Tim Dierkes of MLBTR has done a great job of breaking down this year’s FA Pitchers market in this article: Free Agent Market: Starting Pitchers
Tim has ranked these pitchers according to many different stats from ERA to Highest Ground Ball Ratio.
Taking it a step further for TRDMB discussion I have taken the leaders of each category and given points to each of the top 5. 5 points for 1st place, 4 for 2nd….
When the list was tallied you would be surprised at some of the results.
Piniero 23
Marquis 15
Wolf 15
Lackey 12
Harden 12
Bedard 10
Smoltz 7
Washburn 6
Penny 5
Padilla 3
Pavano 3
Looper 3
Johnson 2
Garland 2
Pettitte 1
Now if you adjusted that for age and FA status by adding 5 points for under 30 and taking away 5 for TYPE A.
Lackey would have 7 points, Wolf would have 10 points, and Harden would stay at 12 as he is a TYPE A and under 30.
So what does this say? Maybe not much. It does show that Piniero is having an unbelievable season that most likely is not sustainable. What it also shows me is there is no dominant pitcher in this group that does not come with question marks. If the Mets look to acquire a mid-rotation starter the choice may not be as easy as first thought.
32 comments
CaseStreet
9/25/2009-10:23am at 10:23 am (UTC -4)
I think the real question is, What would the Yankees do?
CaseStreet
9/25/2009-4:19pm at 4:19 pm (UTC -4)
seriously though, I really wish Omar can find his inner Cashman and just go out and get the big name free agents.
Say Lackey and Holliday, and leave Murph at 1B and a Santos/Thole platoon.
Would that make you happy?
trs86
9/25/2009-4:23pm at 4:23 pm (UTC -4)
I am not sure I am in on this one. The problem is that I was looking at our contracts, trying to figure out why we have only 2 bad contracts but tons of money tied up. Of course the Mets would not go over the luxury tax anyway but lets say Lackey and Holliday both take 5 years. That means we would have Johan’s, Wright’s and Reyes’ salary going up and then another 32-40M tied up in those two players. Talk about the Cubs, that would be it.
CaseStreet
9/25/2009-4:26pm at 4:26 pm (UTC -4)
True, which is why the Yanks are the only team that can pull off having top salary FA’s at basically every position.
trs86
9/25/2009-4:32pm at 4:32 pm (UTC -4)
The Cubs tried. My thing is the length of those contracts and how that basically makes them untradeable. Really, not that we would want to, but we could not trade Johan even without taking on another big contract. The same for Krod and Beltran…
CaseStreet
9/25/2009-4:38pm at 4:38 pm (UTC -4)
The key is to have ML ready prospects to be able to fill in the gaps. We already have 5 perennial All-Stars and should be surrounding them w/ a strong support squad of players whose less expensive contracts allow us to pay the big bucks to the All-Stars.
Imagine F-Mart had a strong full season at AAA. We wouldn’t be having a LF discussion.
Or imagine Murph had played a full season where he hit for a decent average, I’d be the first one to say Nick who?
trs86
9/25/2009-4:50pm at 4:50 pm (UTC -4)
True, but to look at the Phillies they have taken the quantity over quality mode. The have 9 players making over 5M but only 4 making over 10.
stickguy
9/25/2009-10:23am at 10:23 am (UTC -4)
couole of thoughts here.
1) I read that piece, and I think you would need to weight the catagories somehow to get a fair representation. Say, is hits per 9 worth the same as HR/fb ratio?
2) surpirsed to see lackey so low/mid pack, since he has developed this god like reputation.
3) I feel justified for being on the Harden bandwagon! Just not for a lot of years…
4) some of these guys have to be a bit of smoke and mirros. Like Piniero, can he possibly not regress?
5) I also feel it justified my off season stance that Garland stinks.
6) finally, and I don’t know how to do it, can you weight the rankings for a health facotr? A few of these guys have arm injuries to finish the season, so thta has to be a giant red flag.
trs86
9/25/2009-10:31am at 10:31 am (UTC -4)
Yeah I was thinking about the health issue. And no I don’t think I want to weight the categories. I think they all have merit.
What I would like to know is how it would look if you included every pitcher not just the FA ones. Then maybe you would get a better idea of their worth.
wannybackstra
9/25/2009-10:37am at 10:37 am (UTC -4)
Not weighting the categories is just silly. How can hits per 9 (which may also be affected by poor defense) or K rates possibly be of the same importance as average fastball velocity or number of pitches thrown?
Anything that results in Sidney Ponson (fastball velocity) being toward the top is obviously useless.
I can tell I’ll have to stay out of this thread today…
trs86
9/25/2009-10:41am at 10:41 am (UTC -4)
Agreed, but where would Ponson be on the list? At or near the bottom overall.
wannybackstra
9/25/2009-10:34am at 10:34 am (UTC -4)
Stick’s point 1) is the key as to why this exercise, while perhaps interesting, is pretty useless. It probably also explains his point 2).
