Player Review: Wheels and Edwin Jackson
Mr. Dan Wheeler first:
Wheeler was acquired during the 2007 trade deadline straight up for Ty "Wiggy" Wigginton. He started 2008 as the set up man to "Closer" Troy Percival, and featured flukey success in an 8th inning role. He was a flyball pitcher, and through the first month and a half of the season, only gave up 2 Long Balls on a staggering 35 Fly Balls, a regressable 5.7 percent HR/FB rate up to 5/17.
Overall, his numbers look pretty ugly. 37% Flyball Rate with only a 27.1% GB rate, which in itself is asking for trouble. Throw in a 21% LD with a .191(!) BABIP, and you have a situation where a trade at peak value is the ideal situation. Wheels is a ticking time bomb, which is reflected in his FIP of 4.49 and a tRA of 4.72, both of which are well below average.
In the offseason, I would recommend trading Wheeler. He has a favorable contract that opposing GMs may value, and his, ahem, 3.12 ERA may coax some unwitting GM into thinking that he's worth a Jon Rauch type package. Frankly if we can get a decent package of one position prospect I would be ecstatic, especially with the packages that have been given out thus far in the winter.
Edwin Jackson next:
Edwin, of course was acquired in the Winter of 2006 in the Jackson/Tiffany for Danys Baez and Lance Carter trade, where Jackson is the best player involved pretty much by default. He was the 5th starter this year, and as such, did not have crazy high expectations. Like Wheeler, Edwin is a pitcher who grossly underperformed his ERA.
Edwin had a Flyball Percentage of 29% compared to a Groundball percentage of 38%, which while not awful, is not great either. His LD% 21.8% with a .301 BABIP falls around where it should be, maybe he is due for a tiny bit of regression. The serious problems are with his K/BB. He struck out 5.30 per 9, whichis very low, compared to a 3.78 BB/9, which is very high. Both of thos are pretty much a recipe for disaster.
Edwin seems like a prime candidate for either a trade or a move to the pen, a move to the pen probably will hide his high walk and high fly ball tendencies, while he would probably bring in a decent package in return. All in all, Edwin will probably fight for a roster spot next year with Talbot and Niemman out of spring training, and is probably going to need a big showing if we wants to continue in a rays uni.
0 recs |
124 comments
Comments
It’s good for a pitcher to strike out a lot of hitters; and bad for a pitcher to walk a lot of hitters (unfortunately, Edwin fails at both departments)…but what is the significance of combining them for to create a K/BB ratio? aren’t those two stats more telling when looked at independent of each other, and perhaps most telling when looked at K/9 and BB/9?
by walkoffwalk on Nov 14, 2008 9:54 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Kind of.
Simply looking at K rates and BB rates independent of one another can underrate some players, I think. Sonny, for example: excellent walk rate, okay strikeout rate, but fantastic strikeout-to-walk rate.
by Peter Bendix on Nov 14, 2008 10:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
but, 37 walks in 193 innings is phenominal.
by walkoffwalk on Nov 14, 2008 10:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely. But less so if it comes with 52 strikeouts.
by Peter Bendix on Nov 14, 2008 10:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
but isn't that because 52 ks in 193 innings is not impressive?
by walkoffwalk on Nov 14, 2008 2:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think we're arguing semantics.
You shouldn’t look at JUST walks or JUST strikeouts, but you can look at both and thus make K/BB irrelevant.
by Peter Bendix on Nov 14, 2008 3:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
K/BB is simpler -- just one number.
(K-BB)/9 is actually a bit better, but not as common. More numbers are more descriptive. Fewer numbers are easier to deal with.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Nov 15, 2008 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Conclusion: EJax and Wheeler should be traded.
Why not see if Minaya would like EJax for Ryan Church? Gives the Mets a starter/reliever and gives the Rays a RF. The big issue would be Church’s health though. And Church is cheap. Yeah, the Mets need another OF then, but then they could sign someone for LF (remember, the Mets aren’t that smart), and do something platoony with Murphy/Tatis/Evans in RF.
This.
by Blicks on Nov 14, 2008 10:10 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
is Church even an upgrade over Gross? Their stats are scary-similar.
by walkoffwalk on Nov 14, 2008 10:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Except Church is opposite handed than Gross.
You know like a platoon or something
Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found
a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up
that much.
~George Costanza~
by Sandy Kazmir on Nov 15, 2008 9:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
except they are both left-handed hitters.
by walkoffwalk on Nov 15, 2008 10:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ooooooh Ryan Church
I thought you said Bubba Church. My bad.
Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found
a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up
that much.
~George Costanza~
by Sandy Kazmir on Nov 15, 2008 10:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wade Davis, Reid Brignac, Wheeler and EJax for Jose Reyes
DO IT.
