But there are no other examples as far as I can see.

29 starts is about 5-7 shy of a full season for a starting pitcher. 5 to 7 starts is 14-20% of a pitcher’s season. That’s equivalent to missing 25-35 games for a position player. That’s not any kind of bellweather of endurance.

Anyways, to answer your question specifically, more than you remember. He missed 14 days in of ‘05 with shoulder soreness and 15 days with a groin strain last September. He missed his opening start in 2004 with a sore shoulder, which was supposedly unrelated to the elbow surgery he had in the 2003 offseason. In a two year spain, he had problems with his shoulder, elbow, and groin. Not the picture of perfect health that you’re painting.

I like Schmidt’s K-rate. It’s still up at over 7.5 K’s per game… I’m not complaining!

He’s striking out 20% of the batters he faces, or 8 K/G when adjusted for batters faced. The NL average is 6.6 K/G, so certainly, his strikeout rate isn’t a problem in and of itself. Translated to the AL, his K/G would be 7.63 this year, or basically the same as what Gil Meche is posting.

I’m not saying Schmidt’s strikeout rate is a problem. I’m saying the drastic dropoff in his strikeout rate (and groundball rate) are both signs that his stuff has deteriorated. That’s not something we can ignore.

I really like the prospect of Jason’s next 3 seasons, and I think securing them would be well worth guaranteeing a 4th and holding out a vesting option for the 5th (based on performance and reasonable IP/GS over whatever time period you prefer – perhaps years 3 and 4?). Schmidt is still definitely a legitimate ace – and imagine what Felix could learn from him! I think he may follow Schilling’s career arc, albeit a half-step lower… isn’t Schilling considered a pretty close comp?

Okay, so you like Schmidt as an ace. Why? Because he was an ace from 2002-2004, and you’re willing to overlook the regression he’s taken the past two season and assume that he’s going to hook up to the juvenation machine and party like its 2003 all over again?

And no, Curt Schilling’s not a particularly good comparison for Jason Schmidt. For his career, Schilling has walked 5.4% of the batters he’s faced and has been a pinpoint control artist for the past decade, basically. Schmidt has walked 9% of the batters he’s faced and has struggled with his command the last three years. Since his dominant ‘03 season, Schmidt’s ability to put the ball in the strike zone has been inconsistent at best.

Or, to put it another way, Schilling’s career K/BB rate is 4.39, while Schmidt’s is 2.27. Schmidt’s had one year (2003) where his K/BB rate was even close to Schilling’s career average. In 2002, Curt Schilling walked 33 guys in 259 innings. Jason Schmidt has walked less than 70 batters in a season once in the past five years.

They have different skillsets. Schilling’s been consistently better than Schmidt his entire career. They’re both white, right-handed, and throw hard, but they’re not comparable talents. Comparing Schmidt to Schilling is like comparing Rich Aurilia to Cal Ripken Jr.

Finally, I’m glad you agree with me on the overpaying for the right player side. I just disagree with you as far as whether going after a pitcher, inherent risks taken into account, is worth the trouble. You need guys whom you can ride into the playoffs, use to break up slumps, and generate excitement (and confidence) in the rest of the team – and you don’t get those guys without risk or for free. If a guy like Jason wants to be in Seattle as much as he’s expressed, I’m all for giving him that chance – if he has a year or two of poor performance that’s too bad, but the other years may make all the difference.

Have any recent examples of a free agent pitcher carrying his team into the playoffs, breaking up slumps, and generating excitement and confidence in the rest of the team?

Seriously, any examples? At all?

Schmidt is less risky, yes. How many starts has he missed over the past 4-5 years? None over the past 4 which I’m aware of… he’s started 29 or more for 5 years running, counting 2006. He’s also on track for over 200IP for 3 out of the last 4 years. Jason Schmidt’s arm surgery is, quite simply, not a factor! He bounced back immediately and never [i]looked[/i] back once.

