The market for mediocre pitching

[chuckywang]

Aren't GMs wary of mediocre pitchers who have good runs in the postseason? I certainly wouldn't open my wallet wide for them. A mediocre pitcher with one good game is still a mediocre pitcher.

[TruffleShuffle]

Aren't GMs wary of mediocre pitchers who have good runs in the postseason? I certainly wouldn't open my wallet wide for them. A mediocre pitcher with one good game is still a mediocre pitcher.

 

See Derek Lowe's 2004 season and the contract that he got. He was downright bad that year, but redeemed himself in the playoffs and parlayed that into $9M/year.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

With Pavano you can throw most of his stats out cause he was really only healthy for 2 or 3 of his seasons.

 

In Pavano's one and only good season, the only thing about him that changed was his HR rate and his H/9 went WAY down.

 

The HR rate was a good thing, but keep in mind he was pitching in one of the best pitchers parks in the NL.

 

Actually his command got slightly better, but the thing is he had never stayed healthy before that, he suddenly got less hittable, and he was in a major pitchers park.

 

Now he went to the Yankees in the AL, his hit rate went back to Pavano levels, his control was excellent, but he started giving up HRs again.

 

He probably would be a solid 4 or 5 guy though.

[Mephistopheles]

you're entitled to that opinion, but is has no basis in stats

 

As someone said, it was the only season in his career with 20 starts where he had an ERA+ over 100. He was helped a lot by his home park and I didn't think he'd adjust well to the AL East.

[chuckywang]

Aren't GMs wary of mediocre pitchers who have good runs in the postseason? I certainly wouldn't open my wallet wide for them. A mediocre pitcher with one good game is still a mediocre pitcher.

 

See Derek Lowe's 2004 season and the contract that he got. He was downright bad that year, but redeemed himself in the playoffs and parlayed that into $9M/year.

 

Derek Lowe isn't a mediocre pitcher. He's quite decent.

[baseball7897]

Aren't GMs wary of mediocre pitchers who have good runs in the postseason? I certainly wouldn't open my wallet wide for them. A mediocre pitcher with one good game is still a mediocre pitcher.

 

See Derek Lowe's 2004 season and the contract that he got. He was downright bad that year, but redeemed himself in the playoffs and parlayed that into $9M/year.

 

Derek Lowe isn't a mediocre pitcher. He's quite decent.

 

Derek Lowe would be a great wrigley field pitcher.

[BeerHere]

Moyer just signed a 2yr deal with the Phills for $10.5M.

[Guest]

Aren't GMs wary of mediocre pitchers who have good runs in the postseason? I certainly wouldn't open my wallet wide for them. A mediocre pitcher with one good game is still a mediocre pitcher.

 

See Derek Lowe's 2004 season and the contract that he got. He was downright bad that year, but redeemed himself in the playoffs and parlayed that into $9M/year.

How was he the year before?

[goonys evil twin]

Aren't GMs wary of mediocre pitchers who have good runs in the postseason? I certainly wouldn't open my wallet wide for them. A mediocre pitcher with one good game is still a mediocre pitcher.

 

See Derek Lowe's 2004 season and the contract that he got. He was downright bad that year, but redeemed himself in the playoffs and parlayed that into $9M/year.

How was he the year before?

 

Slightly above average.

[TruffleShuffle]

Aren't GMs wary of mediocre pitchers who have good runs in the postseason? I certainly wouldn't open my wallet wide for them. A mediocre pitcher with one good game is still a mediocre pitcher.

 

See Derek Lowe's 2004 season and the contract that he got. He was downright bad that year, but redeemed himself in the playoffs and parlayed that into $9M/year.

How was he the year before?

 

Slightly above average.

 

Yup - 105 ERA+. His strikeout rate was down to around 5 per 9 innings both of those years, and he was way too hittable - something he wasn't for most of his Red Sox career. Teams don't give $9 million per year contracts to guys coming off consecutive seasons with a 4.47 and 5.42 ERA, the latter one in his "walk" year. But he won each of the Red Sox three series-clinching games that year, and pitched great in his two winning starts. That's where the money came from.

 

Similarly, Suppan has more than just the pressure of a WS start riding on tonight's game (or tomorrow's game if tonight's gets rained out). If he has a great outing, he'll be regarded as a "big game pitcher" and some team will probably throw an $8M per year contract at him. If he gets shelled, he'll probably lose about $3M per year. It's ridiculous, but there are enough GMs out there that someone will overpay for his services with another great start tonight.

