Trevor Cahill: The Comparables
Max Scherzer. Johnny Cueto. Noah Lowry. Gio Gonzales. Anibal Sanchez. Hey, don't look at me. I'm just quoting what Baseball Reference reckons are the most similar active pitchers to Cahill. Just about any of those would make it seem like Kevin Towers met a drunken Billy Beane down a dark alley, and went all pool-ball in a sock on his Brad Pittness. I was particularly amused by the Gio Gonzales comp, since Cahill was thought of as Gio Lite in some circles, in terms of who we were wanting.
Let's dig a little deeper...
A key factor is that Cahill won't turn 24 until after pitchers and catchers report to Salt River Fields, but has already thrown 583 major-league innings.That's a ton. Only five currently active pitchers had more by the end of their age 23 season. Three have a Cy Young on their mantelpiece, and all were All-Stars, with a dozen All-Star Game appearances to date between them (of course, something Cahill has already accomplished). However, caution compels me to mention that one of these is Dontrelle Willis, who had two All-Star appearances before his 24th birthday, then largely flamed out following it, with an ERA north of five thereafter.
Let's drop the cut-off to 400 major-league innings by the end of their age 23 season. That gives us a better number - ironically, 23 including Cahill - with which to work. Here are the stats for all those active pitchers, in descending order of ERA+.
| Rk | Player | SO/9 | BB/9 | H/9 | IP | G | W | L | H | R | ER | BB | SO | ERA | ERA+ | HR | Tm |
| 1 | Mark Prior | 10.70 | 2.74 | 7.92 | 446.2 | 70 | 30 | 16 | 393 | 165 | 153 | 136 | 531 | 3.08 | 139 | 43 | CHC |
| 2 | Clayton Kershaw | 9.36 | 3.49 | 7.06 | 716.1 | 118 | 47 | 28 | 562 | 245 | 229 | 278 | 745 | 2.88 | 135 | 46 | LAD |
| 3 | Carlos Zambrano | 7.55 | 4.10 | 7.79 | 539.2 | 101 | 34 | 29 | 467 | 227 | 195 | 246 | 453 | 3.25 | 132 | 34 | CHC |
| 4 | Jair Jurrjens | 6.30 | 3.24 | 8.25 | 434.0 | 72 | 30 | 21 | 398 | 174 | 155 | 156 | 304 | 3.21 | 131 | 30 | DET-ATL |
| 5 | Mark Buehrle | 5.22 | 2.25 | 8.43 | 511.2 | 94 | 39 | 21 | 479 | 218 | 200 | 128 | 297 | 3.52 | 131 | 54 | CHW |
| 6 | Chad Billingsley | 8.25 | 4.15 | 8.45 | 437.2 | 96 | 35 | 19 | 411 | 175 | 162 | 202 | 401 | 3.33 | 130 | 36 | LAD |
| 7 | Felix Hernandez | 8.06 | 2.85 | 8.58 | 905.0 | 138 | 58 | 41 | 863 | 385 | 347 | 287 | 810 | 3.45 | 125 | 80 | SEA |
| 8 | Dontrelle Willis | 6.83 | 2.64 | 8.65 | 594.0 | 93 | 46 | 27 | 571 | 239 | 216 | 174 | 451 | 3.27 | 125 | 44 | FLA |
| 9 | Scott Kazmir | 9.73 | 4.13 | 8.41 | 570.2 | 98 | 35 | 29 | 533 | 262 | 231 | 262 | 617 | 3.64 | 124 | 49 | TBD |
| 10 | Matt Cain | 7.67 | 3.79 | 7.70 | 654.2 | 105 | 30 | 43 | 560 | 284 | 272 | 276 | 558 | 3.74 | 119 | 55 | SFG |
| 11 | Jake Peavy | 8.22 | 3.30 | 8.34 | 458.2 | 76 | 33 | 24 | 425 | 197 | 180 | 168 | 419 | 3.53 | 110 | 57 | SDP |
| 12 | Mat Latos | 8.65 | 2.83 | 7.56 | 429.2 | 72 | 27 | 29 | 361 | 174 | 161 | 135 | 413 | 3.37 | 108 | 39 | SDP |
| 13 | CC Sabathia | 6.96 | 3.72 | 8.27 | 776.0 | 126 | 54 | 35 | 713 | 377 | 355 | 321 | 600 | 4.12 | 107 | 75 | CLE |
| 14 | Trevor Cahill | 5.48 | 3.35 | 8.55 | 583.0 | 96 | 40 | 35 | 554 | 274 | 253 | 217 | 355 | 3.91 | 107 | 65 | OAK |
