Sifting Through The Remains Of The Starting Pitching Market
The once-ample-yet-unspectacular pile of free-agent starting pitchers is shrinking by the day. Still unspectacular, no longer ample. Joel Pineiro signed with the Angels for two years and $16 million, taking Los Anaheimgeles's offer over a Mets deal that was reported to be comparable in both years and dollars. The Brewers signed Doug Davis to a one-year, $5.25 million with an option for 2011. Neither pitcher is slam-dunk spectacular, and Pineiro's 2009 was the only really good season either has pitched in a long time. Both are fair bets to be at least decent, each figures to be worth at least the money he is being paid, and Pineiro has a chance to be quite good.
Meanwhile, the Mets rotation as presently constituted looks like this.
- Johan Santana -- had season-ending elbow surgery at the end of August.
- Mike Pelfrey -- ERA went up 1.3 runs; FIP went up 0.4 runs; xFIP stayed the same.
- John Maine -- Missed final 3+ months of the season.
- Oliver Perez -- Is Oliver Perez.
- ...?
Normally this is where I'd prattle on a bit about how Jon Niese has great minor league strikeout, walk, and groundball rates, and that he throws with his left hand, all of which are 'things' he has 'going for him'. The problem is that young pitchers with little big-league experience are often slow to get rolling, and given the other question marks in the starting rotation it might be too much to dump on Niese right now. Nelson Figueroa is another in-house option, and I guess he isn't terrible. The issue is not with Niese or Figueroa in particular, who might be reasonable number-five starters if the Mets had credible one-through-fours. The problem is that the Mets don't have a decent one-through-four rotation, and I don't think anyone knows what to expect out of Maine and Perez especially. We're already two seasons removed from their promising 2007 seasons and they're at least as likely to repeat their 2009 performances than their 2007's, if not more so.
Some options.
- Ben Sheets. The list of teams that watched Sheets pitch a simulated game in Louisiana seems to get longer with each story written about the now-famous throwing session. Buster Olney thinks the Mets are in a good position, which I guess just means they have some money to spend and at least one available rotation spot. Sheets was said to be throwing his fastball in the low-nineties and his curveball had a good break to it. That's great and all, but he has a storied injury history and missed all of 2009 recovering from right-elbow surgery. At his best he strikes out many and walks few. At his worst he doesn't pitch at all. The last I read he was looking for $7 million, which seems like a lot to guarantee someone who pitched as much as I did last year. Heck, Pineiro was fantastic last season and he'll only get paid $8 million or so next year. I do like Sheets, though, and I would imagine that even a one-year deal at the $7 million he's asking for might be a medium-risk, high-reward gamble for a team that could really stand to have a few things go their way.
- Jon Garland. Sam hates him. I think he's at least okay. The guy can throw 200 innings in his sleep, which is something no Met did last year and only three Mets have done in the past four years. He has good control and not much else, but with FIPs around the league average every year he is far from the worst option. Earlier in the offseason I wouldn't have been surprised to see him sign a two-year, $10 million deal, but now he could very well go for $2-3 million for a single season, and at that price point the Mets have to at least dip their toes in the water.
- Erik Bedard. It's hard to believe that this is the same guy some argued might have been a preferable acquisition to Johan Santana two offseasons ago. Bedard had shoulder surgery last summer and is undergoing physical therapy as we speak, and reports differ as to when he might be ready to return. Some have him coming back mid-season while others say he'll be in game shape in May sometime. Whatever the case, any deal he signs will likely have a low base with considerable incentives, and he's probably looking for a make-good deal so he can hit the market again next year. I suspect he'll get a base similar to Garland's with innings pitched (or games, or whatever) bonuses that could bring it into Sheets territory. The Orioles have been keeping tabs on Bedard whereas I haven't read even a single story linking him to the Mets.
- Pedro Martinez. Our old friend. He doesn't really solve this rotation's reliability problems, but nor does anyone on this list apart from Garland. Pedro's fastball was up to 88.5 MPH last season, which is higher than even his first season with the Mets in 2005. He has very good control and strikes out enough batters to be useful in that area, but his biggest problem -- as it was in 2008 -- is the longball. His HR/FB was 11.5% last year, which is comparable to his last three years with the Mets (in 2005 it was 7.5%).
- Chien-Ming Wang. Wang pitched 42 terrible innings with the Yankees last year and was non-tendered in the wake of that team's hard-fought and richly-deserved 27th World Series title. He has historically been a low-walk, low-strikeout, groundball machine, two-thirds of which are extremely desirable traits. He had shoulder surgery in July and could begin throwing from a mound in February with a possible return to action sometime in April.
Not much to look at, I suppose. Sheets might be the best combination of talent and availability since he should be on track for Opening Day. Garland has the fewest health concerns but is certainly the least talented of this group. Bedard could be the best pitcher of the lot but we have no idea when he'll be ready to resume throwing. Wang is intriguing because groundballs are sexy. Pedro is Pedro.
0 recs |
61 comments
|
Comments
Bedard I guess
Though if they can’t sign Sheets, I’d rather have none of the above. Get Sheets or trade for Harang and Phillips or give up on the 2010 season and sign the big boys coming out in 2010.
How feasible is that scenario?
More importantly, how feasible is Minaya swallowing his pride for this season?
We are gonna shock them with 5,000 mega watts of raw ROO POWER.
interesting point re: minaya
I’ve been surprised by how little we’ve heard about Bedard cause even in the brief period he pitched this year his numbers were stellar… and even if he misses the 1st month or 2, having him come back at full strength seems to me enough of a reward. The guy simply misses a lot of bats and generally gives hitters fits.
The other guy who turn into a nice swingman/5th starter is Jose Contreras who pitched well when he flipped over to the NL last season.
and btw I cannot see Garland getting any less $ than Doug Davis just got.
by ThnkGoodnessforHowieRose on Jan 22, 2010 7:14 AM EST up reply actions
Another point in Bedard's favor is that he'll be coming back in the second half as a "fresh" arm.
We’ve traditionally had problems in the second half, lately.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jan 22, 2010 2:25 PM EST up reply actions
The problem with Pedro
is that can he realistically be expected to throw even 100 innings?
Also, did the Mets resign Nelson Figueroa?
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
I would say Bedard
But I’m bright-eyed, bushy tailed, young, and hopeful, and am a sucker for “high reward” situations, despite the whole silly “high-risk” part.
We are gonna shock them with 5,000 mega watts of raw ROO POWER.
stay away from the injured
enough of hiring the ill, garland can show up
I'd really be okay with any of them
except for Pedro and Wang. I just don’t like Wang, I think he’s more of an implosion risk than any of them. And obviously, only if the price is right would I sign Bedard or Sheets, especially Bedard. But as was mentioned before, a highly incentivized deal would be ideal… not sure if either would take it though.
We are gonna shock them with 5,000 mega watts of raw ROO POWER.
Normally I dont like Garland
But at this point I think we need consistency and reliability for once. Sure, he’s probably not going to put up an ERA lower than 4.00, but he’s put up something like 8 straight seasons (I forget the exact number) with an ERA under 5.00 and 32 or more starts. Johan’s health is in question, Maine and Perez are always injury concerns, leaving Pelf as the only moderately predictable pitcher on our staff.
And if Garland can really be had for that low a price, who’s to say we can’t sign 2 pitchers?
Check out my Mets blog: http://metsmosh.blogspot.com/
Part of the Shore Sports Report blog network, Fox Sports Radio 1310 New Jersey
rec'd
for the ’who’s to say we can’t sign two’ comment. I’m in the ’who’s to say we can’t sign THREE’ camp. Those three should be Sheets and Bedard on ILC’s and Garland to a EMVOLC (exactly market value or less contract)
douchion = -(grission)
Why can't we sign 3?
because it wouldn’t make sense to Omar.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Yes
This is feasible and appealing.
by James Kannengieser on Jan 22, 2010 9:38 AM EST up reply actions
that would be the ideal decision here
one stable, on high upside.
by KeithsMoustache on Jan 22, 2010 4:41 PM EST up reply actions
Garland
Which is funny, because I think he was incredibly over hyped a couple of seasons ago. But I think Pedro’s time has past, something of which I was reminded by watching game 6 of the 2009 World Series a couple of days ago. I get a bad vibe about Bedard, who has really only had two great seasons anyway. I’ve never liked Wang – on a couple of levels.
I thought a couple of weeks ago that a combination of Sheets and Garland was the way to go. I still do.
I would have Niese pitch
This team isnt really going anywhere this year so there isnt much to lose.
by aparkermarshall on Jan 22, 2010 8:55 AM EST reply actions
Nelson Figueroa
Eric, you write: " Nelson Figueroa is another in-house option, and I guess he isn’t terrible." ISN’T TERRIBLE?
