NFBC Content Panel: Top 25 Starting Pitchers

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 5:42 pm

Yah, to both of you, easy way to sort this out. Qualifying pitchers last year, any stat service, 1.13 is fifth right after 1.10 and 1.11 which are virtually identical to 1.13. 3rd, 4th, 5th all = elite. We are talking about the top 7. This is # 5.

As for the whole argument about how he does get K's and yet his ERA is more valuable because it comes in more innings, I have no idea how that does not support my argument.

And I'm still waiting to find out why Webb's lower K rate is relevant. Compare him to, say, Sabathia who gets more K's/9.

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:58 pm

Tradesman Kettlers sure sounds like he knows what he's talking about.

Brandon Webb's 1.13 whip is very solid but "not ELITE". You also have to take into account that this was Webb's best year by far and could be tough to duplicate this year. I think he regresses a little bit to the tune of a 3.40 e.r.a. - 14 wins - 1.20 whip. I mean, this guy generally has given up a lot of hits in his career and it'll be tough for him to keep that whip under the 1.20's.

As I'm throwing out my prediction for Webb and thinking about where he was ranked, Cole Hamels strikes me as a player who could EASILY have a better year than Webb. Of course there is a health risk, but if Hamels can stay healthy, he has dominant stuff to go along with a Phillies team that cam give him some serious run support.

I'm kind of surprised he doesn't get more attention.

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 1:24 am

Wow! This is a tough room and you guys are tough graders.

Over the course of a 33 game, 235 IP season, if Webb had allowed 10 less walks or hits or any combination there of, he would have moved from merely superhuman (1.13 WHIP for a starter and there were only nine guys with 100 or more IP had better WHIPs last year and three of those had higher ERA's, seven had fewer K's, only Santana had more wins, and Webb threw more innings than all nine of who only three had 200+ IP) to "Elite" of 1.09!

Just pulling your respective chains just a bit, but I am glad I do not work for any of you. I just don't think my work product would measure up!

Tradesman Kettleers · Post by **Tradesman Kettleers** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 1:20 pm

In 2004,

R. Johnson 245.67IP .900WHIP 2.601ERA 290K

J. Santana 228 .921 2.605 265

B. Sheets 237 .983 2.696 264

C. Schilling 226.67 1.063 3.256 203

J. Schmidt 225 1.076 3.200 251

In 2005,

P. Martinez 217.00IP .949WHIP 2.820ERA 208K

R. Halladay 141.67 .960 2.414 108

J. Santana 231.67 .971 2.875 238

F. Hernandez 84.33 .986 2.668 77

R. Clemens 211.33 1.008 1.874 185

A. Pettite 222.33 1.030 2.388 171

J. Peavy 203.33 1.044 2.882 216

C. Carpenter 241.67 1.055 2.830 213

R. Harden 128 1.062 2.531 121

B. Sheets 156.67 1.066 3.332 141

Now these are what I call ELITE level performances. Yes, you can remove those who didn't reach the 200IP plateau, but you would still have 5 guys in 2005 who were truly ELITE. Was 2006 an aberration for Pitching performance? Time will tell. Did MLB screw around with the ball in 2006? I don't know. But, I am not ready to lower MY OWN EXPECTATIONS for what I consider ELITE performance just yet. I believe Webb won a Cy Young in an off-year for pitching. Was B. Webb's performance "ELITE" in terms of 2006? I'd have to say yes. Was his performance "ELITE" in even recent historical terms? I'd have to say emphatically NO!!

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:37 am

I understand your point.

Most of our differences are probably semantics and style. Would any of us liked to have had Webb on our team in '06? Without question. Would any of us like to have the same results in '07 on our team? Absolutely. Is such a performance more than adequate to anchor a staff? Again, yes.

eddiejag · Post by **eddiejag** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:12 am

Look at Jason Schimdt's 2004 season , especially 251 K'S.He fooled a lot of people the next year, including myself.He SUCKED THE NEXT , with a 4and half era , and shitty whip.Anytime you take a pitcher in the first 3 rounds you are gambling.This also applies to Sheets who did the same act,and last year the top closer going into last year was Lidge. Now go get your pithers early, because you will miss them.