| 15 | Jon Garland | 5.09 | 3.97 | 9.16 | 571.0 | 115 | 34 | 40 | 581 | 326 | 292 | 252 | 323 | 4.6 | 101 | 77 | CHW |
| 16 | Zack Greinke | 6.41 | 2.33 | 9.96 | 456.1 | 112 | 21 | 35 | 505 | 244 | 235 | 118 | 325 | 4.63 | 99 | 62 | KCR |
| 17 | Oliver Perez | 9.97 | 4.82 | 7.80 | 515.2 | 90 | 27 | 30 | 447 | 256 | 244 | 276 | 571 | 4.26 | 97 | 80 | SDP-PIT |
| 18 | Ryan Dempster | 7.78 | 4.79 | 9.00 | 428.0 | 72 | 22 | 23 | 428 | 226 | 212 | 228 | 370 | 4.46 | 97 | 57 | FLA |
| 19 | Chris Volstad | 5.62 | 3.33 | 9.29 | 418.1 | 74 | 27 | 26 | 432 | 224 | 208 | 155 | 261 | 4.47 | 95 | 49 | FLA |
| 20 | Rick Porcello | 4.84 | 2.38 | 10.02 | 515.1 | 89 | 38 | 30 | 574 | 280 | 260 | 136 | 277 | 4.54 | 94 | 59 | DET |
| 21 | Javier Vazquez | 7.40 | 2.99 | 9.86 | 544.2 | 92 | 25 | 32 | 597 | 323 | 300 | 181 | 448 | 4.96 | 91 | 75 | MON |
| 22 | Jamey Wright | 3.82 | 4.16 | 10.82 | 447.1 | 76 | 21 | 30 | 538 | 316 | 284 | 207 | 190 | 5.71 | 91 | 51 | COL |
| 23 | Brett Myers | 5.98 | 3.41 | 9.67 | 441.0 | 76 | 29 | 25 | 474 | 250 | 237 | 167 | 293 | 4.84 | 86 | 62 | PHI |
It's an interesting and broad mix, especially in terms of where those pitchers have gone thereafter. You've got everything from flameouts like Willis and Oliver Perez, to half the Cy Young winners in the majors over the past five years. In terms of K-rate - something a good number of people have brought up as a knock on Cahill - he is lower than most, ranked 19th of the 23. However, it's still a better strikeout rate than Mark Buerhle and Jon Garland had at this point in their respective careers.It's also encouraging to note Trevor's improvement in this area, going up from 15.1% to 16.3% last season, though well short of his fabulous 27.1% minor-league number.
Cahill's walk-rate puts him dead in the middle of the sample, sitting between Chris Volstad and Brett Myers. The former had a pretty 'meh' season with the Marlins, putting up a 4.89 ERA, but Myers has been solid - a 112 ERA+ over the six seasons (Cahill's control period, including his team options) which followed, with Philadelphia and Houston. That number did tick up in 2011, from 8.1% to 9.1%, and an overall lack of control was fingered by Cahill in last night's chat, as a reason for his struggles. But speaking of fingers... Here's an interesting piece from Athletics Nation last August, when Cahill was in the midst of his struggles:
It's surprising to me that the bruised index finger on Cahill's right hand isn't getting more attention. Clearly he has been pitching poorly for a while now, following a terrific start to the season, but this nagging problem is almost mentioned only as an afterthought: "Oh, by the way he can't throw his spike curve because of the bruised finger." This is no small deal. It was the emergence of the spike curve to replace the "slider which replaced the knuckle curve" that helped Cahill leap from the valley that was 2009 to the mountain top that was 2010. Losing the ability to throw any pitch is a big deal, and it's not clear whether Cahill's sinker and changeup might be affected but since they are thrown with the same fingers you'd think it's quite possible.
Hmm. That would go a long way to explaining his struggles late in 2010, and if so, would suggest there's a very good chance that a 100% healthy Cahill would be back to the form he had for 2010 and the first half of 2011. Over those 50 starts, he had a 3.03 ERA, which would be ace-caliber level, even before moving to the National League and its pathetic-hitting pitchers [Diamondbacks excluded, obviously...] It's also worth noting he finished strongly, three consecutive quality starts and a 2.66 ERA there, with six earned runs allowed over 20.1 innings - two against division winners in the Tigers and Rangers. Here's his final outing, seven scoreless vs. Seattle:
But it's the uncertainty which adds to the anticipation in some ways. For the next three months, D-backs fans will be like kids on Christmas Eve, wondering if Santa Towers has got them a shiny new train-set or a lump of coal.
And remember folks: Gibby knows if you've been good...
63 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm liking this trade a lot more now
Hopefully he can polish his command even by a little bit and the rest could come by simply staying 100% healthy. He likely won’t be a star (though I’m allowed to dream, though, right?) but a cost controlled solid #3 is nothing to complain about. Heck, he’s a #3 right now. He could be as good as Hudson was this year in 2012.
I think he could easily be a star.
He’s only 23 years old and he’s going to get better. He’s still figuring things out. I actually think he could be our best pitcher next year. Lets face it, besides Colorado the offenses in this division are pretty terrible. Combine that with the switch from the AL to the NL and a better defense, he could have a great season.
"Clearly the Brewers didn't realize that going into Beast Mode raised their testosterone levels."
by tcyoung
I don't to expect that from him
Because that’s not the likely outcome, and I’ll just end up being disappointed if he produces below star level.
Aim low and avoid disappointment…
by CaptainCanuck on Dec 11, 2011 6:12 PM EST up reply actions
Cahill should be a good, solid #3 starter in this rotation for at least the next few seasons. He has the potential to be more than that, though, and I think he can mature into a very good #2 starter pitching in the NL West. He showed flashes of his earlier form last season, so let’s hope the reports of injury hampering him were true.
I’ve been as big a Jarrod Parker fan as anybody here the last few years, but Parker was a fair price to pay. When it comes down to it, we landed Cahill for the oldest and most uncertain of our Big Four pitching prospects. Sounds good to me.
The bird is struggling out of the egg. The egg is the world. Whoever wants to be born, must first destroy a world.
by Stupendous Man on Dec 11, 2011 2:31 PM EST via mobile reply actions
A's fan
As an A’s fan I’m sorry to lose Trevor. I feel confident that his K/9 will continue to improve as it has each year he’s been in the majors.
And for those of you who watched that video clip of his last start against Seattle, you’ll notice that all seven strikeouts were swinging. And not just on the same pitch. Some with the changeup, some with the sinker, some with the breaking ball. He even threw a high fastball past one guy. When he commands his sinker and his curveball is working, he can be dominant. Much better than the #3 innings eater some people project him as.
Also, he’s just a funny, quirky guy that I think you’ll come to appreciate.
Thanks for giving us an A's fan perspective!
Hopefully, you guys will get some great seasons out of Parker. Assuming he’s fully healthy, he’ll be wowing you guys with 97 mph heat and an excellent slider.
The bird is struggling out of the egg. The egg is the world. Whoever wants to be born, must first destroy a world.
by Stupendous Man on Dec 11, 2011 4:55 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Yeah
Sinker is filthy. Command of it is really spotty though and he does hang it at times. Hopefully he’ll fix that.
by CaptainCanuck on Dec 11, 2011 6:14 PM EST up reply actions
You need to make an edit
a 100% healthy Cahill would be back to the form he had for 2009 and the first half of 2010.
Cahill was bad in 2009. You meant to say “2010 and the first half of 2011.”
