Whats changed with Zambrano? Young Good Z vs Prime Average Z

[Gmoney08]

From 2001 to 2007 (ages 21 to 26) he was a great young pitcher who looked on his way to being a perennial all star and one of the top 5 to 10 pitchers in the game.

 

He won 18 games in 07 as the Cubs won their first of back to back division titles and looked as if he was starting to put it all together.

 

Then in 08 which was a great year for the Cubs as a team, and 09 its as if not only Zambrano didn't take that step forward into a consensus elite pitcher, he for some reason took 2 step backwards into a very average pitcher. 2010 isnt starting to look any different.

 

Im just perplexed why this has happened considering his age he should be just hitting his prime, not taking so many steps backwards.

 

Why do you think he was better as a 23 year old then as a 28 year old?

 

I feel he still has great velocity but I felt he through consistently harder at 23. I know he has changed his pitcher repertoire a bit, any chance it is because of that?

 

Was he just luckier his first few years and the league caught up to him? Or has he just been unlucky the last couple years and he still has the goods to be an elite pitcher?

[jersey cubs fan]

Why do you think he was better as a 23 year old then as a 28 year old?

 

 

Wear and tear lessens an arm's ability to do amazing things with a baseball.

[SouthSideRyan]

The 2007 breakout season you reference was probably the worst full season he's had. He's got a lot of miles on his arm, which should explain some of it. He's become a different pitcher though. Used to pitch more to contact in '03 and '04.

[Eephus Speed]

You'd need to do some pitch f/x analysis to figure out exactly what's changed, but Zambrano's peripherals have remained fairly steady. His GB/FB has declined, however. His BB rate has always sucked, while his K rate has always been above average. He threw a ton of pitches at a very young age.

 

All that said, Zambrano has maintained an ERA that's much better than average (striking out 7-8 per 9 helps a lot).

[inari]

I think Z is on the verge of becoming underrated. He was still quite solid last year. He's not what he used to be but he's still pretty solid.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I think the worst thing that ever happened to Z is the tag of "Ace". Lets face it, hes not an ace an never will be and Im done waiting for him to become one. Sure he has ace stuff, but the footnotes of baseball history are full of guys who who had ace stuff, but for one reason or another were unable to pull it all together.

 

Dont get me wrong, Z is a gr..., OK, hes a very good pitcher. More major league managers than not would love to have Z, Lilly, and Dempster make up the 2-4 spots in their rotation. What seperates the Cubs from a lot of the other league elite is an ace. Look at Boston, the Yankees, and the Phillies, and they all have a staff ace. If we were to get ahold of a legit ace, wed be neck and nect as the divison favs with the Cards. Unfortuantely, a legit ace isnt easy to come by, as when a team has one, they're quick to lock them up long term.

 

My advice to whoever happens to be Cubs GM in the near future is if a Danny Haren or Zack Greinke hits the free agent market any time soon, step away from the power hitting outfielder and jump on him.

[SouthSideRyan]

lol

[Hairyducked Idiot]

He was the Cubs best pitcher for awhile and nobody* noticed. Then he started to lose a little and nobody* noticed. I wonder if anyone will notice whatever happens next.

 

* - Mainstream fans and press

[Schwarber Fan]

God hates the Cubs.

 

Z comes in to 2010 with a new calm attitude and is given an inning with a level of frustration that would have Ted Lilly punching small animals.

[NonProfitCow]

From what I've seen, he's just lost velocity. 90-93 with that sink is a lot easier to square up than 93-96 with the same sink. He's never been a control pitcher so he's relied on velocity and movement. As that diminishes so does his effectiveness.

 

But it's way too early to draw conclusions. At the end of the year he's probably going to be the same pitcher he's always been. 180 innings of 115-125 ERA+ ball. The worst thing that's happened to him (in the baseball fan's eyes) is his contract.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Even if he pitches exactly as expected the rest of the season, this start alone adds 0.3 to his final ERA and knocks his ERA+ down by about 7 points.

[inari]

I think the worst thing that ever happened to Z is the tag of "Ace". Lets face it, hes not an ace an never will be and Im done waiting for him to become one. Sure he has ace stuff, but the footnotes of baseball history are full of guys who who had ace stuff, but for one reason or another were unable to pull it all together.

