No lack of attention for Lackey
John Lackey, John Lackey, John Lackey.
Are you tired of hearing about him yet? Get used to it. He's considered the top free agent pitcher out there and the time for players to file for their "freedom" hasn't even come yet.
Some are speculating that Lackey will garner a contract for five years and worth between 80 and 100 million.
The ship is about to come in for the right hander.
O's fans will anxiously await word on whether their club is in the hunt for Lackey. While I would love to see him top and lead Baltimore's young rotation, I don't see the O's throwing out a contract of that magnitude.
Some say whoever signs Lackey will be getting a good, but not nearly great pitcher. There is some evidence that may be true.
Here's a comparison of Lackey's last two seasons (combined) vs. Jeremy Guthrie's 2007 and 2008 seasons.
Lackey: 23-13, 3.79.....340IP....338H....43 HR.....87BB.....269K.......1.25 WHIP.
Guthrie: 17-17, 3.66....366IP.....341H....47HR.....105BB.....243K......1.22 WHIP.
Is the Guthrie of those years a pitcher worth 80 to 100 million? I didn't think so, either. By the way, Guthrie is 30 and Lackey 31.
Still, I'll take Lackey on the O's any day and I don't mind if they overspend for him - It's not our money, right?
I just don't see that happening with the Orioles.
These stats do show how important a return to form by Guthrie would be. It would be like adding a Lackey to the rotation. I've heard some say that even at his best, Guthrie is only a third or fourth starter.
At his best, he is clearly better than that - Not an ace like Sabathia or Halladay, but a very solid, perhaps number two, pitcher.
A return to form by Guthrie in 2010 would be so huge for the Orioles. Even with that, they could use another solid starter with similar numbers to help the young guns.
The O's have several quality pitchers still on the way on the farm, but you can never have enough starters. Perish the thought, but if they ever have a surplus of quality starters, other teams would jump at the chance to trade with a club willing to part with young arms.
Maybe then, they wouldn't be Lackey, I mean, lacking a good rotation.
 |
Categories (click for archive)Orioles News | Steve Melewski |
I would love for them to go out and get Lackey. It would take a lot of pressure off of Guthrie and help him return to his 07-08 form. Plus a rotation of: Lackey, Guthrie, Bergesen, Matusz, and Tillman would look pretty good.
However, I am not too sure there is an impact bat out there in the market that we should throw a bunch of money at. If Beltre was willing to do a one year deal with an option that would be great.
I think the Orioles should definetely keep Guthrie(especially considering he's just entering arbitration and is going to be cheap), and that he's a good pitcher... but I wouldn't say that he's a solid #2.
He has had two great years in 2007 and 2008, but he got pretty lucky. He had a very fluky BABIP those two years. True, he gets guys to hit a lot of flyballs, and these pitchers have low BABIPs, but still. His HR/9 numbers for those two years are pretty high at 1.15. To put that in context, if you take out Lackey's "terrible" year in 2008 when he was injured, he gives up around .7 H/9.
It's also worth noting that the last two years were Lackey's worst two years in the last five. It's also worth noting that Lackey has a superior K/BB rate, H/9 rate, and FIP.
Guthrie isn't a bad pitcher, but he doesn't have close to the track record that Lackey does.
____________________________________________
I think if you look closer at that comparison, he does for those years have a track record just like Lackey. For those two years, he was in the top 20 in AL in ERA, that's pretty strong, number two stuff if you ask me. I don't put all those other numbers on it that you did, I don't even know what some of them are.
I just know what I watched and saw with my own eyes. I don't think he got lucky for two years worth of starts. - Steve
I think signing Lackey would be the wrong move. He is the best pitcher available in a very weak free agent class, so it really doesn't say much about him. You can look at his stats and see he is clearly not worth $100 million. Is he a good pitcher? Sure, but I wouldn't say he is great. I would only assume his stats would get worse if he had to play in the AL East plus the fact that he will be getting older over that long contract that he is seeking. Someone posted his career numbers against the Red Sox and Yankees in Roch's blog yesterday and they are horrendous. We're talking over 5.00 era here and those are the two teams we would need him to be good against. Locking him up for five years and around $100 million just doesn't make sense at this point for the O's. Seems like a waste of money.
_________________________________________________________
Lackey career vs. Bost: 14 starts........3-7, 5.25
Lackey career vs NYY: 16 starts.........5-7, 4.66
Steve
Unless the Angels don't sign him and the Yankees don't want him. Then other teams will have a chance to get him. I would love to have him. Especially, what I saw in the playoffs. He is a gamer. And a 100 plus pitch count doesn't bother him. He wants the ball. He wants to win. My kind of player.......
I don't understand the argument that adding another solid starter will help the young guns. I'd understand it if they needed another season or two in the minor leagues, but at this stage I think adding another solid starter just blocks somebody. The Orioles could begin the season with Guthrie, Bergesen, Matusz, and Tillman all in the rotation with a competition for 5th starter between Hernandez, Berken, Patton, and Arrieta. Erbe and Steve Johnson did well at Bowie, so it is conceivable they could debut with Baltimore sometime in late 2010.
If we are going to go after a free agent pitcher, I'd rather improve the bullpen.
Does anybody really have a good track record against Boston and New York? Their lineups are always stacked.
The lackey v. Guthrie question is a tortured comparison. If Guthrie had other years in which you could fall back on other than 10-17 with a 5.04 era than maybe you could make a case. I guess we ignore Lackey's best year and Guthrie's worst.
In the last five years, Lackey has double digit win totals, an era under 4 and is 31 games over .500.
Guthrie only has one winning season and was allegely the "ace" of our staff. You could argue that he had a bad year b/c we were relying on him to have the output of a more seasoned pitcher. If the O's have good young pitchers, fingers crossed, having someone like Lackey would has had consistently good to very good years would be helpful.
