Is it time to worry about Kyle Gibson?

[DaveW]

Looked pretty terrible against a couple of good but not great hitting teams.

[Kwak]

Huh?  1 run after six, "after battlin' his tail off"?  Gardenhire woulda yanked him!  I would have expected the thread to be entitled "Molitor blows another one", or something like that.

[DocBauer]

No.

 

No.

 

And.....finally.....no.

 

A couple hiccups. Happens to just about every single pitcher, every single year at sometime. Could be early, could be late, could be coming off the All Star break where routines get interrupted and pitchers sometimes get an extra day off, or two, that maybe they didn't need.

 

Did I say no yet?

[TheLeviathan]

By this logic we should cut bait on Glen Perkins too.  Stick a fork in him even.

[USAFChief]

He is what he is...a decent MLB starter, sometimes pretty hittable, sometimes not, due to decent but not exceptional stuff.

 

Which is why you don't let trading him be the stopper on acquiring someone like Tulo, if that's the piece that gets it done and everything else is reasonable.

[Seth Stohs]

 

Is it time to worry about Kyle Gibson?

 

No.

[DaveW]

I guess worry is the wrong word, he just looks a lot more like a #3/#4 recently then the #2 we were all hoping for.

 

I agree with Chief, Gibson should be on the block for a guy like Tulo who can help out the team long term.

[jimmer]

 

Looked pretty terrible against a couple of good but not great hitting teams.

Depends on what kind of pitcher you thought he was to begin with.

 

But I was assured many times that all we need to take into account is what he's shown since the calendar turned May and that it proved he had become a serious quality pitcher. Not sure if we are supposed to consider the last two starts :-)

[jimmer]

 

By this logic we should cut bait on Glen Perkins too.  Stick a fork in him even.

perhaps, but Perkins has a track record of being a stud closer.  Gibson's track record?

[DiscGolfer]

Time to worry about Gibson!?  Really!?  He's had 2 rough outings after 4/5 good starts.  Remember how inconsistent he was last year?  He's only 27 and still getting better, no need to worry about him until he stops improving (not after 1 or 2 bad games).  He's not a shut down #1 ace and probably never will be but that doesn't mean he won't be quality starter.  He'll bounce back and get more of those ground ball outs.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

The guy couldn't find the strike zone yesterday. He fell behind over half the hitters he faced.

 

And let's not forget the bullpen's contribution to Kyle's stat line. In his past two starts, Gibson has been credited with five (!) runs that scored after he left the game. Given that it's impossible to be credited with more than six runs after leaving two games, that's... wow. It's just wow.

 

Has he been good his past two starts? No, but I doubt we're gnashing our teeth over his performances if the bullpen didn't allow every inherited runner on base to score after Kyle left the game.

[Mike Sixel]

I still think he's a solid number 3. I am not worried.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I still think he's a solid number 3. I am not worried.

My thoughts as well. He could be a borderline two during his peak seasons.

 

He looks like an above average pitcher. How much above average? That I don't know. His K rate of late is super-promising but I don't think he's elite even if it sticks.

[Badsmerf]

I thought this was a joke thread when I opened it. Now, it's just a joke.

 

Even having a bad day he still should have made it through the first place Yankee lineup with a quality start. Every pitcher has a rough patch, I'm willing to let these slide and not get caught up in the short term.

[Loosey]

Short answer, No.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Depends on what kind of pitcher you thought he was to begin with.

 

But I was assured many times that all we need to take into account is what he's shown since the calendar turned May and that it proved he had become a serious quality pitcher. Not sure if we are supposed to consider the last two starts :-)

Well, here's his xFIP by month:

 

April: 5.65 

May: 3.89

June: 2.89

July: 3.05

 

I'd say that looks like a pitcher who rather abruptly turned a corner some time in May. Not coincidentally, that's exactly when he started striking people out. Also not coincidentally, his July xFIP is still pretty good because it doesn't factor in that Kyle was replaced by a pitching machine in his past two games and that the pitching machine allowed every inherited runner on base to score.

[Mike Sixel]

In fairness, there were a lot of base runners on, in scoring position, with less than 2 outs when Gibson left the game, you'd expect a decent number of them to score......

 

But it sure would be nice if they had a SO guy they could bring into those situations (May, anyone?) where they need one......

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

In fairness, there were a lot of base runners on, in scoring position, with less than 2 outs when Gibson left the game, you'd expect a decent number of them to score......

 

But it sure would be nice if they had a SO guy they could bring into those situations (May, anyone?) where they need one......

Yes, you expect a few of those runners to score... but not all of them. 

 

It comes back to the bullpen. It seems as if everything on this team comes back to the bullpen.

 

Yet, the bullpen doesn't significantly change.

 

Arghblargh.

[Rosterman]

Coming out of the All-Star breaks, some pitchers need a bit more time, like spring training. Which is why, as manager, I wouldn't push guys (unless absolutely brilliant like Ervin was...yet Molly didn't let him complete the game, why?). You want to get ALL your guys work. Like Milone the night before. Six GREAT innings are wonderful. No need to puish towards 7 because...... Especially with the days off also happening.

