Not to spam, but as a side note, I'm seriously wondering if he calls his own game (doesn't depend much on the catcher to call the shots)? He strikes me as the kind of guy that asks the skipper to call his own game.

Wow! The guy seems to be quite cerebral! I love this kind of player... someone who isn't content with only his "stuff" but also digs in and finds out more "why". Thanks for the link, garryoak. It's stuff like this that keeps bringing me back to this site.

There was a great little Q/A done by Tim Dierkes (presumably) at: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/01/brian-bannist-2.html

I found it a facinating little read, and quite cool to see how, as a pitcher, Bannister integrates statistical research (and theories a la DIPS) into his approach in order to improve his game. Seems like an intelligent and thoughtful guy...enjoy.

(btw, I have no affiliation to mlbtraderumors.com)

A few weeks ago Bannister had an on-line Q/A with someone about DIPS ERA. I think the discussion was actually with Voros McCracken, the man who developed it, then fell out of the sabermetric community for a few years for various reasons.

Further research has refined DIPS and does suggest that some pitchers do have some impact on BIP Avg, but very few.

I just read an article by Al Melchior at CBSSports that was a little interesting. Al says, "He not only knows what his H/BIP was last year, but contrary to what the research suggests, he thinks his low rate was neither random nor accidental. Bannister thinks he knows how to keep hit balls from becoming base hits. It's not that Bannister is ignorant of the research findings; he is actually a student of them. Through his own statistical research, he concludes that his H/BIP, ERA and WHIP could easily remain at their 2007 levels."

And then words from Bannister:

"I think a lot of fans underestimate how much time I spend working with statistics to improve my performance on the field ... I don't claim to be able to beat the .300 (H/BIP) average year in and year out at the Major League level. However, I also don't feel that every pitcher is hopelessly bound to that .300 number for his career if he takes some steps to improve his odds -- which is what pitching is all about."

My initial reaction is to sound the phoney balogna alarm. Ok, so the article goes on to state the purposefuly tries to manipulate his H/BIP with pitch selection and the induction of weak swings in two-strike counts. But doesn't this lead to the argument about how much control the pitcher has over BIP?

He went for $6 in LABR. In 5x5, innings are the 11th category.

Um, unless you actually do play with innings. Then they're the 10th category.

A .264 BABIP in 2007. What that means to the uninitiated is that Bannister is more likely to give up 176 hits next year than he is 156. I agree with Rotoman: Bannister's a cagey pitcher who will get by for years in the majors with guile and wile. But that $18 season is probably as good as it will ever get, and you shouldn't pay for it this year.

Notice how much our 5x5 guy (Mike Fenger) is impressed by Bannister's K/IP. And in 5x5, I'd happily take him at $2: not many relievers get 77 SO.

I like him. I think he's successful so far because he knows what he's doing and trusts his stuff. But that stuff is hittable when things don't go right. He's going to have years where he's as bad as he was last September for two or three months, and have no value--or worse. It's not a big leap from $7 to $10, which may be why I put him at $5 in the Guide.

Any chance you'll address the freeze culture a little more? Bannister's at $10 in a lot of A.L. only leagues, and my money's on him getting kept in almost all of them.