 

Dont get me wrong, Z is a gr..., OK, hes a very good pitcher. More major league managers than not would love to have Z, Lilly, and Dempster make up the 2-4 spots in their rotation. What seperates the Cubs from a lot of the other league elite is an ace. Look at Boston, the Yankees, and the Phillies, and they all have a staff ace. If we were to get ahold of a legit ace, wed be neck and nect as the divison favs with the Cards. Unfortuantely, a legit ace isnt easy to come by, as when a team has one, they're quick to lock them up long term.

 

My advice to whoever happens to be Cubs GM in the near future is if a Danny Haren or Zack Greinke hits the free agent market any time soon, step away from the power hitting outfielder and jump on him.

 

I'm not even sure what to make of this post.

[Hawk4Hall]

He's a #2 guy at best. Flashes of greatness mixed in with epic meltdowns.

[Clem Fandango]

It's because he lost weight and is keeping his cool. Each year he loses weight and proclaims he's gonna keep his cool, and each year he sucks to begin and then turns back into grumpy, fat Z and pitches like he normally does.

[UMFan83]

He's a #2 guy at best. Flashes of greatness mixed in with epic meltdowns.

 

I think Z is the epitome of what an ideal number 2 for a good team would be. Very good stuff. Shows flashes of dominance, but isn't consistent enough to be relied on as an ace.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

The Cubs rode Z hard when he was young, and he's a high effort guy.

 

I really wish we could develop AND maintain an ace level starting pitcher...It'd really help this team stop the whole losing thing.

[imb]

The Cubs rode Z hard when he was young, and he's a high effort guy.

 

I really wish we could develop AND maintain an ace level starting pitcher...It'd really help this team stop the whole losing thing.

 

i really want one with a HAMMER CURVE

[SouthSideRyan]

I wish people would stop using made up rotation slots to describe how good a pitcher is.

[mcgoobs]

The big difference appears to be that the 2003 Zambrano was better at keeping HRs from flying out of the ballpark. He went from 9 HR in 214 IP in 2003 to 23 HR in 216 IP in 2007. His GB/FB ratio was 1.4, by 2007 was 0.9.

[UMFan83]

I wish people would stop using made up rotation slots to describe how good a pitcher is.

 

It's just another way to group pitchers in terms of level of talent. I don't see the issue.

[treebird]

I wish people would stop using made up rotation slots to describe how good a pitcher is.

 

It's just another way to group pitchers in terms of level of talent. I don't see the issue.

 

let's keep it simple. ace means one, so your ace is you number one starter. there are thirty teams, and in the theoretical universe of "this guy's an ace, this guy's a three" or whatever, each team will get one of each pitcher, so we need thirty aces. let's even keep it so simple that we just use era to decide who the aces are. whoever was in the top thirty of era among starting pitchers in the major leagues is an ace.

 

carlos zambrano's era of 3.77 was good for number 30 in the majors. ACE MATERIAL

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I wish people would stop using made up rotation slots to describe how good a pitcher is.

 

It's just another way to group pitchers in terms of level of talent. I don't see the issue.

 

let's keep it simple. ace means one, so your ace is you number one starter. there are thirty teams, and in the theoretical universe of "this guy's an ace, this guy's a three" or whatever, each team will get one of each pitcher, so we need thirty aces. let's even keep it so simple that we just use era to decide who the aces are. whoever was in the top thirty of era among starting pitchers in the major leagues is an ace.

 

carlos zambrano's era of 3.77 was good for number 30 in the majors. ACE MATERIAL

 

The whole identifying pitchers by imaginary rotation slot thing is stupid, but when people do it, they usually have an implied "on a good team." The 30th best pitcher may be a No. 1 somewhere, but he's not a No. 1 on most good teams.

[Tyrant]

John Lannan is a #1. Jon Lester is a #2.

[Uber]

Ah the footnotes of baseball history..

[Soul]

I wish people would stop using made up rotation slots to describe how good a pitcher is.

 

It's just another way to group pitchers in terms of level of talent. I don't see the issue.

 

Because it starts up a lot of semantic arguments that don't really mean much.