Contemplating C.J. Wilson As A Starting Pitcher
Should C.J. Wilson be converted into a starter?According to FanGraphs, C.J. Wilson was the ninth-most valuable reliever in baseball in 2009 after accumulating 2.0 wins above replacement (WAR). He appeared in 73 games, tossed 73.2 innings and posted a 2.81 ERA, 10.3 K/9, and 3.9 BB/9. Following the season, the Texas Rangers reportedly agreed to C.J.'s request that he be allowed to compete as a starting pitcher during spring training in 2010.
Most die-hard Rangers fans (including many of you who responded to Joey's Sunday questions on November 8th) believe that Wilson should remain in the bullpen. After all, Wilson proved to be a very reliable pitcher in what proved to be a very effective bullpen in 2009. In theory, removing Wilson from the team's 2010 bullpen would likely weaken that unit. Being a bit of a contrarian, I wanted to get a better look at whether "C.J. -- Starting Pitcher" is as crazy as it sounds. Below are answers to what I believe to be key questions regarding C.J.'s proposed career change.
QUESTION NO. 1 -- IS C.J. AN INDISPENSIBLE COMPONENT OF THE RANGERS BULLPEN?
Wilson was the Rangers' most valuable reliever in 2009, outpacing Darren O'Day (1.4 WAR), Frank Francisco (1.1 WAR) and Neftali Feliz (1.1 WAR) for the honor. The year before, Wilson was one of the bullpen's least effective relievers at -0.4 WAR in 46 innings. He was a 1.0 WAR pitcher in 68 innings in 2007 and a 0.2 WAR pitcher in 44 innings in 2006. Like most relievers not named Mariano, it is difficult to predict whether C.J. will be irreplaceable, useful, or a disaster pitching out of the 'pen in 2010.
Concerns about losing the bullpen's one reliable left-handed reliever seem unfounded, since Wilson was not really used as a situational lefty in 2009. Almost all of his appearances came in the eighth or ninth innings, and he faced almost twice as many right-handed batters (185) as left-handed ones (97). In theory, Feliz (if he remains in the bullpen), O'Day, or Dustin Nippert could fill C.J.'s late-inning role in 2010 without having problems arise due to their being right-handed. In addition, Matt Harrison, Kasey Kiker, A.J. Murray, Zach Phillips, Corey Young, Michael Kirkman, and Beau Jones all appear to be viable candidates to fill in if left-handed relievers are needed in Arlington.
Answer: Making C.J. a starter will reduce the talent available for the 'pen in 2010, but it seems unlikely that Wilson's presence is required for the Rangers' bullpen to be a good one.
QUESTION NO. 2: COULD C.J. BE AN EFFECTIVE STARTING PITCHER?
Adam Wainwright did it. So did Ryan Dempster. And how different would the 2009 Rangers have been without Scott Feldman working every fifth day? Although not a common occurrence, relief pitchers can succeed while making the switch to the starting rotation.
The transition for both Wainwright and Dempster appears to have been simplified by the fact that they were three-pitch relievers. Wainwright's pitch mix (55% fastball/18% slider/20% curveball) remained unchanged when he switched from relieving to starting in 2007. Likewise, Dempster's pitch selection and usage changed very little between his time as a closer (2005-2007) and a starter (50-60% fastball/30% slider/15% change-up).
Feldman's transition from the bullpen to the rotation required that he add a cut fastball to reduce his reliance on his four-seam fastball from 75 percent as a reliever to 55 percent as a starter. In his two years as a starter, Feldman has thrown his cutter roughly 23 percent of the time and his curveball roughly 19 percent of the time while mixing in an occasional slider or change-up.
In 2009, Wilson relied primarily upon his fastball (70%) and slider (19%). Both pitches rated as above average with values of 0.92 wins and 0.42 wins per 100 times thrown. According to FanGraphs, Wilson began throwing a cut fastball in 2009 that rates as an above-average pitch (0.34 wins/100 times thrown). He apparently used the pitch around five percent of the time, which is reminiscent of Scott Feldman's cutter usage in 2008. He will likely need to use his new pitch at least 10 percent of the time in order to bring his fastball usage down into the 60-65 percent range that most starters use.
