MLB 2011 Preseason

Discussion in 'Sports' started by Prosthetic, Jan 22, 2011.

  1. Ken

    Ken Premium

    Messages:
    7,432
    Location:
    United States
    THANK THE HEAVENS!!! That would have been a horrible choice!

    EDIT: The Nationals put Strasburg on 60-day DL. Does this kid ever plan on pitching on the Majors?
     
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2011
  2. spiker

    spiker

    Messages:
    353
  3. Ken

    Ken Premium

    Messages:
    7,432
    Location:
    United States
    If he is out of the remainder, then is he worth it? Two years, and twelve games pitched. $15.1 million over four years, and they get (maybe) two years out of him. I hope that the Expos, er............, the Nationals have better luck with the Sultan of Face Paint, Mr. Harper.
     
  4. spiker

    spiker

    Messages:
    353
    Well, the thing Strasbug has going for him is his age. He's got plenty of time to recover so they're going to take it easy with him. It just sucks that he got hurt before he hit his inning limit last year. Honestly, the whole thing reminds me of Mark Prior. Here's a good article on that predicted Strasburg's "Inverted-W" would give him problems in his career. They even compare him to Prior. :sly:

    (To read in chronological order, read from the bottom up. Starts in 2008!)

    http://www.chrisoleary.com/projects...essionalpitcheranalyses/StephenStrasburg.html

    Harper should be okay. He had a good spring training this year. His biggest problem will be adjusting to Major League pitching. By the looks of it, he's probably not going to have much of a problem with that. They've even shifted him to the OF to progress him along faster. If he dominates the minors, I bet we see him in the majors this season. We may even see him if he doesn't dominate the minors - the Nationals don't sell many tickets after all.
     
  5. Ken

    Ken Premium

    Messages:
    7,432
    Location:
    United States
    TJ surgery can end a career. It's true that the surgery will repair the tendons. But it's not always true, as Mark Prior can attest, as it can screw with one's delivery. A pitcher can and has come back from Tommy John's. But can he pitch any where near where he did. Ankiel had to move to an offensive position because he couldn't pitch the same. Just has me questioning, are we going to get the phenom, or another Manny Corpas. A promise with no return.

    As far as Harper. I have great exceptions for the kid. He does seem to hitting well, (.389 with 5 RBI's in 18 at-bats.) I don't see any problems with his ankle sprain. I just hope that he comes through and takes the world by storm. I would hate to see another Nats prospect flounder out.
     
  6. spiker

    spiker

    Messages:
    353
    I really think Harper is the real deal. For as much crap as the guy gets, he actually plays the game the right way. It will be fun to watch him become a superstar.

    Strasburg, on the other hand, will have to adjust his mechanics if he wants to continute pitching in MLB. Who knows what new mechanics and TJ surgery will do to his velocity but it can't be good.
     
  7. Ken

    Ken Premium

    Messages:
    7,432
    Location:
    United States
    I've been following Harper since early HS. I, too, really hope he is the real deal. He is a beast. It's the shot in the arm that baseball needs right now. (At least in my opinion.)

    Strasburg isn't going to be the Strasburg that everybody wants. Which is really sad. Outside of Philadelphia and New York, there are no real pitching stars, IMO. I for one love seeing a star on both sides of the plate. Makes for a great and classic duel. I would love to see the Strasburg that everybody hoped he would be go against Pujols for spot in the wildcard. That makes exciting baseball. It's something that is getting further and further away from our baseball now. Now it's just a team out pitching another teams batters. Or two teams hitting the leather off the ball to see who survives. Think about it. Halladay pitched a gem of a perfect game. But against who? Uggla, Stanton, Ramirez? Good hitters, but nothing elite. Braden threw a gem against the Rays, a good team. But nothing special. I think that is good baseball, but not great. I want to see more Strasburg's coming up and out. Staying healthy, and pitching more gems against the best hitters out there. It's a shame that this kids career might be cut so short. But such is sports after all.

    EDIT: Yes, I do consider Lincecum and F. Hernandez stars. But who else really?
     
  8. Prosthetic

    Prosthetic

    Messages:
    3,542
    Location:
    United States
    Who else? Josh Johnson, Clayton Kershaw, Matt Cain, Ubaldo Jiminez, Mat Latos, David Price want more? Maddy Bum has the making of a stud pitcher, impossible to break attitude, attacks the strikezone with nasty breaking pitches and a mid 90's fastball.