Steve,
I would prefer going after Petite. Over pay for a real veteran to mentor Matuze (sp). Lefty, who pitches in the AL East, with sneaky stuff and sneaky smarts to help a crew of young pitchers do the same. 2 years 16 mil w/ incentives for starts and innings pitched ( the announcers for last nights game said w/ incentives he made 10.5 mil this year ). In 2 years you may have Erbe, Britton & others ready to fill out rotation.
The major statistical differences between Lackey and Guthrie are in the peripherals. Lackey blows Guthrie away. All the numbers point to Jeremy pitching over his head in 2007-2008. H/9, HR/9, BB/9, K/9 all favor Lackey. Gutz did have a great 2008, but Lackey has done it more consistently.
Guthrie Career:
H/9 HR/9 BB/9 K/9
9.06 1.30 2.81 5.63
Lackey Career:
9.11 0.91 2.64 7.20
2007-2008 show the same patter, all though Guthrie's 2008 h/9 and hr/9 were better, that is an anomaly.
I like Lackey, however I think a one year deal of 10+ mill with incentives for Rich Harden who is 28/29 and has better numbers than Lackey is a better fit. Or maybe bring back Bedard. Or both. To me, this would add depth for a year. Which would allow our next wave of pitching prospects to mature.
What's the current status of John Parrish? Not that he is the answer.
________________________________________________________
I'd have to check, don't know. - Steve
Steve,
Just to compliment the comments made by Matt P, the statistics he cited--FIP, K/9, BB/9, HR/9 etc.-- are generally accepted as better indicators of a pitchers independent performance and more useful in projecting their ability to perform the same in following years. I think we can all agree that stats like Wins and Saves don't really tell the whole story of a pitchers true performance. It can be argued that ERA has some of the same flaws given the scoring of Errors, or the tendency for fly balls to turn into HR in OPACY versus turning into outs in San Diego or Seattle (both huge parks).
So, stat geeks came up with FIP, which attempts to adjust for a pitcher's defenders and home park by providing a stat that relies more exclusively on things the pitcher controls like BB, K, HR, hits, etc. Then this number is normalized to league the average ERA so that it can be compared as easily.
Anyways, just thought this info would be useful to other readers. You can read more about FIP here. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary/index.php?search=FIP
In the case of Guthrie, it tells a different story about his performances in 2007-8. http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=2072&position=P
Take it for what it is--a stat--which can never replace a scout's assessment. However, I still find stats useful, some more than others.
I personally believe Guthrie has #2 stuff, just not every game. Let's hope for more consistency in 2010. Go Guthrie!
____________________________________________________________
I love stats, too, anyone who has read my posts the last two years knows that.
I'm just saying the comparison I made shows that Guthrie at his best compared somewhat to Lackey - maybe not in every stat out there. Also, in the two years I compared, Guthrie made 13 of 56 starts vs. NY and Boston and Lackey made 6 of 51 vs. NY and Boston. Guthrie's ERA was lower, pretty strong stuff to me.
By the way, I would never push a starter based on the win column. That's the stat he least has control over.
Steve
"Steve,
Just an educated guess - - the Nestor who comments here and on Roch's blog -- is not the diminutive sports magnate who modestly named his station and web site in honor of the person he loves most. Can you confirm my guess from this guy's email address, or any other evidence?"
____________________________________________________________
I don't know or care what he says, writes, blogs or where he does it.
Steve
Steve,
I think I should have been more expansive in stating my question.
Posters on Roch's blog and on your blog seem to assume that the posts submitted by Nestor are from the Nestor of eponymic WNST - Nestor's humbly named radio station. Accordingly, these posters are responding to Nestor Aparicio; but, I don't think -- whoever this guy is -- he is, in reality, the little radio magnate.
I am asking if you think -- or know -- that the "posting Nestor" is not Nestor Aparicio? Email address or other evidence that indicates this is just a run-of-the-mill poster and not the troubled "look-at-me" publicity hound.
___________________________________________________________
Still don't care to look into it, sorry. Next topic. - Steve
Well, any comparison can be made if one cherry-picks the years of comparison. FanGraphs valued John Lackey at $23 million in 2007, $9.1 million in 2008 and $17.6 million in 2009. Jeremy Guthrie was valued at $10.7 million in 2007, $10.9 million in 2008 and $5 million in 2009.
Jeremy Guthrie is no John Lackey.
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1507&position=P
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=2072&position=P
______________________________________________________________
The two years I cited, they compared favorably, with all due respect to fangraphs.
Steve
uh, career FIP
Pitcher A: 4.82
Pitcher B: 3.83
Average wins above replacement, last three years:
Pitcher A: 2
Pitcher B: 4
K/9 rate (7.09 vs. 4.95), BB/9 rate (2.40 vs. 2.70), HR rate (.87 vs. 1.5)...everything is dominated by pitcher A, whose name I hopefully don't need to tell you - but starts with an "L" and ends in an "ackey".
I really can't believe anyone would attempt to make an argument that these two pitchers are in the same stratosphere. I really, really can't believe a sportswriter just did.
Lackey will be overpaid, no doubt - but using Guthrie as your benchmark is just silly.
_________________________________________________________
Not only did Guthrie pitch as well as Lackey in my comparison years, but as I've now added to the comparison, Guthrie made 13 starts vs. NY-Boston to Lackey's six. So a case could be made that Guthrie was better those two years. Never once did I say Guthrie is a better pitcher, he is not. He just pitched on Lackey's level for two straight years compared to Lackey 2008-09.
But I guess that becasue Lackey gives up fewer hits per nine vs. AL West opp when it's cloudy and under 60 degrees followed a loss proves me wrong.
