The Forgotten Chad Billingsley...(Vs. Matt Cain)
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 |
11 comments
Comments
The difference....
by rwperu34 on Aug 4, 2007 3:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
"Terrible" Last Year?
by CanuckDodger on Aug 4, 2007 4:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't think
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
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
ALOT?
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...
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
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...
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...
by samjjones on Aug 4, 2007 12:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Tme Will Tell
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

by 












