Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

At the bottom of this Jeff Blair column there's a blurb that Dustin McGowan put on some muscle this offseason and now has a routine down to deal with diabetes.

Semi-bold prediction: Dustin McGowan will be the Jays best pitcher this season (using some stat that combines quantity and quality like VORP or win shares). And I'll say the same thing even if you told me that Halladay and Burnett each make at least 30 starts.

Agree or disagree?

Posted by Pistol on Friday, February 22 2008 @ 08:40 AM EST.

Ace in the Hole | 29 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

China fan - Friday, February 22 2008 @ 09:28 AM EST (#180229) #

   It's a provocative prediction, but can we persuade you to give a bit more detail? Are you predicting a big improvement by McGowan, or are you projecting a decline by Halladay and Burnett? Or will both occur?
    I can agree that McGowan will improve this year -- that's a fairly safe prediction. But do you have some reason to expect a decline by Halladay and Burnett?   If so, could you share your reasoning? Would it be age-related, or injury-related?
    Personally, I think there's a reasonable chance of a solid improvement by McGowan this year -- putting him in the range of 15 to 18 wins -- coupled with a typically strong year by Halladay and a reasonably good year by Burnett. That might put all three of them into the top 15 in AL starters, if all goes well.

Chuck - Friday, February 22 2008 @ 10:23 AM EST (#180232) #

I can agree that McGowan will improve this year -- that's a fairly safe prediction.

I don't agree that it's a safe prediction at all. While McGowan certainly seems to have the repertoire of a staff ace, young players often regress early in their careers as the league makes adjustments. While McGowan is not young, per se, being 26, he is young from an experience perspective.

He could well take his game to the next level. He could regress. Neither would shock me or seem any more likely than the other. My gut tells me 180 IP, 4.50 ERA for 2008. I'd love to be wrong.

Mike Green - Friday, February 22 2008 @ 10:23 AM EST (#180233) #

If he's healthy, McGowan might be the Jays best pitcher this year, but so might Halladay, Burnett, Marcum or even Janssen. I was no fan of the club's handling of McGowan last season and the rent may have to be paid for that...

My money is on Doc, who still has the ability to put up a few more 225 inning, 150 ERA+ seasons.

Jevant - Friday, February 22 2008 @ 11:28 AM EST (#180234) #

I'll be super-bold and say McG is going to have 180 K's or more this year, and a WHIP under 1.25. While we're in the predictions game.

John Northey - Friday, February 22 2008 @ 11:48 AM EST (#180235) #

Always fun to speculate on how the starters will do.

Lets try a new direction... checking the 3 true outcomes (K, BB, HR) what do we see (not counting Janssen as he was a reliever last year). Figures shown are...
B/K = batters per strikeout
B/W = batters per walk
B/HR = batters per home run
Basically, how many guys gotta come to the plate before the event occurs based on 2007 stats.

Player		Age	B/K	B/W	B/HR
Roy Halladay	30	6.7	19.3	61.8
Dustin McGowan	25	4.9	11.6	50.4
A.J. Burnett	30	3.9	10.5	30.0
Shaun Marcum	25	5.4	13.5	24.4
Jesse Litsch	22	9.6	13.3	34.1

Interesting to look at. Batters per home run puts McGowan nearer Halladay than anyone else. Batters per strikeout puts McGowan and Marcum closest together, but more than a batter away from Burnett (the best). The batters per walk though is nice to see for all of them as no one walks more than one out of 10 batters, although it is clear that McGowan must keep working on it.

So, from this one can safely say that Litsch isn't going to be the ace (worst for B/K, not impressive vs the rest in the other two categories). Marcum has to keep the ball in the park more (gives them up twice as often as McGowan and Halladay) to make it to the top. AJ plays with fire as he has the worst B/W figure and his HR rate isn't great either but that B/K mark is sweet.

If I had to call it I'd put Halladay as the likely ace and McGowan as ace 2 due to the HR rates. If McGowan can improve the B/W ratio this year he could go there but his lifetime AAA figure is 9.8 B/W, for the past 3 seasons in the minors it is 11.0 but that is helped mainly by a strong 2005 season (15.9 B/W) in AA/A+. Lets hope he keeps working on it.