It is worth noting that Wilson has had success as a starting pitcher. In 403 minor league innings, he posted a 3.53 ERA, 1.26 WHIP, 3.0 BB/9, 7.5 K/9, and 0.6 HR/9 primarily as a starter. As a major leaguer, Wilson has a 4.30 ERA, 1.33 WHIP, 4.1 BB/9, 8.4 K/9 and 1.99 GB/FB. In 2009, his walk rate was 3.9 BB/9, which is not ideal for a starter, but he made up for it with a strikeout rate of 10.3 K/9 and a GB/FB of 2.25.
In addition, he proved to be almost as good against right-handed batters (.249/.329/.373) as left-handed ones (.206/.310/.237). Using the chart shown here, Wilson would likely have an ERA of around 4.25 as a starter if he can maintain the walk and ground ball rates that he notched in 2009 while sustaining a drop in his strikeout rate to around 8.0 K/9. In 2009, that would have ranked Wilson alongside Tommy Hunter for the third-best ERA on the staff.
Answer: Assuming Wilson can increase his use of the “cutter” that he apparently introduced in 2009, then it seems likely that he will have the three-pitch repertoire that most successful starting pitchers feature Based on his career statistical profile, it seems likely that Wilson could maintain the ERA of a solid No. 3 pitcher.
QUESTION NO. 3 - WOULD WILSON BE MORE VALUABLE AS A STARTER OR RELIEVER?
Good starting pitchers are more valuable to their teams than good relievers because starters typically impact two to three times as many innings. The very best relievers in baseball rarely exceed 3.0 WAR in a season (Broxton led MLB relievers in 2009 with 2.9 WAR and Mariano Rivera finished with 2.0 WAR). In 2009, 49 starting pitchers finished with 3.0 WAR or greater. Among the three converted relievers discussed above, Wainwright has averaged 3.8 WAR as a starter after being a 1.1 WAR reliever. Dempster has been a 4.3 WAR starter after averaging 0.8 WAR as a reliever. And Feldman has averaged 2.1 WAR as a starter after beginning his career as a 0.1 WAR reliever.
If C.J. remains in the bullpen, his greatest value to the Rangers would likely result from him being designated the closer. Unfortunately, Wilson has proven to be relatively ineffective when pitching on consecutive nights. In 2009, Wilson pitched on back-to-back days 21 times. In the 18 innings he pitched on the second day, he gave up 20 runs (16 earned) and permitted an opponents' batting average of .325. As noted in the graph below, Wilson's career numbers indicate that he is far more effective when rested. Unfortunately, that is a luxury that closers are not allowed.
Assuming Wilson pitches out of the bullpen but is not the closer, and assuming that he remains healthy throughout 2010, then it is reasonable to expect a 1-2 WAR performance. Fifty-nine percent of the 123 starting pitchers who tossed at least 100 innings in 2009 exceeded 2.0 WAR. If Wilson joins the ranks of starting pitchers and is able to give the team 150 innings of 4.25 ERA baseball, then he will likely produce at least 2.0 WAR with the potential to be significantly more valuable if he pitches more innings.
Answer (and another question): Although he needs to prove that he can be at least moderately effective as a starting pitcher, it seems very likely that Wilson's personal value to the Rangers in 2010 will be greater as a starter than as a reliever. However, the key question is whether the value of “Wilson + his bullpen replacement” will be greater than the “starter that Wilson replaces + Wilson in the bullpen.” The answer to that will depend on how effective the Rangers are this off-season in acquiring major league pitching and how their young pitchers progress before and during spring training.
Conclusion: I like the fact that the Rangers are allowing Wilson to compete for a spot in the starting rotation. The best-case scenario nets the Rangers a starting rotation that includes two hard-throwing left-handers (Wilson and Derek Holland) who will complement three solid right-handers (Feldman, Kevin Millwood, and Tommy Hunter, Brandon McCarthy, or Feliz).
If C.J. fails to secure a job in the rotation, then he either reprises his role in the major league bullpen or the Rangers burn his last option so that he can spend time in the minors either getting his reliever mojo back or working on his starter's repertoire. And on the off chance that Wilson spends a couple of months in the minors, then he postpones his free agency by a year and allows the Rangers to keep the lefty at least through the 2012 season.
