THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

This one is turning out to be anti-climactic, which I’m surprised with.

Anyway, combining the six polls, I get this as the rough order of which pitchers you guys would give 100MM$ to through 2015:

Felix
Lincecum / Verlander / Kershaw
Lester
Pineda / Strasburg / Josh Johnson
Hamels / Weaver / Greinke
Cain / Ubaldo / Danks / Cahill / Bumgarner

Kershaw to me is the revelation as to how much his stock has risen.  I’m surprised at how much love Pineda is getting.  Strasburg’s injury doesn’t seem to be much of a worry either.

Josh Johnson… ah, JJ… it’s too bad he’s missed so many starts already.  He should be challenging for #1 with Lincecum and Felix.

I’m surprised that Lincecum isn’t putting up a fight for the #1 spot. I’d put him in a dead heat with Felix. Also, I’d flip flop Pineda and Hamels. I think there is some Seattle bias in these polls…

I live in Seattle, but I’m an Indians fan. I voted Felix and Strasburg in their respective polls. The age advantage that Felix has over Lincecum is enormous; mgl has posted on here multiple times about the vastly negative effects of aging on pitchers.

I love Josh Johnson but the injuries he has suffered are pretty tough to ignore. Strasburg’s injuries are easier to look over because of how much more dominant he was when he was healthy.

It’s possible about the Seattle bias.  But if you track it early enough, before the Mariner faithful take charge, you see it doesn’t change much.

Pineda/Strasbug for example were in a dead heat almost throughout.

Hard to say for sure, but I think people are putting value on succeeding in the AL vs the NL.  That was what nudged me to choose Felix over Lincecum.

Also very surprised about the love for Kershaw.  From 2009-current, in fWAR, he’s behind Felix, Lincecum, Verlander, Lester, Greinke, Johnson, Weaver, and Jimenez.  And just barely in front of Hamels.  Admittedly he’s a fair bit younger than most of those guys, but still.

I think the AL/NL argument is more powerful than the age difference. “Through 2015” would mean Felix would be 29 at the end of the contract, and Lincecum 31. I wouldn’t call that an “enormous advantage”.

RE: Kershaw - I think people are wooed by his 2011 control… if that’s true talent improvement to the tune of ~2.7 BB/9, which it seems like it could be - he’s trending that direction, he’s a top 3/4/5 pitcher in baseball, at 23.

The age thing is very important. 

For Felix, I’m guessing there’s “comfort” in seeing a big physical guy compared to scrawny Lincecum, and that he’s been pitching with the workload he has for so long.

So, just guessing, that people see their talent as comparable, and so they go with a tie-breaker of “who’s got the body type to last until 2015”.

Of course, that’s been the knock on Lincecum since before the draft, so it may be more a question of unfounded bias, than insight by the readers of this blog.

I voted for Verlander, but then I’m biased as a Tiger fan who seems him pitch often.

If it is just a matter of performance, then Verlander (zero Cy Young awards, nor has he deserved any) comes in last of these three.  However, with velocity that improves in the late innings of his starts and that improved in the last monthe of the season last year, I think Verlander has shown that his durability is freakish good.

Felix Hernandez also does well in that regard subjectively, but I’d be more concerned about Lincecum.  Just a year ago we were wondering why his velocity has dropped.

When it was Felix v Kershaw, Felix got 82% or so of the votes.  When it’s Felix v Lincecum PLUS Verlander, it’s the same 82%.

This would imply that Kershaw is ahead of Lincecum and Verlander (if that property of math carries through).

So, Kershaw to me is the huge surprise…

I go Felix because of his reptoire. The changeup saves his arm some. But, Verlander is my favorite. King has sound mechanics, durability, and his not reliant on high-risk pitches.

If Verlander’s control is here to stay, then he and King are 1 and 1A.

Pinieda has all the makings of being the next Liriano. There’s good and bad in that, but I’m not paying 100M for it.

Tango, how important really is the age difference?

If right this second I knew that 25 year old Felix had a true talent, park/team/league adjusted RA/9 of 2.80, what would 27 year old Lincecum’s true RA/9 need to be in order for you take him through 2015?

Assuming first that at first we know nothing of their body/style, just a standard aging. Then with any qualitative adjustments about how they pitch and how that style ages.

(Is that a good way of asking the question?)

Lee, there are two components: talent while pitching, and how often will be pitch.

So, good question, so let’s come up with one plausible scenario.

Let’s say you have a young guy who has still not peaked.  He’s still strong.  We have this:

Age Rate IP
25 70% 210
26 67% 200
27 65% 190
28 68% 175
29 71% 160

So, he gives up runs at 70% of the league average while pitching 210 innings.  Next year, he’s better, but because of potential injuries, won’t pitch as much.  He peaks at age 27, and then starts giving up runs more each year.

The WAR for this pitcher is 31.

Now, compare to this pitcher at age 28:
Age Rate IP
28 57% 210
29 60% 190
30 63% 170
31 66% 150
32 69% 130

His drop in IP mimics our first pitcher’s drop at age 28.  His increase in runs allowed goes up at the same rate as our first pitcher at age 28.

This pitcher also has 31 WAR.

So, this pitcher at age 28 would have to be super-awesome compared to the guy at age 25.

This TOTALLY depends on the aging of his IP.  Just being out there is a hugely important thing.  As an example: Josh Johnson.  You can make the case he’s the best pitcher in MLB, but if he’s not actually pitching, he’s not helping.

Again, that’s just one illustration.  You can try to come up with your own.

Personally, I think Kershaw is overrated. The increased control is nice, but he’s still pitching in the NL in park that helps fly ball pitchers (plus PETCO and AT&T; and Coors). I’d put him below Lester but above the Pineda group. And I’d move Greinke up with Lester and Weaver up with Kershaw.

Yea, that makes perfect sense. The expected decrease of IP makes a big difference in the overall value. In this case I’m not even sure that Lincecum is the true talent favorite over the next 5 years, so it’s a no brainer to go with the younger guy.

Pineda above the Hamels-Greinke group just baffles me.

IMO, we don’t know about a guys talent until he goes over the 200 IP mark. That goes for Latos as well.

Is Jaime Garcia in this group of young talented pitchers. He seems to have what we’re looking for. MLB success, increasing K-rate, decreasing walk rate, and suppresses homers.

CC: without agreeing or disagreeing with the crowd, don’t forget that the question asked about today through 2015.

I get that. The comment was more in regards to making that decision (Pineda) on 3 months worth of performance.

A contract through 2015 is only a 4-year deal. Not sure how much aging that group is really going to experience (negatively) over that span.

We need to see how he performs in the dog days, IMHO. Although it’s easy to get excited about a guy with electric stuff (Feliz for example). I anticipate some combination of regression, batter adjustments, and general “growing pains”, as well as, injury/fatigue.