Part of CSNPhilly.com


« Halladay rocked in unsettling performance vs. Tigers | Main | Under the lights, Phillies will face the Yankees »

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Comments

Good. There's zero chance that the team and Halladay are lying at all regarding how he really feels.

There were changes in his rotator cuff last season? When was this reported?

Just get me to the mound, boys.

This is what I found regarding "changes":

"When you look at any pitcher's MRI, unfortunately there are changes in his shoulder over time, that's part of what we see in any MRI," Phillies head trainer Scott Sheridansaid. "Any time we do a baseline MRI we usually see something; they're never pristine because unfortunately throwing a baseball isn't a normal act. So Dr. Altchek was concerned with some of the changes in Roy's rotator cuff. And we had seen those changes when we signed him. Basically he just wanted to get a better picture. So he looked at the previous MRI in 2009, compared it to the his current MRI and basically found that there were minimal changes in his cuff from 2009 until now."

http://articles.mcall.com/2012-06-06/sports/mc-phillies-halladay-thome-dodgers-0606-20120606_1_phillies-mike-fontenot-triple-a-lehigh-valley

Team Lohse

Is anyone surprised he's worn out, given his never ending thirst for super intense workouts? There's something to be said for keeping in shape, but how much is too much? Just seems to me like maybe he's run himself ragged.

Is the game really at 7:05? I believe it is just being aired on MLBTV at 7, but being played at normal time.

Halladay felt absolutely fine during his warm up pitches and then as soon as game started he felt 'exhausted?'

At least a little white lie as he had nothing from the get-go in the 1st inning yesterday.

Now have to see if Halladay starts during his next scheduling outing & if he looked like his first two outings in spring training (88-91 with decent command & control).

Seriously though what are the chances that Boras gave Amaro a ring/text yesterday or this morning?

I would bet they are pretty damn close to 100%.

I'm telling you, if Hamels-Halladay-Lee-Kendrick-Lannan turns into Hamels-Lee-Kendrick-Lannan-Cook just write the ticket to a .500 season at best, now.

"I'm telling you, if Hamels-Halladay-Lee-Kendrick-Lannan turns into Hamels-Lee-Kendrick-Lannan-Cook just write the ticket to a .500 season at best, now."

If either Aaron Cook or Rodrigo Lopez makes more than a spot start or two for the Phillies this year, you can rest assured that they won't be a .500 team. They were a .500 team LAST year, and they didn't have anyone nearly that crappy in their rotation. For that matter, I'm not sure they even had anyone as crappy as Lannan in their rotation.

AL - The schedule says game time 705.

Scotch Man, I think they'd be better than .500, but not good enough to make the postseason, which is the difference that a healthy Halladay makes.

For everyone on here who has projected the Phillies to be a playoff team because this year, unlike last year, Utley, Howard, and Halladay all will be healthy, I ask:

How confident are you that all those guys will actually be healthy?

The Myth of the Healthy Polanco lives on in the form of the Myth of the Healthy Halladay, Howard, and Utley.

BAP: Numbers wise, Lannan is better than Blanton.

TTI: Numbers-wise, when? Blanton's peripherals actually say that he pitched pretty well last year. Meanwhile, Lannan spent almost the entire season at AAA -- and pitched poorly while there.

Is Kyle Lohse still available? Rube should sign him. Think about these rotations:

Hamels, Lee, Lohse, Halladay, Kendrick

or

Hamels, Lee, Lohse, Kendrick, Lannan

In the first scenario, Halladay would have to be half the man he used to be, and we could still win the division.

In the second scenario, the Phillies will be fighting for a wild card spot if the injury bug doesn't bite.

BAP, pitchers on the Phils who under performed Lannan's career 185-195 IP/Yr and 103 ERA+?

Kyle Kendrick
Vance Worley
Roy Halladay
Joe Blanton
Tyler Cloyd

They definitely had pitchers worse than Lannan last year, who is a decent enough 4/5 starters in this league.