CeeBee - Friday, February 22 2008 @ 02:56 PM EST (#180237) #

Has anyone ever published a study comparing starting pitchers rookie seasons to their second season? Is it 50-50 whether they improve or regress? A lot of people seem to think McGowan, Marcum and Janssen will regress but is that based on fact or a hunch? I realise there are a lot of issues to consider. Age, pro experience, injury history and useage will affect performance and probably maturity, personality and who knows what else. Anyway, I'm just curious as to why people think the way they do. My take is that while one always hopes for at least a little improvement in a players first years it seems to be a toss-up and sometimes when things look grim something materializes almost out of nowhere somewhat like the emergence of the Jay's young pitchers last year due to injuries further up the chain.

HollywoodHartman - Friday, February 22 2008 @ 03:34 PM EST (#180238) #

Rosenthal has a nice fluff peice on Rolen.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7826252/Rolen-hoping-to-shed-misconceptions-in-Toronto

ChicagoJaysFan - Friday, February 22 2008 @ 04:07 PM EST (#180239) #

CeeBee - I haven't seen studies. However, I do remember reading somewhere that people generally overestimate the amount of growth / development that players experience in their careers.

While not a study - you can look at pitchers on our staff to see some of the pitfalls that one can expect:

Halladay - we all know what happened after his first solid season in the majors ... he had the worst starting pitcher year in history
Burnett - 2 good seasons and then his injury year
Chacin - followed up his solid rookie year with some stinkers and some injuries

Pretty mixed bag there.

Some other recent Jays also show a mixed bag:

Ohka - rather steady. No real progression in his early years and no real drop-offs, just the normal volatility you'd expect from a pitcher
Towers - what would you expect? The guy followed just about every good year in his career with a stinker, so of course his solid rookie year was followed by arguably the worst year of his career (and we all know that says a lot)
Lilly - similar to Ohka. He's never really evolved since coming up and remains Ted the Tease.
Bush - he's regressed pretty steadily since his first call-up looked so promising

As far as I can think of, those are all the Jays starters that have been on the roster recently and have primarily been starters throughout their career.

There are obviously a lot of guys up above that don't really match McGowan's ability (aside from Halladay and Burnett). However, if you look over the history of Jays, the other guys that I can think of who homegrown and similar to McGowan (hopefully) are: Carpenter, Hentgen, Key, and Stieb (I'm probably missing some). I'm deliberately ignoring Escobar as he kept bouncing around from bullpen to starter.

Carpenter was really up and down at the start of his career and had some pretty bad years in there initially.
Hentgen was one of the most volatile pitchers we've had. A couple of all-star seasons to start his career followed by his disastrous '95 and then a Cy Young in '96.
Jimmy Key was just solid throughout his career.
Dave Stieb was similar to Jimmy Key

Overall, at least if learning Jays history, it looks like we don't know what to expect this upcoming season for McGowan (although over the long run, if he turns into any of Carpenter, Hentgen, Key, Stieb, or Halladay, we'd obviously be happy).

TimberLee - Friday, February 22 2008 @ 10:28 PM EST (#180245) #

I don't want to appear critical, but isn't the important news the part that says McGowan has a "routine" to deal with his diabetes? I don't know which type of the disease he has, but it is potentially dangerous if not taken seriously. Presumably McGowan's routine involves diet and medication, and I certainly hope he can control it. Several players in recent years have stated publically that they are diabetic. I remember that it was a big deal when Ron Santo disclosed his condition, as if there were some reason to keep it a secret.

TamRa - Friday, February 22 2008 @ 11:20 PM EST (#180246) #

I agree. In many secondary stats, such as batting against, McGowan was already one of the top 3 or so SP in the league last year. (second only to Bedard in SLG and OPS against, for instance, fourth in BAA) and his ERC was fourth behind only Santana, Bedard, and Beckett.

Despite a misleadingly high ERA, he's already one of the best few pitchers in the AL. Whether or not he's better than doc depends more on how much doc improves with Rolen behind him and a full season of work than it does McGowan, but It'd be shocked if both (all three if Burnett doesn't suffer major injury) were not among the 10 best AL pitchers this year by virtually any measure save wins (wins being such a irrational stat).

owen - Friday, February 22 2008 @ 11:44 PM EST (#180247) #

While McGowan is not young, per se, being 26, he is young from an experience perspective.