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Dec 11, 2011 5:44 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
You are correct
And now, so is the article. ;)
"Barry's Puffin has gone red and is hiding under a pirate hat!"
by Jim McLennan on Dec 11, 2011 6:14 PM EST up reply actions
This article smoked out another lurker
Your next to last paragraph perfectly captured what it means to be a baseball fan. As one who learned to read at 3rd grade level during the summer after 1st grade so I could read the sports section of the Trib to follow the Cubs WAYYYYY too many years ago only to switch to the Indians some 10 years after moving to NE OH (and the Cubs having stomped my heart into the mud once too often), I know pain and frustration. <Jose stinking Mesa can’t get one more stinking Marlin out??!!! > <If Jim Puhl doesn’t hang that curve to Justice in 95 we had one C Nagy (yes the very same) ready for game 7 and the Braves were dead meat.>
I moved down here at the beginning of October 2001. I was supremely unimpressed. So you guys bought a World Series and you’ve only been around for 4 years. That’s not baseball! Baseball is waiting for next year, and the year after, and so on and so forth, etc, etc, etc..
Maybe it was them coming through the Vally of the Shadow of Suck that was the 2009/2010 seasons but I started to get interested in the DBacks at the beginning of 2011. They obviously had no chance to win the division but what the hell. It was fun to watch some of the young guys like Upton. Lo and behold, they started clawing their way up the standings. Well actually, the Giants came back to the pack and opened the door just a bit. Damned if the DBacks didn’t kick that door wide open and go pillaging and looting through the rest of the NL West. Beating up on the Dodger’s is a meritorious and virtuous act anyway. You may actually see me at more than the one game every two years or so.
Well
We’re glad you’re here! The more people who go out to the games (And read the ’Pit, of course) the better! Also, the next year, year after, so on and so for etc. is being a Cubs fan, not a baseball fan. Most teams win at least one before then ;-)
Have you been good this year? I hope so, because Gibby. Is. Watching.
by imstillhungry95 on Dec 11, 2011 8:10 PM EST up reply actions
*so on and so forth
UGH!
Have you been good this year? I hope so, because Gibby. Is. Watching.
by imstillhungry95 on Dec 11, 2011 8:10 PM EST up reply actions
bought a World Series?
Didn’t many of the players take paycuts that year to keep the team together? And didn’t the Yankees have 3x the salaries? Yeah, I wouldn’t say “bought”.
I would...
We spent over $100MM on salaries when we didn’t make anything close to $100MM. They didn’t so much take “paycuts” as much as they took “massive deferrals.” They got their money. And Arizona got a team that was basically bankrupt (though treaded water, unlike the Dodgers of recent years) for the mid-2000’s.
Founder and Chairman of the Send Dan Some Pizzeria Bianco Commission (SDSPBC). SDSPBC is a totally, definitely for-profit organization.
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 12, 2011 11:20 PM EST up reply actions
Deferred salary over 200 million
The worst major leaguer is better at baseball than I'll ever be at anything I ever do in my life.
The Yankees didnt have 3x the salaries
but I share your confusion over the logic that Arizona “bought a World Series”, when their WS opponent actually spent more money on players.
Colangelo bought, and in his case “negotiated”, what several large market franchises buy (or retain) every single year. Quality stars who give you a chance to contend. It still amazes me how people who watched the precarious ebb and flow of that epic struggle insist Colangelo “bought a World Series”.
by Diamondhacks on Dec 14, 2011 1:58 AM EST up reply actions
He bought a chance
To contend, then. That’s the egg that comes before the chicken, and he certainly bought the egg.
Founder and Chairman of the Send Dan Some Pizzeria Bianco Commission (SDSPBC). SDSPBC is a totally, definitely for-profit organization.
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 14, 2011 9:31 PM EST up reply actions
The more
I hear about this trade, the more I like it. We traded Parker, who I liked please keep that in mind as you read this, for someone the same age and (I think) same amount of control. Yes, Cahill gets kind of expensive towards the end, but if he’s good, he’ll still be a bargin.
