The Forgotten Chad Billingsley...(Vs. Matt Cain)

by SenorGato88 on Aug 4, 2007 3:26 AM EDT Comment 11 comments

now has an ERA of 3.43 with 82 K's in 85 IP.

He's a bit homer prone and his control isn't stunning, but I don't consider them a big deal in the long term.

I'd like him to go back to his groundball tendencies from last year, and I like his stuff enough that I think he can get there again.

He seems to have become the forgotten guy in the group of elite pitching prospects recently called up. I like him ALOT more than Matt Cain for the long term, but that doesn't seem to be the prevailing thought.

What exactly is the difference between Cain and Billingsley that got Cain so much more hype? Billingsley's stuff is not exactly lesser, seeing as his two breaking balls are way more advanced than Cain's. His control's better. He K's more guys.

0 recs | Comment 11 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The difference....

...was their performance in MLB. Billingsly was kind of a "Post-Hype Sleeper" coming into this season. He still had the stuff, he still had the minor league track record, and he was still young. The reason he was forgotten about was because he was terrible in the Show last season and he wasn't eligible for the preseason prospect lists. The Billingsly vs Cain debate should be a good one over the next few years since not only are they comparable prospects, they play for bitter division rivals.

by rwperu34 on Aug 4, 2007 3:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

"Terrible" Last Year?

Billingsley's strikeout-to-walk ratio was certainly terrible last season, but the bottom line in pitching is still keeping opponent runs off the board. Billingsley had a 3.80 ERA last year, so it is pretty foolish to call that performance terrible, especially from a 21-year-old rookie who would have just been drafted last year if he hadn't turned pro after high school. Because of all the walks, I guess it is fair to say that compared to his pitching prospect "peer group" -- Liriano, Verlander, and Cain --Billingsley had the "least smooth" introduction to the majors. Compared to those other three, Billingsley's fastball is also probably the "least electric," even though it is still good. I prefer Billingsley's secondary pitches to Cain's or Verlander's, however. Those secondary pitches are what entitles him to be included in the Liriano, Verlander, and Cain group.

by CanuckDodger on Aug 4, 2007 4:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't think

anyone is criticizing Billingsley, they're just commenting on why he fell through the cracks relative to his peer group. He maybe shouldn't have had a 3.80 ERA given his peripherals last year, and even a 3.80 is (slightly) disappointing for a guy in Liriano's league, when Liriano was putting up 2.something ERAs.

He's obviously incredible, and I think the only "critique" you can tie to him is that he didn't dominate right out the gate, but pitched well. Just not dominant enough to draw comps to having a Verlander-like impact. So, he slipped through the cracks. That's all. He's still supremely talented and an incredible pitcher, at a phenomenal age.

by mroak89 on Aug 4, 2007 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

cain and billingsley

this year billingsley has been steady 92-94 with his 4 seamer and sometimes hitting 96 when he has to. He cuts his fb a lot and has been progressing steadily with his change up. I honestly haven't seen him throw his slider in a while. Right now hes going with his cutter as his harder breaking pitch to go along with his curveball.

his splits are interesting

vs LHB: .250avg 2hr 136AB
vs RHB: .197avg 8hr 157AB

by npurcell on Aug 4, 2007 5:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

to add

I think i wish Billingsley would do is quicken his tempo while on the rubber. I LOVE Cain's quick tempo.

by npurcell on Aug 4, 2007 5:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ALOT?

IMO, Cain and Billingsly are comparable pitchers at this point. Anybody who favors one by ALOT loses some credibility. Billingsley has come along more slowly than Matt in the majors, but both have huge upsides.

As for the breaking stuff, did you catch Cain's game last night against San Diego? His breaking stuff was just plain nasty.

Cain has been snakebit this year, but he also has had a bit of a lull in his performance in the 10 or so starts prior to last night's game. To my eye, he has been consciously working on his secondary stuff, adding a two seamer and a steadily improving breaking pitch and change to his repertoire. He's getting more GB outs.

Provided continued good health, of course, Cain is going to emerge from all this as an elite pitcher. I still think Tom Seaver is the guy he reminds me most of. Billingsley looks like he could be every bit as good. Should have some epic battles for Giants and Dodger fans to look forward to.

by DrBGiantsfan on Aug 4, 2007 11:09 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Question...

How important is credibility loss over the internet really?

Cain may have had his breaking stuff working against the Pads, but everytime I see him its either on but he's missing, it's on and its kickass, or it's completely off. He's highly inconsistent with his breaking stuff.

Plus, I'm not a big fan of Cain's periphs this year, and his control has gotten worse.

I like Cain long term, but right now he's really inconsistent and still has alot of work to do.

by SenorGato88 on Aug 5, 2007 3:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Breaking Stuff

That wasn't just a one game blip for Cain. He's been forcing the secondary stuff in order to deveiop it and it has been coming along steadily. He will continue to be somewhat inconsistent for awhile, but even his bad games aren't horrible.

Billingsley hasn't exactly been a model of consistency himself and command of the secondary stuff is an issue with him too.

I'm not objecting to you favoring Billngsley. I'm objecting to the word "ALOT".

As for credibility, I guess since nobody here knows you in real life, you can sound as stupid as you want. Some of us just like to be taken seriously even in anonymity.

by DrBGiantsfan on Aug 5, 2007 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I do like being taken seriously...

and one of those ways I do that is by not pretending I'm important enough to take and give credibility to posters.

I get the feeling I've talked enough baseball on here to not lose my precious credibility over liking Chad Billingsley more than I like Cain.

It's not like I don't like Cain. You are right on one thing, I shouldn't have used "alot."

by SenorGato88 on Aug 5, 2007 10:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They are both very good, if not excellent...

...but neither is worthy of residing on the same coast of the United States as Timothy Lincecum.

by samjjones on Aug 4, 2007 12:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Tme Will Tell

I'm still not completely sold on Timmy's long term durability. Both Cain and Billz are horses.

One other point. Billingsley's body is significantly shorter and squattier than Cain. Not saying that makes him project worse, but Cain has a much more classic pitcher's body.

by DrBGiantsfan on Aug 4, 2007 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs