premium blogad:
blogads:
advertisement:
sitemeter:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
February 9, 2009
2008 New York Mets Pitcher’s WAR
Last week I took a look at the hitters wins above replacement. This week, I’ll take a look at the pitchers. First, I’ll give an overview of my methodology for figuring out WAR which is slightly different then the calculations from Fangraphs and I’ll then present the chart. A brief note before I get started. The numbers are not park adjusted. The New York Mets have a 3 year weighted park factor of 0.97 so I might be overstating numbers a little bit. It should not make a huge difference but I wanted to point it out anyways. Figuring out a pitcher’s WAR was a lot different than hitters. The starting point for figuring out a pitcher’s WAR is his Fielding Independent Pitching or FIP. For those who are unfamiliar with FIP, it’s a measure of all things a pitcher is responsible for, namely walks, strikeouts and home runs. I been debating on whether to use FIP or not since I do believe that certain pitchers do have an ability to post low BABIP consistently, whereas FIP believes that is out of the pitcher’s control. I ultimately settled on FIP because when I did the hitter’s WAR, I factored in defense (balls in play) and if I did the same thing for pitchers, I would be double counting. Since FIP is a better predictor of future ERA than ERA itself, I decided this would be the best measure to use. I obtained each pitcher’s FIP from Fangraphs. Since we are looking at what happened last year, I used 2008 FIP, not future predicted FIP. Ok so we have a pitcher’s FIP, what’s next? We compare that FIP to the league average FIP which for the NL last year was 4.29. Since FIP is scaled to ERA, the league average FIP is exactly the same as the league average ERA. Now we need to convert this into a winning percentage for the pitcher. For example, if a player had a FIP of 4.29 and the league average is 4.29, he would have a winning percentage of .500. Anything below that number, the higher the win percentage, anything higher than that number the lower the winning percentage. To find the exact win percentage we will use the PythagoPat Formula. This is essentially the same as the Pythagorean Formula you see on various sites, except instead of using 2 as the exponent, it uses different numbers depending on the run environment, making it more accurate. To do the Formula, we take the pitcher’s FIP, add the league average FIP, and divide by .92. The reason we do this is because we need to scale it to all runs per game, not just earned runs. That gives us Runs Per Game. We take this figure and raise it to the .28 power to get the exponent we want to use. This exponent is usually around 1.87, pretty close to the 2 we use in the Pythagorean Formula. Once we get the exponent, we perform the calculations just like the Pythagorean Formula to get the pitcher’s win percentage. Once we get the pitcher’s win percentage, we need to see how much better he was compared to league average. The NL replacement level for starters is .390 and for relievers its .480. An NL starter with a .500 winning percentage would be .11 wins better than replacement level. We also need to factor in playing time so the exact formula becomes (Win Pct – Replace Level) * IP/9. That will give you the pitcher’s WAR. Once you get the pitcher’s WAR, you simply multiply it by 4.4 to get the pitcher’s value. With closers, there also a bonus WAR based on win percentage. The closers get an additional bonus for every win percentage that’s over .580. So here’s the chart with all Mets pitchers from 2008:
After looking at this chart it’s easy to see why the Mets would not want to bring Pedro back. He gave the Mets almost zero production last year above replacement level and yet the Mets paid them 11.8 Million dollars. On the flipside, Mike Pelfrey being under the Mets control has done more than make up for Pedro’s contract. John Maine was also a bargain given the fact he’s still under control as well. From a reliever standpoint, I’d have to say the two huge disappointments were Aaron Heilman and Scott Schoeneweis. I knew they were bad last year but combined they gave us a WAR of -0.68 in about 133 innings. Just by getting rid of those two members without replacing them gives the Mets an additional .68 wins. Lastly, since there’s been a lot of Ollie Perez talk lately with the signing of his contract I thought I’d take a look at him. If we drop his win pct by 10% each year, drop his IP by 10% each year and add 10% salary each year for $ per win we get:
Total paid by the Mets = 3/36 Total the Mets should have paid = 3/16.69 Perez is young and it’s quite possible he performs better than expected but he would have to pretty much put him the best 3 years of his career to justify the contract. 44 Responses to “2008 New York Mets Pitcher’s WAR”Leave a ReplyYou must be logged in to post a comment. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Say what you will about overpaying a bit for Perez, I’d much rather have him than the broken Sheets or the creakingly ancient Lowe.
