Jump to content


Recent Topics




Bleacher Nation is on Facebook, and you should totally "Like" us:
 


Bleacher Nation is also on Twitter, and you should totally follow us:




Upcoming Calendar Events

There are no forthcoming calendar events

Today's birthdays

No members are celebrating a birthday today

Photo

Samardzija is an Ace (le sigh)


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 Scotti

Scotti

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 12:47 AM

A post was made in the comments re. Samardzija not being and Ace, having only #2 potential , etc, and his not being "consistent" as given the reason.  None of this is, of course, new. Folks in Cubdom have long been discounting him for years (familiarity breeds contempt).  Aside from Samardzija's pure stuff (FB is plus, plus. Split is plus, plus. Slider is a touch above solid average which is plenty good for a third MLB pitch), his numbers the last several years have been very good.  And yet two other factors drag down those numbers:

 

Factor One: The Cub staff had him throwing a curve instead of his slider in June of last year (0-4, 10.41 ERA, 5 GS, 23.1 IP, 33 H, 27 ER, 4 HR, 15 BB, 20K).  What numbers did he put up when he was throwing his three best pitches (i.e. every non-June IP last year)?  

 

9-9, 2.80 ERA, 23 GS, 151.1 IP, 124 H, 47 ER, 16 HR, 41 BB, 160 K.   

 

Factor Two: Pair that arm with a team that can hit, pitch in relief and defend (and come off the bench and manage and develop it's core players--maybe even a team that is TRYING to win...) and he is even better.  Prior to the 12 runs in 7 IP he got last time out, his run support this season has been very poor (he was 45th of 46 NL starters in run support last year) and I can't imagine that this bullpen, this bench or this defense has done him any favors.  

 

Certainly an ACE if placed on a "World Series contending team" by any reasonable standard.  

 

 



#2 calicubsfan007

calicubsfan007

    The Guy Who Came Back From the Dead

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 540 posts
  • LocationWherever I Am, There I Am

Posted 26 June 2013 - 01:10 AM

I like Shark.  I can agree with the argument that he should be viewed as a legit ace.



#3 Cubbie Blues

Cubbie Blues

    The Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,369 posts
  • Twitter:@timhall76
  • LocationBloomington, IN

Posted 26 June 2013 - 06:06 AM

Being called a #2 is not a knock on him at all. Most people look at being called an Ace as something very special and feel their are only 8-10 in the game at a time. He is 10th in xFIP (3.07), 16th in FIP (3.03) 8th in K/9 (9.73), 14th in LOB% (72.4), 14th in WAR (2.5) and 13th in IP (106.1). All of those numbers are right on the cusp of being an Ace and why there is a debate about it, but they just don't reach that 8-10th best pitcher level that most are looking for. He has the potential of being an Ace. He just isn't there yet. Again, being a top #2 isn't a knock on him whatsoever and he would the best pitcher on a lot of teams. He just isn't a true Ace yet.


"It's not the dress that makes you look fat, it's the fat that makes you look fat." - Al Bundy

 

"Ow" - Dylan Bundy


#4 hansman1982

hansman1982

    King Regent of The Calendar Trivia Empire

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,939 posts
  • Twitter:JoeHansman
  • LocationDes Moines, IA

Posted 26 June 2013 - 07:49 AM

Being called a #2 is not a knock on him at all. Most people look at being called an Ace as something very special and feel their are only 8-10 in the game at a time. He is 10th in xFIP (3.07), 16th in FIP (3.03) 8th in K/9 (9.73), 14th in LOB% (72.4), 14th in WAR (2.5) and 13th in IP (106.1). All of those numbers are right on the cusp of being an Ace and why there is a debate about it, but they just don't reach that 8-10th best pitcher level that most are looking for. He has the potential of being an Ace. He just isn't there yet. Again, being a top #2 isn't a knock on him whatsoever and he would the best pitcher on a lot of teams. He just isn't a true Ace yet.

 

Then you also have the contingent of fans that, unless he was lights out every single game with 0 exceptions, he would still get crapped on. 

 

Is he a step below Verlander/Kershaw/Hernandez?  Sure, but it's not that far.