He’s now pitching in the Dominican Republic Winter League for the Escogido Leones (Lions). He relieved in four games, 9.2 innings, 0.93 ERA. The Lions made the playoffs and lost the first two games. So on Wednesday (Jan. 20), he started, went 6.2 innings, allowed 1 run, and the Lions won the game. Are the Mets paying attention? I would think so: the Lions manager is Ken Oberkfell, former Mets coach and presently their manager in Buffalo. It’s not a coincidence that Figgy is pitching for Escogido. He’s continuing his superb pitching since mid-August when he took Santana’s spot in the rotation: In 8 starts his ERA was 3.38. Take away one bad start, and in 7 of the 8 games he had a 2.23 ERA. Averaged 6+ innings per start (only Santana averaged higher). He was 2-6, but in his 6 losses, the Mets scored a total of 11 runs. Figueroa was the only Mets pitcher to throw a complete game shut out at Citi Field. Had more September strikeouts than any Mets pitcher. By the way, if he had pitched just 3 more innings in Triple A in 2009 (he pitched 112), he would have led the International League in lowest ERA (2.25) and lowest WHIP (1.03).
Not only isn’t Nelson Figueroa “terrible.” He’s good. More consistent than Maine, Niese, Pelrey, or Perez.
Figueroa
Hey, I like the guy, and I don’t have a problem giving him a shot. Calling him ‘good’ based on a handful of starts last season and some time in the Dominican Republic against inferior opposition is a bit of a stretch.
He did look better last year than in 2008, so maybe that’s something. The Mets really jerk him around — calling him up, designating him for assignment — but no other teams seem at all interested in him (nor were they from 2006-2007). Maybe they’re all missing something, but maybe they’re not.
No, he really is decent.
Last year, he put up 0.6 WAR in 70 IP. If you give him 180, it’s fair to say he could put up 1.5, and maybe even 2.0. If you go by his CHONE projections, it’d be about 2.2 for just under 200 IP. FanGraphs fan projections put Maine at 2.1 (0.6 last year), Jason Marquis at 1.9 (3.8 last year), and Jon Garland 2.1 (1.9).
He’s higher risk than these guys, maybe (honestly, not really), but his cost makes up for that.
Decent != Good
Or are we arguing semantics? ‘Good’ and ‘decent’ aren’t interchangeable, at least not the way I’m using them. If you’re simply swapping one for the other then I guess we’re actually in agreement.
A few points:
1) We’re not really using fan projections as any kind of empirical evidence, are we?
2) Yes, 70 nice innings last year. I like Figgy, but I’m not convinced he’s that good.
3) He’s decent. He’s cheap. There’s no reason not to keep him around. That notwithstanding, it’s not clear that he’s a good pitcher.
At this point
I wouldn’t be bothered by drastically overpaying for Sheets, as ling as it’s for only one year. The ticket prices are already set, it doesn’t look that money is going to be spent anywhere else (unless they allocate some draft money and end up taking a college reliever with the seventh pick), and I’m not worried about the Wilpon’s willingness to spend some money for some in-season bolstering no matter what the payroll. If he’s a total wipeout, it’s not my money and he’ll be off the books for next year.
Oh god we're so f*****
John Olerud, Hall of Famer. Got a nice ring to it.
by squid92 on Jan 22, 2010 9:10 AM EST reply actions 3 recs
I don't see any point in avoiding the injuries
and going with someone like Garland, because at this point all Garlands going to do is turn us from a .500 team to a team that temporarily looks like a WC contender for a few months before ultimately being eliminated from contention. Now if you sign some high risk/reward types like Sheets and Bedard then it makes sense to me to add someone like Garland but if not we might as well just go with some combination of Figueroa and Niese.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Because if by some unimaginable stroke of luck
Perez/Maine actually turns in a good, complete season and we’re in contention, we’ll be kicking ourselves at the trade deadline for not signing a reliable number 4/5 pitcher. If you’re a GM, you have to do whatever gives you the best chance of winning. Is signing Garland going to get us a few more wins? Probably. Is he going to hurt the future of this team even if we dont make the playoffs? Not at all.
I dont see any way signing him could be a bad thing. Low risk, modest reward.