 

As for the rest of this debate, I think people underestimate how hard it is to be a consistent league-average pitcher who doesn't miss starts. Sure, Marshall might be able to do what Suppan did this year. But he sure didn't this year, and the likelihood of him staying healthy for an entire season is slim. People look at league-average (i.e., Suppan) as if he's just a complete bum, but to be average, you have to be better than everyone who is below-average. That might sounds McCarverish, but it's true. Average pitchers are better than a lot of other pitchers.

 

I'd be happy to take on someone like Lilly or Suppan for the right price, because as we saw this year, an unproven guy like Marshall might just not be that good, and when people get hurt, then you're turning to guys like Walrond, Mateo, Marmol and Guzman who were clearly not ready for the majors, and therefore were easily below-average. It just seems to me that after watching a team that was fielding so many fragile and inept pitchers, Cub fans would recognize the value of a guy who can take the ball every time his turn comes up, and eat up some innings and keep his team in the game most times he takes the hill.

[Guest]

Aren't GMs wary of mediocre pitchers who have good runs in the postseason? I certainly wouldn't open my wallet wide for them. A mediocre pitcher with one good game is still a mediocre pitcher.

 

See Derek Lowe's 2004 season and the contract that he got. He was downright bad that year, but redeemed himself in the playoffs and parlayed that into $9M/year.

How was he the year before?

 

Slightly above average.

 

Yup - 105 ERA+. His strikeout rate was down to around 5 per 9 innings both of those years, and he was way too hittable - something he wasn't for most of his Red Sox career. Teams don't give $9 million per year contracts to guys coming off consecutive seasons with a 4.47 and 5.42 ERA, the latter one in his "walk" year. But he won each of the Red Sox three series-clinching games that year, and pitched great in his two winning starts. That's where the money came from.

 

Similarly, Suppan has more than just the pressure of a WS start riding on tonight's game (or tomorrow's game if tonight's gets rained out). If he has a great outing, he'll be regarded as a "big game pitcher" and some team will probably throw an $8M per year contract at him. If he gets shelled, he'll probably lose about $3M per year. It's ridiculous, but there are enough GMs out there that someone will overpay for his services with another great start tonight.

 

As for the rest of this debate, I think people underestimate how hard it is to be a consistent league-average pitcher who doesn't miss starts. Sure, Marshall might be able to do what Suppan did this year. But he sure didn't this year, and the likelihood of him staying healthy for an entire season is slim. People look at league-average (i.e., Suppan) as if he's just a complete bum, but to be average, you have to be better than everyone who is below-average. That might sounds McCarverish, but it's true. Average pitchers are better than a lot of other pitchers.

 

I'd be happy to take on someone like Lilly or Suppan for the right price, because as we saw this year, an unproven guy like Marshall might just not be that good, and when people get hurt, then you're turning to guys like Walrond, Mateo, Marmol and Guzman who were clearly not ready for the majors, and therefore were easily below-average. It just seems to me that after watching a team that was fielding so many fragile and inept pitchers, Cub fans would recognize the value of a guy who can take the ball every time his turn comes up, and eat up some innings and keep his team in the game most times he takes the hill.

Maybe I should stop being lazy and look this up. :D

 

Okay...it was the 2002 season I was thinking of that really earned him his money.

[goonys evil twin]

Similarly, Suppan has more than just the pressure of a WS start riding on tonight's game (or tomorrow's game if tonight's gets rained out). If he has a great outing, he'll be regarded as a "big game pitcher" and some team will probably throw an $8M per year contract at him. If he gets shelled, he'll probably lose about $3M per year. It's ridiculous, but there are enough GMs out there that someone will overpay for his services with another great start tonight.

 

I believe the range is much higher. I think he's already looking at 3/27 easy, and could go to the $10-12m per range with a great WS outing. I don't think a shelling will put him down to $5m per either.

 

 

As for the rest of this debate, I think people underestimate how hard it is to be a consistent league-average pitcher who doesn't miss starts. Sure, Marshall might be able to do what Suppan did this year. But he sure didn't this year, and the likelihood of him staying healthy for an entire season is slim. People look at league-average (i.e., Suppan) as if he's just a complete bum, but to be average, you have to be better than everyone who is below-average. That might sounds McCarverish, but it's true. Average pitchers are better than a lot of other pitchers.

