

 

Gibson seems to always get pinched by the umpires, especially with his sinkers. He has low strikes that are consistently called balls. Pitch f/x shows us. Perhaps they umpires will get better, or when the machines call balls and strikes it will finally be corrected. 2-1 counts become 1-2 counts, as they should, and the whole at bat changes.

Getting it right???  I shore do hope theys umpires gets it wright pretty soon.

 

Just saying, hello pot, the kettle is calling.  I'm pretty sure no one misunderstood what you were trying to say.  I'm also pretty sure that everyone knew who I was talking about.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

In my opinion the Royals Ace was their bullpen.

i rest my case

[h2oface]

 

Getting it right???  I shore do hope theys umpires gets it wright pretty soon.

 

Just saying, hello pot, the kettle is calling.  I'm pretty sure no one misunderstood what you were trying to say.  I'm also pretty sure that everyone knew who I was talking about.

Please don't take offense. I was just funnin' around. By the time i posted that, you weren't even being considered. I was mostly tagging on to twinsnorth49. I will be glad to delete it if you request. I really am not meaning for it to be personal, and I apologize if it truly upsets you. It was just funnin' around with the english language.. sorry for the typo..... not really the same thing... but it was my mistake, the they instead of the. It won't be the first or last one. Hey....... the upside of it all? Now we all really know how to spell Bumgarner's name. Don't even get started on Stauffer, Pressly, Presley, Pressley, Mientkiewicz, Pierzynski, Pooholes.......

[HitInAPinch]

The last time I saw a real ACE pitching for the Twins, it was Johan Santana.  Dumped the circle-change on the outside corner [ or just outside ] to righthanded hitters, popped the fastball inside if they started leaning over.  He had a plan.

 

Kyle Gibson looked like he might be developing a plan.  He pitched a really good game and should have been allowed to finish it off. 

[jimmer]

The idea that Gibson is near Ace category is premature at best.

[Twodogs]

 

Please don't take offense. I was just funnin' around. By the time i posted that, you weren't even being considered. I was mostly tagging on to twinsnorth49. I will be glad to delete it if you request. I really am not meaning for it to be personal, and I apologize if it truly upsets you. It was just funnin' around with the english language.. sorry for the typo..... not really the same thing... but it was my mistake, the they instead of the. It won't be the first or last one. Hey....... the upside of it all? Now we all really know how to spell Bumgarner's name. Don't even get started on Stauffer, Pressly, Presley, Pressley, Mientkiewicz, Pierzynski, Pooholes.......

Naw thats fine.  I just thought you were piling on.  That's why I gave an explanation to when I went back at ya.

[Twodogs]

 

 

i rest my case

But they lost.  To SF who had an ACE?

[DocBauer]

Pfft! Everyone knows the Twins ACE is Nolasco.

[Twodogs]

In my defending of teams with Aces, I'm not saying that you absolutely need one.  But if I had my choice, I'd get one.  Even back in '87, the Twins had 2 really good pitchers, Blyleven had Ace like seasons, and maybe even Ace like numbers at the end of his career, he wasn't always Ace like, but he was pretty damn good.  Viola was Ace like for a number of years from the mid 80's till early 90's.  After those two they had Straker???  I mean, if it wasn't for the two really good pitchers the Twins had, they wouldn't have even been there let alone WS champs.

[Twodogs]

 

Pfft! Everyone knows the Twins ACE is Nolasco.

I know, 5 - 1 huh??

[Dantes929]

 

Hypothetical example: Team A has 5 starters who each go 15-10. Team B has 2 starters who go 21-4 and 3 starters who go 11-14. Both teams are 75-50 as a staff, which will almost certainly get you into the postseason. During the regular season I'd say team A probably has a bit of an advantage, especially if they are in the same division and play each other 19 times. But in a 7-game postseason series I'd put my money on team B.

Yes, I would agree with this example but rather extreme since only one pitcher in the majors came close to that 21-4 stat.    Playoffs or no you would rather have aces but aces or no everyone gets beat and every year a #2 or 3 guy pitches like an ace.   In half of his starts in the last two years Gibson has given up 1 run or less.   Get to the playoffs.   I don't mind taking my chances with guys like him.  Some years it won't work out so well and some years it will.

[Dantes929]

 

Bumgarner a borderliner? I guess the Twins aren't even close to an Ace then, eh?

I like the guy and obviously he is capable of great things.    In ERA last year there were 2 Dodgers and 3 Nationals ahead of him and overall he was 14th in the 15 team National League.      Twins had a borderline ace in Hughes last year and some guys pitching well this year so far but like I said.  I don't like the labels so much.   We just beat up on Sale twice.   Is he an ace or not?  Aces get beat and non aces can pitch like aces.    I would bet money on the ace.   Its self evident but there is more to the game and there are only so many that fit the bill anyway.