Parker, on the other hand, is only 9 months younger, and has no major league experience. Also, he’s already had TJ surgery. It sounds to me like this was a win-now move that was rather conservative. We traded a prospect with a higher ceiling for a major league starter with an appearantly pretty high floor. To top it all off, we got a LHR pitcher, which was something I thought we could use
Have you been good this year? I hope so, because Gibby. Is. Watching.
by imstillhungry95 on Dec 11, 2011 8:08 PM EST reply actions
It's worth noting
That while the pitchers directly above Cahill on the list generally kick ass (C.C., Latos, Peavy, and Cain immediately ahead? I’ll have another, please), while those directly below Cahill are shockingly mediocre in comparison (Garland, Perez, Dempster, and Volstad, although that Greinke fellow turned out okay). Good news is that the split between Cahill and first group – identical to C.C., nearly identical to Latos – is smaller than Cahill and the second group – with just one of those guys showing above-average performance.
Founder and Chairman of the Send Dan Some Pizzeria Bianco Commission (SDSPBC). SDSPBC is a totally, definitely for-profit organization.
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 11, 2011 8:53 PM EST reply actions
Id be more than okay with Garland
by CaptainCanuck on Dec 11, 2011 9:15 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
No kidding
I mean, we aren’t expecting this guy to be an ace for us, and I’ve always liked Garland as a #3 or there abouts
Have you been good this year? I hope so, because Gibby. Is. Watching.
by imstillhungry95 on Dec 11, 2011 9:20 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, I thought Garland wasn't properly
utilized when he was here. But I heard there were some attitude problems, and a team can’t have that though.
Is it mid-February yet?
by NASCARbernet on Dec 11, 2011 11:48 PM EST up reply actions
Don't know if it applies here,
but misuse can beget a bad attitude.
"The kingdoms of Experience, In the precious wind they rot, While paupers change possessions, Each one wishing for what the other has got, And the princess and the prince, Discuss what's real and what is not, It doesn't matter inside the Gates of Eden." B. Dylan
No kidding
We’ve gone over it many times here, but my mind was boggled often during that era.
Is it mid-February yet?
by NASCARbernet on Dec 12, 2011 12:40 PM EST up reply actions
You mean the guy with the 4.68 career FIP?
That Jon Garland? No thanks. Garland has three years in his career better than Cahill’s 2011 by fWAR standards, and even if you give Garland the benefit of the doubt for out-performing his FIP by .3 throughout his career, Garland matched the 7.5 bWAR Cahill posted from ’09 to ’10 – luck and all, he was 22 and 23 years old, with more IP (and likely PA) in the ’11 season with a .302 BABIP than the ’10 season with a .236 BABIP, so combined BABIP north of .270 not super crazy flukey – during just one two-year stretch of his career, from ’05 to ’06 in his age-25 and age-26 seasons (combined bWAR for Garland in those years: an admittedly-impressive 8.3).
We’re acquiring Cahill because he offers some present value and safety while not sacrificing elite upside (just sacrificing AAV, it seems), so if he bums out and becomes a #4 starter, I’m not going to be happy.
Founder and Chairman of the Send Dan Some Pizzeria Bianco Commission (SDSPBC). SDSPBC is a totally, definitely for-profit organization.
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 12, 2011 2:56 AM EST up reply actions
Garland age 24-27, (the ages Cahill signed for)
Averaged the following:
32 GS, 214 IP, 107 ERA+ , 3.5 bWAR, 3.35 fWAR, 14-10 W/L
2 good starts in the 2005 Post Season that helped Chicago win a world series.
If you could bank that over 4 years from Cahill right now, would you take it ?
(Above point borrowed from Stu on the Bullpen)
The worst major leaguer is better at baseball than I'll ever be at anything I ever do in my life.
Sure
Especially if I get the “helps us win a world series” part ;-)
by Craig from Az on Dec 12, 2011 10:21 AM EST up reply actions
He can pitch like Russ Ortiz
As long as he goes 2-0 in the World Series. :)
"Barry's Puffin has gone red and is hiding under a pirate hat!"
by Jim McLennan on Dec 12, 2011 11:50 AM EST up reply actions
What you say is impossible
nobody pitched or pitches like Russ Ortiz.
