David Price Expectations
by Sky Kalkman on Jul 25, 2008 11:09 AM EDT
Email
PrintI think it would help us (me, at least) to be aware of what we're expecting from David Price over his six team-controlled seasons. I mean, if he truly is untouchable in a trade, there should be good reason.
Ignoring any 2008 production out of Price, what do you think 2009 through 2014 will look like? Keep in mind that some top prospects pan out (Evan Longoria) while some don't (Alex Gordon). And keep in mind that pitchers are more injury-prone than we usually realize. Here's my best guess, although I don't value my opinion all that much on this topic. I present it only as a sample:
2009: 160 IP 4.00 ERA
2010: 170 IP 3.75 ERA
2011: 180 IP 3.50 ERA
2012: 180 IP 3.50 ERA
2013: 180 IP 3.00 ERA (he's bound to have one crazy good season, I'm not claiming it's 2013)
2014: 180 IP 3.50 ERA
My innings pitched estimates might actually be high, as I'm not sure you should project even Johan Santana or CC Sabathia for 180 innings five years down the road. But whatever.
And if you want to throw out what you think Price's ERA could be in 2008, either in the rotation or in the bullpen, go for it.
This post was written by a member of the DRaysBay community and does not necessarily express the views or opinions of DRaysBay staff.
64 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
totally guessing -- i don't know anything about the guy other than what i read about here
Not that everyone else isn’t “guessing” to a certain extent, either.
I wrote the fanpost asking for others’ opinions, not to push my opinion on others. I’m truly interested to see what Rays’ fans expect out of Price. Thanks in advance for your help.
by Sky Kalkman on Jul 25, 2008 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions
see
my username.
NUFF SAID.
by PriceMultiCyYoungs on Jul 25, 2008 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Chances are, you're going to be disappointed.
by Peter Bendix on Jul 25, 2008 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions
There is nothing in Price's history to suggest that he will be brittle
Aces have to average 200IP to be an ace. David Price will be an ace eventually.
Most pitching prospects don't become aces.
Or for the more sabermetrically-inclined, TINSTAAPP.
by Peter Bendix on Jul 25, 2008 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
that's circular reasoning
david price will be an ace -> since aces pitch 200 innings, price will pitch 200 innings -> price will be an ace
you don’t have to be brittle or show an injury history to miss a few starts in a season. there is NOBODY currently in the major leagues that should be expected to throw 200 innings four years down the road.
pitchers with 200 IP…
2007: Sabathia, Webb, Harang, Blanton, Halladay, Hudson, Lackey, Peavy, Haren, Santana, Vazquez, Zambrano, Meche, Francis, Carmona, Shields, Pettitte, Oswalt, Arroyo, Garland, Penny, Snell, Lilly, Kazmir, Suppan, Smoltz, Willis, Matsuzaka, Livan, Cabrera, Wainwright, Silva, Verlander, Gorzelanny, Beckett, Glavine, Cain
2006:, Arroyo, Webb, Santana, Harang, Smoltz, Willis, Haren, Carpenter, Capuano, Zito, Halladay, Oswalt, Hudson, Lackey, Wang, Gracia, Livan, Duke, Lowe, Millwood, Bonderman, Zambrano, Schmidt, Pettitte, Cook, Jennings, Westbrook, Moyer, Garland, Maddux, Robertson, Morris, Bush, Batista, Randy, Beckett, Schilling, Ervin, Buehrle, Davis, Peavy, Rogers, Vazquez, Lee, Padilla
Repeats: Webb, Harang, Halladay, Hudson, Lackey, Peavy, Haren, Santana, Vazquez, Zambrano, Pettitte, Oswalt, Arroyo, Smoltz, Willis, Livan
It’s tough to go 200 IP back to back years
by Sky Kalkman on Jul 25, 2008 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Aces have to average 200IP to be an ace
I guess Felix Hernandez isn’t an ace.
by R.J. Anderson on Jul 25, 2008 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions
I didn't say IP is the only barometer
And I also said he has to average 200IP. I didn’t say he has to hit it every single year.
And also David Price isn’t just the average everyday pitching prospect.
C'mon seriously
prospects flame out as much as they succeed. I hope he becomes some kind of staff ace, and there’s a chance for that. He could also end up being a #3 starter, or get injured.
