|
|
|
|
Baseball Primer Newsblog— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Monday, August 04, 2008
But, but…he’s only got 10 wins!
It appears that Lester’s control and command have been steadily improving throughout the season. While his no hitter may be one of the pinnacle achievements of his career, it’s quite possible that Lester is a better pitcher today than he was on May 14. His control is certainly improved: in his first ten starts, Lester threw 61% of his pitches for strikes; in his following 12 starts, he has thrown 66.4% of his pitches for strikes. Predictably, he walk rate has fallen dramatically: he walked 4.58 batters per nine innings in his first ten starts; in his subsequent 12 starts, he has walked only 1.71 per nine. That’s a major improvement.
...Jon Lester’s velocity and sink have returned to his fastball and cutter this season. As the season has progressed, we can see clear evidence of improved control (he has lowered his walk rate) and improved command (he has raised his strikeout rate and has gotten more swings-and-misses). Lester is seemingly now above-average in the three most important aspects of being a pitcher: keeping the ball on the ground (and thus, in the park), preventing walks, and accumulating strikeouts. If these improvements are real – and we have no reason to think they’re not – Lester is set to become one of the best pitchers in the American League.
No wonder the Red Sox wouldn’t deal him this offseason.
Repoz
Posted: August 04, 2008 at 11:56 AM | 63 comment(s)
| Login to Bookmark
Related News: General, Boston
|
Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Newsblog: Guelph Mercury: Argos will likely be turfed out of Rogers if Jays get grass (21 - 4:53pm, Feb 09)Last: Harmon "Thread Killer" MicrobrewNewsblog: Jeff Sullivan: The Worst Team Ever Projected? (2 - 4:53pm, Feb 09)Last: Jose Can You SeabiscuitNewsblog: The Book Blog: MGL: Today on Clubhouse Confidential (59 - 4:53pm, Feb 09)Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)Newsblog: OT: NBA Monthly Thread, February 2012 (353 - 4:52pm, Feb 09)Last: robinredNewsblog: Grantland/Bill James: An Open Letter to the Hall of Fame About Dwight Evans (1 - 4:51pm, Feb 09)Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)Newsblog: Fangraphs: Cameron: The 10 Worst Transactions Of The Winter (79 - 4:50pm, Feb 09)Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)Newsblog: WHYGAV: Burnett to Pirates a Good Idea? (11 - 4:47pm, Feb 09)Last: Something OtherNewsblog: Sources: Cubs’ Starlin Castro Accused Of Sexual Assault (5784 - 4:44pm, Feb 09)Last: Chicago JoeNewsblog: Oil Can Boyd says he used cocaine with Red Sox (43 - 4:39pm, Feb 09)Last: billyjackNewsblog: NYT: Alderson Remakes Needy Mets From Bottom Line Up (19 - 4:36pm, Feb 09)Last: toratoratoraNewsblog: RICH HARDEN TO MISS 2012 DUE TO SHOULDER SURGERY (11 - 4:35pm, Feb 09)Last: DannyNewsblog: Justice: 5 things that could make the 2012 season a successful one for the Astros (24 - 4:30pm, Feb 09)Last: Davo the MagnificentNewsblog: Strange Times in Baseball: 1891-1895 (8 - 4:22pm, Feb 09)Last: Steve NNewsblog: NY Daily News: Brian Cashman's accused stalker says Yankees GM misled feds on steroid probe (39 - 4:21pm, Feb 09)Last: Something OtherNewsblog: ESPN: Law: Top 100 Prospects (paywalled) (4 - 4:19pm, Feb 09)Last: Slivers of Maranville (SdeB)
|
|
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Since someone will surely say this, I'll note that although there were no sure reports of the Santana trade talks, there were multiple rumors that had Lester in the package the Sox offered.
I was lucky enough to be at Fenway the night of his no-hitter. His confidence on the mound was palpably different from the times I had seen him pitch in '06 and '07. He works much quicker than he used to and he attacks hitters. It's been a remarkable change.
As for this article...I'm fairly certain Joba is the best pitcher in the AL.
/kidding...but not really
I was just thinking that to myself this weekend during his start against Oakland. I had not seen him pitch in a couple months...just randomly had conflicts; I've seen a bunch of hyper-frustrating Dice-K and Beckett starts. Anyway, he does look like a bull out there these days. I wouldn't be surprised if he's a good 10-15 pounds (of muscle) heavier now than he was when he first got called up.
