I/O: Jarrod Washburn performs like Jamie Moyer for two games.
Crunch: It's a Bill James principle, from way back in the 1980's, that certain types of veteran starters look absolutely terrible on 100-loss teams, but look quite good on 100-win teams. Bill noticed, by simply watching baseball, that Jarrod Washburn types get blamed way too much for terrible seasons and get credited too much for pennant seasons.
It's a Zen insight into baseball history. And it suddenly dawns that we might be seeing it in Washburn's case.
You might object, reasonably, that ALL pitchers are subject to this, but they are not. Erik Bedard was known as an ace no matter how bad the Orioles were. Horacio Ramirez is going to be thought of poorly, however his team does. No, there are certain kinds of "tough", competitive low-BB, low-K, smart veteran pitchers who get overrated and underrated depending on context. Everybody knows that Francisco Liriano is good and that Ryan Rowland-Smith, as long as his fastball is MIA, is not.
In my day, Freddy Norman had this kind of career. A 98 ERA+ guy lifetime, he was regarded a complete meatball when going 3-12 and 1-7 for the hapless 1970's Padres. However, the Big Red Machine (my heroes) traded for Norman midseason, when he was 1-7 with a bad ERA ... and immediately started running records like 12-4 for the Reds.
.....................
Washburn is indeed throwing better, with another foot or so on his FB and a much-improved changeup. In his first start, he benefitted from fine defense, although in his second he didn't even require any interesting defense (the flyouts were all skied).
He's even got an 8/1 control ratio -- somebody juice up the paddles for me -- and is being praised by Mike Sweeney for his attitude. (Well, okay, Keith Olbermann would be praised for his attitude by Mike Sweeney.)
....................
The fact is, we've all been too tough on Washburn from a performance standpoint. We've taken out a lot of our frustrations on the club with him, when the fact is, his context has made him look worse than he is. Now, that will be misunderstood, so lemme do this in self-defense:
A PAINFUL ALBATROSS, BAD STARTER, 16-GAME LOSER -- what we thought Washburn was
AN AVERAGE STARTER WHO DOES WELL OR BADLY DEPENDING ON HIS TEAM - what Washburn really is
I'm not saying Washburn is great now. I'm saying he wasn't bad before. He's a guy who can help a team win 95 games -- from the #3 or #4 slot -- and he's obviously also a guy who can help a team lose 100. His personality seems to morph with the standings.
This guy ain't going to win any more games 2-0. But he can give the M's a very consistent run of quality starts, playing in front of a good defense and in a big park and in a close game. One thing Washburn is comfortable with, is pitching tough in big games. He'll challenge anybody. Even losing 100 games, Washburn would always take the fight to the opposing batters.
.
=== Dr's Prognosis Dept. ===
With Washburn's (1) 10%-sharper-pitches this year, (2) a park that suits him, (3) the improved defense behind him, and (4) the important games that he relishes .... sure, his fans can hope for a 100-115 ERA+ this year.
Hey, his career ERA+ is 108, and now that you look at it, he's NEVER had an ERA over 4.69.
Had you noticed? that Washburn has never had an ERA over 4.69 in nine full seasons as a starter? Measuring an SP by his WORST season is a valid, and important way, to look at a pitcher -- and there would be VERY few ML starting pitchers who have run 8-9 consecutive seasons of 150+ IP at an ERA
Funny how DIFFERENT a pitch-to-contact, low-K low-BB innings-eater like Washburn looks -- when he's in front of a team that is playing well.
All of a sudden, Washburn is looking like a plus #4 starter on a 90-win team -- it's not his fault that the M's #3 starter asked for lighter weights on the bar -- and if so, many of us especially me, will owe Armstrong (and Bavasi) an apology.
Somebody said that 3/5 of the Mariners' rotation is broken. With Jaka ready to parachute in, it might actually only be 1/5.
Cheers,
Dr D