Price isn’t untouchable because it’s guaranteed that he’ll be so good. He’s untouchable because there’s a decent chance he might be so good, and it would look horrible if he hits his best case scenario in exchange for a season and a half of a guy with limited upside.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
You're underestimating Price.
He’s on a talent level of what Prior was when he was coming up. As long as we don’t overuse him he will be special.
"I'm like a retarded Adam Dunn mixed with Jason Bartlett" - R.J. Anderson
You just made Brickhaus's point.
By comparing Price to Mark Prior…
by Peter Bendix on Jul 25, 2008 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Dusty baker is not our manager.
"I'm like a retarded Adam Dunn mixed with Jason Bartlett" - R.J. Anderson
The point remains.
Young pitching is incredibly risky.
by Peter Bendix on Jul 25, 2008 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Of course, but Price has to be considered as close to a sure thing as can be.
"I'm like a retarded Adam Dunn mixed with Jason Bartlett" - R.J. Anderson
So was Mark Prior.
Remember, not all of Prior’s injuries were Dusty’s doing. Getting hit in the elbow with a line drive and running over Marcus Giles could happen to anyone; obviously Price is less likely with the second part.
by R.J. Anderson on Jul 25, 2008 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions
With our luck he'll run over papi an manny will put him in armbar for vengeance
"I'm like a retarded Adam Dunn mixed with Jason Bartlett" - R.J. Anderson
true. it's understanding how close "close" actually is that's tough
by Sky Kalkman on Jul 25, 2008 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Silly silly silly
Just take a look at every “sure thing” prospect that’s come along in all systems in the past 10 years. Then look at how many of them actually lived up to their potential. Fact is that as many top prospects don’t pan out as expected as do, and that there are plenty of top ballplayers who came out of leftfield and who were never great prospects to begin with (two of our favorite targets, Bay and Holliday, both fall into that category).
I think it’s appropriate to assign Price a very high value, but you can’t let expectation rule the day, and it can hurt to overrate a prospect.
The way I see it, prospects are almost like tech stocks. You buy at the draft, then they appreciate or depreciate, based on early results that don’t lead to any actual profits and speculation. If you trade Price now, it’s like selling a tech stock before they even have a product hit the market. It would be dumb, because if you trade him for his literal value, you don’t get that much back in return, and you miss out on the opportunity for massive appreciation once he actually hits the market. However, if people start to price the stock (or value the player) based on their optimistic outlook, then you probably have an overvalued prospect and it’s not a bad time to trade and cash in on your appreciation. If the guy you can get in return is better than the median expected result, then you’re ending up with a good trade, because you’ve cashed in for extra value. You still look bad if the player reaches his best-case scenario, but at the time you traded him, you got more than the likely case scenario.
Say, for instance, that you think that at 90th percentile Price could be prime Tom Glavine, at 50th percentile he’s Cliff Lee (career, not just this year) and 10th percentile he’s an injury bust who shows promise from time to time, then if you can get someone in return who provides better value than the 50th percentile, you should probably make the trade. It doesn’t usually work that way because GMs don’t want to risk looking awful if the prospect pans out, but that’s the way it goes. If Bay had four years left after this one instead of one, then Price for Bay should be a no-brainer, whether we love Price or not, because there’s still less than a 50% chance that he’d be a perennial all-star type player, even if that’s his optimistic projection.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
I disagree...
Most SCOUTS believe there is a good chance Price will be at least a #3. A lot of scouts think it is a reasonable chance that Price will be a #1. The small chance is he doesnt achieve that because of talent. A slightly higher chance is that he gets injured and misses serious time. Price is an elite talent. You dont trade pitching like that for a good corner OF’er. In fact, most of the value charts that have come out have Price as a higher value then just about every Major League player.
Putting it in terms of math
On a standard bell curve, the next four years of Bay is probably worth 36 WARP3, with a standard deviation of 4. (his WARP for the past few years has been 10.6, 10.6, 3.5 last year and he’s on pace for another 10.x this year)
The next 6 years of Price is probably worth about 36, with a standard deviation of 10. (FWIW Kazmir’s 2006 season was a 6 WARP, so this is still a very good player; starting pitchers just need to do a lot more to have the same value as a position player)
By that calculation, there’s a much greater chance that Price helps more or flops, but Bay helps more each year than Price’s average. That makes Price a no-brainer in my mind, although I see how someone could value it differently.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
To play devil's advocate...