Of the 2/3 starters out there, he was the best call.
Creakingly ancient Lowe?
The same guy that has been over 180 innings in 7 straight seasons? The guy who is about .50 runs better in career ERA then Perez?
Listen I like having young players as well but your bias towards older players clouds your judgement.
Well, that brings an interesting question, doesn’t it, John?
Assume that, given typical age progression, Ollie stays the same or gets a little better over the course of his contract. Similarly, Lowe gets a little worse over the course of his contract (not saying he WILL. Just saying it’s typical). What do their expected WARs look like then?
John, for the same contract I would agree with you, but for 3 mil more per year and 4 years instead of 3? I would MUCH rather have Perez for his 27/28/29/30 seasons than Lowe for his 37/38/39/40 seasons.
Why in this analysis are we assuming that Perez will be 10% worse each of the next three years, he finished last season strong and last year was a good step down from his 07 performance. Why are you assuming a pitcher entering the prime of his career will only get worse from here on out?
BTW, I also get frustrated with the love affair with Lowe, he would have been a solid #2 for the mets next year and the year after, but we are talking about a pitcher who has been on a decent Dodgers team and was under 500 in two of his four years on the club. Admittedly the 05 Dodgers were aweful, but he was around 500 for an over 500 team for 3 years. I am not saying that makes him a “bad” pitcher, but in terms of overpaying, I think in the end, the Braves will spend a lot more per win out of Lowe than the Mets will for Perez.
Not to mention the Braves are in a foolish situation for signing a guy like Lowe. Lowe made a lot more sense for a team looking to win over the next two years and the Braves are a lot closer to rebuilding than winning a World Series right now.
Considering that Lowe just put up a 3.26 FIP its hard to imagine him slowing down that much during a 3 year deal.
Considering that Ollie only had one year he posted a FIP under 4, its hard to imagine him catching up.
Let’s look at Lowe. I won’t use the 3.26…..let’s just use his career average of 3.76. He’s faced over 8000 batters so I think thats a decent starting point.
He’s been around 190-200 innings the last few years so lets say he pitchers 190 innings.
The 3.76 FIP makes him a .560 pitcher….giving him a WAR of 3.59 for 2009. Following typical age patterns we drop the innings by 10%, the win pct by .01% and increase the salary 10% each year. We get:
Year Win IP WAR $per $FA
2009 .560 190 3.59 4.40 15.80 M
2010 .550 171 3.04 4.84 14.71 M
2011 .540 154 2.57 5.32 13.67 M
2012 .530 141 2.19 5.85 12.81 M
Total Lowe Value 3/44 or 4/57
He signed for 4/60
Not bad.
Notice that even in the last year…….it’s still better than Perez’s 08. In fact, Ollie has only had ONE SEASON over 2.2 WAR…….thats in 04 when he posted a 4.5 WAR. Other then that he’s been less than 2.2.
Now its quite possible a light can turn on and he can turn into something special, but Lowe was the more proven commodity and better pitcher. If we went 3/36 for ollie we definitely should have gone 3/44 or 4/60 for Lowe.
His FIP in 2008 was 4.68….his career FIP was 4.67. Looking at other projection systems:
Chrone 4.97
Marcel 4.52
Bill James 4.85
Two out of the three think he’s going to be WORSE than his average. You find a similar pattern if you look at ERA.
