Should/Will the O’s Exercise the Jordan Lyles Option?

[Sports Guy]

Last year was basically a best case scenario for Lyles.  The fence was moved back and offense was down and he could still only accomplish a 91 ERA+.

His stat cast numbers aren’t good. Poor K rate, poor HR rate and doesn’t miss bats.  
 

The only really positive things he does is throw strikes/keep the walks down and eat innings.  That’s it.

But they are below average innings and at that cost, it doesn’t make much sense.

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

Last year was basically a best case scenario for Lyles.  The fence was moved back and offense was down and he could still only accomplish a 91 ERA+.

The second sentence doesn’t make a lot of sense, since ERA+ adjusts for both league-wide run-scoring environment and park effects.   But I agree that Lyles is highly unlikely to get better from here, and could be significantly worse.

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

The second sentence doesn’t make a lot of sense, since ERA+ adjusts for both league-wide run-scoring environment and park effects.   But I agree that Lyles is highly unlikely to get better from here, and could be significantly worse.

The point is that it was a perfect storm for a below average pitcher like Lyles and he was still a below average pitcher in basically a perfect situation for him.

Hes not good and we need to stop being satisfied with mediocrity.  The point of playing is to win.  We should be trying to get better, not have status quo.

[Frobby]

19 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The point is that it was a perfect storm for a below average pitcher like Lyles and he was still a below average pitcher in basically a perfect situation for him.

Hes not good and we need to stop being satisfied with mediocrity.  The point of playing is to win.  We should be trying to get better, not have status quo.

I don’t think anyone could really argue that we don’t need to get at least one new pitcher better than Lyles.  I could see an argument that keeping Lyles for the bottom of the rotation makes sense, rather than relying on the Spenser Watkinses of the world.  But personally, I’d spend the money elsewhere.  

[emmett16]

If they bring him back then they are planning on going cheap.  That’s only possible reason. They need better players to compete.  He wAs a fantastic teammate and played for 2022 but not what the doctor ordered for 2023. 

[RZNJ]

How is a 91 ERA+ a best-case scenario for a pitcher who had a 106 ERA+ as recently as 2019 in 28 starts? Admittedly that's his career best but at age 32 it's not out of the question that he's as good as last year and MAYBE better.

Keep in mind that Lyles was a starter in Colorado from age 20-24.  After 2015 he stayed in Colorado as basically a swing man who made sporadic starts.  He didn't become a full-time starter again until 2019.   

Edited October 28, 2022 by RZNJ

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

How is a 91 ERA+ a best-case scenario for a pitcher who had a 106 ERA+ as recently as 2019 in 28 starts? Admittedly that's his career best but at age 32 it's not out of the question that he's as good as last year and MAYBE better.

Keep in mind that Lyles was a starter in Colorado from age 20-24.  After 2015 he stayed in Colorado as basically a swing man who made sporadic starts.  He didn't become a full-time starter again until 2019.   

It’s fair to say that it’s not literally his “best case scenario.”   But put it this way: give me an over/under on 91 ERA+ for 2023, and I’m taking the under.  Even if I was given 2-1 odds on the over and 1-2 odds on the under, I’d take the under.  

[RZNJ]

6 minutes ago, Frobby said:

It’s fair to say that it’s not literally his “best case scenario.”   But put it this way: give me an over/under on 91 ERA+ for 2023, and I’m taking the under.  Even if I was given 2-1 odds on the over and 1-2 odds on the under, I’d take the under.  

His last 4 years are 106, 64, 86, 91.  I'm going with the trending up.  I'll take the over for $11M.   I think they changed his pitch usage and think his second half is indicative of what he can do moving forward.    Any way to see ERA+ broken down by month or half?   I'm curious to know what it was over his last 3 months.

[Aristotelian]

27 minutes ago, emmett16 said:

If they bring him back then they are planning on going cheap.  That’s only possible reason. They need better players to compete.  He wAs a fantastic teammate and played for 2022 but not what the doctor ordered for 2023. 

