According to MLB.com. He's cheaper and younger than Johan Santana (but not as good). He had a stellar 2007 season, but his career numbers don't quite support that type of pitcher. He has very good peripherals (in a pitcher's park), but there's no way anyone should expect another 137 ERA+ season (he also declined throughout the year).I was curious as to how Phil Hughes compared to Haren - favorably I might add, at least in their rookie years and minor league stats. They make for good a comparison because they're both power righties with the exact same body size (6'5", 220), both pitched the exact same number of innings (72.2) their rookie years (and both hail from SoCal to boot). Hughes allowed less hits, less walks, less home runs, more strikeouts, a lower ERA and whip, all while being a year younger than Haren (and pitching in the AL East compared to the NL Central) - he also had better minor league numbers across the board. Can we expect him to be a better pitcher than Dan Haren? The stats (and scouts) support it. It's damn exciting just thinking about it...
No comments:
Post a Comment