[blairpaul715]

For me a definition of an ACE is someone that is better than good during the regular season and consistent, and/or is able to step it up a notch in a BIG game or postseason on a regular basis. True Aces are few and far between, the word is used to much, but i also know that all teams call their #1 an ace for their team. I may miss some but true aces, or soon to be  are , Kershaw, Verlander, F Hernandez, Greinke, Scherzer, G Cole, C Archer ,Harvey, Bumgarner, Hamels, Cueto, Price , might be missing someone, but their is not many more than that, and maybe even one or two of these is debateable

[jimbo92107]

 

Gibson had the same pitch mix that he's had in the past. He executed his pitches better than usual, but there's no reason to think he can do that every time out. If he does this for an extended period, that would be different.

I could be wrong, but I think we're seeing the results of that gradual evolution of a ballplayer that's called "figuring things out." It happened for Trevor Plouffe and Brian Dozier. It's beginning to happen for Aaron Hicks. It can take years and many thousands of repetitions of the same old baseball drills, but all that hard work does tend to have an effect.

 

Dozier was a singles hitter and a mediocre second baseman. Now he's an excellent defender, and one of the most dangerous 2B hitters in the league. Plouffe was a streaky hitter and a semi-butcher at 3B. Now he's getting near the top in both categories. Hicks seems to have suddenly become an excellent CF, and his hitting is...well, still a work in progress. Hitting has never seemed natural for Hicks, but with thousands more reps...

 

Kyle Gibson is experiencing a similar gradual improvement. He already had good control when he came up, but now it's better. He did already have a full complement of pitches, but his command was inconsistent. Now, he's more precise. His poise on the mound was already advanced for a young pitcher. Now, he's practically unflappable.

 

Yes, it's unfair to compare Kyle Gibson to Cy Young candidates at this stage. His stuff isn't completely overwhelming. But he's at a point right now where he's getting consistently good results most of the time, and he no longer falls apart after one bad inning. He's trusting his stuff, sticking to his plan, and fielding his position like a pro. With good fielding, Gibson can look like an ace often enough to fool at least this Twins fan.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I don't know what to think of Gibson right now. Looking through his stats over the past two years, he has 40 starts.

 

In 20 of those starts, he has given up two or fewer earned runs. That's... close to ace-like.

 

The difference between 2014 and 2015 Gibson is that he hasn't mixed in a bunch of clunkers this season. After giving up six earned runs in his first start of the season, he hasn't given up more than three.

 

Lucky? Probably, at least to some extent... But we might be watching the emergence of what many predicted was Gibson's ceiling as a prospect: a very good #2 starter who doesn't miss bats but induces a ton of groundballs. Those guys will always be prone to a single-game implosion but that's why they're a #2 pitcher, not an ace.

 

What I find concerning is that his peripherals haven't really stepped up since 2014 and in some cases, they slightly regressed. Whether that will continue or whether the last few starts (more strikeouts and missed bats) are indicative of the new Kyle Gibson remains to be seen.

[drivlikejehu]

Who are the #2 starters with peripherals like Gibson? I guess that would be the source of my skepticism.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Who are the #2 starters with peripherals like Gibson? I guess that would be the source of my skepticism.

That's the major cause of my skepticism as well but I don't think there are many good comps for Gibson. Buerhle has been a good #2 for a long time but he doesn't induce groundballs like Gibson. Jon Garland is another guy who doesn't miss bats but again, he doesn't induce groundballs like Kyle. Bartolo Colon... But again, doesn't induce groundballs.

 

There are guys who pitch like a #2 for a prolonged period of time but fail to miss bats, I just can't think of one with Gibson's toolset offhand.

[Loosey]

I don't really like the term "ace".  It can been so many things.  For some Ace means he is the best pitcher on his team, for others he is the leader of their pitching staff, A la Brad Radke.  Yet others define an ace as the type of pitcher who is exceptionally better than 95% of the other pitchers in baseball, and is a perennial Cy Young candidate that dominates and overpowers hitters with stuff that is unhittable much of the time.  I think of the latter as a true Ace.

 

That being said I think Gibson is turning into great pitcher.  What he did to the Sox on Sunday was fantastic.  He isn't unhittable, but when he is tuned in he makes it very difficult to square up the ball and causes the occasional whiff.  He is beginning to gain confidence in his offspeed stuff and picking up a lot more strikeouts than he was earlier in the season, which is huge.  If he can turn in more performances like that one he will solidify himself as top of the rotation fixture for years to come.  Maybe not an "Ace" but someone who will give his team great opportunities to win every outing. 