 

I'd be happy to take on someone like Lilly or Suppan for the right price, because as we saw this year, an unproven guy like Marshall might just not be that good, and when people get hurt, then you're turning to guys like Walrond, Mateo, Marmol and Guzman who were clearly not ready for the majors, and therefore were easily below-average. It just seems to me that after watching a team that was fielding so many fragile and inept pitchers, Cub fans would recognize the value of a guy who can take the ball every time his turn comes up, and eat up some innings and keep his team in the game most times he takes the hill.

 

If you can get a slightly above average pitcher for slightly above average pay, that's great. Average pay is around $2m though, right? A $4-5m guy who throws 200 IP with an ERA+ of 100 is going to be valuable to the team. I'm warming slightly to the idea of getting an average starter or two.

[KaiserCesar]

Similarly, Suppan has more than just the pressure of a WS start riding on tonight's game (or tomorrow's game if tonight's gets rained out). If he has a great outing, he'll be regarded as a "big game pitcher" and some team will probably throw an $8M per year contract at him. If he gets shelled, he'll probably lose about $3M per year. It's ridiculous, but there are enough GMs out there that someone will overpay for his services with another great start tonight.

 

I believe the range is much higher. I think he's already looking at 3/27 easy, and could go to the $10-12m per range with a great WS outing. I don't think a shelling will put him down to $5m per either.

 

 

As for the rest of this debate, I think people underestimate how hard it is to be a consistent league-average pitcher who doesn't miss starts. Sure, Marshall might be able to do what Suppan did this year. But he sure didn't this year, and the likelihood of him staying healthy for an entire season is slim. People look at league-average (i.e., Suppan) as if he's just a complete bum, but to be average, you have to be better than everyone who is below-average. That might sounds McCarverish, but it's true. Average pitchers are better than a lot of other pitchers.

 

I'd be happy to take on someone like Lilly or Suppan for the right price, because as we saw this year, an unproven guy like Marshall might just not be that good, and when people get hurt, then you're turning to guys like Walrond, Mateo, Marmol and Guzman who were clearly not ready for the majors, and therefore were easily below-average. It just seems to me that after watching a team that was fielding so many fragile and inept pitchers, Cub fans would recognize the value of a guy who can take the ball every time his turn comes up, and eat up some innings and keep his team in the game most times he takes the hill.

 

If you can get a slightly above average pitcher for slightly above average pay, that's great. Average pay is around $2m though, right? A $4-5m guy who throws 200 IP with an ERA+ of 100 is going to be valuable to the team. I'm warming slightly to the idea of getting an average starter or two.

 

Average pay is 2 million because you have 5-6 bench players and about 3 low end relievers at least per pen.

[goonys evil twin]

Average pay is 2 million because you have 5-6 bench players and about 3 low end relievers at least per pen.

 

Yes, but average is average. I'm still talking about twice the average pay, assuming a premium for pitchers. There are lots of average to above average pitchers who make less than what Suppan is likely to make in free agency.

[KaiserCesar]

Average pay is 2 million because you have 5-6 bench players and about 3 low end relievers at least per pen.

 

Yes, but average is average. I'm still talking about twice the average pay, assuming a premium for pitchers. There are lots of average to above average pitchers who make less than what Suppan is likely to make in free agency.

 

I'd like to make the argument that Suppan is above average for the fact that he goes 200 innings per year

[goonys evil twin]

Average pay is 2 million because you have 5-6 bench players and about 3 low end relievers at least per pen.

 

Yes, but average is average. I'm still talking about twice the average pay, assuming a premium for pitchers. There are lots of average to above average pitchers who make less than what Suppan is likely to make in free agency.

 

I'd like to make the argument that Suppan is above average for the fact that he goes 200 innings per year

 

Then I'd like to throw out the fact that he hasn't done that since 2003.

[KaiserCesar]

Average pay is 2 million because you have 5-6 bench players and about 3 low end relievers at least per pen.

 

Yes, but average is average. I'm still talking about twice the average pay, assuming a premium for pitchers. There are lots of average to above average pitchers who make less than what Suppan is likely to make in free agency.

