Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, April 01, 2012

TYA: Sciacco: What’s next for Michael Pineda?

Sciacco feels that…“we may not see Pineda back with the club indefinitely, possibly as late as September…” (grabs riot gear).

Yankee fans collectively breathed a sigh of relief yesterday, with the news that Michael Pineda’s injury wasn’t all that serious. It would now be easy to assume he’ll rest up for a few weeks, come back firing 95 MPH fastballs and assume his rightful place in the Yankee rotation. But I’m here to tell you I don’t think that’s the case, not even close. If you walk through the timeline of his rehab, I would argue you won’t see him back with the team indefinitely, barring injury or complete ineffectiveness by one of the other five members of the Yankee rotation. Further, I think there’s a good chance he won’t be back with the club until September. Yes, September.

...All of this adds up Michael Pineda pitching for the AAA club for the foreseeable future, with no date set for his return. I know that fans of Jesus Montero will be repulsed by this scenario, saying we gave up a big bat for a guy who’s not even on the team. But those folks need to understand that Jesus Montero is no longer a member of the Yankee organization, and therefore no longer a consideration in the decisions being made going forward. Maybe Brian Cashman looks bad from a PR standpoint in 2012, but if we know anything about Brain we know he is unfailingly patient. This trade wont be given its final grade in 2012 or even 2014. We will have to wait at least 5 years to see if it worked out or not, and Jose Campos will be part of that equation. But as things stand today, it looks like Michael Pineda won’t get an opportunity to do his part of the evaluation anytime soon.

Repoz Posted: April 01, 2012 at 12:00 PM | 58 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: injury, yankees

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.

   1. Dan Posted: April 01, 2012 at 12:14 PM (#4094169)
I expect that he'll be back before September. Someone else in the rotation will get hurt or be ineffective at some point, opening up a slot for Pineda to return sometime in June or July, probably.
   2. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: April 01, 2012 at 12:19 PM (#4094171)
Yeah, how often does a team go through a full season without "injury or complete ineffectiveness" by at least one of their seasoning opening starting rotation?
   3. Demitri Krotchliknioff Posted: April 01, 2012 at 12:27 PM (#4094175)
Wake me up when September comes.
   4. Steve S. of TYA Posted: April 01, 2012 at 12:30 PM (#4094177)
Thanks for the link Repoz, always appreciated.

I'd encourage folks to read the timeline I laid out (based on Hughes and Joba's shoulder injuries). But long story short by the time Pineda is ready, Andy should be back and there will be no spot open for Pineda. At that point, he's waiting for an injury or ineffectiveness for him to get the call. Barring that, we don't see him until the end of the year. I posted this because I got the impression some folks think he'll be back in 2 weeks, and that's not what happened with Joba or Hughes.
   5. Bruce Markusen Posted: April 01, 2012 at 12:35 PM (#4094181)
Man, this sky-is-falling routine every time a significant player gets hurt needs to stop. On what basis does this writer think that Pineda will be out until September? He hasn't undergone any kind of surgery. He has shoulder inflammation, which probably every pitcher has had at one point or another in his career.

As always, the two rules of baseball apply:

Rule No. 1: Pitchers get hurt.
Rule No. 2: Pitch counts, innings limits, pitching coaches and general managers can't stop Rule No. 1.
   6. Steve S. of TYA Posted: April 01, 2012 at 12:38 PM (#4094182)
Bruce, read the piece. At no point do I argue he won't be pitching until September, just that by the time he's ready, there won't be an opening on the MLB club and he'll be stuck in AAA.
   7. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: April 01, 2012 at 12:47 PM (#4094192)
Bruce, read the piece. At no point do I argue he won't be pitching until September, just that by the time he's ready, there won't be an opening on the MLB club and he'll be stuck in AAA.


I think the chances of the Yankees not needing their seventh starter before September are exceedingly unlikely. Not because of anything specific to the Yanks (though counting on one pitcher who didn't throw at all last year to be in the Top 6 may make calling on No. 7 slightly more likely), but because pitchers often get hurt and pitchers often suck and pitchers frequently do both.

   8. philly Posted: April 01, 2012 at 12:57 PM (#4094195)
I'd encourage folks to read the timeline I laid out (based on Hughes and Joba's shoulder injuries).


