Graph: Chris Archer Among the Greats
Earlier today, the present author utilized a nearly coherent metaphor involving astronomy to illustrate a point about Tampa Bay right-hander Chris Archer — namely that, not unlike how a star is both luminous and hot, so is Chris Archer’s future as a pitcher simultaneously luminous and also bursting with heat.
There are a number of statistical indicators one might consider when attempting to evaluate a pitcher’s likelihood for future success. One of the most expedient, however, is to assess his capacity to produce both strikeouts and ground balls at a rate better than league average. What follows is a graph that plots those two metrics against each other for all qualifiers thus far in 2015.

The data points in the top right corner represent a small sample of those pitchers who’ve managed to record decidedly above-average figures by both metrics — and the names associated with those data points are noteworthy. Felix Hernandez, Clayton Kershaw, and Corey Kluber: as a group, they’ve received five Cy Young awards total and have produced a three of the top-five pitching WAR figures since the beginning of 2014. As for Tyson Ross, he’s also recorded excellent numbers — and would produce even more excellent ones were he to exhibit slightly better command.
Archer, meanwhile, hasn’t exhibited problems with either command or control this year. He features one of the hardest fastballs among qualifiers and has also recorded one of the most unhittable sliders among starting pitchers this year, as well. To find him among the top candidates for the American League Cy Young award at the season end would be an exercise in not-surprise.
Carson Cistulli has published a book of aphorisms called Spirited Ejaculations of a New Enthusiast.
It’s a shame that this dreck is unreadable, because I’m guessing there’s a nice point in that random goulash of words. Luckily, you have provided a graph making your prose literally unnecessary. Thank you for that.
Why are you a thing?
While I wouldn’t necessarily characterize the point as harshly, I find that Carson’s prose almost always detracts from whatever point he’s trying to make.
I love whimsy–I thought Jason Parks’ digressive posts relating tangentially or directly to prospects were absolutely fantastic, Carson’s stylings are more reminiscent of verbal tics or mailing-it-in-era David Letterman than something interesting, funny, or vital that adds to my enjoyment of this site.
Plus he killed Notgraphs.
There was another era besides the mailing-it-in one?
but all that aside, how well does Carson perform relative to expectations?
Would you like salt with that foot in your mouth, or do you prefer it plain?