The Pitching Cup Is Half Empty
With nothing of tremendous substance yet unfolding in Surprise (unless, of course, you count the predictably cheery stories on Brandon Webb's recovery and some hints around Colby Lewis being in the best shape of his life), and with really very little else to say about Michael Young until he either shows up to camp or doesn't this weekend, I thought I'd revisit something that I haven't really harped on since the last day of 2010 -- the pitching depth (and corresponding talent level) lurking behind Colby Lewis and C.J. Wilson, and the unfortunate and seeming likelihood that the Rangers will yet again go to war with by far the worst starting rotation in the division.
Below, I identified the five (or six) starting pitchers that Baseball Prospectus labeled as either likely picks for their respective Opening Day rotations or spot starters, and with those depth charts in mind, I proceeded to average their forecasted innings and ERAs using PECOTA, ZiPS, and CAIRO projection sets; these were averaged equally and without any additional weight being lent to any single forecasting system, and then converted into wins above replacement using Jeff Zimmerman's WAR calculator (with a few minor adjustments being undertaken along the way). The final product is a set of numbers that I feel pretty comfortable with on the whole, in spite of a few mild reservations:
Jered Weaver: 199 innings, 3.46 ERA, 4.7 WAR
Dan Haren: 222 innings, 3.54 ERA, 5.1 WAR
Ervin Santana: 193 innings, 4.21 ERA, 2.8 WAR
Scott Kazmir: 151 innings, 4.78 ERA, 1.2 WAR
Joel Pineiro: 165 innings, 4.15 ERA, 2.5 WAR
Angels: 930 innings, 3.97 ERA, 16.3 WAR
Trevor Cahill: 185 innings, 3.93 ERA, 3.3 WAR
Brett Anderson: 152 innings, 3.87 ERA, 2.8 WAR
Gio Gonzalez: 177 innings, 4.09 ERA, 2.8 WAR
Dallas Braden: 173 innings, 3.89 ERA, 3.2 WAR
Brandon McCarthy: 99 innings, 4.38 ERA, 1.2 WAR
Rich Harden: 116 innings, 4.07 ERA, 1.9 WAR
Athletics: 900 innings, 4.01 ERA, 15.2 WAR
Felix Hernandez: 228 innings, 2.78 ERA, 7.4 WAR
Jason Vargas: 171 innings, 4.19 ERA, 2.5 WAR
Doug Fister: 148 innings, 4.41 ERA, 1.8 WAR
Lucas French: 127 innings, 4.74 ERA, 1.1 WAR
Michael Pineda: 114 innings, 4.06 ERA, 1.9 WAR
Erik Bedard: 58 innings, 3.47 ERA, 1.4 WAR
Mariners: 846 innings, 3.63 ERA, 16.0 WAR
C.J. Wilson: 180 innings, 3.78 ERA, 3.6 WAR
Colby Lewis: 192 innings, 3.87 ERA, 3.6 WAR
Brandon Webb: 103 innings, 3.80 ERA, 2.0 WAR
Tommy Hunter: 155 innings, 4.85 ERA, 1.1 WAR
Derek Holland: 142 innings, 4.72 ERA, 1.2 WAR
Scott Feldman: 144 innings, 4.85 ERA, 1.0 WAR
Rangers: 916 innings, 4.30 ERA, 12.5 WAR
Two red flags stand out in the Rangers' projection set, although I would consider both to be readily explainable -- conventional wisdom holds that if Webb is capable of posting a sub-4.00 ERA, he's going to pitch more than 100 innings, but this is a slippery slope because you could then go ahead and make the same assumption about 150 innings, or 160 innings, and so on. I'd personally be ecstatic with merely 100 innings, and I have some problems with the more optimistic belief that he can roll 150-plus innings deep; ultimately, this one feels right, although the projected ERA itself is dicey because these forecasting systems can't begin to fully account for the effects of an injury-imposed two-year absence.
