Back in June 2010, I looked at the season that Jamie Moyer, then 47, was having. A month later, he suffered a season-ending (and seemingly career-ending) injury that resulted in Tommy John surgery. He missed the entire 2011 season, but managed to make the Rockies rotation this year. Six starts into the season, I would say that he's not bad for his age, but that wouldn't be entirely accurate; he hasn't been bad for any MLB pitcher of any age.
Granted, he is only 1-2, and he's averaging only 5.2 innings per start, but his ERA is 4.01, and his ERA+ is a respectable 111, putting him safely above the league average. To put that in perspective, that's better than any member of the 2012 Red Sox rotation so far.
At the age of 49, Moyer is now the fourth oldest pitcher in MLB history, behind Satchel Paige (59), Jack Quinn (50), and Hoyt Wilhelm (49). Each of the three of them only pitched one season at an age older than what Moyer is right now, and here's how it adds up for the three of them. In MLB history, pitchers older than Moyer have pitched a total of:
31 games
1 start
44 innings
0 wins
2 losses
Moyer was already the oldest pitcher to pitch a shutout, and this year became the oldest ever to win a game, and the second oldest ever to start a game (a record set by Satchel Paige that is unlikely to be broken), the oldest to pitch more than three innings in a start, the oldest to start multiple games in a season, and the oldest to pitch more than 30 innings in a season (he's currently at 33.2 innings). He's also the oldest MLB player at any position in the majors since 1980, surpassing Julio Franco, who played less than a month past his 49th birthday in 2007.
I would say that this is probably Moyer's last season, but I'm sure people were saying the same thing 21 years ago, when he was released by the Cardinals. Not that I can blame them; he has a lower ERA+ so far this year than he had in any season in his 20's.
Monday, May 7, 2012
Designated Winner
One baseball phenomenon that has always interested me is when position players are called upon to pitch. It's relatively uncommon; typically it will only happen a few times a year. Understandably so, because it's almost always preferable to use a legitimate professional pitcher instead of taking a huge chance either giving up a lot of runs and/or injuring a position player. Consequently, position players who pitch are usually bench players, and they are usually used as pitchers for one of three reasons:
1. The team is so far behind that a comeback is virtually impossible; done to avoid wasting/potentially injuring relief pitchers on meaningless innings.
2. The team is completely out of viable pitchers and is essentially conceding defeat.
3. (Rarely) A team is trying out a position player as a potential pitcher, usually in a meaningless game or situation.
Because of this, it is even rarer to see two position players pitch in the same game on opposing teams. In fact, it had not been done since 1925, until last night, at least. In the situation in question, the Red Sox and Orioles were tied in the bottom of the 16th, with both teams having depleted their bullpens. The Orioles chose to bring in designated hitter Chris Davis, who had no previous MLB pitching experience. He pitched a scoreless inning, and in the top of the 17th, the Red Sox chose to bring in utility outfielder Darnell McDonald, who had all of one inning of MLB pitching experience, in a blowout game last year. McDonald allowed three runs, and in the bottom of the 17th Chris Davis pitched another scoreless inning, becoming only the fourth position player since 1968 to win a MLB game.
The question is, was this a wise decision by Red Sox manager Bobby Valentine? He obviously was out of arms in the bullpen, but would it have been unreasonable to bring in a starter to pitch a couple innings? I had a hunch that it would have been a good idea, but I decided to take a closer look at the numbers. After all, an extra inning game being pitched on one side by a professional pitcher and on the other side by a designated hitter should not have lasted much longer, right?
With the help of the Non-pitchers with pitching appearances page on Baseball Reference, I decided to take a look at what the results have been in the past when teams use position players to pitch. I focused the list on just those who have played since 1968, and I removed as many as I could find who (like Rick Ankiel) were at one point considered MLB-caliber pitchers. Here's what I found:
Win-Loss Record: 4-6
Games: 208
Games Started: 1
Games Finished: 190
Innings Pitched: 223.2
Earned Runs: 194
ERA: 7.81
Notice how the numbers confirm the fact that most position players are used in meaningless situations; in 208 appearances, only 10 have received decisions. Furthermore, 190 of those 208 games were finished by the position player in question, presumably when the outcome had long-since been obvious. So, what relevance does this have in last night's game?
Well, probably the best option for the Red Sox (in my opinion) would have been to pitch Felix Doubront, today's scheduled starter. That would've affected today's game, but that's something that could've been sorted out later. Granted, Doubront's 5.19 ERA so far this season doesn't inspire much confidence, but the odds certainly would have been in Boston's favor against the 7.81 average ERA of position players who pitch. Instead, Bobby Valentine essentially evened the odds, presumably in the interest of maintaining the pitching matchup for today. Meaning that he gave up a near-certain victory yesterday in order to have basically even odds at winning today. Doesn't seem to make much sense to me.
1. The team is so far behind that a comeback is virtually impossible; done to avoid wasting/potentially injuring relief pitchers on meaningless innings.
2. The team is completely out of viable pitchers and is essentially conceding defeat.
3. (Rarely) A team is trying out a position player as a potential pitcher, usually in a meaningless game or situation.
Because of this, it is even rarer to see two position players pitch in the same game on opposing teams. In fact, it had not been done since 1925, until last night, at least. In the situation in question, the Red Sox and Orioles were tied in the bottom of the 16th, with both teams having depleted their bullpens. The Orioles chose to bring in designated hitter Chris Davis, who had no previous MLB pitching experience. He pitched a scoreless inning, and in the top of the 17th, the Red Sox chose to bring in utility outfielder Darnell McDonald, who had all of one inning of MLB pitching experience, in a blowout game last year. McDonald allowed three runs, and in the bottom of the 17th Chris Davis pitched another scoreless inning, becoming only the fourth position player since 1968 to win a MLB game.
The question is, was this a wise decision by Red Sox manager Bobby Valentine? He obviously was out of arms in the bullpen, but would it have been unreasonable to bring in a starter to pitch a couple innings? I had a hunch that it would have been a good idea, but I decided to take a closer look at the numbers. After all, an extra inning game being pitched on one side by a professional pitcher and on the other side by a designated hitter should not have lasted much longer, right?
With the help of the Non-pitchers with pitching appearances page on Baseball Reference, I decided to take a look at what the results have been in the past when teams use position players to pitch. I focused the list on just those who have played since 1968, and I removed as many as I could find who (like Rick Ankiel) were at one point considered MLB-caliber pitchers. Here's what I found:
Win-Loss Record: 4-6
Games: 208
Games Started: 1
Games Finished: 190
Innings Pitched: 223.2
Earned Runs: 194
ERA: 7.81
Notice how the numbers confirm the fact that most position players are used in meaningless situations; in 208 appearances, only 10 have received decisions. Furthermore, 190 of those 208 games were finished by the position player in question, presumably when the outcome had long-since been obvious. So, what relevance does this have in last night's game?
Well, probably the best option for the Red Sox (in my opinion) would have been to pitch Felix Doubront, today's scheduled starter. That would've affected today's game, but that's something that could've been sorted out later. Granted, Doubront's 5.19 ERA so far this season doesn't inspire much confidence, but the odds certainly would have been in Boston's favor against the 7.81 average ERA of position players who pitch. Instead, Bobby Valentine essentially evened the odds, presumably in the interest of maintaining the pitching matchup for today. Meaning that he gave up a near-certain victory yesterday in order to have basically even odds at winning today. Doesn't seem to make much sense to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)