Kevin Gausman: Starter or reliever?

[DrungoHazewood]

Pitchers who figure it out are the exception to the rule, but are the real good ones as well. Unlike hitters who drastically improve after getting called up pitchers do not. FIP remains basically flat once a pitcher debuts in the MLB.

[Graph goes here]

I'm not sure that graph means what you think it means, especially with regards to pitchers with small samples of innings. You can't take an average across hundreds or thousands of pitchers and say projections apply equally to those with 200 innings at 21 and those with 30 innings at 21. You have to understand that Gausman's performance in such a small sample is full of noise, and probably doesn't represent true talent to any meaningful degree.

[PolishFalcon22]

A lot of guys, when they move to the pen, shelf a pitch (Koji for instance). The idea being, you don't want to get beat with your third best pitch. That is a less then ideal environment to be adding a pitch.

Also, why should the Catcher call for it?

He wouldn't be adding it now, mastering a new pitch isn't an in-season task in the big leagues. Not wanting to be a reliever would give him plenty of reason to add a change-up, slider, cutter, or whatever, in the off season. Winter ball, spring training, or in the minors is where he'd have to master it.

[calmunderfire]

I'm not sure that graph means what you think it means, especially with regards to pitchers with small samples of innings. You can't take an average across hundreds or thousands of pitchers and say projections apply equally to those with 200 innings at 21 and those with 30 innings at 21. You have to understand that Gausman's performance in such a small sample is full of noise, and probably doesn't represent true talent to any meaningful degree.

Yes, but it holds one of baseballs best kept secrets. Pitchers in general improve only minutely from the the day they debut. It's almost as if their performance stays flat. Obviously some get better and they are the ones who go on to win lots of games and get a big contract, but for every Chris Tillman there are more Bergesen's, Arrieta's and Matusz who do not improve.

Is the sample size too small to make an accurate judge of Gasuman's starting pitching performance? I think you are right about that. This notion however that he will transform into a completely new guy is not backed by the statistics. If he was a hitter then I would say of course he will get much better because most do. Pitching is different.

[Can_of_corn]

He wouldn't be adding it now, mastering a new pitch isn't an in-season task in the big leagues. Not wanting to be a reliever would give him plenty of reason to add a change-up, slider, cutter, or whatever, in the off season. Winter ball, spring training, or in the minors is where he'd have to master it.

Right, he would be better served in the minors mastering a third pitch then in a ML Bullpen.

[mdbdotcom]

Yes, but it holds one of baseballs best kept secrets. Pitchers in general improve only minutely from the the day they debut. It's almost as if their performance stays flat. Obviously some get better and they are the ones who go on to win lots of games and get a big contract, but for every Chris Tillman there are more Bergesen's, Arrieta's and Matusz who do not improve.

Is the sample size too small to make an accurate judge of Gasuman's starting pitching performance? I think you are right about that. This notion however that he will transform into a completely new guy is not backed by the statistics. If he was a hitter then I would say of course he will get much better because most do. Pitching is different.

He doesn't have to get "much" better. He just needs one new pitch. Very good high velocity pitchers frequently have to develop a new breaking pitch at the major league level, because they didn't need it until they got there. Whether or not KG is able to do so remains to be seen, but it's way to early to pigeon hole him as a reliever.

[DrungoHazewood]

Right, he would be better served in the minors mastering a third pitch then in a ML Bullpen.

But the minor league season is over, so he's better off pitching MLB relief than hanging out at home.

I don't see it being particularly controversial to have a kid pitcher throw a few innings of MLB relief.

[clapdiddy]

Haven't read through this thread, but you should leave Gausman as a starter until he proves he can't be one.

[Ohfan67]

Pitchers who figure it out are the exception to the rule, but are the real good ones as well. Unlike hitters who drastically improve after getting called up pitchers do not. FIP remains basically flat once a pitcher debuts in the MLB.