And Feldman? There aren't exactly abundant positive indications flowing out of Surprise with regard to him making an expeditious return to the mound (the general tenor of the beat reports seem to place him more on a late-May to early-June timetable), so 144 innings out of Feldman almost certainly isn't going to happen ... but I'm betting we'll see him in the rotation at some point, and probably for an extended period of time, since he'd otherwise serve as an especially well-compensated long reliever. In the meantime, these guys in the vein of Michael Kirkman and Matt Harrison and Dave Bush strike me as decent bets to post a cumulative ERA in the vicinity of where Feldman's projection sits now.
I suppose if you want to look at this from the glass-half-full perspective, you can construct the argument that no team boasts more reachable "upside" between two of its assumed top five starters; Holland and Webb are at worst marginal -- and at best legitimate -- threats to go bonkers, based on the former's prospect pedigree and stuff and the latter's track record of being one of the greatest pitchers to toe the rubber during the mid-aughts. If one or the other falls well short of expectations (and let's be honest, it probably will happen given the risk still associated with both), though, and if this rotation loses even one of its mainstays to injury, this is going to be a tough pitching carousel to watch, and much likelier to threaten the Rangers' status as divisional favorite than any stunt Michael Young can possibly pull between now and the trade deadline.
Sure, you could say that any other team would also be in a tight jam minus one of their regular five starting pitchers. But in this new era of heightened expectations, and having seen what we've seen over the years with purportedly decent pitching depth built on the foundation of youth falling to pieces, and with Texas having more to lose than ever before ... I don't know. I'm pumped for this season, and I love reckless spring optimism as much as the next guy, but I don't think we'll ultimately find that the rotation was the right thing to be recklessly optimistic about.
[I also recommend whizzing past Robbie G.'s Rangers projection article this morning, provided that I haven't outright killed your spring training buzz ... and I sincerely hope I didn't. This really is a wonderful time of the year.]
Analysis, Spring Training
Reader Comments (48)
I''ll take the Rangers projections and run with them.
Three things about the other projections here:
1) The Mariners staff behind King Felix is dreadful. Some overly kind projections on those guys.
2) If Rich Harden pitches to a 4.07 ERA in 116 innings for the A's (even taking the A's ballbark into consideration), I will print your column and eat it.
3) Piniero and Kazmir don't figure to hit those figures. Kazmir has been around forever and he's never figured out how to pitch. Now that his stuff is diminishing I doubt he finishes the year with them.
One thing to consider, is what was the projected performance of the Rangers rotation one year ago today?
I'd be curious what the numbers looked like in comparison. I expect that to make the glass look a little more full.
The projections for the other teams also have their variability factors, but on the whole, it's certainly reasonable to consider the overall projected ERA and WAR totals a good starting point for expectations. The Rangers simply must have someone like Holland step up and deliver on their promise for the rotation to be a strength. Or we'll see another mid-season deal for a starter.
If each team's top starter got hurt, that would favor the Rangers, whose strength is depth. It's at the top where the Rangers are at a serious disadvantage. They look much better in the matchups at Nos. three through eight, and they have vastly more upside than the others in that comparison. The key for the Rangers is that someone (Holland? Feldman? Webb?) must have a significant breakthrough/combeback year. Otherwise, they've got a problem. The good news is that the sheer number of candidates they have for a breakthrough/comeback stunner bodes well.
One other item to consider in the quest for optimism. The Rangers arguably have the best defense in the division replacing Young with Beltre. It's certainly very close. Last year we had the fourth best BABIP against in the majors at .280 and I don't attribute that to luck.
Each individual pitcher projection usually shows a BABIP that reverts back to the mean for 2011 compared to their 2010. I would have positive expectations of lower ERA than projected as a staff because of the very good defense behind them, and I don't think that's something that the projection models are factoring in. I would lean towards a staff ERA much closer to 4.00 and perhaps even below it because of the defense behind them.
According to the WAR numbers, we have the top two starters behind the Angels front two. I'll take that.