I like Schmidt’s K-rate. It’s still up at over 7.5 K’s per game… I’m not complaining! What is he right now, 5th in the NL for strikeouts? He’s somewhere in that vicinity… which means I’m not going to get too concerned. To me, it looks like Schmidt is a bit overused and has adjusted well to a little tiredness and a little pain. I really like the prospect of Jason’s next 3 seasons, and I think securing them would be well worth guaranteeing a 4th and holding out a vesting option for the 5th (based on performance and reasonable IP/GS over whatever time period you prefer – perhaps years 3 and 4?). Schmidt is still definitely a legitimate ace – and imagine what Felix could learn from him! I think he may follow Schilling’s career arc, albeit a half-step lower… isn’t Schilling considered a pretty close comp?

Finally, I’m glad you agree with me on the overpaying for the right player side. I just disagree with you as far as whether going after a pitcher, inherent risks taken into account, is worth the trouble. You need guys whom you can ride into the playoffs, use to break up slumps, and generate excitement (and confidence) in the rest of the team – and you don’t get those guys without risk or for free. If a guy like Jason wants to be in Seattle as much as he’s expressed, I’m all for giving him that chance – if he has a year or two of poor performance that’s too bad, but the other years may make all the difference.

Obviously it doesn’t make sense to spend that way from an intelligent team perspective. But for fans, bad GMs, and much of the media, they certainly think that way. It’s amazing to see to talk and contract numbers concerning Schmidt, who isn’t one of the top 25 starting pitchers, and Zito, who isn’t in the top 50. That a pitcher was great 2 (or more) years ago, seems to entitle him to a contract as if he’s likely to recapture that one time success over the next three seasons. Zito simply isn’t a good starting pitcher right now but wow, look at all the hype.

In part, Washburn was paid for his 3.20 ERA but he was also paid for his success in 2002.

Jason Schmidt, he of the recent arm surgery and declining strikeout rates while pitching in the National League, is less risky than Millwood, established healthy American League top notch pitcher?

But Schmidt? You can’t just run out to the supermarket and get a legitimate ace who can carry you on his back through the postseason.

The idea that Jason Schmidt is an ace is an interesting one. He certainly was one before he blew out his arm, but he hasn’t been that pitcher since 2004. His groundball rate has gone through the floor at the same time his strikeout rate has experienced a huge decline, and despite the decrease in velocity, his command hasn’t improved at all.

Why do we think Jason Schmidt is an ace when he hasn’t been one for the past two years and is now employing a significantly different skillset than the one he used to have? Does aceness never fade as some kind of annointed gift that is not subject to the laws of nature?

The M’s need to shoot for 100 wins instead of 82, and if overpaying for an A-level player (instead of the usual B-level, or the usual best-available A-minus-level) is the only way to get it done… then charge me an extra $2 for my CF bleacher seats, or I’ll go buy an extra lemonade.

I don’t disagree with any of this. I’m the guy who has defended the A-Rod contract since the day it was signed. You’ll see in my offseason plan that I’m completely in favor of overpaying star players.

I’m just not convinced that Jason Schmidt is worth overpaying for. In general, I think pitcher inconsistency is such an enormous problem that we haven’t been able to solve that trying to build a championship club around a starting pitcher is a great way to never win anything.

Schmidt and Matsuzaka are much less risky than Millwood. I think that whomever signs these gentlemen during the offseason will likely be overpaying for their services on a price-for-performance ratio… but I also think that you have to pay a premium for premium players. It’s like the old roto catchphrase, ‘you have to give talent to get talent’. If you don’t pay the extra $1-2m/year, someone else will.

Now, for a Washburn-eque player, that’s just fine. Let Anaheim overpay. Millwood may or may not be worth the additional cost. But Schmidt? You can’t just run out to the supermarket and get a legitimate ace who can carry you on his back through the postseason. Guaranteeing a fifth year to him would be a bit scary – but if Schmidt takes us to the Series in 2007, 2008, and/or 2009… I accept the sunk cost, and ramp up the workload of Baek and Cruceta (and whomever else comes along) when necessary.