I'm not too concerned about Howard staying healthy. He doesn't have a long injury history and plays a low impact position. His injury was also fluky. The other two...

Mike, I agree with the first half of your statement, but Howard's injury wasn't "fluky" in the sense that Utley's sliding into 2nd base and breaking his thumb was. Howard had been dealing with a gimpy leg all throughout 2011, and the Achilles finally gave in at the end of the year.

Fat: Perhaps I should clarify. Instead of "I'm not sure they even had anyone as crappy as Lannan in their [2012] rotation," I'll say, "I'm not sure they even had anyone in their 2012 rotation who was as crappy as I suspect Lannan will be in 2013."

Utley cant play when the field is damp...no worries on 150 games out of him this year.

Being careful with Utley in spring training when the field is wet = can't play

interesting

The 'Michael Martinez, Professional Baseball Player' posts never fail to crack me up. Well done.

BAP: You think Lannan won't top Blanton's 87 ERA+?

A guy who has career ERA+ seasons of: 103, 110, 109, 87, 103, 97.


I'll take that bet.

Yeah BAP, I think you need reevaluate Lannan.

He's not great shakes, but he's proven himself a dependable back of the rotation starter.

TTI: I won't bet on it but, yes, I predict Lannan will be worse than that & that he'll be out of the rotation by the All Star break. And, to forestall a long rolo post about Lannan's career numbers against everyone except the Phillies (which numbers don't count, I guess) . . . no, I cannot point to any concrete evidence in Lannan's track record to support my belief. It's more like a gut feeling, based on the fact that no-stuff ground ball pitchers can turn into 6.00 ERA pitchers very quickly. You need look no further than the Phillies' very own Aaron Cook as an example.

I just realized that we're at the halfway point of Spring Training which tells us one significant fact...Spring Training is way too freaking long.

Love the prediction that Lannan is all of a sudden going to spiral downward this season before age 30- despite posting remarkably consistent numbers while in the majors up until now- based on absolutely nothing at all except a 'suspicion.'

I think I miscalculated the odds of Lannan being BLers whipping boy this year if they think he's going to be worse than Tyler Cloyd.

I look forward to this summer where we have to endure awh telling bap that Lannan's 6 ERA is league average for a 5th starter, so he can't complain.

I can see Adam Morgan in the rotation by the all star break. He should jump over all the usual suspects at AAA (Cook, Lopez, and Pettibone) pretty quickly. He'll be replacing either Halladay or Lannan.

In a perfect world, Pettibone would be next to the big team, but he's simply not as good as Morgan or even Ethan Martin. He's more refined than both, but has nowhere near the talent.

So, let's see my fearless predictions so far:
1. Ruf to AAA
2. Enciarte to the big leagues (or, alternatively a trade will be made to keep him.)
3. Betancourt will be given the annual honor of the Luis Castillo Numbers in ST Don't Mean Anything Release.
4. Delmon Young will come back in the best shape of his life, and will be a surprise contestant for the 26th man on the All Star Team (j/k)

And for down the road, Cody Asche will replace Michael Young on the roster next season. The kid can play and even if he's not a gold glover at third, he'll be replacing a butcher. So, he'll be good enough.

Pat Gallen: "Charlie Manuel said he thinks Roy Halladay can be "serviceable" for the Phillies. Serviceable isn't exactly the word you wanna hear."

Well, that's a relief!

lore: Yeah, that line of argument has always struck me as complete sophistry. It's league-flipping average for a "5th starter" because almost all 5th starters suck & many teams can't even find one who's a viable major league pitcher. So we're supposed to be satisfied with a guy who's not even a viable major league starter because many other teams' 5th starters aren't viable either?

Blanton's a better pitcher than Lannan and at least Blanton can give you some streaks where he is very good over a couple of starts.

Nothing is special about Lannan except his durability in his career.

and on top of that i think the stat was from like 2006 when runs per game were at their peak.

MG/BAP/others: Who would you have signed in FA, Joe Blanton or John Lannan?

