I think it would be helpful to show all presumed closers at draft time....If you list the 14 presumed closers, I guess you should also list the 14 most expensive starters as well and their ERA/WHIP earnings.
I might be more convinced if more than two or three closers actually earn a positive return in ERA/WHIP. My guess is that most are break even, so buyers better not spend more than their saves and Ks are going to earn, otherwise it's an automatic loss for 1 category.
I'd be glad to fulfill Eugene's request. I would point out, though, that this wasn't the idea I was addressing in my initial post. Rather, I was addressing the following:
Ten Most Expensive A.L. Starting Pitchers 2009
The biggest problem with closers is that you put so much money into one player who only provides a huge advantage in one category.My response wasn't designed to "prove" that closers do earn more but, rather, that they can earn money in these catgories.
Ten Most Expensive A.L. Starting Pitchers 2009
(w ERA/WHIP earnings)
| # | Player | $ | Sal | +/- | $E | $W | $E+W |
| 1 | CC Sabathia | $34 | $31 | +3 | $5 | $7 | $11 |
| 2 | Roy Halladay | $37 | $28 | +9 | $8 | $7 | $16 |
| 3 | Josh Beckett | $28 | $23 | +5 | $2 | $5 | $7 |
| 4 | James Shields | $18 | $23 | -5 | $0 | $1 | $2 |
| 5 | Zack Greinke | $44 | $21 | +23 | $11 | $9 | $20 |
| 6 | Felix Hernandez | $40 | $21 | +20 | $10 | $7 | $17 |
| 7 | Francisco Liriano | $1 | $20 | -19 | -$5 | -$4 | -$9 |
| 8 | John Lackey | $18 | $20 | -1 | $2 | $2 | $4 |
| 9 | Scott Kazmir | $9 | $20 | -11 | -$2 | -$1 | -$4 |
| 10 | A.J. Burnett | $19 | $19 | 0 | $1 | -$1 | -$0 |
| Average | $25 | $23 | +2 | $3 | $3 | $6 |
Ten Most Expensive A.L. Relievers 2009
(w ERA/WHIP earnings)
| # | Player | $ | Sal | +/- | $E | $W | $E+W |
| 1 | Jon Papelbon | $22 | $29 | -7 | $4 | $2 | $6 |
| 2 | Joe Nathan | $28 | $26 | +1 | $4 | $4 | $8 |
| 3 | Joakim Soria | $19 | $26 | -7 | $3 | $2 | $5 |
| 4 | Mariano Rivera | $27 | $25 | +2 | $4 | $5 | $9 |
| 5 | Bobby Jenks | $14 | $22 | -8 | $1 | $1 | $1 |
| 6 | Brian Fuentes | $17 | $21 | -5 | $0 | -$0 | $0 |
| 7 | B.J. Ryan | -$1 | $21 | -22 | -$1 | -$2 | -$3 |
| 8 | Kerry Wood | $11 | $19 | -8 | -$0 | -$0 | -$0 |
| 9 | Joey Devine | $18 | -18 | ||||
| 10 | Frank Francisco | $14 | $15 | -1 | $1 | $2 | $2 |
| Average | $15 | $22 | -7 | $2 | $1 | $3 |
The two charts above come right from my earlier post covering the most expensive A.L. starters and relievers. And - as I would have surmised without running these charts - the 10 most expensive A.L. starters last year did earn more money.
However, the closers do challenge the premise about positive earnings in ERA/WHIP. To be sure, the most successful starters earn much more in ERA/WHIP than their bullpen counterparts. However, four relievers earn $5 or more combined in ERA/WHIP, compared to five starters who manage to pull the same trick.
Another thing to look at - when comparing relievers to starters - is that while your greatest successes came with the starting pitchers last year in ERA/WHIP, so did your greatest failures. If you bought Liriano hoping to make big gains in ERA/WHIP you set yourself back far more in those categories than you did with any Top 10 A.L. reliever.
Of course, Liriano isn't some kind of universal proof that the worst starters kill you more in ERA/WHIP than the worst relievers.
