What are Sonnanstine’s strengths as a pitcher? In my view:
1 Ability to adapt: useful in a starter who has time to experiment with what works that day. Nearly irrlevant for a reliever.

2. Great variety of pitches: Useful in a starter to befuddle hitters over the course of a game. Nearly irrelevant for a reliever.

What are his weaknesses, perceived or real?

1. Tends to give up lots of hits. Disastrous for a reliever coming in with men on base. Less a problem for a starter, especially one who doesn’t walk many.

2. Although less so this year, tendency to the gopher ball. Again, disastrous in a reliever where one run often decides things. Less a problem for a starter.

People say Sonny would be better in the bullpen than Jackson so they should move Sonny to the bullpen. Sonny’s also better as a starter than Jackson though so I’d rather have Jackson in the bullpen. I don’t think neither is in the team’s long-term plans though.

When the Rays manager and pitching coach discuss their own guys they always talk about Sonny as the perfect candidate to be good in the bullpen. Both of these guys might end up there eventually, but they were planning on Sonny in the Pen for this year if certain things didn’t happen to make that less important to this year’s team. Next year I definately think that Sonny will be in the pen and trust that Maddon and Hick both know what they are doing. Even discussed over at the post about the expanded rosters several people noted that with Niemann it takes him too long to get loose which makes him not fit in the pen even though the rest of his stuff would be a good fit for the pen. It just goes to show you that stats only tell part of the story and when you only look at stats it can help but not be definitive!!! Stats don’t tell you how long it takes someone to get loose, doesn’t tell you how well their arm recovers after use and doesn’t tell you their mindset and mental approach and makeup, all of which are very important when deciding who is best for a bullpen job versus a starter’s job.

If we are looking at the off-season, it’s important to view what the Rays assets are. While Sonny may benefit from a move to the N.L. he will not get the same return as Jackson. Jackson has always been looked at for his potential, and even if some view this year as above-average for him, some may view it as him starting to reach his ceiling. No matter what you may believe, you have a 24 year old pitcher with a sub-4:00 ERA whose value may never be higher. With the Rays excess of pitching, they can afford to deal him as part of a package to get a RF/DH, say perhaps for someone such as Cards OF Rick Ankiel? Either way, Jackson gives the Rays the best potential to boost the offense.

didn’t say the Rays could get Ankiel…also said it could be part of a package. Also, “mediocre back of the rotation” is your opinion, and you presented absolutely no facts/stats/etc to back it up. What is true, however, is a 24 year old pitcher that may or may not be starting to reach his potential. He has continued to improve each year since coming to the Rays.

Furthermore, if you don’t like something that was said, fine. you are entitled to your opinion. But please spare me and every other person’s opinion that you may not agree with the condescending tone to your response.

Similar to the A’s of the past, isn’t it possible that such a strong defense could pump the value up of borderline pitchers and the Rays could trade them as they develop?

The defense has done wonders with Jackson this year and could seemingly do the same with Niemann and Talbot. Why turn any into relievers? Jackson’s value diminshes when he becomes a reliever. I still think JP could be a very productive starter in front of this defense. Talbot seems to have the skills to transition very well. Niemann would benefit if he limits HRs. Just churn the guys through and see what happens. There are four or five guys that could look like very productive major leaguers with some time in front of this defense.

The only problem I have with the analysis of EJax is that everyone keeps saying he’s doing it with luck but he keeps putting up good numbers. I don’t buy it, but it keeps happening. Where is the threshold where people start to investigate why he’s being successful and stop attributing it to dumb luck?

Sorry, but if a pitcher has a lower BABIP then another pitcher it may not necessarily be due to luck. There is not reason to suspect that two pitchers should have the same BABIP. There is not some number that should be baseline for all pitchers. Its simply incorrect to argue that a pitcher who has had a lower BABIP has been luckier than a pitcher with a higher BABIP.

If a guy throws pitches that are generally less hittable than another guy, his long-term BABIP is going to be lower. And by less hittable, I don’t mean he strikes more guys out, his stuff if just better and he gets guys to hit the ball weakly more often than another guy. A perfect example of this is Jackson versus Sonnanstine. Watch Jackson pitch, his ball rises late and he gets a ton of infield pop-ups. Watch Sonnanstine pitch, when he throws a fastball it is flat and when hitters make contact they tend to pound it. Of course this a generalization but I think the main point is obvious to anyone who has watched this season.

Please stop treating every pitcher like a machine. Your peripherals can’t predict everything. You have to take every instance on a case-by-case basis.

If Jackson continues to do the same thing next year with the same peripherals will you guys finally start to believe? I’m just wondering how long he has to be an “outlier” before you readjust your views.

I suppose it is conceivable that the stats are wrong or based on inaccurate observations and calculations or that there are other factors not covered by the stats. Perhaps Jackson really is doing something well that the stats simply cannot discover.

BUT, when a person is using arguments that are themselves amenable to stats, the stats have to be the clinching argument for that particular issue until some other type of argument arises. For example, here is what RaystheRoof says:
_________________________________________________________________________
" I don’t mean he strikes more guys out, his stuff if just better and he gets guys to hit the ball weakly more often than another guy. A perfect example of this is Jackson versus Sonnanstine. Watch Jackson pitch, his ball rises late and he gets a ton of infield pop-ups. Watch Sonnanstine pitch, when he throws a fastball it is flat and when hitters make contact they tend to pound it. Of course this a generalization but I think the main point is obvious to anyone who has watched this season."
___________________________________________________________________________
Now, this is a statistical argument. Not the part about his stuff being better (although that might be too) but a statement like “gets guys to hit the ball weakly more often” and especially “gets a ton of infield pop-ups”. Both of those statements may be based on anecdotal memory, but both can be tested with data. I suppose one could say that Jackson’s line drives are weak hump backed liners while Sonnanstine’s are creamed, but barring such waffling, either the statement is true or not, and if Sonnanstine is getting more infield flys than Jackson, then it simply is not and must be recognized as such. Referring to “anyone who has watched this season” is faulty reasoning for too many reasons to explain here. As a matter of fact, eyewitness testimony tends to be the least reliable type of evidence.

Again, I am not actually taking sides in the discussion. There may indeed be factors not recognized in the numbers. But to demonstrate there are requires careful explanation and certainly cannot be supported with assertions that are data based but directly contradicted by the data we have.

I always chuckle at criticisms that the stats people are arrogant in thinking their numbers provide the answers (which they really do not do, by the way. cf: Lookout Landing on probability vs. certainty). As a matter of fact, it is the opposite of arrogance because it requires them to submit to the data and hold all opinions tentative. On the other hand, what could be more arrogant than asserting that one’s observations or common sense provide access to the truth?

As Rays fans we’ve been conditioned to really think about potential over results. It has always been the youth movement. It has always been trading away vets to get younger players. We’ve always wanted the guy with the better stuff, stronger arm, quicker legs, and just an overall higher ceiling. We’ve been conditioned to really look to the future and ignore the present. It is what we’ve been told by the Rays and the Devil Rays.

Well Jackson certainly has a higher ceiling than Sonny. He has more potential. And he has better stuff. That much is hard to dispute. Sonny is the better ‘pitcher’ and has produced better results this year. And since he has produced better results THIS YEAR he certainly deserves to be called the better pitcher THIS YEAR. Rays fans just don’t really think like that. We’ve just been trained to think about the next few years and the overall ceiling of players.

Is Jackson going to hit that potential? Who knows.