Its hand-down Lannan to me.

I'm sure Utley will play on wet fields during the season. Why risk it in spring?

I would've loved to see this site if Blanton had been resigned.

Lore: I agree. In fact, I'm kind of curious where all the negative feelings about Lannan come from. Even including his starts against the Phillies, he has a career ERA of 4.01 and hasn't posted anything above a 4.13 since 2010.

His ERA+ hovers around 100 with a pretty sustainable BABIP and a GB% between 50 and 60. He's not going to be your staff ace (unless you're the 2009 Nationals), but he's not going to embarrass you as a #5 starter...

lorecore: If you gave me truth serum, I guess I'd probably say Lannan -- but that's in large part because he's something new. Neither one of them excites me very much.

MG: Blanton by ERA+ is not a better pitcher than Lannan. In 9 full seasons Blanton has posted an ERA+ north of 100, 3 times.

Lannan has done 3 in his 4 full seasons. Less hits for Lannan (barely), less home runs (barely), but more strikeouts and less walks for Blanton.

Blanton's career WAR in 237 games is 10, Lannan's in 134 games is 7.

BAP's posts are uninformed even we he thinks them out. When it's based on a "gut feeling," fugedaboudit.

The jury is out until Lannan hits his first World Series homer.

aksmith: "I can see Adam Morgan in the rotation by the all star break. He should jump over all the usual suspects at AAA (Cook, Lopez, and Pettibone) pretty quickly. He'll be replacing either Halladay or Lannan."

Wanna bet?

@Scotch Man @MG The rules haven't changed since spring training started. Put the money aside and fantasize you could get him on a reasonable, one-year deal, the luxury tax be damned... Lohse is still going to cost a first round draft pick. Ain't happening.

I would have resigned if Blanton had been resigned.

The question is whether Blanton is a better pitcher than Lannan. The answer is 'yes' even if there isn't that big of a difference at this point in their respective careers.

Did I want Blanton resigned? - No especially not at the dollars and years he got.

I realize they aren't going to after Lohse either and it isn't about the first round pick. It's the cash and the Phils don't have it.

Lannan sucks. He throws a lot of pitches but doesn't throw one any of them particularly well nor does he have good command/control. For a year contract at the dollars he is making, he's fine.

The difference between KK and Lannan is that KK might have some surprise upside this year especially if he is able to duplicate his 2nd half stats including K/9 rate.

Lannan has no upside and most nights he is going to struggle to make it through 6 IP.

Lannan and KK are similar in that they're both pitchers about whom you say "Huh. Surprising. When you look at his numbers, he's actually mediocre, which is a lot better than I was expecting."

"Lannan has no upside and most nights he is going to struggle to make it through 6 IP."

You could you replace Lannan with Blanton in that sentence after watching Joe the last 3 years.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-13/dont-like-your-seat-baseball-fans-can-now-upgrade-mid-game

You have to love baseball owners trying to squeeze out every last nickel from the fans pockets including what is basically trying to sell the same seat twice with no discount.

I can't believe I am actually defending Blanton but he had some very good streaks while he was here.

The problem is that when he was bad he tended to give up HRs at a ridiculous rate & he should during a 5-6 week stretch where he would get absolutely shelled.

Lannan's value is his durability and the way his contract is structured. That's about it.

MG: Yeah, for a one-year contract, fine. I didn't grouse about the signing when it happened and I'm not really grousing about the signing now. I'm just saying: there's a good chance it isn't going to turn out as well as everyone seems to think.

Ground ball pitchers who don't strike anyone out tend to flame out quickly or have wild fluctuations from year to year (i.e., Jason Marquis, Joel Pineiro, Aaron Cook). And when you add in poor control, and the fact that he didn't even pitch well at AAA last year, it's not exactly like these concerns about Lannan are being pulled out of thin air.

110 pitchers have thrown at least 200IP in the NL over the past three years.