 

You push, something bad happens, and then even the whole bullpen blows up and gets uneven.

 

Gotta say that starters are a relief this year. Last year we were happy they went 5 and mad when they pitched into the sixth.

[Mike Sixel]

3rd time thru the lineup=bad results, even for good pitchers, let alone marginal ones........it's why other teams are building great bullpens, they've figured that out.

[drjim]

 

Well, here's his xFIP by month:

 

April: 5.65 

May: 3.89

June: 2.89

July: 3.05

 

I'd say that looks like a pitcher who rather abruptly turned a corner some time in May. Not coincidentally, that's exactly when he started striking people out. Also not coincidentally, his July xFIP is still pretty good because it doesn't factor in that Kyle was replaced by a pitching machine in his past two games and that the pitching machine allowed every inherited runner on base to score.

 

Small point, and I know what you meant, but I chuckled a little when you said his xFIP improved when he struck out more people. You don't say! Almost as informative as saying his k/9 went up when he started striking out more people.

 

But he does show that striking out people generally leads to a better ERA and better performance overall. What a concept.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Small point, and I know what you meant, but I chuckled a little when you said his xFIP improved when he struck out more people. You don't say! Almost as informative as saying his k/9 went up when he started striking out more people.

 

But he does show that striking out people generally leads to a better ERA and better performance overall. What a concept.

Heh, fair enough. The point was more "when he started striking out people, almost all his stats started improving, traditional or otherwise".

 

Missing bats is not a flukey thing. It's not BABIP where you just happen to find a lucky hole in the defense once or twice a week. Maybe Gibson isn't an 8 k/9 guy - hell, I might even say that's likely - but if he's even a 7 k/9 guy, that's a good pitcher once you factor in Gibson's groundball profile. I don't see Kyle returning to his 5 k/9 ways, at least not in the near future.

 

I'm not in love with Kyle Gibson's potential, my only worry is what replaces him in the Twins' rotation. That's why I'm wary of trading him, though I wouldn't rule it out by any means.

[drjim]

 

Heh, fair enough. The point was more "when he started striking out people, almost all his stats started improving, traditional or otherwise".

 

Missing bats is not a flukey thing. It's not BABIP where you just happen to find a lucky hole in the defense once or twice a week. Maybe Gibson isn't an 8 k/9 guy - hell, I might even say that's likely - but if he's even a 7 k/9 guy, that's a good pitcher once you factor in Gibson's groundball profile. I don't see Kyle returning to his 5 k/9 ways, at least not in the near future.

 

I'm not in love with Kyle Gibson's potential, my only worry is what replaces him in the Twins' rotation. That's why I'm wary of trading him, though I wouldn't rule it out by any means.

 

Agree with all of this.

 

He's a good pitcher but not an ace, nice to have in the rotation, unlikely to find 5 better guys, but could be a trade option if he fills a hole for multiple years.

 

A couple bad starts in a row against the best teams in the league does not lead to concern, seems more like a reality of a pitcher of his ability. The timing was a little unfortunate though.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Certainly not time to "worry" about Gibson being a decent rotation asset -- that hasn't changed -- but probably a little cause to sweat if you had recently resisted Tulo-for-Gibson overtures.  (No evidence the Twins actually did that, though.)

[jimmer]

 

Well, here's his xFIP by month:

 

April: 5.65 

May: 3.89

June: 2.89

July: 3.05

 

I'd say that looks like a pitcher who rather abruptly turned a corner some time in May. Not coincidentally, that's exactly when he started striking people out. Also not coincidentally, his July xFIP is still pretty good because it doesn't factor in that Kyle was replaced by a pitching machine in his past two games and that the pitching machine allowed every inherited runner on base to score.

Good stuff Brock!

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Well, here's his xFIP by month:

 

...

 

I'd say that looks like a pitcher who rather abruptly turned a corner some time in May. Not coincidentally, that's exactly when he started striking people out.

To be fair, xFIP is largely based off those strikeouts, so your first "not coincidentally" is actually doubt-counting.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Well, here's his xFIP by month:

 

April: 5.65 

May: 3.89

June: 2.89

July: 3.05

 

I'd say that looks like a pitcher who rather abruptly turned a corner some time in May. Not coincidentally, that's exactly when he started striking people out. Also not coincidentally, his July xFIP is still pretty good because it doesn't factor in that Kyle was replaced by a pitching machine in his past two games and that the pitching machine allowed every inherited runner on base to score.

 

Brock, where were you able to get the monthly xFIP?  In the earlier Gibson debate I was trying like hell to find them and couldn't.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Brock, where were you able to get the monthly xFIP? In the earlier Gibson debate I was trying like hell to find them and couldn't.

Splits page at Fangraphs, then scroll down to the Advanced section:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/statsplits.aspx?playerid=10123&position=P&season=2015

[Brock Beauchamp]

Brock, where were you able to get the monthly xFIP? In the earlier Gibson debate I was trying like hell to find them and couldn't.

Fangraphs splits page. Dunno where on the page, just did a find on xFIP.

[TheLeviathan]

I combed that page...how the hell did I miss that?  Yeesh...thanks guys, very helpful.