A few days I wrote about Charlie Morton — the Pirates’ young starter with ethereal velocity who had been knocked around quite a bit despite not walking anyone and fanning a good number. Well, meet Mitch Talbot. So far, Talbot is the anti-Morton. In two starts, he’s tallied 14 innings, three strikeouts, five walks, and an ERA in the low-3s.

The Indians acquired Talbot over the off-season from the Tampa Bay Rays for Kelly Shoppach. For years Talbot slaved in Triple-A, waiting for a job to open up in the Tampa rotation without much avail. He simply entered the organization at the wrong point in time, a year earlier and who knows what the book on Talbot would be. Here are his lines from those three separate stints in Triple-A Durham:

2007: 161 IP, 6.93 K/9, 3.30 BB/9, 4.00 FIP
2008: 161 IP, 7.88 K/9, 1.96 BB/9, 3.03 FIP
2009: 54.1 IP, 6.63 K/9, 2.98 BB/9, 3.55 FIP

Talbot battled injuries in 2009, but otherwise it’s easy to see why the Indians thought he could help their rotation now, and as such, selected him as the player in the trade rather than the younger Joseph Cruz. Anyhow, Talbot’s fastball sits in the low-90s, he tosses a cutter, and he throws a change-up that was named the best in the Rays (and before being traded to Tampa Bay) and Astros’ system for something like four years running.

It’s hard to get worked up over 14 innings, but boy, Talbot’s not missing any bats to date. A 2% swinging strike rate is absurdly low and while Talbot’s 55% GB rate is nice, he was never known to be that much of a groundball pitcher. He’s pitching like Nick Blackburn right now, except Blackburn has nearly 6% swinging strikes for his career.

Talbot has thrown a combined 58 cutters and sliders without a single whiff. Considering those two pitches are making up nearly 30% of his total pitches thrown, and that another 48% is devoted to his four-seam fastball (holder of a horrifying 3.1% whiff rate), it’s really pretty impressive that Talbot has found any success through two starts.

Don’t expect the ERA to maintain its shine if his stuff continues to show none of its own.

This is not the timeliest of posts, so apologies to those who come here for more 2010-related discussion.

In 1999, Baseball America ranked Bruce Chen as the number four prospect in baseball. Chen was a 21-year-old southpaw pitcher for the Atlanta Braves. He stood only six-foot-one and was signed out of Panama in 1993 as a teenager. Chen had a history of injuries and his top tools were deception and brains. Take that combination in the latter 1990s and the first comparison out of people’s mouths was, of course, Greg Maddux. Now, I don’t want to spoil anything here, but … well, Chen did not become Greg Maddux part deux.

Chen did find a way to rack up nearly 900 Major League innings over his career. His 4.71 ERA is obviously below what many would have pegged for him, but it is a nice representation of his pitching career than his 5.22 FIP. The odd thing about Chen is not that he was a velocity-starved left-handed pitcher. Nor that he was compared to Maddux based on smarts. Heck, not even that he failed to live up to expectations. But, that he was traded within the division. Not once. Not twice. Not thrice. But four times. Within four seasons.

Remember, Chen was the number four prospect in all of baseball entering the 1999 season. He appeared in 16 games for the Braves that season and had a 5.47 ERA. The next season, Chen pitched in 39 innings for the Braves – all in relief – and held a 2.50 ERA (4.34 FIP). The Braves traded him and Jimmy Osting to the Philadelphia Phillies for Andy Ashby. Chen went on to make 15 starts for the Phillies with a 3.63 ERA (4.26 FIP). This looked like a long-term win for the Phillies, right?

Well, in 2001, he made 16 starts with the Phils and despite strikingly good peripherals (8.24 K/9, 3.23 BB/9) Chen posted a 5 ERA (5.19 FIP thanks to allowing two homers per nine) and the Phillies did the sensible thing: They traded him to the New York Mets with a minor leaguer for Dennis Cook and Turk Wendell. He would work out of the rotation for the Mets and do okay – a 4.68 ERA and 5.06 FIP – again because of issues with the long ball.

