Randy Wells in 2012

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The Cespedes thread got distracted by this, and I think it's an interesting case.

 

There's two ways to look at Randy Wells for 2012:

 

The positive spin

He was 3.5 WAR pitcher in 2010 and 2011, and his 2012 can be written off to injuries that never let him get into a rhythm. He looked like he had it back in an excellent August stretch run.

 

The negative spin

This one's mine. I've always been a Wells skeptic. He's got a mediocre fastball and he doesn't strike out a lot of guys, which I don't think gives him a lot of margin for error and makes him a poor bet to sustain any success. He was absolutely terrible last season outside of August, and his August numbers were fueled by a .181 BABIP.

 

Throw in the wildcard of how he's 29 years old but relatively inexperienced as a pitcher, and I'd be interested in hearing people's projections and expectations of him in 2012.

[Guest]

In 2009 and 2010, Randy was a decent back of the rotation pitcher. He kept a low strikeout rate, which limited his ceiling, but he didn’t walk many and was ok at keeping the ball in the park. This kind of profile made him a perfectly acceptable option to eat innings. He never had a whole lot of margin for error, though. In 2011, he struck out fewer batters, walked more and nearly doubled the allowed home run rate. His pitch data doesn’t look pretty, either. He lost a tick and a half off his fastball from the year before. His swinging strike percentage also dropped significantly. Not to mention he suffered from shoulder issues and is a big injury risk going forward.

 

You know what happens when a marginal pitcher declines in all of those areas? He gets replaced.

 

Link. :D

[Magnetic Curses]

that sirahhh guy is a dope

[Hairyducked Idiot]

In 2009 and 2010, Randy was a decent back of the rotation pitcher. He kept a low strikeout rate, which limited his ceiling, but he didn’t walk many and was ok at keeping the ball in the park. This kind of profile made him a perfectly acceptable option to eat innings. He never had a whole lot of margin for error, though. In 2011, he struck out fewer batters, walked more and nearly doubled the allowed home run rate. His pitch data doesn’t look pretty, either. He lost a tick and a half off his fastball from the year before. His swinging strike percentage also dropped significantly. Not to mention he suffered from shoulder issues and is a big injury risk going forward.

 

You know what happens when a marginal pitcher declines in all of those areas? He gets replaced.

 

Link. :D

 

I like it!

 

In 2009 and 2010, Randy was a decent back of the rotation pitcher. He kept a low strikeout rate, which limited his ceiling, but he didn’t walk many and was ok at keeping the ball in the park. This kind of profile made him a perfectly acceptable option to eat innings. He never had a whole lot of margin for error, though. In 2011, he struck out fewer batters, walked more and nearly doubled the allowed home run rate. His pitch data doesn’t look pretty, either. He lost a tick and a half off his fastball from the year before. His swinging strike percentage also dropped significantly. Not to mention he suffered from shoulder issues and is a big injury risk going forward.

 

You know what happens when a marginal pitcher declines in all of those areas? He gets replaced.

 

That's right in line with where I am on him.

[9YRPLAN]

if hes healthy hes about as good as i expect to do in the 5 slot next year.

[scarey]

He was absolutely terrible last season outside of August, and his August numbers were fueled by a .181 BABIP.

 

I never understood how anyone could in good conscience evaluate a BABIP without considering line drive percentage as well.

 

Personally, I don't see the harm in giving him the opportunity to pitch on the back end of the rotation again. Barring injuries, I expect production similar to '09/'10. If he doesn't get back there by the end of 2012, I'm fine looking for other options (hopefully in house as I hate paying a premium on 4/5 spot pitchers).

[WrigleyField 22]

What are the options if he isn't our fifth starter. Can he be sent to AAA as an extra arm or is pretty much a waive or keep scenario?

[jersey cubs fan]

I never had any faith in him when he was doing well, so I really don't have any faith in him going forward either. But I wouldn't freak out if he started the year as the 5th guy with better options waiting in the wings.

[jersey cubs fan]

What are the options if he isn't our fifth starter. Can he be sent to AAA as an extra arm or is pretty much a waive or keep scenario?

 

he could always be a long man.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I never understood how anyone could in good conscience evaluate a BABIP without considering line drive percentage as well.

 

Pitchers don't really have total control over line drives either, so you could go a few levels deeper than that if you wanted and had the data. But it's enough for my purposes to know that he sucked most of the year but had a month where he gave up fewer runs but wasn't missing any more bats.

 

What are the options if he isn't our fifth starter. Can he be sent to AAA as an extra arm or is pretty much a waive or keep scenario?

 

He'd have to clear waivers (can't recall if it's revocable or irrevocable) in order to be sent down. Otherwise, it's trade or long man.

[Exile on Waveland]

It was a lot of fun and a great story when Wells was pitching well, but it seemed apparent to me there was a lot of smoke and mirrors to his success. I never expected that success to continue. He's pitched (basically) three years in the majors and gotten worse each year. Not only was he average/poor last year, but he only managed to be average/poor for 135 innings -- if you're going to be a replacement-level back-of-the-rotation starter, you at least need to reliably eat innings.

 

I'm sure people will point to his first two years but baseball -- nay, sports in general -- is littered with people who overachieved for a year or two and regressed to their true talent level. It was laughable last year when people favorably compared Wells to Garza; I don't think expecting Wells to miraculously be the 3-win pitcher he was his first two years is much better. Wells should, obviously, be allowed to compete for a rotation spot. I would be disappointed if he's guaranteed a spot, though.

