Boston’s Ridiculous Pitching Depth Pt. 1
The Boston Red Sox organization may have the best pitching depth in all of Major League Baseball. The veteran starting rotation currently boasts Josh Beckett, Daisuke Matsuzaka, Jon Lester, Tim Wakefield, Brad Penny, and John Smoltz. For those of you counting at home, that adds up to six quality starting pitchers. Six pitchers that could probably be No. 3 starters or better on almost any club in the Majors.
Now to be fair, both Penny and Smoltz come with major questions marks because of their health. Smoltz, 41, will only be available for half a season at best, but he could be a major difference maker in a short playoff series – as either a starter or a reliever. Penny won 16 games in both 2006 and 2007. At the age of 30, he still has the chance to regain his old form if his arm does not fall off. All he really needs to do is stay healthy until Smoltz is ready. Together, Penny and Smoltz make a pretty intimidating two-headed monster.
Wakefield, now 42, had his share of injury woes in 2008 thanks to shoulder problems, but he is a great value at just $4 million and throwing the knuckleball takes less toll on his body than other pitches. He should still be good for 10 wins, 150 innings and possibly 100 strikeouts.
Lester made a valiant return from cancer and provided 33 starts in 2008. In his first full season, he compiled 16 wins, 210.1 innings and 152 strikeouts. The 25-year-old southpaw should be even better in 2009 with a year of experience under his belt.
Matsuzaka, 28, is arguably the most talented and most frustrating pitcher on the staff. He has about six pitches in his repertoire, he gets good movement on all of them and he sits around 92 mph with his fastball. Matsuzaka won 18 games in 2008 but the scary thing is that he should have won even more. If he can learn to trust his stuff and stop nibbling, he could win a lot of games in 2009.
Beckett had some injury concerns of his own in 2008 and won just 12 games after racking up 20 in 2007. He should be a good bet for about 200 innings and close to 200 strikeouts. If you’re looking for Fantasy impact, grab Beckett followed by Lester, Matsuzaka, Penny and Wakefield.
The depth that the organzation has is even more impressive given how Boston acquired the six pitchers above. Lester was a home-grown project, having been selected out of high school in the second round of the 2002 draft. Matsuzaka was an international free agent signing out of Japan. Wakefield was rescued off the scrap heap after Pittsburgh (of all places) gave up on him and released him. Beckett was acquired via a trade with Florida (although Boston gave up Hanley Ramirez for him). Penny and Smoltz were then added via free agency. Good clubs find multiple ways to obtain talent; Boston is quite obviously one of them. And Fantasy Baseball owners can reap the rewards in 2009.
18
Matsuzaka had a 4.03 FIP and a 4.46 tRA in 29 starts and he should have won MORE than 18 games? Did I read that right?
The guy did lead the majors in avg against.
Agree with Justin. every projection on fangraph shows lester regressing greatly. the best one only gives him 12 wins, a 3.76 era (3.95 FIP), with 129 so in 171 innings. but obviously, these projections didn’t factor in a year of experience under his belt.
Lester may be an exception with these projections, though. Remember, the other seasons the projections are going off of, were years he was sick with cancer. Now he is healthy. Last year was not a fluke IMO.
Justin, the thing is, those are “what if” stats that have absolutely nothing to do with how many wins a pitcher gets. All that matters with wins is how many runs a pitcher gives up versus how many runs the offense provides. Not that I don’t think FIP and tRA can be useful, but they definitely aren’t in that context.
Nick: I completely agree with you. The projections are useful sometimes, but really shouldn’t be the main factor in how you plan your fantasy team. Really, I think these blogs are much more useful :).
Wakefield, Penny, and Smoltz as #3 starters or better on almost any club in the majors?
I stopped reading at that point.
You do know which Wakefield, Penny and Smoltz he’s talking about, right?
David: Smoltz and Penny would probably be #2′s when healthy, Wake a #4. How can anyone disagree with that?
The projection systems showing Lester takeing a step back are an excellent case of why projection systems should not alwaysbe relied upon.
I don’t think theres any adjustment for cancer for one?
Lesters start of the year was miserable he had more walks than Ks in his first month. It sounds strange but at some point in may he just “got it” his control from that point went from well below aveerage to nicely above average. His fastball went from averaging 91 during this first cpl months to 94 during the last cpl months and plfayoffs.
Really if he can pitch like he did in the last few months of year he should barring injury be a top 10 overall pitcher in 09
Ray, what a funny guy. I appreciate your sense of humor even if no one else does.
Pick a projection, any projection you want, and then count the number of teams that have at least three starters projected to be better than the projections for those three.
Without doing the research myself, I’ll bet there’s at least 10 teams meeting that criteria.
David, funny stuff. If only real life was a projection. I projected myself to be billionaire and live in a 10,000 sq ft mansion. I keep showing people my projections but for some reason they’re not impressed by it.
i understand the regression of players who only have one solid year under their cap. look at carmona as an instance of a guy who regressed.
i just find it funny how some places project Burnett with 18 wins. I guess they forget Burnett only pitches full years on contract years.
Smoltz and Penny can easily still be number 3 SPs when healthy. Both can win 14-16 games a year when healthy which is no more then Burnett or Sabathia will win.
FYI Wake is a 4 at best. I’d say closer to a number 5 then anything.
Do you even have any idea what these numbers mean? The average AL starter’s RA/9 since 2004 is 5.01. Wakefield’s is 4.94. How is that not the very definition of a number three?
Matthew Carruth did a nice breakdown of tRA+ by rotation slot over at Stat Corner. Basically 119 and up is a #1, 107-118 is a #2, 95-106 is a #3, 86-94 is a #4, and below 86 is a #5. Wakefield’s tRA+ the last six years? 121, 106, 113, 103, 96, 100.
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that by “4 at best” you meant “4 at worst” and I’m just going to ignore that little “closer to a number 5 than anything” remark since he’s as close to the lower threshold of a two as he is to a five.
Ray & MattLee:
How’s that Penny/Smoltz “#3 on virtually any team” working out for you now?
Jim – forgot all about you. #2′s?
Another #2 start for Penny tonight. Guess he must be hurt.
Jim, Jim, Jim, where have you gone?