David Price has a reasonable chance (relative to other pitching prospects) of becoming an ace. This chance is not nearly as great as some might have you believe, but it’s not insignificant.
For argument’s sake, let’s say that an “ace” is worth 9 wins (CC Sabathia was worth 9.4 last year). The number is unimportant, but what is important is this: one ace at 9 wins is worth a heck of a lot more than two pitchers who have WARPs of 5 and 4.
An ace is worth not only those 9 wins, but is even more valuable because he takes up only one roster spot with those 9 wins. Thus, although the chance of Price becoming that ace is small, the payoff is he DOES reach “ace-ness” is extremely, extremely high. Especially for a team that cannot afford to purchase much talent on the free agent market.
by Peter Bendix on Jul 25, 2008 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions
But
if Bay, as a hitter, is worth 10 wins, and outfield is a bigger hole than the rotation, then doesn’t it make sense to have the 10-win guy out there rather than the 9-win guy, especially if the (potentially) 9 win guy is more likely to be a 6 win guy than a 9 win guy?
Vogt early, Vogt often.
yes, for one season
but then you consider we’d have the 9-win guy for six more years and the 10-win guy for one more. the increase in playoff probability this year probably isn’t as much as the increase in playoff probability over those next years.
what we really want to know is the expected wins from Price (it’s much less than 9, both because you can’t even project Sabathia to repeat that 9-win level and because Price is much more of an unknown thing.)
Agreed, I'm not pegging a WARP of 9 on Price.
I’m just saying that there is a not-insignificant chance of him reaching that total. And that’s coming from someone whose expectations for Price are more realistic/pessimistic than many others’.
Additionally, it’s easier to find above-replacement-level corner outfielders than it is to find above-replacement-level starting pitchers.
by Peter Bendix on Jul 25, 2008 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions
you think?
Additionally, it’s easier to find above-replacement-level corner outfielders than it is to find above-replacement-level starting pitchers.
Why do you say that? Isn’t it by definition the same?
Hmm.
You’re right, by definition it’s the same. But the “replacement level” bar is set in a different place according to position.
I think it’s easier to find production out of corner outfielders than it is a similar of production of out starting pitching.
by Peter Bendix on Jul 25, 2008 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions
i think people overrate corner outfielders by a lot, since they focus on offense
yes, it’s very easy to find players that can hit, but that have to be put in a corner spot (or first base). but because there are so many of them, their usefulness is limited, because only production above and beyond what others are providing is valuable. but i know you know that. i’m just rambling.
it would be interesting to study the distribution of position players at each talent level versus the distribution of pitchers at each talent level.
my guess is that there’s little difference. replacement-level ERA is about 5.75 for starters and 4.75 for relievers. it’s not hard to find a 5.00 ERA starter, which is about as productive as a slightly above replacement-level corner outfielder, like, well, i’m not sure off the top of my head.
It's tough to compare replacement level hitters and pitchers.
I agree that it’s relatively easy to find pitchers with 5.00 ERAs. You don’t have to give up three prospects for them.
Right, Pat Gillick? Right?
by Peter Bendix on Jul 25, 2008 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Which is why I said
If he was around for FOUR more years, it would be a no-brainer.
Obviously it’s not worth it for one season of production.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
I understood about 6.8% of everything you guys just posted...
But I still enjoyed the conversation…I love this place.
Let's see...
I believe someone (Perhaps Sackmann?) found that strikeouts are the best carry over statistic from the minors to the majors for pitchers, right now he’s around 9 per nine throughout both starts. I’m guessing along the way he becomes 7/8 K, 1.5/2 BB per nine type pitcher, which is very, very good.
hey, a prediction, fancy that.
what sort of ERA does that translate to, once he’s hit his prime?
by Sky Kalkman on Jul 25, 2008 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
No clue.
I would guess RAs below 4, but I’m not sure what his prime could bring.
by R.J. Anderson on Jul 25, 2008 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Still, the best predictor of major league success for pitchers
is hit rate. It’s a stat easily discounted at the major levels, but it’s extremely important in the minors.
Price should be fine, either way.