[Tracer Bullet]

I never had any faith in him when he was doing well, so I really don't have any faith in him going forward either. But I wouldn't freak out if he started the year as the 5th guy with better options waiting in the wings.

 

Why would better options be waiting in the wings? If we had better options, wouldn't they be in the rotation?

[jersey cubs fan]

I never had any faith in him when he was doing well, so I really don't have any faith in him going forward either. But I wouldn't freak out if he started the year as the 5th guy with better options waiting in the wings.

 

Why would better options be waiting in the wings? If we had better options, wouldn't they be in the rotation?

 

Well, Cashner for one is doubtful to be ready to be a major league starter on Opening Day. I'm thinking something like him still stretching out in the bullpen or Iowa, or something along those lines. Basically I'm not counting on 6 months of 30 plus starts with solid results out of Wells. But he could holder his own until somebody else proves ready or they make a deal.

[Tracer Bullet]

I never had any faith in him when he was doing well, so I really don't have any faith in him going forward either. But I wouldn't freak out if he started the year as the 5th guy with better options waiting in the wings.

 

Why would better options be waiting in the wings? If we had better options, wouldn't they be in the rotation?

 

Well, Cashner for one is doubtful to be ready to be a major league starter on Opening Day. I'm thinking something like him still stretching out in the bullpen or Iowa, or something along those lines. Basically I'm not counting on 6 months of 30 plus starts with solid results out of Wells. But he could holder his own until somebody else proves ready or they make a deal.

I see. Agreed.

[sneakypower]

It was a lot of fun and a great story when Wells was pitching well, but it seemed apparent to me there was a lot of smoke and mirrors to his success. I never expected that success to continue. He's pitched (basically) three years in the majors and gotten worse each year. Not only was he average/poor last year, but he only managed to be average/poor for 135 innings -- if you're going to be a replacement-level back-of-the-rotation starter, you at least need to reliably eat innings.

 

I'm sure people will point to his first two years but baseball -- nay, sports in general -- is littered with people who overachieved for a year or two and regressed to their true talent level. It was laughable last year when people favorably compared Wells to Garza; I don't think expecting Wells to miraculously be the 3-win pitcher he was his first two years is much better. Wells should, obviously, be allowed to compete for a rotation spot. I would be disappointed if he's guaranteed a spot, though.

you really missed the point if you thought they were being compared strictly as pitchers

 

the point was that Wells' effectiveness combined with his cost-efficiency made him arguably nearly as valuable a commodity as Garza; of course he suffered some arm injuries last season and Garza had a breakout season so things have indubitably changed

[Exile on Waveland]

It was a lot of fun and a great story when Wells was pitching well, but it seemed apparent to me there was a lot of smoke and mirrors to his success. I never expected that success to continue. He's pitched (basically) three years in the majors and gotten worse each year. Not only was he average/poor last year, but he only managed to be average/poor for 135 innings -- if you're going to be a replacement-level back-of-the-rotation starter, you at least need to reliably eat innings.

 

I'm sure people will point to his first two years but baseball -- nay, sports in general -- is littered with people who overachieved for a year or two and regressed to their true talent level. It was laughable last year when people favorably compared Wells to Garza; I don't think expecting Wells to miraculously be the 3-win pitcher he was his first two years is much better. Wells should, obviously, be allowed to compete for a rotation spot. I would be disappointed if he's guaranteed a spot, though.

you really missed the point if you thought they were being compared strictly as pitchers

 

the point was that Wells' effectiveness combined with his cost-efficiency made him arguably nearly as valuable a commodity as Garza; of course he suffered some arm injuries last season and Garza had a breakout season so things have indubitably changed

 

Of course they were being compared as pitchers. They are pitchers, after all, what else would they be compared as? Here are some quotes from the first four pages of the Garza trade threat:

 

 

"[Garza] and Gorzelanny have a lot of similarities, but we're aggressively shopping one and trying to acquire the other?" (OK, not Wells, but still)

 

"Why on earth would we trade Wells for Garza?"

 

"[Garza to Wells is] really not that much of an upgrade, and when you factor in the salary difference between the two, it makes little sense for the Cubs to make that trade."

 

"Again, his ERA+ and WAR was worse than Wells last season. Since ERA+ is calculated using league ERA and adjusts for ballparks, I fail to see how he's much of an upgrade. "

 

"I really don't see the positive behind dealing Wells for Garza."

 

"And what reason do we have to believe that Garza will be much better than Wells from here on out? He hasn't been to this point."

 

 

Obviously, any comparison between players will factor in cost. Cost was often a factor when making the Wells-Garza comparison; however, the Wells-is-as-good-as-Garza point was made nearly/just as often. The thread became a discussion if Wells-for-Garza was a fair trade and posters said no, often independent of salary/acquisation concerns. People specifically said Garza was not an upgrade over Wells. Sorry, but that's comparing them as pitchers.

 

Regardless, your second paragraph is pretty much the point, actually. Garza was always a candidate for a break-out season. Wells was always a candidate for a break-down season (either in performance or durability -- he had never pitched more than 131.1 innings prior to his first season starting with the Cubs). That thread was not a shining moment in this board's history.