Check out my Mets blog: http://metsmosh.blogspot.com/
Part of the Shore Sports Report blog network, Fox Sports Radio 1310 New Jersey
We have limited roster spots. We can't go with a 6 man rotation with Garland + Sheets (or Bedard).
We have a lock in 4 of the rotation spots and 6 bullpen (could use another lefty).
I wasnt advocating signing 2 pitchers
I’d take Garland over other high risk pitchers.
Check out my Mets blog: http://metsmosh.blogspot.com/
Part of the Shore Sports Report blog network, Fox Sports Radio 1310 New Jersey
None of the above.
Try to trade. If not, roll the dice and make a deal at the break. If the Astros are out of it, Oswalt will be on the block and we will be 1 of only 4 or 5 teams that can afford him.
Vote For Pedro
I know he’s not the right choice, not for 2010 and certainly not beyond, but when given the choice, I will always vote for Pedro. And not because of the overrated movie from which that line is derived. No, Pedro is awesome, and awesome in so many ways. And this Mets team is at risk of being entirely unawesome. So, I’m going with the sure thing. Vote for Pedro.
I'm not sure "Pedro" and "sure thing" should be in the same sentence
by James Kannengieser on Jan 22, 2010 10:06 AM EST up reply actions
Only if you're saying he's a sure thing to land on the DL.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jan 22, 2010 2:26 PM EST up reply actions
He's a sure thing to be entertaining, likeable, smart, interesting
I’m entirely on board with this — basically, my liking for Pedro, should they re-sign him, would be about my strongest reason to watch Mets games in 2010, even if he never actually appeared in a game.
Figueroa looks like the classic case
of a guy the Mets will toss aside and after someone else picks him up he’ll go on to have a superb year…. 3.6 ERA and 175 IP…
The Mets don’t have a problem with their 5th starter… it’s 2 thru 4 that is the big concern.
by ThnkGoodnessforHowieRose on Jan 22, 2010 9:57 AM EST reply actions
He'll be a "throw in"....
….for a small market team one day, and be a solid #3.
I vote for "none of the above"
You don't cheer for the Mets. You drink for the Mets.
Wang. This team needs a Wang.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jan 22, 2010 2:27 PM EST reply actions
How about all of the above?
"For $11.4 million you can actually get a good player. But of course this is one of the things foolish organizations do: They complain that they can't afford good players after spending millions of dollars on not-good players." --Rob Neyer
Starting pitching
I am in favor of the following:
Sign Ben Sheets with insurace (Jon Smoltz)
Trade Mike Pelfrey, Bobby Parnell, and a high prospect for Bronson Arroyo
I think Ben Sheets is the best available pitcher in the free agent market. He should be able to go half the season, even if (when) he does get injured. Getting Smoltz to start in the bullpen and be available in case Sheets does get injured acts as insurance.
Trading for Arroyo has been rummored all off-season. Getting two quality pitchers reduces the loss for when Sheets gets injured.
1. JohanSantana
2. Bronson Arroyo
3. Ben Sheets (Jon Smoltz in the bullpen)
4. Oliver Perez
5. John Maine
Why would you trade Pelfrey for Arroyo straight up, much less that package you offered?
Pelfrey is younger, cheaper, and has been the better pitcher for the past two seasons. Not only that but he’s under team control for several more years. Bronson Arroyo is Jon Garland with a 12 million dollar salary…He is not a good player for the Mets to acquire.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
That's an awful trade.
Pelfrey is better than Arroyo and seven years younger. Last year Pelfrey had a 4.93 tRA to Arroyo’s 5.34 tRA. He also has a lower FIP and xFIP.
"Three home teams advance, and the fuckin' Jets" - Rex Ryan
See, when you put it like that,
It makes me think Omar’s going to go all out to make this trade.
Arroyo isn't any better
than comparable pitchers still on the market that can be had for much less money than he’s owed and no prospects.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Yeah,
But he’s won 14 games 4 of the last 5 years. Plus, he’s a musician, which automatically raises his grission quotient by 10 billion percent.
I bet that Sheets guy doesn’t even play an instrument. Pansy.
It really depends on what instrument he plays.
If he plays he flute, then he sux. If he plays guitar hero, then he is awesome.
Flutes are cool.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jan 22, 2010 9:18 PM EST up reply actions
Not a good idea.
Pelfrey is much more valuable than Arroyo.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jan 22, 2010 9:18 PM EST up reply actions
Pedro, Pedro, Pedro
What a pathetic offseason.