Steve
Steve, I enjoy your stuff and really appreciate your work at MASN. However, if you don't know what BABIP is by now, that's frightening for someone paid to write about baseball. "I just know what I watched and saw with my own eyes" makes me want to slam my head in a door.
_____________________________________________________________
First off, I'll bet most writers don't know what BABIP is. It probably would frightten you how many don't know or even quote it in a dugout conversation about a pitcher.
Sorry that I base opinions on what I see. Should I just close my eyes and open them only when baseball-prospectus comes up on the computer.
Basebal surivved for many years somehow without these stats. I'm sure they are helpful and enhance your enjoyment of the game. I just don't use that one, nor do I use all these fielding range stats. Doesn't make me a bad guy.
Gutrhie compared favorably those two years to Lackey. They both faced AL opp's and Guthrie even pitched 13 times vs. NY and Boston to Lackey's six. He had a lower ERA as well pitching for a worse club. In Lackey's league? He clearly was those two years wiht all due respect to any other stats out there.
Steve
Steve,I say no for getting rid of Guthrie,but add to the staff and still try for Lackey, but $40 mil for 3 years tops.If not enough so be it.I'd say Beltre(F.A) the best bet for third supposedly 100% after his shoulder surgery,maybe a crack at Glaus,good power for our park also has filled at first, health also a question mark but short term deals look the way to go
First base needs a bopper,Aubrey didn't look too bad , but Gonzalez or Fielder would look a whole lot better, might take a pitcher to get him with some others,but I would go for it, exclude Matusz,Tillman, Arrieta all the rest are still suspects,Include Scott, Montanez,or any of the regulars,except our reg outfield ,Roberts, or Wieters And maybe keep Pie for outfield insurance I doubt any of these will happen ,so far front office has taken baby steps and only in 1 direction at a time. keep growing them on the farm , but free agents and trades are all part of the continuos deal.oh! don't forget the bullpen needs some overhauling too. I'd say about 5 new competent faces at the right spots would give us a pretty good outlook for 2010.Steve do you think I am dreaming or asking for too much to happen at one time?
______________________________________________________________
Sorry, but I'm going with dreaming. You can't get Fielder without giving up Matusz, Tillman, maybe more. At least one would have to go. If your offer for Lakcey is 3 for 40, don't even bother, that won't get you in the ballpark. - Steve
Steve, I agree with you on the assessment of signing Lackey - would be nice, he's overvalued, probably not going to happen.
However, Matt P is right on here. There have been extensive studies done on predictors of future success for pitchers. Basically it comes down to 3 key variables - BB rate, K rate, and GB/FB ratio (or HR rate, which generally correlates to GB/FB). So the best of the best pitchers (e.g. Lincecum, Santana, Sabathia) have all 3 in their favor or two dominant ones. Of course, a pitcher's numbers will always be affected by the stadium he plays in and who he faces. And there are exceptions. I would say Guthrie, on the whole, is not as bad as this season's numbers showed, but not as good as the 2007-08 numbers showed. Many would say that the dip this year was easy to predict. In any case, the bottom line is that Lackey would probably be an improvement over Guthrie. But it does seem very unlikely that the O's sign him.
Glossary for you:
BABIP - Batting Avg on Balls in Play
FIP - Fielding Independent Pitching (sort of an ERA equivalent that factors out balls hit in play)
____________________________________________________________
I really worked some people up today all this stat talk. Lackey is better than Guthrie, I never said anything to the contrary. But Gutrie was very comparable to him in that comparison. Thanks. - Steve
Lackey career FIP: 3.83
Guthrie career FIP: 4.82
Signing Lackey would be great, and hopefully would be the equivalent of signing Sutcliffe back in the early 90s. Implying that Guts and Lackey are similar is misleading at best, imo.
_______________________________________________________
I don't think I implied it. I pointed out they had simliar numbers in the comparison years.
Guthrie ERA 3.66
Lackey ERA 3.79
Steve
I'm with Justin D, Laskey while good is not worth the money.Boston new york 8 and 14 with a 500+ team.
_____________________________________________________________
Sure, but did you check his BABIP stats?
Just kidding everyone, don't blow a gasket. - Steve
Steve,
Apparently a lot of readers here, aren't really looking at the comparison you posted. For people still trying to say that Guthrie isn't as good as Lackey, well first of all, you need to understand that the article isn't saying that Guthrie is Lackey's equal, what he has said NUMEROUS times is that for the years of 2007, and 2008 Jeremy Guthrie's numbers are comparable, and in a few cases better than the numbers that Lackey posted in 2008, and 2009. Now please notice that Steve is not comparing the same exact years, but rather a 2 year period of Guthrie, compared to Lackey's 2 year period entering his free agent year. And by those measures Guthrie has been very comparable to Lackey, and makes you wonder is Lackey really worth the money he will command, in regards to the money we are paying Guthrie for what had been at one point similar production? I don't think Lackey is going to be worth what he will get when he isn't really a bonafide ace himself. Just my opinion.
___________________________________________________________
Thanks for understanding the gist of the article. I also said "I'll take Lackey on the O's any day and I don't care if they overspend for him." I'd love to have him.
Steve
uh, career FIP
Pitcher A: 4.82
Pitcher B: 3.83
Average wins above replacement, last three years:
Pitcher A: 2
Pitcher B: 4
K/9 rate (7.09 vs. 4.95), BB/9 rate (2.40 vs. 2.70), HR rate (.87 vs. 1.5)...everything is dominated by pitcher A, whose name I hopefully don't need to tell you - but starts with an "L" and ends in an "ackey".
I really can't believe anyone would attempt to make an argument that these two pitchers are in the same stratosphere. I really, really can't believe a sportswriter just did.
Lackey will be overpaid, no doubt - but using Guthrie as your benchmark is just silly.
