Let’s Talk About “Aces”
October 22, 2009 at 12:01 pm | Posted in 2010 sucks so far, aces, Clayton Kershaw, Felix Hernandez, Josh Johnson, Roy Halladay | 26 CommentsI’d hoped to wait a little longer to move past 2009 and get into the real offseason stuff, but since the drumbeats are already starting (okay, and work is really boring today, too) we might as well get out ahead of what is sure to be a defining issue of the winter:
OHMYGOD OHMYGOD OHMYGOD WE NEED AN ACE NOW NOW ACE ACE
Which is basically the impression I’m getting from the general public right now. As always, Bill Plaschke’s the one who starts the negativity train rolling:
For the Dodgers to fulfill that promise, the first bit of education must occur in the front office, which needs to realize something that everyone from here to Nicaragua now understands.
They need an ace, or they will continue to be NLCS jokers.
The fact that they had to start castoff Vicente Padilla in Wednesday’s critical game makes one sort of statement.
The fact that Padilla was a complete wreck, giving up six runs in three innings, just confirms that statement.
In this championship series, the Dodger starters were 0-3 with a 12.59 ERA, and even the best bullpen in baseball couldn’t save that.
The ERA statement is a little unfair – so much of that is due to Hiroki Kuroda’s disaster in Game 3, and he’d likely have started a game regardless - but for once, Billy’s not completely wrong. The pitching wasn’t championship quality in this series, and I don’t think anyone disagrees that upgrades will need to be made in the starting rotation if the Dodgers are going to go any further next year.
Here’s the thing, though, as I learned while listening to some hilarious calls on KABC’s DodgerTalk after the game (and good lord, Josh Suchon, I have no idea how you have the patience to deal with some of the comments you get there). Most people don’t seem to understand just how difficult it is to acquire an “ace”. It’s not like you snap your fingers and one just appears, and as we’ve been through so many times, the fact that Ned Colletti didn’t come up with one in July says much less about his ability as GM than it does about the ridiculous demands made by Toronto for Roy Halladay and Cleveland’s questionable decision to accept Philadelphia’s package for Cliff Lee.
There’s so few pitchers of that quality that even exist, and if you have one, you’re not giving him up. On the rare occasions that one does hit the market, you’re either going to be paying a crushing price in talent, an enormous free agent contract, or both.
So before we start an offseason filled with bleatings of “we need an ace! I don’t care what it costs!” let’s try to define just how possible that’s going to be.
1. What is an ace?
How do you define an “ace”? There’s all sorts of nebulous ideas out there you’ll hear, like “knows how to win”, and “playoff tested”, and “veteran toughness”. Those are all bullshit. How many times have you seen Zack Greinke, Tim Lincecum, Roy Halladay, and – until this year – Cliff Lee in the playoffs? Yet, you’d still consider them “aces”, right? No, we’re going to do this with stats.
Let’s go with two Baseball Prospectus measures on this – VORP, and SNLVAR, which is “Support Neutral Value Above Replacement”, i.e., taking out the variables of offense and defense to measure just a pitcher’s contributions. (Full explanation here.)
So how many “aces” were there in 2009? One per team? Well, when you get down to #30 on those lists, you get names like Ted Lilly and Kevin Millwood. Quality pitchers to be sure, but hardly anyone’s definition of an “ace”. Completely arbitrarily, the top 20 seems to be a more appropriate cutoff, just based on the names there. As it happens, 19 names make the top 20 on both the VORP and SNLVAR leaderboards, with Jered Weaver and Wandy Rodriguez making one and just missing the other. We’ll include them, give Johan Santana, Brandon Webb and Jake Peavy injury exemptions, and go with 24 total pitchers; quibble all you want about whether these guys are “aces”, this is just unquestionably who the top pitchers were in 2009 – plus those three.
2) Who are the 2009 aces, then?
Zack Greinke
Adam Wainwright
Felix Hernandez
Tim Lincecum
Roy Halladay
Chris Carpenter
Jair Jurrjens
Matt Cain
Cliff Lee
Javier Vazquez
Justin Verlander
Wandy Rodriguez
Dan Haren
Josh Johnson
Clayton Kershaw
CC Sabathia
Jon Lester
Randy Wolf
Ubaldo Jimenez
Edwin Jackson
Jered Weaver
Johan Santana
Jake Peavy
Brandon Webb
I’m sure a few things jump out at you from that list, like “there’s two Dodgers on it!!” (yep, we’ll get to that in a second) and “what about guys I know like Cole Hamels and Roy Oswalt and John Lackey?!” Well, I shouldn’t have to explain Hamels, who got kicked around by the Dodgers twice in the NLCS after a mediocre season, and Oswalt’s been declining for four straight years, down to just league-average in 2009. While Lackey’s a solid pitcher, ERA’s of 3.75 and 3.83 the last two years hardly have him beating down Cy Young’s door. If Cy Young had a door. And wasn’t dead.
