FanGraphs Baseball

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Sorry for the off topic post, but the link to Zimmerman’s prospects story on Rotographs is dead or incorrect.

    Comment by dsimon — April 22, 2010 @ 10:31 am

  2. I get a little I told you so moment. In the offseason I was criticized here for my belief that Lannan’s mediocre talent would catch up to him. I had him projected at 110 IP of 5.5 FIP ball. If he surpasses the IP projection, it may only be because Jason Marquis, Craig Stammen, and friends are equally futile.

    Comment by The A Team — April 22, 2010 @ 12:19 pm

  3. No way that happens. I bet you by the time he reaches 110 IP, his ERA will be around 4.20 or less. No way does he play at 5.50 FIP. He’s never done that before in his career. His 12.0 HR/FB% will regress, so will his .350 BABIP that will go closer to his .280 career BABIP average. 3 starts into last year, Lannan’s ERA was over 6. 6 Starts in and his ERA was 4.63. He will be fine.

    Comment by pm — April 22, 2010 @ 1:00 pm

  4. While I don’t disagree that Lannan could post an ERA much closer to his career FIP over the next 110 IP, there’s no way he only pitches 110 innings. Even on a good team, two solid 200+ inning seasons earns you a longer leash that that (see: Wellemeyer, E. Santana). When you factor in the fact that the options beyond their current rotation is Shairon Martis and Collin Balester, who could only dream of a 5.50 FIP, it’s even more unlikely he doesn’t last the whole season.

    Side note: Strasburg will be replacing Scott Olsen in the rotation. Olsen is inarguably much worse than John Lannan.

    Comment by Will — April 22, 2010 @ 1:26 pm

  5. That 110 IP projection is so dumb unless you see him getting injured midseason. He has never been injured in his career and has no mechanical issues. The idea that you thought the Nats could potentially replace from the rotation is so laughable even if you factor out the bad options the team has. Why would a team replace a guy midseason who has been a sub 4 ERA guy with 200 IP consistently? Teams don’t just send those kind of guys out into market.

    Comment by pm — April 22, 2010 @ 2:19 pm

  6. Really, you’re discounting Lannan’s entire career of outperforming DIPS in favor of 4 starts? That, sir, is conformation bias!

    Comment by vivaelpujols — April 22, 2010 @ 4:00 pm

  7. Yeah i don’t really understand this article. It seems to me that the author is saying that it was bound to happen that because of his low K numbers and high walk BB numbers his ERA was bound to rise but it look likes to me that his ERA has risen because his Ks are down this season.

    Comment by ingeindahouse — April 22, 2010 @ 5:04 pm

  8. A little premature on the Strasburg-Olsen swap aren’t you Will? Two good starts-one bad one, the second being a 7 innings shutout. Wait until June to make pronouncements.

    Comment by Sec 204 Row H Seat 7 — April 26, 2010 @ 10:38 am

  9. Followed the link contained in today’s Washington Post Nats Journal and registered just to leave this comment: I’m not a stats maven and don’t pretend to know about a lot of the metrics the article refers to. And I’m not going to predict which way JL will go from here (after today’s loss to the Marlins). All I want to point out, which isn’t mentioned in the article (maybe because it has more to do with W-L than with ERA or other more individual stats?), is that with this season’s improved Nats infield + outfield defense and bullpen (even accounting for R. Zimmerman’s injury absences so far), a pitcher of Lannan’s ilk, *if* he reverts to form, could be even more successful than he has been in the past (when he was often a tough-luck loser in quality outings, also due largely to a lack of even a modest amount of run support). Just another one of the ‘many mysteries’ of his career thus far I suppose…

    Comment by outtaplace — May 3, 2010 @ 3:55 am

  10. Lannan requires a broad and low strike zone to be effective. He doesn’t have any stuff he can throw past anybody so he requires a the umpire to define a zone that allows him to throw strikes out of reach of batters inside or outside, depending on their stances, and low enough to induce ground balls. He’s gotten that zone a lot in the past — it is the traditional “National League Strike Zone” — but it appears that this year the umpires (or more probably the NL powers-that-be have instructed the umpires to do this) have significantly narrowed and raised the strike zone, probably because run production draws fans to the ballparks. Last night against the Marlins he was getting no calls on the black and so he got rocked again. The Nats’ Stammen is a lot the same way — with a smaller strike zone, these guys aren’t going to make it in The Bigs.

    Comment by Woody Smith — May 3, 2010 @ 8:00 am

  11. It’s now reported (see the Washington Post Nats Journal for one) that JL will miss his next scheduled start and has been pitching with elbow pain for anything other than fastballs, starting with his 4/21 outing against Colorado and continuing over his following two starts, during which time he underwent an MRI that proved negative and received a cortisone shot that failed to alleviate his discomfort.

    Comment by outtaplace — May 5, 2010 @ 6:42 pm

  12. I wonder if you’re ready to return to this topic. It took only 4 starts to for the “I told you so” moment, and it’s been 7 since he was called back up. In which time he has a 3.45 FIP over 43 innings. So you could actually praise the adjustments he made and not have to back off of saberstats. Or is FanGraphs just going to sit on their laurels on this one?

    Comment by Nate — September 5, 2010 @ 12:41 am

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


 

Close this window.

0.074 Powered by WordPress