He's been writing pieces for MSNBC.com, and I'm finally ready to call him out.
Here, he ranks the top aces in baseball
Here are his AL choices.
1) Roy Halladay, Blue Jays.
OK sure. I don't agree, but you're welcome to that opinion.
2) Josh Beckett, Red Sox
Yeah, yeah...
3) Erik Bedard, Mariners
He's filthy, and might be my #1. Totally deserves mention in this list.
4) Justin Verlander, Tigers
Good, good, nice choice.
5) C.C. Sabathia, Indians
Also an outstanding young pitcher.
6) John Lackey, Angels
Great work, you're on a roll!
7) Jon Garland, Angels
STOP!
Garland has a 105 ERA+. He's perfectly "above average". He is not an "ace". You already have John Lackey on this list, so why did you choose another Angels pitcher, unless you're really trying to rank the best overall starters in the AL?
Where's Kazmir? Vazquez? Wang? Greinke? Possibly the biggest sin of all, where's Fausto Carmona? And hell, why not rattle off Burnett, Buchholz, and Blanton? Felix Hernandez? James Shields? Healthy Rich Harden? There's guaranteed a few more to name, but where the FUCK did you get the idea that Jon Garland was the 7th best starter in the AL? Jon Garland?????
Wait, there's more, he tries to justify this crap.
After winning 18 games in 2005 and 2006
Hi Bert. Wins are not good for evaluation, Bert. Matt Cain was 7-16 last year, Bert. The White Sox crushed the ball on offense in 2006, Bert.
the right-hander posted just 10 victories last season and had a losing record (10-13).
But he pitched better in 2007 than 2006, Bert.
But the White Sox experienced a tough 2007 and for 2008 Garland has changed uniforms, traded last November to the Angels, where he should flourish with increased run support.
Bert, the offense scoring more runs does not make Garland a better Bert. I mean pitcher, Bert. It just means he'll accumulate more of an outdated pitching statistic intensely correlated with run support, Bert.
Bert.
Garland induces a lot of groundballs
But his GB% has alarmingly declined from 48% to 43% to 41% over the last three years, Bert.
and he does not give up a lot of home runs.
You win, Bert.
He will battle hitters hard and can handle throwing a lot of innings (he’s pitched over 200 the last four seasons).
Jason Marquis has averaged something like 200 over the past 4 seasons, Bert. Jon Garland is like Jason Marquis with less homers, Bert.
He has an aggressive approach aimed at getting ahead of hitters
Which contrasts to Fausto Carmona, who tries to get behind hitters in the count, Bert?
He stays around the plate and doesn't give up many walks.
But he also doesn't strike out guys, Bert! Is striking people out important, Bert? Is the combination of 4.5 K/9 and a decreasing ground ball rate a good sign, Bert?
Garland grew up in Southern California and with him going home a big year might well be in the cards, maybe in the range of 18 to 21 wins.
Please send me a historical report showing statistical data that pitchers pitch better in their home states, Bert. Do you even know who James Shields is, Bert?
For Garland the positives with the Angels are not only on offense
None of the positives for Jon Garland are on offense, Bert. Jon Garland doesn't hit in the vast majority of his baseball games, Bert. If Casey Kotchman decides to break out and club 67 homers, this does not make Jon Garland a better pitcher, Bert.
but also on defense where he can expect solid fielding behind him all season long.
That also does not make Jon Garland a better pitcher, Bert. It makes Jon Garland look like a better pitcher, Bert. That's why we have things like Defense Independent Pitching Statistics and Defense-Adjusted ERA, Bert.
I can't believe I just had to convince Bert Blyleven that Jon Garland is not a top 7 pitcher in the American League. I'm literally kicking myself for bringing that "Circle me, Bert!" sign to the last baseball game I saw in the Metrodome.
Just kidding, I've never been to the Metrodome. I actually want to be the one who gets to push down the trigger for the dynamite when that thing goes up in smoke.
For the interested, Jon Garland currently boasts a 5.50 ERA. He has started 3 games, thrown 18 innings, and has struck out a fuckingwhopping (yes, that's a word) 2 hitters.
Pnoles, as always I like most of your analysis - but Carmona? Yeah, I know he was good last year, everyone does - but he was also mediocre throughout the majority of his minor league career, and awful in 2006. He also walked 8 guys while getting out 10 in his most recent start (since you used the small sample size for Garland). Carmona is still only 24 and likely will be a solid #2 starter for a long time, but you make it sound crazy that no one would consider him one of the top 7 pitchers in the AL. Kinda hard to say that for a guy after one good season.
ReplyDeleteMainly, I just like to start arguments with you.
Which contrasts to Fausto Carmona, who tries to get behind hitters in the count, Bert?
ReplyDeleteThat seems to be Bronson Arroyo's approach lately. This almost merits a BronsonBall label.
andrew - Direct quote from BP 2008. "[Carmona] is basically Chien-Ming Wang with better stuff, and his strikeout rate grew throughout the season. If he turns out to be a better pitcher than C.C. Sabathia for the remainder of the decade, we won't be shocked." I'm not saying that BP is the say-all, end-all, or that Carmona will be as consistently good as 2007 indicated, or that he absolutely must be in a list of the top 7 starters in the AL (because that's certainly very debatable, and there are a lot of interesting cases to be made). All I'm saying is that he's head and shoulders above Jon Garland. That's a fact.
ReplyDeleteAs for the small sample size thing I included at the bottom, that's really more of a funny afterthought than me actually trying to argue a point.
dan-bob, as usual, I can't say no to your label requests.
I hate to side with Bert on this one, but... well, I'm not really siding with him, I'm just hoping that his delirious prediction of 18-21 wins turns out to be spot on.
ReplyDelete