That's why I haven't voted. I'd be slightly in favor of picking up the option, but only on the assumption we are still going after a TOR starter, either through FA or trade. I think there is room for both Lyles and an upgrade, but if we are choosing between the two I would go for the upgrade for sure. 

[Yardball85]

17 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

They shouldn't.

The money could be better spent as a partial payment to a player who is likely to exceed his production.

I think they will bring him back.

I don't think that bringing him back with the idea to then trade him is worth the risk.

This is exactly my thinking. 

[DrungoHazewood]

27 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The point is that it was a perfect storm for a below average pitcher like Lyles and he was still a below average pitcher in basically a perfect situation for him.

Hes not good and we need to stop being satisfied with mediocrity.  The point of playing is to win.  We should be trying to get better, not have status quo.

I think the question is whether there is value in having a player with a 90 ERA+ who can take the ball every fifth day, if he's at the back end of your rotation.

The Blue Jays gave 72 starts to pitchers with ERA/ERA+'s worse than Lyles.  They would have been a better team with Lyles than Berrios, Kikuchi and the rest.

The Rays really only had four regular starters, but gave between one and nine starts to 13 other pitchers.  Some pretty good, some pretty terrible. It's arguable they'd have been better just using Lyles as their 5th starter.

The Guardians had two starters with 20+ starts and an ERA+ worse than Lyles.

I don't think the decision on Lyles is obvious.  They do need better 1-3 starters.  But they could do worse than having him as the 4th/5th starter.

 

[Frobby]

21 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

His last 4 years are 106, 64, 86, 91.  I'm going with the trending up.  I'll take the over for $11M.   I think they changed his pitch usage and think his second half is indicative of what he can do moving forward.    Any way to see ERA+ broken down by month or half?   I'm curious to know what it was over his last 3 months.

I’m not aware of any way to see ERA+ by month or half.  His raw ERA was 4.70 in the first half (by which I mean the first 81 games), 4.14 in the second half, so it’s probable that his ERA+ was better in the second half, too.  Maybe not quite as much better as his raw ERA, because Lyles threw 10 of 16 starts on the road (where he was much worse) in the first half, 8 of 16 in the second half.  

[DrungoHazewood]

38 minutes ago, emmett16 said:

If they bring him back then they are planning on going cheap.  That’s only possible reason. They need better players to compete.  He wAs a fantastic teammate and played for 2022 but not what the doctor ordered for 2023. 

How is paying $11M for what is objectively a 4th or 5th starter going cheap?  If they wanted to go cheap they'd just let one of the much less experienced guys making $700k a year the 4th/5th starter.

[DrungoHazewood]

17 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think that bringing him back with the idea to then trade him is worth the risk.

You have to assume that a 32-year-old with a career FIP of 4.68 is going to give you something like a 4.68 ERA.  What would be a reasonable return for half a season of a guy with a 4.68 ERA?  A #10 organizational prospect?  A #20?  Not someone who is likely to be a good major league player.

If you bring him back it's because you think he's a positive performer for the team compared to other options.

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I think the question is whether there is value in having a player with a 90 ERA+ who can take the ball every fifth day, if he's at the back end of your rotation.

The Blue Jays gave 72 starts to pitchers with ERA/ERA+'s worse than Lyles.  They would have been a better team with Lyles than Berrios, Kikuchi and the rest.

The Rays really only had four regular starters, but gave between one and nine starts to 13 other pitchers.  Some pretty good, some pretty terrible. It's arguable they'd have been better just using Lyles as their 5th starter.

The Guardians had two starters with 20+ starts and an ERA+ worse than Lyles.

I don't think the decision on Lyles is obvious.  They do need better 1-3 starters.  But they could do worse than having him as the 4th/5th starter.

 

It depends what you think of our back end candidates.  Let’s assume we pick up one starter better than Lyles.   Then you have:

New starter

Rodriguez

Kramer

Bradish

Voth 

Wells

Watkins

Hall

Means (hopefully, by July/August)

That feels like pretty decent depth at the back end, to me.