Pitchers when they get older then to get better by not walking as many batters as they once did. The thing about Perez is he really hasnt given an indication of that ever happening. The big reason he was so successful in 04 was the 3.72 BB/9 rate. The problem is that number isnt improving, its getting worse, and not by just a lil bit but alot. It was 4.02 in 2007 (which isnt great but decent for him) but it spiked to 4.87 last year.
Also, his strikeout rate went down. The 8.35 K/9 is the lowest ever for Ollie. We cannot assume that just because a pitcher is entering year 27-31 that he’s going into his prime. Thats the typical age pattern but there’s always exceptions. Looking at his numbers, he’s going south. There’s really nothing to suggest that he’s going to turn it around and even if he did it would have to be one big turnaround to match Lowe’s production.
Not sure why a 27 year old pitcher would have such a dramatic increase over a three year period. Doesn’t make sense, at that age most players are still improving, not regressing.
Two points — one Ollie has a low BAA every year, so FIP is always going to undervalue him.
Two — Lowe’s numbers last year were better than his previous 3 seasons. Funny, a 36 year old having a dominant year in his contract walk year.
Lowe is going to have a major step back next year, not to mention the years he is 38 and 39.
john, thanks for these write-ups. They’re great food for thought.
Thats not necessary true. Its more true for hitters than pitchers mostly.
This is true but we can look at ERA if you’d like and we’d find the same thing.
Most do. Most perform better in walk years. And then they have a set back the next year. It happens more often then not. But if you look, i wasnt even using his 2008 numbers, I was using his career average.
I don’t know about major step backwards, he wont be as good as 08, but I don’t think its unreasonable to think he can be his career average in FIP and ERA which is still higher then Ollie.
I think people are overrating the decline Lowe would see just because of age. Usually heavy strike out pitchers are the ones that see heavy declines with age because of lost velocity. Lowe is a contact pitcher and they usually age less drastically. Even if Lowe does decline unless Ollie does a complete 180, and like has been pointed out there’s no evidence to suggest anything like that will happen, there’s no reason to think Ollie will be more valuable over the course of his contract than Lowe.
So lets get this strait, when looking at Lowe going into his 37/38/39/40 years we are assuming he will maintain his career average which includes dramatic spike years in his prime. But a pitcher entering his 27-29 years should see a THIRTY % decrease in his performance when he has had two years above his average (especially if you focus on the end of last year and not his rough start).
Sure, sounds like a perfect game plan.
I am still very much in the boat that I would much rather have Perez for 3/36 (heck if for no other reason than I get a pitcher in his biggest contract year of his career at age 30 instead of Lowe who will be looking to retire at 40).
I’m not even saying he’s going to maintain his career averages. I’m saying that he’s already so far ahead of perez in terms of value that perez would have to have a huge ascent and lowe a huge decline for perez to be more valuable over the next 3 years. Even if Lowe declines by 10% each of the next 3 years and Perez maintains or improves by 10%, which there’s pretty much zero evidence to say that will happen, Lowe would still be more valuable over the next 3 years.
I totally agree with this, but given their respective ages, I think there is a fair chance of this happening
BTW John — I do like this article.
I differ from you in how to value Ollie v. Lowe, but over all I thought this was an awesome read.
I would nominate as the article of the off season!
Not being as valuable as Lowe is no shame, I would imagine most pitchers arent. Lowe is very underrated, really a low 1 by performance. Most people dont think of him that way.
However, he did pitch in Dodger stadium.
Im sure the Mets would have jumped at 3/36 for him…they thought they were the high bidder, gambled and lost. However, saying we should go another year (40 years old) and spend $24 million more is debatable.
As for Perez, 27 year olds who have pitched successfully in NY are a rare commodity. He responded well to the new pitching coach, anyone who actually watches the games saw the difference - how he came more forward towards the plate, etc… Also unspoken is the big game pitching, Ollie was awesome in that respect last year. In Santana and Perez, we have arguably the best lefty lefty combo in baseball. Another added benefit is that given his high SO, high FB pitching style, you couls start say Murphy at 2B and rest Castillo. Im not a Castillo hater, but Murphy intrigues me there and I hope he’ll get some opportunity.