 

I'd like to make the argument that Suppan is above average for the fact that he goes 200 innings per year

 

Then I'd like to throw out the fact that he hasn't done that since 2003.

 

Well, it's close, but would you say that a pitcher who throws an above average amount of innings at about a league average ERA is above average (this is starting pitchers in general here)

[goonys evil twin]

Well, it's close, but would you say that a pitcher who throws an above average amount of innings at about a league average ERA is above average (this is starting pitchers in general here)

 

Yes. I've said Suppan is above average.

[TruffleShuffle]

Average pay is 2 million because you have 5-6 bench players and about 3 low end relievers at least per pen.

 

Yes, but average is average. I'm still talking about twice the average pay, assuming a premium for pitchers. There are lots of average to above average pitchers who make less than what Suppan is likely to make in free agency.

 

$2 million is not a fair figure to use. It's skewed by all the players who are in their first few years of play and haven't reached the point of unrestricted free agency. When you talk about signing a free agent, you have to look at the market value for average starting pitchers who have reached unrestricted free agency. I think that market is probably in the range of $6 million per year. There are plenty of average to above average pitchers who make less than Suppan will make, this is true, but most of them haven't reached UFA status and can't be had by the Cubs unless they can work out a trade.

 

That being said, I'd like to hear some suggestions of guys of guys the Cubs could sign this offseason who are better than Suppan and can be signed for cheaper, though.

[goonys evil twin]

That being said, I'd like to hear some suggestions of guys of guys the Cubs could sign this offseason who are better than Suppan and can be signed for cheaper, though.

 

It wouldn't be stretch to say Padilla is as good as Suppan, and could easily be better next year, if not the next 3-4 years. And he could sign for less.

 

The "average" salary is skewed by first year players, but the cost of free agents is skewed by the lack of supply. If every player was a free agent that only signed one year contracts, there'd be a much bigger supply. In theory, the average salary would go up a bit, based on teams no longer having to worry about future risk. But, there's still a finite amount of money that teams are willing to spend on players. If teams spend X on player salaries today, they wouldn't all of a sudden spend 2X.

 

The average salary is the average salary. It's the money the league spends on players divided by the amount of players. How it is distributed is skewed by tenure. But that just means veterans are overpaid and pre-arby guys are underpaid.

[TruffleShuffle]

That being said, I'd like to hear some suggestions of guys of guys the Cubs could sign this offseason who are better than Suppan and can be signed for cheaper, though.

 

It wouldn't be stretch to say Padilla is as good as Suppan, and could easily be better next year, if not the next 3-4 years. And he could sign for less.

 

The "average" salary is skewed by first year players, but the cost of free agents is skewed by the lack of supply. If every player was a free agent that only signed one year contracts, there'd be a much bigger supply. In theory, the average salary would go up a bit, based on teams no longer having to worry about future risk. But, there's still a finite amount of money that teams are willing to spend on players. If teams spend X on player salaries today, they wouldn't all of a sudden spend 2X.

 

The average salary is the average salary. It's the money the league spends on players divided by the amount of players. How it is distributed is skewed by tenure. But that just means veterans are overpaid and pre-arby guys are underpaid.

 

Of course they are. That's the way the system works. Unfortunately, the Cubs can't just go out and get pre-arby guys. The only way to improve, unless they trade, is to sign free agents. I am fine with the Padilla idea, but I really don't think there will be a big difference between what he gets and what Suppan gets.

 

Other ideas:

 

Wading through the list of free agent pitchers, here are some guys I think may be good value signings:

 

-Tim Wakefield if the Sox don't pick up his option (can't imagine they wouldn't though)

-Miguel Batista

-John Thomson

-Byung-Hyun Kim (if he's real cheap)

-Steve Trachsel (hey, why not a second go around? still wouldn't pay him that much given his decline this season)

-Randy Wolf (maybe my favorite one - was pretty bad last year but it was his first year back from TJ surgery - think he can be had fairly cheap)

-Woody Williams (not to be relied on for a lot of innings, but could be cheap due to his age, and he's still pretty effective)

[Warpticon]

Put me down in favor of either Wolf, Padilla, or Batista for something 3 years or less (2 for Batista, as he's considerably older) at around 4-5 mil per.

[BigbadB]

Signing Wakefield requires signing a catcher who can catch him as well.