Getting back to the original subject, if I had to guess and not be over-optimistic, I’d guess that Price ends up being a guy who puts up ERA+ in the 100 – 120 range over 200 IP for most seasons, with a couple of better seasons and a couple of worse seasons thrown in for good measure.
Actually, here’s my prediction for what I think his career might look like:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/f/finlech01.shtml
Vogt early, Vogt often.
Assuming we have the same
front office and manager in place, I doubt that Price will get to 200 innings in his first year or two, but if he proves healthy and effective he will likely reach that plateau by his third year and stay there for a while. My guess is that it will remain in the low 200s though. Remember them shutting Shields down last year when he cracked that barrier.
Of course, the big “ifs” are healthy and effective. I think a few things work in his favor. He is big and strong. The Rays have a very highly regarded medical staff and are very cautious with injuries. Aside from a minor tweak early this year which was handled with kid gloves he has no history of injury. He is 22, so in 3 years he should be out of the most dangerous period of the “injury nexus”. He apparently is a highly motivated and intelligent player who will remain in shape and not try to hide any injury. There are simply no red flags about his condition, work ethic, character or performance.
My guess is that upon first arriving in the majors he will suffer through the normal adjustment period, showing his promise occasionally but also enduring some bad streaks. Perhaps that first full year he gives us 150 innings or so with a mid 4 ERA. Given that in AA his BB and K rate have declined a bit already, it is probably that he may not exhibit exceptional control initially, perhaps 3.5-3.8 BB/9 to start and 6.5-7.5 K/9.
From there, I expect him to adjust and make progress so that by year 3 he is approaching 200 innings with an ERA in the mid 3s and an improving BB and K rate as well. From that point on I expect that Price will be a legitimate #1 pitcher. That means years when he contends for a Cy Young with ERAs in the mid-high 2s and 200+ Ks and others when he is less overwhelming but still excellent.
Of course TINSTAAPP applies to Price as it does to any pitching prospect, but that’s like saying that every trade is a risk. We know that, but given what else we know, what CAN we project, keeping the unknowns firmly in mind to tamp down but not douse our optimism.
Agreed with bobr. I think you pretty much set out my hopes and expectations for Price. He’s a smart, confident hard working guy without serious injury history or red flags such as Dewon Brazelton’s gimpy knees which resulted in poor conditioning, which led to bad mechanics, then bad pitching, then bad career.
Longlorious.
Free Kila Kaaihue!
Well said, bobr.
I don’t know if there is any rookie-eligible pitcher I’d want more than David Price. He’s (relatively) low-risk and has a very high upside – I don’t know as any prospect can boast the same pair of traits.
I just think that some people (obviously not you, bobr) need to adjust their expectations accordingly, given how risky ANY young pitcher is.
by Peter Bendix on Jul 25, 2008 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Alex Gordon is FAR from not panning out
If I had to place a bet, Id say he turns into one of the better 3B in the league
IMO Price will be nearly as effective in 2009 as he will be in 2013. I see him as a refined, developed pitcher right now (ala Mark Prior, Kerry Wood, Joba, etc). If you told me he will pitch 190+ innings next year I wont be surprised, and if you said his ERA owuld be under 3.50 I’d be even less surprised
I agree nobody should give up on Gordon
My point is that even when prospects fulfill their potential, it’s not always right away (like with Longoria, who could definitely struggle for a bit going forward, too). Expecting six years of stardom is wishcasting.
another random example for Price
let’s say his peak has these odds:
2.50 ERA 220IP: 5%
3.00 ERA 200IP: 10%
3.50 ERA 190IP: 30%
4.00 ERA 190IP: 30%
4.50 ERA 170 IP: 10%
5.00 ERA 150IP: 5%
injuries, no value: 10%
That’s a 15% chance of being a top-five starter and a 45% chance of being a consistent all-star. But the average line is “merely” in the 3.75 to 4.00 ERA range. If his ERA is half a run higher than that over his first year or two, we’re expecting two seasons as a league-average starter, and four as a solid #2. change the distribution as necessary.
Point taken, but...
This is actually a problem I have with PECOTA, too: I don’t think the innings pitched would necessarily go down as ERA goes down.
