Verlander will never be any good again!

[Tigertowner68]

OK! Now that I have your attention...

I am kidding. Just to illustrate that great pitchers are humans, I am going to compare three Hall of Fame pitchers at stretches in their careers that somewhat parallel Justin Verlander.

They are:

Nolan Ryan
Steve Carlton
Ferguson Jenkins

Note that I am giving you between six to eight year chunks of their records during the primes of their careers. And note also that each had some really suck ass years.

Verlander has just hit age 30. Half of baseball thinks the Tigers wasted millions of dollars signing him up for all these future years. Think he's "washed up". No. He is simply hitting an inevitable rough patch that even the greats run into. Roger Clemens is another example that I do not include because a) he is not in the HOF and b) odds are overwhelming that he is a cheat!


Nolan Ryan

Year Team Age Wins Losses ERA

1973 Angels 26 21 16 2.87
1974 Angels 27 22 16 2.89
1975 Angels 28 14 12 3.45
1976 Angels 29 17 18 3.36
1977 Angels 30 19 16 2.77
1978 Angels 31 10 13 3.72
1979 Angels 32 16 14 3.60
1980 Astros 33 11 10 3.35
1981 Astros 34 11 5 1.69

Steve Carlton

Year Team Age Wins Losses ERA

1971 Cardinals 27 20 9 3.56
1972 Phillies 28 27 10 1.97
1973 Phillies 29 13 20 3.90
1974 Phillies 30 16 13 3.22
1975 Phillies 31 15 14 3.56
1976 Phillies 32 20 7 3.13
1977 Phillies 33 23 10 2.64

Ferguson Jenkins

Year Team Age Wins Losses ERA

1973 Cubs 30 14 16 3.89
1974 Rangers 31 25 12 2.82
1975 Rangers 32 17 18 3.93
1976 Red Sox 33 12 11 3.27
1977 Red Sox 34 10 10 3.68
1978 Rangers 35 18 8 3.04


Both Nolan Ryan and Steve Carlton went on and had many more very good to excellent seasons after the end of the samples I have shown, after age 33 and 34. Jenkins, who was essentially discarded by the Cubs at Verlander's age was not as fortunate, yet as the six-year block illustrated here indicates, he had two more excellent seasons after age 30 (1974 and 1978).

Three Hall of Fame pitchers. All proved human in many of their seasons. It is hardly time to think Verlander is on the down side of his career.

 

[depraved]

I think anyone who follows baseball closely knows that some players just have off years. It has happened to some all time greats as you've shown, and realistically Verlander probably has another 2 years of being dominant. After that maybe 2-3 years of being very good, but after that it's anyone's guess.

 

[RobBase]

His ego has gotten the best of him.

Gets toasted in the All-Star Game, then playoffs last year. Strike 1
Gets dumped by Kate Upton. Strike 2
Scherzer > Verlander. Strike 3.

Dude is total head case right now.

 

[Tigertowner68]

His ego has gotten the best of him.

Gets toasted in the All-Star Game, then playoffs last year. Strike 1
Gets dumped by Kate Upton. Strike 2
Scherzer > Verlander. Strike 3.

Dude is total head case right now.

Your take has merit but is not accurate.

Even the great Mariano Rivera had major hiccups in games vs. the Red Sox (especially the 2004 LCS) and vs Diamondbacks.

Ups and downs, yes. Just like the HOF's I posted. And what evidence do you have that he was really dumped by Kate Upton?

Looked like no more than a quick infatuation by JV to me...

 

[Tigertowner68]

I think anyone who follows baseball closely knows that some players just have off years. It has happened to some all time greats as you've shown, and realistically Verlander probably has another 2 years of being dominant. After that maybe 2-3 years of being very good, but after that it's anyone's guess.

Yes, but Nolan Ryan looked like that too...he may yet become dominant again.

 

[tygerphan4ever]

At 11-8 3.88 he is a good pitcher this season, but he's not been uber-dominant as he had been in recent years, in fact if I must say so, he's actually been the Tigers 4'th best pitcher behind Sanchez 2.58 ERA, Scherzer at 3.01, and Fister at 3.67. Since they all have winning records the W-L mark would be irrelevant in this case. I don't care who the pitchers belong to, that's a mean rotation when you can truthfully say that somebody with an above average ERA of 3.88 has been the 4th best pitcher this season.

 

[Chef99]

"That's right, JV...I took your bitch!"

 

[romeo212000]

Wins and losses are the last things I'd look at when evaluating pitchers.

 

[navamind]

Verlander's WHIP is up by about 37 points this year. That's a lot.

 

[tygerphan4ever]

ERA is the more telling stat than anything, everything else is arguable. Runs are the name of the game and it's not like Detroits 'defensive wizardry' has been taking away runs to keep the ERAs low for the Tigers.. the ERAs are low because they're good pitchers who keep big runs off the board most of the time. Some of them give up plenty of baserunners, but when it comes to runs, that's different.