28 Comments | in Analysis, Rumors, The Off-Season
Reader Comments (28)
CJ is not easy to figure out, he scares me EVERY time he comes in, I feel like he is going to give up a hit and walk a batter... if someone was already on, a run scores. or he gives one up, BUT, after that, he seems to go after the batters and blow them away, he gets tough. So, with MY mind set, I like him as a starter, better than a reliever.... at least we have a chance to catch back up, because it wont be in the 8 or 9th inning.
gosh, what brilliant thinking........... I'm overwhelmed..... Rangers do you need me?????
oh. ok. I'll be quite.
sorry....
I think the Rangers agreeing to have CJ come to ST and work as a SP is just trying to appease CJ. He will get his opportunity to start in two years when he becomes a FA.
I'm all for it. CJ is solid but a bit flighty. Decreasing his appearences and increasing his innings may do wonders for his fragile psyche, but that's pure speculation.
Another question, though - if CJ goes to the starting rotation, who's our go-to guy when (not if!) Frankie gets hurt? Neftali? B-mac? Sheppers ???
Barring injury or trade, I can't see both CJ and Neftali in the rotation, I think that leaves our bullpen too depleted. Given the choice b/w the two, I'd put CJ in the pen and Neftali in the rotation, but I am willing to let them fight it out in spring training. I think we owe it to CJ to give him a chance.
Great write-up. I was very much against this (potential) move, as CJ is an odd duck who seems to have finally found a niche,but I'm now torn.
Bottom line, David, would you be in support of CJ transitioning to the rotation?
No, I agree with Biillyd (You're hired!) and David (Delicious summary again!) I think we're seeing someone who has gone through the growing pains that we will need to be willing to suffer with Holland, Feliz, Perez... Davis, Smoak...). He was a starter and has what it takes to be a starter, except for efficiency. If he can improve in that department, then I think he's in for real, and not just a dog to whom the Rangers are throwing a tokenistic bone.
In comparison with Billy D's assessment of CJ, I wonder the opposite about Feliz. While he DOES have the efficiency to be a starter, he is vulnerable when he has a runner on 1st (or at least he has been) due to his inability to hold that runner.
On the other hand, if we use him out of the pen as our trouble-shooter, squashing rallies or holding narrow leads, since he's capable of striking out 2 with the bases loaded, or coaxing a pop-up with men on first and second... we wouldn't be exposing his Achilles heel, and we'd be maximizing the value of his incredible strength. Even though he'd pitch only half the number of innings as a reliever, those innings would be at least twice as valuable if they were either holding onto a narrow lead or squelching the other team's rally.
To have a pitcher who can't necessarily sustain that "power to stifle" for 7 innings in a row, but can spread it out, over 4 games per week, would change a lot of our other pitchers' fair-to-good starts into entirely well-pitched ballgames-- even the ones that otherwise might have gotten away.
Precisely because "not all innings are created equal"-- a strikeout, or retiring three-in-a-row is more valuable in some situations than in others-- I lean toward Feliz as a reliever, and CJ as a starter.
CJ Wilson has been sucessfully groomed for the bullpen. Feliz has been prepared for the rotation. The Rangers should keep player roles well defined and lead with their strengths.
I agree with rob m: CJ will get his chance to start in two years for another team.
If he proves in the spring he can handle it, I'm all for CJ in the rotation. Two power lefties starting would have to be an advantage over what most other teams can throw out there, of course that is assuming they are effective. He's seemingly always wanted to be a starter and I think his penchant for throwing all kinds of different pitches suits a rotation spot much better than being at the back end of the pen. If you roll with a pen of McCarthy, Nippert, Feliz, O'day, Frankie and a few other pieces (maybe even Scheppers) then I think losing CJ back there doesn't hurt much at all and give Feliz more seasoning before committing to him in the rotation when Millwood leaves. I'm all for it.
That said, I don't see any scenario whatsoever that CJ gets sent back down and his free agency is extended a year. He'd throw a hissy and rightly so given that he's been one of our more effective relievers over the last several years - last season's injury riddled performance not withstanding. Unless he's injured or becomes completely ineffective during the season, he's on this team's staff next season in some role.