Rays 2009 Slogan: "Come back with your shield or on it"
by PriceMultiCyYoungs on Nov 14, 2008 1:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If Edwin isnt traded
He WILL be on the roster. I completely disagree with saying Niemann or Talbot would make it before him, regardless of what happens in Spring Training. Neither of those two have proven anything. Maddon has shown loyalness to vets. That last sentenced really irked me. I swear everyone on this site must hate Edwin. Take a guess at which of our pitchers induced the most double plays? That’s right it was Edwin. The guy is 25 and was an above average #5 starter last year and everyone seems like they are willing to just give him away. For what? Niemann? Talbot? You got to be kidding me…
by dannythegreat on Nov 14, 2008 12:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Edwin has proven he's not very good.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Edwin had a 101 ERA+
Sonny had a 102 ERA+. So if Edwin has proven he’s not very good than so has Sonny. Edwin improved his ERA, ERA+, and WHIP from last season. He was a much improved pitcher this year. You dont think he might be figuring it out?
by dannythegreat on Nov 14, 2008 12:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Edwin had a tRA over 5 and a FIP near 5.
Sonny’s were in the 3.8/3.9 range.
They aren’t even close in performance.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Exact numbers:
Sonny 3.82 tRA, 4.31 tRA*, 3.91 FIP
Edwin 5.68 tRA, 5.51 tRA*, 4.88 FIP
ERA is misleading.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ERA is misleading to an extent
But so is any stat. And I put more emphasis on ERA+ than ERA. I dont trust a stat that says Sonny was better than Garza. No way.
by dannythegreat on Nov 14, 2008 12:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If you put more trust in ERA+ than tRA than frankly there's no point in me discussing this with you.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
After watching the whole season
I dont see how anyone can say Sonny was better than Garza.
by dannythegreat on Nov 14, 2008 12:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Believe it or not what your eyes tell you isn't always correct.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Believe it or not
not all sabermetric stats work. If tRA says Sonny was better than Garza and almost as good as Shields than IMO it doesnt work. Survey 100 people and ask who was better, Garza or Sonny. I bet 80% or more say Garza.
We’re getting off topic. Edwin takes alot of unfair criticism on this site. He’s 25 and is improving.
by dannythegreat on Nov 14, 2008 12:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Believe it or not, the majority is usually wrong.
Edwin improved, and still sucks.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And also, please do provide one thing tRA does fundamentally wrong.
That way Graham (or I might be able to) can address it and perhaps reach an understanding. Simply saying “LOL I DON’T BELIEVE IT SO IT SUCKS!” is neither helpful or particularly worthwhile.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
When did I say it like that?
I dont see the point of “defense free” stats. Some pitchers like to pitch to contact and are very successful. But with your stats they are garbage.
by dannythegreat on Nov 14, 2008 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What?
You’re a fan of a team that went from one of the worst of all time to the league best and you don’t realize how defense matters to pitching stats and how we should eliminate it to understand true pitching talent?
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No
The only TRUE stat that matters is RA. I would only find use in tRA and FIP if I were trying to field a team with no defense. But since we have defense, and a good one at that, I dont see the need for stats like those.
You just stick with tRA and we’ll agree to disagree cause this is going no where fast.
by dannythegreat on Nov 14, 2008 12:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, because pitchers who strike people out, don't walk anyone, and don't allow homers...
Aren’t good with a defense behind them too.
Ugh.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is pre-tRA, but probably worth your read
http://ussmariner.com/2006/08/29/evaluating-pitcher-talent/
And yes, I do think you should trust David Cameron, why? Because he’s a goddamn genius.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You're kidding, right?
So in your mind, if your team has a good defense then there is no reason ever to isolate a pitcher’s performance and ability through a statistic like tRA?
by BrianL on Nov 14, 2008 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Also, is it too late for the "You're only using one stat" joke?
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So let me get this straight
If Edwin starts a game with an OF defense of CC,BJ, Perez and the opposing team is just hitting laser line drives all over, but they are all being caught by the great OF defense, Edwin should get credit for that.
If Sonny starts a game with an OF defense of Hinske, Gross and Gomes and the same opposing team is hitting blooper to the outfield, but they are all dropping because of the lack of speed in the outfield, then Sonny’s #’s should be negatively reflected upon…..
This is what we call …logic fail
by Tommy Rancel on Nov 14, 2008 1:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You do realize that tRA doesn't penalize pitchers for allowing balls in play, right?
It penalizes them for homeruns, walk and line drives, mostly. Ok, so line drives are a ball in play. But if a pitcher ONLY allowed GBs and FBs, they would rate very well in tRA.
And your argument for pitch to contact would favor Sonny over Edwin, you do realize?
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Nov 15, 2008 12:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I;ve asked this about a thousand times
yet have never gotten an answer. Who decided what is and isn’t a line drive and what is the criteria. This seem likes the most subjective stats possible.
by RaysTheRoof on Nov 15, 2008 6:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There is a mildly appeasing definition.