Only 2 of them have had higher HR/9 than Joe Blanton(Rodrigo Lopez and Bronson Arroyo).

MG: Performance and numbers wise you are categorically wrong when you say this:

The question is whether Blanton is a better pitcher than Lannan. The answer is 'yes' even if there isn't that big of a difference at this point in their respective careers.


Why are you arguing against facts?

me: "MG, Who would you have signed in FA, Joe Blanton or John Lannan?"

MG: "The question is whether Blanton is a better pitcher than Lannan."

I know that is not the real MG talking about how Blanton is better than Lannan. For three seasons he has been railing on Blanton, calling him a fat slob with poor conditioning and saying he couldn't even pass a physical for another team.

Whenever a mediocre player (like Lannan) is signed by the Phils people here act like he's the worst player in the MLB and predict disaster. If a rival had signed Lannan MG and others would be calling it a 'nice depth signing' and a 'bargain' based on the market this year. Look at the deal he signed compared to others on the market (notably Blanton and his 2yr/15mil). This was a fine move to make.

It is OK to have a mediocre 5th starter. Trust me. We'll all get through this together.

Take a point and make a ridiculous abstraction/extension of what a person said which is a TTI/Iceman staple.

Yeah I wasn't a fan of Blanton by any stretch and did think his overall conditioning especially in early in '09 when he came into camp notably overweight & out-of-shape did affect his performance at times. I won't miss seeing him here as a Phils' pitcher or watching him pitch.

I was fine with the Lannan signing at the time and given the apparent move the Phils were looking to spend on a 5th starter. Options were pretty lean on a 1-yr/$2-$4M price range. It wasn't like the Durbin signing where there several better alternatives available at the time and in the same price range or even cheaper.

I just think Lannan generally sucks largely for some of the reasons BAP listed above & his limited ability most nights to work into camps.

Maybe Lannan really surprises me this year and posts an ERA under 4 or close to it. I expect it will be somewhere north of 4.50 though playing a HR-friendly park & behind a shaky INF defense.

I find it strange that no one has yet to bring up Halladay's oft-repeated quote that over the course of a season, most pitchers are hitting on all cylinders for 5 starts, hitting on no cylinders for 5 starts, and somewhere in between for the rest of the starts. Hopefully yesterday's start counts towards one of those 5 "no cylinder" starts. That said, Doc's "no-cylinder" appearances still used to have better outcomes than most other pitchers' "all-cylinder" starts. If he can't command and show at least a little zip, it's going to be a rough year. But hey, it's spring training. I'm not going to care until the games count.

"Take a point and make a ridiculous abstraction/extension of what a person said which is a TTI/Iceman staple."

___________________________________________

You know what- I'm calling Bullshit on this you big freakin' crybaby. You absolutely did bash Blanton for years on here calling him a fat slob and saying he was never in shape and that is why the Oakland Athletics dumped him blah blah blah. So it isn't Iceman distorting you or what you have said- it is a documented fact on this site.

As for the Lannan thing you have said a few times now that Blanton is better. Numbers wise I showed how Lannan has a better ERA+ over his career and a similar WAR in 103 less games. I pointed out where Blanton is better and where Lannan is better. You set an ERA limit of 4.50- something Lannan has gone over 1 time. Blanton, 5 times. At every chance you have obfuscated every time you have been asked the question.

So let's be real clear here on this question and your answer to it:

You have stated that Blanton is a better pitcher than Lannan despite the fact that numbers wise Lannan is a better pitcher. What numbers are you using or where are you drawing the idea that Blanton is better?

from gtown: "Pat Gallen: "Charlie Manuel said he thinks Roy Halladay can be "serviceable" for the Phillies. Serviceable isn't exactly the word you wanna hear.""

That is actually a horrifying quote, and possibly more worrisome than anything that happened on Tuesday.

# of World Series HRs:
Joe Blanton: 1
John Lannan: 0


Seems pretty cut and dry.

