More pitchers coming off the board, are you worried yet?

[Capital_Dave]

22 minutes ago, greginpsca said:

Taillan is now off the board. Traded to the Skanks for 4 minor leaguers.

Not only 4 minor leaguers, but the Yankees' #15, 19, 21 prospects and a guy that isn't even in their top 30.  And the Yankees minor league system isn't too much better than ours.  This would be like us getting Taillon for four guys most of us have never heard of.

[Second Base]

38 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

I am looking at the whole picture.  You have recency bias.  And his age matters.   He's had an FIP of 4.08 in the three years before his 2020 aberration.  And that includes the stretch at the end of 2019 where he was very good (not 2020 good).  

It's not 20mil on Darvish.  It's 60m.  Through the age of 36.  You're basically taking away a significant chunk of money to improve the team in 2022 and 2023 when he's 35 and 36 years old.  Quintana's money comes off the book after a year.  I think it's very likely that Darvish is the better pitcher in 2021.  After that?  I'll take my chances that we can find someone else who'll be better than him in the two years to follow for that kind of money.  

And even though we have no idea what it would have cost to match the offer, it's still not just prospect or money.  It's both.  We decrease the prospect capital within the system AND commit 20m per season to a guy in his mid 30's.  

I am not saying Darvish isn't a good or very good pitcher.  It's just that getting him comes with a shit ton of risk and I don't blame Minasian for taking a pass whatsoever.  

Seeing that Garrett Richards commands 10 million, Drew Smyly 11, etc...Yu Darvish on the open market would command significantly more than 3/60. There's a metric ton of risk in pitching right now regardless of trade or free agent. The risk of trading for Yu Darvish, particularly at a very fair rate as the Padres paid, is no more of a risk than depending on Jose Quintana to not completely suck. 

Regardless of whether you think he's good or not (which is a difficult factor to put aside, because that's the crux of any acquisition), it's illogical to say Yu Darvish is too much of a risk in comparison to the one year deals the Angels have been banking on to get them back into the playoffs. 

[Stradling]

33 minutes ago, Second Base said:

Seeing that Garrett Richards commands 10 million, Drew Smyly 11, etc...Yu Darvish on the open market would command significantly more than 3/60. There's a metric ton of risk in pitching right now regardless of trade or free agent. The risk of trading for Yu Darvish, particularly at a very fair rate as the Padres paid, is no more of a risk than depending on Jose Quintana to not completely suck. 

Regardless of whether you think he's good or not (which is a difficult factor to put aside, because that's the crux of any acquisition), it's illogical to say Yu Darvish is too much of a risk in comparison to the one year deals the Angels have been banking on to get them back into the playoffs. 

I do not believe that if Darvish was a free agent he would get 3 years and $60 million, even after his last 25 or so starts. 

[floplag]

People angry over missing out on Taillan seem to be the same folks telling me that Kluber and or Paxton are too big a risk. 
I get that hes only making 2+ mil but again it comes back to if a few mil are stopping us... then were not a big player on the big guys. 

[Stradling]

3 minutes ago, floplag said:

People angry over missing out on Taillan seem to be the same folks telling me that Kluber and or Paxton are too big a risk. 
I get that hes only making 2+ mil but again it comes back to if a few mil are stopping us... then were not a big player on the big guys. 

Probably because of money and upside?  

[Angels 1961]

After we sign Odorizzi things will be fine and couple pen pieces.

[floplag]

12 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Probably because of money and upside?  

Yeah, as noted, although the upside is debatable.
Worth noting the same team took the chance both he and Kluber.

[Stradling]

2 minutes ago, floplag said:

Yeah, as noted, although the upside is debatable.
Worth noting the same team took the chance both he and Kluber.

Yea, I noticed that.  The Yankees are going to have an interesting year.  They have an ace then a bunch of question marks.  But they do have an excellent pen.

[Stradling]

And when I say upside I am talking about a 28 year old starter with a career 3.67 ERA and three of his four seasons he has posted a WHIP under 1.20.  Also there have been a few other starters who left Pittsburgh and excelled including Cole and Glasgow.  

[Second Base]

7 minutes ago, Angels 1961 said:

After we sign Odorizzi things will be fine and couple pen pieces.

I actually agree with this. I believe that Odorizzi's going to be good for 170 innings and a 3.75 ERA, a mediocre #3 and great #4. Quintana would be a solid #4 and I think Barria, when the opportunity arises is a halfway decent #4 as well. Chalk up Heaney and Canning as #4's as well.

