At this point, I think the only course of action is to cross collective fingers and hope we've stumbled on some weird exception.

The Moyer comparison is fun and all but not really that valid. Moyer's K rate has hovered around 5 most of his career. Jeremy's was 3.57 last year and that seemed pretty in line with what could be expected over a full season.

Um, isn't that all the indians are expecting him to be?  I don't see the problem here.

At the same time, they peg him for a 4.7 ERA next year - and I think that's a bit high to forecast for a guy with a 2.0 minor league ERA.  Anyway, he's an oddball, and the truth likely lies somewhere inbetween, IMHO. I love oddball players.

Top 3 comps - Tom Glavine, Claude Osteen, and Mark Buehrle.  I'll take that.  Heck, thinking about it, I though Buehrle was going to implode for the longest time and he never did (save for too much work the previous 4 years which caused a lousy '06).

Hello exileincincy,

While I agree that Bailey's ceiling is considerably higher than Sowers', that doesn't guarantee he's a sure-fire ace pitching prospect.  Personally, I think he's behind Hughes, Miller, and Gallardo - the reason why is because his BB/9 IP was 3.71 at AA, plus the fact that he does not have good command of his offspeed stuff (he's also behind the other three in this regard.)

Even if he can dial the fastball up to 99 MPH, that won't be enough against MLers if he can't throw the fastball enough over the plate AND he can't get his offspeed stuff over.  We seen what happened with CC, and even Colon and Wright, when they couldn't get their offspeed stuff over on a consistent basis - they each didn't dominate, and pretty much, each of them got hammered.  

So, at this point, Bailey is FAR from a sure thing.  Would I have liked to have had Bailey in the Indians' system?  Of course I would have, but let's not assume Bailey is an absolute sure thing at this point - many other pitching prospects with similar profiles have done very well in the Minors, but then falter at the ML level and not live up to the expectations that were placed on them.  While Bailey has the higher ceiling, Sowers IS more of a sure thing, and is already here.  Bailey still has to handle AAA and still has to get his command in order, neither of which are a guarantee.

Just something to consider and realize that just because the Indians would have had Bailey in the system doesn't guarantee they'd be better off - Bailey still has considerable more work to do to be that sure-fire ace, arguably more than Adam Miller has to do, since Miller has already demonstrated a great BB rate at AA (nearly as good as Hughes) and has shown great command of his offspeed stuff, which includes his devastating slider.  

Just my 2 cents.  :-)

So yes, his K/9 trends downward as he rises through the system, but it may well have something to do with moving 4 levels in the space of about 20 months. And the jump in HRs from AAA (1/100 IP) to MLB (10/88 IP) may well be chalked up to rookie mistakes. His other numbers consistently outstanding.
A good comparison right now is Cliff Lee, who may have been a bit disappointing this year (4.46 ERA,  1.42 WHIP, 5.7 K/9), but who was coming off a Cy-Young-vote-receiving 2005 season going 18-5, 3.79 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 6.4 K/9.

Looking back, Lee's strikeout rate has always been better than Sowers', but not dramatically. He posted 8 K/9 at AA/AAA, 8.67 at AAA, but before 2005 his K/BB rate was about an even 2/1, and Sowers posted superior ERA/WHIP.

Also: guys like Moyer and Radke have built pretty solid careers with K/9s in the mid-5 range, ERAs around 4.25 and WHIPs at about 1.25-1.30.

One cannot tell anything just from number crunching, but Sowers could well increase his K/9 from 2006, and might be capable of sustaining a 3.5 - 4 ERA with low WHIP and low HRs. In other words, a quality # 3-4 starter for years to come.

PECOTA is a very impressive tool, but there is a lot that it doesn't account for.  I'm disappointed that they haven't done anything in five years to improve the defensive metrics they're feeding it, which renders many of their WARP and MORP conclusions meaningless, as in Peralta's case.  And there may be a few things on the pitching side that are as bad as that.

PECOTA predicts a drop in performance for 2007, but also a bit of a rebound in 2008.  PECOTA seems pessimistic by its very nature, understanding as it does that regression to the mean is a more reliable predictor than any other one thing.  Much of its method lies in defining a player's mean better than most other systems.  It doesn't like what it sees in Sowers, even though it pegs Glavine as his top comparable.  A little further down, it has Buerhle and Jason Jacome (remember him?) in a dead heat.  And therein lies the range of possibilities.

PECOTA of course hates the K rate.  But everyone knows about the K rate, and everyone knows what it generally means.  The Indians know about the K rate, DiamondView I can assure you knows about the K rate.  On the other hand, DiamondView, like many of us, knows plenty in areas where PECOTA is totally in the dark.  The Indians' young players outperform PECOTA on a fairly regular basis in fact.  PECOTA hates Trevor Crowe, too.  I can promise you, Shapiro and Antonetti know why PECOTA hates Crowe and Sowers, and they like those guys anyway.  And not for superstitious or fuzzy reasons, either.  For some real good, systematic, analytical reasons.  Not purely statistical, but rigorous nonetheless.  I'm sure of it.