3) Oooh! Aces!! I want them now! Gimme gimme gimme! The cost be damned!
So now that we’ve defined 24 “aces”, what are the chances of the Dodgers actually ending up with any of these guys?
No chance in hell, teams won’t move them, at least this offseason division (13): Zack Greinke, Adam Wainwright, Edwin Jackson, Justin Verlander, Jon Lester, Jair Jurrjens, Cliff Lee, C.C. Sabathia, Chris Carpenter, Johan Santana, Jake Peavy, Wandy Rodriguez, Jered Weaver
No chance in hell, within the NL West division (5): Tim Lincecum, Matt Cain, Ubaldo Jimenez, Dan Haren, Brandon Webb
No chance in hell, hates the West Coast division (1): Javier Vazquez
Already Dodgers (2): Clayton Kershaw, Randy Wolf
Let’s not overlook that last point. While no one considers Wolf to be a top-level guy, by all measures he was one of the best pitchers in all of baseball in 2009. And Kershaw? Just leave the kid alone and let him be awesome. He’s done nothing but improve in his short career, dominating for much of 2009. You could make the case that he’s an “ace” right now – I did already, in July, pointing out that:
Look, what Kershaw is doing right now is simply unbelievable, as his 2.76 ERA is good for 11th in all of baseball. Forget his age for a moment, because the performances we’re seeing are outstanding no matter what year his was born. In the 9 starts since his 2.2 inning struggle on June 10, Kershaw’s pitched 56 2/3 innings… and given up all of five earned runs. That’s an ERA of 0.80, which would be awesome if it didn’t make the blood rush to my head hard enough to make me think I’m going to pass out. Really, you think there’s anyone in baseball that’s going to improve on that? There’s a pretty solid case to be made that Clayton Kershaw has been the best pitcher in baseball for the last two months, and that’s even with Mark Buehrle doing nothing but throwing perfect games lately (he gave up 8 ER in 3.1 IP four starts ago).
If a guy like that is our best pitcher in 2010, I think I’ll be more than okay with that. Still, the only thing better than one ace is two, so…
4) So there’s only three aces who may or may not be available?
Sure seems that way - Felix Hernandez, Josh Johnson, and Roy Halladay, and even they’re not for sure. Hernandez made it to the bigs even earlier than Kershaw, and was outstanding at age 23 this year (19-5, 2.49 ERA, 217 K), so the only reason he even might be on the market is because he’s only a year away from free agency and the Mariners might not think they can keep him. If they make him available – a big if – it’s going to cost an ungodly haul of prospects and at least $180m in contracts, because he’s that good.
Johnson would be available for the same reason, as he’s in his arbitration years and the Marlins may not be able to afford him. He’s less of a sure thing than Hernandez if only because he had two years of arm troubles, but he came up huge this year (15-5, 3.23 ERA, 209 IP). However, he’s not free agent eligible until 2012 (I think), so the Fish might not feel pressure to move him just yet.
And then there’s Halladay, yet again. There’s no question that he’s on a Hall of Fame trajectory. But there is going to be a question about whether the new Toronto GM, Alex Anthopolos, is going to be as absurd in his requests as J.P. Ricciardi was. Either way, Halladay’s a free agent after 2010, so if you’re going to give up a boatload of prospects to get him, you’ll want to sign him – but how much are you going to want to give a guy who’ll be 34 in 2011 with over 2000 innings on that arm?
5) So you’re saying there’s no ace coming?
Well, I’m saying that there’s already an ace here in Clayton Kershaw, and I’m also saying that anyone who’s given up on Chad Billingsley is a fool. Don’t forget, the two aces everyone wanted to trade Billingsley for – Lee and Halladay – each ended up back in the minors after establishing themselves in the bigs. I’m not saying Billingsley needs to be farmed out, just that he’d hardly be the first young pitcher to struggle for a bit before regaining his game.
