The Starting Pitching has to get better.

[LookinUp]

I suspect we'll know by the deadline whether we're comfortable with Tillman and Britton as 2 of our 5 starters (Arrieta/Hunter out). If not, absent a resurgence by Arrieta, I suspect we'll be buyers.

[LookinUp]

Any regression from Chen and Hammel and they won't be enough.

It's worth pointing out that absent a regression from those two, they'll have proven to be two of the top SPs in baseball. I hope that's the case, but it seems more likely that they both regress a little bit (to me, at least).

[Mr Snuffleupagus]

The thing with Jake and Matusz is the huge disparity between who they are during QS's vs. who they are in non QS.

Matusz has 6 QS (38IP) and carries a 2.13 ERA in those starts. His ERA in his other starts (45.2IP)... 8.18

Arrieta has 5 QS (35.2IP) and carries a 1.01 ERA in those starts. His ERA in his other starts (33IP)... 9.76

So they're either great, or they're awful, and in most cases, you can tell which it's going to be after about 1IP.

[El Gordo]

If you think we'll continue to contend with the status quo, that's fine - but logic dictates otherwise. We're "contending" by outplaying our pythag, with a work-heavy and over-performing bullpen. Any slippage there and Arrieta and Matusz won't be enough. Any regression from Chen and Hammel and they won't be enough. In fact, even w/o any significant slippage, the inconsistency of our Nos. 3-5 starters may drag us down and out of the pennant race. Performance doesn't exist in a vacuum.

We are 20-20 when our 3,4, and 5, start. Since we are talking about regressing to some theoretical mean, then their numbers are as likely to improve, as the bullpen and Chen and Hammel decline. Hammel could well get better has his knee heals and the bull pen is pretty deep with Lindstrom, Neshek, Villareal, Gonzalez, Pomeranz, Socolovich, Phillps, etc.If you removed the major meltdowns of Hunter, Arrieta, and Matusz, how much beyond our pythag would we be?

[El Gordo]

It's worth pointing out that absent a regression from those two, they'll have proven to be two of the top SPs in baseball. I hope that's the case, but it seems more likely that they both regress a little bit (to me, at least).

Isn't it just as possible that as Chen adjusts to the pitching/rest schedule and learns the AL players he could improve. Isn't it just as likely that Hammel could improve as his knee gets stronger?

[Lucky Jim]

We are 20-20 when our 3,4, and 5, start. Since we are talking about regressing to some theoretical mean, then their numbers are as likely to improve, as the bullpen and Chen and Hammel decline. Hammel could well get better has his knee heals and the bull pen is pretty deep with Lindstrom, Neshek, Villareal, Gonzalez, Pomeranz, Socolovich, Phillps, etc.If you removed the major meltdowns of Hunter, Arrieta, and Matusz, how much beyond our pythag would we be?

I don't follow any of this. You said that we're contending with Matusz and Arrieta at their current production (contra my statement that they need to a improve). I replied by stating that their current production in a context of regression in other parts likely wouldn't be enough. You responded by saying that they are likely to improve.

I end up w/ the following questions:

1. Why are we removing Hunter, Arrieta and Matusz?

2. What does it matter if Matusz and Arrieta are "as likely" to improve as Hammel and Chen are to regress downward?

3. What do you base this likelihood on?

[LookinUp]

Isn't it just as possible that as Chen adjusts to the pitching/rest schedule and learns the AL players he could improve. Isn't it just as likely that Hammel could improve as his knee gets stronger?

I don't know the probabilities. I do know that there's more room for regression than their is for improvement and track record suggest some regression could happen. Don't get me wrong. I really hope Hammel's new 2S truly has made him a nearly elite pitcher, and that Chen will hold up on 5 days rest through the season. It's definitely possible.

I think the bullpen is more likely to stay near their production level just by virtue of the number of good arms that we have. Similarly, I do think it's possible that Matusz becomes a reliable #3 as the year progresses, and that 2 of Arrieta, Britton, Tillman, Gonzalez and Hunter give us a chance to win more often than not. I'd feel much much better if we acquired a #2/3 pitcher, but who wouldn't?

[El Gordo]

I don't follow any of this. You said that we're contending with Matusz and Arrieta at their current production (contra my statement that they need to a improve). I replied by stating that their current production in a context of regression in other parts likely wouldn't be enough. You responded by saying that they are likely to improve.