This is an 80 win team with no upside, no collection of young guys who are going to break out and add ten wins. If I’m going to suffer I at least want to ride the enjoyment of the Pedro saga for half a season before he breaks off a curveball and his arm flies over the backstop.
Would he throw it for a strike is the question? The ball, that is.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jan 23, 2010 1:13 AM EST up reply actions
But of course.
He is, after all, the Pedro.
by SeanSchirmer on Jan 23, 2010 1:21 AM EST up reply actions
You're overly pessimistic
You went from saying this was like an 86 win team with Beltran, to 83 wins when he got injured now to 80. I’m not saying we’re winning the division, but we could compete for a wild card, especially if Beltran comes back healthy early or mid May
Not quoting you exactly, by the way, just seems like every post you have us winning less games. Just sayin’
"Three home teams advance, and the fuckin' Jets" - Rex Ryan
I think a lot of people were including Piniero
when they said 86-83 wins, because until he actually ended up somewhere else I don’t think anyone thought there was any chance we wouldn’t land him unless his price was outrageous.
Also I know WAR isn’t the end all be all, but at this point according to WAR we’re maybe an 80-82 win team… and that’s not even considering possible negative contributions from some players.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
True for me. I assumed we were going to pick up at least one
of the group of Marquis, Piniero, Garland, etc. It’s incredible to me that it’s fairly likely we’re not going to be adding any starting pitching, but all the “interest” by the FO seems lukewarm at best, even feigned in several instances.
by SeanSchirmer on Jan 23, 2010 2:36 AM EST up reply actions
I'm pretty sure this was as we were contemplating various options,
refinements in projections, other people’s input, and so on. Hey, I’d like to be optimistic, but the FO isn’t giving me any cause.
My last pick was based on the Phillies Nation’s thoughtful and slightly optimistic WAR projection, and includes give Sarge Lite at least 200 ABs. That’s negative value, Evan.
Please don’t shoot the messenger.
by SeanSchirmer on Jan 23, 2010 2:35 AM EST up reply actions
He's not getting 200 ABs.
He can’t get 200 ABs. Even the Mets won’t allow Gary Freakinmattews Jr. 200 ABs. Pagan’s gotta get the bulk of the at bats in Beltran’s absence, right? They know Pagan is much better than Matthews Jr., they have to. Holy shit, Sarge Jr. is gonna get 500 ABs isn’t he? Oh God, why? When will this suffering end?
I think I just snapped.
"Three home teams advance, and the fuckin' Jets" - Rex Ryan
To elaborate a little more,
I estimate Matthews at slightly below replacement level. He’ll get a couple hundred PAs (he’s the fourth OFer with Beltran out and my guess is that Beltran won’t play 100 games in 2010) meaning he’d actually be dragging down a team that would only prject to win 50 games. He’ll be getting those 200 PAs at the expense of a more typical 4th/5th OFer, a guy who might be worth a win over the course of the season, or about one-third of a win over 200 PAs. Combine Matthews’ negative production with the production of a typical bench OFer and you deduct a half a win from the team’s total versus what you would have projected two days ago.
I think that's being cautiously pessamistic (which is a good thing- being overly optimistic is worse)
Beltran probably will, at the end of the day, play in more than 100 games. If you figure that he’s back and ready for baseball activities when the season starts, and out for an extended Spring Training that takes him to the beginning/middle of May, there’s still four and a half months of baseball to play. Given that the majority of his problems have been with his knees, in theory, he should be without knee ailments this season, because of his surgery.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jan 23, 2010 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
What about Fernando? The incumbent fifth starter?
Oh Fernando, we hardly new ye. I know he was only the fifth starter for a little while last year, but he did great until his hammy rolled up like a window shade. And what’s more, according to Jerry Manuel, Fernando Nieve, not Niese, or Figgy, is the number five starter until further notice. It appears to be his job, to lose, especially considering what an awful job Omar did acquiring starting pitching this winter, arguably the team’s number one priority going into the off-season. Sheets is to the wind now, so is Garland, Davis, etc. All that’s left is Jarrod Washburn (whoopee!) and the scrap heap, ie: Pedro, Bedard, Wang, oh yeah, and Braden Looper. Not much to write home about there, unless your mailing their medical records.






























