April 26th: Marcum -- 7 IP 4 hits, 2 ER, 3 BB, 4 K
April 27th: Litsch -- 7 IP, 5 hits, 1 ER, 0 BB, 4 K
April 29th: Halladay -- 8.2 IP, 5 hits, 1 ER, 1 BB, 6 K
April 30th: McGowan -- 7.1 IP, 4 hits, 1 ER, 1 BB, 5 K
May 1st: Burnett -- 7.2 IP, 3 hits, 0 ER, 5 BB, 5 K
May 2nd: Marcum -- 6.2 IP, 2 hits, 0 ER, 3 BB, 9 K
May 3rd: Litsch -- 7.1 IP, 5 hits, 2 ER, 0 BB, 3 K

Total: 51.2 IP, 27 hits, 7 ER, 13 BB, 36 K

= 7.4 IP per start, 1.22 ERA, 0.77 WHIP, 2.77 K/BB

7 consecutive incredible starts from the staff, the sad part is we're only 4-3 in those games.

What happened the bullpen or Rios got sick?

We're hitting below .200 with RISP this season.

Lucky.

Yes, we're a lucky team.

Best rotation in baseball.

Certainly one of the best.

Other contenders:

Cardinals
Padres
Braves
Indians
Mariners
Red Sox

I'd put them roughly in that order, with the Blue Jays between the Indians and the Mariners.

Toronto may have the strongest "weakest link" in Litsch, although the Red Sox with Lester look good in that regard, too. Still, Toronto's best starter, either Halladay or Marcum, is nowhere near as good as Cliff Lee, Erik Bedard, King Felix or Jake Peavy.

The Cardinals are doing it with PFM (Pure Magic), but until/unless their staff returns to its historical level of performance, it's tough to call any other staff better.

You did not just say Lee is better than Halladay...

And I'd erase the Braves from your list considering Smoltz doubts he'll ever start a game again in his life.

haha lee, bedard better then roy.

Umm, your joking right? Wellemeyer has been solid thus far, but I'd take every one of the Jays pitchers over him. Other than Wainwright, there's nothing in that rotation. Lohse is overperforming, though he COULD have a career year, but I'll always be betting against that because the chances are slim.

Jake Peavy takes the Padres rotation to another level, and I like their roto especially with Wolf and Young, though I'd much much rather have Burnett over Young, and McGowan over Wolf. Peavy has the best right arm in baseball, and I would EASILY take Marcum over Maddux. Justin Germano sucks. So basically, they win with Peavy, but lose with everyone else.

Braves are nice with Hudson and Jurrjens, but how long can Jurrjens keep throwing quality starts? He's still young, and he'll hit rough patches. I'll take Doc, AJ, DMac, and Marcum over him. Glavine, James, Bennet, Reyes, etc. are all #5's. Their not in the same league as the Jays, definitely not.

Indians look pretty good with CC, Carmona, Lee, and Westbrook. Carmona will walk 100+ this year, and I doubt he reaches 200+ innings. CC is pretty good, but I think he goes on the DL some time this year. Cliff Lee is not this good, and I'll take D-Mac over him. Marcum+Litsch>Westbrook+Byrd. Marcum is pitching like a #2 right now. Unless Cliff Lee and Jake Westbrook can post mid 3 to high 3's ERA's and throw 200+ innings, we win.

Oh, and Lester SUCKS right now. Do you really see that 1.50 WHIP and sub 5 K-rate being able to sustain a sub 5 ERA? Especially in that park.

Yea, no kidding.

Sometimes people misconstrue fantasy and reality. Peavy is clearly better than Halladay, no argument. Bedard and Felix are clearly better than Halladay in fantasy, but in reality it's pretty much a toss up. Lee is in no way better than Halladay in any way, unless by better you mean much, much worse. The fact that he uses "no where near" is incredibly insulting.

What makes Halladay sweet is he is able to dominate for 9 innings, that may hurt him down the road, but thats just awesome when a pitcher can do that.