If he's saying Lester's control has likely improved over the course of the season, sure. If he's saying there's no reason to doubt that Lester's 1.71 BB/9 is his new level of talent, he's completely wrong.
But they did make sure he was included in every reported offer for Santana.
And BTW, that "laughable" offer of Lester/Lowrie/Crisp for Santana now looks like a boon compared to what we got from the Mets.
Oh, and Ziegler is not only the best pitcher in the AL, but the best pitcher in the history of the universe.
I'd still call it about even at this point. Joba and Lester look roughly equal this year, while Buchholz/Hughes and Melky/Ellsbury have been disappointing. Pedroia's been better than Cano so far too, but that's about it. I expect Cano to bounce back next year. A lot more was expected from Ellsbury though, so that seems like a much bigger disappointment for the Sox.
If Lowrie's for real, then his success might have the Sox looking a little better in the development game.
I was just having that conversation the other day. At the time, it looked like maybe the worst of the proposed deals. Now, it is clearly the best (vs. Kennedy/Jackson/?? and the one they got). I might be wrong, but I thought they also had Masterson in a deal instead of Crisp. If that was the case, the lineup would now be (if healthy):
CF- Span
2B- Casilla
C- Mauer
1B- Morneau
RF- Cuddyer
DH- Kubel
LF- Young
SS- Lowrie
3B- Harris/Buscher
Bench- Redmond, Punto, OF (Pridie?)
with a rotation of: Lester, Liriano, Baker, Slowey, Blackburn
and a bullpen of: Nathan, Crain, Masterson, Perkins, Reyes, Guerrier, Bonser
I know the Twins are playing well, but that trade would have filled their two biggest current holes (mid-INF and 7th inning relief) while preventing the production crater in CF.
Hmmm...we also have Reddick v. Jackson and Lars v. Jesus coming up.
Cliff Lee? 167 ERA+, 125 SO, 20 BB, 1.064 WHIP.
Don't forget the new signee Casey.
Then again, even the current top Latin prospect's first name fits with that soap cast: Michael.
Che-Hsuan Lin won't make the cut.
The idea of "Lars!" being shouted in a thick Boston accent is something special.
we also have a Hunter, Dusty, Mitch, Bubba and a Brock!
And let's not forget we just gave away Craig
Michael Bowden's white face says hi.
W/r/t to Lester's new-found on-mound persona: Tewksbury stresses to pitchers throughout the system that no matter what type of person they are off the field, they must, or at least are behooved to, transform into type-A personalities on the mound. Makes sense.
Michael Bowden's white face says hi.
Michael Bowden's non-Latinness kind of eliminates from consideration as top Latin prospect.
Worked for Rancid.
Bob Tewksbury? Is the Sox minor-league pitching guy? No wonder he ain't walking nobody.
As to Lester, if he maintains a 5/1 K/BB and an HR rate of about 1 per 20-25 IP (which is where he's been the last couple months) then yes I daresay the young man will have a heck of a career.
He really reminds me of Andy Pettitte at his best.
Listen to me . . Palmer . . you will forget all about the Dalkowski file . .
Manny Parra 2008: 119 innings of 110 ERA+
Jon Lester 2008: 146.1 innings of 141 ERA+
My favorite Lester stat this season is this:
(MPH)
Fastball:
2007- 89.9
2008- 91.6
Cutter:
2007- 85.0
2008- 87.8
Curveball:
2007- 72.3
2008- 75.6
Thank you, I am quite aware what their numbers are at this moment in time. Numbers are pretty easy to get these days. Care to offer any thoughts?
Those numbers seem sufficient to refute post #35, until that post is itself bolstered by some amount of statistics, observations, and/or analysis. Right?
Correct. Not to mention that Lester plays in the tougher league, and has a defense behind him that has not been rated as particularly effective.
past 12 starts
Parra 69 2/3 IP, 3.10 ERA, 58k
Lester 75 1/3 IP, 2.75 ERA, 56k
These guys are very similar. Even with a scouting eye, they have similar stuff, with Parra having a touch more velocity than Lester. Both are sure to be above average starters for the next several years. I doubt we are looking at greatness from either.