    How is Ramirez not elite? Only one SS is better then him and that would be Tulo but beyond that its a HUGE drop off. No SS is close to their level of play. Uggla I would also say is at least a top notch offensive second basemen, and the most consistent one in baseball. And how were the Rays not special? They had a stud pitching staff and a lineup full of good hitters.

    As for Strasburg, I remember Chris Lincecum (Tims dad) had a segment on KNBR our local sports radio talk show, and he discussed at the beginning of the year before he came up how Strasburg wouldn't last a full seasons worth of innings without injury.
     
  9. spiker

    spiker

    Messages:
    353
    When I think of "star" pitchers, I think of pitchers who are career 57-62 with a K:BB ratio just over 2.0. Other statistically similar pitchers to this pitcher I mentioned? It's oozing with comparable star power

    1.Ed Halicki (959)
    2.Tom Phoebus (957)
    3.Tom Bradley (956)
    4.Pascual Perez (955)
    5.Jesse Duryea (953)
    6.Wally Bunker (952)
    7.Zack Greinke (950)
    8.Jim Nash (948)
    9.Gary Gentry (948)
    10.Johnny Rigney (948)
     
  10. Prosthetic

    Prosthetic

    Messages:
    3,542
    Location:
    United States

    Hes 26 year old that played for terrible offenses for the first few years of his career. Win/Loss ratio is a terrible way of judging a pitcher. He gives you 200+ innings every year, ERA has always been good. WHIP is going down every year. 1.08 this year which VERY good. And a SO/BB ratio that is going UP every year. This guy started out at the age of 20 on terrible teams. Maybe you didn't see him in the playoffs murder the bats of the Braves, Phillies and Rangers.

    Halicki only had one season of 200+. Cain is doing it every year except his first full in which he had 190 because he was limited. The guy has stud tattooed on his DNA strands.
     
  11. spiker

    spiker

    Messages:
    353
    [​IMG]

    Matt Cain is not a great pitcher. He is above average to good. Not great. He's just not. Please don't be that crazy homer guy.
     
  12. Prosthetic

    Prosthetic

    Messages:
    3,542
    Location:
    United States
    Wow, you backed it up with great evidence! I don't know why I should question your almighty authority. Excuse me, for my ignorance...:rolleyes:
     
  13. spiker

    spiker

    Messages:
    353
    Do you know what Wins Above Replacement (WAR) is, young man?

    http://www.fangraphs.com/library/index.php/misc/war/

    Stat-heads like to use WAR when ranking players because it takes everything a player does and computes how many wins a player contributes to his club. It is an easy way to consider a players total value without hashing through and comparing 50 different statistical categories. It's calculated differently at Baseball Prospectus, Baseball Reference, and Fangraphs, but the results are similar.

    His career WAR is 35th amongst active pitchers at Baseball Reference. There are 34 pitchers who are more valuable to a club's W-L record than he is. He is not amongst the most valuable pitchers in MLB.

    The Top 10 players ranked by WAR:

    1. Roy Halladay (33) 54.30 R
    2. Mariano Rivera (40) 52.90 R
    3. Andy Pettitte (38) 50.20 L
    4. Jamie Moyer (47) 47.20 L
    5. Johan Santana (31) 46.50 L
    6. Tim Hudson (34) 46.30 R
    7. Roy Oswalt (32) 44.60 R
    8. Mark Buehrle (31) 42.90 L
    9. CC Sabathia (29) 42.70 L
    10. Javier Vazquez (34) 37.20 R

    Obviously, Andy Pettitte needs to be removed but I hope my point isn't lost on that.

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/WAR_pitch_active.shtml

    After all of that, I have a feeling that will not suffice. Should I just start banging my head on the wall now?
     
  14. Prosthetic

    Prosthetic

    Messages:
    3,542
    Location:
    United States
    Talking down to me isn't exactly the best way to go about it. Yes I do know what WAR is but you can't rely on one stat to judge a player. Which is where you are failing to understand. The fact that you are comparing CAREERS is comical. Cain is 26, TWENTY-SIX. WAR is increased with time played. A good player with 1,000 PA's will ALWAYS have a less career WAR then a player with 3,000 PA's. Cain is 26 and already a claims a 3ERA or less and 200+ innings. With other stats such as WHIP, SO/BB, ERA+ so on and so forth getting better every year.