Ollie needs to improve his consistency and his control, and pitch into the 7th inning. If he does, there is no reason he cant be a 200 IP guy, and worth every penny of that contract. Another benefit is he’ll be 30 at the end of that contract, and we’ll have the chance to sign him again, Lowe will be retiring.
I have a couple issues with this, one, Perez has been much better since he left the bad situation in Pittsburg and other than a couple months last year has been better than anything John is predicting in his estimates. And Perezed pitched more innings last year than he has in a while but got stronger thoughout the season which gives me no reason to not at least expect similar performance over the next 3 years and ZERO reason to expect a 30% decline over the next three years.
As for Lowe, I think a drop off from 08 would be almost expected in 09 especially with a lesser situation to pitch in (a lot closer to the 05 Dodgers than the 08 Dodgers). And he will be going till his 40th year on the contract.
I’m not predicting a 30% decline……that would be quite insane. Going from a .459 pitcher to a .439 isnt anywhere near a 30% decline.
And if I went the other way…… .459 to .479 he’s still WAY BEHIND. Its not even close to be honest. Or heck lets go .459/.479/.499 or .459/.489/.519………its STILL NOT CLOSE.
Also I just wanted to make note, I’m not really predicting anything. I’m taking predications from projection systems that have pretty good track records in predicting performance. At the very best, Marcel has him 4.52……I’m not the only one that doesnt think he’ll do well.
He only had his one good season in pittsburgh. Yes he was better once he left but be honest, he couldn’t have been much worse or else he would be pitching in AAA right now. He regressed back to the mean.
Thats my point. If he was .459 in 2008 and he performed at the SAME RATE…..then he is defintely NOT WORTH the money.
I guess I just have a hard time believing that Perez is a .459 pitcher, he was 15-10 in 07 and 10-7 last year. I guess we just don’t see the same pitcher. You seem to see Traxsel, I see a young lefty with a ton of talent that has been better than his career here, especially outside of the first couple of months last year.
I see room for growth and a pitcher we have during his prime of his career. I would have loved to have Lowe as our number 2 the next couple of years, but for the contracts the two signed, I will take Perez.
great article
great thread
john = da man
I hope Ollie really does well. i’m a skeptic, i love the guy, even have his jersey, but the walks are just painfully bad. i honestly think its part of his game. he’s “effectively wild”. i think his BAA will go up if his BB/9 goes down, just a hunch. we’ll see how it plays out.
i think we made a big mistake never really going harder after lowe. we ended up offering more $’s to ollie then we ever did to lowe. that’s bothersome. but it is what it is. go ollie. prove the doubters wrong.
Dep, I thought we offered the 3/36 to Lowe.
I do want to say, it was an excellent article and I only really disagreed with the last paragraph.
This has been a fun thread :)
I think what’s clear here is that if Omar is paying Ollie for past performance, he’s a moron, and got fleeced.
What seems more likely is that he’s paying for potential, in which case he’s not a moron, but still got somewhat fleeced (as potential has always come cheaper for guys who’ve been in the bigs as long as Ollie).
The only statistical reason we have for any optimism regarding Ollie is his high K rate. That is a part of the equation for successful pitching that some pitchers simply can’t muster. So Ollie’s potential is real.
Will he ever harness his potential? Well, most signs point toward “no”, or, more precisely, “yes, for a time; and then he’ll lose it again.” Let’s just hope he’s on a roll when we make it to the postseason.
For shame, Sweetlew! That ain’t how it works. BAA is a product of K rate, and FIP factors in K rate quite heavily.
