Anderson/Cahill or Holland/Feliz?
by Michael Cave on Sep 29, 2009 4:46 PM EDT
Email
PrintFirst, let me qualify this by saying I am a Rangers fan. Prior to this season and during last season there has been a huge debate over which duo in the West one would take: Anderson/Cahill or Holland/Feliz?
The season is about to be over and each guy has gotten a good amount of ML time (I am not going to dive too deep into the numbers as im sure many posters will invoke that information in a more qualified fashion than I could).
Trevor Cahill (age: 21)
Record: 10-12
ERA: 4.55
K/9: 4.6
K/BB: 1.27
Brett Anderson (age: 21)
Record: 11-12
ERA: 4.12
K/9: 7.7
K/BB: 3.3
Derek Holland (age: 22, about to turn 23)
Record: 8-12
ERA: 6.14
K/9: 7.1
K/BB: 2.21
Neftali Feliz (age: 21) – as a reliever
Record: 1-0
ERA: 1.80
Saves: 2
K/9: 11.4
K/BB: 5.43
A few comments: As a Ranger fan I can admit that as impressive/exciting as Feliz was, Holland was equally as frustrating. He would pitch marvelous games and then of course absolute stinkers. However this can be expected with rookies. Feliz was electric out of the pen this yr but there is a question of whether he will stay in his current role or start which makes the debate that much more intriguing. Anderson looks like the real deal. He will be terrorizing the Rangers for years im sure. Cahill’s K/9 worries me so next year itll be interesting to see if he increases it. Him and Anderson did make a pretty big jump this yr.
So which duo would you take right now for the next 10 yrs?
65 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
anderson cahill by a mile
anderson is by far the best player here..
and cahill ws suppose to be better then anderson… shows you how much potential he has…
and we dont know about felizz starting in the bigs and how good he will be
and holland hasnt been that great this year
I can understand
either pair but i believe saying “by a mile” is a bit much. You mention Cahill’s potential yet dismiss Feliz’s potential as a starter. Seems rather contradictory to me.
08/03/2009 A day that will live in infamy for the rest of the AL West.
by Michael Cave on Sep 29, 2009 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions
He did in the minors
08/03/2009 A day that will live in infamy for the rest of the AL West.
by Michael Cave on Sep 29, 2009 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions
He averaged less than five innings per start in the minors in 2009
13 starts; 60 2/3 innings.
I believe the resident Rangers fans
told us before that was for innings/pitch limit purposes. Regardless, the scouting reports have Feliz keeping his stuff and velocity late into games.
Correct
I saw him pitch twice in AA into the 6th inning and he was still firing high 90s. You are right, very much a pitch limit thing
08/03/2009 A day that will live in infamy for the rest of the AL West.
by Michael Cave on Sep 30, 2009 9:00 AM EDT up reply actions
How about he maintains his velocity past 90 pitches
Is that better? The Rangers were very strict with him about his innings and pitch limits in the minors.
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
Anderson is the best of them right now.
But Feliz looks really really good. Very excited to see what he’ll do with a full year of starting in MLB next year (or maybe not, since I’m an A’s fan). But in the future, I don’t think you can go wrong with either.
So of course, this comes down to Holland and Cahill. Cahill and Holland have really been pretty freaking bad this year (tRAs of around 5.90) but Cahill has been showing improvement these last two months. Both of them have been rushed. Blah, obviously it comes down to upside and who you think is gonna quickly improve more. I’d have to go with Cahill for now since he’s shown more improvement recently while Holland seems to have gotten worse.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
In regards
to Cahill (you are an A’s fan and im sure saw him pitch more than i did) are you worried at all by his K/9?
08/03/2009 A day that will live in infamy for the rest of the AL West.
by Michael Cave on Sep 29, 2009 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, very.
The reason for that is because he has entirely given up on throwing his knuckle curve since, well, he’s so overmatched in the major leagues. Recently, he’s just been trying to establish command of his two seam fastball, get groundballs, and limit home runs. And over the last two months, he’s actually been able to accomplish that pretty well.
Cahill’s main focus in the offseason/spring training will be to reintroduce the knuckle curve into his repertoire. Hopefully then, the Ks would come but as of now, he doesn’t project to be any better than a number 4.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Sep 29, 2009 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Anderson is overrated...
he could be a number one pitcher, but his potential is very similar to Holland’s and Holland could easily end up the better pitcher. Feliz, in my opinion, has miles more of potential than Cahill. I see Cahill as more of a good number 2 starter than a true number 1 like Feliz could be.
i think anderson > holland is fairly easy to say for me
because even if i’ve underrated holland’s breaking ball, i can say with 100% certainty that anderson’s secondary pitchers are quite a bit better.
baseball rules.