I haven't read the article, but all injuries are not the same. These are three Yankee pitchers with shoulder injuries and therefore the first two tell us what exactly about the third? Unless the article convinces me that all three injuries are very similar, I'm going to have to go with "not much" for an answer.
   9. Pingu Posted: April 01, 2012 at 01:03 PM (#4094198)
I've tried to make this point on several occasions and usually am rewarded by nothing but blank stares....

...but, on what planet is a healthy Pineda not better than Ivan Nova? Or Freddy Garcia, or Hughes, or Pettitte for that matter? It would be criminal for the Yankees to let him rot in AAA. It borders on criminal to even call him the Yankee's #7 starter.
   10. jyjjy Posted: April 01, 2012 at 01:05 PM (#4094199)
Bruce, read the piece. At no point do I argue he won't be pitching until September, just that by the time he's ready, there won't be an opening on the MLB club and he'll be stuck in AAA.

What basis do you have for assuming it's likely that 5 of the other 6 starters will be both healthy and effective all season? That seems the exact opposite of likely to me.
   11. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: April 01, 2012 at 01:20 PM (#4094202)
Wake me up when September comes.

It's 'Wake me up when September ends'.
   12. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: April 01, 2012 at 01:24 PM (#4094204)
Not in this instance.
   13. Tom Nawrocki Posted: April 01, 2012 at 01:33 PM (#4094211)
...but, on what planet is a healthy Pineda not better than Ivan Nova? Or Freddy Garcia, or Hughes, or Pettitte for that matter? It would be criminal for the Yankees to let him rot in AAA. It borders on criminal to even call him the Yankee's #7 starter.


Yeah. For that matter, if the Yankees traded one of the best hitting prospects in the game for a pitcher they think should get sent back to AAA, that seems like a huge mistake.
   14. Ron J Posted: April 01, 2012 at 01:50 PM (#4094218)
#5 Appropriate care rates to mitigate rule 1. I mean Bill James is a current critic of usage limits as is Craig Wright. Both were keenly aware of the other side of the issue though. I don't think it's an accident that few pitchers survived the 80s well enough to put together impressive career total.

Right now baseball is probably too risk adverse and way too much on the one size fits all, but 5 pitches too few is way better than one pitch too many (and I don't think they've backed off that far. I think there's maybe 20 innings of needless risk avoidance per year per top starter. Arguably there's more reason to think that getting more out of elite relief pitchers is a bigger deal, but the current patterns of use has produced some pretty good results)
   15. Ron J Posted: April 01, 2012 at 02:00 PM (#4094223)
#13 If Montero was in fact one of the best hitting prospects in the game that's true. But Montero's record isn't quite at that level.

Yeah, I'd be optimistic but his track record isn't precisely Carlos Delgado (hell, it's not Tom Brunansky -- though that's no sin. Bruno seems to have peaked at 20 or 21 but he was awfully good at that age), it's a cut below that. Extremely promising to be sure but he'll have to improve a lot to be an impact player as a DH.
   16. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 01, 2012 at 02:40 PM (#4094234)
As always, the two rules of baseball apply:
Rule No. 1: Pitchers get hurt.
Rule No. 2: Pitch counts, innings limits, pitching coaches and general managers can't stop Rule No. 1.


Horse hockey! Sufferin' saddle sores!
   17. Walt Davis Posted: April 01, 2012 at 02:49 PM (#4094241)
#15 -- agreed, some of the bloom has come off the Montero rose. If he can stay at C, he's still a stud prospect; if he's a 1B/DH, he's a good hitting prospect. If memory serves, he has only the 7th best projected OPS+ for a 22-year-old in this year's ZiPS. ZiPS is not gospel of course and Montero has a ton of room for growth so still very promising.

And what #9 says -- a "ready" Pineda is the Yanks 2nd or 3rd best starter, no way they leave him in AAA if they think he's "ready." Alternatively, if this injury is serious enough to have reduced him to 6th/7th starter status longer-term, then this is a pretty serious injury.
   18. Bruce Markusen Posted: April 01, 2012 at 02:54 PM (#4094246)
Sorry, Steve, for not reading the article. I see what you're saying.