But yes, there’s subjectivity involved. And that could make a non-insignificant difference. And that’s one reason to favor tRA* over tRA.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Nov 15, 2008 6:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
MLB provides the data.
They have people at every game making the calls. There’s obviously some subjectivity in it, but I don’t think it’s a huge deal. Baseball Info Solutions also collects data, and the differences between the two are pretty minimal.
In the comments of this thread, Matthew and Graham talk about the data from the scorekeepers.
by Teej on Nov 15, 2008 6:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
not a criticism
just a question…as long as there is good training and oversight for all the people deciding what is a line-drive AND they switch up who is deciding for each team (so that no one person can sway a teams numbers one way or another) I think it is perfectly valid.
by RaysTheRoof on Nov 16, 2008 2:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So everyone is wrong
and tRA is always right? And he was an above average #4 or 5 last year, so again I dont see how he sucks.
by dannythegreat on Nov 14, 2008 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Again
http://www.draysbay.com/2008/11/14/660984/player-review-wheels-and-e#10014007
And no, not everyone is wrong, I don’t see anyone else arguing that tRA is wrong about Edwin.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Who is wrong besides you?
Who is this everyone?
by rglass44 on Nov 14, 2008 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So you agree Sonny was better than Garza?
by dannythegreat on Nov 14, 2008 12:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Over the course of the year last year?
Maybe.
by rglass44 on Nov 14, 2008 12:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
We’ll just have to agree to disagree than.
by dannythegreat on Nov 14, 2008 12:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How about we agree to use actual facts instead?
— Sonnanstine threw more innings
— Garza struck out 4 more guys than Sonnanstine, but walked 22 more.
— The two were virtually equal in GB% and LD% (though Sonny was slightly better)
— Garza’s BABIP was .270, while Sonnanstine’s was .302.
Sonnanstine is not an ace, and I’m not saying he’ll be better from here out, but he was better than Garza in 2008. By how much, we can debate, but he was better.
And Edwin Jackson is bad. He struck out a lower percentage of batters faced than Andy Sonnanstine!
by Teej on Nov 14, 2008 5:58 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Edwin improved his luck.
He also improved the defense behind him
Is Sonny better than Garza or Kaz? Probably not, but he was better last year over the course of a season.
by rglass44 on Nov 14, 2008 12:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I designed it to be right quite a lot of the time, yes
You are hilariously unqualified to try to poke holes in it.
by Graham on Nov 14, 2008 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Dude don't worry
He knows a ton of stuff. He would even survey 100 people.
Top Josh Paul Pornos- Big Navi Stroking, 2pitchers1cup, BJ to the Balls, Riggans Your Thingans
09: This one is for all the rings.
by SRQman on Nov 14, 2008 1:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He was an average to slightly better than average #5 last year.
Use whatever subjective adjectives you’d like.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Nov 15, 2008 12:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If you were to have surveyed 100 people w/r/t the shape of the earth in the 1400s I bet 80% of them would have said flat.
People are quite often incorrect in their assumptions. That’s why eliminating subjectivity is a positive.
J.K.L.
by acblue on Nov 14, 2008 12:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
are you suggesting that the world is not flat?
by walkoffwalk on Nov 14, 2008 5:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
what really matters is
if it’s tFLAT
by benfunke on Nov 17, 2008 5:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
60% of Americans wouldn't vote for an atheist president.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Nov 15, 2008 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Also, how is tRA misleading.
- park free
- defense free
- luck regressed
What am I missing?
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sonny had a lower tRA than Kaz and Garza
So you’re saying he was better than those two last year? I’m not a huge fan of tRA as you can tell. And I have no clue what FIP is.
by dannythegreat on Nov 14, 2008 12:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I am.
You haven’t voiced your displeasure with it in the tRA thread, so I have no way of knowing.
FIP is ERA, but defensive independent, focusing on the aspects pitchers can control.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If you have no idea what FIP is
you probably have no idea how tRA works. Study up before you spout off like an bumbling fool.
by BrianL on Nov 14, 2008 12:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Prove to me that I should take you seriously and I'll fix whatever your problem with tRA is
You will need to show:
A complete understanding of how it actually works
An understanding of its stated limitations
A problem and a vague idea of how to fix it
Otherwise, from the bottom of my heart: fuck off.
by Graham on Nov 14, 2008 1:17 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Now if you will, Graham, tell us how you really feel?
by Tommy Rancel on Nov 14, 2008 1:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Keeping your love lockdown?
Top Josh Paul Pornos- Big Navi Stroking, 2pitchers1cup, BJ to the Balls, Riggans Your Thingans
09: This one is for all the rings.
by SRQman on Nov 14, 2008 1:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
NB:
Assuming that was you, googling ‘why tra is not a good way to evaluate pitchers’ really doesn’t count.
by Graham on Nov 14, 2008 3:06 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Bahahahahahaha
Brad Ziegler had a scoreless inning streak. Brad Ziegler had not met BJ Upton.
by P Brady on Nov 14, 2008 3:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Way to sneak ERA back into the argument.