As I see it, there’s only those three top-tier guys that might be available. I think the cost for Hernandez would be prohibitive, and I don’t think the Marlins are ready to move Johnson. Now if the price for Halladay has dropped due to A) only getting him for 2010, rather than the ’09 playoff push as well, and B) a new boss in town who’s more reasonable, then I’d be interested in exploring that – as long as it doesn’t take Kershaw or Billingsley.
No one wants to improve the pitching staff more than me; you just can’t forget that there’s only so many guys like that out there. After all, they wouldn’t be “aces” if every team had a bunch, would they?
26 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a Reply
How Many McCourt Sins?
MSTI on the web
MSTI Library
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
God, I love ur blog. Awesome work, friend.
Comment by Austin Lesch— October 22, 2009 #
The interesting thing about your list is how many of those would the loudest bleaters for an “ace” discount. I think Jair Jurrjens has a world of talent, but would the chief bleater for the Times (I can’t even mention his name anymore) accept him as the ace the Dodgers supposedly need? And of course he’d immediately discount Kershaw and Wolf. And probably Jackson, Vazquez, Rodriguez and Weaver too.
What the Dodger pitching staff needs the most is to be rid of that foul stench known as “Honeycutt”.
Comment by Mike— October 22, 2009 #
Yeah, I was actually really surprised to see that Wandy Rodriguez had been so good this year – I had no idea. Still, I’d hardly call him an ace. What I probably should have done was some sort of three-year regression study that took into account more than just 2009, but, well, there’s only so many numbers to crunch in a day.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— October 22, 2009 #
The only thing that separates good pitchers like Kershaw and Wolf from “aces” in the eyes of the media is wins. If Kershaw had had any kind of run support and gone 17-5 with every other stat being exactly the same, the media would be talking about how he should win the Cy Young, not how LA needs an “ace”.
Comment by bray424— October 22, 2009 #
I saw the most idiotic thing in an mlb.com article I was reading the other day with some moron saying “CLAYTON KERSHAW WAS ONLY 8-8! I KNOW HE’S GOT A GOOD ERA BUT ONLY 8 WINS??? HE’S SO OVERRATED!!”. Yeah, I’ll admit there’s that old-timey baseball side of me that immediately vaults a pitcher’s value sky high when I see 17+ wins next to his name, but that side is quickly beaten down by the more rational “yeah, but what’s his ERA, FIP, and OPS against have to say about that?” I think the really scary part is that Kershaw improved so much in just one year. I expected a league average ERA from him at best this year and he turned in a sub-3.00 ERA. Maybe he was a little lucky, and hopefully the walks go down a bit, he’s still worthy of being called an “ace” in my opinion.
Comment by The Fury— October 22, 2009 #
Great post man. Nothing else to say. Lets hope Wolf is offered and accepts arbitration, although not f…ing likely. You should do a similar bats on available (or lack thereof) hitters that could fill gaps (perceived or real)!
Comment by BFCD— October 22, 2009 #
I don’t know what’s more depressing right now, having the season end the way it did yesterday or being in L.A. and having to hear idiot after idiot calling for the Dodgers to “trade Billingsley, dump Broxton, waive Manny and get a couple of aces and power hitters.” What you heard on Dodger Talk yesterday is just a small sampling of what’s been on the radio airwaves the last couple of days since the Game 4 meltdown.
Outside of Halladay possibly being available, I don’t see the Dodgers obtaining an “ace” this offseason. I’d love Hernandez, but the cost would be way too much (surely to include Kershaw) in prospects and money, so really, I don’t want him.
So with that being reality, I’m totally fine with that. Having Kershaw and Billingsley at the top of the rotation is a really good thing, and it wouldn’t surprise me the least if they did what Lincecum and Cain did this season. The 2010 Dodgers don’t need much tweaking to be world series contenders again. We just need to be patient and hope for some breaks, which every team needs to win it all.
Comment by Hamlet— October 22, 2009 #
Couldn’t agree more! I just hope the idiot media pressure doesn’t work down Ned.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— October 23, 2009 #
Most exceellent Sir!
Comment by bluetrain— October 22, 2009 #
Damn, this is an awesome post. Well done. –SoSG Sax
Comment by SoSG Sax— October 22, 2009 #
I posted earlier this year that Kershaw & Bills can be a second coming of Koufax and Drysdale. Even if they never reach quite that level (it’s a lot to ask, to be sure), I think the Blue will be just fine if they hold on to them and let them blossom.