    I think you should take the advice that's in your own quote. "You should always use more than one metric at a time when evaluating players"
    WAR isn't a end all be all metric. Its good but it favors older players. Because all those pitchers outside of Halladay, are not on the same level as Felix, Timmy, Johnson, Ubaldo and in a year or two Kershaw. WAR is a nice stat when comparing players with similar length playing careers.

    I mean for christ sakes, Moyer.. MOYER is #4 on that list. Career 104 ERA+ 1.3 WHIP and 2.12 SO/BB which you call not good. Never once had below 3.0 ERA and never struck out over 158 batters.
     
  15. spiker

    spiker

    Messages:
    353
    Yes, I'm comparing careers. Is there something else I should be comparing? Those players that you are listing barely have had a career. You seem to be ranking players based on potential.

    Who are your 10 best pitchers that have pitched for at least 5 full seasons?

    Edit: Also I knew you'd pick out that one phrase in my quote. The remainder of that sentence reads:

     
  16. Prosthetic

    Prosthetic

    Messages:
    3,542
    Location:
    United States
    Baseball isn't about whats happened in the past, its about what WILL happen. Can you honestly say you'd take all of those pitchers with the exception of Halladay and maybe CC over the ones I mentioned? I'm not talking about potential exactly, I'm talking about what will happen in 2011. Not 2012, 2013 or 2006. I'm not going to sit here for 30 minutes and and look at a handful of stats and make a list on who I think is the best with at least 5 years of experience. You don't need lots of experience to try and predict what a player can do in the up coming season.

    But the fact is you are ignoring stats that show a player is trending towards becoming a star pitcher. For career stats which is laughable. What players did in the past (2+ years) is irrelevant to what will happen now. It may show that if they had a few bad years that they have the skill set to come back. Burrell and Huff were tremendous examples of that.

    We aren't talking about CAREERS here.. we are talking about the present and what can happen. You can't honestly think that Oswalt is going to keep on pitching the way he did with Philly for years to come. And that Gordon Beckham of your beloved White Sox will hit .260 for the rest of his career.

    You look at recent trends when judging a player on the PRESENT. This isn't a vote into the HoF this is what will this player be when this season is all said in done.
     
  17. spiker

    spiker

    Messages:
    353
    What is your basis for determining what a player will do in the future, or the 2011 season if you prefer?
     
  18. Prosthetic

    Prosthetic

    Messages:
    3,542
    Location:
    United States
    You look at their trends.. I've said this multiple times. Look at some of the stats from players new old and in the middle. You look at all sorts of stats %, counting it doesn't matter. Some people like certain things more then others. With pitchers you may start to see less strikeouts but less walks and more innings pitched. Young pitchers you will often see high SO and high BB marks. For a few years it will keep going up (both of them) and then their will be his peak where his SO will still be up but his walks will go down because hes learned his movement better. Then as his arm declines his velocity goes down, less K's so he has to learn to change. He will start walking less batters and giving up more hits. This is where most fall off and the best then learn how to hit their spots and keeping a similar ERA for many more years.

    Mechanics/injuries are another thing but I'm not very good at predicting those because I have no medical background.

    You will obviously have some freak pitchers like Randy Johnson who will still throw low-mid 90's into their late 30's and even 40's and continue to hit their spots while still being able to elevate and blow it by a hitter. Obviously a Randy Johnson doesn't come around too often.

    Cliff Lee and Greg Maddox are different stories, never really a wizard of the K but a wizard on keeping the hitter off balance and having the ability to throw any pitch in any count.

    That is why I think pitchers like Cain will could potentially be good for an extended amount of time. Cain has a perfect pitchers body and simple mechanics that cause little stress on his solid frame. As of 2009 he has gotten better at being able to throw his curve and change up for strikes thus seeing a drop in ERA. Hes not throwing 98-99 at the letters anymore but he can still throw 95-96 while hitting his target if his other pitches aren't working as well. Much like Oswalt. Timmy, Sanchez, Kershaw to name a few have a problem of too much movement. They have nasty stuff so lots of K's and low H/9 but more walks. And in Sanchez case last year had dead arm in September/October thus being inconsistent.

    Cain can easily just fall off and not be anything special but he is headed towards having a very good career. He and Bumgarner are the ones I want the Giants to really keep because he both have the body of work horses and have the mentality of a 20 year old vet.
     