_________________________________________________________
Not only did Guthrie pitch as well as Lackey in my comparison years, but as I've now added to the comparison, Guthrie made 13 starts vs. NY-Boston to Lackey's six. So a case could be made that Guthrie was better those two years. Never once did I say Guthrie is a better pitcher, he is not. He just pitched on Lackey's level for two straight years compared to Lackey 2008-09.
But I guess that becasue Lackey gives up fewer hits per nine vs. AL West opp when it's cloudy and under 60 degrees followed a loss proves me wrong.
Steve
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey man - your article, your space on the page - you get to say whatever you want. But the in the world of fact and reality, on any given day, cloudy or not, 60 degrees or 80, this comparison is just a total failure.
_________________________________________________________
Let's just agree to disagree. - Steve
so if I'm a sportswriter and in the context of making an argument for hitting ability, I pointed out that Alberto Callaspo had a .300 batting average and Prince Fielder had a .299 batting average, I'm not loosely implying that they are similarly talented hitters?
so if you didn't imply they are similar pitchers, what was the point of comparing their stats?
_______________________________________________________
To show that Guthrie at his best, 2007-08, was in Lackey's league and that his return to form would be huge is the word I used for 2010. To also point out all the fuss over Lackey doesn't make him an ace, aka, Halladay or CC. Or doesn't make him a 100 million dollar pitcher.
I just expressed an opinion and backed it with some facts. Not nearly enough to please some people. I had no idea it would create this much fuss. But I am glad that passionate baseball fans took time to read it, maybe I should look at it that way.
Steve
Jon Garland was just given his buyout and is now a free agent. I'd say forget Lackey (which we probably don't have a snowball's chance of getting) and go for a steady performer in the AL like Garland. Certainly not the ace pitcher, but he's a inning's eater that we desperately need, keeps the ball in the park, and doesn't walk too many guys.
I think a 3/$40 million will be right on par with what Garland might be able to get on the market. Doubt anyone gives him more than 3-4 years and I don't think he will command $10-$12+ per year, though the pitching market is pretty slim.
Noah Lowry has become a FA too. He's been hurt and hasn't pitched in the majors for two seasons while coming back from an injury, but the full year he was healthy he performed extremely well. Anybody from the Orioles taking a good look at him?
To be realistic, Lackey is not going to come here. He is good but not worth C.C. Sabathia money. The O's won't be getting Fielder or Gonzalez either unless they give away pitching and pitching prospects which will set the O's back another 5 years. The only pitcher we could possibly land is Bedard or Harden and both are injury prone. We have to use the resources we have and hope for the best. Matusz could evolve into a true ace and possibly put up Cy Young numbers, Tillman could be a great #2 starter, and Bergy could be a real solid pitcher for years to come. Don't forget we have Arrieta, Erbe, and Britton waiting in the wings. As for the offense, I predict Reimold is going to have a real breakout season next year, and Weiters will hit 25-30 HRs next year with an average around .295. Jones can hit 25-30 HRs with a average around .300 as well if he stays healthy and it's the same thing with Markakis. If the O's play their cards right, next season is a winning season, and 2011 is the playoffs. Everyone just has to stay healthy.
Is everyone afraid of what these stats mean? Pitching in the AL East is harder than pitching in any other division. Any pitcher we bring in will have an ERA half a run higher because of facing New York and Boston so often.
If we got Lackey, his numbers would not be very great. Look at Burnetts numbers, and he didn't even have to face the Yankees 3-4 times this year. I don't want him for what he's gone to cost.
Remember that wins/losses is a reflection of run support, which the pitcher has no control over (maybe a little control in the NL). Cy Young himself would have had about 12 wins this year if he pitched for us.
We have plenty of good pitching either already on the team (Bergy, Matusz, Tillman), or ready to come up next year (Arrieta, Erbe).
I think part of the fundamental mistake your making is in grouping those two years by Guthrie together; the similar ERAs are misleading. In 2008 his walks were up and his strikeouts were down -- again in 2009 his strike out totals decreased. This is what we call a trend; two consecutive years of regression from a guy who was never that dominant means you should probably expect another year of regression. Lackey meanwhile has been one of most consistent starters in baseball over the past five years. The writer of the article seemed to respond to a post saying that the pitcher has no control over wins: a real stathead will tell you the only thing the pitcher does have control of is whether he strikes a guy out or walks a guy. In these regards Lackey is one of the most consistent pitchers in baseball. He strikes out 7 guys per 9 innings and walks 2. The guy does pretty much the same thing every year. Guthrie's never had that kind of a control in his career. Lackey might not be Roy Halladay or CC, but Jeremy Guthrie is no Lackey.
__________________________________________________________
So because Guthrie's control is not as good as Lackey's you over looked that he out performed him in ERA in the comparison while also facing NY and Boston twice as much. Walk and strikeout stats superceed all else?
I (as the writer of the article, you can call me Steve by the way) also said wins is something the starter has least control over, not no control over.
Steve
I can't believe you said Guthrie was better than Cliff Lee.
Wait you didn't say that?
I can't believe you said Guthrie was better than Justin Verlander.
Wait you didn't say that?
Whoa.. let me get this straight... you are only saying that Lackey and Guthrie are comparable players and Guthrie pitches in a tougher divisionon a weaker team, so buyer beware. I don't get it... how does Sabathia not fit in there somewhere?
____________________________________________________
Good one......Steve
Steve wrote:
These stats do show how important a return to form by Guthrie would be. It would be like adding a Lackey to the rotation
Steve wrote:
I don't think I implied it. I pointed out they had simliar numbers in the comparison years.
___________________________________________________
I think stating "it would be like adding a Lackey" implies that they are similar. Guts is an average pitcher. I like him. John Lackey is a superior pitcher (see stats that better predict future performance). Superior talent costs money. Lackey is no CC, but I'd take him over AJ Burnett.