As to Wins/Losses, while I know much of that has to do with the lineups they play in front of, at the same time a tough pitcher can do well in close games, whereas some pitchers just can't handle tie games or having small leads.. they blow it and give the leads back or lose the tie because they don't have the toughness. That's why you'll see some pitchers have worse records that their ERA suggests they should even though the run support they receive is not all that bad.. so, w/l doesn't say it all about pitchers, but it does say something about hoe the pitcher is capable of handling himself. in many cases.

 

[romeo212000]

ERA is the more telling stat than anything, everything else is arguable. Runs are the name of the game and it's not like Detroits 'defensive wizardry' has been taking away runs to keep the ERAs low for the Tigers.. the ERAs are low because they're good pitchers who keep big runs off the board most of the time. Some of them give up plenty of baserunners, but when it comes to runs, that's different.

As to Wins/Losses, while I know much of that has to do with the lineups they play in front of, at the same time a tough pitcher can do well in close games, whereas some pitchers just can't handle tie games or having small leads.. they blow it and give the leads back or lose the tie because they don't have the toughness. That's why you'll see some pitchers have worse records that their ERA suggests they should even though the run support they receive is not all that bad.. so, w/l doesn't say it all about pitchers, but it does say something about hoe the pitcher is capable of handling himself. in many cases.

Hernandez only had 13 wins in his cy young year I believe. Scott Feldman had 17 with a 4+ ERA in his best year. They're meaningless.

ERA is a decent stat to start at, but its not an end all arguments stat. WHIP is equally as telling to me, if not moreso, and park adjusted stats tell more of the story as well.

 

[tygerphan4ever]

Hernandez only had 13 wins in his cy young year I believe. Scott Feldman had 17 with a 4+ ERA in his best year. They're meaningless.

ERA is a decent stat to start at, but its not an end all arguments stat. WHIP is equally as telling to me, if not moreso, and park adjusted stats tell more of the story as well.

I already covered how MUCH of a w/l record is due to run support, but not all of it. Over the past 38 seasons I have seen alot of pitchers and how they handle themselves in tight games.. some can handle it to give their lineup the chance to score that extra run or 2 to put them in position to win and some can't do so very well. Like I said, w/l is not everything but it often says SOMETHING about the pitcher. AND, give me ERA over WHIP anyday. Runs are the name of the game, moreso than baserunners alone. A pitcher can go 6 innings and give up 6 hits and 3 walks for a 1.50 WHIP, but if he's bearing down enough to keep runs off the board he pitched a good game.. better than the guy who gives up 3 hits and 1 walk across those 6 innings for a 0.67 WHIP, but 1 of the hits was a 3 run homer, like I say, I know which guy pitched better when it came down to it, so ERA says a mouthful to me. Park adjustments CAN matter in your more extreme cases like Fenway on one end of the spectrum, or Petc 0 on the other.

 

[romeo212000]

I already covered how MUCH of a w/l record is due to run support, but not all of it. Over the past 38 seasons I have seen alot of pitchers and how they handle themselves in tight games.. some can handle it to give their lineup the chance to score that extra run or 2 to put them in position to win and some can't do so very well. Like I said, w/l is not everything but it often says SOMETHING about the pitcher. AND, give me ERA over WHIP anyday. Runs are the name of the game, moreso than baserunners alone. A pitcher can go 6 innings and give up 6 hits and 3 walks for a 1.50 WHIP, but if he's bearing down enough to keep runs off the board he pitched a good game.. better than the guy who gives up 3 hits and 1 walk across those 6 innings for a 0.67 WHIP, but 1 of the hits was a 3 run homer, like I say, I know which guy pitched better when it came down to it, so ERA says a mouthful to me. Park adjustments CAN matter in your more extreme cases like Fenway on one end of the spectrum, or Petc 0 on the other.

Most of the time when a pitcher is having a run like that where they're constantly having to work out of trouble its not sustainable. Of course better pitchers will have the grit to bear down and get through it more often, but if a pitcher is sporting a 5-0 record through 6-7 starts with a mid 2's ERA and a 1.50 WHIP, and an unsustainably high LOB%, history tells us that pitcher is due for regression as that really isn't sustainable.

Second, giving up a 3 run homer for more runs doesn't mean he didn't pitch better. It means he made a mistake with one pitch. It happens.

 

[tygerphan4ever]

I'm not calling WHIP meaningless or anything, I'm just saying I'm all about the bottom line on alot of things in life, so that's why I view ERA as the biggest indicator of how a pitcher is doing.. on the same token, I realize that a high WHIP usually will bring about a high ERA, so more often than not those stats will run hand in hand with one another anyhow.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

At 11-8 3.88 he is a good pitcher this season, but he's not been uber-dominant as he had been in recent years, in fact if I must say so, he's actually been the Tigers 4'th best pitcher behind Sanchez 2.58 ERA, Scherzer at 3.01, and Fister at 3.67. Since they all have winning records the W-L mark would be irrelevant in this case. I don't care who the pitchers belong to, that's a mean rotation when you can truthfully say that somebody with an above average ERA of 3.88 has been the 4th best pitcher this season.