#5 Scotti

Scotti

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 03:30 PM

Being called a #2 is not a knock on him at all. Most people look at being called an Ace as something very special and feel their are only 8-10 in the game at a time. He is 10th in xFIP (3.07), 16th in FIP (3.03) 8th in K/9 (9.73), 14th in LOB% (72.4), 14th in WAR (2.5) and 13th in IP (106.1). All of those numbers are right on the cusp of being an Ace and why there is a debate about it, but they just don't reach that 8-10th best pitcher level that most are looking for. He has the potential of being an Ace. He just isn't there yet. Again, being a top #2 isn't a knock on him whatsoever and he would the best pitcher on a lot of teams. He just isn't a true Ace yet.

Last time I had the "Ace" discussion on BN I was told "most people" accepted that there are only 15, or so, "Aces" and now you tell me that "most people" agree there are 8-10. I'm sure next time it will be 6-8 and, certainly, NONE of this is arbitrary. Is there a certain place where "most people" vote on this? I've missed the "most people" meetings. Maybe the invites have gotten lost in the mail.

As to the numbers you cite, A ) you lump AL starters in with NL starters and that's just wrong. AL starters don't bat and, as such, their IP are greater (and K/9 lesser). Apples to apples. B ) a pitcher's numbers are interwoven with the actual team an individual plays on. The Cubs aren't just a BAD team, they are a team that is TRYING to be BAD. As such, the offensive support for Ace is really low (see above). That affects IP, K's, etc. The bullpen is all kind of suck (see above). That affects Ace's ER, ERA, W-L, etc. The defense is ugly--that affects BA, OBP, SLG, etc. and those affect virtually any, and every, other number out there.

As the original post said, the excuse given for Ace's dis-inclusion was that he pails next to some mythical "World Series contending" Ace. The fact is that a team makes an Ace every bit as much as an Ace makes the team. SamardzijAce would be a better pitcher on a better team--one that tried to be good.

Regardless, looking at what Ace has done over the last year and a half (especially while being ALLOWED to use his three best pitches--see above) few others compare.

#6 Cubbie Blues

Cubbie Blues

    The Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,369 posts
  • Twitter:@timhall76
  • LocationBloomington, IN

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:04 PM

 

Being called a #2 is not a knock on him at all. Most people look at being called an Ace as something very special and feel their are only 8-10 in the game at a time. He is 10th in xFIP (3.07), 16th in FIP (3.03) 8th in K/9 (9.73), 14th in LOB% (72.4), 14th in WAR (2.5) and 13th in IP (106.1). All of those numbers are right on the cusp of being an Ace and why there is a debate about it, but they just don't reach that 8-10th best pitcher level that most are looking for. He has the potential of being an Ace. He just isn't there yet. Again, being a top #2 isn't a knock on him whatsoever and he would the best pitcher on a lot of teams. He just isn't a true Ace yet.

Last time I had the "Ace" discussion on BN I was told "most people" accepted that there are only 15, or so, "Aces" and now you tell me that "most people" agree there are 8-10. I'm sure next time it will be 6-8 and, certainly, NONE of this is arbitrary. Is there a certain place where "most people" vote on this? I've missed the "most people" meetings. Maybe the invites have gotten lost in the mail.
As to the numbers you cite, A ) you lump AL starters in with NL starters and that's just wrong. AL starters don't bat and, as such, their IP are greater (and K/9 lesser). Apples to apples. B ) a pitcher's numbers are interwoven with the actual team an individual plays on. The Cubs aren't just a BAD team, they are a team that is TRYING to be BAD. As such, the offensive support for Ace is really low (see above). That affects IP, K's, etc. The bullpen is all kind of suck (see above). That affects Ace's ER, ERA, W-L, etc. The defense is ugly--that affects BA, OBP, SLG, etc. and those affect virtually any, and every, other number out there.
As the original post said, the excuse given for Ace's dis-inclusion was that he pails next to some mythical "World Series contending" Ace. The fact is that a team makes an Ace every bit as much as an Ace makes the team. SamardzijAce would be a better pitcher on a better team--one that tried to be good.
Regardless, looking at what Ace has done over the last year and a half (especially while being ALLOWED to use his three best pitches--see above) few others compare.

Listen kid. I have never had a discussion with you about Samardzija before. 15 Aces is way too high. And as far as playing for a bad team, I guess it's a good thing I only used numbers that were independent of what team he plays for. I said he is close and he is. He deserves to be in the discussion, but the numbers just aren't quite there yet. Now, that's not to say after another year his numbers won't be there, but as of right now he is just on the outside knocking on the door to get in. And you're dang right I lumped in the AL. The fact that you say AL k/9 is lower would work in Samrdzija's favor. That's all I've got for right now, I'm on my phone and its a pain to type.


