Does 2,500 Strikeouts Mean Anything?

Javier Vazquez could be a lightening rod case for the wins versus the analyst crowd. The well-traveled pitcher has--after fourteen seasons--a perfect .500 record at 160-160. His ERA+ for his career stands at 104, just barely over average. He's only cracked the Cy Young Award voting once in his career. He's only made one All Star team. And yet Fangraphs rates his career with an impressive 53.6 WAR. Even the stat sites can't agree on his value as his WAR for baseball-reference.com sits at a substantially lower 37.6. Now Vazquez has become only the thirtieth pitcher in major league history to fan 2,500 batters. What does it all mean? Or does it mean anything?

Vazquez now has more career strikeouts than Don Drysdale, Jack Morris, Jim Kaat, Sudden Sam McDowell, Luis Tiant, Kevin Brown and Sandy Koufax. There are some pretty good pitchers in that list. But don't we have to put Vazquez in some kind of historical perspective? When Javier Vazquez began his major league career, the average strikeouts per nine innings was 6.41. The strikeout per nine rate has grown to over seven strikeouts per nine innings in the last two years. That may not be that much of a jump since Vazquez started, but it is significant. Not only that, but just five years earlier than when Vazquez started his career, the league's strikeouts per nine had never been over six strikeouts per nine innings. In other words, we are witnessing an unprecedented era of strikeouts in major league baseball. That leads to the overall question of whether strikeouts are over valued in today's analysis? Has this number become akin to 500 homers in a career?

Please know that his writer isn't making a judgement here. The Fan prefers to ask questions and let others answer them. Those people that stick to the old-fashioned notion that a starting pitcher should be valued by his wins could point to the fact that Javier Vazquez has had only seven "winning" seasons out of his fourteen. Mike Mussina (a pretty darn good pitcher in his time) said that a starting pitcher should win half of the games he starts. Mussina did that. Vazquez has won 160 games in 438 starts.

Analysts will argue that a pitcher can't be held accountable for things out of his control and wins are not in the pitcher's control. It's a compelling argument. And the pendulum seems to be swinging in that direction judging by Felix Hernandez and Zack Greinke's Cy Young Awards in recent years. Vazquez did pitch for some pretty bad teams in some of those Expos years and certainly this year with the Marlins.

Javier Vazquez's career is much more than his strikeouts or his wins and losses. His strikeout to walk ratio has been terrific in his career. He's shown excellent control over the years. But he's also given up 372 homers or an average of 29 per full season. His 1.2 home runs per nine innings is a very high number. But so are his infield pop ups with a career average of 11.4 percent. 

This writer will let the "wins" versus "value" people duke out what kind of career Javier Vazquez has had.  According to baseball-reference.com, his career "comps" are Brad Radke, Andy Benes and Livan Hernandez. Those seem about right. If you had to put this writer in a corner and forced him to make a value judgment, the answer would probably be that Vazquez has been a serviceable big league pitcher for a rather long time. He's shown durability and resilience and there isn't too much more you can ask of a pitcher in the long haul. He's only had a couple of sub-par seasons. His strikeouts may be overvalued given the historical data that we have. And his value as a pitcher is probably somewhere in the middle of Fangraphs' lofty WAR total and B-R's somewhat lower number. 

Javier Vazquez Was Brian Cashman's Mistake...Again

Javier Vazquez (according to multiple reports) just signed with the Florida Marlins with a one year deal worth $7 million. That's not a bad paycheck for a guy who according to WAR brought zero value to the Yankees. With the travails of A. J. Burnett being so prominent on every one's mind, the Vazquez debacle was often overlooked. And the thing about the mistake in signing Vazquez was that it was the second time the Yankees made it.

In some aspects, it's hard to blame Mr. Cashman on what happened with Vazquez in 2010. The pitcher pitched quite well for the Braves the year before and compiled a 5.2 WAR for that team in 2009. The pitcher's fastball was in the 91 MPH range regularly with Atlanta and he struck out 9.8 batters per nine innings while only walking 1.8 in those same nine innings. That's terrific pitching and it would seem reasonable that he could repeat it. And $11.5 million seems like a steal if a guy could come close to those kinds of numbers again.

But there had to be some hesitation based on Vazquez's first experience in New York. That year (2004) was Javier Vazquez's worst year since his sophomore season in 1999. And if you are Javier Vazquez, you have to have that in the back of your mind too when you are negotiating as a free agent and have choices on where you will pitch. So put a little blame on the player too. But like it or not, sometimes what a general manager does backfires and this was one of those occasions. The Yankees got no value at all for the money they spent on Vazquez.

And make no mistake about it, 2010 was a disaster. Only Shields of the Bay Rays gave up more homers than Vazquez and Shields pitched fifty more innings. Vazquez gave up 32 homers in just 151+ innings for a 1.8 homer per nine rate. He finished with an 80 ERA+. His fastball was in the 87 to 88 range instead of 91 (suitors for Cliff Lee take note). It's only 4 MPH, but it made a huge difference in results.

Well, we could also blame the departed pitching coach, Dave Eiland, who didn't help Vazquez get back on track. It's always good to have a fired guy to blame results on. You can also blame a couple of catchers who had really poor years behind the plate. Perhaps there is plenty of blame to go around. The bottom line though is that Vazquez was a bust for the Yankees and if he cost them three or four games, he cost them the AL East title.