Yes, lots of potential for success or failure behind Lewis and Wilson, but for some reason I'm not too concerned with it. Perhaps it's the faith I have in guys like Webb and Holland to step up a little bit...or the depth we have for guys like O. Beltre or Harrison to do okay in spot starts...or the potential of a Feliz or Ogando moving to the rotation...or the hope that Lewis and Wilson are even better than those projections. Who knows? Still, I think we'll be fine.
With so many candidates for breakout I am excited.
However, as Joey said, if CJ or Colby go down for an extended period we could be in a shit storm.
Michael Kirkman is going to break out as a starter if given the chance. I just know it.
With the exception of the A's rotation I find the projections for the Angels and Mariners quite optimistic, and there is no way the Rangers' projection can factor in the possibilities of break out candidates.
Spring optimism or real depth, that is the question.
Let the carousel begin!
I agree with Rich P. I think some of these figures are overly generous, specifically Kazmir and Harden. I also think Haren's projection seems a little high compared to his performance in 2010. While Bedard has a decent history, he's also barely pitched in the past three years.
At the same time, I think this has to be the year Derek Holland steps up. Holland needs to top his projection for the Rangers to successfully defend their division title.
I think Holland will far surpass those numbers. I don't think Hunter will be as bad as this, either, though his projection is closer to his reality, I think.
It's true that Texas' SPs are not quite as good as the other rotations in the division. But remember that Texas' lineup is vastly superior to anyone in the division, and by a much bigger margin, too. Seattle is dreadful at the plate and will not score nearly enough to make up for this discrepancy.
The only team that I think can bridge the gap is Oakland. Their park really supresses offense, but if they can keep the game close they have a chance to stay with Texas most of the season because if they score 3 or 4 runs per day, their pitching can make that stand up.
Your story didn't kill my buzz. Bring on the games!
My concerns about this rotation really come down to depth. Maybe it's decades as a Ranger fan where I am conditioned to seeing a dozen starters a year, and a fairly unsuccessful rotating door for the last slot, but unless Webb is healthy and ready to go, this rotation could be tough to watch.
Luckily, one thing that is significantly different from a decade or so ago when we put out some of the worst pitching staffs in the history of baseball. Our defense at the time was fairly horrific, this year's defense should really aid marginal pitchers, and get them out of situations even when they don't have much working. As long as a pitcher isn't too homer prone, they should be able to be serviceable, even if they have fairly weak stuff.
Our rotation looks better than it did last year, ..... so what happened???
My cup is half full, looking for a great season, and coming out on top AGAIN...
For all the efforts the Rangers have made to improve drafting & player development it has just not panned out in regard to internally developed pitchers. They have done well with trades, but drdraftees are a bit disappointing for all the resources put into that area.
I honestly think that they should do a complete overhaul and look at both Oakland & San Francisco as better models. For example, the Rangers have tended to focus on high school talent because of the reported higher upside whereas Oakland tends to go after college level pitching where there is less upside, but a better track record. Not sure what San Fran does, but boy did it pay off in pitching talent.
Are you retarded?? You want to overhaul our system? Trade in our top guys for youth and draft picks. Lets trade Josh, Cruz, Kins, Colby, and everyone else and start over.. a year after making it to the world series!?.. I think not.
Corey - I'm pretty sure that you misunderstood Jon's point.
I didn't see him mention anything about literally trading players for youth and draft picks.
Jon - while your point is well-taken, you also must realize that the Texas "system" developed both Danks and Volquez. While they did not have the opportunity to exploit their talents in Arlington, I chalk both of those guys up to being groomed in the Texas system.
Having said that, Danks and Volquez were prospects some time ago. Other than Perez, the Texas system doesn't boast many high-end, anywhere-near-ready options. Drafting/developing pitchers has not been a strength of the Texas system, despite a consistently heightened emphasis placed in that area.
Carlos Zambrano for Michael Young. That's what I wish for my birthday. It solves Myriad problems.
"Are you retarded?? "
Reading comprehension is FUNdamental; especially for those who are somewhat mental.
"Drafting/developing pitchers has not been a strength of the Texas system, despite a consistently heightened emphasis placed in that area."
BINGO! We have a winner!