Ten Most Expensive N.L. Starting Pitchers 2009
(w ERA/WHIP earnings)
(w ERA/WHIP earnings)
| # | Player | $ | Sal | +/- | $E | $W | $E+W |
| 1 | Tim Lincecum | $38 | $34 | +4 | $8 | $8 | $15 |
| 2 | Johan Santana | $21 | $34 | -13 | $3 | $3 | $6 |
| 3 | Cole Hamels | $13 | $30 | -17 | -$2 | $1 | -$1 |
| 4 | Brandon Webb | -$1 | $30 | -31 | -$1 | -$0 | -$1 |
| 5 | Dan Haren | $33 | $27 | +6 | $5 | $10 | $14 |
| 6 | Jake Peavy | $10 | $26 | -16 | $0 | $2 | $2 |
| 7 | Roy Oswalt | $13 | $23 | -10 | -$1 | $2 | $1 |
| 8 | Javier Vazquez | $35 | $22 | +13 | $6 | $9 | $15 |
| 9 | Chad Billingsley | $16 | $21 | -6 | -$0 | $0 | -$0 |
| 10 | Yovani Gallardo | $19 | $20 | -1 | $1 | $0 | $1 |
| Average | $20 | $27 | -7 | $2 | $4 | $5 |
Ten Most Expensive N.L. Relievers 2009
(w ERA/WHIP earnings)
| # | Player | $ | Sal | +/- | $E | $W | $E+W |
| 1 | Brad Lidge | $2 | $24 | -21 | -$5 | -$4 | -$9 |
| 2 | Francisco Rodriguez | $16 | $23 | -7 | $0 | $0 | $1 |
| 3 | Carlos Marmol | $10 | $20 | -10 | $1 | -$2 | -$0 |
| 4 | Jonathan Broxton | $26 | $19 | +7 | $3 | $4 | $7 |
| 5 | Jose Valverde | $16 | $19 | -3 | $2 | $2 | $4 |
| 6 | Matt Capps | $6 | $17 | -11 | -$3 | -$3 | -$5 |
| 7 | Chad Qualls | $12 | $16 | -4 | $0 | $1 | $2 |
| 8 | Francisco Cordero | $18 | $15 | +3 | $3 | $0 | $3 |
| 9 | Heath Bell | $23 | $15 | +8 | $2 | $2 | $4 |
| 10 | Brian Wilson | $21 | $14 | +7 | $2 | $1 | $4 |
| Average | $15 | $18 | -3 | $1 | $0 | $1 |
...because Brad Lidge was a far worse offender in the N.L. (among these datasets) than any of his starting pitcher counterparts.
These lists do tell the same story, though, in terms of how many ERA/WHIP success stories you see for both the starters and the relievers. As many pitchers earned $4 or more in ERA/WHIP among the expensive closers (4) as among the expensive starters (4). It goes without saying that I'd rather have Lincecum, Vazquez and Haren's ERA/WHIPs than Broxton, Valverde, and Bell's. Once again, though, this challenges the notion that spending big money on starting pitchers leads to an automatic head start in ERA/WHIP; the results, in fact, are scattershot.
Two more points before I leave this topic behind.
1) You should pay any player - hitter or pitcher - based on what you think that pitcher will do, not based upon a notion that X is automatically better than Y. I'd rather have Joe Nathan than Bobby Jenks because Nathan is a three and a half category stud while Jenks provides saves and little else (and may, in fact, hurt you in two categories). Individual performance and trends can - and should - trump these types of player groupings.
2) Overall earnings in the charts above matter more to me than what a pitcher did in ERA or WHIP alone. I like the A.L. starters above as a group because they made money on their investment and don't like the relievers because they lost money. In the N.L., I like the relievers better because while they earn less per pitcher they return more on the dollar than their starting counterparts. If the market in your league pushes starters past a logical bidding point, you should grab two (or even three) cheap relievers and adjust later. If relievers are being pushed to crazy prices, buy one reliever (or none) and worry about saves later. Let the market in your league - not the notion that "no relievers can earn money in ERA/WHIP" - be your guide.
No comments:
Post a Comment