If Ollie had a BAA way lower than his K rate would suggest, then I’d have to explain why that’s luck… but he doesn’t, so I don’t. :)
The comparison to Lowe is really off. Lowe isn’t worth 4 years and over $60m. (Don’t get me wrong, I would have loved to have seen him on the 2009 Mets, but not for that kind of monetary commitment.) He’s going to fall off by way more than 10% in Atlanta. Just look at his Home/Away splits over the past few years in LA. He really benefited from pitching half of the time in a big-time pitchers’ park. 3-Year ERA and WHIP = 2.95 and 1.10 at HOME and 4.24 and 1.35 AWAY. The difference was even more pronounced in 2008 (2.30 and 0.93 vs. 4.42 and 1.39).
Looking at ESPN’s Park Factors - http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor - Turner Field had the 9th most runs scored and Dodger Stadium had the 29th (of 30) most runs scored in 2008.
I could easily see Lowe have substantially worse numbers over the 4 years of his contract…not even taking into account his advancing age.
I will say that I refered to Lowe as creakingly old over the course of his contract. This year, who knows, he might be quite good.
But in the post-roid era, holy God, those last two years are gonna be ugly.
umm I think you have it backwards. Look at his splits, 4 months of a 4+ ERA, 3 months of a 5+ ERA. And as for being a big game pitcher I would think anyone who watched in September last year would remember him having 1 or 2 good games and then getting shelled multipld times, including a 3 inning effort against the nats.
I think there is a lot that people on both sides of this little debate can agree on here. I just hate it when people dig in on one side or the other.
I think I speak for most when I say that Derek Lowe projects to be better than Oliver Perez in 2009. He probably projects better in 2010 as well. The question which is being skirted about is whether Derek Lowe at 4/60 would have been a better deal than Ollie at 3/36. Aside from John throwing out some numbers, I don’t think that’s been discussed too much on point.
I think that we can fairly throw the projection systems for Ollie out the window (see my journal if you want to know why). The fact of the matter is that we’ve got to compare Derek Lowe at ages 37-40 and Ollie at ages 27-30. It would be nice if things progressed in straight lines and if the past could predict the future, but it can’t. Some of these were touched on above, but this is why the Ollie contract is better than the Lowe contract.
1. Oliver Perez is better than the projection systems indicate.
a) He’s been significantly better in his Mets career than in 2005-2006 (which would weigh into projections). In addition, he was 2007 Ollie for the majority of last season after a poor April-May.
b) He’s got good stuff, and K/9 indicates it.
c) He, and other strikeout pitchers, routinely beat their FIP projections.
d) He is entering his prime.
e) He costs one year and TWENTY FOUR MILLION dollars less.
f) Control generally improves with age, and his comparable players on B-R indicate an excellent chance that he be average and a decent chance that he improve.
2. Derek Lowe is going to regress.
a) His numbers were depressed by Dodger Stadium, a great pitchers park in a weak division.
b) He’ll now face the Mets, Phillies, and Marlins, top offenses in the NL, regularly.
c) He’s OLD — and if he doesn’t outright suck or get injured, he is going to regress.
d) The idea that sinkerballers age more gracefully than other kinds of pitchers is, as far as I can tell, just a rumor.
e) Sinkerballers are likely to give up a greater amount of unearned runs and do worse than their FIP would indicate because they put too many balls in play.
3. Even if Lowe is better (he might be), he would need to be significantly better to justify the contract disparity (he won’t)
I just wanted to say that I like Ollie Perez as well. I really don’t want that to get lost in this whole debate. I’m rooting hard for him. And of course Lowe as a brave, Im rooting against him lol. I didn’t mean to sound like I was totally against him lol.
Not exactly. I mean when using FIP to project future performance it accounts for the three things pitchers have most control over…that is strikeouts, walks and home runs allowed. There’s no question of Perez’s stuff (read my pitchfx article on him)…the problem is his FIP rates so highly because he walks everyone. If he can control this, then he becomes this dangerous pitcher. Problem is, he’s been around for awhile now and hasnt shown any consistency doing so.
I think this is where we differ the most and I understand your point. I mean pitcher’s will get better over time. The one’s that do stick around tend to because they realize their stuff is diminishing and they lower the walk rate. The problem I think is thinking that just because someone is at a magical age of 27, they will automatically turn it on. The rise is using a gradual one and perez hasnt shown that yet.