  19. Ken

    Ken Premium

    Messages:
    7,432
    Location:
    United States
    All of those guys are good pitchers in my opinion. Johnson has had two good years, but nothing great. The potential is there. But I don't want to jump on a band wagon just yet. I have seen plenty of pitchers have two good years, never to heard of again. That's why he's not a star, YET.

    Kershaw, well 13-10 isn't the best. Yes, his era was just under 3.00. Giving up 13 hrs and 66 er's isn't the top of the pot.

    Matt Cain, again is good. But his 13-11 isn't fantastic. He's got good stuff, but nothing intimidating, IMO. Good 2 or 3 pitcher. But no number #1.

    Jimenez? I'm from Colorado. I went to the first Rockies night game. I have to over 200 games in the last five years alone. What did he do before last year. Not a whole lot. A couple barely winning seasons, a highess ERA, and allot hits when the Rocks needed a out. One year isn't going to turn me into a drooling fan boy. Really the same thing with Price and Greinke.

    Latos, potentially a great pitcher. But he isn't yet. Period.


    I agree that Ramirez and Tulo are the best. It's a huge drop off after that, right. I agree. Does that make them great? No. Ramirez can swing a bat. Two sliver sluggers, a ROY. GREAT BAT!!! But you don't get a great fielder. A great shortstop to me is fielding and hitting. I feel that about any position, except the pitcher. Which brings me to Tulowitzki. I stand corrected about his eliteness. A ROY, sliver slugger, and a gold glove. Also, he only seems to getting better.

    The Rays aren't great. They have a great manager! Maddon is a baseball god! Evan Longoria is a rising star, yes. Pena, another great year, and not much after that. Plus, he's a Cubbie now. Upton, lots and lots of potential, but no drive. Zorbrist produces under Maddon, but hasn't in the past. Price can be elite, but isn't there yet. But past that, Maddon makes even the mediocre good. I worship at the altar of Maddon, but not the Rays.

    Just to say, I don't think they aren't elite players and pitchers out there. But they are more players than pitchers. I just want to see more players and pitchers live up to the hype. Create better match-ups and better baseball. I have hopes for everybody I mentioned, plus many more. Choo, Montero, Harper, Chris Young, the Uptons, David Frees, Stanton, Heyward, Posey, Matusz, and many, many others.

    EDIT: The way things are going in here, I just want to say that I am merely debating. I don't want to talk "down" to anybody. I am just putting my two cents worth, and waiting for a rebuttal. Good ole fashioned baseball talk. Not Yankees and Red Sox baseball talk. :lol:

    EDIT2:
    I have to agree with 100% agree with everything mentioned. :tup:
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2011
  20. Villain

    Villain Premium

    Messages:
    4,687
    Location:
    United States
    Oi... You can't point to cumulative WAR and W-L... I'm dumbfounded. You realize that you can't generate run support from the mound, right?

    Don't you think that something is fishy when you've got those two on your list? Andy Pettitte is retired and Mariano Rivera isn't even a starting pitcher. Cumulative WAR is like saying that a player is the best because they have more career home runs. Following that logic, if we put Hank Aaron back into the game tomorrow he'd be the best player. :dunce:

    I... I just don't know what to say. Wow.
     
  21. Ken

    Ken Premium

    Messages:
    7,432
    Location:
    United States
    I corrected myself and added Lincecum and F. Hernandez. I think that there is allot of potential in the league. Allot of kids that need to prove themselves before I jump on the bandwagon. But it's just one (mad) man's opinion. That's all. :dopey:

    Also, I didn't even consider the bull-pen. If I did, then Rivera (DUH), Wilson, and Papelbon are great pitchers as well. I don't know why I discounted talking about the bullpens. Not WINNING!!! on my part!

    Remember, I still think that the Cardinals are making the play-offs!
     
  22. Villain

    Villain Premium

    Messages:
    4,687
    Location:
    United States
    Prosthetic pretty much explained all that there needs to be said but I'm still in shock after reading all of this.

    You do realize that he's only been 23 since last week, right? As a 22-year-old last season: 2.91 ERA, 33IP more than in 09 with 10 less walks. That you would point to his W-L record as a reason to disqualify him is just ridiculous.

    Just... Wow. Have you seen Ubaldo Jiminez pitch? David Price? Don't you realize that these guys are all just barely starting to mature? :dunce:
     
  23. Ken

    Ken Premium

    Messages:
    7,432
    Location:
    United States

    Never seen Jimenez pitch, no.


