Can Silva Turn Things Around and Be Useful?

[CubsWin]

He's just pitched 4 scoreless allowing 2 hits, striking out 3 and walking none against the Rangers today. That's seven consecutive innings pitched without allowing a run. Normally I would chalk that up to spring training weirdness, but it was preceded by a work session with Larry Rothschild in which Silva adjusted his stride toward the plate and something clicked which got Silva's sinker sinking again. Consequently, Silva was excited about going out on the mound two starts ago, excited for the first time in a long time he said. And he hasn't allowed a run since.

 

What are the chances this keeps up into the season and he's actually useful in some way? And what are the chances this is just spring training being spring training? Your thoughts...

[Keener98]

David Patton was really good last spring too, Id lay big money on this being a few good innings in spring training, and thats it.

[Old Style]

Optimism has no place on NSBB, sir.

[CubsWin]

David Patton was really good last spring too, Id lay big money on this being a few good innings in spring training, and thats it.

Which is why I'm asking the question and not jumping to the conclusion. Patton's a terrible example because he had never pitched successfully above A ball. Silva's been successful at the major league level. But it's not just Patton, of course. Lots of pitchers do this. Clearly, spring training performances are to be taken with a salt lick. But when combined with the anecdotal evidence, it does make one wonder...

[CubsWin]

Optimism has no place on NSBB, sir.

I know. You're right. What was I thinking?

[SouthSideRyan]

Optimism has no place on NSBB, sir.

I know. You're right. What was I thinking?

 

He was the worst pitcher in baseball the last season he was healthy. Even when he's been not horrendous, he relies heavily on his defense because he can't strike anybody out. He brings nothing to the table. There's optimism and there's realism. This guy stinks.

[TruffleShuffle]

well many of his years with the twins he was pretty much a less-walks, less-strikeouts version of jason marquis, so yes it's possible that he could be an innings-eating 5th starter. he'll pretty much always walk a fine line because he gives up so many balls in play, but if he can get back to averaging 1-2 walks per 9 innings and his sinker comes back to the point where he's not getting drilled so frequently, then he could be okay. but he had better straighten something out from last year because he really was that bad in 2009.

 

by the way, the start before this one he gave up 4 hits (2 doubles) and 1 walk in 3 innings without striking anyone out, so giving up 0 runs was more luck than some new effectiveness. today he was considerably better (4 ip, 2 h, 0 bb, 3 k, 1 hbp) than his last start.

[Little Slide Rooter]

He has bounced back nicely from his dismal Cubs debut, but hes been so bad for so many years that I dont trust that he'll be anything more than long inning mop up man for when Z gets booted after 3 innings because a hot dog vendor looked at him funny.

[CubsWin]

by the way, the start before this one he gave up 4 hits (2 doubles) and 1 walk in 3 innings without striking anyone out, so giving up 0 runs was more luck than some new effectiveness. today he was considerably better (4 ip, 2 h, 0 bb, 3 k, 1 hbp) than his last start.

True, but it was a vast improvement over his first start, and it was preceded by this adjustment that got him excited to pitch again.

 

Look, I'm not thinking he has a chance to be the something great. I don't even know if he has a chance to return to what he did in Minnesota yet. But we had all written him off, and rightly so based on his performance in Seattle, from being able to contribute at all. What I'm asking is is it possible that he could actually contribute something this year and is the story of his pitching session and his subsequent improvement evidence of such a possibility or not. The obvious answer is it's too soon to tell. But it's fun to hear people's opinions on the subject and thank you for your's.

[CubsWin]

Optimism has no place on NSBB, sir.

I know. You're right. What was I thinking?

 

He was the worst pitcher in baseball the last season he was healthy. Even when he's been not horrendous, he relies heavily on his defense because he can't strike anybody out. He brings nothing to the table. There's optimism and there's realism. This guy stinks.

So you're saying there's no chance for him to ever be serviceable pitcher in the major leagues ever again. Got it. Duly noted.

 

I think realism states that when he pitched terribly, he stunk. But realism also states that pitcher's performances vary.

[UMFan83]

Is it time to buy one of these:

 

http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/2722/silvaaa.png

 

or more accurately....

 

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/7517/notbrad.png

[BigbadB1679666149]

NotBradley. That's awesome!

[mhuber92211]

What would considered Useful? 180 IP 4.25 ERA?

