Mazz on Masterson.
by tommy.otm on Dec 10, 2008 8:59 PM EST
Email
PrintSo we've all read Mazz's interview with OTM from the other day.
Here's his sidebar from today's Globe/blog thingy:
Tony's Top 5
Reasons to keep Justin Masterson in the bullpen:
5 The impact on Manny Delcarmen. As we learned last year, Delcarmen is far more effective in the sixth or seventh innings.
4 His stuff is better. As a starter, Masterson's fastball is in 90-92. As a reliever, he has touched 96. This gives Masterson the ability to induce K's and double plays.
3 The lefty issue. Unless or until he incorporates an effective changeup or split, Masterson will continue to be vulnerable against lefthanded batters.
2 Efficiency - or inefficiency. As a starter, Masterson's difficulties against lefthanded batters can inflate his pitch counts and shorten his outings.
1 The team would be better off. It may seem sad to say, but an effective late-inning reliever now may have more value than a mediocre, back-end starter.
On the whole, I agree that Masterson should stay in the pen. But this does seem inconsistent with the idea that Masterson is "the best of the lot" of Buch and Bowden. Unless he is implying that Buch and Bowden project as worse than "mediocre, backend starter(s)." Which I take serious issue with.
41 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Mazz
In isolation all he says here makes sense. What doesn’t make sense is the previous “best of the lot” comment. I suppose he was saying “at the moment” meaning he might have more value now, and he seems to think that versatility is meaningful in this context. However in reality “versitility” is not something that other teams will be looking for from these three; everyone wants quality starters for value.
How is no one else seeing the mechanics issue?
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
You know the 'young pitching talent surplus' the Rays have?
Jeff Niemann, Wade Davis, Jeremy Hellickson, Mitch Talbot, and so on? They all have worse MiL numbers, are older and have worse stuff than Bowden. I think we underrate Bowden a bit.
Mother---- him and John Wayne!
by MerryGoByeBye on Dec 10, 2008 9:53 PM EST up reply actions
Price is the real deal.
"You know you're having a bad day when the fifth inning rolls around and they drag the warning track." - Mike Flanagan, Baltimore Orioles pitcher, 1992.
Bowden has the best K/BB of them all
I think Bowden gets a bad look because of the lower K/9 which is his game. He is more control then the other too, which should translate well when called up.
Masterson has the worst K/BB of the bunch and needs the most work. His game relies on his higher GB%.
Visit my site - http://www.rotosavants.com
by Dailyrotopickups on Dec 11, 2008 2:49 PM EST up reply actions
David Price is a big girly girl
And he has awesome stuff, but his MiL numbers really don’t matter because he stayed, what, 2 days there?
Mother---- him and John Wayne!
by MerryGoByeBye on Dec 11, 2008 8:02 PM EST up reply actions
Cumulative, yes.
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
I just think we are going to have to part with one of Bowden, Buchholz, or Masterson to get anything worth a damn coming back. Of the 3 for me, Bowden is the one I’d part with.
+1
If you have to trade one, he’d be my choice. However, it’s looking like Theo won’t trade for a young catcher any time soon. So, all three will likely stay put.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Dec 11, 2008 9:09 AM EST up reply actions
Agreed
Masterson is the first to trade.
Visit my site - http://www.rotosavants.com
by Dailyrotopickups on Dec 11, 2008 2:50 PM EST up reply actions
Buch.
I gave up on him early last year.
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
Don't
He has just as much potential as he did before his unfortunate major league performance. Give him time.
I'm not looking at his potential anymore.
He’s no longer a prospect.
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
After half a season in the majors,
you won’t look at his potential? Ellsbury has been with the big club three times longer, and I still think about his potential. Just because he has some major league experience, does not mean he’s done improving.
He still got power building.
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
Pitchers are different from everyday players.
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
Really?
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/gamelog?playerId=28487&year=2006
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
Only prospects have potential?
He was terrible last year. No question about it. But I’m sure there is an analogous player out there who sucked then got awesome. I’m not going to find him (I learned in PoliSci that analogizing leads to oversimplification and incorrect conclusions). But to say you won’t look at someone’s potential isn’t smart.
"analogous player out there who sucked then got awesome"
Maddux comes to mind. Glavine and Smoltz too, for that matter.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Santana sucked
for YEARS. See here for his story.
"It's just a tiny little nick, but it hurts when I get champagne in there."
- Jason Bay, on getting spiked scoring the winning run in ALDS Game Four.
by 0157H7 on Dec 12, 2008 12:28 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Analogy would make no sense for now.
A = A+B, where A is sucky beginning and B is a HOF career afterward. And yes, that’s an equation.
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
That's the basic comparison that y'all have been making.
There is nothing to show that he will turn it around like the above mentioned pitchers.
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
I think you messed up your variables
I think our comparison would be:
HOF career + sucky beginning = HOF career.
I get your point though. The sucky beginning obviously makes it more likely that he will end up sucky. Our point though is that a sucky beginning does not preclude a HOF career. The above equation has happened in the past. (I don’t think I have ever used the word “sucky” this much and I promise to never do it again)
My point is that there is no way to conclusively say either way.
It’s all opinions.
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
Exactly.
You have to admit there is some chance that it works out for him. Let’s say 25% chance that hes a total bust, 60% that hes a solid major league pitcher and 15% that he is an ace. Given those probabilities he is highly valuable, and more valuable than a bullpen arm.
Not sure you can conclusively determine percentages either.
50/50 aside.
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
no you can't.
but the point is, depending on how you assign those percentages, shows you how valuable he is.
In fairness
I bet there are more guys who sucked at first then continued to suck. I’m not sure how many were as hyped as Buch then sucked; or then killed it. The point is that we have to judge him as an individual. I think he will become, at worst, a league average starter and this is worth $10 mill per as a FA.
Yes
But the point is that even the best of the best sometimes hit the majors with a thud.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
And so did the worst of the worst sometimes.
You can’t use that analogy to say he will bounce back.
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
The point is he could,
while you seem to be saying that he has already shown his true level of performance and will continue to be that bad going forward.
I'm saying I don't see the potential anymore.
It’s just my opinion. I think he is going to be a Ryan Leaf-like bust [cross-sport ref].
Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/glossary/
Mazz is kinda right
Reacting to his points:
5. I think its stupid that Delcarmen is more effective in the sixth/seventh innings (not sure if its true, just know its stupid). he’s right that Masterson was great in the eighth.
4. He’s also right that Masterson has better stuff out of the pen, but that’s almost every pitcher.
3. The lefty issue is the biggest one. It’s not yet clear that Masterson can be effective against lefties. This drops his value enormously. He can never be more than a situational guy if he can’t consistently get lefty outs.
2. Two is the same as three. Should have been four points.
1. Wrong. If Masterson could be a mediocre back end starter, meaning to me a league average pitcher, then he is more valuable as a starter. The fear is that he would be a bad starter. That’s why most guys go to the bullpen. They can not be highly effective starters.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
- Shane Victorino lands role on ‘Hawaii Five-0′
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
