Garrett Richards

[UCLAngel]

I'm not sold on the idea that he can stick in the rotation. No consistency and no third pitch.

ESPN seems to agree.

http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=sweetspot&id=43922

Maybe someone can change my mind, but I'm just not seeing an impact arm, whether in the pen or starting.

[nando714]

He's our #3

Lol

[Cdaniel]

Richards has really great movement on his pitches. If he can improve his control he can forsure be a #3

[floplag]

He isnt going to win any Cy Young awards but hes fine at the back end of the rotation and has done rather well there as far as im concerned.

 

Our problem is that for now he isnt at the back end and might be over-matched at the 3 unless he steps it up a little.. which he could do

 

i still have faith that by opening day we have a true 3... perhaps im optimistic, lol

[Angelsjunky]

Look at it this way. At worst, Richards will continue as he did last year and be a solid #4 starter, with an ERA around 4.00-4.30. That's not very good for a #3, but consider that Tyler Skaggs has #2 upside and could be a #3 as soon as next year, especially after he gets likely/possible early season jitters out. The point being, even if Richards doesn't improve, Skaggs could be a legit #3 at some point next year, possibly earlier than later.

 

Of course its risky - 2014 isn't a year in which we're going into the season with a surefire contending team, strong in every way. The rotation is the biggest question mark, the bullpen is solid but potentially leaky, and the lineup - while potentially very good, also some risks (Hamilton and Pujols). The Angels could implode and win 75 games next year, or if everything gels they could win close to 95. I'm predicting 87 at this point.

[DMVol]

Tough crowd....he was 5-4 3.59 as a starter when he was moved into the rotation full time after the AllStar break....I'd take that every year from here to end of his career....pretty good numbers for any 3/4 starter....

[tdawg87]

I agree that this is a now-or-never situation for Richards, but I don't think he will completely tank. I expect him to take his bumps but ultimately I think he will prove himself to be a decent 3/solid 4.

[Make Angels Great Again]

Richards has such good stuff and potential, but he's unpredictable. He could be a decent 4 or he could have a huge breakout and his K/9 could skyrocket and he could turn into a legit ace.

[nate]

Look at it this way. At worst, Richards will continue as he did last year and be a solid #4 starter, with an ERA around 4.00-4.30. That's not very good for a #3, but consider that Tyler Skaggs has #2 upside and could be a #3 as soon as next year, especially after he gets likely/possible early season jitters out. The point being, even if Richards doesn't improve, Skaggs could be a legit #3 at some point next year, possibly earlier than later.

 

Of course its risky - 2014 isn't a year in which we're going into the season with a surefire contending team, strong in every way. The rotation is the biggest question mark, the bullpen is solid but potentially leaky, and the lineup - while potentially very good, also some risks (Hamilton and Pujols). The Angels could implode and win 75 games next year, or if everything gels they could win close to 95. I'm predicting 87 at this point.

How are those solid #4 numbers?  That is a #5.  Richards is a #5, we have to hope that Skaggs and Santiago can be 3-4, which is a lot of hoping.

 

I expect a lot of regression from Weaver too.  Our rotation, combined with the bullpen tells me this team will be lucky to win more than 80 games.

[Inside Pitch]

How are those solid #4 numbers?  That is a #5.  Richards is a #5, we have to hope that Skaggs and Santiago can be 3-4, which is a lot of hoping.

 

I expect a lot of regression from Weaver too.  Our rotation, combined with the bullpen tells me this team will be lucky to win more than 80 games.

 

If you don't mind me asking.. is there something specific you are basing your opinion on?  I'm not being argumentative, I'm just curious if you're just pulling numbers out of a hat (which is all i've ever done), based on your personal ideal of what a 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, should be or if you have taken the time to look at the leagues and see where guys fall in line according to rotation spots.  FTR, I've never tried to do any real research into it so I'm hoping maybe you have because it's an interesting subject IMO.  A few years back during the PED era a few breakdowns of ERA by slot according to actual performance were done but obviously those numbers mean little now.

 

This article from Feb of last year attempts to slot pitchers into 5 groups based on certain different criteria...   http://battlingbucs.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/defining-the-rotation-spots/  

Edited January 30, 2014 by Inside Pitch

[Brent Maguire]

How are those solid #4 numbers?  That is a #5.  Richards is a #5, we have to hope that Skaggs and Santiago can be 3-4, which is a lot of hoping.

 

I expect a lot of regression from Weaver too.  Our rotation, combined with the bullpen tells me this team will be lucky to win more than 80 games.

The league average ERA in the AL last year was 3.99. Putting up a 4-4.30 ERA makes you a solid 4, if not very close to a league average pitcher, which would make you a #3. 

[nate]

What was the average on playoff teams?  To me you are only a solid #4 if you put up better than average numbers for a #4.  Otherwise you are an average #4 pitcher.

