Rethinking Pitching: Intro
With the exohberted signings of pitchers such as Adam Eaton, I was left pondering what is really needed to win in the majors. I mean, $8 million a season for three years is way too much for a pitcher that has an average ERA of over 4.50, and a WHIP near 1.40. If a number three starter like Ted Lilly is looking at $10+ million for a 4.00 ERA, and a slightly above .500 record (over three years), then there has to be a better option.
Is the money better spent on a strong bat, bullpen help, or even a defensive star? I originally guessed that the answer would boil down to runs. But runs can’t be the only answer. Next time I’ll come back with some statistical data, and some overall thoughts on what to do (in a cost effective manner) in today’s baseball climate.
I think we have figured out through statistical studies that, “Great pitching will get you into the playoffs”.
But as you say teams are spending alot of money on pitchers that are far from “Great” and do not really have alot of untapped potential. It would be interesting to see what the top FA pitchers/hitters get every year regarless of talent level.
If we rank the FA pitchers 1,2,3,4…20. Do you think we will see a trend in contract size regarless of ability? If Ted Lilly is the 2nd best starter available this year it seems he will get the second best money. And maybe the 2nd best contract is the same every year.
Think of it as a draft, epecially NHL or NBA. A team gets a high pick in a weak draft year compared to a high pick in a strong draft year. The weak players picked 1,2,3,4 will still be considered a “1st overall pick” and so on and if he was picked in a strong year he would have gone much later. Still gets the pomp and the honour of being No.1.