That's blatantly false. BAD pitchers tend to stay bad, so when you do this analysis for bad pitchers the data look like what you are saying. When you do the analysis for GOOD pitchers, then you see a lot more variation. Some good pitchers are lights out from the beginning, some good pitchers are mediocre in the beginning, and some good pitchers stink in the beginning. Heck, there are significant periods during the career of most good pitchers where they stink, not just in the beginning. Very, very, very few good pitchers don't go through stretches where they are mediocre or even worse. This is especially true when you use the kind of sample size that you are using for Gauseman.

[waroriole]

Haven't read through this thread, but you should leave Gausman as a starter until he proves he can't be one.

I don't even see how this is a discussion.

Why don't we discuss whether Davis should be in the starting lineup or just have him PH.

[Can_of_corn]

I don't even see how this is a discussion.

Why don't we discuss whether Davis should be in the starting lineup or just have him PH.

Well, if he pinch hits then Buck can ensure he bats in a high leverage situation...

[waroriole]

Well, if he pinch hits then Buck can ensure he bats in a high leverage situation...

Ha, I knew there would be someone who responded with that.

[calmunderfire]

That's blatantly false. BAD pitchers tend to stay bad, so when you do this analysis for bad pitchers the data look like what you are saying. When you do the analysis for GOOD pitchers, then you see a lot more variation. Some good pitchers are lights out from the beginning, some good pitchers are mediocre in the beginning, and some good pitchers stink in the beginning. Heck, there are significant periods during the career of most good pitchers where they stink, not just in the beginning. Very, very, very few good pitchers don't go through stretches where they are mediocre or even worse. This is especially true when you use the kind of sample size that you are using for Gauseman.

I disagree. We must include all pitchers who play. Why would isolate just the few pitchers that do improve and get better. Most of them do not. For hitting we do not isolate the players and divide them into good and bad. That is because hitters improve drastically throughout their career. Even taking into account the scrubs who do not make it.

Small market teams can compete because they understand this. Pitchers are about as good as they ever will be from day 1.

[Can_of_corn]

But the minor league season is over, so he's better off pitching MLB relief than hanging out at home.

I don't see it being particularly controversial to have a kid pitcher throw a few innings of MLB relief.

I wasn't talking about right now, I was talking about next season.

Would be funny to send him to Aberdeen for the playoffs tho.

[DrungoHazewood]

Is the sample size too small to make an accurate judge of Gasuman's starting pitching performance? I think you are right about that. This notion however that he will transform into a completely new guy is not backed by the statistics.

Yes, the sample is way too small to draw any conclusions. Your chart was a summary of all players at those ages, meaning that taken as a group you can argue that pitchers don't improve*, but individuals differ from that, often wildly.

And he doesn't have to transform into a completely new guy - he just has to show a bit of improvement in a couple areas while allowing his HR/FB rate to stabilize at a reasonable rate and he'll be a fine starter.

* And I don't even believe that - you have to be extremely careful to avoid selection bias, among other pitfalls, that make your data look very different than reality. The chart you presented could also be read as "pitchers peak at some age around, say, 27 like other players but the high attrition rate means that those gains are offset, in the aggregate, but pitchers getting hurt, pitching badly, and dropping out of the league." I think it's probable that healthy pitchers peak at or around 27, but injuries obscure that information.

[DrungoHazewood]

I disagree. We must include all pitchers who play. Why would isolate just the few pitchers that do improve and get better. Most of them do not. For hitting we do not isolate the players and divide them into good and bad. That is because hitters improve drastically throughout their career. Even taking into account the scrubs who do not make it.

Small market teams can compete because they understand this. Pitchers are about as good as they ever will be from day 1.

I think that pitchers do get better, but that when you lump all pitchers together the ones who get hurt offset most of the gains the healthy ones makes. So if you accumulate enough young pitchers you can plan on some of them improving over time, while some will drop out of the league altogether.