Is it completely out of the question to go with a six man rotation? Feldman, Millwood, Holland, Hunter, Feliz, and then Wilson or even Sheets. It seems like this would be a viable option provided the everyone in the rotation, whose name isn't Feldman, could be more effective with fewer innings. Especially if Sheets is signed (big if). I, for one think C.J. should stay right where he is. It's not like the Rangers have to have him in the rotation. So why force it? Also, if he has a hard time pitching one inning on back to back days, then what makes the Rangers think that he is capable of going seven or eight in a row?
Regardless whether the rotation is five or six guys, C.J. should be in the pen. In fact, the bullpen really needs another lefty to go along with him to insulate him from pitching on back to back nights. Mike Gonzalez anybody?
Both CJ and Feliz will have to be replaced, obviously, if they head to the rotation. They do have some arms they can call up, even someone like Scheppers in late relief could be an option, conceivably. But Texas could be playing with fire here. The safe thing would be to let these guys stick in their current roles until something needs to be changed due to lack of performance or injury. In my mind, the only guys in the starting rotation that have secured a definite opening day spot are Feldman, Millwood and Hunter. And I'm still holding out hope they can move Millwood before the season starts. No offense to Millwood - as he is a great guy and has pitched some big games for Texas - but he's just too fragile, and he's also shown himself to be incapable of going a full season at full strength & effectiveness.
I guess the questions that need to be raised are:
(a) Does team need CJ in the rotation more than they need him in the bullpen?
and
(b) Is it (the potential reward of having a hard throwing lefty in the rotation) worth the risk tampering with his psyche and arm?
I guess you can say the same thing for Feliz.
I'm all for making CJ a starter... that way, when he melts down, it's in the 3rd or 4th inning and we have a chance to get back in it. Melting down in the 8th and 9th gives us no chance.
I think that if I were JD I would look to move CJ (in a trade). His stock is high right now and he might just be the 1 player that you could use to sweeten the pot without gutting your bullpen.
I think that JD could deal from an area of strength; lefthanded pitching. Granted, most of our lefties are starters (Holland, Harrison, Perez, Kiker, etc... and I realize Kiker and Perez are still a couple of years away) but I'm sure we could fill the void left by CJ.
Here's a thought... and this is not completely original; what if JD packaged Borbon, CJ, McCarthy and Chris Davis for Granderson?
OR... and this would be a very bold move and would require quite a bit of payroll flexibility but would allow us to fill some big holes without gutting our farm; CJ, Cruz, McCarthy and MY for Josh Beckett? The Red Sox are old at 3B, have issues at catcher... and wouldn't have to worry about re-signing Bay... and with that savings, could pick up a stating pitcher to fill the void left by Beckett (not that this would be necessary because they have pitching depth and they could count on McCarthy to give them 15 or 16 starts).
The salaries would be a wash... trading MY's $16m for whatever Beckett makes... and if needed, we could throw in a couple of nice prospects; Kiker and/or Main/Beavan/Boscan, etc... to sweeten the pot.
Hammy could swing to RF, which is what's going to happen anyway... and to fill 3B, and pick up our franchise centerfieder, we could then ship Borbon, C. Davis, Millwood and a nice prospect (again, a Main/Beavan/Kiker type) to Detroit for Granderson and then we sign FA Chone Figgins.
To fill our DH spot, we sign Vlad to a 3 yr deal loaded with incentives.
Figgins (3B)
Andrus (SS)
Granderson (CF)
Hammy (RF)
Vlad (DH)
Murphy/Byrd (LF)
Kins (2B)
Smoak (1B)
Salty/TT (C)
Rotation -
Beckett
Feldman
Hunter
Holland
Harrison/Hurley/Moscoso
Pen -
Feliz
Frankie
O'Day
Mathis
Nippert
** We'd need to pick up a cost effective LH reliever... which I realize is ideally CJ but I'm saying that we trade him while his stock is high and we get something nice in return.
This gives the Rangers TONS of speed, a TRUE #1 starting pitcher, a slick fielding third baseman, and a franchise CFer... and we barely touched the farm and wouldn't be taking on a ton of salary and/or bad contracts.
