Jason Marquis Facts

[Mephistopheles]

* He struck out 5 guys in a start 5 times last season. Carlos Zambrano didn't strike out at least 5 guys in 5 starts last season.

* He walked 4 guys or more in a start 5 times last season. Greg Maddux walked that many once all season.

* He hasn't struck out 6 guys in a game since July 7th, 2005. Angel Guzman struck out 8 batters in relief last season (only 5 appearances)

* Marquis hasn't struck out 8 guys since April 22nd, 2005. Even Mark Prior did that last season.

* His career high in strikeouts and only 10+ K game was 13 on August 3, 2001. Rich Hill struck out at least 10 guys 3 times last season. In September.

* Marquis struck out 13 guys in September, Rich Hill struck out 11 in one game in September.

* Jason Marquis hasn't gone 8 innings since July 23, 2006. Ryan O'Malley went 8 on his major league debut on August 16.

* Jason Marquis gave up less than 4 hits 5 times last season. Carlos Zambrano gave up less than 4 hits 4 times last season.

* Jason Marquis gave up 14 hits two times last season. Neither Carlos Zambrano nor Rich Hill gave up 10 hits last season.

* Jason Marquis gave up at least 12 earned runs twice last season. Carlos Zambrano allowed less than earned 12 runs in three of the six months last season.

* Jason Marquis had an ERA over 5.00 in 5 months last season. Carlos Zambrano has had an ERA over 5.00 in 5 months during his career.

 

Feel free to add some.

[A New Era]

Jason Marquis had a great first full year for braves and cardinals. Jason Marquis had "good" 2nd full seaons for braves and cardinals. .

[Danny82]

Those strike-out numbers/comparisons really don't mean much. He's a sinkerballer who mostly just tries to get batters to beat the ball into the dirt.

[UMFan83]

*He posted a 6.02 ERA last year and was left off the St. Louis Cardinals playoff roster in 2006.

*He received a 3 year/$21 million contract from the Chicago Cubs that same offseason.

[Mephistopheles]

Those aren't facts.

[Garwilly]

.

[RichHillIsABeast]

I guess Marquis is this year's Jacque Jones.

[Garwilly]

What do this post, my last post, and the original post have in common?

 

 

 

 

 

They are completely worthless.

 

But at least I didn't spend 30 minutes looking it up

[CubinNY]

What do this post, my last post, and the original post have in common?

 

 

 

 

 

They are completely worthless.

 

But at least I didn't spend 30 minutes looking it up

 

I liked them, well not really but they do say a lot. Why do you think they are worthless?

[imb]

What do this post, my last post, and the original post have in common?

 

 

 

 

 

They are completely worthless.

 

But at least I didn't spend 30 minutes looking it up

 

2 KOOL 4 SKOOL

[Mephistopheles]

What do this post, my last post, and the original post have in common?

 

 

 

 

 

They are completely worthless.

 

But at least I didn't spend 30 minutes looking it up

Oh shut up. If anything it shows how much he sucks. Of course we all (hopefully) know that but they're interesting none the less. Next time don't be a dick about it.

[CubColtPacer]

Basically these stats boil down to 2 things:

 

Marquis is not a strikeout pitcher, and Marquis had a horrible year last year. Those are important to know, as is the next post that points out that Marquis's good years have been his first couple years with a new club.

[A New Era]

I guess Marquis is this year's Jacque Jones.

 

Yeah I agree. He could go out an perform well and shut some of these critics up. But right NOW, none of them will say it is in ANY WAY possible. Just like they did for Jones. They had him not batting above .250 with an OBP not at .300.

[mg420]

* He struck out 5 guys in a start 5 times last season. Carlos Zambrano didn't strike out at least 5 guys in 5 starts last season.

* He walked 4 guys or more in a start 5 times last season. Greg Maddux walked that many once all season.

* He hasn't struck out 6 guys in a game since July 7th, 2005. Angel Guzman struck out 8 batters in relief last season (only 5 appearances)

* Marquis hasn't struck out 8 guys since April 22nd, 2005. Even Mark Prior did that last season.

* His career high in strikeouts and only 10+ K game was 13 on August 3, 2001. Rich Hill struck out at least 10 guys 3 times last season. In September.

* Marquis struck out 13 guys in September, Rich Hill struck out 11 in one game in September.

* Jason Marquis hasn't gone 8 innings since July 23, 2006. Ryan O'Malley went 8 on his major league debut on August 16.

* Jason Marquis gave up less than 4 hits 5 times last season. Carlos Zambrano gave up less than 4 hits 4 times last season.

* Jason Marquis gave up 14 hits two times last season. Neither Carlos Zambrano nor Rich Hill gave up 10 hits last season.