This rule doesnt include SANTANA.

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:18 am

Originally posted by eddiejag:

Look at Jason Schimdt's 2004 season , especially 251 K'S.He fooled a lot of people the next year, including myself.He SUCKED THE NEXT , with a 4and half era , and shitty whip.Anytime you take a pitcher in the first 3 rounds you are gambling.This also applies to Sheets who did the same act,and last year the top closer going into last year was Lidge. Now go get your pithers early, because you will miss them.

This rule doesnt include SANTANA. It is old news, but just for grins, do you remember where you had Schmidt ranked going into last year after his bad year in '05? I had him for a bit of a come-back and picked him with the 12th pick of the 6th round to anchor my staff. Payed off pretty well though he was unlucky in wins (as was the rest of my damn staff).

eddiejag · Post by **eddiejag** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:58 am

KING EDWARDS, after the 2005 season i wasnt going with him, he also had a history of injury.Where you got him his stats were about right for a 7th round pick. HE still walk's to many guys for me , 80 last year, and he's getting older .

Here's what the SPORTING NEWS WRITE'S.

With his K'S and velocity on decline, Schimdt has fallen to No. 4 Status.

AND SHANDLER , HAS FALLEN FROM ELITE, but he'll remain solid if healthy. THAT'S A BIG IF.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:44 am

There was nothing aberrant about 2006. It was similar to the years leading up to it with the exception of 2005, which was clearly aberrant. Anyone who uses three year samples knows that.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:15 am

Originally posted by bjoak:

There was nothing aberrant about 2006. It was similar to the years leading up to it with the exception of 2005, which was clearly aberrant. Anyone who uses three year samples knows that. That is certainly factually correct- there is the exception to every rule- Schmidt may be the exception to that rule for me. He seems to me at this stage to be a guy who needs to be physically 100% to get the mechanics necessary to be succesful. I will gladly admit to Big Dogging it (defined as having no facts to back up my opinion) on this one- just my opinion. I will avoid him.

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:50 am

Originally posted by eddiejag:

KING EDWARDS, after the 2005 season i wasnt going with him, he also had a history of injury.Where you got him his stats were about right for a 7th round pick. HE still walk's to many guys for me , 80 last year, and he's getting older .

Here's what the SPORTING NEWS WRITE'S.

With his K'S and velocity on decline, Schimdt has fallen to No. 4 Status.

AND SHANDLER , HAS FALLEN FROM ELITE, but he'll remain solid if healthy. THAT'S A BIG IF. I thought Schmidt was a good target in '06, but not so much for '07. I am not one of those that thinks Chavez Ravine (and its "peuter gray" skies) is as much of a pitchers park anymore as others do (the Dodgers have just had good pitching staffs) and is certainly not on par with AT&T in SF. He put up some good numbers and went deep in a lot of games (7.0+ IP in 17 of 32 games) which is good because he only had four wins out of the other 15. He did some heavy lifting in the middle of the season, then his PC moderated, but the results over his last eight games were troubling as he had less than a 2:1 K to BB ratio and never gave up fewer than three earned runs (including the two starts where he could not make it out of the fourth and fifth innings respectively).

Right round, right roster mix, maybe. But Schmidt will probably not be on my team next year.

[ February 01, 2007, 12:51 PM: Message edited by: Edwards Kings ]

eddiejag · Post by **eddiejag** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:50 am

I agree with both you guys, i wont be looking for Schimdt , because of age, walks, new team , history of injury, all this is just too much risk.BUT if im up in the 10th round and he's there, i might gamble considering his AVG DRAFT POSITION.Schimdt went 9th round pick 3 in the championship mag draft, i can see him even going higher.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 8:22 am

Chavez Ravine has always been a plus home run park. Overall, it was a pitcher's park primarily from the extra foul pop outs. It has lost some of that with the renovation a couple years back.