Now comes 2002 and Chen appears in one game for the Mets, recording two outs. On April 5th, they trade him to the Montreal Expos in a deal that involves Scott Strickland heading to the Big Apple. Chen wouldn’t last long there either, he would appear in 15 games with the Expos, post an excellent strikeout rate, but also hold a 21.4% HR/FB ratio and 6.99 ERA and find himself dealt to the Cincinnati Reds on Flag Day.

I think only Rob Neyer holds enough knowledge to be able to answer this, but has another player in the history of baseball as highly touted as Bruce Chen been tossed around a division so often and fast? Clearly Chen had some flaws, no doubt, but here are the number four ranked prospects in baseball over the last few years:

2010 – Jesus Montero
2009 – Tommy Hanson
2008 – Clay Buchholz
2007 – Phil Hughes
2006 – Jeremy Hermida
2005 – Ian Stewart

Obviously comparing prospect list quality across years is tricky but stay with me. Can anyone imagine the Red Sox trading Clay Buchholz to the Orioles for Kevin Millwood. And then in a season the Orioles trading Buchholz to the Blue Jays for Jason Frasor. And then a season later, the Jays trading Buchholz to the Rays for Lance Cormier. Would never happen. But it did.

Prior to yesterday’s games, the Pittsburgh Pirates were the only team in the Majors without a starter who had thrown 100 pitches in a game. Naturally, Paul Maholm replied to my tweet with this nugget by throwing 100 pitches exactly. The Pirates have had four starters removed before topping 80 pitches, which is second in futility only to the Washington Nationals. Here are the Pirates’ six starters this year and their notable numbers:

Brian Burres – 1 GS, 4 IP, 5.03 FIP
Zach Duke – 3 GS, 19 IP, 4.13 FIP
Paul Maholm – 3 GS, 17.2 IP, 4.27 FIP
Daniel McCutchen – 2 GS, 7.1 IP, 9.98 FIP
Charlie Morton – 2 GS, 9.1 IP, 7.31 FIP
Ross Ohlendorf – 1 GS, 5 IP, 7.03 FIP

(Yes, I know the samples are small. The FIP is there just to illustrate how awful some oe the performances have been.)

Generally speaking, when it’s April and Burres is getting starts for you, something has gone wrong. Horribly, horribly wrong. That wrongness is Ohlendorf being hurt. Ohlendorf is more interesting for his off the field accomplishments than his on the field pitching. The real gem of intrigue in the Pirates’ rotation right now is Morton.

Morton was the power arm acquired by the Pirates in the Nate McLouth deal. He has something spectacular growing on his chin in the form of a beard. Check his gamelogs so far:

4/9 @ ARI: 3.1 IP, 1 HR, 6 SO, 1 BB, 4 FB, 2 GB, 8 LD
4/14 @ SF: 6 IP, 3 HR, 3 SO, 0 BB, 7 FB, 10 GB, 4 LD

That Arizona start is incredible to me. He gave up eight earned runs despite posting a 6/1 K/BB ratio and only allowing one home run. I guess there’s no bias in those eight line drives, because, jeez. I actually used the Baseball-Reference Play Index to find comparable starts since 1980. As it turns out, Morton shares some, um, really good company. No, really.

In 1998 Randy Johnson struck out 12 batters while allowing eight earned runs (giving up three homers undoubtedly played into that). Ryan Dempster, Curt Schilling, Mike Mussina, Nolan Ryan, and Floyd Youmans gave up boats of runs while striking out 10 apiece. Kerry Wood, Roger Clemens, Johnson twice, Sidney Ponson, Kevin Gross, and Mike Norris K’d nine through rough starts. And the list goes on. Josh Beckett, Kenny Rogers, John Smoltz, Mark Langston … they all got battered around while fanning at least eight.

Of course there are some stinkers on this list too. But right now, Morton’s name resides next to A.J. Burnett, Jon Lester, Justin Verlander, and Roy Oswalt. That’s not too shabby. Now, before someone takes this the wrong way, I’m not saying good pitchers get hit around super duper hard while striking batters out. It does happen sometimes. But, I’m not saying this is some harbinger to Morton winning the Cy Young. It’s just not a death knell by any means.