Cahill
He didn’t give up throwing his curve because he’s overmatched, that doesn’t make any sense. He hasn’t thrown it because he hasn’t had good control or also maybe the A’s just did not want him to throw it this season. My guess is just the that he hasn’t thrown it because he hasn’t had control this season.
I also don’t agree with people who say that his K rate is extremely worrisome because he hasn’t thrown possibly his best (def his best swing and miss) offering (knuckle curve).
Saying he doesn’t project right now to be any better than a #4 is way too much of stretch. 21yr old rookie, who was rushed majors from AA w/a 4.7 ERA and whip of 1.45 without his best swing and miss pitch all season is pretty damn good, considering.
Another tight question.
But as lenscrafters said, Anderson is the best of them right now. Given that, and given that Cahill has pitched a bit better lately, and that it’s way too early to give up on him (who was rushed to the majors, but is still only 21 and has good ground ball tendencies), I’ll give the slightest edge to the A’s duo.
Can’t really go wrong either way though.
It pains me to do this
As a Rangers fan, but I’m choosing the Oakland duo based almost entirely on Anderson. I think he’s as close as there is to a lock to become an ace.
I take Holland over Cahill because firstly, he has a far superior K rate, and that’s something which is actually fairly static throughout a pitcher’s career until he reaches his peak; command is far more likely to improve than K rate, and therefore I don’t think Cahill has great upside.
Additionally, Holland’s giving up a ludicrous number of home runs despite a pretty standard GB/FB rate. He’s been very unlucky to this point, and will likely put up sexier numbers next year.
I like steak.
Cahill has also given up significantly more HR than one would expect from his FB rate
His HR/FB is about 15%, or half again as much as an average pitcher.
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
Hmm, solid point
That being said, pitchers with heavy GB tendencies have higher HR/FB rates than average. His numbers will definitely drop from 15%, though.
I just have a hard time seeing him as a frontline starter with that K/BB ratio.
I like steak.
It's clear that he will not be a frontline starter if he doesn't massively improve K/BB
Other than a few see-no-evil-hear-no-evil-speak-no-evil A’s fanboys, no one would dispute that.
The question is whether he can; I tend to say yes, but it’s going to basically require a total reboot of his pitches and mechanics.
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
To me that says that Cahill makes a lot of mistakes
The average (or flyball) pitcher will just give up a homers because fly balls tend to go far sometimes. It happens. With Cahill, it seems more like he makes a lot of mistakes (leaving that sinker up), and then grown ass men hit the ball 450 feet. I don’t think it’s so much a matter of stuff or movement or velocity, but execution.
by thejd44 on Sep 30, 2009 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Ill take Holland and Feliz
I feel Feliz is the best of the arms, followed by Anderson. I like Holland and Cahill both a lot, but I’ll take Holland. Slightest of edges to the Texas duo – who has a little bit greater chance of being really special.
I’m with you on this. Fangraphs ran an article on the territory Holland is getting into. There’s a precedent suggesting that we ought to look for a strong rebound. His HR/9 is atrocious. But other than that his peripherals sparkle, especially is ability to generate k’s while walking very few hitters (7.1 K/BB).
I’ll take these two next year.
My uncle says you've got a screw loose.
Your uncle molests collies.
by gorilla_baller on Sep 29, 2009 10:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Anyone who doesnt see Holland's 2009 as extremely promising and exciting really doesnt understand baseball
Ill go so far as to say that. Stats wise and scouting wise, he impressed this year.
I saw a LOT to like about this kid this year. Very good chance he emerges as a front line starter in the next couple of years (allowing for some more bumps in the road).
Young pitcher rushed, barely spends any time in the high minors – it shouldnt surprise people to see him struggle at times. What was amazing was how he dominated at times, and how he fooled MLB hitters. A great deal of success in the majors has to do with polish/veteran know-how. Holland doesnt have any yet. He was damned good with just his pure stuff while learning on the job.
Really, I dont know how far behind Anderson I have Holland. I really dont want to kill Cahill here – because I do like him a lot… but I see three special arms that could become Aces with big strikeout numbers (Feliz being the most special). In Cahill, I see a groundball pitcher who is good enough at everything else to be a #2-3 starter. That’s really awesome, and we would talk about him a lot more if he werent paired with Anderson. This poll, in that sense, isnt very fair to Cahill… yet, again, IMHO the biggest gap between these two pairs is the difference between Cahill and Holland, so I keep finding myself coming back to discussing Cahill’s deficiencies.