Also, I have not looked at the article but I am guessing the stats used were not league and park adjusted. Therefore, it is silly to rank an AL 3.50 ERA as worse than a NL 3.30, for example.
trs86
9/25/2009-10:40am at 10:40 am (UTC -4)
Good point. Perhaps we can give a few points to AL pitchers. However, shouldn’t somethings stay the same? Like GB%?
Also, the 2nd ERA stat was indeed park adjusted.
Also, why are we to determine which stat is more valuable? If someone leads in K/9 does that not deserve recognition? Does it deserve more than the guy who leads in GB percentage?
DNDJohan aka kistics
9/25/2009-11:05am at 11:05 am (UTC -4)
If they cost the same who would you sign next year, Pineiro or Lackey?
Your answer should tell you that this analysis is bogus.
trs86
9/25/2009-11:12am at 11:12 am (UTC -4)
You also have to factor in career averages of course. AS I SAID in the write up, Piniero’s stats are most likely unsustainable.
DNDJohan aka kistics
9/25/2009-11:15am at 11:15 am (UTC -4)
I agree that Pineiro’s stats are unsustainable especially if he’s not with Dave Duncan. But to rank pitchers purely based on this year’s numbers are not a right way to analyze who is the best on the market.
trs86
9/25/2009-11:25am at 11:25 am (UTC -4)
Nope and as I said I agree. This is just another look at it.
trs86
9/25/2009-11:26am at 11:26 am (UTC -4)
“You also have to factor in career averages of course”
CaseStreet
9/25/2009-10:54am at 10:54 am (UTC -4)
Marquis does pretty well in most of the categories, but you know he’s not gonna match those numbers next year.
I say go for the best available.
I want to see the Mets sign Lackey, Figgins (Crawford costs the same in salary plus prospects) and Nick Johnson.
wannybackstra
9/25/2009-11:01am at 11:01 am (UTC -4)
Crawford might have a higher transactional cost but isn’t he a better player? (that said, I don’t believe the Rays will even trade him much less do I think the Mets have the ammo to make such a deal)
DNDJohan aka kistics
9/25/2009-11:03am at 11:03 am (UTC -4)
I think the Mets have the ammo. I don’t think Omar will use that ammo though. If you were TB, wouldn’t you do FMart and young pitching prospect for Crawford?
wannybackstra
9/25/2009-11:18am at 11:18 am (UTC -4)
Probably not.
There will be a lot of teams interested in Crawford. And given F-Mart’s recent and current injury, I can’t imagine they’re too high on him.
The Mets might have the ammo to get the deal done. But they’ll have to measure that against what they’ll have left in the system.
trs86
9/25/2009-11:27am at 11:27 am (UTC -4)
Yeah, it just depends on who is on the market. Say the Yankee’s go out and get Holliday, the Braves Dye and the RedSox resign Bay then the market for Crawford does shrink some.
wannybackstra
9/25/2009-11:29am at 11:29 am (UTC -4)
Those teams might also try to trade for Crawford first rather than spend ridiculous money on long-term deals for three older players when they acquire a younger, more athletic player and then lock him up too.
The fatc of the matter is that no matter how you slice it, the Mets will not be left alone and handed Crawford in a silver platter. Not when he is making only $10m next year. A contender (or pretender) might just trade for him for the one year.
trs86
9/25/2009-11:32am at 11:32 am (UTC -4)
Sure they might. Never said it would be easy. I still think the Mets are in the discussion though. So the Yankee’s take Crawford, would that lower the price of Holliday? Maybe?
trs86
9/25/2009-11:33am at 11:33 am (UTC -4)
And if you are the Yankee’s do you value Crawford so much that you would trade prospects for him instead of just overpaying a FA the Yankee way? Besides for them I would actually think Figgins has more value as he can fill in other spots to give Aroid a break.
DNDJohan aka kistics
9/25/2009-11:00am at 11:00 am (UTC -4)
This analysis is completely bogus. If you were a GM who would you sign for one year if they cost the same. Andy Pettitte or Randy Wolf?
trs86
9/25/2009-11:13am at 11:13 am (UTC -4)
Wolf.
DNDJohan aka kistics
9/25/2009-11:16am at 11:16 am (UTC -4)
for one year?
wannybackstra
9/25/2009-11:19am at 11:19 am (UTC -4)
Of course, he ranked higher in more categories.
(wolf isn’t signing another one year deal anyway)
trs86
9/25/2009-11:24am at 11:24 am (UTC -4)
And Wanny, if you would notice I never said I what order I would pick from that list. There are common sense things that go into it. This is just another look at what is available.
I would still go
Lackey
Harden
Piniero
Marquis
But cost does play a role. Should Lackey get 6M more a year and 2 more years than some of the others? I don’t know.
trs86
9/25/2009-11:22am at 11:22 am (UTC -4)
Wolf has had two very good years, now if you factor in his potential injury then no I would not take him if he actually is injured.