Sure, from a major-league experience perspective. But he has plenty of life experience, including plenty of experience as a professional ballplayer. McGowan has gone through life as a highly-touted, everything-comes-easy-to-me prospect, and has been knocked all the way to rock bottom by failures and injuries. He has battled back, retained his stuff and regained his confidence. I think that his background protects him from some of the pratfalls of sophomorism. I recognize that the rigors of a full season's schedule plus the effectiveness of advanced scouting (though his is the type of stuff where you might not hit what you know is coming) could still do him in. But in my view, McGowan's experiences give him an edge over pitchers who are at apparently comparable points in their careers (like Cain and Lincecum).

westcoast dude - Saturday, February 23 2008 @ 01:51 PM EST (#180251) #

If he can pitch 200 innings, the Cy Young Award will go to Dustin McGowan. Symmetrically, Alex Rios may have an MVP year, particularly if he bats cleanup. Two budding superstars can challenge and balance each other in harmony..

Amarsh - Saturday, February 23 2008 @ 06:39 PM EST (#180252) #

On another note, check out this news:
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7833412/Stewart-to-fill-platoon-in-left-field-for-Jays

So now we have: Stairs, Johnson, Lind, and Stewart all competing for LF playing time. I guess it's assumed that Lind starts the year in AAA.

Lind could emerge as the 25 hr guy. Stairs could repeat last year. Johnson could return to his 2006 form.
All of those 3 situations are less than likely to happen. But the odds of 1 out of the 3 happening aren't bad. And then there's still Stewart to fill a platoon with one of the three.

2008's LF could turn out like 2006's.

ANationalAcrobat - Saturday, February 23 2008 @ 07:15 PM EST (#180253) #

Stewart vs righties: .298/.350/.406
Vs lefties: .268/.333/.365
At home (Oak): .252/.311/.319
Road: .324/.375/.461

China fan - Saturday, February 23 2008 @ 08:58 PM EST (#180254) #

That's great news about Shannon Stewart -- although it also implies that Reed must be still hampered by his injury of last year. I love the increased competition in the outfield, and the increased offensive depth. Both were badly needed by the Jays of last year, and certainly needed improvement this year.
I have a feeling that Reed will lose the competition. The Jays may have soured on him. It's a bit unfair. I still believe in the Reed of 2006, but I have to admit that he will probably never climb those heights again.

Seamus - Saturday, February 23 2008 @ 09:24 PM EST (#180255) #

Yeah, I have to say that I like the fact that the Jays seem very to be a very deep club this year - it reminds me much more of 2006 than 2007.

Although I hope all the competition doesn't cause dissent in the clubhouse.

If Stewart makes the club what happens to Johnson? I would presume he'd be traded or released.

Interesting move!

ayjackson - Saturday, February 23 2008 @ 09:41 PM EST (#180256) #

I think Shannon's just here to audition for other clubs. I can't see how he is retained over Reed at the end of Spring. I doubt anybody's going to offer any thing of value for Reed if he can't even beat out SS for a platoon position. Further, we're not going to give SS the job and release Reed based on one month of ST action.

Reed's line versus LHP over the past three seasons is .305/.380/.451, whereas SS's numbers versus lefties over the past three seasons is .263/.331/.351. And then there's the defence.

VBF - Saturday, February 23 2008 @ 11:06 PM EST (#180257) #

I too love the idea of building some healthy competition. If memory serves me, it was Reed who kind of stole Shannon's job in 2003 after Shannon got hurt and since the Jays thought they couldn't afford him, traded Shannon.

Wait. There was a time when we couldn't afford Shannon Stewart? Crazy.

I do wonder about if Shannon doesn't make the team, and accepts a spot in the minors how that works out on the organizational depth chart (thinking Syracuse will have Lind, Patterson, Cannon? Adams?). I suppose he could choose to retire, which would seem a little strange for someone who hit .290/.345 last year. Shouldn't the Pirates be giving him a multi year deal?

SK in NJ - Saturday, February 23 2008 @ 11:06 PM EST (#180258) #

Johnson, Wells, and Overbay are all coming back from injury. Depth in the outfield is a necessity (Stairs can play 1B if Overbay is hurt). As far as I'm concerned, the Jays may need 14 position players more than 12 pitchers. Plus, guys like Chacin, Litsch, Wolfe, etc, have options left, so it's not like they have to start with the big club.