Now Vazquez will go and play for his Puerto Rican buddy in Florida. The Marlins could get lucky as Vazquez has this quirky every other year thing going. Vazquez has thrived in the NL East before. The ball park in Miami doesn't yield homers easily which could help Vazquez. Maybe he will have a great year again. It's a gamble worth taking for the Fish.

And if he succeeds in Florida, then all Brian Cashman can do is scratch his head because the Yankees tried Vazquez twice and got bit twice for doing so.

The Joba Question

Joba Chamberlain lost another game last night for the Yankees. Javier Vazquez pitched brilliantly for seven innings without giving up a run and turned the ball over to Chamberlain with a 1-0 lead. These are the kinds of games that last year, the Yankees always won. This year has been an adventure. Chamberlain came in and promptly gave up four runs on a grand slam and the Yankees lost 4-1. It was Joba's fourth loss, all in relief. The big question is whether the Yankees can go as far as they want to go with Joba bridging the gap between the starter and Rivera? The answer has a surprising conditional answer.

Joba Chamberlain is facing what happens to relief pitchers who have bad outings. The lack of innings compiled allow a couple of bad outings to blow up their ERAs. Joba still has 9.6 strikeouts per nine innings. He still has an almost three to one strikeout to walk ratio. He has given up 39 hits in 36.1 innings pitched, which is too high for a high power relief pitcher. But his BABIP for this season is .369 which shows that he's unlucky so far. Last night's grand slam was the first homer he's allowed all season.

Regular readers of this blog are going to groan at this next statement because the Fan has harped on this all year. Part of Joba's problem depends on who is catching him. Yeah, there is a difference when Chamberlain pitches to Cervelli and when he pitches to Posada. When Joba pitches to Cervelli he has a 3.71 K/BB ratio. When he pitches to Posada, that figure drops to 2.33. Joba's OPS against is .649 with Cervelli and .766 with Posada. This simply continues a trend that is over two years long which the Fan has proven over and over again.

And what about Javier Vazquez's beautiful performance last night? Is it a coincidence that it occurred because Cervelli started the game behind the plate? No. Vazquez has a 3.28 ERA pitching to Cervelli and a 7.52 ERA pitching to Posada. It's not a coincidence. The Yankees have to know this stuff right? Do they have high powered statisticians in their organization? This Fan doesn't know. But either way, the evidence is overwhelming.

The Yankees will win if their pitching holds up. Plain and simple. The playoffs and World Series are all about who pitches better. The Yankees have spent millions to get the pitching they need. So why then do they throw that pitching to a catcher who doesn't do them any favors? If the Yankees would want to maximize their pitching, then put Cervelli as the number one catcher and put Posada at DH without delay. There are questions on whether Cervelli can hit long term. Doesn't matter. They need to pitch well and they will have enough offense.

Oh, and in case you think this is a new phenomenon, remember the first time Vazquez pitched for the Yankees? Remember how that didn't go so well? That was 2004 in case you've forgotten. That year, Vazquez pitched 28 times to Posada. His ERA was 5.23 in those games. He pitched five games to John Flaherty in 2004. His ERA in those games was 3.31.

So where did this post go wrong? It probably got lost because this is a subject that frosts the Fan's hide like no other because it is so obvious. If this writer can at least finish it up with Joba and tie the post up in a bow, that would be nice. Okay, here goes: Joba has had a few bad outings, but his stats are still impressive and he can still dominate. Stick with him (as there are few other options out there anyway) and at the very least, bring Cervelli in for a defensive replacement in the late innings and things will work out just fine.

Vazquez and Halladay

Two of the most dominant pitchers in either league are among the rumors being bandied about in the trade market. According to ESPN.com, the Brewers are interested in Vazquez and would have to part with either Gamel or Alcedes Escobar. The same report states that Blue Jays GM, J. P. Ricciardi said, "We have to be open to anything." And that includes Halladay.

Let's start with the Brewers. Gamel hasn't shown anything in his brief stint with the Brewers to show that he should be untouchable. If the Brewers could get a pitcher such as Vazquez, this sidewalk GM would trade Gamel in a heartbeat. The Braves need offense. The Brewers already have two of the best offensive stars in the game. They need pitching. This deal would make great sense for both clubs, especially since Hanson is working out nicely.

On the other hand, Ricciardi would be really stupid to let Halladay get away. It's not just that he is one of the best pitchers in the American League. He is a legend and a hero up in Toronto for a franchise that is struggling to fill seats. What do you say to your fan base if you are trading away your fans' brightest hero? Okay, he's expensive. But what is the cost of losing him?

The Fan does miss the good old days when trades were made to improve both clubs instead of being a vehicle to save money. Any trade the Blue Jays were to make with Halladay would be a salary dump, no matter how anyone else wants to look at it. To trade a B-level major leaguer for prospects makes sense. To trace a true ace for prospects that may never make anything of themselves is stupid. Names like Dukes and Pie litter the field like shrapnel from those kinds of hopes.

Vazquez for Gamel? Heck yeah. Halladay for anybody or any mess of anybodys? No way!