 

To make the playoffs you need to be above average.

[fan_since79]

I think Nate nailed it.

 

The way I see our rotation at the moment, we have two top starters and three or four #4/5's. Richards, probably Skaggs, maybe Santiago, a small chance of Mulder, and a distinct possibility of Blanton.

 

It's very unclear after Weaver and Wilson.

Edited January 30, 2014 by fan_since79

[OregonLAA]

I will never understand all this stuff about Weaver. We need an "eat crow" thread for him

[Brent Maguire]

What was the average on playoff teams?  To me you are only a solid #4 if you put up better than average numbers for a #4.  Otherwise you are an average #4 pitcher.

 

To make the playoffs you need to be above average.

Those numbers would be better than average for a 4 though. Like I said in the post before, if you're putting up an ERA near the league average ERA, you're closer to a #3 than a #4. 

 

Richards probably won't be an above average pitcher but there's nothing wrong with having a league average guy. 

[Brent Maguire]

Looking at Richards' numbers a little further, I think there's a good chance he ends up having a good year. 

 

In 103.1 IP as a starter last year, Richards had a 4.18 ERA, 2.22 K/BB ratio, a HR/9 rate of 0.7, a 1.31 WHIP and a 3.61 FIP. I want to see what he does over a full season but if he were to pitch 175 innings with those numbers, I would be ecstatic. 

Edited January 30, 2014 by Angels_Baseball

[Inside Pitch]

What was the average on playoff teams?  To me you are only a solid #4 if you put up better than average numbers for a #4.  Otherwise you are an average #4 pitcher.

 

To make the playoffs you need to be above average.

 

That's not a bad starting point/measuring stick.  So based on lowest ERA for the third best pitcher on last years AL teams we get this...

 

A's - Dan Straily 3.96.

TB - Matt Moore 3.29

Bos - John Lester 3.75

Det - Justin Verlander 3.45

Cle - Zach McCallister 3.75

 

Looking at those 5 teams, TB is absolutely loaded..   But the thing that sticks out more than who playoff teams have at number three is is the kind of performance they got from the pitchers with the 6th most starts for each of those teams...  And that is where the Angels fall massively short.

 

A's - Sonny Gray, 2.67

TB - Roberto Hernandez, 4.84, Jake Odorizzi, their # 7 and likely new #6 was at 3.94

Bos - Jake Peavy, 4.17

Det - Jose Alvarez, 5.82.  Detroit's rotation was amazingly healthy.  

Cle - Danny Salazar, 3.10

 

Angels badly need to sign a pitcher for depth.

Edited January 30, 2014 by Inside Pitch

[nate]

The #4 pitcher in your rotation will pitch at least one game in the ALCS and WS.  Do you really want Garrett Richards up against whatever team that is?  He labors because he struggles throwing strikes and does not have a good strikeout pitch.

[arch stanton]

Argue whether he's a 3 or a 4 or a 5 or whatever but to say he can't stick as a starter is just naysaying for naysaying's sake. I'll bet anyone an Angels 2014 World Series Champions hat that he's gonna log 180+ innings.

[UCLAngel]

Look, I'm not just naysaying without reason. I actually rather like the rotation, have hope that Mulder throws 100+ solid innings and think Skaggs will develop nicely. I just really think GRich will take a Jerome-like route this year. He'll be spotty to start with, lose his release point on his curveball and be moved to the pen after 7 or 8 straight rough starts. He has so much talent, but his inability to locate his curve and lack of third pitch allows hitters to sit fastball. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't have a ton of faith in him.

[arch stanton]

So we're on for the bet?

[UCLAngel]

Absolutely. If he throws 180+ innings I'll send you an Angels World Series hat or other item of your choice (not to exceed $25). I expect the same in return.

[arch stanton]

Done

[VariousCrap]

Counting on Skaggs for 2014 is wishful thinking IMO.

 

The Angels need to either trade or sign one of the remaining FA's for this starting rotation.

[Angel Oracle]

How is 101 Ks in 145 innings terrible?  

Stretch that out to 190 innings, and he would have 132 Ks; not great, but not terrible.

Sometimes, the Ks come a little later for some than others.   He is still only 26 in 2014.

 

A GREAT comp for Richards could well be a younger Justin Masterson.

Masterson didn't rack up the Ks until his age 27 season in 2013, averaging 6.5-7.0 Ks/per 9 innings in 2010-2012 and then 9.1 Ks/9 innings in 2013.   Richards averaged 6.3 Ks/9 innings in 2013.

 

Like with Masterson, Richards had about a 3/2 GB/FB ratio in 2013 and would have ranked near the top of the AL in GB/FB ratio if he had pitched just 17 more innings in 2013 for the 162 minimum innings to qualify.  

 

Richards may well = Masterson, ultimately.    I like that thought.