__________________________________________________________
Guthrie 2008: 7th in batting average against, 14th in ERA in AL and allowed 2ER or less in 17 of 30 starts.
Guthrie 2007: 13th in AL in ERA and 14th in batting average against.
He had a poor 2009 but in those others years he was certainly better than average. I'd take Lackey over Burnett also.
It's funny that some of you guys put huge weight in certain numbers but seem to totally discount others. I didn't predict future performance but what you have done in the past sometimes can be duplicated. I could see Guthrie returning to 2008 form in 2010 or something close to it. - Steve
Strikeouts and walks allowed are controlled by the pitcher. The pitcher has less influence over batting average against. Izturis has better range than Fahey, wouldn't that result in a pitcher having a lower batting average against? This is why FIP is a more useful too, IMO. Quoting ERA rankings, while better than quoting wins, doesn't tell me much. So this is why some numbers are discounted...there are just not as useful. Nothing "funny" about it.
____________________________________________________________
Right, in your opinion, let's be clear on that.
How far do you want to take it. Do we have a stat for the umpires, who miss calls and hurt pitchers performance. I just don't see how ERA doesn't tell you much.
Sometimes it's paralysis by analysis, but we'll agree to disagree.
Steve
If we don't go after Lackey which I think we should. What starter would we go after that is not a Mark Hendrickson or Adam Eaton, or is that what we should expect again, pitchers from the bottom of the barrel.
__________________________________________________________
They don't need those "lesser" talents if you will anymore. They were there last year while the club was waiting on Bergesen, Tillman and company to be ready.
If they trade for and/or sign a pitcher this year it should be someone of quality. Someone that has a track record of some success to help supplement the youth. Not sure who that person is yet. - Steve
Well, the numbers are similar in that they are both sets of numbers noted in a decimal scale within a range of 0 and 10. Out of all the possible numbers in the world, you have to admit they're relatively similar.
Lackey had a very uncharacteristic year in 2008 with his HR/F %
Guthrie: 4.41, 4.53, 5.31 notice a trend?
I say what the heck, lets try to get Lackey, if we get priced out most likely, then so be it. Trading for talent is just as well, it gives the O's and alternative versus the perception that no free agent right now wants to play here. So trade for the talent. I would love the idea of trading for Zach Greinke. Man oh man, that would be sweet, under the radar and a definite young exciting upgrade on our pitching staff.
It's not really paralysis by analysis, it's simply about trying to use better statistics. ERA is a better stat than wins. FIP is a better stat than ERA. I'm not sure why that's complicated.
All I can tell you is that I hope that Andy MacPhail et al are using more reliable metrics...it would be troublesome if the Orioles were still in the dark ages in terms of statistical analysis. I mean, if AM were still relying more on batting average than on base percentage, what would that say about the organization?
_________________________________________________________________
For someone so precise about stats, you call yourself "sometimes."
Anyway, FIP is better than ERA in your opinion. That's not complicated at all. You act like everything can be done on a stat sheet. If it were so un complicated we would hire computer programmers to crunch the numbers and not baseball pros like Andy MacPhail with years of scouting and player developement in their background. Feel free to write back and get the last word. No sense in us going round and round about this anymore. - Steve
So trying to find a better analytic tool is the same as hiring a computer programmer to crunch numbers? And having a stat to account for better defense is like trying to create a stat based on an umpires strike zone? OK.
I love the game and I'm not afraid of using statistics, kind of like Earl Weaver I suppose. It's insulting to imply that I believe I know more about baseball than MacPhail. I don't. I wouldn't pretend to. If you want to infer that, feel free, I can't control want people infer. But if you want to post statistics, I would hope you would be open to using more telling statistics. And I would hope MacPhail is using statistics in addition to his scouting background to evaluate players. It's not an either/or scenario, or at least it shouldn't be. Sometimes people create strawmans, though...
The Yankees will sign Lackey to fill that gaping hole in the number 4 starter . . . plus Carl Crawford to replace Damon as leadoff hitter (Derek back to #2) and Matt Holliday or Jason Bay for good measure . . .
I see Jon Garland is available, but i really don't think he would come to the Orioles, and I don't see Angelos spending big money on Lackey. But
If Bret Myers leaves Philly, what do think about the Orioles possibly signing him. He could help out as a veteran starter or possibly being a closer for us. He said he really liked closing in philly before Lidge. Or if not Myers what are the chances the Orioles go after Soriano from Atlanta or José Valverde from the Astros as closers. That way Johnson can go back to being the 8th inning guy which is probably more suited for him.
Hey, how about instead of actually playing baseball games let's just create a computer algorithm to crunch all of these stats and tell us who wins! Who needs an actual pitch to be thrown when you can just predict the future success of the players involved?
Seriously everyone, let's relax a bit. It's not like Steve is saying Guthrie is going to win the Cy Young every year for the rest of his career. Is a 0.98 difference in FIP (or should we call it "the oracle") worth $15 million per year?
____________________________________________________________
Thanks Jeff and we all should Chill. - Steve
The thing that stats can't tell you about is heart. Guthrie, while his stats may or may not compare to Lackey's, is not a guy I would want give the ball to in game 7, Lackey is. Lackey is a true #1 starter, Guthrie is not. That is obvious to anyone who has watched both guys pitch on a regular basis, which I have. Guthrie seems to pitch just well enough to lose, and his win-loss record shows that. Lackey is a gamer that wants the ball and will give you 200+ innings year in and year out. Guthrie probably will not do that.
That being said, let me tell you a few other things about John Lackey. He is not the sharpest tool in the shed, and his work ethic is not the best. He's also a big drinker, so I would kept some of those things in mind when bidding on him.
