Dec. 27: A Zito stat to remember
-
- December
- 27
Here’s something the Mets should consider before throwing millions of dollars at Barry Zito.
His career record is 102-63, which is 39 games over .500. Pretty good.
However, his record over the past four years is only nine games over .500, which you’d take from a No. 4 or No. 5 pitcher. It is not what you would expect from a supposed ace.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, December 27th, 2006 at 5:31 pm by LoHudBlogs.com Admin.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Share and Enjoy: 
| 
| 
Advertisement
John,
Love the blog and your insiders' perspective. You're by far the best of the NY area beat writers at understanding blogs and its readers.
However, I have to disagree with your characterization of Zito's performance in the last four years as that of a "No. 4 or No. 5 pitcher." First off, No. 4 or No. 5 starters are a lot worse than you likely think they are—this article ("How Good is Your #4 Starter": http://tinyurl.com/yeb3ng) shows that MLB No. 4 starters averaged a 5.10 ERA while No. 5's sported a 6.24 ERA. Zito's 3.86 ERA from 2003 – 2006 lands him squarely between a #1 (3.60) and a #2 (4.14).
Furthermore, evaluating a pitcher strictly on his won/loss record may have made sense at one time, but it's beyond silly now. As you no doubt know, a pitcher's won/loss record is highly dependent upon his team's offense. Though Zito still won 55 percent of his decisions over the last four years, he likely would have won 60 or 65 percent had the A's offense held up their end of the bargain—they've ranked 9th, 6th, 9th and 9th out of 14 teams in the AL the past four years. As it was, he was still 20th in the league in wins over the last four years.
It's certainly true that Zito doesn't feel like an ace worthy of $100 million. But it's clear he has been, at worst, a #2 starter over his career any way you measure it.
C'mon John, you know just quoting a guys wins, or lack there of, in a vaccum without context is prett useless. Over the same 4 years span you quote, Kenny Rogers was 62 and 33 . . . should we persue him instead, despite his 4.17 ERA (and despite his surly attitude and "muddy" hand)? How 'bout Mark Mulder (54/32 4.20 ERA)? Estaban Loaiza had a spectacular .602 winning percentage (4.21 ERA) over that span, so is he an "ace?"
Over that same 4 year span, Zito had a solid 3.87 ERA (17th among pitchers with at least 700 IP). This 4 year ERA was better than other supposed "aces" or supposed solid #2 guys, such as Mussina, Buehrle, Colon, and Freddy Garcia. Over this 4 year span he was also 2nd in games started and 3rd in innings pitched. So, while the wins might not have been there (although we're still talking about a "winning pitcher" in this time period) seems to me the guy stepped up and did what an "ace" or solid #2 guy is supposed to do . . . he took the mound every 5th day, went deep into games, and kept runners from crossing home plate.
To RyanMcC and Joe C. ...
Thanks for your posts. You both made terrific points that made me realize just quoting wins and losses is an oversimplification. Ryan, thanks for giving me that link, it was very helpful.
I should have been more precise in what I was trying to. Nine games over .500 is not ace material as I suggested, it is roughly two games over .500 a year. He is four years beyond his best year, which is a concern to me, with increases in his ERA.
That said, your points are correct. A team's offense plays a huge part in a pitcher's record and Oakland's has consistently been poor. He has, as you say, kept his team in games. Put his same ERA, opponent's average, etc., with the support he'd get from the Mets, and even Texas, and there would likely be better W-L record.
And Joe C. ... no, I wouldn't go after Kenny Rogers, but I think Mulder would be a good risk because his contract would weigh heavy with incentives. And, no, Loaiza isn't an ace.
Again, thanks guys for your input and taking the time to write. It is greatly appreciated.
...Precisely why instead of chasing Barry, I'd instead offfer a package of Lastings Milledge, Aaron Heilman and Philip Humber to the Padres for pitchers Jake Peavy and Scott Linebrink.
To Gil …
I'd make that deal, but I think the Padres would want more.
Interesing link on #4 pitchers, Ryan, but the thing that most stands out from that article to me has nothing to do with Zito. It's that Omar should immediately run out and resign Trachsel! With his 4.97 ERA, 15 wins and perhaps a one-year, 2 million dollar contract, he would be a steal as a #4 or #5 starter!
John,
I agree and disagree with you and the other writers. While I agree that there is more to pitching than wins and losses in reality that is the bottom line as you said.
Steve Trachsel used to get killed as someone that pitched just well enough to use then he got killed for winning badly. I prefer a bad winner to a good loser.
When it comes to an ace? That is a different story—an ace wins whether he has run support or not. He wins games 1 – 0, or 3 – 2. Think Tom Seaver!!! Roger Clemens!!! All the pitchers that blew the opposition away.
As far as worth? That is determined by the market and what the teams are willing to pay. Personally I don't want another junk baller, crafty lefty, whatever you want to call Zito. I want a hard thrower. However since there is not one available and Zito is the best available I am glad the Mets are going after him. I am equally as glad that they are not willing to throw the bank at him.
Omar is smart and something will happen. But not something foolish. He is not Steve Phillips.
Thanks,
CLM
John,
Is there any way you can find out from your IT people if "tropicalista" is Steve Trachsel himself?
Appreciate your help! Thanks!
Mike
Don't forget in those earlier years Zito had an offense. Giambi on steriods was there as well as Tejada, Ramon Hernandez, Eric Chavez, Jermaine Dye, Johnny Damon, etc… There was another stat I read yesterday that you need to remember too…When Zito has 4 or more runs scored for him his record is 85 – 4. I don't think it's a coincidence that his record became more mediocre as his offensive support dwindled.
I noted earlier that over the previous 4 years, Zito had a 3.87 ERA, which ranked him 17th among pitchers with at least 700 IP. I just realized that this list is littered with NL pitchers. Looking at predominently AL pitchers, Zito is 5th or 6th.
To Mike (RE: Trachsel)
Thanks for that post. It's great to laugh.
To CLM (RE: The bottom line)
I agree W/L is the most important. The other pitchers made me consider offensive support more than I had. But, I remember a conversation I had with Roger Clemens, and he said ``great pitchers find a way to win.'' If they don't get the runs, they have to shut the other team down. Zito's ERA has increased since his best season four years ago. Sure, a lot of that is the AL, but I have to wonder, is lack of run support the only reason for the disparity in Zito's W/L record?
Roger Clemens, and he said ``great pitchers find a way to win.''
That's easy for Clemens to say, he has played his entire career on mostly stacked offensive teams. Actually, I have no real evidence of that I just hate Clemens and have a knee-jerk reaction to disagree with whatever he says.
To JoeC. ...
I love it … thanks for making me laugh.
John,
You are saying what I have been saying for quite some time. Zito is good but not an ace and should not get that money.
For a #1 pitcher we really need a fireballer.
As for Trachsel, he is done, won't be back even if what we end up with is not much better.
The comments about era's of #4/5 pitchers; in the 80's when the Mets were good pitchers who came with that stuff would have been cut from the team let alone be on the rotation. The minors would not have em.
Our #4/5 was El Sid who had I think a mid 3 era. Wonder what he would get in todays market.
How times have changed.
Dave
Hi
The main page of a site has especially pleased. Good color scale! Thanks!