I’m sick of mediocrity. I’m sick of a team that wants to ‘compete’ instead of ‘dominate’. The M’s have room to make a couple major signings with the cheap roster spots they have covered with quality players (bullpen, Felix, MI, Snelling/Jones/Reed). If there’s not enough room for Schmidt AND Dice-K, I say get Dice-K… and then make room for Schmidt by shipping out a contract. The M’s need to shoot for 100 wins instead of 82, and if overpaying for an A-level player (instead of the usual B-level, or the usual best-available A-minus-level) is the only way to get it done… then charge me an extra $2 for my CF bleacher seats, or I’ll go buy an extra lemonade.

I like your analysis. I think that the conclusion is generally true.

However, I think that the category you are using (free agent pitchers who signed big multi-year contracts) is a little too inclusive. You can definitely make distinctions within that group of players. Although the sample size gets smaller, I don’t think that these pitchers are all that comparable.

With that group, it is pretty easy to lump them based on their specific situations:

1: Aging elite pitchers: these are guys who were really good for a while, and signed big contracts after they were already on the wrong side of 30. This group includes Pedro Martinez and Mike Mussina.

2: Second tier pitchers: these are guys who put up good numbers, but were probably overrated even during their peak years. This group would include Mike Hampton, Bartolo Colon, Chan Ho Park, Derek Lowe, and Tim Hudson. Washburn would fit in this category as well, since we although calling him a second tier pitcher is way way too generous. These guys were all good, but not dominant elite starters. If you looked at their peripherals, there isn’t anything amazing about them.

3: Contract Year Phenoms: these are guys who had a really good year or two, and put up big numbers right before they went on the free agent market. This group would include Carl Pavano and Kevin Millwood, and to a lesser extent Contreras, Burnett, and Washburn. These guys cashed in at the right time, and teams assumed that their most recent performances would be repeatable. However, Contreras and Burnett probably fit in other categories better.

4: Upside guys: these are pitchers who had obvious tools, but hadn’t really put things together. All were guys who scouts love, and clubs looking at them in free were projecting what they might do in the future. AJ Burnett, Jason Schmidt (back in 2001), and Jose Contreras. In these cases, the clubs who were looking at them were expecting better production from the player in the future than they what they had done in the past.

Obviously, these categories aren’t mutually exclusive. Burnett, Schmidt, and Contreras could fit into multiple categories. Plus, Vazquez doesn’t fit nicely in any of them. He was a legit elite pitcher in Montreal, and he just hasn’t been the same since. But he was not old when he signed with the Yankees. He doesn’t fit in any category. Plus, Washburn doesn’t fit in any category nicely either. He isn’t really good enough to be a second tier guy, and his contract year season wasn’t really that good if you looked base the ERA. So he really could fit into his own category: the overpaid #4 starter (Russ Ortiz, Eric Milton, and guys like that would also fit in this category).

If you break it down like this, the long term deals don’t look quite so bleak. Categories 1 and 4 have been pretty good. Pedro Martinez, Mike Mussina, AJ Burnett, Jose Contreras, and Jason Schmidt have all been at least partially successful (with Burnett still very much up in the air). Not one total bust here.

The other categories have been really bleak. The second tier pitchers and the guys who had breakout seasons just before free agency did very poorly. Only Millwood and Lowe look like they were worth the investment, and the biggest busts (Park, Hampton, and perhaps Hudson) fall into these categories.

In a comment you mentioned that the guys who are worth the huge contracts are young elite starters. That is clearly true. However, the upside guys and older elite guys are also not bad investments. You will likely end up overpaying for guys like Pedro and Mussina, and they might end up losing out on the final year of the contract. But even if they are not pitching to peak form, those two have been good. On the upside guys, the risk is huge. The upside guys like Burnett don’t often get 4+ year deals, so the group we are dealing with here only includes the top guys (or the worst contracts). But those guys seem like a pretty good investment as well. The risk is big, but you have the greatest chance to get a bargain (like Schmidt).

Interestingly, I think that this year, Schmidt falls into category 1. He has performed at a near Cy-Young level for several years, but is not quite as dominant now as he used to be. I think that he is much more similar to Pedro and Mussina than the rest of these guys. Obviously, signing a guy until he is 37 is a huge risk. But these guys seem to be a better risk than second tier players.