Would I like to see the O's sign Lackey, sure. But I wouldn't be to hurt if they didn't. I certainly would give him Sabathia type money. I'd say 4, maybe 5 yrs @ 15-16 mil per is the most I would go. I might take a healthy Eric Bedard over Lackey, or maybe Ben Sheets, at least they wouldn't cost as much.
Guthrie may not be John Lackey, but Lackey is certainly no CC Sabathia.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fan, you confuse me with this post. You start out saying Lackey is a true number one who you want on the mound in game Seven. Later you question his work ethic and finally say you'd take a healthy Bedard over Lackey.
Also by the way, innings pitched last year. Guthrie 200 Lackey 176.
Steve
Steve -
I am also very hopeful that Guthrie can regain his form from 2008. If he had anything resembling run support he may well have won 18-20 games that year.
- Out of his 30 starts, he gave up more than 4 runs only 4 times.
- In 16 starts he gave up 2 runs or fewer, and won only 6 of those games (6-4 record).
- If you add the 4 starts that he allowed only 3 runs, his record was 7-7 in those 20 starts.
If he can learn how to keep the ball in the ballpark again I think he will bounce back from his disappointing 2009 in a big way. He looked much better at the end of the season, though he was still giving out homers like Halloween candy.
hey,steve way don't you let the fans know. that the orioles have the money to get these free agents but angelos would't let them. two years ago was with the money from masn and money from washington nationals we would spend on free agents but only thing that we have saw has been a big drop in payroll from 105 million to 45 mllion that around 60 million that they could spent on free agents but there we go again the fan pay admission.while angelos feels his pockets with baseball money,union money,cagarette money,tv money,and law firm money.so all this money from baltimore fan and he will not give back to the community that he came from.only thing that we ask for is a winner which he has not been because of his lies i hope he can take it with him when he goes ,bacause unlike steve b.who has gave us a winner ,angelos has rob us and our community of our sports history,because of his love for money ane not his community. thank god he is gone from dundalk because he never cared !!!!!!!!!!!!!
I didn't overlook the fact that Guthrie's ERA was lower -- I merely pointed out that this was the product of luck, and that his 2009 results are far closer to the kind of results you can expect from a pitcher with his mediocre skills. What I'm saying, Steve, is that Lackey has been unlucky the last two years while Guthrie was incredibly lucky in 07 and 08. What I'm saying, Steve, is that Lackey is a 3.50 ERA guy -- has been for a very long time -- while Guthrie is a barely-was, a 4.50 ERA guy at best.
And I love how you keep referring to your ridiculous comparison. You take two years where Lackey started the year on the DL versus the two very best years Guthrie's ever had. The comparison might be valid if they were the same historical years, so you could at least compare their individual numbers to league averages. It's vaguely instructive, at best. At worst it enables you to evade any real debate by dumbly saying "Oh well look at these ridiculous numbers."
The funny thing is I agree with you -- the Orioles should not sign Lackey. But not because Guthrie might bounce back . You don't sign a 30 year old starter when you're at least two years from seriously contending anyway.
___________________________________________________________
So Guthrie was lucky for two years and Lackey was unlucky for a year or two. How did Guthrie have over 50 lucky starts for two years and finish in the top 15 in the league in ERA. That was luck. Come on Lucas, you;ve got to come up something beter than that. - Steve
PS Go re read the piece, I want them to sign Lackey (they won't). He's just not an ace or number one pitcher. But in reading some of these posts with the myriad of stats thrown out on this pitcher, you'd think he was Bob Gibson in his prime and Guthrie was Terry Mathews. - sm
Steve, you remind me of a DJ who asks his or her listeners to call in with their opinion of a song and assumes that everyone listening has the same opinion. Better yet, you remind me of a congressman taking a poll of how people feel about a certain topic in his district, and only asking his affluent neighbors and friends rather than attempting to find a more representative sample of people. People misuse statistics all the time. It is not a crime; however, if you are going to use statistics and get paid for being a sports writer who at the very least should have a working knowledge of a fair amount of sports statistics, then you should be prepared to accept the criticism when you use them incorrectly.
No true baseball person would ever compare Lackey to Guthrie on the statistics that you used because you arbitrarily picked the years and you chose the statistics that painted the picture that you wanted to tell. A fair comparison shows all of the statistics and does not arbitrarily pick the time frames.
By your reasoning, I can compare myself with Usain Bolt in terms of athletic ability because when I was twenty, my times in the 100 meter dash were much better than his times in the same event when he was two years old. That is a ridiculous comparison, just as your comparison of Guthrie and Lackey is.
Now, you may be right when you say that Lackey is probably not worth the money that he will receive. A good amount of baseball players are not. But, to write that this is because Guthrie and Lackey are similar pitchers with similar numbers is ridiculous. Guthrie's value lies in the fact that he is still under team control and that he is much cheaper than Lackey, not that he is a better pitcher.
By the way, if wins and ERA are such great statistics when looking at pitchers, which is obviously your opinion since you dismiss FIP, K/9, BB/9 as less-telling stats, why is it that a good amount of pitchers in the minors with high wins and low ERA's but poor FIP, K/9, and BB/9, do not make it in the majors while a good amount of pitchers in the minors with good FIP, K/9, and BB/9, yet higher ERA's and less wins do? This might explain why most baseball pundits were surprised at the initial success of Bergesen who had good win totals and good ERA's in the minors, but less than stellar strikeout numbers.
It seems as usual that you and anyone employed by MASN is more interested in being an apologist for the O's and some of their poor decisions instead of stating some cold-hard truths like the team would not pay for Lackey because it would cut into their profit margin. See, the reality is Lackey, while a good pitcher, is not enough of a name to bring a lot of people to the park and he alone cannot get us back to the playoffs. Since that is the case, Angelos will not spend on someone who does not offset their contract enough for him to enjoy a continued accumulation of wealth.