    I am not discrediting these guys. I am not counting them out, just saying they aren't there yet!!! That's all. I hope to see Kershaw, Jimenez, Price, Johnson become great. I just can't say "Oh, you had one/two good year(s). Your the best in the game." Show me consistent outings over three years, I will show you a fan. I am just hard to impress, I suppose.
     
  24. spiker

    spiker

    Messages:
    353
    Well, I'm making a case for who are the best active pitchers. Cumulative WAR takes into account a player's whole career. If they had bad years, it's accounted for in cumulative WAR.

    Now obviously, if I'm a GM, Jamie Moyer is not #4 on my list of guys to sign right now, mainly because of his age. But if you're looking to fill a gap with a 4th or 5th starter, Jamie Moyer has proved over the years that he can still get it done. He's had a great career. You don't pitch for 20 years if you are a bad pitcher.

    And poor Javier Vasquez never gets any love. He's one of the best strikeout pitchers in the history of MLB. He just doesn't compile the gaudy W-L stats and he's always been overshadowed on by other aces on his staff. At 34, he's still a good pitcher.

    Other than comparing WAR, what would you like to compare? We could analyze 50 different stats, you'll win some, I'll win some, but in the end, we're just pissing in the wind. WAR is good to rank players because it accounts for damn near everything in one number. Further, cumulative WAR accounts for a career's worth of performance - not just one or two good seasons. Or last season.

    Yes, longevity overrates Jamie Moyer. So what? It doesn't mean that he's still not a solid pitcher. He's been doing it for 20 years, doing it well, and his arm hasn't fallen off yet. I could think of worse pitchers you could have.
     
  25. Villain

    Villain Premium

    Messages:
    4,687
    Location:
    United States
    Please put Jamie Moyer on your pitching staff and watch the losses pile up. He's a fossil! His fastball is like 79mph.
     
  26. spiker

    spiker

    Messages:
    353
    At this point, I'd rather see Jamie Moyer as the 5th starter for the White Sox instead of Phil Humber. Phil Humber could be terrible. At least we know Jamie Moyer is serviceable.
     
  27. spiker

    spiker

    Messages:
    353
    Alright, this thread needs to lighten up a bit. MLB Trade Rumors posted this a few weeks ago.

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/03/highest-paid-players-of-the-last-three-decades.html

    It's insane when you look at how fast salaries for MLB players have increased over the past 20 years. Like the article suggests, I don't think it's too crazy to think that we will see a $40mil player this decade. As long as there isn't a hard cap on baseball, I can see teams spending themselves into a state where making money doesn't even matter to the big teams anymore, just like some of the big European soccer teams.

    Do you think we'll see a $40mil player this next decade? Who could you see commanding that salary? Jason Heyward? Bryce Harper? David Price? I would think that $40mil player would have to be playing either in the minors or majors right now and be really young. Heyward and Price will be just over 30 by 2020. Harper won't even be 30 by then. The youngest the $40mil player could be is about 15 or 16 today if you figure they'll get that big FA contract by the time they are 24 or 25. They'd also have to be able to deliver on that phenom hype pretty quickly.
     
  28. Villain

    Villain Premium

    Messages:
    4,687
    Location:
    United States
    I hope we don't. It has to top out somewhere.
     
  29. Prosthetic

    Prosthetic

    Messages:
    3,542
    Location:
    United States
    Considering the people that pay them have billions of dollars and are making hundreds of millions every year. I honestly don't care if a player is payed a **** ton or not. Considering how much money they make for the owners they deserve it.

    What I hate are teams like Pittsburgh who have ruined a storied franchised into the ground by not spending money. Its so bad they couldn't sign players now.. they have to pull a Tampa Bay/Florida Marlins. Funny how both those teams are in Florida... Anyways Pujols would easily make any team 30 million in one year, he earns that money. He has the image of a good easy to like ball player that just so happens to be one of the greatest right handed hitters in the history of the game. 30/6-7 years I think would be a fine contract. 10 years is pushing it but 6-7 he could easily be a high caliber player during that time span.
     
  30. spiker

    spiker

    Messages:
    353
    Here's an interview with the author of a new book about baseball economics intertwined with the story of the Rays recent success. It sounds like it's in the same vein as "Moneyball" but I'll probably pick it up when it goes to paperback.

    http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/defying-the-economics-of-baseball/