[TruffleShuffle]

What would considered Useful? 180 IP 4.25 ERA?

 

probably even 4.50 or 4.60... that's probably not far from league average and that's not awful for a 5th starter.

[Sammy Sofa]

Silva's been successful at the major league level.

 

This is very debatable.

 

Yeah, it would be fantastic if Silva somehow figured things out, but it just doesn't seem very likely given his age, the type of pitcher he is and his lack of success in the majors to this point. He's really only got one year where he wasn't terrible, and it's not like that one year sticks out as some impressive feat of what could be (he pitched about 6 games fewer than his other full seasons, and his last couple games that year he was horrendous, so so who knows how that year would look with at least 5-6 more starts). Yes, it would be great if he could get back to those 2005 levels. It's just very unlikely.

[TruffleShuffle]

He's really only got one year where he wasn't terrible

 

that's not really true. his xFIP's with the twins were 4.45, 3.94, 4.81 and 4.54. he was pretty close to league average in 2004 and 2007, above average in 2005 and below average in 2006. it wasn't until he got to seattle that he became truly terrible.

[Sammy Sofa]

He's really only got one year where he wasn't terrible

 

that's not really true. his xFIP's with the twins were 4.45, 3.94, 4.81 and 4.54. he was pretty close to league average in 2004 and 2007, above average in 2005 and below average in 2006. it wasn't until he got to seattle that he became truly terrible.

 

It's mainly those WHIPs scaring the crap out of me.

[Eephus Speed]

You'd have to be thrilled if your worst SP pitches 180 IP with a league average 4.25 ERA. Or even a 4.75 ERA. Afterall, the difference between 4.25 and 4.75 is only 10 runs.

 

Silva has an extraordinarily low K rate, but he also had a very low BB rate prior to 2009. With excellent control and an above average GB rate, there's a slim chance Silva will prove useful. I wouldn't bet on it, though.

[SouthSideRyan]

He's really only got one year where he wasn't terrible

 

that's not really true. his xFIP's with the twins were 4.45, 3.94, 4.81 and 4.54. he was pretty close to league average in 2004 and 2007, above average in 2005 and below average in 2006. it wasn't until he got to seattle that he became truly terrible.

 

It's mainly those WHIPs scaring the crap out of me.

 

That and the concept that Silva is so damn hittable that xFIP doesn't accurately judge what he brings to the table

[CubsWin]

Silva's been successful at the major league level.

 

This is very debatable.

No, it's fact. If you can make the major leagues and be league average or better, that's being successful at the major league level. And to fulfill that statement, he'd only have to have done it once. He's certainly done that.

[Sammy Sofa]

Well, that's not a fact. That's just, like, your opinion, man.

[CubsWin]

I don't know about any of the rest of you, but my thoughts going into the season were that Silva was going to be a wasted roster space. That the Cubs would carry him on the 25-man and work with him to see if he could be somebody who could be effective (roughly getting an ERA below 5), but if he couldn't be that guy that they'd wind up cutting him and eating the contract at some point.

 

His first start seemed to confirm he was still on this path. But then a work session and two distinctly different starts later, is he still on that path or might he be someone who can contribute? Some say no chance. I say, it's possible for him to return to a Twins-like performance, but its way to early to tell if that is likely.

 

The question is does the work session that got him excited about pitching again and two better ST performances amount to anything or are they completely meaningless?

[Sammy Sofa]

I think we have to wait and see. Today was definitely encouraging, but I think it's overstating things to lump his start prior to this latest one in as looking as good. Yeah, it was a drastic improvement to that disaster of a first start, but he still got pretty lucky. I don't think any of us can really say what this last start potentially means at this point. Edited March 17, 2010 by Sammy Sofa

[CubsWin]

Well, that's not a fact. That's just, like, your opinion, man.

The phrase "successful at the major league level" could certainly mean different things to different people. I define it as making the majors and being league average or better for meaningful stretch like a season or 100+ innings pitched or 400-500 plate appearances, something like that. That's how I define that general notion that someone has had success at the major league level. Your definition of having had success at the major level may be different.

 

But it is fact to say that Silva has had a season in which he performed at a league average level or better at the major level.

[17 Seconds]

its possible silva could end up being useful, but 2 spring training starts tell you nothing about that possibility.