Read the rest of this entry »

During the off-season, Sports Illustrated ran this piece by Albert Chen which compared, contrasted, and prodded the past, present, and future of baseball’s market inefficiencies. The notable quotable – for this piece at least – comes courtesy Tony Blengino, bright mind who works with the Mariners. (I’ll beat you to the snark: No, Blengino cannot hit the baseball well, either.) Here’s what he said:

“Defense might be the new OBP,” says Blengino, “but at some point it’s going to be something else that will be underappreciated. It may be something that has nothing to do with the statistical perspective. A team that figures out how to get 250 innings out of a starter, for example, is going to have a huge advantage. Who knows what the next inefficiency in the marketplace is going to be.”

The 250 innings idea is worth examining.

Since 2000, five pitchers have topped 250 innings: The since forgotten Jon Lieber (2000); Curt Schilling, twice (2001 and 2002); Randy Johnson (2002); Livan Hernandez (2004); and yes, Roy Halladay (2003). Halladay actually tossed 266 innings in 2003, the most of the group. That puts him third on a list since the last strike, with those two guys, Johnson and Schilling, both topping him with their respective 1999 and 1998 seasons.

Halladay started 36 games that season. He would start a combined 40 the next two years. His high since was 246 in 2008, but he’s thrown at least 220 in every season since returning full-time in 2006. SO far, he’s made three starts in the National League, and he’s averaging eight innings per. If he makes 30 more starts, he needs to average roughly 7.5 innings in order to reach 250 innings again.

The Phillies seem committed to start Halladay every fifth day, too, regardless of the number five starter being bumped, which gives him a legitimate chance at racking up more than 33 starts. He’s almost certainly not going to average eight innings per start from here on out. If he makes 35 starts on the season, though, he’ll only need seven innings per outing. That’s a more realistic goal given Halladay’s history.

The National League is a double-edged sword in Halladay’s pursuit. Yeah, the competition level doesn’t approach that of the American League East, but Halladay now has to come to the plate a couple of times as a hitter, making it more likely that he would be pulled in a tight game for a pinch hitter rather than being allowed to continue to work through a deficit. Of course, the quality of the innings matter too, but forget Roy flirting with 25 wins; his race towards 250 should be the one counting stat worth watching.

Since debuting last season, Brett Anderson has been one of the game’s top starting pitchers. He’s posted a 3.61 FIP in 187 innings and heck, he’s even leading the American League in ERA right now. Oakland rewarded Anderson today by signing him to a four-year extension with two option years.

Financial terms are unavailable at this point, but honestly, it’s hard to sign a player this early in the service time game for this long without it being a team-friendly contract. Anderson has a bit more leverage than Evan Longoria did when he signed his extension, but not quite as much as Dan Haren did when he signed a four-year, $44.8M extension in 2008, a season after the Athletics traded him, and coincidentally received Anderson in return.

I believe Anderson would qualify for Super Two status, meaning the A’s are in effect buying out four arbitration years while holding the additional right to keeping Anderson off the free agent market for one season. Barring injury, this extension has the potential to look awfully sweet. So, why would Anderson and his agent do this deal, assuming it really is a sweetheart contract?

Well, the most obvious reason is that injuries and attrition do happen. Anderson could tear something tomorrow and never be the same. Wouldn’t matter, he’d still receive the money. There’s also the present and future value of money to consider. Anderson is probably (I’d use hopefully, but someone would accuse me of being a player’s union apologist, I’m sure) getting an immediate raise either this or next season.

Oakland is definitely not without risk in this deal. If it works out, they’re going to look quite smart and be praised for their foresight. If it doesn’t … well, Eric Chavez’s contract already happened. Look at the repercussions from that.

Fantastic pitching match-up last night in Cleveland as Carson Cistulli’s boy toy — Colby Lewis – faced off against the Indians’ big return on Victor Martinez. Justin Masterson is only 24 years old, but it feels like he’s been around longer. In limited time as a starter last season, I have him posting a FIP around 4.24. For comparison’s sake, qualified starting pitchers around that mark last season included Matt Garza, Jonathan Sanchez, and Zach Duke. Not too bad for someone who transitioned to the rotation full-time midway through the season.