I know that ifs and butts were candy and nuts... (or however that stupid saying goes) but this rotation would be the best in the west if we had traded for Greinke. I really hope we don't live to regret the decision to not bump up our offer. If Elvis was truly part of the asking price, then I'm glad we didn't do it... but I guarantee you the pot could have been sweetened to make up for the exclusion of Elvis.
I'm VERY concerned that if CJ and/or Colby slips... and let's face it they could very easily do so, we're in big trouble. Both pitchers stepped up big time last year but in Colby's case we're dealing with a guy 1 year removed from pitching in freaking Japan. And CJ's personality is volatile enough to become a huge problem. I'm NOT suggeting he's a pain in the rear in the clubhouse, etc... but he's pretty arrogant and seemingly has a very large ego. I'm just saying that if he struggles and senses a lack of confidence from Wash/Nolan/JD, he could spiral downwards in a hurry.
Whether you want to admit it or not, this team did catch lightning in a bottle last year. That's not to say that every win wasn't earned... but things could just as easily go south this season.
Again, alot of ifs and buts... but we'd look alot stronger if we had proven guys at the top of this rotation.
I'm still hopeful JD will pull something off where we have a TORP in a Rangers uni no later than June.
Huge variability in this rotation. If we hit on Holland and Webb, get repeat performances from CJ and Colby, and get one of the myriad other options (Hurley, Kirkman, etc) to step up, this rotation could be pure dynamite). If we miss on both Holland and Webb this season, and see either CJ or Colby regress substantially, it could be just dreadful. Excited to find out which it is.
On the bright side, if the rotation is dreadful, I think the offense/defense keeps us in it and JD finds us that TORP (or at least a solid #2 type) to patch up the rotation for the stretch run.
Based on these numbers are we to believe that the Rangers were idiots for not holding on to McCarthy and Harden? Or does this have more to do with the ballpark they are pitching in? The Rangers pitch in the most hitter-friendly park in the division so naturally their full season pitching numbers will look worse than if they played their home games in Oakland or Seattle, but their offensive numbers will do the same. I'm as concerned as the next guy about our rotation, but these numbers aren't the cause of the concern. In a real world game, both teams are playing on the same field so these full season numbers mean very little at this point.
There's no doubt, to me, that our staff has upsides.
I am optimistic that a couple of arms will step-up. I
expect Hunter to become the solid #3. Do we go into
the season, with thought of finding an ACE at the ASB?
One would think so, as in 2010's p/u of Lee. Those arms
won't come cheap. The bidding will be hotter than last Dec.
Seemingly, It's a projected gamble, at least to the fans view.
Do we not EXPECT a deal at the turn? To win the Big Show...
ya have to have a 'shut down arm'... better yet, two. Hopes
spring eternal in Arizona. It's really been a long winter, huh?
Harden is already shut down for a few weeks at A's camp. Screw him and B Mac.
http://twitter.com/JaneMLB/status/38273654311755776
Texas has a long list of young talented guys. These aren't washed up retreads like we used to get, but guys who have potential. If the list were only 3 players long, I'd be worried. But you have 8-10 guys who legitimately could be league-average if given 150 IP. And these comments are not about Webb or Bush - both those guys are extra depth.
So I think Texas is okay. The bigger worry is what happens if all of them are healthy and performing, and you have to try to get a couple of them through waivers.
Harden and BMac suck... if Beane is going into the season pinning hopes to those 2 guys, he's alot dumber than I thought.
The depth of the Rangers rotation is NOT the problem... it's the QUALITY of the pitchers at the top of the rotation that worries me.
Scooby listed out a couple of scenarios that will make or break the season... and the hope of relying on CJ, Colby... and even Hunter/Webb/Holland... is dangerous.
What if at the trade deadline a guy like King Felix is available but it's going to cost you the farm (i.e. Perez/Scheppers/Profar/Beltre and Ogando or Kirkman or Hunter or Holland)... do you do it?