What person today would use ERA+ as the sole criteria to largely judye a pitcher? Look at Blanton's peripheral stats including K/9, BB/9, swing and miss, and his FIP/SIERA. He's the better pitcher.

There was times here Blanton was out of shape including early in '09 and ''11. For the first time last year, I thought Blanton did make a concerted effort to really get in shape and help deal with trying to overcome his elbow injuries in '11. Blanton said as much last spring since he didn't choose to have offseason surgery and instead dealt with it through rehab and conditioning.

MG, I am the one of the biggest sabermetrics defenders on this site, but even those who helped develop the stats would quickly admit that there are those who consistently either under perform or outperform their xFIP/SIERA, etc, and that after a while, you have to recognize the pitcher for who he is.

Another thing is, I don't think these estimators, while doing quite a lot to improve our understanding of pitching, do quite enough right now to account for a pitcher's ability to induce weak contact, and the importance of ground balls (both of which would obviously impact John Lannan's peripheral estimation more than Blanton's).

Also, you cite that Blanton had some dominant stretches here, which is true, but those dominant stretches are from 2009 (as far as I can tell). Do you think Blanton is THAT guy anymore? He's going to be 32 this year, and has had 2 injury plagued seasons since.

I just think you're overvaluing Blanton and undervaluing Lannan.

Both are mediocre pitchers, but Lannan has probably been the slightly better pitcher, though with less variation (lower highs and higher lows).

"I look forward to this summer where we have to endure awh telling bap that Lannan's 6 ERA is league average for a 5th starter, so he can't complain."


lore, you'd be wrong. Once again.


Sackman's piece was written a few years ago, and rotation spot ERAs need to be adjusted downward because of the MLB wide decline in scoring. This is a point I have acknowledged before, but I'm not surprised your selective memory is faulty.

What person today would use ERA+ as the sole criteria to largely judye a pitcher? Look at Blanton's peripheral stats including K/9, BB/9, swing and miss, and his FIP/SIERA. He's the better pitcher.

____________________________________________

Again MG you are avoiding the question. Furthermore, your reading skills must be rudimentary at best because I used many other things to compare the two pitchers (ERA, WAR, K/9, H/9, HR/9, BB/9)

I suggest if you want to continue in this discussion you do two things:

1.) Answer the question I asked which was simple and direct and

2.) Learn to read what I type.

Gettin' chippy in here...

MG: "What person today would use ERA+ as the sole criteria to largely judye a pitcher? Look at Blanton's peripheral stats including K/9, BB/9, swing and miss, and his FIP/SIERA. He's the better pitcher."

Peripheral stats are used for predictive purposes, as in players with better k/9, bb/9, etc. are more likely to pitch better in the future - not that they were better in the past.

At the end of an inning, striking out the side after giving up two ground balls that scores a run isn't better than walking the bases loaded and getting 3 linedrive outs at the warning track. It just sure as hell isn't likely to happen that way many more times.

This may be a moot discussion however, as I believe MG knows/understands all of this, and is simply unwilling to give in.

I'm just wondering how you get a "linedrive out" at the warning track? And how that doesn't score the runner from 3rd with either 0 or 1 outs?

Lorecore, explain yourself!

forgot to add the punchline of: So after 9 years of pitching, Joe Blanton should no longer be judged on what his predictve stats may indicate.

"Blanton's a better pitcher than Lannan and at least Blanton can give you some streaks where he is very good over a couple of starts."


MG, you need to do some homework on Blanton before you post. In 30 seconds I found that Lannan had a 12 game streak in 2009 where he pitched 86.2 innings, 2.80 ERA, had a 6 - 3 record (team: 8 - 4) for a crappy Nats team, with a 1.177 WHIP.

fatal: Delmon Young was on 3rd, and he was actually HBP since saying that he walked would further ruin the story.

lorecore, really the only possible reasonable explanation you could have given. :)

or: Ben Revere was on third, but Juan Samuel was the 3rd base coach.