I guess my reaction is more to the New York mainstream writers who have already declared the Montero/Pineda deal a failure based on one spring training injury.
   19. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: April 01, 2012 at 03:02 PM (#4094250)
.
   20. Nolan Giesbrecht Posted: April 01, 2012 at 05:45 PM (#4094315)
As always, the two rules of baseball apply:
Rule No. 1: Pitchers get hurt.
Rule No. 2: Pitch counts, innings limits, pitching coaches and general managers can't stop Rule No. 1.

Horse hockey! Sufferin' saddle sores!



Wrong colonel.
   21. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: April 01, 2012 at 06:55 PM (#4094357)
If Pineda isn't back in the majors before September, it means one of two things:

1) The Yankees' rotation has stayed extremely healthy and nobody has been particularly ineffective. In this scenario, the Yankees probably have close to the best record in baseball, so who cares that Pineda isn't up?

2) Pineda gets hurt again or is ineffective in AAA, which doesn't have much to do with this injury.
   22. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 01, 2012 at 08:02 PM (#4094392)
If Pineda isn't back in the majors before September, it means one of two things:

1) The Yankees' rotation has stayed extremely healthy and nobody has been particularly ineffective. In this scenario, the Yankees probably have close to the best record in baseball, so who cares that Pineda isn't up?

2) Pineda gets hurt again or is ineffective in AAA, which doesn't have much to do with this injury.


Exactly. If the Yankees have no room for a healthy and effective Pineda, they're heading for a 100-win season.
   23. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: April 01, 2012 at 08:26 PM (#4094404)
If Pineda isn't back in the majors before September, it means one of two things:


I suppose that it could also mean:

3) Pineda's shoulder doesn't respond to conservative management and he has surgery in early June.

or perhaps one of several other things.
   24. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 01, 2012 at 08:43 PM (#4094416)
I suppose that it could also mean:

3) Pineda's shoulder doesn't respond to conservative management and he has surgery in early June.

or perhaps one of several other things.


Doesn't that fall under "gets hurt again"?
   25. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: April 01, 2012 at 08:55 PM (#4094421)
Doesn't that fall under "gets hurt again"?
He's saying that the MRI results are wrong, and there is damage in the shoulder that needs to be repaired. So it wouldn't really be a new injury.
   26. ptodd Posted: April 01, 2012 at 09:14 PM (#4094430)
MRI's don't pick up all rotator cuff or labrum tears. I remember Matt Clement, MRI's came up clean but he was awful and then could not pitch. Finally they decided to do exploratory surgery and found 2 separate labrum tears plus a rotator cuff tear.

Some rotator cuff tears are asymptomatic as well, and the only real red flag is a drop in velocity. When pain does come, that means the tear has gotten larger and what may have been resolved w/o surgery may need surgery.

It was scary watching Pinedas FB velo drop to 88 in the 3rd and his repeated grimaces. Pretty sure something tore on him there. Does not mean he needs surgery, as rest and rehab could be enough to let him pitch again, albeit at reduced velocity. Expect him to be out for 3 months.

I believe Phil Hughes had a similar problem last year. They called it tendinitis, like with Pineda, but it was probably a small labrum tear. ESPN had reported during a game he had a shoulder cyst removed, and these usually occur as a result of labrum injuries. Rest and rehab got him to where he could pitch w/o surgery with improved velo, but not at the same velo as his peak.

Pedro has the same problem in 2001. Came back and pitched effectively w/o surgery, but his FB never got back to where it used to be.
   27. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: April 01, 2012 at 09:34 PM (#4094441)
Phil Hughes' average fastball was 91 mph in his rookie year, and 92.6 mph in 2010. He threw a little harder as a reliever, which is to be expected. His 2011 average of 91.1 includes his horrific pre-DL starts, so I'm not sure it's completely accurate to say that his post-rehab velocity never got back to where it used to be. It will be interesting to get some 2012 data.

For some reason, a lot of people have the impression that Hughes used to throw exceptionally hard, but I'm not sure that he ever did.
   28. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 01, 2012 at 09:41 PM (#4094443)
For some reason, a lot of people have the impression that Hughes used to throw exceptionally hard, but I'm not sure that he ever did.