My fear is that the pressure to “win the whole f-ing thing” will force Ned into thinking he needs to make a trade to get a big arm for the postseason, because the core group has failed at the highest level twice now.
Hopefully, by the time the deadline rolls around… Kershaw & Bills are sitting on 9 or 10 wins apiece, we’re 6 or 7 games up in the west, and the “kids” are tearing up pitching staffs.
We are in prime position to compete for a title for the next five seasons… as long as Ned can keep his finger off the button.
Comment by Vegas Blue— October 22, 2009 #
Great breakdown Mike, too bad the voices of reason will be drowned out by the Chicken Littles of Dodger fandom.
With the McCourt divorce and a number of young arbitration eligible Dodgers due raises this off season, I don’t imagine we’ll be in the “ace” market anyways, and we don’t really need to. Kershaw will continue to improve, and it’s way too soon to give up on Billz.
Comment by Babe Herman— October 22, 2009 #
Great post!
I am a dodger fan who lives in AZ and thank goodness I’m missing all the negative radio talk on the beloved blue.
I would just like to say that Brandon Webb has publicly stated that he will NOT be a Diamondback next year. I think he’s opting out of his contract…wouldn’t it be nice to see him in blue (tho I’m not sure if he’ll be ready for spring training from surgery)
’til March…love to see them play when nothing matters and everyone is having a good time. These playoff games were way too stressful!!
Comment by Patty— October 22, 2009 #
Now signing Webb is something Could go for. Can you imagine a rotation of Webb, Bilz, and Kershaw that would be 3 guys that is living to potential could be CY young canidates. Plus, Kuroda who is good and if healthy pretty good and Garland eating innings.
Comment by gillbert— October 23, 2009 #
If Dave Duncan ends up not going back to the Cardinals, we should pay him $20 million a year to be our pitching coach. Then we can all just sit back and watch Kershaw and Bills mow people down.
I know it doesn’t matter anymore, but the only thing I would really like to know is what Ned offered for Cliff Lee. You’d think if Shapiro was going to take a lesser deal (which he seems to have done here), he would have taken it from the guy who dealt him a top 3 catching prospect for CASEY BLAKE.
If Halladay’s price comes down, we should make a run at him. Other than that, I have only one other idea. I know there’s a lot to get in the way of this, but there’s a good chance the Braves will make Derek Lowe available. He had a crappy year for him, but I honestly think this team is much better suited for him now than a year ago. With Chad and Clayton, he wouldn’t have to be THE guy for us, just go out there and rack up innings and tally up wins. He wasn’t an ace, but we put a lot of pressure on him to be one. The offense is better, and we can get him some wins. What do you guys think?
Also, I would not be opposed to the Webb idea.
Comment by Justin— October 22, 2009 #
Derek Lowe is going to make $15 million for each of the next three years. I’d rather keep Garland for half the price and better production.
Comment by J— October 22, 2009 #
You know where I stand on Billz, if he is fixable, fine. Keep him. For all we know his problem is physical and he could be as good as gold come next spring. I am just somewhat reluctant to take that chance, but the talent of the young man makes it a worthwhile gamble. Of course, a smarter, more pro-active pitching coach would likely be what we need.
Of the pitchers who are available and might fit the payroll, the only names I could come up with are Sheets (injury concerns) and Bedard (head and arm concerns). Seeing as how it is likely the Nuclear Winter of the McCourt Divorce Proceedings will have the Blue squeezing every nickel to death, taking huge risks on the cheap may be our only option.
Comment by grabarkewitz— October 22, 2009 #
If you want an “Ace” just buy Kershaw and Bills a shirt from Juan’s “Beast Mode” supplier saying “ACE!”.
Dodgers need to add a strong arm to the pen without giving up anything good. Best bet is through free agency, just spend some more money that is about to get divided in half and go through a contemptuous legal ritual. Fuck. Can we divide an ace and get Sundays through Thursdays?
Comment by Dodger Dude— October 22, 2009 #
said “pen” but meant “rotation”.
We need another good starter if we are serious about this whole winning thing.
Comment by Dodger Dude— October 22, 2009 #
That’s all well and good, and you make excellent points as always.
But…
What the heck happened to Billz in last year’s playoffs? What the hell happened to him in the second half of 2009? Seems to me his development went backward. Can we count on him next year? Can he lead a pitching staff in the post-season?
