Last time out, I looked at
the 10 best and 10 most expensive National League starting pitchers in
2012. At the end of that post, I wondered if last year was a good year for
pursuing non-elite starters to try and turn a profit.
The next chart makes me
think it wasn't.
Next 10 (11-20) Most
Expensive N.L. Starting Pitchers 2012
#
|
Player
|
$
|
Sal
|
+/-
|
CBS
|
LABR
|
TW
|
PK
|
2011
|
11
|
$15
|
20
|
-5
|
23
|
16
|
20
|
19
|
||
12
|
$8
|
19
|
-11
|
18
|
19
|
19
|
18
|
$16
|
|
13
|
$14
|
18
|
-4
|
20
|
17
|
17
|
19
|
$29
|
|
14
|
-$4
|
18
|
-22
|
19
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
$18
|
|
15
|
$13
|
17
|
-4
|
22
|
14
|
16
|
16
|
$12
|
|
16
|
$20
|
17
|
3
|
19
|
16
|
16
|
17
|
$16
|
|
17
|
$4
|
17
|
-13
|
18
|
15
|
18
|
19
|
$15
|
|
18
|
$19
|
16
|
3
|
16
|
15
|
17
|
18
|
$14
|
|
19
|
$11
|
16
|
-5
|
18
|
14
|
16
|
16
|
$10
|
|
20
|
$6
|
16
|
-10
|
17
|
14
|
16
|
14
|
$14
|
|
Average
|
$11
|
17
|
-7
|
19
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
$14
|
Daniel Hudson is the only
repeater on this list, yet the earnings and salary columns are nearly identical
to 2011.
The +/- column is all over the place (ranging from a three dollar gain for
Latos and Zimmerman to a $22 loss for Hudson), but the overall result is the
same. This grouping of pitchers loses money for the fourth year in a row.
There are a couple of
changes in the market dynamic from last year.
Where the market gave these
pitchers a pay cut in 2011, they received a raise in 2012. Wainwright partially
explains this phenomenon but not entirely. There were seven $20+ prior year
earners purchased in 2011 but only Kennedy in 2012. This isn't because the
market was being overly generous in 2011 but rather because the best pitchers
in 2010 earned more.
$20+ N.L. Starting
Pitchers: 2010-2012
Year
|
$20+ SP
|
2012
|
11
|
2011
|
9
|
2010
|
17
|
The reason why there
are more $20+ starters in 2010 is a subject for another day. But while the
expert market should recognize that the second tier earned
less in 2011 - and, as a result, probably should be paid less - the experts
continue to do what they have been doing all of these years: assigning a
general dollar value to the grouping rather than judge the overall trend line
from season to season.
This leads right to the
second change from 2011. Er, um...forget what I said about the experts failing to adjust for the change. CBS is the primary reason that this group gets such
a big raise from what it earned in 2011. CBS gives this bloc of pitchers a
three raise per pitcher. Tout Wars and Rotoman drop these guys
a dollar per pitcher and LABR pushes these guys down two dollars per pitcher.
It most definitely isn't stingy
enough. But CBS is the culprit here for the higher prices. In a
three-way battle with the market, the only pitchers they don't "get"
are Garza and Zimmerman (they tie Tout Wars on Luebke).
Oddly enough, it turns out
that the biggest change was that CBS pushed this second tier of starters up by
spending money aggressively on starting pitching for the first time since it
moved to an auction format in 2008. The prior earnings column suggest last year
wasn't the year to do this...and the results more than back this notion up.
Just like they did in the
A.L., CBS has to either eventually run out of money or put a lot more of their
money into starting pitching.
Next 10 (21-30) Most
Expensive N.L. Starting Pitchers 2012
#
|
Player
|
$
|
Sal
|
+/-
|
CBS
|
LABR
|
TW
|
PK
|
2011
|
21
|
$28
|
15
|
13
|
18
|
13
|
15
|
14
|
$21
|
|
22
|
$6
|
13
|
-7
|
14
|
11
|
14
|
15
|
$12
|
|
23
|
$9
|
12
|
-4
|
11
|
13
|
13
|
14
|
$17
|
|
24
|
$1
|
12
|
-11
|
15
|
15
|
6
|
4
|
$15
|
|
25
|
$25
|
12
|
13
|
12
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
$18
|
|
26
|
$7
|
11
|
-4
|
14
|
9
|
11
|
13
|
$12
|
|
27
|
$6
|
11
|
-5
|
6
|
10
|
16
|
15
|
$14
|
|
28
|
$12
|
10
|
2
|
8
|
10
|
12
|
12
|
$12
|
|
29
|
$14
|
9
|
4
|
8
|
9
|
11
|
10
|
$3
|
|
30
|
$5
|
9
|
-4
|
11
|
6
|
10
|
9
|
$9
|
|
Average
|
$11
|
11
|
0
|
12
|
11
|
12
|
12
|
$14
|
As you might expect, they
start running out of money.