People are remembering 2009 in the pen, where he average 93.7, and was over 95 with regularity.

They're not making the appropriate adjustment that everyone throws harder in the pen.
   29. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: April 01, 2012 at 09:59 PM (#4094448)
I think there's more to it than that. Lots of folks seem to think he threw high nineties in the minors, and I don't think there's much evidence of that (if any).
   30. Jarrod HypnerotomachiaPoliphili(Teddy F. Ballgame) Posted: April 01, 2012 at 10:56 PM (#4094472)
Yeah, how often does a team go through a full season without "injury or complete ineffectiveness" by at least one of their seasoning opening starting rotation?


Didn't the 2001 Mariner rotation not miss a start?

[checks]

Looks like they used six starters that year--the top four guys got around 30 starts apiece, and Halama and Pineiro had 17 and 11 respectively. Don't recall either injury or complete ineffectiveness for either, but who knows.
   31. vortex of dissipation Posted: April 01, 2012 at 11:03 PM (#4094476)
The 2003 Mariners were the team that didn't miss a start.
   32. Jarrod HypnerotomachiaPoliphili(Teddy F. Ballgame) Posted: April 01, 2012 at 11:20 PM (#4094483)
Yes, that's the team I was trying to remember. Thanks.
   33. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: April 01, 2012 at 11:40 PM (#4094495)
The 2003 Mariners were the team that didn't miss a start.


Also known as the year John Olerud got old.
   34. ptodd Posted: April 02, 2012 at 01:55 AM (#4094533)
Phil Hughes' average fastball was 91 mph in his rookie year, and 92.6 mph in 2010. He threw a little harder as a reliever, which is to be expected. His 2011 average of 91.1 includes his horrific pre-DL starts, so I'm not sure it's completely accurate to say that his post-rehab velocity never got back to where it used to be. It will be interesting to get some 2012 data.

For some reason, a lot of people have the impression that Hughes used to throw exceptionally hard, but I'm not sure that he ever did.


Good points. Velocity generally increases up until 27-28, so an increase in velocity from his age 22 season would be expected, and is what we saw until a 1 MPH drop in velocity from 2010 to 2011. Not sure he was all that healthy in 2010 either since he was pretty bad after the first few starts of the season (4.98 ERA the rest of the way), which was masked by his great run support

Looking at his velocity out of the pen might be useful. In 2009, he was averaging 94-95 in September, In September 2011, he was 92-93 out of the pen (only a couple of appearances, but he was nowhere as dominant as in 2009).
   35. baudib Posted: April 02, 2012 at 02:34 AM (#4094535)
A huge chunk of that Jamie Moyer All-Star team comes from the Mariners teams he played on, another way of showing how the Mariners of that era were the biggest underachieving team of all time.

   36.     Hey Gurl Posted: April 02, 2012 at 02:51 AM (#4094539)

Also known as the year John Olerud got old.


I know that NOCAYFT, but I actually had Jamie Moyer on my fantasy team that year and remember thinking that I should trade him cause he couldn't possibly have any more gas left in the tank. Heh. That was almost a decade ago.
   37. NJ in DC (Now with Wife!) Posted: April 02, 2012 at 05:16 AM (#4094549)
Re: Hughes' velo

Hughes has spent the majority of his ML career hurt. However, when he's been right his velocity has been where it was in the minors, which is 90-94, touching 95/96 as a starter, or sitting mid 90s as a reliever. So, that's pretty much just '09 and '10.

Re: Of course Pineda starts over Nova who sucks

I know non-Yankee fan Primates are pre-disposed to hating Nova because he's a guy that is overrated due to a high W total and not enough Ks, but the guy isn't a total stiff. He had a largely unexciting minor league career, but he's someone whose talent the organization has always been high on and he's generally performed at a high level since '10. As I, and a few others here, have pointed out numerous times, if you look at his numbers from when he started throwing his slider in about mid May to the end of the year, he has perfectly reasonable peripherals. No one thinks he's going to be a star, but he doesn't have to have star potential to be a useful young pitcher that any organization would love to keep as part of their rotation.
   38. JPWF1313 Posted: April 02, 2012 at 10:36 AM (#4094625)
I know non-Yankee fan Primates are pre-disposed to hating Nova because he's a guy that is overrated due to a high W total and not enough Ks, but the guy isn't a total stiff. He had a largely unexciting minor league career, but he's someone whose talent the organization has always been high on and he's generally performed at a high level since '10.