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/gammons_a_lot_of_upside_in_lester
Since then: 5-0, 2.67 ERA, 5-1 K/BB. Yup, maybe Varitek was on to something.
I imagine Lester has arrived, a bit before Varitek expected, but perhaps he knew a thing or two about what he was talking about.
I am rather confident we are looking at something special wit Lester.
Sure, there is a difference in those numbers. But since when are decisions made around here based on a little over 3 months of baseball. As far as post #35, Lester is not great. It is doubtful he will be great, good certainly, but great?
Pitchers always have volatale 100 inning stretches. Going from +140 ERA in one patch, to +85 in another is not unusual. I could cobble together 2 pitchers of any caliber and prove that. It would be absurd to declare that Lester has arrived as a great starter. He hasn't yet. Neither Lester or Parra have ever made it through a full season yet.
You keep saying this, but why? Lester, extremly highly thought until he came down with cancer. And with reasonable adjustments for his recovery, he pitched up to that. Not to mention his stuff is considered excellent.
Halladay: 141/28 K/BB 7.6 K/9 Great
Am I really the first person to question Lester's "greatness"? It seems from your response, the only reason people have to justify calling Lester great, is because he is "highly thought of". So in otherwords, because people kept saying it.
It is not too hard to look at the data these days. Lester has a good, not great track record. So what? Nothing wrong with that. Manny Parra is an excellent example of a comparable to Lester. Both good, not great. Both have the exact same career ERA, in fact. 3.90 (yes I get there are differences in the leagues so it is not "the same"). Lester has already thrown 290 innings. It was Parra, not Lester that had a better track record in the Minors, but both were good, not GREAT.
If I had to summarize my two main points here it would be that Lester is not GREAT, he is good. Second, he is comparable to Manny Parra. However, Lester, or Parra, or both, COULD become great, thought that is very unlikely based on prior track record.
If Lester is now seen as someone who can be the best pitcher in baseball, that's a significant change in his assessment. I don't really see it, myself.
EDIT: And add my name to the Halladay list. Being the best in the league in a year other than 2008 counts for a lot. (ie, no Lee, no Lester, no Joba)
Which generally speaking is one of the top 20-30 starting pitchers in baseball. That is better than "above average" which is what Beano said.
Beano, care to name terms on a lester versus parra bet from 2008-10? I have little doubt that lester will be better.
In my mind for the above comments, I have average, above average, great. But I suppose I should adopt the 20-80 scouting scale. Where there is 60,70 and 80. I'd say Lester is a 60 today, with upside as a 65. I'm guessing you would put him at 70.
If you only look at the historical track record of Jon Lester you are under rating him. Of course, if 5 years from now Lester has a couple of top 5 cy-young finnishes and 1000 innings of 130 ERA+ then I will assesment will still be considered wrong, and it was just luck.
Can someone explain why it's 20-80 and not 0-60 or 0-100? Did the scouts not want to hurt any feelings by writing zeros? Or build egos by writing 100s? Or did they want the high school kids to be able to compare their throwing arm to their verbal SAT score with ease?
That would be interesting. I think Parra has more upside to work with, due to his higher BB rate and where it was in the minors. If Parra can bring that down, and there is a lot of room there, he can vault up quite a bit. His HR rate is good/excellent already, K/rate is good, but it has been good/excellent before, so there is some upside there as well.
Parra has more arm injury issues from the past that could show up again. So Lester may prove to be more durable. We will see, but neither has gone a FULL season yet. Some guys can't ever go 200.
Good question, I don't know the history myself. I look forward to the answer. I do believe there is something there about standard deviations from mean. 50 being mean. Perhaps 3 standard deviations being 80? I doubt a math/stats expert became a scout, there has to be more to story.
I don't think people who really follow the prospects ever thought this was laughable; what happened is a lot of people who read MSM and know little beyond BA's top 100 list (which, great as it is, is awful dated by the winter meetings) said things like that.
Well...I really ###### up there.
Do you have a reference for this, Mikael? If it's from a profile piece or something, I'd love to read it.
Actually, I'm pretty sure it's something like that. Basically, there's no reason to have 0 to 100, because 20-80 provides enough data points for the purposes of scouting. Nobody has a 100 fastball; likewise, nobody has 0 power. Well, maybe Jason Tyner.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main