The idea here is that the rotation itself won't necessarily be good as much as it will be adequate to keep it close for six innings. With a strong bullpen, you can cut off scoring for the final three innings, and open up an opportunity to win the ball game.

[BTH]

The only reason I question the Odorizzi fit is that until he actually does it, I'm not sure that Minasian wants to sign any mid-tier free agent to a multi-year deal. At least this offseason.

[34red4]

48 minutes ago, Second Base said:

I actually agree with this. I believe that Odorizzi's going to be good for 170 innings and a 3.75 ERA, a mediocre #3 and great #4. Quintana would be a solid #4 and I think Barria, when the opportunity arises is a halfway decent #4 as well. Chalk up Heaney and Canning as #4's as well.

The idea here is that the rotation itself won't necessarily be good as much as it will be adequate to keep it close for six innings. With a strong bullpen, you can cut off scoring for the final three innings, and open up an opportunity to win the ball game.

A 3.75 ERA over 170 innings would almost certainly put him in the top 50 pitchers in baseball. That’s not a #3 or #4.

[jsnpritchett]

4 minutes ago, Jinzu said:

A 3.75 ERA over 170 innings would almost certainly put him in the top 50 pitchers in baseball. That’s not a #3 or #4.

It's also something he's only done one time in his career so far.

[Inside Pitch]

34 minutes ago, Jinzu said:

A 3.75 ERA over 170 innings would almost certainly put him in the top 50 pitchers in baseball. That’s not a #3 or #4.

Yeah...  Not sure where people are setting their personal bar at but in 2019, there were only 58 pitchers in MLB that threw as many as 165 innings.  Of those only 24 of them put up an ERA of 3.75 or lower.   

In 2018 it was 52 and 27.   
In 2017 it was 50 and 21.

 

 

[Docwaukee]

2 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Yeah...  Not sure where people are setting their personal bar at but in 2019, there were only 58 pitchers in MLB that threw as many as 165 innings.  Of those only 24 of them put up an ERA of 3.75 or lower.   

In 2018 it was 52 and 27.   
In 2017 it was 50 and 21.

 

 

I think Taillon is going to be a stud or he's going to be injured most of the year.  I'd weigh the odds at 30%/70%

[jsnpritchett]

3 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

I think Taillon is going to be a stud or he's going to be injured most of the year.  I'd weigh the odds at 30%/70%

The original post that referenced 170 IP/3.75 ERA was about Odorizzi, though, right?

Edited January 24, 2021 by jsnpritchett

[Second Base]

Yeah that's on me gents, I have what I openly consider a "skewed" view of what constitutes a role within an "ideal" rotation. 

Ace - Top 5-10 starting pitcher in all of baseball. Strong record of health and dominance. Good bet to go 180+ innings and log 200 k's. Not many teams have these. Some have two. 

#1 - An ace, minus the prerequisite record of health, and not as many K's. 

#2 - Basically a mid rotation starter that's either on the upswing of his career or has moments when he pitches like an ace. 

#3 - A steady, advice average starter that's better than a back end but lacks the upside of a TOR starter. Just throwing out numbers, but 170 innings, 3.50-ish ERA. 

----This space between 3-4 is where I believe Odorizzi fits. 

#4 - A back end starter that shows prolonged moments of being a dependable #3. 170 innings and a 4.00 ERA. 

#5 - Member of the rotation that's generally replaceable by a good prospect or a decent swingman. 140 innings, 4.50 ERA. 

Again, I know plenty would take exception to these classifications but it's just a shorthand version of where I like pitchers up. 

I picture Quintana, Heaney and Canning being #4's. Bundy being in that space between 2 and 3, and Odorizzi bring in that space between 3 and 4. Barria being in that space between 4 and 5. I suppose if Ohtani is healthy, #1, just not putting all my eggs in that basket.

 

[34red4]

40 minutes ago, Second Base said:

Yeah that's on me gents, I have what I openly consider a "skewed" view of what constitutes a role within an "ideal" rotation. 

Ace - Top 5-10 starting pitcher in all of baseball. Strong record of health and dominance. Good bet to go 180+ innings and log 200 k's. Not many teams have these. Some have two. 

#1 - An ace, minus the prerequisite record of health, and not as many K's. 

#2 - Basically a mid rotation starter that's either on the upswing of his career or has moments when he pitches like an ace. 