_________________________________________________________
Wow, hater is a strong word to use. If you hate us, why come here.
Anyway, stats are arbitrarily used in baseball all the time. For instance:
*Ripken has a six-game hitting streak
*Ripken is just two for his last 30 at bat
*Mussina has given up just 1 earned run his last 20 2/3 innings.
*The Orioles have won six in a row.
I don't completely dismiss those other stats, as you say and as I've stated plenty of times, I don't use wins with starters. it's the stat they pretty much least control. I just put their W-L total with the numbers just to see them.
You are entitled to your opinions, but keep in mind, it's your opinion only which stats are best to determine a players' worth. - Steve
Steve, I guess what I was saying is that in game 7, I would give the ball to Lackey over Guthrie, it seems to me Guthrie always pitches just well enough to lose. If the O's score 1 run, he gives up 2 runs, if the O's score 7 runs he gives up 8.
But I think Lackey is looking for a contract similar to Sabathia's, and I wouldn't go that high for him. 4 yrs 60-65 mill is about as much as I would want to give him. Because of his poor work ethic and heavy drinking, I wouldn't want to go more then 4 yrs. I might add a option to that, but that would be about it. Unfortunatly I don't think that would get it done.
As for the innings, last year Lackey was injuryed so his inning were down. I think for the most part he would give you 200 innings, at least for the next couple of years, but I could see him becoming a injury risk, because of his age and not being in the best shape.
So I guess what I'm saying is, yes I think Lackey is better then Guthrie, but I wouldn't give him 8 yrs, 165 mil, and I think that's what he's looking for. There are others options out there that, while maybe not better pitchers than Lackey, might be a better fit for the O's right now. Like Eric Bedard or Ben Sheets(if both are healthy), just to name a couple.
Steve,
Good Post. These days I don't even think a pitcher has control over strikeouts and walks. I give most of that control to umpires. If everybody is getting crazy into stats, wouldn't the batter's tendencies play a roll in strikeouts or walks too? Even fly balls, ground balls, etc? All of these stats really don't mean much in my opinion.
Steve it is fair to say that you got worked over pretty hard in the comments and that you deserved it. You cherrypicked bad statistics then got WAY overly sensitive when the readers called you on it. If you are going to put your opinions out there for debate then you better get thicker skin. Every blog post is not going to be an award winner ... so don't get so upset when the readers call you on one of your worst. Enjoy the blog and keep up the good work.
___________________________________________________
Believe me I can take it. I've been on air and in the media for many years and hit a lot worse than yesterday. I don't consider it my worst at all, but respect your opinion and right to say it was. - Steve
Anyway, stats are arbitrarily used in baseball all the time. For instance:
*Ripken has a six-game hitting streak
*Ripken is just two for his last 30 at bat
*Mussina has given up just 1 earned run his last 20 2/3 innings.
*The Orioles have won six in a row.
I don't completely dismiss those other stats, as you say and as I've stated plenty of times, I don't use wins with starters. it's the stat they pretty much least control. I just put their W-L total with the numbers just to see them.
You are entitled to your opinions, but keep in mind, it's your opinion only which stats are best to determine a players' worth. - Steve
Again, your argument holds no merit. Just because someone arbitrarily uses something incorrectly does not justify you using it incorrectly. Also, stating that Ripken has a six-game hitting streak, or Ripken is just two for his last 30 at bats, or Mussina has given up just 1 earned run his last 20 2/3 innings, or the Orioles have won six in a row is not a misuse or even an arbitrary use of statistics. The misuse is in using those particular statistics and little else to make projections, which is EXACTLY WHAT YOU DID in your article.
You mentioned that, "it's your opinion only which stats are best to determine a players' worth," but the stats that I mentioned, or my opinions as you refer to them, are what credible baseball people use to make projections for pitchers. Up until this point FIP, K/9, BB/9, etc. have proven to be very useful in making those projections. Just ask Billy Beane why he traded Mulder and let Zito walk. Most credible baseball people consider him a great GM for those moves, and some consider the Mulder trade one of the best, from the A's perspective, in terms of the talent the A's received for a pitcher who proved to be on the downside of his career.
Oh, by the way, the last refuge of someone who has lost a debate in which they pretended to be an expert is stating that the other participants in the debate are "entitled to your opinions." You not only blogged that to me, but several others who shared and agreed with my opinions. There is no harm in admitting that one is wrong, the harm is clinging to that wrong out of ignorance and pride.
____________________________________________________________
You can keep writing in and saying you are right and I am wrong. That is just your opinion and that seems to be a hard concept for you to grasp. I simply expressed my opinion and can easily grasp a concept where others don't agree.
I simply contend that at his best, Guthrie was in Lackey's league and nothing more really. Guthrie faced better competition those two years than Lackey (13 starts vs. NY-Bost to Lackey's 6) and had a better ERA. The fact that he walked a few more batters per nine innings doesn't alarm me even a little or cause me to change my opinion. It's my OPINION AND YOU HAVE YOURS.
Can't you just say we disagree on this matter. There is no right or wrong answer.
You are so sure you can prove everything with stats. What stats showed that Guthrie's ERA would go from 3.63 in 2008 to 5.04 in 2009? I'll bet you have some.
Let's relax and enjoy a baseball difference of opinion. You don't win and I don't win. We move on. Thanks, Steve
You can keep writing in and saying you are right and I am wrong. That is just your opinion and that seems to be a hard concept for you to grasp. I simply expressed my opinion and can easily grasp a concept where others don't agree.
