Kevin Gausman: Starter or reliever?

[DrungoHazewood]

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.

Obviously by the 4th or 5th at bat he's tired and not swinging with full effectiveness. If Buck put him in just to pinch hit he could swing at max effort for a short amount of time, and the resulting 6-run homers would have a tremendous effect on the outcome of the game.

[calmunderfire]

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.

Even if that is true and it may be, the reasoning still stands. A random guy who comes up and starts at 22 is about as good as he is going to get. The statistics show this to be true. Even if his career is derailed by injury then that is just a part of the reason they do not improve.

[blid]

Chris Sale spent a year and two months pitching out of the pen before joining the rotation. I think he's turned out to be a pretty good starter.

Speaking of Sale, I think the Yankees get him and we miss him this upcoming series.

[waroriole]

Even if that is true and it may be, the reasoning still stands. A random guy who comes up and starts at 22 is about as good as he is going to get. The statistics show this to be true. Even if his career is derailed by injury then that is just a part of the reason they do not improve.

You're lumping in a lot of arms who aren't anywhere near as talented as Gausman and making a blanket statement that based on ~50~ IP we know Gausman's talent level. Am I right? And you expect to be taken seriously?

Don't you think that a higher talent level allows for extremes here? Should a guy like Chris Waters be lumped in with Gausman?

[Aglets]

Speaking of Sale, I think the Yankees get him and we miss him this upcoming series.

Looks like the Yankees get him tonight. That means, on normal rest, his next turn would come on Sunday against us.

Assuming they have a normal 5 man rotation and no other funny business.

[Aglets]

Even if that is true and it may be, the reasoning still stands. A random guy who comes up and starts at 22 is about as good as he is going to get. The statistics show this to be true. Even if his career is derailed by injury then that is just a part of the reason they do not improve.

Isn't this kind of like saying that if you or I (or anyone else in the USA for example) go out and attempt to start a MLB game, and get shelled, that we are unlikely to ever do any better than that, therefore because something like 99% of the population won't improve, Gausman is unlikely to improve?

Pitching ability is a skill, not a genetic trait randomly distributed. It's human nature to try to look for patterns and to compare guy A to guy B but the reality is that each MLB player has truly elite talent compared to most humans and needs to be individually evaluated.

[calmunderfire]

You're lumping in a lot of arms who aren't anywhere near as talented as Gausman and making a blanket statement that based on ~50~ IP we know Gausman's talent level. Am I right? And you expect to be taken seriously?

Don't you think that a higher talent level allows for extremes here? Should a guy like Chris Waters be lumped in with Gausman?

Brian Matusz debuted I think at 22, like Gausman. Was the 4th overall pick like Gausman. Then his career as a starting pitcher was derailed in subsequent seasons. There is no special players. Maybe Gausman turns into something incredible, but it's more likely that in future seasons he looks similar to what he does now. It's just how pitching is.

[waroriole]

Brian Matusz debuted I think at 22, like Gausman. Was the 4th overall pick like Gausman. Then his career as a starting pitcher was derailed in subsequent seasons. There is no special players. Maybe Gausman turns into something incredible, but it's more likely that in future seasons he looks similar to what he does now. It's just how pitching is.

Well, ok. Nothing I can refute that with, because one guy was drafted in the same spot in a different draft, there are destined to have similar careers. Crap, I really thought we had one here, but you've shown me indisputable evidence to the contrary.

Just so I can be absolutely sure, you are basing all of this on the results of 50, or so, IP in his first pro season, is that right?

[calmunderfire]

Well, ok. Nothing I can refute that with, because one guy was drafted in the same spot in a different draft, there are destined to have similar careers. Crap, I really thought we had one here, but you've shown me indisputable evidence to the contrary.

Just so I can be absolutely sure, you are basing all of this on the results of 50, or so, IP in his first pro season, is that right?

Everybody is just a man. The statistics show that starting pitchers improve very minutely throughout their careers and their performance remains just about flat.

[waroriole]

Everybody is just a man. The statistics show that starting pitchers improve very minutely throughout their careers and their performance remains just about flat.

So, 36 IP is not too small of a sample size for you to determine this? And really, you seemed to have this figured out at 20 IP. Let me ask you, how many IP do you need to determine someone's career path?

Have any other good SP ever had a poor 36 IP stretch, or will you tell me there is something magic about the first 36 IP that precludes it from being lumped in with other SSS?

[calmunderfire]

So, 36 IP is not too small of a sample size for you to determine this? And really, you seemed to have this figured out at 20 IP. Let me ask you, how many IP do you need to determine someone's career path?

Have any other good SP ever had a poor 36 IP stretch, or will you tell me there is something magic about the first 36 IP that precludes it from being lumped in with other SSS?

Forget about Kevin Gausman for a second. Pitchers in general do not improve much throughout their career. It's backed by numbers.

[waroriole]

Forget about Kevin Gausman for a second. Pitchers in general do not improve much throughout their career. It's backed by numbers.

You're looking at it too generally. When you lump Randy Johnson, Tom Glavine and Roy Halladay in with injury guys like Adam Loewen and Matt Riley and mix in untalented guys like Chris Waters, Garrett Olsen and the countless thousands of other who aren't close to Gausman's talent level, you get poor results. You get those results because there are a lot more people who fit into that 3rd group and make the numbers look the way you are saying. If you can look at that info, and also look at what someone with that kind of talent level did, you can make a more informed statement as to what a guy may do in the future.

It may be that Gausman is nothing more than a bullpen arm, and it may be that he's a TOR SP for many years to come. However, when you make blanket statements, and use largely irrelevant information to make that statement (especially on here) then you're going to be called out and ridiculed.

[DrungoHazewood]

Everybody is just a man. The statistics show that starting pitchers improve very minutely throughout their careers and their performance remains just about flat.

Your interpretation of the statistics. Which is not necessarily either the consensus, or correct.

[DrungoHazewood]

Forget about Kevin Gausman for a second. Pitchers in general do not improve much throughout their career. It's backed by numbers.

No, not necessarily. You should do a search on The Book blog archives. A lot of discussion of this there. And not nearly as cut-and-dried as you suggest.

[calmunderfire]

No, not necessarily. You should do a search on The Book blog archives. A lot of discussion of this there. And not nearly as cut-and-dried as you suggest.

Fair enough. The graph I looked at which looked at the group of MLB starting pitchers as a whole indicated that pitchers remain essentially flat through their careers before they decline. Other graphs may decide to get more fancy.