So there’s a good chance that he’s a 200 inning 4.50 ERA guy. Or a 170 inning 3.00 ERA guy. Know what I mean?
by Peter Bendix on Jul 25, 2008 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions
It does though
And it makes sense. Generally, innings go up as ERA goes down. If you get shelled every so often, the manager isn’t going to leave the pitcher in. Thus, even if the pitch count means he could get to 8 innings, he still gets pulled after 2 if he gives up 5 runs in the 2nd.
Guys with mediocre ERAs who pitch a ton of innings would pitch even more innings if theyhad good ERAs.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
good stuff. two things to add
the worse a starter, the more likely you have a reliever who can post a similar ERA. with a 3.00 ERA starter, he’s always the best option (maybe until your closer). with a 4.00 ERA starter, he’s better than the mop-up guy and the 5th-best guy, so he can go 6 innings. but in the seventh, it’s a tossup between him and the #4 reliever.
also, the better the pitcher, the fewer pitches it takes to throw the same number of innings. so a similar pitch count will result in more innings. pitches cause injury and decreasing effectiveness, not innings
Anecdotally, I don't think this is true.
This is conjecture, but:
I think there is a threshold (perhaps somewhere around 4.50 ERA) where a marginal increase in ERA doesn’t equate to a marginal increase in IP. Rather, efficiency plays a big role. You can have a very efficient 3.75 ERA guy (Roy Halladay last year) or a not-at-all-efficient 3.00 ERA guy (Scott Kazmir last year).
Additionally, you have some guys who are very durable (Derek Lowe comes to mind), while others, who may be better, almost certainly will make a trip to the DL (Erik Bedard comes to mind).
by Peter Bendix on Jul 25, 2008 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions
There's only
a mild correlation between innings and effectiveness on a league-wide basis, because some pitchers are just efficient and some pitchers just aren’t. On an individual basis, I’m pretty sure that you’d find there’s a very strong correlation, though I’m not smart enough to run the numbers.
I’ll agree that the biggest difference is at the back end of the ERA spectrum, but that’s mostly because a starter with an ERA over 6 will usually get waived, sent to the bullpen, or sent to AAA, so they will pitch far fewer innings.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
Price will be the most dominant LHP pitcher in the past quarter century
If you’ve seen the guy throw and know how to evaluate talent, you realize this guy is the real deal. Price will be a “dominating” pitcher barring injury over the next few decades.
He is that DAMN GREAT!
If you're looking at prospect status
He’s not even the best LHP prospect in the minors. There’s a guy who’s 2.5 younger, throws harder, has just as good of a breaking pitch and has better stats in double the innings in AA.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
It is never
a good idea to compare a prospect to all-time greats. By definition, the all-time greats are unique, and there is no way to project with any confidence, let alone certainty, that a prospect will attain those heights.
It is fair to say that Price has the tools and makeup to become an ace. Fact is, so do plenty of other pitchers. Kershaw? Anderson? Liriano? But the likelihood that any will become the “most dominant LHP in the past quarter century” remains slim. Randy Johnson may fit that bill, and to think anyone will be as dominating as he has been is pure speculation. For all you know it will be Lester.
It is the same fallacy as projecting the next Greg Maddux, or in earlier days the next Mantle or Mays or Feller or Koufax. It is not a very useful exercise.
not to pick on you specifically, but i've heard things like this about 4-5 prospects every year
how do we know Price is different? is it merely because he hasn’t hit the big leagues and been disproven yet? His ceiling is still unknown?
Another thing Price has going for him that helps project to the MLB level is
filthiness.
While not an official stat, yet, I think it is a very good one and can translate quite well. If you have disgusting stuff that hitters can not touch (guys like Santana, Kazmir, Pedro IE…) you are most likely going to have long term success. While you will have starts where you struggle your stuff will make up for it in the end.
They said with Pedro during his prime that he could tell you what he was throwing and you still couldnt hit the ball with the heart of the bat, resulting in an out or at worst a bloop hit. I have only seen him once (and that was with team USA his Jr. year of college) and on the computer and he has that kind of filthy stuff.
Of course there is still a lot for him to get done but while yes it is much harder to project pitchers, I do think that Price is a much better pitcher than most prospects.
Filthiness
You know, we could make this a stat. All we need are some petrie dishes and a box of swabs.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Please read our Community Guidelines.
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
DRB Suggestion Box
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