I simply contend that at his best, Guthrie was in Lackey's league and nothing more really. Guthrie faced better competition those two years than Lackey (13 starts vs. NY-Bost to Lackey's 6) and had a better ERA. The fact that he walked a few more batters per nine innings doesn't alarm me even a little or cause me to change my opinion. It's my OPINION AND YOU HAVE YOURS. Steve
I'll try one final time to let you know that you are missing the point. Of course you are allowed to think that Guthrie is as good or almost as good as Lackey, even though I believe that to be completely wrong. My point about what you wrote was that when you reference statistics to support your argument and then misuse those statistics throughout your argument, your opinion becomes of little or no substance.
If you are going to build a case that one pitcher is better than another, you cannot just use ERA and then state that the pitcher you believe is better, in this case Guthrie, faced better competition based solely on name recognition. If you are going to use statistics and make a comparison, you have to make an honest comparison. Did you consider the ballparks that each pitched in? Did you consider the actual competition that they faced in its entirety? Did you think about the defense playing behind each pitcher? Of course not, but you presented your argument glossing over these things to misuse the statistics that supported what you wanted to say. Not only is that wrong, but, being a journalist, I hope you realize that being misleading and dishonest is unethical.
Since it appears you do little research when writing an article, do both of us a favor with the time that you should be spending doing some. Since you have access to the team, ask Trembley, Kranitz, MacPhail, or whoever whether they believe that Guthrie is a better pitcher than Lackey. They probably will not honestly tell you since Guthrie is a member of the O's, but it would be worth a shot. You could probably preface your question by telling them that you will not print their response and see what they say. I wonder if they will respond that Guthrie is better because he had more wins than Lackey when Lackey was out with an injury. If they do, you should ask them if you could become an assistant GM for the team or the new bench coach instead of Datz.
Oh, one more thing. You stated that, "You are so sure you can prove everything with stats." To be honest with you, I am not so sure. What I am sure of though is that I would not have written an article from the platform of a website which lends you, the author, some supposed credibility when I obviously knew very little about what I was writing. The reason people mistrust statistics is because of people like you who back up their opinions incorrectly through a misuse of statistics. Next time, just stick with something like I write for the Orioles, so that is why I think Guthrie is better, or I saw both pitch and I like the way that Guthrie throws compared to Lackey. At least that way it would be a more honest argument. Just stick with what you know and leave the use of statistics to the pros.
_______________________________________________________
You need a class in reading comprehension. Right after quoting me saying Guthrie was in his league for those two years, you say I said Guthrie is as good as Lackey. The first point was true, not the second. Try to understand the point of the article first.
You are trying hard to get my goat and failing. I'm not unethical and I do a lot of prep and stat work in my writings. Do I mis-use stats, according to you I do. Your opinion is not the end all and be all, just so you know.
Did you read my follow up "re-visting Lackey and Guthrie" I stated for the record, I do not think Guthrie is better than Lackey. But for the years I mentioned, Guthrie was in Lackey's league. That's the point I was making. Get it or don't get it, I don't care.
If I'm unethical and just a total bust at covering baseball than just skip my stuff and read Roch only.
Maybe the name you hide behind says it all, Masn hater. By the way, I don't hate you or your opinions. Your opinion counts the same as mine. That seems to be driving you crazy at this point. - Steve
You first state that I "need a class in reading comprehension," and then tell me that I am trying hard to get your goat. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
You may truly believe that you are not unethical, but when you misuse something, such as statistics, or take something out of context in order to support your opinion, it is the equivalent of lying. This is the "ethical line" that many politicians and advertisers dance, and some of them believe that misleading others and not presenting all of the facts is not the equivalent of lying. Apparently, you, as a journalist, are in that particular camp. I am not, which most likely means that you think I should add a class in "Skewed Ethics" with you as the professor to my desperately needed reading comprehension class.
Since you asked so politely, I will no longer read your articles. I had actually already come to that conclusion. If I remember correctly from your days at WBAL, your "ethical" opinions seem to sway the way of the person who is paying your salary, so I almost didn't even click on the link to this particular article. Perhaps you should use all of that time when you "do a lot of prep and stat work," which is obviously wasted, and read a book about standing up for what you truly believe in or about how being a "flip-flopper" or a "fair-weather fan" is a dishonorable ignominy.
Oh, just for the record, I use the posting name "MASN hater" because Peter Angelos failed to reach a fair and equitable agreement with the cable companies and my bill was increased as a result. Then, he decided to pocket that money instead of building a winning ballclub or creating a fan-friendlier atmosphere in the ballpark. Another typical win-win for Angelos and a lose-lose for the true lifeblood of the O's, their fans.
Also, MASN's coverage is nowhere near as good as it was when HTS broadcast the games. I miss Mel Proctor and John Lowenstein. While we are on the subject of missing people, I also miss Brooks, Jon Miller, Davey Johnson, Pat Gillick, Frank Wren, and a host of others.
I easily could have made my posting name "Baseball lover" or "Lifelong O's Fan" because I love baseball and I desperately want to see the Orioles, who at one time during the late 60's, all of the 70's, and early 80's were one of the most respected franchises in all of baseball, turn things around. I just get extremely passionate when I hear or read "backwards" thinking, like in your article, from the Orioles, which being an employee of MASN, a network owned by the team, you represent. This kind of mentality that what we have is good enough or better than some others (the Pirates, the Nationals?) will not turn things around. Only a mentality that strives for constant improvement will. I sure hope that you, the other people at MASN, and the leadership of the Orioles organization soon realize that. Otherwise, this baseball team, a team which I continue to root for and support, will never contend on a consistent basis with any of the teams in our division, let alone challenge for a world championship. Take care Steve, and I wish you continued mediocrity.
____________________________________________________________
To think, you have written all these words, taken cheap shots at me all because I dared to say at his best Guthrie was in Lackey's league. Amazing. I won't take any shots back. - Steve