I just think Feliz is a true elite talent – probably the young pitcher Ive been most excited about since Felix (Buchholz close behind) and I put Anderson and Holland up there with any of the good SP prospects of recent vintage.
by alskor on Sep 29, 2009 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Plus One Guy
I have to say, I COMPLETELY agree with you. The voting is really focused on Feliz’s temporary relieving stint and Holland’s ERA but, I feel like Anderson/ Holland are a toss up- Feliz is amazing- and Cahill is pretty damned good.
For the record, he’s got a 7.2 K/9 and a 3.1 BB/9. That’s a 2.3 K/BB, NOT a 7.1 K/BB. The former is pretty good, the latter is Pedro-like.
Yeah. I just misread the stats listed above.
My uncle says you've got a screw loose.
Your uncle molests collies.
by gorilla_baller on Oct 5, 2009 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions
Fangraphs recently put Holland's season in perspective
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-impressive-derek-holland
Holland is the 20th rookie pitcher in baseball history to throw at least 120 innings and post a BB/9 below 3.5 and a K/9 above 7.0. Of the 20 pitchers, only three others besides Holland have posted a below average ERA during that rookie season – John Danks in 2007, James Shields in 2006, and Roger Clemens in 1984.
In his second year, Danks saw his ERA drop from 5.50 to 3.32. Shields went from 4.84 to 3.85. Clemens went from 4.32 to 3.29. All of them knocked a run per game off their ERA totals the following year.
Danks is a particularly useful comparison, given how similar their profiles are. Holland’s issues with the home run are basically equal to Danks’, as they both gave up 1.8 homers per nine innings, in part due to a high HR/FB rate. Danks HR/9 fell to 0.69 the following year, which was the driving force in his second year improvement. Holland shouldn’t be expected to see an equal drop in home run rate, but it’s a good bet that he’ll be better at keeping balls in the park next year. And that’s going to make a big difference in his results.
I would take...
Feliz/Holland because I believe they have more potential. Feliz can dial up the gun and could be a true “ace”. Holland could be an ace also, but will probably be Texas’ number two behind Feliz. I think Danks is a good comparison for Holland, but I believe Holland will be better because he has more velocity on his fastball. Feliz has more potential than Anderson in my opinion and Holland has more than Cahill and I’ll take more potential over a higher floor. It’s very close and either pair could be the top 1-2 punch in baseball in a few years.
I am pretty sure Anderson falls into category
Rookie pitcher with 120 innings, a BB/9 under 3.5, and a K/9 above 7. Except Anderson has actually been able to get that to use into not giving up runs.
Other than a coulple really good starts, Holland has been horrific. He hasn’t just been getting hit, he has been hammered.
I wasn't arguing Anderson over Holland
I was simply giving some context as to why people are still high on Holland.
i've only seen him twice
but it seems like holland’s breaking pitch (slider?) really doesn’t have that tight of break. seems loopy. good fastball, no doubt. but how good will he be without a good breaking ball?
baseball rules.
He just started throwing a curve (two months ago?)
It won’t be as good as Anderson’s slider but it shows good promise.
The 2009 Texas Rangers offense: sigh...
by Kinslerhomer on Sep 29, 2009 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions
good info
can’t wait to see what kind of progress it makes. i’d like him a lot more if that pitch can improve.
baseball rules.
I'd take Anderson/Cahill by a decent amount
Anderson is the best of the four pitchers; Cahill’s groundball rates have looked pretty good lately. Feliz has big time potential but I don’t think he ends up as successful as Anderson will. I am not a huge Holland fan; I actually think he is more comparable to Gio Gonzalez (with much better control obviously) than Brett Anderson.
Jack "The Must, Just has no Rust, ain't no Bust, after him the ladies Lust, turns pitchers into Dust, likes his pizza with no Crust" Cust
yes but this was a AL west showdown
they aer in the east
by matthewmafa on Sep 29, 2009 10:08 PM EDT up reply actions
tough for me
i loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooove matusz. probably more so than any other pitcher in this group. but Tillman is lower on this list of these 6. so not really sure. definitive answer…i know.
baseball rules.
Really? You think Tillman is at the very bottom out of all these guys? IMO Matusz and Anderson are in the same tier. Feliz I rank slightly below, he has the best upside, but least chance to remain a starter IMO. But after those 3 Id take Tillman. His command isnt there just yet, but hes been improving it. Same thing with the changeup, he turned that into a plus pitch this year. I bet next year, you see Tillman emerge as one of the best rookie pitchers to come outta 09. I like him much more than Holland or Cahill, and he really showed his ability to be consistent this year until his last start or 2.
