Define "Ace"

[TommyPickles]

I already gave my definition in the Means thread, but I might as well throw it in here:

"I think of an 'ace' as a #1 starter who might find himself playing in an All Star game (or several) during his career. A guy who is a top 10 pitcher in his league, year after year."

[Sports Guy]

17 minutes ago, TommyPickles said:

I already gave my definition in the Means thread, but I might as well throw it in here:

"I think of an 'ace' as a #1 starter who might find himself playing in an All Star game (or several) during his career. A guy who is a top 10 pitcher in his league, year after year."

The AS game thing is wrong imo because of the “you have to have a player per team” thing.  Being the best pitcher on a bad team who happened to have a good first 3-4 months isn’t someone in this discussion.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

I had to Google it and I would have never guessed this was the origin of the term. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ace_(baseball)

 

Brainard was not only the primary starter for the famous 1869 Red Stockings, but also a starter on the 1873-74 Baltimore Canaries of the National Association. That was the first league side to represent Baltimore. 

His 1874 pitching line is physically unrealizable today - 240 innings, 405 hits, 329 runs, 99 earned, 27 walks, eight strikeouts, and 19 wild pitches.  Was 5-22.  Also... strange accounting here 30 games pitched, 27 starts, 4 games finished, and 25 complete games.  The only way that math works out is if he left a game, moved to the field, then went back and finished the game.  In 99.999% of the cases games pitched <= starts plus games finished.

[DrungoHazewood]

44 minutes ago, TommyPickles said:

I already gave my definition in the Means thread, but I might as well throw it in here:

"I think of an 'ace' as a #1 starter who might find himself playing in an All Star game (or several) during his career. A guy who is a top 10 pitcher in his league, year after year."

List of starting pitchers who made an All Star roster despite career WAR totals below replacement include: Jeff Locke, Hal Gregg, and Jim Coates.

Other notable pitchers who could fall under this definition of aces include Russ Ortiz, Wade Miley, Alfredo Simon, Edwin Jackson, Yovani Gallardo, Art Houtteman, and Jair Jurrjens.

[scOtt]

2 hours ago, wildcard said:

Don't know for sure  but I always thought that the term Ace was coined by a card player.  Of course that would make the #3 guy a Queen and the #4 guy a Joker.

But a #5 would be a "10".

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:

Strasburg has ace level stuff and can be amazing when he's on the mound and was fantastic in their 2019 WS run...but he's just not durable enough.  The rest of the guys mentioned are or have been durable.   IMO, he's the one in that list that's unlike the others.  

I think that’s a fair comment.   

[jamalshw]

In a world (particularly baseball world) where we try and quantify everything. An "ace" isn't as easily quantifiable to me as top 5, 10 or even 15 pitchers based on any metric be it ERA, WHIP, FIP, etc. 

For me, an ace is someone that you can start and feel good about your chances regardless about what team you are facing and who is pitching for that team. That needs to be established over a sizeable timeframe, however, one season is usually too short. It's someone that can completely dominate hitters. Right now, Jacob deGrom is obviously an ace. Shane Bieber, Gerrit Cole, and Max Scherzer are aces. Joe Musgrove, Corbin Burnes, Brandon Woodruff are all pitching likes aces and on their way, but need to prove it over a bit more to get into that category.   

[wildcard]

13 minutes ago, scOtt said:

But a #5 would be a "10".

She couldn't throw very well, but no-one really cared.

[LocoChris]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

Active pitchers who to me are or were aces:

Verlander, Greinke, Kershaw, Scherzer, Sale, Price, deGrom, Wainwright, Kluber, Bumgardner, Strasburg, Cole, Darvish, Arrieta.

Guys who I consider borderline: Lester, Cueto,

Guys who might get there: Bauer, Bieber.  (There are other less established guys but these two have had a few excellent seasons already.)

Walker Buehler will be there soon. He’s probably on the “borderline” level right now. Ryu would be too if he could stay healthy. 

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Brainard was not only the primary starter for the famous 1869 Red Stockings, but also a starter on the 1873-74 Baltimore Canaries of the National Association. That was the first league side to represent Baltimore. 

His 1874 pitching line is physically unrealizable today - 240 innings, 405 hits, 329 runs, 99 earned, 27 walks, eight strikeouts, and 19 wild pitches.  Was 5-22.  Also... strange accounting here 30 games pitched, 27 starts, 4 games finished, and 25 complete games.  The only way that math works out is if he left a game, moved to the field, then went back and finished the game.  In 99.999% of the cases games pitched <= starts plus games finished.

Thanks, I figured if any poster could fill in the rest of the story it would be yourself. 

[Redskins Rick]

Ace = Somebody who has shot down 5 enemy aircraft.

[spiritof66]

I guess I look at "ace" a little differently, in terms of a starting pitcher's role on his team. If a team has a starter who the team/manager thinks clearly gives it a better chance to win a game than its other starters, regardless of the strengths and characteristics of the opposition's lineup or the park in which the game is played, he's the team's ace. Cole is the NYYs' ace. The Dodgers don't have an ace, though you could still look at Kershaw that way given his history. If a team faces a critical late-season game or goes into a playoff with its starters rested, and it's obvious who should and will pitch the opener (and, I guess, if the team's not managed by Connie Mack), that guy is the ace of the staff. If you have to start figuring out who would be the best guy to face the other team's righty/lefty batting order, etc., the team has no ace.

John Means is the Oriole's ace, even though he bears that distinction partly because of what surrounds him.

[Just Regular]

On Strasburg, I think pedigree can fast track you to an Ace label.   Jose Fernandez did that too.    That's Bill Parcells' Planet Theory translated to baseball.

If Grayson Rodriguez can pitch like John Means' last 10 starts in his first 10 starts, we probably won't be wondering if he's got the badge, just hoping the fastballs can last for 7-10 years.

If you are a 4th round guy, it might take until September 2019 for it to register, "Shane Bieber has 225K - that can't be right??"    Ahhh...that's probably just Cleveland's institutional knowledge.

I think today the 200 IP part of Ace only means your team needs to lean on you that much - the super team GM's are trying to make sure the world's best pitchers don't have to.   Peak Sabathia or Halladay would probably hate being on today's Dodgers.

[Frobby]

7 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

I think the key is not only are you a top 10 guy for multiple seasons but it’s also the IP.  You have to be going 200+ innings.

You can be a sub 3 ERA guy but if you are only going 180 innings, You aren’t an ace.

Aces mean you don’t use your pen as much.  Get you those 20ish outs every time they take the ball.  
 

Getting 15-18 outs isn’t an ace.

The problem with this is that the IP by starters is shrinking all the time.   In 2009 there were 36 pitchers who threw 200 innings.   In 2019, there were 15; the 36th guy threw 178 innings.    So, throwing 178 innings in 2019 was about the same thing as throwing 200 in 2009.    And that’s only going to keep trending down, at least in the short run.  

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

The problem with this is that the IP by starters is shrinking all the time.   In 2009 there were 36 pitchers who threw 200 innings.   In 2019, there were 15; the 36th guy threw 178 innings.    So, throwing 178 innings in 2019 was about the same thing as throwing 200 in 2009.    And that’s only going to keep trending down, at least in the short run.  

Ehh, I think this is a poor argument.  The better pitchers were still over 200 IP.

Right now, there is no need to re-think anything.  Now, maybe after 2020 and 2021, teams will re-evaluate how they do things but for right now, the thresholds are still there imo.