 

And occasionally when those type of pitchers put together full seasons of that type of baseball they do win awards and go to All-Star games.  He doesn't need to be an ace to be effective and help this team win. Just

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

That being said I think Gibson is turning into great pitcher.  What he did to the Sox on Sunday was fantastic. 

I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade but I put almost zero stock in what pitchers do to the Sox this season. They're last in the AL in OPS despite playing half their games in a child's shoebox.

 

I just looked at the MLB stats and the Sox are 29th in OPS, ahead of only the Phillies.

 

Ouch.

[drivlikejehu]

 

That's the major cause of my skepticism as well but I don't think there are many good comps for Gibson. Buerhle has been a good #2 for a long time but he doesn't induce groundballs like Gibson. Jon Garland is another guy who doesn't miss bats but again, he doesn't induce groundballs like Kyle. Bartolo Colon... But again, doesn't induce groundballs.

 

There are guys who pitch like a #2 for a prolonged period of time but fail to miss bats, I just can't think of one with Gibson's toolset offhand.

 

Buehrle is a completely different pitcher though. There are always one or two crafty southpaws in the league that get results with deception and command.

 

Garland had a decent run from '05-'07 but it's probably a stretch to say he was a #2 starter, though he threw a lot of slightly above-average innings that resulted in solid WAR totals. 

 

One comp that comes to mind is Scott Feldman... a tall righty with a sinker and poor peripherals. He's been somewhat inconsistent, at times pitching like a #3 but with some down years where he didn't provide much value. 

 

At his best, Gibson is probably better, but I suspect he may be prone to the same kind of ups and downs given how many baserunners he allows. So maybe he can be a #3, but a frustrating one.

[Brock Beauchamp]

It all depends on what you consider a #2... Personally, I think a guy who strings together a few seasons of 110-ish ERA+ ball is easily a #2 pitcher (Matt Garza, Brad Radke types). Your mileage may vary.

[Linus]

He barely has one year under his belt in the big leagues.  What we are likely seeing is the natural improvement that most ballplayers (that stick) have as they gain more experience in the big leagues.  Very few (pitchers or otherwise) come in and perform at their highest career standard in the first couple of years.

 

As far as the whole Ace thing goes, I don't get it.  People are debating something that they don't even have a definition for the term they are debating.

[Cast of Thousands]

 

I like Gibson, but please, let's not talk about him being an ace or an "all star" based on ERA and W-Ls

 

Matter of fact, Gibson's FIP, xFIP, SIERA, K% this season is worse than last season.

 

Was he an "ace" or "an all star" pitcher last season?  If not, then he is not this season

 

The way that Gibson is pitching is the way a solid number 3 or number 4 pitcher should be pitching in a contender.  But the Twins forgot what a contender is, and if I am not mistaken, more than one media outlets even called Diamond an 'ace'.   In that comparison, Gibson wins, but an ace he is not.

I disagree.  You said "The way Gibson is pitching...", while at the same time you're citing his entire season numbers.

 

Since May 1, in 5 starts, he's boasting a 1.25 ERA, 21K/5BB, and is 3-1 while averaging over 7 innings per start.  5 starts may not be a huge sample size but it's more than just a 1-2 game hot streak.

 

Ace?  Probably not.  Probably not close.  But #3 or #4?  That's a tough argument.  I'd love to see a staff where you're getting the above numbers from you #4 starter.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Gibson was a pretty typical #4 last season and he's getting very different results this season while his peripherals have been on the upswing over the past month. I don't how anyone can classify Gibson as a #4 at this point. His K/BB ratio went from a 0.5 (ugghhhh) in April to a 4.2 in May. Everything is trending in the right direction for the guy.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

As far as the whole Ace thing goes, I don't get it.  People are debating something that they don't even have a definition for the term they are debating.

Especially considering the OP described "ace" for this thread as guy with top of rotation stuff. That's a fun argument to make considering how well the staff is throwing.

[ericchri]

A ridiculous comparison in general, but it's always easiest to pick the superstars as everybody remembers them, but I think there are flashes of being more Roy Halladay-ish in his pitching than a lot of the other recent top pitchers.  He's not that good, obviously, but to me if he ever "puts it all together" or "finally gets it" or whatever you want to call it, that's what he would probably resemble.  He's not a Roger Clemens or Felix Hernandez, a Verlander or Pedro, but if he's got his location right he's getting you to pound balls into the dirt and getting enough strikeouts to just dominate.  He's not gonna get to that level, likely, but he's starting to show enough that he might be our next Brad Radke, not a superstar but a really good pitcher you can count on.  If he finishes this season like he's been pitching recently, then next year is the year we watch to see if he's becoming an "Ace" but there's no way you say that about him this year.