This year has seen the debut of by far the best group of rookie pitchers in my lifetime. Granted, I have only been around since 1984 but this year's rookie class is inarguably incredible. While the statistics help illustrate just how great this class is — I will get to that in a moment — my anecdotal knowledge of these guys is just as impressive. Watching Verlander, Zumaya, Weaver, Liriano, Johnson, Broxton, Papelbon, and others pitch is amazing. It is a truly thrilling experience to watch talented players succeed right from the start.
To me, the most impressive aspect of this year's rookie pitchers is that they are excellent regardless of what metric is used to measure them. Not only are they statistically brilliant, but they also have all the attributes that scouts love: poise, attitude, stuff, etc. In addition, they are deep and diverse.
They are deep. Some years you have two, three, or even four guys who have good years. This year there are fifteen rookie pitchers with VORPs over 20 and that doesn't include some of the players who were called up later in the season but have excelled in the limited time they have been in the majors.
They are diverse. Many guys have electric stuff (Papelbon, Liriano, Zumaya, Broxton, etc.). Others have good but not great stuff but make up for it with poise and command (Verlander, Weaver, etc.). There are great starters and great relievers. Some guys started the season in the big leagues while others had to adjust to mid-season. There are several guys who, while they haven't performed exceptionally, have played important roles for their teams after being brought up to the majors earlier than their clubs would have liked due to injuries or payroll concerns (Jon Lester and Cole Hamels stand out in this regard). In addition, there are, undoubtably, a number of rookie pitchers who will take a season or more to adjust to the level of talent in the majors but who, in the long run, will be excellent pitchers in their own right (Scott Olson, Matt Cain, Taylor Buchholz, etc.).
In both leagues, there are rookies in the top five in ERA (Josh Johnson in the NL and Justin Verlander in the AL) and, if they had pitched enough innings to qualify (excluding relievers), there would be three more in the top ten in the AL (Jered Weaver, Franicisco Liriano, and Jeremy Sowers) and two more in the top ten in the NL (Chad Billingsley and Anibal Sanchez, who recently pitched a no-hiter). On top of that long list of prominent starters, you could make a case that rookies make up four of the best relievers in the American League (Jonathan Papelbon, Joel Zumaya, Adam Wainwright, and Bobby Jenks, a rookie in name only given his late seaon and post-season exploits last year) and two of the best relievers in the National League (Cla Meredith and Jonathan Broxton).
I will inevitably leave some players who deserve to be mentioned out of this post due to a combination of my relative lack of knowledge of the National League, the sheer number of rookies who have been impact players this season, and the fact that I am an idiot. With that in mind, I want to list some other rookie pitchers who have had good seasons this year: John Maine, Clay Hensley, Chuck James, and Manny Delcarmen.
What does this all add up to? Well, I think there are two related points to be made regarding this historically great group of rookie pitchers. First of all, before we stake our bets for the future on these guys it is important to remember that many, if not most, of these guys will have neither long nor particularly impressive careers due to injuries, mental/makeup issues, and being unable to cope with the adjustments that hitters across the league will inevitably make over the coming seasons. Secondly, with that in mind, let's seize the day. This is a great time to be a baseball fan and we should make our best efforts to enjoy these great rookies while we can.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
If you want to talk about rookie position players you have to put some other guys on that list too. At the top, in my mind, are Dan Uggla and Nick Markakis. Also on the list is Andre Ethier, Hanley Ramirez, Josh Barfield, Ryan Zimmerman, Josh Willingham, and Stephen Drew.
Also, I hate to burst your bubble but I am pretty sure that Freddy Sanchez isn't a rookie. In fact, he has actually been in the league for four years. Seriously, the more I think about it the more I think that you are lazy for not looking this up. Then again, I think you are lazy having nothing to do with this.
Right, Sanchez was a rookie last year (72 career PA's before that - I wish MLB.com had a rules section somewhere I could find it to verify this). We are both lazy. I need a better PR/enforcement crew to make sure every thing I say is true. That is, to make it true after I say it.
OK, he technically a rookie last year but played in the majors as early as 2002. Anyway, he is having a good year and is not a rookie. There, its settled.
Ya, I guess I got him mixed up with Anibal Sanchez. Incidentally, I think I'll be posting soon on the apparent disparity between the success of Sox prospects who have been dealt vs those who have stayed.
Interesting, I will preemptively state that I think that one reason why it appears that the prospects they dealt are playing better may be that the players they traded were further along in their development and, thus, are performing better at the big league level than the prospects the Sox brought up, who, with the exception of Papelbon, would all have stayed in the minors another year before being called up if the Sox hadn't had that outbreak of ebola. In addition, the prospects that the Sox traded who were at a similar level developmentally as those that they kept may have had better seasons because they were allowed to start the season in the big leagues. Finally, several of the prospects that the Sox traded away are playing the National League, which, as we all know is a total joke this year (and for pitchers, the past 10 years, if not longer).
Post a Comment