Masterson had his A-game going last night. His final line included six innings, nine strikeouts, ten groundballs, seven fly balls and line drives, and zero walks. He did give up a home run to Nelson Cruz, but who isn’t giving up hits to him at this point? Regardless, that’s still a really, really good start. Pitchfx data has Masterson throwing mostly sinkers (61), with four-seamers (30) and sliders (15) mixed in. Here are the whiff breakdowns by pitch type:

4FB: 10%
SNK: 11.5%
SLD: 6.7%

This isn’t the only time Masterson has racked up whiffs on his arsenal, either. Last season, he held a contact percentage of 79%, and his career rate is a better-than-average 78.6%. That number is probably aided by his time spent in the pen, but it’s hard to tell it so far. And yes, as you would suspect, the sinker ball-tossing Masterson gets some grounders. His career rate is just shy of 54%.

Gets whiffs, gets groundballs, and throws strikes. That’s a combination to work with. Dave Cameron compared Masterson’s upside to Gil Meche when the Indians acquired him. He’s actually pitched better than that, but the point remains. The quality of the remainder of Cleveland’s package is still up in the air, but Masterson should stay grounded in the Indians’ rotation for years to come.

Brian Matusz is not a fan of the baseball scheduler makers. Or, maybe he is. He’s gotten the call to face the Tampa Bay Rays twice, and his combined line to date is:

12.3 IP, 15 SO, 6 BB, 0 HR

That works out to something like a 2.22 FIP despite facing one of the better offenses in baseball, one that loads their lineup with batters who have made a living hitting left-handed pitching. Matusz’ ERA won’t look quite that good since his bullpen allowed a few leftover runners to score last night. Also worth noting is that five of those walks came in his first start. In that sense, I suppose this has been a continuation of Matusz’ brief 2009 introduction to the majors. He threw in 44 innings, striking out nearly 8 per nine, walking fewer than three, en route to a 4.08 FIP, but with a 4.63 ERA.

The only thing that one can find fault with about Matusz’ game is his batted ball-profile. In his first start, he allowed five fly balls and three liners while failing to get a grounder. Last night, he did get a grounder – four of them actually – but, between both games, allowed 15 fly balls and liners to be put in play as well. Unlike his first start, which he exited after five innings and 97 pitches, Matusz didn’t lose command of the strike zone for the entire stretch.

Obviously, it’s only two starts. But it’s two good starts from a supposedly good prospect against a supposedly good division foe. He’s going to take some knocks eventually. Until then, though, Baltimore fans may continue to gaze upon Matusz with a sense of anticipation and excitement.

The Astros’ offense has been bad. Really bad. That doesn’t mean they’ll continue to be this bad (and they shouldn’t be, with Lance Berkman coming back to replace someone who most certainly is not Lance Berkman), but still, have you realized how bad they’ve been?

If, for whatever reason, Houston were to continue this pace, they would be expected to score about 300 runs. Since 1980, two teams have scored fewer than 350 runs during a season, but both occurred in 1981 (the Jays and the Mets), which was a strike shortened season. The worst offense since 1990 scored 466 runs. The Astros can add an entire run to their per game average and still fall shy of topping that team, which happened to be the 1994 Pirates, who, as you probably aware, had the whole ‘league on strike’ thing to deal with.

Add a run and a half to the Astros’ per game average and they score 544 runs. That total would make them the worst offense of the 2000s, with the 2003 Dodgers, 2002 Tigers, and 2003 Tigers representing the only other teams to score fewer than 600 runs.

This is supposed to be about the Astros and inappropriately using prorating techniques to make something out of nothing, but I cannot mention the 2003 Dodgers without talking about them a little more. They won 85 games despite barely crossing the plate more times than a gluttonous atheist. How unusual is the Dodgers’ feat? Here are the win totals of the next nine lowest scoring teams of the 2000s:

2002 Tigers 55
2003 Tigers 43
2004 Diamondbacks 51
2002 Brewers 56
2004 Brewers 67
2004 Expos 67
2008 Padres 63
2005 Nationals 81
2008 Giants 72
2002 Pirates 72

Only the 2001 Mets, 2005 Padres, 2005 Twins, and 2005 Astros scored fewer than 700 – not 600 – runs and finished above .500. The 2009 Astros won’t be joining those teams, but at least Berkman is due back soon.