Is it mid-February yet?
by NASCARbernet on Dec 12, 2011 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
Ehhh
I mean, if I can be sure that Cahill will put up a 5-bWAR year and finish sixth in Cy Young voting, yeah, that’d be great, but the rest of Garland’s time during that stretch was rather uninspiring.
Honestly, I’m not sure. Probably not, because I think that Jarrod Parker can provide somewhere around 2 bWAR on average over the next four years and Cahill costs $30MM whereas JP costs minimum for three years then has Arb1.
Founder and Chairman of the Send Dan Some Pizzeria Bianco Commission (SDSPBC). SDSPBC is a totally, definitely for-profit organization.
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 12, 2011 11:23 PM EST up reply actions
From
a complete outside perspective, solid trade all around. Both teams did well I think. The A’s got a good piece for the future and the Diamondbacks dealt from depth to improve their rotation right now.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 11, 2011 11:50 PM EST reply actions
Yeah,
Both teams did pretty much what teams in their position should be doing right now, with the A’s building for the future and the Diamondbacks improving their rotation both for now and for the next few years. This is why it’s so weird that fans on both sides are so angry about the deal.
Ian, Daniel, Josh, and two Trevors: It's not a Christian rock group.
by Zavada's Moustache on Dec 12, 2011 1:40 PM EST up reply actions
Ya
you know its an odd deal when both fanbases feel like they get shafted.
I fully expect the Diamondbacks to win the NL West again next year. GL!
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 12, 2011 3:25 PM EST up reply actions
i personally think
if both fanbases feel like they got shafted, then the deal was probably fair
it’s much more odd to me when both fanbases felt like they won outright.
btw, welcome to the ‘Pit! i’ve seen you post a lot on Minorleagueball.
by blue bulldog on Dec 12, 2011 3:39 PM EST up reply actions
Thanks
man. Figured it was high time to get out a bit and explore some other teams’ blogs. Been good so far.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 12, 2011 3:59 PM EST up reply actions
I second this post
Always nice to have new minds floating about, especially another who likes prospects.
Founder and Chairman of the Send Dan Some Pizzeria Bianco Commission (SDSPBC). SDSPBC is a totally, definitely for-profit organization.
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 12, 2011 11:24 PM EST up reply actions
You know, we could have saved time
by keeping the original Max Scherzer. I’m happy with IPK but I’m just sayin’.
"Hey, why don't you people watch the game?"-my mom after viewing a wave going around Chase Field.
by Reynolds rapper on Dec 12, 2011 12:37 AM EST reply actions
Sure
If you don’t count that other guy we got for Scherzer…Huddy somethingorother.
by Nonpartisan on Dec 12, 2011 11:15 AM EST up reply actions
I was joking.
"Hey, why don't you people watch the game?"-my mom after viewing a wave going around Chase Field.
by Reynolds rapper on Dec 12, 2011 2:03 PM EST up reply actions
Limiting the criteria
Sometimes I tend to limit the criteria of my comparisons to try to hone in on guys that are TRULY similiar.
For example, I would limit it to only right handers. There is a world of difference between a right handed sinker baller and a lefty hard throwing youngin with a killer curve ball. Why put them in the same list ?
Secondly I DO limit the K/9, because it’s a decent proxy for sinker ballers and guys that throw up in the zone with heat.
Anyway
Since 1996
http://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/share.cgi?id=gItJ4
Since 1986
http://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/share.cgi?id=lnj3H
Maybe too small a sample size there, but some cool names in there nonetheless.
The worst major leaguer is better at baseball than I'll ever be at anything I ever do in my life.
I'm going to vaguely include something like this next week
For both Gio and Cahill. The Gio names I found were not pretty…
Founder and Chairman of the Send Dan Some Pizzeria Bianco Commission (SDSPBC). SDSPBC is a totally, definitely for-profit organization.
