Fantasy Baseball 2011: Brewing an Ace - Yovani Gallardo

by Jeremy Miedzinski on Mar 12, 2026 11:00 AM EST in Baseball

The Brewers are set to go all in this year and that could mean big things from Yovani Gallardo. If ever there were a year to let him loose for 200+ innings this would be it. Gallardo has not showed any signs of arm trouble since entering the league in 2007 so 200+ is a real possibility. He would have had a shot at it last year had an oblique injury not cost him half of July. Combine that potential for innings with his elite K/9 and you could have yourself a fantasy ace in 2011.

There are a few things keeping him from true super stardom. He walks too many but when you compare his 3.65 BB/9 to Jon Lester's 3.59 BB/9 it doesn't look as bad. Gallardo's minor league numbers suggest he could lower that number even further which would help him reach 200 IP. His H/9 last year was at 8.7 which is good but not elite like the 7.3 he put up in 2009. Based upon his past performance he should able to lower his H/9 and something near 8 would make him one of the better pitchers in the game.

He isn't likely to drop much in the K/9 department and any drop there would likely coincide with a drop in BB/9 or H/9. The Brewers defense will probably hurt him so there is a chance he underperforms his FIP. I would put his ERA somewhere in the 3.70 range with 3.20 upside. If he pitches 205 innings he should give you 220 K. The Brewers have a solid offense and their defense is underrated. Yovanni Gallardo should come off the board after guys like Ubaldo Jimenez and Cole Hamels but he provides just as much hope for a profitable return. At the very least you should get a pitcher who gives 180+ innings with an ERA under 4 and a K/9 above 9. It's a safe pick and a smart pick.

Tweet Comment 14 comments | Add comment | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Read More: Cole Hamels (P - PHI), Ubaldo Jimenez (P - COL), Yovani Gallardo (P - MIL), Jon Lester (P - BOS), Milwaukee Brewers

Comments

Yovani’s up there with Cain, it may be possible for him to reach up to being as good as Weaver. Who knows, a lot is in store for him.

"A baseball fan has the digestive apparatus of a billy goat. He can, and does, devour any set of statistics with insatiable appetite and then nuzzles hungrily for more." - Sportswriter Arthur Daley

by Over the Fence on Mar 12, 2026 1:50 PM EST reply actions

Cain

He’s much better than Cain. Cain has shown a remarkable ability to maintain a low HR/FB rate but he also has an extremely lucky BABIP while Gallardo had an extremely unlucky BABIP. I’ll take the strikeout potential of Gallardo over Cain any day.

by dudedudedude on Mar 12, 2026 6:08 PM EST up reply actions

If Gallardo pitches 200 innings

he will put up some very nice numbers and I see him hitting that mark this year. Has proven to be pretty durable.

Jeremy Miedzinski
www.faketeams.com
@jrmiedzinski

by Jeremy Miedzinski on Mar 12, 2026 6:09 PM EST up reply actions

Cain

Gallardo has only pitched in the bigs for 4 years while Cain, has6 years under his belt. Cain is also larger than Yovani in size by a small amount. Cain has a better BB/9 ratio than Gallardo. And a better WHIP. Those are important stats for pitchers - I’d rather choose Cain over Gallardo because of the establishment. In years to come, yes Yovani will become better than Cain but right now it’s a wise decision to stay with Matt, enough said.

"A baseball fan has the digestive apparatus of a billy goat. He can, and does, devour any set of statistics with insatiable appetite and then nuzzles hungrily for more." - Sportswriter Arthur Daley

by Over the Fence on Mar 13, 2026 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions

Cain, Gallardo, Hammels

I would rate them as above. Cain has shown an ability to move forward and defeat some problematic issues of his past while Gallardo, although a nice pitcher, seems to always have one sore thumb or another every year, stat wise. I really don’t know why someone would take Hammels over either of these guys, though.

by acr on Mar 12, 2026 11:07 PM EST reply actions

Hamels

He has a solid bull pen behind him and plays for a better team. His last 3 months were dominant and he has a nice cutter to his repertoire now. His strikeout rate rose last season and he got extremely unlucky with wins.

by dudedudedude on Mar 13, 2026 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions

Sometimes splits can be useful. So Hamels may be able to continue his latest trend. He still has essentially the same bullpen as last year, whether that’s good or bad is another story. Cain was pretty dominant himself, even the second half last year. Hamels is more of the K guy but he will have to stay away from pitching like the 1st half of 2010 (and all of 2009) or he’ll be likely to give up 30+ homers this coming year. Also, IMO Cain will be the #2 guy in the SF rotation while Hamels will be #4. I realize Hamels could move to #3 but I kinda doubt that as of now. But in the big picture of things the placement of #2 vs. #4 could mean a couple less starts for Hamels than Cain in 2011. When a pitcher could potentially get 34 starts or 32, I think you have to figure that into their value. It may not seem like a big deal but it could be a 5-6% difference which could partially negate some of the potential improvements of a #4 starter.

by acr on Mar 13, 2026 5:17 PM EDT reply actions

Cain

Hamels won’t be skipped in the rotation. All 4 will get at least 33 starts if they remain healthy. Hamels also started using his cutter more in the second half, and that has to be a larger factor in his improvement. Cain also benefited from a .252 BABIP as well as that absurd HR/FB rate. For a guy who doesn’t induce ground balls, I don’t trust him to have such a low HR/FB rate.

I’d take Hamels over Gallardo as well.

by dudedudedude on Mar 13, 2026 8:23 PM EDT up reply actions

I’m not saying he’ll be skipped in the rotation, at least in regard to how skipping usually occurs. He could make every scheduled start and still be 2-3 starts less than a normal #2 guy. At this point an issue is Cain’s healthy, or unhealthy, elbow. So Hamels gets the nod because of that regardless of the stats from last year IMO. But in complaining about Cain’s BABIP and hr/fb stat lines, how are they much different last year vs. his career norms? There’s really not much to the argument. Wasn’t there another BABIP Evangelist on here the other day stating that fb pitchers have a lower than norm BABIP anyway?

I don’t think anyone is going to complain about having any of the three pitchers in their line up. I would take a healthy Cain over the other 2.

by acr on Mar 13, 2026 9:54 PM EDT reply actions

Cain

His BABIP was the lowest it’s even been. A fly ball pitcher will generally have a lower BABIP but compare him to someone like Jered Weaver who had the exact same GB% and Cain was still extremely lucky. His fly ball rate is just absurd and I doubt he keeps putting up historic HR/FB %‘s. His xFIP is more than a run higher than his ERA, and that’s the stat his contributes to the most. That screams regression.

by dudedudedude on Mar 13, 2026 10:09 PM EDT reply actions

Sure. We’ll just concentrate on his last couple months of 2010 and ignore Hammels’ preceding season and a half of mediocrity. Likewise, we could just write off Cain’s entire career as a fortuitous aberration. Then again, looks like Bill James has them both regressing.

by acr on Mar 13, 2026 10:35 PM EDT reply actions

Cole Hamels 2009 xFIP: 3.69
Matt Cain 2009 xFIP: 4.22

Cole Hamels’ 2009 was the definition of an unlucky season. It was far from a mediocre season.

by dudedudedude on Mar 14, 2026 3:09 AM EDT reply actions

right

Drink the kool-aid all you want, that’s fine. His road stats in 2009 included a 4.99 ERA, 1.48 WHIP and .308 BAA. That went along with giving up 111 hits in just over 88 innings of work through 15 road starts. Pure bad luck, I’m sure. Him getting hit to death was purely bad luck or he was just horrible that year on the road. You guys can use the “unlucky” word all you want. But what that word usually means is that you are unable to explain what actually happened. Something happening again and again, start after start, is not luck. At least it should be able to be explained as something other than lucky or unlucky. That’s just a pure cop out.

by acr on Mar 14, 2026 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions

The .348 BABIP explains why his stats were so inflated. Argue all you want, but he was extremely unlucky. His xFIP in 2010 was 3.47 on the road. I don’t understand why you keep bringing up ERA because it’s the most luck dependent stat. It is by no means a way to judge how well a pitcher has performed.

by dudedudedude on Mar 14, 2026 11:28 AM EDT reply actions