This was basically a “move along, folks, nothing to see here” kind of game. Trevor Cahill didn’t have it, and other than back-to-back homers by Freddie Freeman and A.J. Pierzynski, neither did the offense. It was 3-0 before the Braves came to bat, and the margin literally never got any closer than that.
Cahill’s struggles were not entirely unexpected — he changed his arm slot during the offseason and the Diamondbacks were willing to trade him and $6.5 million for a non-prospect — but there’s still a glimmer of hope that he could be a useful pitcher at some point during the year, as he had a few nice heavy sinkers and touched 93-94 at points during the evening. Something to dream on.
Meanwhile, Sugar Ray Marimon, Julio Teheran’s second cousin, had a very successful major league debut: after Cahill got knocked out in the third, Marimon bailed out the rest of the bullpen by going four innings, allowing two runs, and legging out an infield single during his first major league at-bat. He was throwing 95 and threw 44 strikes to just 15 balls. That’s pretty good.
Tonight, Eric Stults goes against Dan Haren. Haren’s last three years have basically been like a slightly better version of Mike Minor in 2014: good K/BB, but his teams still get killed because he gives up 1.4 homers per nine innings.
(Actual statistical comparison:
Minor in 2014: 6-12, 4.77 ERA, 76 ERA+, 4.39 FIP, 7.4 K/9, 2.7 BB/9, 1.3 HR/9
Dan Haren 2012-2014: 35-38, 4.30 ERA, 86 ERA+, 4.14 FIP, 7.4 K/9, 1.8 BB/9, 1.4 HR/9)
And apparently we’ve got this guy:
When a pitcher is “homer prone” does anybody know if that means (a) guys that usually hit home runs hit more or (b) guys who don’t usually hit homeruns hit more or (c) proportionally, each group tends to increase prorata?
Because if it is (a), then Haren should be an effective pitcher against the Braves.
@1, I wondered the same thing. I’m predicting an impressive display of warning track power.
Dan Haren gives up HR’s to pretty much anyone.
Yikes,
Melvin Upton leading the way with 6 knocks off Senor Haren.
Cistulli on Cody Martin.
I liked what I saw of Sugar Ray last night. If you throw 91-93 with control it’s better than throwing 95+ without control.
Well Stu @ 5,
I read it all and it didn’t tell me much. I knew that Cody Martin wasn’t better than Craig Kimbrel. A NEGATIVE xFIP? Somebody needs to rework that formula.
I am sure that more sample will have to be in the tank to tell us if he can be a legit 4 starter or legit 2nd righthanded reliever / “8th inning guy.”
I can’t remember if it was Cody or somebody else interviewed in the past few days, but whoever had started a “spike curve” that was coming in around 75 to an original old style curve at 70. The “spike curve” is “the Braves pitch” like the cutter with the White Sox and the Cardinals with the sinker when Dave Duncan was there. Somehow, somebody has figured out how to be consistently in control of that thing and everybody that adds it seems to get better overall.
The negative FIP means Cody Martin causes a team to lose runs when he is in the game. He’s a run vampire.
7—Not sure whether you’re used to Cistulli’s writing style, but I actually thought it was interesting, if lighthearted. If you think he was trying to tell you that Martin isn’t better than Kimbrel, you missed his point(s) entirely.
The Run Vampire is a good nickname.
Haren used to be one of the better pitchers in baseball, but right now he’s basically something like Ricky Nolasco or Bad Javier Vazquez: a great K/BB ratio that’s mitigated by his propensity to throw a bunch of meatballs.
If Cody Martin turned into Darren O’Day, I think we’d all be overjoyed.
Game thread is up.