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 12, 2011 2:58 AM EST up reply actions
not all that happy about that list of names
tbh
especially the since 1996 list
by blue bulldog on Dec 12, 2011 4:01 AM EST up reply actions
Yeah
If you take away Maddux and Grienke (and I don’t think Grienke is anywhere near a comparable type pitcher), the list is unimpressive. Not terrible, but nothing to be excited about.
by Craig from Az on Dec 12, 2011 10:28 AM EST up reply actions
How much of Cahill's success
has been a product of the Coliseum? His 2010-11 home ERA (2.70) is almost two runs lower than the away (4.56), transcending generally recognized park effects. In that same timeframe, three Oakland starters (TC, Gio, McCarthy) rank in mlb’s top dozen in home ERA, nestled just behind Kershaw (Chavez Ravine), and ahead of Felix Hernandez (Safeco), Matt Cain (AT&T), etc…. much like when we discuss Colorado hitters, it just seems like something more systematic than Trevor Cahill and more profound than homogenized park effects might be going on there. Maybe the better (best) pitchers exploit most advantage from these extreme park characteristsics, but even if that’s so, is that “skill” transferable elsewhere.
There’s also Oakland’s 2010 IF defense. UZR suggests that four of the American League’s top eleven run preventers were the A’s principal infielders. This, of course, was Cahill’s monster season. Even if Drew returns healthy, I just dont see our IF replicating that.
John McDonald
Will be Cahill’s personal Shortstop, and by the end of the year everyone will be lamenting Cahill’s lack of run support.
Probably a good call about park factors not quite capturing the home field advantage Cahill received in Oakland.
The worst major leaguer is better at baseball than I'll ever be at anything I ever do in my life.
Yes, I can see that very much being the case
With Cahill on the mound, infield defense will likely be seen as paramount, and we’ll take the offensive hits.
"Barry's Puffin has gone red and is hiding under a pirate hat!"
by Jim McLennan on Dec 12, 2011 2:13 PM EST up reply actions
funny on the run support drama
cuz A) it’s fairly likely to play out, and B) a fair amount of folks mistakenly assume Cahill’s RS must’ve been lacking in Oakland.
(Not that it was alarming or Bronxesque, but surprisingly respectable. A little better than respectable, maybe.)
by Diamondhacks on Dec 12, 2011 11:12 PM EST up reply actions
Ehhh
Not like I’m counting on Drew to do much this year. If he gets two wins for us, I’ll be happy. I don’t see the drop to McDonald being too staggering, frankly. I also don’t see Drew hitting very high in the order, so the lineup won’t change a ton.
Guess I’m probably pessimistic on Drew, though.
Founder and Chairman of the Send Dan Some Pizzeria Bianco Commission (SDSPBC). SDSPBC is a totally, definitely for-profit organization.
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 12, 2011 11:27 PM EST up reply actions
The last part:
Chicken or egg? Were fielders rewarded with gaudy UZR’s because Cahill fed them easy ground balls, or did they have awesome defensive seasons that gave them high UZR’s and artificially lowered Cahill’s ERA?
Founder and Chairman of the Send Dan Some Pizzeria Bianco Commission (SDSPBC). SDSPBC is a totally, definitely for-profit organization.
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 12, 2011 11:26 PM EST up reply actions
He still only threw about 1/7th of the teams innings that year
Therefore the fielders had a lot more impact on his ERA then he had on their UZR’s.
The worst major leaguer is better at baseball than I'll ever be at anything I ever do in my life.
1/7 of the team's innings
But probably a significantly larger portion of the team’s ground balls in play. It’s probably an unanswerable question, but a useful one.
Founder and Chairman of the Send Dan Some Pizzeria Bianco Commission (SDSPBC). SDSPBC is a totally, definitely for-profit organization.
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 14, 2011 9:32 PM EST up reply actions
ahh Dan......
Never doubt Baseball Reference ;)
In 2010 the A’s pitching staff allowed 1990 ground balls, of which Cahill allowed 332.
That is one out of every 6, or 16.7 %
He pitched one out of every 7.3 IP by the team, or 13.7% of the innings.
The point remains. I think his ERA was due a lot more to really good infield defense and some luck too, as opposed to Cahill turning his infield into a bunch of UZR Gods.
In 2010 he had a .151 BABIP on GB. In 2011 it was .221
Take a look at the link below. In 2010 they had Barton, Ellis, Kouzmanoff and Pennington all getting most of the playing time. In fact they got 85% of the infield innings. (Yes, I am a geek, I calculated that).
