=== Taro Sez ===
I think the window of opportunity has closed for the rest of the division.
This isn't a reaction to the 1-3 start (it could easily be 2-2), its a reaction to watching CJ Wilson pitch in the rotation. Hes going to be Breakout SP of 2010.
Texas is going to run away with it. I already had Texas as the favorites, but CJ Wilson and Colby Lewis (we get to see his debut tommorow) are a lot better than everybody realizes.Long-term, Texas is also in a tremendous position to stay at the top for a while. We'll give it a shot, but if the division is pretty much decided by June then it wouldn't be a bad year to rebuild and pawn off Cliff Lee and Bedard at the deadline if they're healthy.
.
=== The Mainframe Crunch ===
The Champ's logic is sound. Are the premises valid?
.
1. Rich Harden you can crunch as well as I can.
...
2. Scott Feldman is perceived as a #2-3 starter, and in the long term I see him as an okay #4. Very mediocre stuff, 4 to 5 strikeouts a game into the bargain, good pitchability. This kind of pitcher has a short shelf life.
...
3. C.J. Wilson has always been a great fave of mine. I completely agree with Taro -- that on paper, he'd be on my little 8-pitcher yellow sticky note for guys I want to steal in the late rounds of a draft.
But, see below.
.
4. Scott Lewis is undoubtedly a talented pitcher, and has the K's to prove it. Here's the kind of guy you absolutely love to have in your #4-5 spot, a sort of young, lefty Gil Meche-class talent, a guy who could come through and win 16 for you.
But, see below.
.
=== 30,000 Foot View ===
As talented as Wilson and Lewis are, there is a great, overarching negative here. And it bodes poorly for the development of these Ranger experiments.
Fifteen years ago, the STATS Baseball Scoreboard observed that it is much, much easier to develop a winner in a pitcher's park than in a hitter's park. Just like the 1990's Colorado stadium warped hitters' approaches to the game of baseball, so Texas warps pitchers' approaches.
It's not just the electroshock therapy of good pitches being socked for 3-run homers. It's the withering heat, the draining effect of July and August, combined with the pinball park. (The numbers don't show an extreme effect the last couple of years, but I disagree with the numbers. It's a very tough park to pitch well in.)
You could look it up. Last year Texas managed a 106 ERA+, but that is the absolute highwater mark for them. Flip back through b-ref.com and you'll find team ERA+ after team ERA+ that runs between 83 and 100.
...............
It's not like Texas brought in Cliff Lee and Erik Bedard. That would be one thing. Texas is trying to make the Wilson and Lewis experiments work. In that scenario, the environment becomes more important.
.............
As well, you are talking about only four pitchers here:
#5 = now you're done
..............
So if two of these four pitchers develop issues, where are you? With the usual Texas pitching problems in August.
Talent? Absolutely. Favorites to finish ahead of the M's? Probably. And Texas could have a good staff. But scared? The team ERA+ over/under is 105 or so, and SSI bets the under. History's with SSI here.
My $0.02,
Jeff
Good point about the heat. I wonder if thats a pattern in Texas over the years (fading late)?
I'm a little lower on Lewis maintaining his effectiveness late in the season after watching his start. His game is mostly reliant on a located 90mph fastball. The crispness of his command probably won't be there late in the year, especially with 1 less days rest.
Holland is a very promising young SP. I see him fitting in that 5-hole eventually.
.... don't know where the HBT study is on it, but James spent a fair amount of time discussing the summer-heat factor, even back in the 1980's (he protested, against the wind, that the Rangers *did* have a very good excuse for their annual pitching collapses).
It's not an absolute, the heat and the park, but it's an overarching negative IMHO.
..............
Holland definitely looks like a top young talent to me too champ. My guess is that they'll have to go to him by mid-summer. When the temp is 96 and the ball flying, it's not the greatest place for a soft landing...
But yeah. Texas has serious talent on the mound. And BaseballHQ credits them and Cleveland with having the best minors pitching talent in all of O.B.
Personally, I don't think you can under-emphasize ORGANIZATIONAL changes. In 2009, Nolan Ryan came on board, and drastically changed the entire Ranger approach to pitchers and pitching. Additionally, the Texas DEFENSE took a quantum leap in 2009, just like Seattle.
The unknown reality is "how much" of run allowance is pitching - how much is defense? There is also the question of how much defense is positioning -- how much of the defensive result is contingent on the ORGANIZATIONAL decisions?
IMO, too many SABEs have arrogantly concluded they HAVE the answer - so many have stopped looking or even considering that any current part of their understanding is flawed.
There is no doubt that the Texas change in run allowance coincides with the arrival of Nolan Ryan as pitching coach - and the sudden materialization of defensive competence. The big question is -- "how much of that is real and sustainable".
You suggest that the 106 ERA+ is the ceiling (or close to it). But, the Stats, Inc. data can be correct - and the conclusion patently wrong. What if the reason why hitters parks *ARE* hitters parks is more a factor of the ORGANIZATIONAL defensive mindset than the actual effect of the park on the final numbers?
I was a Braves fan when they played in the "Launching Pad" - with the likes of Aaron and Dusty Baker hitting 40 dingers a year. I can tell you - AT THAT TIME - the club believed TRYING to get good at pitching was a waste of effort - ***SO THEY DIDN'T***. The point here is that the self-fulfilling prophecy is the bane of analysts.
Texas has a "hitters park". So, what do they do? They concentrate their resources on finding hitters that excell in that park - and they don't waste time and effort on trying to develop pitchers. Why? Because the stats say it would be a waste of time to do so.
Every now and then hitter/pitcher park effects reverse for no apparent reason. The Astrodome was a known pitchers park. When they built a new stadium - they built one INTENDED to help hitters - AND they morphed the personnel to try and take advantage of that new park.
Texas, for the past decade, has tried to buy FA pitchers on the open market to fix their run allowance issues - and done next to nothing to remedy their defensive issues.
The reality is not that the park *alone* skews the numbers. Parks do have effects. But, outside of Coors, *NO* park determines the final numbers by itself. The personnel make that reality.
From '96 to '02, Fenway's park impact was a hitters park ranging from 101-103. From '03 to present day, it's climbed to 104-106, (just like back in the early 90s). Based on my observations, teams can CHANGE their park effect by 3-4 points by TRYING to do so. The Arlington impact is partially real -- and part of it has been the result of concentrating on building uber-offense teams.
Particularly w/r/t Atlanta overcoming their home park via the addition of three Hall of Famers.
Of course, 106 isn't the limit if Texas goes out and gets several 300-game winners -- it has been the practical limit, more or less, when trying to home-grow their own pitching staffs.
Agreed that Texas shouldn't throw its hands in the air and accept lousy pitching. That's for sure. And perhaps this crop will finally climb Sisyphus' hill.
Taro asked who thought the Rangers would have overwhelming pitching in 2010: I said they've got some factors going against them, so I wouldn't get too freaked out just yet.
Feldman and CJ Wilson add cutters and BOOM they're above-average pitchers overnight.
Nolan Ryan might very well be doing some good in Texas.
Only Q in my mind is whether he can execute his pitches for 180+ innings...
This is precisely why I want to extend my game context studies to include weather data. Because I think we're going to be able to make musch better-informed judgments about which pitchers are most likely to be abl3e to continue to survive and thrive in the Texas heat or the Minnesota cold and build teams more intelligently if we do.