MG, Lannan also had an 11 game streak to close out the 2010 season where he put up a 3.42 ERA and the team was 7 - 4.

Dude, you need to do a little research before you post.

Dude, you need to do a little research before you post.

Posted by: rolo | Wednesday, March 13, 2013 at 02:52 PM

We have VERY high standards here at Beerleaguer University!

It's what sets us apart!

Que es mas mediocre?! Thanks for the laugh today, guys. Your Blanton vs. Lannan slap-fight was hilarious. Only on BL can you find an argument ad nauseam/ad infinitum over two such mediocrities.

MG, it keeps getting worse for you...

In 2011 Lannan started the season poorly and was sitting with a 5.09 ERA and a 2 . 4 record after 7 starts.

Over his next 26 starts to close the season he pitched to a 3.38 ERA, the team went 14 - 12, and he finished with a 3.70 ERA. The only downside was that he only averaged 5.74 IP/start.


But, OK, I guess he never has good streaks like Blanton.

Dragon, exactly.

This is BL, where every mediocrity, all minutae, and even minimart are discussed ad infinitum.

I next expect we'll be discussing the relative merits of Ruf vs. DYoung's OF defense.

Rolo: can we get them rule exemptions to play the outfield with a bat instead of a glove?

ot: cards pray new papal pick is ped-free.

Over the last 5 years or so, I think you can pretty clearly say that Lannan has been a better pitcher than Blanton. So I'm not signing onto that part of MG's argument. But, given Lannan's peripherals, his poor control, his lost 2012 season, and the wildly erratic year-to-year performance of other similar pitchers, I think it's fair to say that those who believe he's a lock for 180 innings, and an ERA between 3.9 and 4.20, are simply deluding themselves. He COULD wind up giving you that and, given his history, I can't blame the Phillies for betting on him. But I think people are significantly underestimating the chances that he could be a complete bust.

So, how about that offsides rule in soccer?

MG- dude, where did I distort what you have said about Blanton? Stop acting like everyone here has a memory that lasts five seconds. You absolutely have ripped him here for years, and to say that "you weren't a fan" is the freaking understatement of the century.

"...I think it's fair to say that those who believe he's a lock for 180 innings, and an ERA between 3.9 and 4.20, are simply deluding themselves."


Strawman ALERT!!!

bap, please identify ONE single poster who stated Lannan was a "lock".

One.

BAP: I think the problem is that a 4.00-4.50 ERA is totally fine for a 5th starter, so long as he gives you 5.2+ IP on average.

Do we think Lannan will give us that? Well, except for 2010, he's done it every season of his career, and generally done better (especially against all teams other than the Phillies, for some reason), so it wouldn't really make a lot of sense to bet against that outcome, if you're wagering based on actual numbers.

If you want to believe he's going to be bad because you have a feeling he will, I guess that's your prerogative, but you shouldn't be too surprised when there aren't lots of other people hitching their cart up to that horse.

I was dead wrong about Lannan not pitching well over stretches.

Still consider Blanton a slightly better overall pitcher who got a much worse contract than Lannan.

Lannan has pitched 6 seasons in MLB. His career ERA is 4.01.

In 3 of those seasons his ERA has been below 4.00, and in 3 his ERA was above 4.00.

bap, I'll personally go this far:

Based on his history, Lannan has a 50/50 chance of his 2013 ERA being either above or below 4.00.

When I think of a 'lost season,' I think of a guy like Joe Blanton in 2011 who really did lose most of his season due to injury.

Lannan didn't have a 'lost' 2012. There are statistics to document that he pitched 180 IP between AAA and the majors. He pitched like he has pitched his entire career. He came up at the end of the season for the Nats and started six games with basically the exact same statistics that he's put up his entire career at the MLB level (4.13 ERA) giving up 3 ER or less in 5 of his 6 starts.

The last three times he's made over 30 starts in a season, his ERAs have been 3.91, 3.88 and 3.70. There are no red flags in his peripherals to suggest that he's all of a sudden going to bottom out at age 28. This is all just typical, unnecessary panic from people that can't even point out one specific, tangible reason as to why the panic is justified.