In 2011, those same 4 guys, (excellent defenders all) accounted for just 47% of the infield innings. And who got the bulk of the time missed ? Conor Jackson at first, Jemile Weeks at 2nd and Scott Sizemore at 3rd. (Pennington mostly healthy). Those 3 guys stink at defense.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/OAK/2010-fielding.shtml
In 2010 Cahill, a GB pitcher had a GREAT infield defense behind him, and a little bit of good luck. In 2011 he had a mediocre to poor infield defense behind, and it showed, as his hit rate soared. The UZR’s of 2010 Oak Infield are not because of Cahill…..rather his ERA (and low BABIP) is because of those UZR’s.
So……….
Is an infield of Goldschmidt, Hill, Roberts and (Drew/McDonald/Bloomquist) going to help or hurt him in 2012 ? Time will tell. As I said earlier, expect to see McDonald out there almost every time Cahill pitches.
The worst major leaguer is better at baseball than I'll ever be at anything I ever do in my life.
knowing KT
he’s going to mess with us and have Bloomquist there at SS every time we have Cahill pitch
by blue bulldog on Dec 15, 2011 12:43 AM EST up reply actions
Dude.......
Bloomquist will be too busy manning left field every time we face a lefty or one of the starting 3 outfielders needs a day off.
The worst major leaguer is better at baseball than I'll ever be at anything I ever do in my life.
Truly the heavens' greatest gift to mankind.
A smaller percentage than I would have expected. Point certainly remains.
Excited to watch McDonald. Even though he sucks offensively, watching him play defense is truly exhilarating for me.
Founder and Chairman of the Send Dan Some Pizzeria Bianco Commission (SDSPBC). SDSPBC is a totally, definitely for-profit organization.
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 15, 2011 1:50 PM EST up reply actions
Not to worry
when playing DH teams, we can have the DBack pitchers bat for him…
Is it mid-February yet?
by NASCARbernet on Dec 15, 2011 9:06 PM EST up reply actions
It may be some of both
Oakland’s staff (TC and everyone else) threw mlb’s 6th highest GB% in 2010. A lot of ground balls, but not really off the charts. They ranked eighth in 2009, Cahill’s rookie season – but their infield UZRs (dragged down by Orlando Cabrera, Adam Kennedy, Giambi) were nothing at all like 2010.
Total Zone also ranked OAKs principal IFers quite hghly in 2010:
Pennington +14
Barton +11
Ellis +8
Kouz +6
Rosales +6
Oakland’s Total Zone “Totals” (incl OF):
2009 – negative 67
2010 – positive 35
2011 – negative 30.
The 2011 defense apparently got hurt by the insertion of Sizemore, Weeks little brother, etc…but the carryover personnel (Pennington, Ellis, Barton) didnt rate as well either. The staff’s GB% dropped to 18th.
So, I assume 2010 was a little of both. Plus defensive pesonnel across the IF… and the staff bolstered those stats somewhat.
by Diamondhacks on Dec 13, 2011 10:17 AM EST up reply actions
Orlando Cabrera, Adam Kennedy, and Jason Giambi....
Gee, wonder why they didn’t fare as well. :-)
On a more serious note, I think the fact that the holdovers did not fare as well is a) sample size fluctuations and b) UZR being skewed by inferior teammates. As we’ve seen with CY/Upton/Parra, having good defenders next to you makes UZR really like you, perhaps more than it should.
But it certainly is true that the ’10 defenders were a generally good crew, though I refuse to believe Daric Barton was a +11 defender that year.
Founder and Chairman of the Send Dan Some Pizzeria Bianco Commission (SDSPBC). SDSPBC is a totally, definitely for-profit organization.
by Dan Strittmatter on Dec 14, 2011 9:35 PM EST up reply actions
Sorry Hacks
I didn’t see your post below until after I wrote mine. Obviously a lot of overlap of point. Consider my post an addendum mostly in support of what you said. ;)
The worst major leaguer is better at baseball than I'll ever be at anything I ever do in my life.

by 