IMO I take Baltimore’s duo….And in honesty, if you wanna see who has the best trio, I still go with Baltimore, Matusz, Tillman, Arrieta….
I'd take
Feliz, Holland and Perez over them.
The 2009 Texas Rangers offense: sigh...
by Kinslerhomer on Sep 30, 2009 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Anderson might be the best of them
But I’m pretty confident Cahill is the worst.
So, uh, I guess I don’t know.
we in the losin baseball binness. and cousin, binness is a boomin.
Feliz/Holland
I love Anderson, and wouldn’t give up on cahill yet, but I think Holland’s peripherals show a lot of promise, although he’s not in Anderson’s league yet. Feliz is the difference maker in my mind, even if he was pitching in relief in the bighs this year. I don’t think Cahill is as good as the other 3.
Feliz is so hard to compare to the others
Obviously Anderson>Holland>Cahill right now. Feliz could show up anywhere on that list. But Feliz’s ceiling is so high, and I’m a sucker for high ceilings….
Go Rice Owls!
I took the Rangers Duo
I’m basing a lot of this on potential, but in my opinion right now I would rank them Anderson, Feliz, Holland, Cahill. Anderson is the best right now (and I love him) but Cahill really worries me. I think Feliz will make the transition to starter and Holland will eventually come around. In the future my order could easily be Feliz, Anderson, Holland, Cahill which makes it more obvious why I would take the Rangers duo. There is a lot of projection involved but I think the two Rangers will be better than the two A’s in the long run.
I dunno
When you’re talking prospects, isn’t the “bird in the hand” principle particularly applicable?
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
If you're an oakland fan
Who loves orange soda?
by Kenan and Kel on Oct 1, 2009 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Not necessarily
When it comes to prospects, the idea is often closer to “grass is greener” rather than “bird in hand.” When you know the prospect you have isn’t Albert Pujols at the plate and Rickey Henderson on the basepaths it’s easy to imagine that the next prospect might be the next Pujols (because he hasn’t proven otherwise).
Imagination is oftentimes easier much grander than life.
Visit my sports blog: Triple Slash Sports
by nobodyinparticular on Oct 2, 2009 3:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Normally I would agree
but both Rangers guys have pitched in the majors with some varying levels of success and flashes of dominance. Its not like we’re comparing Anderson and Cahill to two kids in the Carolina league.
Holland?
Holland has a tRA of 5.99. Dominance?
Visit my sports blog: Triple Slash Sports
by nobodyinparticular on Oct 3, 2009 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Flashes
The coin has two sides…
He’s flashed crapitude too. Like that 10R game in August. And the two 6R games in Sept. Or the whole month of September (8.20 ERA) for that matter.
Cahill has had his dominant spurts as well—his back-to-back games against Texas in September allowing only 1 run total, his 7 inning shutout against LAA, his two-hitter in Seattle, etc.
“Flashes” don’t exactly differentiate pitchers like Cahill and Holland.
Visit my sports blog: Triple Slash Sports
by nobodyinparticular on Oct 6, 2009 7:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I would argue they do.
Showing that, even on one night, you can dominate says something about your stuff and your ceiling. Holland did that a few times and really impressed people.
I find it hard to believe you would really take this much exception to my original statement:
both Rangers guys have pitched in the majors with some varying levels of success and flashes of dominance.
I dont really think anyone would argue with that.
Anderson Cahill
Is that even a question?
Sure, Feliz is great as a reliever but Brett Anderson is already an ace and Cahill has proved useful as well.
I'll take Anderson...
and Cahill.
Anderson is awesome, I still have alot of faith in Cahill’s development, and basically I have less worries there.
Perez might be the Joba of the AL West. Not that that’s a bad thing, but it could become a story.
Not easy but only Cahill has shown a high risk of failure
Anderson is hands-down the most certain star of the four as he was already pitching like one for much of the season.
But Cahill is the only one whose performance raised alarm bells — there are simply few pitchers who have peripherals as poor as his who go on succeed.
Holland’s peripherals are much better and is a good candidate to improve. Feliz hasn’t been tested as a major league starter.
If you need one future stud you are better off with Anderson/Cahill. If you want two its Holland/Feliz. So in prospect terminology, the A’s pair has a higher floor and the Ranger’s pair a higher ceiling.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