The top 3 in the lineup would be a nightmare for opposing teams... and Vlad could protect Hammy... followed by solid production in the 6-9 spots... and maybe moving Kins down in the lineup would take a little pressure off him and he could just hack away.
The most obvious hole... and the 1 thing that your article was about... is CJ. We'd need to find a LH reliever in FA/trade.
I realize this is probably far fetched and short sighted... I'm just having some fun...
My feelings:
CJ got shafted by the organization when he was called up (too soon) and then crammed into the bullpen b/c he wasn't ready to start and not allowed to work back into being a starter b/c we needed warm bodies in the pen (and for whatever reasons the brain trust at the time decided he wouldn't make it)
Based on the track records of the former crew, i have a hard time believing they were 100% correct on CJ.
Meanwhile CJ has repeatedly requested another chance to be a starter. The only way to stop him from requesting this would be to make him the closer.
I dont think JD owes CJ a chance to be a starter again, but i do like this move for Texas if they want to retain CJ when the time comes for him to be a FA.
(If only we had done this in 2006 or 2007 when we were giving Koranka or Loe 23 starts respectively and Tejada 33 total.)
@Pabloesque, the Red Sox would never make that deal. Youk (-5.4 UZR/150) plays a better 3B than Young (-10.7 UZR/150) so they could sign a decent 1B Johnson as a stopgap to Lars Anderson and get their youth at 3B and 1B. What the Sox would love is a SS, and the Rangers aren't giving up Andrus. Also you say the salaries are a wash, but MY's salary is locked in for a few more years, while his performance will be declining. Basically MY is untradeable, unless you are giving up a lot of talent or taking on another bad contract, neither of which the Rangers will do. I am not a MY hater, my son has his jersey and I think he is a great player. I'm just stating the facts.
"Here's a thought... and this is not completely original; what if JD packaged Borbon, CJ, McCarthy and Chris Davis for Granderson?"
I read this and quickly looked at my calendar to see if it was the beginning of April. No - it's only mid-November, so this doesn't look to be a joke.
I would hope that Borbon, CJ, McCarthy and Davis would net a bigger prize than Granderson - Good lord! Nothing against Granderson, but I think you could get him for 2 of those guys and a couple middling prospects.
And why do we want Granderson, other than Evan Grant says we should? I thought we were trying to correct the hitting imbalance, not make it easier for opposing lefties to dominate us.
billydpowell - You are probably on to something regarding CJ dealing with inherited runners. In his career, opposing hitters have a .609 OPS when there are no runners on, .829 with runners on base, and .854 with runners in scoring position. He's likely better suited for starting innings than entering innigs with a mandate to put out a fire.
jesse - Relievers are the toughest players in baseball to predict future performance. Jonathan Broxton, Matt Thornton, Mike Wuertz, Andrew Bailey, and Brian Wilson were the five most valuable relievers in baseball in 2009. I suspect that Broxton was the only player on that list that anyone expected to be key contributors on their respoective teams last season. If Frankie goes down, I think it likely that one or more of O'Day, Nippert, Feliz (if he's in the bullpen), Benoit (if he returns), Hurley (if he's healthy), or even Kasey Kiker could step in and handle the role of closer.
Andrew - A great starting rotation can mitigate the effects of a relatively weak bullpen by increasing the run differential when the first reliever enters the game and reducing the number of innings that the bullpen has to pitch. If Feliz and Wilson prove to be effective as starters, then having them both in the rotation will make it easier for Francisco, O'Day, Nippert, Mathis, etc to get through the ninth inning. If one or both CJ and Neftali pove to be ineffective, then having them in the bullpen is a great fallback position.
Or - If CJ adds an effective third pitch and he proves that he can work efficiently (16-717 pitches per inning), then I would very much support his move to the starting rotation. I think that CJ will be one of the Rangers five best pitchers in 2009 and, except for when injuries or pitch usage dictate, those are the guys that you want in your rotation.
Charles - I think it will be interesting to see what CJ and the Rangers do in spring training if Wilson is deemed the sixth best starting pitcher when camp breaks. It wouldn't surprise me if CJ requested being sent to AAA so that he can work on a starter's schedule. He would be gambling that ineffectiveness or injury would strike one of the top 5 starters by June and that he would get his chance in the majors. The upside to CJ would be that if he succeeded, his value as a free agent would be substantially greater as a starter than as a late-inning reliever.