Not often can one player account for 60% of his team’s runs batted in and still have a night that invokes more sympathy than props. Will Venable’s Saturday night has to qualify.

Everything started off ordinarily enough. In the second inning against Rockies’ starter Jason Hammel, Venable took the first pitch for a ball and then grounded the next offering to the shortstop for the third out. -.012 WPA.

Venable would get his second at-bat in the fourth inning. The bases would be loaded with one out. Once again, Venable would take the first pitch for a ball. He would work the count to 3-2 before hitting a ball to center which resulted in not a single, nor a double, but a triple. Effectively clearing the bases and putting the Padres up 3-2. +.256 WPA.

Venable would come up with a runner on in the sixth and promptly grounded into a double play. -.064 WPA.

In the eighth inning of a tied game, up would came Venable, again with the bags full of runners and two outs. The tough Rafael Betancourt on the mound would prevail in the end, striking Venable out and stranding the runners. -.146 WPA.

Onto the tenth inning, Venable up, runners on the corners, and Randy Flores is brought in to face him. Flores would do his job, as Venable would ground the ball right back to him, again ending the threat. -.148 WPA.

He’s nowhere near finished. Two innings later, Venable would come up with … get this, the bases loaded in a tied game. He would get ahead in the count 1-0 and then hit a roper into left field that the speedy Carlos Gonzalez ran down. -.182 WPA.

To call this game a battle of the benches and bullpens is an understatement. Bud Black and Jim Tracy managed like this was taking place a week earlier, and that they could mutually agree to end the affair whenever they pleased. The Padres’ bullpen shines as the most impressive part of the latter innings. Heath Bell allowed more baserunners than the other Padres relievers had combined.

Oh, but our friend Will Venable was not done and after the Pads grabbed the lead (the eventual winning run), he would step to the dish with a runner on third … and fly out. -.039 WPA.

For those keeping count, that’s a total of -.334 WPA by Venable despite a three RBI triple that gave his team the lead. That’s a really impressive set of misfortunate at-bats by Venable the rest of the night to rack up more than -.500 WPA in one game.

Randy Wells did something that Cubs’ pitchers had previously found difficult last night. He locked down the Atlanta Braves in rather generic fashion.

Wells’ line is anything but spectacular. He struck out one batter and walked two, but he didn’t allow a home run (or a run of any kind) in large part because very few balls were hit into the air. Of the 21 balls put into play against him, 13 – or over 60% — were hit on the ground. Combine that with 60% strikes and it’s pretty clear that Wells’ game plan was simply to pound the zone with his sinker and let his infielders do the rest.

Pitchfx has 35 of Wells’ 97 pitches classified as sinkers, an additional 20 as four-seam fastballs, 23 more as change-ups, and the final 19 as sliders. Roughly three-fourths of his sinkers went for strikes of the called variety, since only one was swung at and missed. In fact, the only pitch that Braves’ batters had a hard time connecting with was his change-up, which generated an impressive five empty swings.

The Braves only managed six hits, with a Martin Prado double being the only of extra base variety. They definitely had some chances though. In the second, with runners on first and third, the Braves had the unfortunate coincidence of pitcher Tommy Hanson going to the plate. He would fly out, but the Bravos would threaten again the very next inning, as the bases would be loaded for Troy Glaus. On a 1-1 pitch, Glaus rolled to third and became the victim of a double play.

The Braves’ run expectancy at the time was a game high 1.5, they wouldn’t top 1.0 for the remainder of the game, as Sean Marshall, Esmailin Caridad, John Grabow, and Carlos Marmol would combine to shut the door and Wells earned the first victory of the year for the Cubbies.

There are going to be some nights where Wells doesn’t have passable command or movement on his pitches, and that’s fine, because there are also going to be nights like this, when the opposing team pounds the ball into the dirt, only to become one easy out after the next.