I'm not a Yankee fan, Yankee fans tend to be annoying and overrate their prospects even worse than us Mets fans overrate Mets prospects.

That said, having seen Nova pitch a few times- he looks genuinely good.
Having said that, his peripherals look really bad.

But what do I know?
J.A. Happ had results way out of line with his peripherals, and he didn't LOOK good at all to me, I had no problems predicting that he'd collapse- and he has- but injury may have had something to do with that.
John Garland has pretty much outpitched his peripherals his entire career- plus he's never looked good to me, basically for nearly 10 years I've been expecting him to go LimaTime... 2000 career innings worth an ERA+ over 100 I can confidently state that I was wrong.
Joe Saunders initial success had me baffled on every level- he looked bad and his peripherals were bad- his struggle since 2009 have not baffled me.
Wang- bad peripherals - he LOOKED better than his peripherals, his results were better, I couldn't figure out why he didn't get more Ks... and before his arm fell off he was starting to get more.
Pelfrey- bad peripherals- good primary stuff, bad secondary stuff... IMHO I always thought he should have been groomed as a setup/closer. Right now he looks awful on every level, his secondary stuff remains awful, he's lost movement (sink) on his primary stuff. He really needs a change of scenery as much as any one I've seen
   39. NJ in DC (Now with Wife!) Posted: April 02, 2012 at 10:54 AM (#4094636)
Having said that, his peripherals look really bad.

They're not though. (Nova section)

   40. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 02, 2012 at 10:59 AM (#4094641)
They're not though. (Nova section)

SSS alert!

His career peripherals are bad (minors and majors): career K/9 5.5, BB/9 3.2, and minor league numbers to match. He had a really good three month run last year.

You can't just automatically assume that's all real improvement. There's probably some improvement (K-rate stabilizes quickly) but he's likely due some regression.
   41. NJ in DC (Now with Wife!) Posted: April 02, 2012 at 11:12 AM (#4094652)
[40] 1. You can't just look at his career totals without context. His numbers seem to clearly indicate that sometime between '09 and '10 he improved as demonstrated by the (qualitative)jump in fastball velocity and (quantitative) leap in minor league performance where he dramatically cut BBs and increased Ks. He also had a leap in May '11 when (qualitatively) he added his slider and (quantitatively) walks went down and Ks went up once again.

2. I (and the linked projection systems) am not assuming all his improvement is real. The fact that their will be some regression is obviously a part of any projection system and there's about 57 in the linked post. Despite that they all say Nova looks to be about a league average SP. And on the infintestimal chance that a young pitcher who added a new pitch and saw his results take a significant turn for the better within a sample size that can be relied upon as real (as far as BIP results) maybe he will be better than league average. But, no, let's all keep referring to Nova as though he a.) sucks and b.) there's no possible way it could make sense for a team to want to keep him in their rotation.
   42. JPWF1313 Posted: April 02, 2012 at 11:15 AM (#4094655)

His career peripherals are bad (minors and majors): career K/9 5.5, BB/9 3.2, and minor league numbers to match. He had a really good three month run last year.


League was 6.9/3.1 last year.
HR/9 was 1.0 (Nova was 0.7)

He was good at avoiding HRs in the minors, HR avoidance is somewhat skill-based so he has that on his side. His BABIP was low, but not absurdly so.

1: If he can keep his HR rate below league average, and keep his BABIP 15-20 below league average (not likely, but possible), he can still be a reasonably effective pitcher despite his K/BB
2: Strand rate, batters hit .215/.287/.285 against him with RISP, .267/.331/.435, that is almost certainly luck/random variation. Flip those around and he'll look like Jose Lima in a bad year.
   43. Squash Posted: April 02, 2012 at 12:33 PM (#4094705)
Forget Nova, they need to get Aaron Small back.
   44. JPWF1313 Posted: April 02, 2012 at 12:52 PM (#4094712)
Forget Nova, they need to get Aaron Small back.