W-L and ERA? Sorry, but Verlander has not been "good". His numbers are extremely mediocre, but he's pitched a lot of innings, which certainly adds value. If the Tigers weren't going to the playoffs, I'd say they should shut him down. He's probably feeling the effects of all the innings he's pitched the last 5 years and needs a breather, similar to Sabathia.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

ERA is the more telling stat than anything, everything else is arguable. Runs are the name of the game and it's not like Detroits 'defensive wizardry' has been taking away runs to keep the ERAs low for the Tigers.. the ERAs are low because they're good pitchers who keep big runs off the board most of the time. Some of them give up plenty of baserunners, but when it comes to runs, that's different.

As to Wins/Losses, while I know much of that has to do with the lineups they play in front of, at the same time a tough pitcher can do well in close games, whereas some pitchers just can't handle tie games or having small leads.. they blow it and give the leads back or lose the tie because they don't have the toughness. That's why you'll see some pitchers have worse records that their ERA suggests they should even though the run support they receive is not all that bad.. so, w/l doesn't say it all about pitchers, but it does say something about hoe the pitcher is capable of handling himself. in many cases.

Raw ERA most definitely is not the most telling stat. In terms of a pitcher's dominance, WHIP and OPSA are much more telling. xFIP as well. ERA is secondary to ERA+.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

I already covered how MUCH of a w/l record is due to run support, but not all of it. Over the past 38 seasons I have seen alot of pitchers and how they handle themselves in tight games.. some can handle it to give their lineup the chance to score that extra run or 2 to put them in position to win and some can't do so very well. Like I said, w/l is not everything but it often says SOMETHING about the pitcher. AND, give me ERA over WHIP anyday. Runs are the name of the game, moreso than baserunners alone. A pitcher can go 6 innings and give up 6 hits and 3 walks for a 1.50 WHIP, but if he's bearing down enough to keep runs off the board he pitched a good game.. better than the guy who gives up 3 hits and 1 walk across those 6 innings for a 0.67 WHIP, but 1 of the hits was a 3 run homer, like I say, I know which guy pitched better when it came down to it, so ERA says a mouthful to me. Park adjustments CAN matter in your more extreme cases like Fenway on one end of the spectrum, or Petc 0 on the other.

Well, for starters, in the environment of a single game, stats don't mean the same things they do over the course of a full season. You don't evaluate players based on a single game (or at least you shouldn't).

That means the pitcher did a good job battling and getting himself out of jams. That doesn't mean he's pitching well. It means he's playing with fire and he'll have great difficulty preventing runs if he keeps allowing so many baserunners. Meanwhile, a guy who dominates but makes one mistake can lose the game, but that doesn't mean he didn't pitch better. He clearly did. It happens. But the guy who consistently keeps runners off base is more likely to be successful over the course of several starts or a full season.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

Most of the time when a pitcher is having a run like that where they're constantly having to work out of trouble its not sustainable. Of course better pitchers will have the grit to bear down and get through it more often, but if a pitcher is sporting a 5-0 record through 6-7 starts with a mid 2's ERA and a 1.50 WHIP, and an unsustainably high LOB%, history tells us that pitcher is due for regression as that really isn't sustainable.

Second, giving up a 3 run homer for more runs doesn't mean he didn't pitch better. It means he made a mistake with one pitch. It happens.

Bingo!

 

[tygerphan4ever]

Well, for starters, in the environment of a single game, stats don't mean the same things they do over the course of a full season. You don't evaluate players based on a single game (or at least you shouldn't).

That means the pitcher did a good job battling and getting himself out of jams. That doesn't mean he's pitching well. It means he's playing with fire and he'll have great difficulty preventing runs if he keeps allowing so many baserunners. Meanwhile, a guy who dominates but makes one mistake can lose the game, but that doesn't mean he didn't pitch better. He clearly did. It happens. But the guy who consistently keeps runners off base is more likely to be successful over the course of several starts or a full season.

ERA is the bottom line in my book, I don't care what you say. Detroit pitchers often give up tons of baserunners, but scoring many runs off them is something else altogether, so that's one reason why although their pitchers deserve to get beat most of the time, they usually don't and keep good ERAs to boot. So-- ERA is bottom line to me.. THE END.

 

[tygerphan4ever]

W-L and ERA? Sorry, but Verlander has not been "good". His numbers are extremely mediocre, but he's pitched a lot of innings, which certainly adds value. If the Tigers weren't going to the playoffs, I'd say they should shut him down. He's probably feeling the effects of all the innings he's pitched the last 5 years and needs a breather, similar to Sabathia.

He's far from the only starter they've got who have bad saber geek garbage stats, but hey, bottom line cuz.. they keep most of those runners off the board, so, to me.. that's everything-- how many of those assholes cross that plate. Style points to me aint shit