@WWJD - "The bigger worry is what happens if all of them are healthy and performing, and you have to try to get a couple of them through waivers." - that's a problem we would ALL love to have.
Geez... no point in being too pessimistic. First of all, each team in the west has some huge wholes.
Angels - Kazmir is a big big IF. The bottom of that rotation looks shaky to me and their average bullpen lacks a shutdown closer. They don't have a ML calibre catcher or 3b, their 2b really digressed last year, and their best hitter is coming off a badly broken leg. And finally, their youngest good ouftielder is 32. They are dangerous, 3 great starters, and if their old guys can keep it up and they're young guys can get it up, they're very very good, but a lot of ifs. Despite the contract stuff, Wells is a deginite upgrade for this year, but still, even if they stay healthy, it looks like the 7,8 and 9 hitters will be well below average for those slots.
Oakland.... Great pitching, can't hit at all. Not one guy in that batting order is scary. .There is not much depth either. A few injuries, and they drop off the radar fast. They'll be okay with that pitching, but can only win the West if every other team tanks.
Seattle, KIng Felix and that’s it.
Texas - A batting lineup that 1 to 9 is flat out scary, plus some good depth. Our defense improved a whole lot with Beltre. Napoli is a King Kong vs. lefties and opens up a lot of late inning pinch hitting situations for the catcher position. Elvis is just getting to the age where his #s should get better every year. That he’s done what he’s done when other guys his age are college or single A guys is scary. C.J. broke out last year, got better as the year went on, and is in his contract year, And Colby was solid, and got better in the pressure of the playoffs. Lots of ifs in the 3,4 and 5 rotation slots, but we’ve got a lot of candidates to step up into those slots. And our bullpen might be the best in baseball.
Depth is a lot different than "quality depth."
I don't see much quality pitching depth at the high levels of the Texas system. In other words, I don't think many non-Ranger fans would look at the starting depth behind CJ/Colby and think that Texas has "quality depth" behind them.
I know it's already been linked, but this made me LOL:
"Harden has stiffness in lat area. Shut down for a few weeks. #Athletics"
Baseball: Expect the Unexpected~
The problem, as many of us in here have, is knowing the prospects as we do.
Possibly too close or not close enough, as in Coaches, trainers and the Org. I
always take a step back, because of the depth I take to analyze each player.
There's nothing to discourage me into thinking Hunter, Kirkman, Holland or a few
others, can't make that next step forward. It happens. Maturity of brain meets body.
Anyone remember Jim Bibby? Even closer. Colby Lewis? Bet's are always on the come.
Nothing is assured, nor a given. Chicago-Detroit came out of their WS, seemingly to repeat.
Let's hope their experience of repeat, does not happen to our Rangers. The West Division'
is going to be a battle. We can only look at Boston for April 1st... we'll move forward after.
Expecting one of Hunter/Kirkman/Holland to take a step forward is plausible...just as it's plausible to think that CJ and/or Colby will regress.
However, it seems overly optimistic to think that several of the fringe starters will take a step forward while CJ/Colby remain consistently above average.
@johnsamo - easyyyy big fella (Seinfeld reference)... you should tap the brakes a bit on your "Texas - A batting lineup that 1 to 9 is flat out scary" comment. I think it's fair to say Torraelbella, Borbon, and Andrus are NOT "scary" hitters... agree? Wouldn't you also agree that Kinsler, Murphy, and Napoli are not exactly Murderer's Row... and that we'd all be ecstatic if Moreland hit to the tune of .275 with 12-15 HRs and 55 -60 RBI... which isn't exatly an All Star caliber performance out of your 1B? That leaves Hammy, Cruz, and Beltre... and the only SURE thing in that group is Hammy, and he's pretty fragile. Ok, Cruz is probably a sure thing... and Beltre may mash at our park... but he could flame out too... and Cruz has a very difficult time staying healthy.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate your optimism... and I love our lineup... I'm just saying that, IMO, it should not be confused with what the Yankees and Red Sox are going to roll out there. The Yanks with Tex, Arod, Granderson, Cano, Posada, Jeter, Swisher, etc... and the Sox with A. Gonzalez, Youkilis, Crawford, Pedroia, Big Papi, Drew, etc... feature proven hitters. I'm not sure we're at their level just yet...