Shak - Saturday, February 23 2008 @ 11:12 PM EST (#180259) #

Good move by JP.

Stewart provides depth. Maybe JP has lost confidence in Reed or maybe Overbay isn't ready and Stairs is moving to 1B and Stewart to the LF platoon?

JP has done a good job bringing in depth this year.

HollywoodHartman - Sunday, February 24 2008 @ 01:52 AM EST (#180260) #

Just for fun, our thoughts on when Shannon left.

http://www.battersbox.ca/article.php?story=20030716013909999#comments

TamRa - Sunday, February 24 2008 @ 06:36 AM EST (#180261) #

If we needed Stewart, then we could have signed Mench who's like Reed only moreso....and any team that would have trade for Reed could have signed Mench....if we needed a guy who we know will hit RH...there's no reason for that not to be Lind.

And, if we really just wanted to add more offense vs. LHP (for some odd reason) from a marginal defender, we could have signed Sosa.
;)

melondough - Sunday, February 24 2008 @ 10:32 AM EST (#180262) #

As far as I'm concerned, the Jays may need 14 position players more than 12 pitchers.

Has the team confirmed where their preference lies? Is it 5 bench players or 7 relievers?

Let' s assume they decide to go with a very deep 5 man bench of R.Johnson, MacDonald, Scutraro, Barajas, and Stewart. Let's further assume that Ryan is ready to go and that Janssen begins the season as a starting pitcher. Givens to begin the season in the bullpen are Ryan, Accardo, Frasor, Downs, Wolfe, & Tallett. Therefore there would be no spots available for any of Litsch, League, Parrish, Carter, Camp, or R.Wells.

Assuming Ryan is healthy and they decide to start Stweard in the minors (barring a trade of Reed), then who has the inside track for this last bullpen spot? I hope it is League.

Assuming League comes through and they do go with 7 relievers, then AAA is very deep with players ready to help in case of injury on the big club:

Starting Pitchers: Litsch, Chacin, & Pursey

Relievers: Parrish, Carter, Camp, R.Wells, D.Romero, Banks, & Ketchner

OF's: S.Stewart, Lind, & Coats

IF's: Adams, Santos, & Inglett (with the versitle Scutaro and McDonald on the bench I don't think there is going to be a big risk of having to call one of these gusy up)

Am I forgetting anyone?

ChicagoJaysFan - Sunday, February 24 2008 @ 11:46 AM EST (#180265) #

if we needed a guy who we know will hit RH...there's no reason for that not to be Lind.

I think there is a reason for that not to be Lind - .251/.289/.430, which is how he performed against righties last year. I'd say we don't know that Lind can hit righties.

As for Sosa and Mench - first, I don't see how this deal prevents the Jays from signing either of them. Second, do we know that either was interested in coming to Toronto? I hadn't heard anything about either before.

I'm surprised that there can be any negative comments about signing a guy to a minor league deal. I don't follow the logic at all.

TamRa - Sunday, February 24 2008 @ 05:33 PM EST (#180282) #

Lind's career numbers vs RHP:

.270.308.464.772

And last season:
.251.289.430.719

Stewart vs. RHP last three years:
.291.338.402.740

Assuming the rather generous assumption that a widely praised 24 year old hitter is NOT going to get better, and is only as good as his last season, and that a relatively fragile 33 year old is NOT going to decline....I'm still failing to see how an additional .021 in OPS is worth a million and a half dollars to a financially pinched payroll.

This is the sort of thing the Orioles do, I hope it's not the sort of thing the Jays make a habit of.

Hopefully this is a matter of mutual convenience (the Jays get insurance against a "King Ralph" scenario and Stewart gets a place to get into game shape and improve his marketability) and it's all over by 4/1.

ChicagoJaysFan - Sunday, February 24 2008 @ 05:53 PM EST (#180286) #

And last season:
.251.289.430.719

Stewart vs. RHP last three years:
.291.338.402.740

Selective stats imply you have something to hide - Why not compare apples to apples?

Stewart vs. RHP last year:
.298/.350/.406 = .756.