"It's not the dress that makes you look fat, it's the fat that makes you look fat." - Al Bundy

 

"Ow" - Dylan Bundy


#7 fromthemitten

fromthemitten

    sleeps in too late to answer the calendar trivia

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,471 posts
  • Twitter:fromthemitten
  • Locationin a van down by the river

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:58 PM

Do semantics really matter?  There's no objective brightline to what constitutes an "ace" other than bluster like "X is an ace, nobody has belly fire like him!  oh shit he set the infield on fire..."  What I do know is that he's one of the few Hendry draft picks that has possibly exceeded expectations and I want him on the mound in a playoff game.



#8 Mike Taylor (no relation)

Mike Taylor (no relation)

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 384 posts
  • LocationLouisville, KY

Posted 26 June 2013 - 06:10 PM

http://www.bleachern...lite-heres-why/



#9 Spencer

Spencer

    Bleacher Hero

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,560 posts
  • LocationValparaiso, IN

Posted 26 June 2013 - 06:16 PM

 

Ugh, that thread has Morken in it.



#10 Spencer

Spencer

    Bleacher Hero

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,560 posts
  • LocationValparaiso, IN

Posted 26 June 2013 - 06:16 PM

Listen kid.

 

TWC? Is that you?



#11 Luke

Luke

    Bleacher Hero

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,083 posts
  • Twitter:@ltblaize
  • LocationMaryland

Posted 26 June 2013 - 07:41 PM

Aside from Samardzija's pure stuff (FB is plus, plus. Split is plus, plus. Slider is a touch above solid average which is plenty good for a third MLB pitch), 

 

Samardzija has two plus-plus pitches?  

 

I have my doubts about that.  



#12 willis

willis

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 276 posts
  • Twitter:@deadboltwillie
  • LocationMemphis, TN

Posted 26 June 2013 - 08:55 PM

Shark is not an ace. He's very, very good with electric stuff. But not quite an ace. He's close, and he could become somewhat of an ace. There aren't that many aces out there. For the most part, Shark gives us a chance to win. But not all the time. When that happens (if) we can call him an ace. But as he stands right now, he's a hell of a pitcher who has a very high ceiling and I'm glad he's a Cub. He has found some magic the last year and a half, and if he keeps that up, a year or so from now we can have this discussion again.

#13 Scotti

Scotti

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts

Posted 27 June 2013 - 04:18 PM

 

Aside from Samardzija's pure stuff (FB is plus, plus. Split is plus, plus. Slider is a touch above solid average which is plenty good for a third MLB pitch), 

 

Samardzija has two plus-plus pitches?  

 

I have my doubts about that.  

 

Mid to upper 90's FB w/ boring action to RHH--has both command and control with the pitch.  His Split is his wipeout pitch and the dude has spent much of the season at or near the top of the league in K's (total and K/9).  As I said above, familiarity breeds contempt.  The guy has two plus, plus pitches.  So did Kerry Wood and Mark Prior but since they were "our guys" we're more likely to see them as the crazy uncle than what they really are (or were).  



#14 Scotti

Scotti

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts

Posted 27 June 2013 - 04:18 PM

 

 

Being called a #2 is not a knock on him at all. Most people look at being called an Ace as something very special and feel their are only 8-10 in the game at a time. He is 10th in xFIP (3.07), 16th in FIP (3.03) 8th in K/9 (9.73), 14th in LOB% (72.4), 14th in WAR (2.5) and 13th in IP (106.1). All of those numbers are right on the cusp of being an Ace and why there is a debate about it, but they just don't reach that 8-10th best pitcher level that most are looking for. He has the potential of being an Ace. He just isn't there yet. Again, being a top #2 isn't a knock on him whatsoever and he would the best pitcher on a lot of teams. He just isn't a true Ace yet.