ESPN is BAD….real bad. We talked about it a bit in the link dump yesterday. The 3 year weighted average has dodgers park at 0.99 and atlanta at 1.00…..little to none difference. Jessica I think mentioned that in 2005 I think they added seats and its become less of a pitchers park since then.
He could have a tailoff, and then he wouldnt be worth 4/60 but I think the bigger problem I have is that Ollie is nowhere near 3/36. I guess when its all said and done I think we overpaid more for Ollie then we would have Lowe.
I don’t think we can necessarily throw the projections out the window. I do agree we need to be cautious with projection systems. I’m in the process right now of doing one for the 2009 Mets and while I use alot of numbers, I also use alot of what I feel might change. I mean take Mike Pelfrey. Wasnt good until this season. Changed his pitching philosophy (added another fastball) and its made a big difference. The thing is they try to estimate true talent levels but these levels on constantly changing.
I guess the question I would have tho is on what basis do you believe anything will change? I mean IMO if there’s no indication of things changing, wouldnt you be more likely to keep the current projections? His K rate went down, His BB rate went up. I could be wrong but even the velocity on the fastball declined. I guess what I’m trying to do is look at signs to say ok he will improve and dont see them. Its very unlikely he just turns on a switch.
a) Im not going to guess how they project. I KNOW marcels weighs the previous seasons more than the other ones and I think rightly so. As far as the other systems go, they never reveal the actual formula and without that it’s hard to know. They all use Regression to the Mean tho basically saying a pitcher’s true talent is anywhere between his career average and the mean (closer to career avg the more batters faced obviously).
b) He does have great stuff. No doubt about it. Even tho the K rate was the lowest in his career and I do think thats a concern, 8.35 is still very good.
c) It’s not so much a matter of beating the FIP projection or not. I mean if we look at ERA projections, it’s still not pretty.
d) He might not be entering in his prime. His prime may have been 2004. The only reason we have to believe that this is his prime is age but we havent seen anything from his numbers to indicate this.
e) Yep. Its alot less money. I think the main issue I have is looking at it without Lowe even factored in. It’s 20 Million overpay. It probably WONT be that high but to illustrate ollie would have to have his 2nd,3rd and 4th best seasons for it to pay off. Its possible, but again its hard for me to see that.
f) His control will improve. Especially as he losses on the fastball and realizes he needs this to stay in baseball. But again we are talking about being average…..a .500 pitcher shouldnt get 12M a year.
2a/b/c/d
All of this is factored in the projections…..the move to the NL East, the move from Dodger to Atlanta ballpark, the age adjustment….its all factored in any good system. His projected ERA and FIP are based on that. And the decline again is gradual, you dont see ppl falling off a cliff mostly.
e. Sinkballers also get more double plays and less extra base hits. Ideally, you’d want both perez’s K rate and lowe’s GB rate lol.
This is a pretty good discussion we got going here. Alot of people on both sides it seems.
As for Perez’s stuff, and whether he is entering his prime, I offer you:
Exhibit A (for Awesome):
Randy Johnson
Sandy Koufax
Both these lefties struggled early in their careers, turned corners, and became all-time greats. Randy Johnson dedicated himself to more consistent mechanics, and focused exclusively on one secondary pitch (slider), ditching his curve (and split/change?). So maybe there’s some hope for Ollie there, to develop focus and concentration in his late 20s the way Johnson did… of course, Johnson’s pure stuff might be the best of all time, and Ollie can’t compare to that.
As for Koufax, he described his revelation as “I stopped trying to make batters miss the ball and started trying to make them hit it.” This implies that he had the ability to command his pitches all along, which doesn’t sound like Ollie.
Exhibit B (for Bad):
Bobby Witt
Witt had great stuff and struck out a lot of batters. In his age 24-26 seasons, he was 3rd, 4th, and 2nd in the AL in K/9. He was wild from the start, but made progress there, dropping his BB/9 rate below 4.5 for the first time at age 26.