* Jason Marquis gave up at least 12 earned runs twice last season. Carlos Zambrano allowed less than earned 12 runs in three of the six months last season.

* Jason Marquis had an ERA over 5.00 in 5 months last season. Carlos Zambrano has had an ERA over 5.00 in 5 months during his career.

 

Feel free to add some.

 

sincere thanks for the refreshing optimism. i have a feeling that jason will have a good year and be a vaulable part of the rotation. i hope he can have a year in 07 like he had in 04 and 05 with 200 ip and 15 wins.

[Mephistopheles]

Maybe it's because 2003/2004 were based largely on pure luck and a good Cardinals defense.

[CubColtPacer]

I guess Marquis is this year's Jacque Jones.

 

Yeah I agree. He could go out an perform well and shut some of these critics up. But right NOW, none of them will say it is in ANY WAY possible. Just like they did for Jones. They had him not batting above .250 with an OBP not at .300.

 

Yeah, that bet that somebody made to give everybody something if Jones accomplished certain marks came a little closer than he wanted, although by the last week he was safe. :D

[baseball7897]

Jason Marquis is not a strikeout pitcher. Batters swing at his first pitch 70% of the time.

[A New Era]

Basically these stats boil down to 2 things:

 

Marquis is not a strikeout pitcher, and Marquis had a horrible year last year. Those are important to know, as is the next post that points out that Marquis's good years have been his first couple years with a new club.

 

You know why I think so? Hard head. But there's more to that. He has given pause to think that he "takes" to a coach at first, then starts to be stubborn and losses his interest in that coach. Then he moves on and gets a man crush on his "new coach". . And then performs well again. That's why I think Jason will have a great/good 1-2 years. And I'm stickin to why I think so. .

[CubColtPacer]

Maybe it's because 2003/2004 were based largely on pure luck and a good Cardinals defense.

 

and 2001 was the same way? Is it really that likely that a pitcher would have 3 highly lucky years out of 5?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Jason Marquis is not a strikeout pitcher. Batters swing at his first pitch 70% of the time.

 

That percentage sounds made up.

 

Marquis isn't any good and we paid too much for him, but I'm not resigned to him being a blight just yet. I won't be surprised if he swings either way performance wise.

[Mephistopheles]

Maybe it's because 2003/2004 were based largely on pure luck and a good Cardinals defense.

 

and 2001 was the same way? Is it really that likely that a pitcher would have 3 highly lucky years out of 5?

He actually knew what a strikeout was in 01. It's pretty damn obvious that he can't strike guys out, walks too many and wasn't even a groundball pitcher in 2005-2006.

[treebird]

Jason Marquis is not a strikeout pitcher. Batters swing at his first pitch 70% of the time.

 

this is a pretty interesting statistic, where did you find it?

[Mephistopheles]

Jason Marquis is not a strikeout pitcher. Batters swing at his first pitch 70% of the time.

 

That percentage sounds made up.

It is, the Tigers swung at the first pitch 32% of the time (link) . I am sure the rest of the league didn't swing twice as often on the first pitch.

[CubColtPacer]

Maybe it's because 2003/2004 were based largely on pure luck and a good Cardinals defense.

 

and 2001 was the same way? Is it really that likely that a pitcher would have 3 highly lucky years out of 5?

He actually knew what a strikeout was in 01. It's pretty damn obvious that he can't strike guys out, walks too many and wasn't even a groundball pitcher in 2005-2006.

 

The difference between 2001 and 2004 for strikeouts and walks was decently small:

 

01: 6.8K/9

4.1BB/9

K/BB ratio-1.66

04: 6.17K/9

3.13BB/9

K/BB ratio-1.97

 

I don't see how 01's numbers are so much better than 04's, in fact they are a little worse overall-they are a little better than 05 though.

[Mephistopheles]

.7 is a sizable difference when you're around league average. No one's saying he "deserved" the ERA in 2001. The fact is the sum of his rates don't add up in 2003 and 2004. I don't know why you can't throw out the other years in his career when his ERA was much more in line with his rates (in fact they were lower). There's so much luck involved with pitching and allowing runs. Something like 40% is pure luck and the only things in a pitchers control amount to less than a fourth or something when you run a regression. If you look at it this way being lucky half the time isn't out of the question.

 

Let's not forget he wasn't exactly "good" in 2001 at preventing runs. He allowed 12 UER in 129.3 innings. I can assure you most if not all of those were his fault. RA is MUCH better for pitchers than ERA. Let's not pretend it's not. His RA wasn't that much better than league average. He wasn't 'that' lucky.

 

The simple fact is he was lucky and is not good. If you can't see this fine. You're entitled to not opening your eyes, I guess.

Edited February 16, 2007 by Mephistopheles