I can see spots in the line-up/pinch-hitting for Stewart's line a lot more than Lind's. Lind you pretty much would only put in with a guy on 3rd - maybe 2nd - with that low OBP. Stewart's .350 can be useful a lot more.

I'm still failing to see how an additional .021 in OPS is worth a million and a half dollars to a financially pinched payroll.

It's not a million and a half dollars. It's a million and a half dollars if he starts the season on the major league roster. There's a big difference there - most importantly, the bump is only a bump insofar as it's more expensive than the person he replaces. If Stewart causes Reed Johnson to be cut, I think there are actually payroll savings. If Stewart steps in as opposed an Adam Lind or something, I think the 1.5 is more like 1.2 more than Lind. Finally, if Stewart doesn't make the roster, there is no bump.

Assuming the rather generous assumption that a widely praised 24 year old hitter is NOT going to get better, and is only as good as his last season, and that a relatively fragile 33 year old is NOT going to decline

Lind can still be higher on the depth chart than Stewart - he just has to do it on the field. However, in Lind, we're talking about a guy that hasn't had 300 AB's in AAA and wasn't out-of-this-world there last year (.299/.353/.471 - very good, but not something that indicates he's way too much better than anyone else).

I don't see the problem with giving Lind some more time at AAA to prove that he's ready for the majors. After all, all the hype about him is really based on 1 season - his 2006. Before that he wasn't nearly as highly thought of and last year didn't do anything to prove that 2006 wasn't a fluke.

Nolan - Sunday, February 24 2008 @ 10:32 PM EST (#180293) #

This is off topic, but interesting [well, to me at least].

I was perusing a Q&A thread with John Sickels [www.minorleagueball.com] and in the thread one person asked Sickels to list his top ten picks from the '07 draft. Of his ten choices, Brett Cecil [39th overall pick] was ranked 9th; also, of the other nine players all but Rick Porcello [27th pick] was picked in the top 14. Sounds encouraging for Cecil and seems like a good choice by Riccardi.

TamRa - Monday, February 25 2008 @ 05:47 AM EST (#180294) #

Finally, if Stewart doesn't make the roster, there is no bump.

Well yeah, Duh. i shouldn't think anyone would have to say you don't get your whole salary in Spring Training - OF COURSE I was speaking of if he made the team.

Selective stats imply you have something to hide - Why not compare apples to apples?

Because one year stats are notoriously misleading. Unfortunately, we don't have a three year spread on Lind to "compare Apples to Apples"

ChicagoJaysFan - Monday, February 25 2008 @ 10:16 AM EST (#180297) #

Well yeah, Duh. i shouldn't think anyone would have to say you don't get your whole salary in Spring Training - OF COURSE I was speaking of if he made the team.

Actually you weren't speaking as if he made the team (if you'd bother to read the sentence after you quoted me, you would have understood your fallacy). Just to remind you, here is what you said originally:

I'm still failing to see how an additional .021 in OPS is worth a million and a half dollars to a financially pinched payroll.

This does not take into consideration Stewart making the team. Specifically, it is ignoring the fact that in order for Stewart to make the team, someone has to be cut. Most likely, that person is Reed Johnson. Cutting Reed Johnson (costs ~800k versus his ~$3.3 million salary) to keep Stewart ($1.5 million) nets out to a savings of just about $1 million.

So a more accurate rephrasing of your original statement would be:

I'm still failing to see how an additional .021 in OPS is worth a savings of a million dollars to a financially pinched payroll.

On to the next point ...

Because one year stats are notoriously misleading. Unfortunately, we don't have a three year spread on Lind to "compare Apples to Apples"

So one year stats are notoriously misleading, however, we can state the following, again based on a one-year stat:

Assuming the rather generous assumption that a widely praised 24 year old hitter [Lind] is NOT going to get better

So one year of stats is misleading, but of course it serves as an accurate baseline upon which Lind will improve - we would have to rely on a generous assumption to think that the one year of stats may actually be higher than what he'd do right now. That makes sense.

Also, in the case of Stewart - his 3 years of stats happen to include 2 years during which he suffered acute injuries (and also the only two years with an OPS against righties lower than last season). Last year, when healthy, his OPS versus righties jumped up almost .040 points.

I think you'd have to believe his acute injuries are actually chronic in order to believe that the 3-year stats are more reflective of what to expect.

Ace in the Hole | 29 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.