Andrew Miller vs. Yovanny Gallardo

Hello FI,

I know this thread is about Andrew Miller, but one additional point about Adam Miller's splits - Adam wasn't back to 100% until around July in terms of his velocity because of that elbow injury and the layoff time he had in 2005 (he was only hitting up to 95 or so early in 2006, versus up to 98 in the second half.)  His command also improved a bit in the second half as well.

That's another major reason why there is the disparity between the two halves:

From April to June 2006:
89.1 IP, 84 H, 8 HR, 26 BB, 87 K, 8.47 H/9 IP, 2.62 BB/9 IP, 8.77 K/9 IP, 0.81 HR/9 IP

From July to August 2006:
64.2 IP, 45 H, 1 HR, 17 BB, 70 K, 6.27 H/9 IP, 2.37 BB/9 IP, 9.75 K/9 IP, 0.14 HR/9 IP

So, in essence, Adam Miller was a tale of two pitchers in 2006 - good in the first half of the season, dominant and great in the second half.  The question is, is the second half the real Miller, since his velocity has returned to almost pre-injury status (hitting 98, maybe 99, whereas he hit 101 in the CL Playoffs back in 2004, though he didn't regularly throw it at 101)?

Of course, he has to adjust to the AAA level as well, but has already gotten a taste of it due to one start he made there in 2006.  I think the reason Miller might be rated higher than Gallardo is because some, including BA, question whether Gallardo is a true #1 or more of a #2-#3 pitcher.  I have not heard that about Miller, especially now that he is healthy again (knock on wood that continues!  :-)  

Personally, I would rate Adam Miller higher than Gallardo, but the Top 4 in my opinion would be Hughes, Bailey or Miller (then the other; I think there's convincing arguments you could make for Bailey being #2 and there are convincing arguments you could make for Miller being #2) then Gallardo.  But essentially, the four of them are within eyelashes of each other or breathing down the necks of each other; I don't think there's considerable difference between the four at this point, outside of Bailey's weaker command and not quite as much polishment on his breaking stuff, so I suppose you could even make the argument Bailey is #4 of the four, but again, it's splitting hairs between the four of them in my opinion.  

The others like Andrew Miller, Lincecum, Hochevar, Kershaw, etc. - they've had impressive debuts, but I wouldn't put them up there with the other four yet, not until we see what these guys do over a full season; after all, the previous four have been dominating for a few years now; the last four are based more-less on projection and a much smaller sample size.  I don't think it's fair to put the last four up with or even above the previous four until they have at least one Minor League season under their belts and see how they hold up under a full season of Minor League baseball.  Then, a stronger argument could be made to put any of those 4 up with or even above the previous 4.

Just my 2 cents.  :-)

Take care and have a great day!