I will say this for Cashman, 2005/06, he was under no illusion that what Small did in 2005, was anything other than a fluke. I of course was a Met fan, if someone had gone 10-0 with a 133 ERA+ for the Mets (with no past record of success and no change in peripherals), Omar would have given him a raise and a 3 year extension.
   45. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: April 02, 2012 at 01:08 PM (#4094723)
Strand rate, batters hit .215/.287/.285 against him with RISP, .267/.331/.435, that is almost certainly luck/random variation.


I don't think it's true that it's "almost certainly luck..." Pitching out of the stretch is fundamentally different from going from a windup. Not that the sample size is huge but in 200 MLB innings Nova has been appreciably better with men on base than with the bases empty. He may be the type of pitcher who loses less going from the stretch than another pitcher. I wouldn't want to bet my life savings on it but I wouldn't be in a rush to bet against it either.
   46. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 02, 2012 at 01:13 PM (#4094728)
He may be the type of pitcher who loses less going from the stretch than another pitcher.

But, everyone loses something, otherwise they would pitch from the stretch all the time.

The 570 OPS with men on is certainly a fluke.
   47. jyjjy Posted: April 02, 2012 at 01:50 PM (#4094752)
Isn't xFIP all peripheral based and even corrects for home run rate? Nova's is 4.20 in 200+ major league innings. Also isn't he a ground ball pitcher and don't they very often often out pitch their peripherals?
   48. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 02, 2012 at 02:00 PM (#4094757)
Isn't xFIP all peripheral based and even corrects for home run rate? Nova's is 4.20 in 200+ major league innings. Also isn't he a ground ball pitcher and don't they very often often out pitch their peripherals?

Yes, but we're talking about projection, and huys with 5 K/9 and 3 BB/9 don't project well.
   49. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 02, 2012 at 02:04 PM (#4094762)
But, everyone loses something, otherwise they would pitch from the stretch all the time.


I can think of a pitcher who does.
   50. jyjjy Posted: April 02, 2012 at 02:05 PM (#4094765)
Yes, but we're talking about projection, and huys with 5 K/9 and 3 BB/9 don't project well.

Then why do his projections look fine?

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1994&position=P
   51. tshipman Posted: April 02, 2012 at 02:08 PM (#4094769)
I don't think it's true that it's "almost certainly luck..." Pitching out of the stretch is fundamentally different from going from a windup. Not that the sample size is huge but in 200 MLB innings Nova has been appreciably better with men on base than with the bases empty. He may be the type of pitcher who loses less going from the stretch than another pitcher. I wouldn't want to bet my life savings on it but I wouldn't be in a rush to bet against it either.


I would. No one is better long term out of the stretch vs. the windup.
Edit: coke to snapper.
   52. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 02, 2012 at 02:13 PM (#4094776)
Then why do his projections look fine?

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1994&position=P


I didn't say he was terrible, but I don't think a 4.40 ERA is what the Yankees fans that are breathless about him losing his rotation spot to Garcia or Pettitte are expecting.

I mean at RLYW, guys were penciling Nova into the 2013 and 2014 Yankee rotation already.
   53. Swedish Chef Posted: April 02, 2012 at 02:26 PM (#4094791)
I mean at RLYW, guys were penciling Nova into the 2013 and 2014 Yankee rotation already.

And why not? He hits arbitration in 2014. He doesn't have to be above average to be huge value for money those years.
   54. jyjjy Posted: April 02, 2012 at 02:31 PM (#4094798)
Eh, 4.40 is his lowest projections. He is entering his age 25 season, projects a decent notch above league average and has shown steady improvement for a while. Maybe nothing to get breathless about but there's no reason to expect him to not deserve a rotation spot any time soon and seems perfectly reasonable to object to the idea of bumping him for guys who don't project any better, are 10 or more years older and likely won't be with the team next year.
   55. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 02, 2012 at 02:34 PM (#4094799)
And why not? He hits arbitration in 2014. He doesn't have to be above average to be huge value for money those years.