Hmmm... On one hand, I agree that we don't have a "true ace," as Joe would say, at the moment, even though we do have 2 guys who are legit #2's. But on the other hand, I don't find the claim that Texas has little depth of "quality" arms in their system. Feliz, Ogando, Holland, Perez, Scheppers - that's a pretty good collection of quality young arms between 0-2 years of service - and there are a bunch of others who are not too far behind. They're going to get good picks this year, too, in compensation for the loss of FAs.
I suspect that 90% of other franchises would be more than happy to have our lack of depth of "quality" arms.
I'm all for JD getting a Cliff Lee type in July, by the way. What I'm arguing about is not panicking right now, but rather letting these young guys (and Webb) have a chance to see what they can do. If you're going to blow your prospect load, don't do it for the wrong player at the wrong time. I think JD knows that.
"Feliz, Ogando, Holland, Perez, Scheppers - that's a pretty good collection of quality young arms between 0-2 years of service."
True, but I would guess that Feliz, Ogando, and Scheppers are going to pitch out of the bullpen this year (though I'm hoping that Ogando transitions into the rotation). Perez isn't knocking down the door to contribute this year (though a hot start from him could change that).
In terms of quality arms, Texas has plenty. I just am not convinced that they have quality "starter" depth.
Holland and Perez will be starters, by all indications. They can't have 3 closers, so one of the trio of Feliz, Scheppers, and Ogando will be a starter, if not two. If 3 out of 5 of those guys can be either starters for us, or used to acquire a TORP, Texas is in good shape, methinks.
It's only the playoffs that we should be worried about, right? Texas didn't have a TORP last season, and they were fine. They have more depth this year, and guys like Holland, Hunter, and Kirkman all have some experience under their belts. Hurley is back. We have Webb, who if healthy could be another #2. If Ogando or Feliz can transition to the rotation, either of those guys could be very good - #2.
I just don't see the concern.
Mainly, like I said, because Texas - if they are in the hunt in July - can use prospects to get a TORP, just like they did last year.
Last year, the pitching was good and consistent - it was the hitting that sputtered during our slumps.
Actually, Pabloesque, I think the Rangers' lineup, if healthy, will be better and more imposing than either the Yankees' or Red Sox', at least against left handers. No one can put up the equivalent, one through seven, of Andrus, Young, Hamilton, Beltre, Cruz, Kinsler and Napoli. Personally, I don't think that should be the Rangers' batting order, one through seven, but that's another issue. I guarantee you that no left hander wants to pitch to that.
I don't know, Boston has some serious speed mixed in with all that power - they are going to be a pain in the ass.
WWJD -
I agree that Holland and Perez will start. Nothing about 2010 suggests that Perez will be ready to contribute this year.
Even if Feliz remains the closer, there is nothing that says Ogando and Scheppers fully transition to starters. Scheppers has injury concerns and the club may consider him a safer bet in the bullpen. Ogando is not young and Texas may not be willing to sacrifice his value as a late-inning bullpen hand in order to develop him as a starter.
Last year, Colby and CJ vastly outperformed expectations.
I am not ready to start shipping prospects off for Greinke - I'm just suggesting that when the majority of the rotational depth consists of guys who have spent the majority of their recent careers in the bullpen, any injury or lack of production from the core members of the rotation will present a problem.
"any injury or lack of production from the core members of the rotation will present a problem."
Well that's definitely true... for every single team in baseball.
The problem is that Texas doesn't have a bunch of Joe Blanton types whom they can trot out there and expect X number of IP and X kind of WHIP or BAA. They have young guys, no-names, and guys who have little in the way of a track record. But the truth is, everyone is susceptible to injury, and any pitcher can fall off and have a down year, even when they have previously been amazing (consider Santana or Zambrano for instance). What does LAA do if Weaver blows out an elbow? If Kazmir has opponents hitting .350 off him?