I end up w/ the following questions:

1. Why are we removing Hunter, Arrieta and Matusz?

2. What does it matter if Matusz and Arrieta are "as likely" to improve as Hammel and Chen are to regress downward?

3. What do you base this likelihood on?

1)Because when they are off the are way off in terms of runs, and that skews the run differential. 2)Because yoiu seem to assume regression to the mean is automatically less than. It may well be that in spite of their career numbers, still relatively small, that their "mean" is better than what it appears to be now.

3)I said just as likely, not likely.

IMO this is an 83-86 W team. If we were to play .500 the rest of the way we would be a 93 W team. That would be well above their pythag, IMO. But as the season plays out making no changes, we will be closer to 83-86 W and our Pythag will be in line with that. This is why I think it is important to get another solid SP .

[square634]

1)Because when they are off the are way off in terms of runs, and that skews the run differential. 2)Because yoiu seem to assume regression to the mean is automatically less than. It may well be that in spite of their career numbers, still relatively small, that their "mean" is better than what it appears to be now.

3)I said just as likely, not likely.

IMO this is an 83-86 W team. If we were to play .500 the rest of the way we would be a 93 W team. That would be well above their pythag, IMO. But as the season plays out making no changes, we will be closer to 83-86 W and our Pythag will be in line with that. This is why I think it is important to get another solid SP .

If we were to play.500 the rest of the way, we would be 87-75 (12 games over .500)

[Great 2BA FL Gator]

I don't disagree with these points, which I had already pointed out to myself. I was merely differing with the overenthusiasm of the original statement that Chen and Hammel "give us quality outings pretty much every time out." I've really savored their performances so far, especially their ability to stay focused and productive even after they've been roughed up by errors, fluke hits, cheap runs, and/or bad calls.

Just to explain my thought process: I was judging from more of a subjective standpoint rather than a pure statistical standpoint.

That's why I didn't say Quality Start but rather a quality outing. To me, a quality outing is when you have pretty clearly given your chance to win. That may be 6+ innings and 4 runs or 5 innings and 2 runs.

To me, Hammel and Chen have only had two real slip ups where they didn't give us much of chance. For Chen, it was against the gnats and TB, for Hammel, it was against NYY, and the gnats.

Again, to me then, that is only 4 outings between them out of 26 starts.

[Great 2BA FL Gator]

Just to explain my thought process: I was judging from more of a subjective standpoint rather than a pure statistical standpoint.

That's why I didn't say Quality Start but rather a quality outing. To me, a quality outing is when you have pretty clearly given your chance to win. That may be 6+ innings and 4 runs or 5 innings and 2 runs.

To me, Hammel and Chen have only had two real slip ups where they didn't give us much of chance. For Chen, it was against the gnats and TB, for Hammel, it was against NYY, and the gnats.

Again, to me then, that is only 4 outings between them out of 26 starts.

*in which they didn't give us a chance to win, and thus were lacking quality.

[Lucky Jim]

Just to explain my thought process: I was judging from more of a subjective standpoint rather than a pure statistical standpoint.

That's why I didn't say Quality Start but rather a quality outing. To me, a quality outing is when you have pretty clearly given your chance to win. That may be 6+ innings and 4 runs or 5 innings and 2 runs.

To me, Hammel and Chen have only had two real slip ups where they didn't give us much of chance. For Chen, it was against the gnats and TB, for Hammel, it was against NYY, and the gnats.

Again, to me then, that is only 4 outings between them out of 26 starts.

Hmmm. The standard here seems to be "anything short of catastrophe."

[OFFNY]

Hmmm. The standard here seems to be "anything short of catastrophe."

That reminds of of a conversation that I had with my brother in 1980 in regard to why The Odd Couple was ever taken off the air in the first place (1975), and why it was no longer on in prime time:

"Everybody loves The Odd Couple."

"I mean, everybody likes The Odd Couple."

"I mean, everybody thinks that The Odd Couple is pretty good."

I mean ..........

and, eventually, it led to something like ........... "There have been people who haven't called ABC on the telephone saying, 'Take The Odd Couple off of the air, or we'll blow up the station.' "

.

[Great 2BA FL Gator]

Hmmm. The standard here seems to be "anything short of catastrophe."

I guess I am basing this off a "rule" my brother and I subscribe to and that's the 4 run rule. It worked pretty well early on in the season with all those come backs and it obviously works well you have a fantastic bullpen to hold things down.

Stating it this way might be more appropriate and I believe this. In 22 out of 26 games that Hammel and Chen have pitched, we have had a legitimate chance to win. (I think the 19-7 record when one of them pitches would point to that, more than the pure QS%)

[OFFNY]

The Starting Pitching has to get better. Period.

It's a small sample size, but it has improved considerably this past week.