Kershaw is still wet behind the ears. He MAY become an ace pitcher at some point, but it ain’t gonna be next year. A big risk counting on him to carry the pitching staff.
What happened to our starting pitching in general against the Phils? Are you confident of making it into and surviving through 2010′s playoffs with this bunch. I’m not. I wasn’t all year. Sure, you can cite all the stats you like but there is no stat for mental toughness. An experience ace, a term you deride joyfully in your post, is assumed to have that mental toughness. THAT’S why he’s called an ace; he elevates his game to a higher level.
So yeah sure, it’s difficult to get an ace. Yeah sure, its an abused term. And yeah, there comes a time when a team has to make a deal to bring in a key missing piece. The Dodgers’ key missing piece is somebody to lead the pitching staff. Somebody to shut down the powerful bats of our next NLCS opponent.
The Dodgers do not have that player. If the Dodgers do not get that player, however difficult and expensive such a deal may be, they will fail in the playoffs again. Mark my words.
THIS is why I think the Dodgers need an ace. I am well aware of the difficulties of obtaining such a player. I am also well aware of the fact that stats can be used to support any argument. But your otherwise excellent post fails to answer the one critical question: who will lead our pitching staff in next year’s playoffs?
Give me a good answer and I’ll stop asking for an ace.
Comment by Shmolnick— October 23, 2009 #
I don’t mean to mock your post, so don’t think that I am, however, I think you missed the whole point of this article. The point is that while we may not have a true “ace”, we have 4 (possibly 5 by next year) quality pitchers who were both very good and very consistent for most of the year.
Your definition of an ace seems to be that this player can somehow “will” his team to win, but unless he can score runs AND shutout the opposing team, I’m not really sure how he can do that. For example, we saw in the series against the Cardinals that Wainwright (a bonafide ace) only allowed 1 run over 8 innings, but that didn’t help his team score more runs or get his team a win.
Guys like Roy Halladay who throw complete games nearly 30% of the time don’t really exist anymore, and even so, he’s just one guy, and nobody’s infallible, so unless he makes a deal with the devil and is guaranteed a win in every playoff game he ever appears in, then it’s not worth giving up what you have in order to try and capture a unicorn.
The thing we have that a lot of teams don’t have is quality depth. I was actually very confident going into the series with the Phillies because I felt that besides Lee, the Phillies had no one they could really rely on to turn in a good performance and we had Wolf and Kershaw who were two great left handers to try and shut them down. They didn’t, but they also ran into an incredibly hot Phillies offense and a post-it note for a strike zone. I’m not sure any pitcher could have done much better against them, given the circumstances. Besides, it wasn’t just the pitching staff, the whole team sucked a collective egg in that series. The offense disappeared half the time and our bullpen tried putting out fires with kerosene, we just went ice-cold at the wrong time, that’s all that happened in my opinion.
Comment by The Fury— October 23, 2009 #
[...] is going to be an incredibly busy offseason for the Dodgers. From the McCourt divorce mess to the cries for an ace to the fact that only two of the starting 9 are under contract right now (Rafael Furcal & [...]
Pingback by The MSTI 16-Step 2010 plan « Mike Scioscia’s tragic illness— October 24, 2009 #
[...] addition to setting career marks in WHIP and ERA+, Wolf was so good that he actually made it onto my list of 2009 “aces” from a few weeks back, and as we all remember ended up starting the first game of the [...]
Pingback by MSTI’s 2009 in Review: Starting Pitchers (10+ Starts) « Mike Scioscia’s tragic illness— November 5, 2009 #
[...] step to the World Series in 2010, but that has nothing to do with the divorce situation – as I’ve been saying for months, there just wasn’t an ace to be had. You can talk all you want about Roy Halladay and Cliff [...]
Pingback by There’s Still Some Good News Here « Mike Scioscia’s tragic illness— January 16, 2010 #
[...] not what he’s supposed to be. As we’ve been through here ad nauseum, the Dodgers were never going to get an ace. There’s just not that many available and for various reasons (not all involving money) Roy [...]
Pingback by Reasons Why You Shouldn’t Be Unhappy With Vicente Padilla « Mike Scioscia’s tragic illness— January 22, 2010 #
[...] while because uninformed media members continually state that the Dodgers need an ace, conveniently ignoring the ascent of Clayton [...]
Pingback by On The Topic of “Aces” « Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— December 31, 2010 #