Old-fashioned, yes, but I think that, for the most part, a team's best pitchers should be starting. Look at almost any starter's number of innings pitched compared with a reliever. This isn't to say that relievers are aren't important, of course they are. But the starters are the most important because they pitch to more guys. CJ wants to start? Good for him, he wants to excell and I think the Rangers are right in giving him a shot at it. I'd like to see what Feliz can do with it, too.
We know that CJ has a history of having some major meltdown innings precipitated by multiple bases on balls before a giving up a big hit..... what we dont know is his resiliency.... to what extent is Wilson able to bounce back from giving up 3 or 4 runs and then return to the mound? Given his immature behavior in the recent past, I would be cautious about putting my faith in his perseverance.
Unless the Rangers trade Millwood, I do not see Wilson breaking the rotation. A six-man starting corps could be a great idea....... as long as the rotation goes 6+ innings per start.
Pabloesque, you're scaring me!
I've enjoyed your suggestions in the past, but that was pure Halloween if not April Fools!
Given the Rangers current needs (and the fact that even Borbon is better against lefties than Granderson), unless I aimed to flip him in a pre-spring trade, I wouldn't take Granderson for any ONE of the players you mentioned-- certainly not for ALL 4!
Did you mean "...and..." or "... OR" when you listed them?
Cheers, nonetheless! It was a fun read for lunchbreak!
I'm all for throwing as many names into the rotation as possible... and for the record I have no problem with a AAA rotation that includes Hurley, Harrison, Wilson and Feliz while we begin the season with Millwood, Feldman, Hunter, Holland and McCarthy. Then when one gets injured or ineffectiveness deems it necessary, we call up whoever's performing the strongest at the time. I'm a fan of Wilson in the rotation because I prefer a least 2 lefties...
Here's a question to those in the "know" around here: Any chance that Kiker's ready to be a lefty setup guy, replacing Wilson? Seems like he's the lefty closest to the major leagues not counting Holland.
Jim - I've only seen Kiker pitch once, but I've spent a fair amount of time with his stats. If his control problems don't significantly increase when promoted to the major league bullpen, I think that he might be ready to help the Rangers in 2010 as a reliever. Trip saw Kiker a lot last year - hopefully he will weigh in with an opinion.
If Kiker isn't ready, I wonder if Matt Harrison wouldn't be the right guy to plug is a bullpen lefty.
Thanks david. Mlbtraderumors just posted a list of trade candidates for lefty relief, and the group was uninspiring - mostly because the asking price would be high for someone like Tallet or even Perez. I'd rather just see them promote from within.
Another matter I've been thinking about is Holland. What if he is still having problems keeping the ball down, and what if he is as bad in the spring as he was for a lot of the late summer/fall? Would the team move him back to the bullpen where he was able to get away with a little more by not having to face hitters more than once in a game? I hope that isn't the case, but one has to wonder about him after the beating he took for about 6 weeks there.
Sorry to keep posting, but what about Billy Wagner? His injury status might keep his price down a bit, eh? He's got the skins on the wall - I guess the question is whether or not he's back to full effectiveness.
Jim - Derek Holland is one of my all-time favorite Rangers prospects, so I am pulling for him to succeed as a starter. I think that the Rangers were premature in promoting him because his secondary pitches weren't ready. Hopefully, a good offseason should be enough to have his curveball and change-up ready for major league hitters in 2010. If not, then he seems morethan capable of handling a late inning role in the bullpen.
I have no idea what Billy Wagner's asking price will be, but I imagine that it will be more than what the Rangers could justify for someone as risky as him. Like you, I think that the team will be better off looking at the 5-6 lefties in their own system who seem ready or close to ready to pitch out of the bullpen.
Absolutely give C.J. a chance as a starter in spring training and see what happens! Good competition in the spring should make for a better rotation.
Make O'Day a starter..his delivery is easy on his arm...he could be another Wakefield (more or less)
I don't have much to add but I just wanted to say thanks for writing such a coherent, articulate, and well researched post. It clearly took some thought and effort to write and I appreciate the work that went into it. It's hard to crank out winners everyday but this is one of em. Keep it up!