Last time I had the "Ace" discussion on BN I was told "most people" accepted that there are only 15, or so, "Aces" and now you tell me that "most people" agree there are 8-10. I'm sure next time it will be 6-8 and, certainly, NONE of this is arbitrary. Is there a certain place where "most people" vote on this? I've missed the "most people" meetings. Maybe the invites have gotten lost in the mail.
As to the numbers you cite, A ) you lump AL starters in with NL starters and that's just wrong. AL starters don't bat and, as such, their IP are greater (and K/9 lesser). Apples to apples. B ) a pitcher's numbers are interwoven with the actual team an individual plays on. The Cubs aren't just a BAD team, they are a team that is TRYING to be BAD. As such, the offensive support for Ace is really low (see above). That affects IP, K's, etc. The bullpen is all kind of suck (see above). That affects Ace's ER, ERA, W-L, etc. The defense is ugly--that affects BA, OBP, SLG, etc. and those affect virtually any, and every, other number out there.
As the original post said, the excuse given for Ace's dis-inclusion was that he pails next to some mythical "World Series contending" Ace. The fact is that a team makes an Ace every bit as much as an Ace makes the team. SamardzijAce would be a better pitcher on a better team--one that tried to be good.
Regardless, looking at what Ace has done over the last year and a half (especially while being ALLOWED to use his three best pitches--see above) few others compare.

Listen kid. I have never had a discussion with you about Samardzija before. 15 Aces is way too high. And as far as playing for a bad team, I guess it's a good thing I only used numbers that were independent of what team he plays for. I said he is close and he is. He deserves to be in the discussion, but the numbers just aren't quite there yet. Now, that's not to say after another year his numbers won't be there, but as of right now he is just on the outside knocking on the door to get in. And you're dang right I lumped in the AL. The fact that you say AL k/9 is lower would work in Samrdzija's favor. That's all I've got for right now, I'm on my phone and its a pain to type.

 

Hey, Pops, perhaps we can carry on a conversation without invectives.  

 

"I have never had a discussion with you about Samardzija before."  

 

Never said you did.  You did speak for "most people," however, and "most people" involved in the earlier discussion disagreed with you.  

 

"15 Aces is way too high."

 

You get that same argument about grades, "Five A's on that test? That's too many! Sorry, fella, your 100% just became a B."  I come at it from a completely different perspective--how many students earned A's?  That's how many A's you get.  

 

What happens if, over the next week, the top 8-10 "Aces" need TJS?  Do you "promote" the next 8-10 guys because "Zero Aces is way too little?"  Of course not, the number is what the PLAYERS make of it on the field--regardless of whether it looks "too much" or "too little."  

 

"And as far as playing for a bad team, I guess it's a good thing I only used numbers that were independent of what team he plays for."  

 

That just isn't true.  You used six stats and, clearly, at least four are affected, in part, by other players on the field (IP, LOB%, WAR and K/9).  

 

*IP is hampered by multiple things outside the pitcher's control: infielders fielding poorly, the offense not scoring (poor hitting, baserunning, pinch-hitting), etc.  

*LOB% is clearly affected by both defense (both good and bad--in this case, bad) and poor (or good) relief work--in this case really, really bad.  For instance, Fangraphs uses (LOB% = (H+BB+HBP-R) / (H+BB+HBP-(1.4 HR)).  Clearly R's (especially R, and not ER, but really BOTH) are affected by fielders AND relievers.  

*WAR (Baseball Reference, BP, Fangraphs and others all use differing formulae)  is dependant upon IP, which is dependant upon BOTH the defense behind the pitcher and the offensive support he receives.  Same for R (earned and unearned) as I show above. 

*Ignoring negative effects from a poor defensive catcher, K/9 can be positively affected by a defense "giving" a pitcher another opportunity to strike out the "fourth out" in the inning.  

 

So, No, these are not "independent of what team he plays for."

 

"And you're dang right I lumped in the AL. The fact that you say AL k/9 is lower would work in Samrdzija's favor."

 

Of course K/9 works in his favor (And, yes, I brought it up simply because it's true).  There are too many variables for this type of analysis without segregating--something as simple as "He's ranked X in his league for IP/GS" works.     

 

"I'm on my phone and its a pain to type."

 

Something we can agree upon.  Especially for me on this site for some reason.  



#15 calicubsfan007

calicubsfan007

    The Guy Who Came Back From the Dead

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 540 posts
  • LocationWherever I Am, There I Am

Posted 28 June 2013 - 03:01 AM

Do we have anyone currently in our minor league system that has ace potential?






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Bleacher Nation is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago National League Ballclub (that's the Cubs).