And…

The best a team can do is acquire pitchers who excel at the things they can control and hope that the ball bounces their direction more often than not.

And, of course, acquire defensive players who also feed into fielding those balls…

But if the M’s have to fill three spots in the rotation next year, and go shopping for undervalued pitchers like Lopez, they’ll be rolling the dice with a cheap rotation of mostly #4-caliber starters. Isn’t that just punting on pitching because it’s too expensive and too unpredictable? Can we really offset weakness in the rotation with enough offense? Didn’t Texas try that for a few years and fail?

Lopez is a great suggestion; you make a great case. I’m wondering if acquiring three Rodrigo Lopezes are going to supply enough pitching prowess.

“Give me lucky generals.”
– Napoleon

But I guess his fastball was a little short by the time he faced Wellington at Waterloo.

And speaking of Schmidt, I see he was scratched from his Friday start due to a strain in his upper back, ostensibly from taking BP. I wonder if his golf swing will aggravate it in the off season?

Since we are on the subject of undervalued pitchers how about Greg Maddux?

I’m not sure if he is a free agent or not, but if he is I would love Maddux in our rotation, he would not be as cheap as the Rodrigo Lopez types, but he certainly wont be as expensive as the Jason Schmidt types and his age would probably lower the price.

Maddux has a 3.92 xFIP, he doesn’t strike out many guys (4.9 K/G), but he hardly walks anyone (2.0 BB/G).

This could all be moot if he isn’t a free agent, but if he is I would love to have him in the rotation, as long as he is not too expensive.

When it comes to pitching, there’s no sure things. Every pitcher is a risk. The Red Sox didn’t expect a 5.09 ERA when they gave up two of their best prospects for Josh Beckett. The Yankees certainly didn’t expect a 4.84 ERA from Randy Johnson, and I’m sure the Braves thought Tim Hudson would do better than a 4.95 ERA.

I mean by your logic, couldn’t good things have been predicted for him after last year, even after his ERA rose quite a bit from 2004?

Yep. That’s the nature of the beast.

What you guys need to come to grips with is the massive effects that things out of the pitcher’s control have on run prevention. Until you stop looking at ERA as a predictor of pitcher effectiveness, you’re going to continue to attribute skills to a pitcher from results that he did not influence.

A huge part of ERA is out of the pitcher’s hands, regardless of whether that pitcher is Johan Santana or Rodrigo Lopez. The best a team can do is acquire pitchers who excel at the things they can control and hope that the ball bounces their direction more often than not.

Acquiring a pitcher because he’s been a recipient of good fortune in the past, or avoiding one who has not, is just a bad way to run a ballclub.

When you consider the potential outcome and the odds that it would overall be beneficial, as opposed to harmful, it seems like a good ‘gamble’ (somewhat) so to speak. On top of that, the saved salary allows for something better in another rotation slot or in the lineup.

Even if this doesn’t specifically happen/work out, I hope this general direction is something that is considered.

Oddly enough, there’s another Oriole SP who’s putting together a pretty crappy performance, someone who I feel is a good bet to rebound next year, for a number of reasons (stats and otherwise). He’s not a great pitcher, but were he in the market this winter he’d be a better bargain for the dollar than those “just above” him. Seriously, not every 2-5 spot in the rotation has to be filled with someone who is available for the most money, just so we can squeeze every last drop of potential (or, well… sometimes it backfires anyway).

He’s making way too much this year. It would surely go down if he were to hit the market, but unfortunately, it looks like he has one year left on the contract, so that ain’t gonna happen.