You can see this with
pitchers like Lilly, Rodriguez, and Dempster. Gio is the last arm CBS really
goes ga ga over; with one other exception in the next chart it's evident that
CBS is going to start having cash flow problems.
But everyone has backed off
here. These pitchers earned the exact same amount in 2011 as the pitchers in
the 11-20 bloc did but get a three-dollar pay cut instead of a three-dollar
raise. My tired old lesson about prior earnings rings true here; follow the
2011 column, avoid the pitchers in the 11-20 group, and on average you'll be
better off. You even had twice as much of a chance of grabbing a $20 earner
here than you did in 11-20.
One thing you can seem to
avoid by spending some money is a negative earner. Once you start getting into
single-digits, the danger increases.
Next 10 (31-40) Most
Expensive N.L. Starting Pitchers 2012
#
|
Player
|
$
|
Sal
|
+/-
|
CBS
|
LABR
|
TW
|
PK
|
2011
|
31
|
$13
|
8
|
13
|
10
|
8
|
7
|
7
|
$9
|
|
32
|
-$2
|
8
|
-10
|
14
|
5
|
6
|
6
|
$11
|
|
33
|
$11
|
8
|
3
|
9
|
9
|
6
|
11
|
$5
|
|
34
|
$2
|
8
|
-6
|
8
|
8
|
8
|
8
|
$14
|
|
35
|
Jon Niese
|
$18
|
8
|
10
|
6
|
9
|
8
|
9
|
$6
|
36
|
-$6
|
8
|
-14
|
8
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
$14
|
|
37
|
$15
|
7
|
7
|
5
|
9
|
8
|
9
|
$14
|
|
38
|
$7
|
7
|
0
|
6
|
10
|
6
|
8
|
-$4
|
|
39
|
-$1
|
7
|
-8
|
6
|
9
|
7
|
8
|
$10
|
|
40
|
$15
|
7
|
8
|
5
|
7
|
9
|
9
|
$21
|
|
Average
|
$7
|
8
|
-1
|
8
|
8
|
7
|
8
|
$10
|
Chacin, Jurrjens, and
Stauffer not only lose their owners money, but fall entirely into the red.
There are some steady earners, but the $20+ pitchers are gone.
Because the experts and Rotoman are
running out of money, the price points on average are nearly uniform. There are
some significant differences to be sure (Chacin in CBS, Volquez in LABR,
Billingsley in Tout) but on the whole the market is pretty close on all of
these guys.
Next 10 (41-50) Most
Expensive N.L. Starting Pitchers 2012
#
|
Player
|
$
|
Sal
|
+/-
|
CBS
|
LABR
|
TW
|
PK
|
2011
|
41
|
$13
|
6
|
7
|
6
|
5
|
8
|
9
|
$2
|
|
42
|
$6
|
6
|
-1
|
4
|
9
|
6
|
10
|
$3
|
|
43
|
$4
|
6
|
-3
|
6
|
5
|
8
|
9
|
||
44
|
$1
|
6
|
-5
|
3
|
9
|
7
|
6
|
$10
|
|
45
|
$12
|
6
|
6
|
5
|
7
|
6
|
6
|
$9
|
|
46
|
-$2
|
6
|
-8
|
4
|
7
|
6
|
$4
|
||
47
|
$3
|
5
|
-2
|
4
|
7
|
5
|
8
|
$13
|
|
48
|
$15
|
5
|
10
|
5
|
6
|
4
|
6
|
$6
|
|
49
|
$17
|
5
|
12
|
3
|
7
|
4
|
3
|
$17
|
|
50
|
$18
|
4
|
13
|
5
|
3
|
4
|
3
|
$5
|
|
Average
|
$9
|
6
|
3
|
5
|
7
|
6
|
6
|
$7
|
This is the first group
where the market turns a profit. It isn't a tiny profit either. A three-dollar
gain per pitcher on this level of pitchers is kind of a big deal.
But there isn't anything in
the prior year's earnings column that makes me believe the market underspent
here and should have been more aggressive. Vogelsong probably should have been
pushed more but the other two $15+ earners - Burnett and Bailey - came out of
nowhere relative to what they did in 2011. Leake and Bedard - the other double-digit
earners in 2011 - weren't so hot in 2012. Pushing these pitchers to par like
LABR did wasn't necessarily the greatest idea in the world.
The mother of all jackpots
was in the final group.