Alas, Witt never got his walk rate down lower than that, and he began fanning fewer as he aged. Despite being extremely healthy (missed 15 starts in his age 27 season and that’s it), Witt retired with a 142-157 record and a 4.83 ERA (compared to 4.38 league avg).
Who laughed and laughed when the Mariners gave Carlos Silva $12M/yr? I did. Well, someone should be laughing at us:
Silva (at signing)
Age 28, record 55-46, ERA+ 102
Perez
Age 27, record 55-60, ERA+ 96
Randy Johnson is an interesting case. His stuff was better than Ollie’s tho. But there was one interesting thing:
1991 BB/9 6.76
1992 BB/9 6.16
1993 BB/9 3.49
After moving to the d-backs in 1999 he was consistenly in the 2’s and sometimes even in the 1’s. An example of someone that “got it”. To be fair in 1988 when he came up he was at 2.42 (only 24 IP)….I dont know what minor league numbers he had but maybe with Johnson it was there all along. He had 4 years of bad BB/9 rates but then turned the corner. Perez time to turn the corner is starting to fade.
If I was to give the numbers:
4.80
5.47
3.72
6.12
5.43
4.02
4.87
What would you predict the next number to be? I’m thinking prehaps 4.5 and that might be on the generous side.
I’m hoping he can pull an RJ tho and turn it around.
Randy Johnson is also 6-10. I imagine that had a lot to do with his control problems, having to learn to consistently repeat his mechanics.
To me one difference between Silva and Perez is the reasons behind their good and bad seasons. Silva had a horrendous 06 year on a team that won 96 games and was very good outside of his pitching. He “rebounded” to be an average pitcher the following year for a team that was finding itself.
Perez was god awful for a god awful team that has one of the worst clubhouses in baseball in terms of getting players to win ballgames. He rebounded based on an exciting set of playoff games and a team and management that believed in him and put him in a better situation. Last year is troubling, but he did have a dominant 3 month stretch last season where he was the best pitcher on our team which is something Silva just can’t do.
If we can get 3 years like 07 out of Perez or even 2 years like 07 out of Perez and 1 like 08 I think the contract will be pretty good.
I also want to mention that I think the point about Lowe’s numbers being inflated (or deflated as is the case) because of Dodgers stadium and more importantly pitching in that division are pretty significant. It is telling that the home/away splits were so dramatic. He also got to face SF 4 times (for a 2.57 era), SD 3 times for a 1.4 era, Col 3 times for a 3.26 era and ari 5 times for 2.05 era. That is 15 of the 24 games he pitched last year against the worst offenses in the game. Meanwhile, against the east he had 1 game against Florida for a 5.4 era, and 1 game against Philly for a 4.26 era. Against the AL he also had 4 games and a 5.13 ERA.
So that to me is a pretty big factor that Lowe gets to replace 15 games against the worst offenses in baseball in a pitchers park with games against the Mets, Phillies and Marlins in a hitters park. You know, like Perez had to do in the last 2 years that we are comparing him to Lowe for.
That 24 was a typo, should have been 34.
That is something I don’t think gets reflected in the numbers. I wonder what the effect is for playing on a shitty team. For instance, Perez so far in his mets career has been known to be a “big game” pitcher…..he does well against atlanta, the yankees, philly. Its the awful teams he seems to do poorly against. I think being in a losing environment can lead to being complacant. I’m not saying this was the case with Perez in pittsburgh or not. I do think its an interesting topic tho.
As far as Lowe goes, there’s a stat and i’m not sure what site has it but Component ERA. It’s like ERA but factors ballparks as well as strength of competition. There’s definitely a difference between NL East and NL West. I do think that current projections factor it in tho so while thats a good reason his 2008 was so great, it’s probably not a valid reason for him being bad in 09. I mean he was at 3.26 last year and this year they predict 3.67 to 3.80 so they are predicting a much worse 09 than 08 but they still have him being well above average.
