Comments on: Buying Low: Nate Robertson

By: Yakker

Yakker — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:21:07 +0000

Good article, and I agree with the conclusion. However, as a dumpster-diving GM, Robertson’s consistently-high HR rates would concern me, coming as they do in Comerica Park. Perhaps he’s due for the mother of all regressions in 2009, but I think that’s unlikely, especially if he switches home parks.

By: RollingWave

RollingWave — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:58:19 +0000

it does make some serious sense for a potential contender to fill their back rotation… like you know, the Tigers

By: Marcus

Marcus — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 05:32:40 +0000

Nobody is arguing that Robertson is a blue light special at Walmart, or that an organization wouldn’t be better off drafting well and developing their own in-house starting rotation candidates on the cheap. But for those who don’t have an in-house option, he’s a good fit.

Here’s a suggestion: if your team needs a league average SP and you don’t like Robertson, name a cheaper candidate with a comparable skillset, or an equally priced candidate with a superior skillset that is available. Otherwise, why disagree?

By: Anthony

Anthony — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 04:12:58 +0000

he’s not all that much of a bargain. for the top 5-10 teams that can afford to spend that type of money on mediocre pitchers, i guess he’s a bargain. but for the majority of the league, he’s far from that

By: Steve

Steve — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 01:25:11 +0000

while quite honestly, he is a bargain as far as back of the rotation guys go, you can have him, I’d like some payroll flexibility please.

By: philosofool

philosofool — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 17:42:51 +0000

League average FIP in 2006 was 4.52, a mark that Robertson is only slightly off. His career xFIP, which is park adjusted, is better than league average by hair. He doesn’t stink. He’s a perfectly acceptable back of the rotation pitcher available for a lot less money than that similar products that will be on the FA market this winter. Simply put: he’s a deal. The cost of a free agent starter is about 10% of the salary budget of a typical major league team, which is an absurd amount to pay. In terms of peripherals, he’s only a little worse than Lohse, who’s FIP and ERA are clearly helped by Bush Stadium, and he’s available at a much better price (2 years, $17M vs. 4 years, $41M.)

Roberston is a much better deal than, for example, Jarrod Washburn, Miguel Batita or Carlos Silva.

By: JH

JH — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 17:39:28 +0000

You need to take another look at what most teams get from their 4-5 starters. A 4.75 FIP at the back end of a rotation is a very valuable piece to a solid team.

By: Isaac

Isaac — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 08:44:53 +0000

I don’t know about you, but from where I stand a pitcher with a career 4.75 FIP stinks.

By: Marcus

Marcus — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 05:23:47 +0000

Dave isn’t claiming that Robertson will elevate someone into contention; his point was that Robertson is a league average pitcher, and can be acquired for less than a league average pitcher currently demands. As far as “awful” and “he stinks” is concerned, you may want to make an argument instead of an unsupported statement. Dave used FIP and the Detroit’s defensive downgrade to explain why his poor results may not be good predictors of future performance. If you wish to disagree, you’ll need to use something beyond IP to back your stance (and Robertson has delivered around 170 IP, which is also – you guessed it – about average for an average starter).

By: Isaac

Isaac — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 03:36:02 +0000

There’s a reason he is a good buy low candidate, he stinks. Like Jim said, I don’t see how he helps any team that is trying to win now. He hasn’t even been a big innings eater the last two years, and thats on top of being awful.