#3 - A steady, advice average starter that's better than a back end but lacks the upside of a TOR starter. Just throwing out numbers, but 170 innings, 3.50-ish ERA. 

----This space between 3-4 is where I believe Odorizzi fits. 

#4 - A back end starter that shows prolonged moments of being a dependable #3. 170 innings and a 4.00 ERA. 

#5 - Member of the rotation that's generally replaceable by a good prospect or a decent swingman. 140 innings, 4.50 ERA. 

Again, I know plenty would take exception to these classifications but it's just a shorthand version of where I like pitchers up. 

I picture Quintana, Heaney and Canning being #4's. Bundy being in that space between 2 and 3, and Odorizzi bring in that space between 3 and 4. Barria being in that space between 4 and 5. I suppose if Ohtani is healthy, #1, just not putting all my eggs in that basket.

 

I think the way people categorize pitchers is subjective, but the best way to keep it consistent is to try and be as objective as possible.

I’d define Ace the same way you do.

Everything else I’d categorize based on value (I like fWAR), since that takes into consideration innings pitched and effectiveness while disregarding “potential”. Potential is just potential until it actually leads to results.

A #1 imo is a top 30 pitchers in baseball based on value over a certain period of time.

#2 is 31-60

#3 is 61-90

and so on.

[floplag]

4 hours ago, Stradling said:

Yea, I noticed that.  The Yankees are going to have an interesting year.  They have an ace then a bunch of question marks.  But they do have an excellent pen.

If some of those risks pay off, they could be very good.  
At least they are doing something, lol 

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, floplag said:

If some of those risks pay off, they could be very good.  
At least they are doing something, lol 

Yea, I agree.  They’ve signed two pitchers we’ve signed a starter, and traded for a closer and a SS. 

[floplag]

25 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Yea, I agree.  They’ve signed two pitchers we’ve signed a starter, and traded for a closer and a SS. 

and still have the biggest parts of need open... come on man, does everything have to be pulling teeth with you?

[Pancake Bear]

5 hours ago, Second Base said:

Yeah that's on me gents, I have what I openly consider a "skewed" view of what constitutes a role within an "ideal" rotation. 

Ace - Top 5-10 starting pitcher in all of baseball. Strong record of health and dominance. Good bet to go 180+ innings and log 200 k's. Not many teams have these. Some have two. 

#1 - An ace, minus the prerequisite record of health, and not as many K's. 

#2 - Basically a mid rotation starter that's either on the upswing of his career or has moments when he pitches like an ace. 

#3 - A steady, advice average starter that's better than a back end but lacks the upside of a TOR starter. Just throwing out numbers, but 170 innings, 3.50-ish ERA. 

----This space between 3-4 is where I believe Odorizzi fits. 

#4 - A back end starter that shows prolonged moments of being a dependable #3. 170 innings and a 4.00 ERA. 

#5 - Member of the rotation that's generally replaceable by a good prospect or a decent swingman. 140 innings, 4.50 ERA. 

Again, I know plenty would take exception to these classifications but it's just a shorthand version of where I like pitchers up. 

I picture Quintana, Heaney and Canning being #4's. Bundy being in that space between 2 and 3, and Odorizzi bring in that space between 3 and 4. Barria being in that space between 4 and 5. I suppose if Ohtani is healthy, #1, just not putting all my eggs in that basket.

 

If you're using any kind of multi year basis for an ace, there's at best two right now. No one else qualifies over multiple years by that standard.

[Second Base]

15 minutes ago, Pancake Bear said:

If you're using any kind of multi year basis for an ace, there's at best two right now. No one else qualifies over multiple years by that standard.

Three I think. Bauer, Odorizzi and Tanaka. I wonder if any of the teams regret on passing on Sugano now. If he was asking 10 million a year, seems like it may have been a prudent buy. 

[Stradling]

6 minutes ago, Second Base said:

Three I think. Bauer, Odorizzi and Tanaka. I wonder if any of the teams regret on passing on Sugano now. If he was asking 10 million a year, seems like it may have been a prudent buy. 

Weren’t reports saying he wanted Kikuchi money?  

[Pancake Bear]

1 hour ago, Second Base said:

Three I think. Bauer, Odorizzi and Tanaka. I wonder if any of the teams regret on passing on Sugano now. If he was asking 10 million a year, seems like it may have been a prudent buy. 

You've lost me. In what sense are Odorizzi or Tanaka aces?

I was referring to two aces in total in MLB by your criteria when you look over a three year period: Cole and deGrom.