Hey, I am not even close to saying that Lowe will be “bad” next year, I just think this is something we have to keep in mind when comparing Lowe to Perez especially over the last two years.
I guess I just find it frustrating that people seem to think that there is zero chance (or close to it) that Perez could have a better year next year than Lowe. When in just 07 Perez did exactly that. Now, does that mean I am saying it is going to happen? No, but I just tend to think that if I have a pitcher who has pitched pretty well for my team, handled NY and all that goes with it, handled being on the “other” team in NY and pitched pretty well and is 27 years old. Versus another player who is 37 years old, has a much deeper and better track record, but wants 24 million dollars, I don’t think it is “Omar messing up” or “Omar misplaying his cards” and ending up with Perez.
Posted that a bit early.
To me I think Omar approached these two pitchers the way he wanted to. He knew Lowe was better than Perez especially for this team and the next couple of years. He went out to get Lowe at a discount, figuring if I can get Lowe on the cheap that is the no brainer option. I think he would have upped his order a little bit to make Lowe happy if no other competition materialized, but to get into a bidding war with Atlanta where it ended up with 4×15 for 60 mil, I don’t think Omar would have gone anywhere near that.
I think there is something to be said that including the terrible years from Pittsburg in the calculations makes those results a bit flawed when it comes to Perez. I think he has turned a different page here as a Met and while I am not expecting him to grow by leaps and bounds, I think it is reasonable to expect him to fluctuate more between 08 and 07 then he will between 05/06 and 08. Which to me the current forecasts are off in going for.
Having said that, all things being equal, Lowe was the better fit, just not a $24 million dollar better fit especially in this economic times where I have no idea what our budget will be in 2011 never mind 2013.
I think there’s a chance he posts a higher ERA then Lowe next year. I mean ERA flucuates alot. It’s unlikely but I wouldnt be so shocked.
You have to realize that projections are just that…..people will outperform them or underperform compared to them. These projection systems while I think are more accurate than just someone looking at things…..they arent outstanding. Luck plays a huge role. I mean the mets were predicted to win the division the past two years and it hasnt happened either.
I guess as of now tho based on numbers of the past and numbers predicting future performance it says lowe was worth it and perez was overpaid. Now that might be different 3 years from now……its something we’ll have to revisit.
One more point that I think is worth making in the OP vs. Lowe comparison is that OP’s contract is just a much better contract. Putting projected value aside, let’s try to look at what Omar was seeing. He wanted to get a good starting pitcher signed up for the next 2-3 years, because let’s face it…next year’s free agent pitchers really aren’t that great and the prices will probably start going up again in a couple of years.
He got Oliver Perez at 27 years old, with tremendous upside potential, to sign for 3/36. After the first year of the contract, if OP isn’t living up to it, the Mets could conceivable eat $4-$6m per year for 2 years, trade a 28 year old lefty with tons of upside potential and be done with it. Even better scenario after two years. Not a heck of a lot of downside risk. On the upside, if OP figures it all out and goes back to 2004…they could have a second ace.
The alternative was locking in Lowe for 4 years for over $60m (since they would have had to outbid the Braves). First off, that’s not a bargain price. Not many people believe that Lowe will be worth way more than that. He could pitch to projections and be worth the $60m, but there are many downsides. Lowe is in his late-30s and Omar definitely did not want to deal with a second Pedro…or a Billy Wagner. If at some point Lowe blows out his arm or has a calf strain followed by a ribcage strain followed by whatever, the Mets are stuck with a monstrous payroll hole. If Lowe can’t readjust to the Northeast media (see what happened in his last couple of years in Boston)…they’re stuck again. Etc.., etc… Not much upside and tons of downside risk.
As has been said before, I would have loved to have seen Lowe on the Mets…but not for that contract. Minaya didn’t miss anything or do a bad job. I think he was being a pretty good GM here.