The thing that keeps me from worrying is the talent, which is certainly there, the age, and the depth. The team that's scary to me is Oakland, because they have better depth, and most of their young guys are a little farther along than ours.
I agree - but you hit on the point that concerns me. Everyone is penciling in Colby and CJ to replicate 2010. The two "knowns" are really not "known" at all.
If Texas had a horse or two that was a "lock" to pitch 200+ innings (ala Blanton), I would feel much more comfortable with the rotation.
As it is, Colby is probably the most likely of the Texas starters to pitch 200 innings, and he is far from a "lock." To me, that is way too much uncertainty to feel good about the rotation.
You guys must be high. Feliz or Ogando as a #2? Just because we have a few guys that could close does not mean the other potential closers are just going to seamlessly move into the rotation and be awesome. Ya'll have some serious high hopes. You shouldn't count on Hurley. You shouldn't count on Webb. Those are all question marks. It's crazy to count on a couple guys that haven't pitched in a couple years.
I'm not trying to rain on your parade, but it all seems very unrealistic.
Pabloesque....
The Yankees ain't what they used to be........ They still have the marquee name value, but A-rod, Jeter, Posada, they're not the hitters, nor fielders, they were. They still put up decent #s, but they're at the age (or past it) where precipitous drops in production happen. Even Texiera isn't the player he used to be. They guy hit 256 last year... in a stadium where a lefty can lob shot homers over the fence. Put his hits on a less hitter friendly park, and Tex doesn't look anything like the Tex we knew. We've seen his best.
THe Red Sox with Crawford and Gonzalez are just sick, but they've got age issues in Varitek, Poppy and Drew, no SS to speak of, and Salty catching? Plus, I think pitchers have either figured out Pedroia better, or he's just not the player he was a couple of years ago. Plus, they look a lot more mortal when you put a lefty on the mound, and we're loaded with lefties... A hell of a lot is riding on whether Lackey and/or Becket can bounce back. They're talent loaded, but they have issues.
Philly - what's the difference between this year and last? Didn't we have even bigger question marks last year? Weren't we counting on Feldman to win 15 games again? Harden? B-Mac?
It's no way as dire as you paint it, brother.
The difference is the expectations. I'd explain more but I'm on my phone and this blows. I'll get back on this stuff later. I'm going to hear Cal Ripken Jr. speak. Go baseball.
So Harden and BMac are suddenly pretty decent or even to be coveted? I bet the projections for them last yr were even better, and we got less than zero from them...they are truly replacement level. Projecting more than a fraction of one WAR from someone who hasn't pitched in more than a yr at the ML level is just silly. There ought to be a law...
Ummm...3.1 WAR combined from Harden and McCarthy?
Seriously?????
So, basically the projections suggest that not one of our 4 returning starters can do what they just finished proving they can do? Even though not one of them is past his prime, or in any other way has shown that last year was a fluke?
Is there a place in Vegas (or any other legal gambling locale) where I can supplement my income by placing a wager or two on these projections?
My argument is that last year we had Harden, Feldman, CJ, Lewis, and Harrison out of spring training. CJ and Lewis were both great all season, but Harden, Feldman, B-Mac, and Harrison all tanked. Holland got hurt. Hunter stepped up bigtime, and remember Cliff Lee only won 4 games with Texas. Yet Texas won 90 games - and that's with an offense that was awful at times.
So I fail to see the doom and gloom about 2011, at least as far as pitching goes.
Two things:
1) I completely agree with you, WWJDD, it appears that we have a half glass empty perhaps, but of a MUCH stronger and better tasting drink than in ST 2010. I'll take this depth, however questionable, over what we started with last year. We have certainly improved defensively, offensively, and perhaps intangibly with the depth and versatility, and I see know reason why those improvements, assuming no great rotation apocalypse disater occurs, that we can't notch 90-95 wins this year.
2) how many of us erupted in sheer thankfulness we got Rich Harden's injured ass out of Texas when we did?!? Give JD some offseason bonus points for that dump!