I’d rather have Jackson in the bullpen for 2009 than Niemann or Talbot, not considering money. But I’d rather have Talbot long term, so making him the long man would be smart.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Nov 15, 2008 12:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You know Edwin is younger than Talbot right? Just a month, but my point stands.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Nov 16, 2008 10:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't know that, actually. Very interesting.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Nov 17, 2008 12:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Inducing the most DPs was due primarily to having more men on base.
I did a DP post. I’ll find it and link it when I get back from lunch.
by rglass44 on Nov 14, 2008 12:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with the both parts.
If Edwin doesn’t bring back more value than a ~4-4.5ish tRA reliever would to this team, then keep him. If he does, deal him. Frankly we can find those types for less than his arbitration raise. Let him and Daniel Cabrera play striptease elsewhere.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
If you would indulge an unknowing outsider:
Edwin Jackson seems like the exact type of pitcher who’s effectiveness would take a quantum leap forward if he were made a full time reliever.
by JI on Nov 14, 2008 1:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Now where have I read this argument before...?
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Nov 15, 2008 12:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Trade Wheeler....
Top Josh Paul Pornos- Big Navi Stroking, 2pitchers1cup, BJ to the Balls, Riggans Your Thingans
09: This one is for all the rings.
by SRQman on Nov 14, 2008 12:51 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Intriguing
Top Josh Paul Pornos- Big Navi Stroking, 2pitchers1cup, BJ to the Balls, Riggans Your Thingans
09: This one is for all the rings.
by SRQman on Nov 14, 2008 12:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nice job replying to yourself.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 14, 2008 12:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dramatic effect.
Top Josh Paul Pornos- Big Navi Stroking, 2pitchers1cup, BJ to the Balls, Riggans Your Thingans
09: This one is for all the rings.
by SRQman on Nov 14, 2008 1:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Mets aren't smart. They'll bite.
As will the Tigers.
This.
by Blicks on Nov 14, 2008 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So you're saying Tigers bite....
by Tommy Rancel on Nov 14, 2008 1:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They bite with fangs of desire.
at the chance to get a “cheap” reliever.
They extended Dontrelle Willis, as we all know.
This.
by Blicks on Nov 14, 2008 1:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wheeler to Farnsworth would be exciting to watch in late innings
by Tommy Rancel on Nov 14, 2008 1:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They have Gary Glover too, right
SUPER COMBO!!!
This.
by Blicks on Nov 14, 2008 3:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oops
I meant that as a reply to “So you’re saying Tigers bite”. I sir, am an idiot.
by Erik Hahmann on Nov 14, 2008 1:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Ladies and Gentlmen your senior editor.....
by Tommy Rancel on Nov 14, 2008 1:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I dun kno hw all deez buttonz wrk yet
by Erik Hahmann on Nov 14, 2008 2:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I cannot wait for the first Gameday thread
Speaking of—do we have GDTs for Spring Training?
by plasticman on Nov 14, 2008 2:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow you guys came off incredibly snobby to that dumbass earlier.
Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found
a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up
that much.
~George Costanza~
by Sandy Kazmir on Nov 15, 2008 10:04 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, a bit.
Some more compassion would have been cool. But an attitude of “huh, I’ve always used ERA and I don’t know what tRA is, so I’m surprised to see everyone thinking Jackson is a bad pitcher – care to elaborate?” might have worked better from him.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Nov 15, 2008 1:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't have a high tolerance for ignorance.
Lack of information is cool, but he was being willfully ignorant. There’s no excuse for that.
J.K.L.
by acblue on Nov 15, 2008 5:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No doubt
Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found
a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up
that much.
~George Costanza~
by Sandy Kazmir on Nov 15, 2008 5:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You act like that is uncommon on this site
by RaysTheRoof on Nov 15, 2008 6:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Arrogant assery > ignorant assery.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 15, 2008 6:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ignorance is slowing losing out in this country
And I am as happy as anyone to see it. However, i think the rhetoric could be toned down
by RaysTheRoof on Nov 15, 2008 6:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If people don't want to be belittled, they shouldn't be annoying enough to invoke me.
by Graham on Nov 15, 2008 8:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Except there should be shame in willful ignorance.
There’s no shame in simply not knowing; to be given evidence that you are incorrect and choose to ignore it is shameful.
J.K.L.
by acblue on Nov 15, 2008 9:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
To clarify...
I think the fact that the conversation went to the right margin until “arrogance” interfered is fine. It’s not like the first reply slammed him.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 15, 2008 9:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 

