Because the Yankees won't stand pat on a guy with a 95 ERA+. If he's as good as his projections, he'll be fighting for a spot every year as one of 4 or 5 guys (including rising prospects and retreads) fighting for 1 or 2 spots.

I think he's got a good chance to be a solid #3 or 4 SP (maybe 30%), a 30% chance to be nothing, and a 40% chance to be meh. If he's meh, he will not be a rotation fixture, he'll be a 5th-7th SP bubble guy. The Yankees don't care that a 1 WAR pitcher is cheap.
   56. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 02, 2012 at 02:40 PM (#4094805)
Eh, 4.40 is his lowest projections. He is entering his age 25 season, projects a decent notch above league average and has shown steady improvement for a while. Maybe nothing to get breathless about but there's no reason to expect him to not deserve a rotation spot any time soon and seems perfectly reasonable to object to the idea of bumping him for guys who don't project any better, are 10 or more years older and likely won't be with the team next year.

CAIRO has a 4.52 FIP for Nova, with Garcia at 4.28. Plus, Nova's gotten shelled this spring.

There's decent reason for the Yankee to think that Garcia is better right now, and by starting Garcia, they get to have both. With Pineda hurting, they both get spots, and whoever pitches worst loses out when Pineda comes back.

I think that's the right way to do it for a contending team.
   57. jyjjy Posted: April 02, 2012 at 02:59 PM (#4094822)
CAIRO has a 4.52 FIP for Nova, with Garcia at 4.28. Plus, Nova's gotten shelled this spring.

Just spotted the Nova/Garcia preview over at RLYW. Certainly more variability in Nova's projections in the ones listed there than on fangraphs but Nova does still project better on average. Ironic that he has great peripherals this spring but poor performance due to a high home run rate and now that is a reason to doubt him, as was the opposite.
   58. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 02, 2012 at 03:02 PM (#4094824)
Ironic that he has great peripherals this spring but poor performance due to a high home run rate and now that is a reason to doubt him, as was the opposite.

Haven't seen him pitch, but from what I've heard, he seems to be having trouble keeping the ball down. Working up in the zone would be consistent with his results; good K rate, but lousy HR rate.

At this point, it's all kind of moot, since he and Garcia will each get at least 5-6 starts before Pineda or Pettitte is likely to be ready.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
James Kannengieser
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogCurt Schilling not hiding his scars - ESPN Boston
(22 - 3:24am, Oct 25)
Last: TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser

NewsblogBuster Olney on Twitter: "Sources: Manager Joe Maddon has exercised an opt-out clause in his contract and is leaving the Tampa Bay Rays immediately."
(81 - 2:03am, Oct 25)
Last: Dan

Newsblog9 reasons Hunter Pence is the most interesting man in the World (Series) | For The Win
(16 - 1:35am, Oct 25)
Last: base ball chick

NewsblogJohn McGrath: The Giants have become the Yankees — obnoxious | The News Tribune
(12 - 1:31am, Oct 25)
Last: Into the Void

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(916 - 1:29am, Oct 25)
Last: J. Sosa

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 3 OMNICHATTER
(515 - 1:26am, Oct 25)
Last: Pat Rapper's Delight

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(385 - 1:05am, Oct 25)
Last: tshipman

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3736 - 12:23am, Oct 25)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogHow top World Series players ranked as prospects. | SportsonEarth.com : Jim Callis Article
(21 - 12:04am, Oct 25)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogRoyals get four AL Gold Glove finalists, but not Lorenzo Cain | The Kansas City Star
(14 - 11:59pm, Oct 24)
Last: Zach

NewsblogDid Adam Dunn Ruin Baseball? – The Hardball Times
(73 - 11:22pm, Oct 24)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogBeaneball | Gold Gloves and Coco Crisp's Terrible 2014 Defense
(2 - 7:47pm, Oct 24)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(871 - 7:22pm, Oct 24)
Last: Jim Wisinski

NewsblogDealing or dueling – what’s a manager to do? | MGL on Baseball
(67 - 6:38pm, Oct 24)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogThe ‘Little Things’ – The Hardball Times
(2 - 6:34pm, Oct 24)
Last: RMc is a fine piece of cheese

Page rendered in 0.6275 seconds
52 querie(s) executed