Next 10 (51-60) Most
Expensive N.L. Starting Pitchers 2012
#
|
Player
|
$
|
Sal
|
+/-
|
CBS
|
LABR
|
TW
|
PK
|
2011
|
51
|
$15
|
4
|
11
|
4
|
3
|
5
|
4
|
$7
|
|
52
|
$6
|
4
|
2
|
3
|
6
|
3
|
5
|
$15
|
|
53
|
$33
|
4
|
29
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
5
|
$13
|
|
54
|
-$8
|
4
|
-11
|
2
|
5
|
4
|
4
|
$11
|
|
55
|
$1
|
3
|
-2
|
4
|
3
|
3
|
7
|
$1
|
|
56
|
$11
|
3
|
8
|
1
|
4
|
3
|
4
|
$3
|
|
57
|
-$1
|
2
|
-3
|
3
|
4
|
R4
|
|||
58
|
-$1
|
2
|
-4
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
3
|
$1
|
|
59
|
Jorge de la Rosa
|
-$2
|
2
|
-5
|
1
|
2
|
4
|
$6
|
|
60
|
-$9
|
2
|
-11
|
4
|
3
|
3
|
-$1
|
||
Average
|
$4
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
$6
|
Well, not the final group.
There are a number of $0-2 salaried pitchers that don't sit for this portrait.
I could go through the 61st through 70th most expensive pitchers, but even for
N.L.-only that's stretching things.
You would expect the group
with R.A. Dickey to turn more than a one-dollar profit, wouldn't you? And yet
this group struggles to get to four dollars per pitcher. Half of the pitchers
in this group lose money.
The earnings relative to
the salaries are misleading. If anyone in any Rotisserie League anywhere carried Wolf for all of those 142 1/3
innings, I'd be shocked. These pitchers are fungible. If your three-dollar
investment is tanking, you're not going to stick around until the bitter end.
The problem isn't what
these pitchers earned. The problem is that if you bought a pitcher like Wolf or
Volstad, you needed to find a replacement. And the replacements last year were
slim. I covered this ground in my last post, but there weren't that many good
starting pitchers out there to get in N.L.-only.
Top 10 N.L. Free Agent
Starting Pitchers 2012
1) Ross Detwiler $12
2) Mike Fiers $11
3) Eric Stults $9
4) Lucas Harrell $9
5) Matt Harvey $7
6) Jason Marquis $5
7) Joe Kelly $5
8) Jacob Turner $4
9) Patrick Corbin $4
10) Ben Sheets $4
This isn't an encouraging
list.
If you didn't get
lucky/display your incredible degree of fantasy baseball skill and buy Dickey,
you probably had to replace one of those starting pitchers you spent $3-4 on.
Maybe you wound up with Detwiler, but chances are better that you wound up with
Sheets or Corbin. With 125 starting pitchers logging at least 120 innings or
more, chances are even better that you wound up with less than that.
But what about relief
pitchers? Surely there were a lot of free agent relief pitchers that earned
more than $4.
That's true. There are 32
free agent relief pitchers that earned more than Ben Sheets did. In terms of
pure earnings, you would have been much better off plucking a reliever off of
the free agent pool.
You need more than earnings,
though; you also need innings. And wins to go along with those innings. And
strikeouts.
But mostly, you need
innings.
It would have been fine to
swing and miss on one starting pitcher and pick up a safe, reliable reliever.
But you probably could not have survived doing this twice. Despite some of the
problems at the top of the heap, that's still where the earnings come from.
N.L. Starting
Pitcher Bids, Sorted by 2012 Earnings
#
|
Slot
|
$
|
SAL
|
+/-
|
CBS
|
LABR
|
TW
|
PK
|
2010
|
1
|
1-10
|
$19
|
25
|
-6
|
27
|
24
|
25
|
28
|
$24
|
2
|
11-20
|
$11
|
17
|
-7
|
19
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
$14
|
3
|
21-30
|
$11
|
11
|
0
|
12
|
11
|
12
|
12
|
$14
|
4
|
31-40
|
$7
|
8
|
-1
|
8
|
8
|
7
|
8
|
$10
|
5
|
41-50
|
$9
|
6
|
3
|
5
|
7
|
6
|
6
|
$7
|
6
|
51-60
|
$4
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
$6
|
Pitcher by pitcher, you can make an argument for picking your
battles. But slot-by-slot, the evidence points to spending at least some of
your money on one of the big dogs. You need a foundation to build your pitching
staff on, and you're far more likely to find that foundation at the top than
you are anywhere else.
1 comment:
Mike,
Thanks again for the great articles - they are incredibly thought provoking. OK, with that out of the way, now the hammer drops! I don't understand how you conclude it's better to go after some of the big dogs. Average value for the top 20 was $15 while average cost was $21. More important, only 6 out of the 20 produced positive value. Pitchers 21 to 60 averaged $8 in value($7.35excluding Dickey)with average cost of $7. Also, one-half of these pitchers produced positive net value. Seems better budgeting to stick to the lower tiers, shift the excess money to hitting and if you get a dog, at least it is not a $15 dog and you still have a reasonable chance to replace the lower priced pitcher with a reasonable FA pick-up. Thoughts ?
Post a Comment