Iceman, all true.

Those of us here who are taking the position that Lannan was a decent value/risk signing for a 5th starter are stating that 'he was a decent value/risk signing'. Nothing more.

The guy ain't a CY winner and, unless God intervenes, never will be.

No one here has stated otherwise.

rolo: what do you think Lannan's chances are at having an ERA above 5?

Your logic above would suggest its close to 0% since he's never done it before Thats what BAP is arguing... that he believes its much higher than the low number you/others are making it out to be.

lore, my own personal estimate of those chances?

I would say that Lannan - over a full season - probably represents a 1 - 25% probability of putting up an ERA over 5.00.

He has, at times DURING previous seasons, been sitting with an ERA above 5.00. It would not surprise me if the same occurs in 2013.

But, for a full season? I'd rate the chances at 1 in 4 or less.

This is almost as hard as the time I actually defended the idea of Betancourt making the roster, but I have to strongly agree with Iceman and TTI here regarding the evaluation of Lannan.

I think I actually might have been the first person on this site to float the acquisition of Lannan as a potential sleeper move, and something with which I was definitely a fan before it happened.

And looking at this career, the most reasonable expectation of him this year is that he will give you about 180-190 IP and be roughly a league average pitcher. It's certainly possible he could crater, and this is probably more likely than the possibility of him having a season more in line with a #3 starter. But the smart money is on him continuing the consistency that he's displayed throughout his career.

Now....all that said.

I do not, in any way, look forward to watching him pitch.

At all.

The odds of any pitcher's ERA being over 5.00 are existent. However, guys with 6 years of proven track records, who have never put up a season-long number within .030 points of that benchmark at any level of play (and a career average a full 1.00 point lower), aren't generally considered huge risks to do so.

Would I put the number at 20%? Maybe. But I really don't think I'd go higher unless we learn he's got a significant injury, because there's literally no evidence to suggest that it's probable.

could lannan, this season, turn out to be more "serviceable" than halladay? god forbid.

When u hear glass it's Vince's ass

"the wildly erratic year-to-year performance of other similar pitchers"

I had a feeling this was crap after I saw BAP mention Aaron Cook, because Cook, from age 25-30, was actually remarkably consistent, with his ERA only 'wildly fluctuating' from 3.67 to 4.28. His WHIP over that time was 1.39. Lannan is in this age range, so why is Cook being used as an example here?

So I looked at the similarity scores for Lannan. #1 on the list is Trevor Wilson. Wilson's ERA over the 7 years he started regularly ranged all the way from 3.56 to 4.35. Not a single year way over, or even over, 4.50. His WHIP during those seasons was 1.33 and nothing in his peripherals or results 'wildly fluctuated.'

The #2 pitcher on the list is Jason Vargas. Vargas is the same age as Lannan and has had three seasons as a full time starter; his ERAs were 3.78, 4.25 and 3.85. His peripherals are very consistent and has had no 'wild fluctuations' in his results.

The #3 pitcher is Clayton Richard, also the same age as Lannan. From 2009-2012 he's never had an ERA over 4.50 and his ERAs the last three years are 3.75, 3.88, and 3.99. There are no 'wildly fluctuating' peripherals for Richard, either, and his career WAR is very close to 1.40, just like Lannan.

Where are these pitchers that BAP is referencing that have a track record of success under the age of 30, yet have 'wildly fluctuating results,' who Lannan's pitching style mimics, that we should all be worried about?

lore, interesting, meaningless factoid:

Cliff Lee, John Lester, Edwin Jackson, Zack Greinke and Justin Verlander have ALL had one or more seasons where they put up an ERA that was higher than Lannan's career high 4.65 ERA in 2010. (Qualifying: at least 140 IP/season.)

Iceman, perhaps bap has been drinking too much of that SF Bay water?

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories

HardballTalk

Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel

CSG