I would take Doc over any M's pitcher in reality since Doc can go 8 every time out. Both Bedard and Doc's ERA's should be identical tho.

Yes that's sweet but I don't think it will hurt him down the road because it's already hurt him before and he got it corrected. In the offseason between 2003 and 2004, he did a lot fo throwing which fatigued him and caused him to have shoulder surgery to go along with an aweful year in 2004. He's said that his shoulder has been stronger since and I really think he's one of the few pitchers in today's game who would retain his dominance in a four man rotation.

I think that stat is that he's pitched a complete 10 inning game. He gives everyone in the bullpen a rest even when he doesn't have his best stuff.

Now that being said, since he goes deep, his record this year is very misleading (2-4) because there've been times he's gone 7 and given up only 3 runs but nobody around him can drive in a run.

This year? Ummm, yeah: 0.96 ERA, 5-0 record.

Career value? Hell no: but by career value, Mussina and Pettitte are probably the two top active AL starting pitchers, and we know that's no longer the case.

Halladay is a great pitcher having a good year, but thus far Cliff Lee is better in 2008.

Halladay is a better pitcher. 5 games doesn't make Cliff Lee better.

D-Backs don't have a good rotation? Webb, Haren, RJ, Owings, Gonzalez not good?

Wellemeyer has just a 3.69 xFIP this year, lower than his ERA...he's done surprisingly well.

Yeah, Germano pretty much sucks.

Peavy is great: the other three Padres starters are all better than average. Maddux throws around 27 mph these days, but an ERA of 3.76 with xFIP to match and 50% ground balls suggests that he's still a very good pitcher.

Jurrjens is posting an ERA better than any Toronto pitcher except Marcum; Glavine is better than any of the Toronto starting five by ERA.

The loss of Smoltz will hurt.

Cliff Lee HAS been that good. It's not that he's posting an ERA of 3.00 unexpectedly--his ERA is below 1.00. I certainly expect a regression to the mean over the course of a season, but I don't expect more than a 4.00 ERA the rest of the way, given his performance at that level in 2005-2006. That would be a season ERA around 3.50...and I could easily see better.

3.26 ERA his last three starts, with a 1-0 win over Toronto his last time out? :P

***

I ranked the starting rotations by SNLVAR, a metric of the starting pitchers' contribution to wins for each team. It's easy to whine about the rankings, but these are the exact ordinal ranking of contributions of each team's starters as of this morning: St Louis and San Diego way out in front, Atlanta, Cleveland, Toronto and Seattle tightly grouped behind, and Boston just a bit further back.

When one starts making subjective assessments about who's good and who isn't, heck, anything goes. Certainly Smoltz's move to the bullpen--if he can return--weakens Atlanta, in particular. But these teams are listed because they've been good: subjectively making statements like, " Cliff Lee is not this good, and I'll take D-Mac over him," doesn't erase the reality of April.

Tell me, do you expect Cliff Lee to be better than Roy Halladay in 2008?

And tell me this. Who would you rather have. Cliff Lee or Johan Santana this year?

If the answers are No, and choice A, then I'm not even going to try to argue.

Wellemeyer might have a good FIP, but he's been living dangerously. I've watched some of his starts, and you could just tell HR's are going to be a big problem for him. He can still K guys out, but the HR's and potential control problems might haunt him.

He still may be a very good pitcher, but I'd take our first 4 over Maddux.

Jurrjens has been good, but this is first full year. He's going to hit the rough patches. Glavine's xFIP is 4.54. His WHIP is 1.50, and he has a LOB% of 86%. He's yet another year older, and either injuries or a 5+ ERA will hit him this year.

If Roy Halladay doesn't throw more innings, and post a less ERA than Cliff Lee, then you can call me a dumbass.

Lee vs. Halladay

Better in May-September, 2008: Halladay
Better in all of 2008: Halladay, but it's very close.

Factoid: Roy Halladay has seen the toughest opposing batters of any AL pitcher with 30+ IP this season, with an average batter's OPS of .751. Cliff Lee has seen batters with OPS of .682, next-to-easiest in the AL this year.

Lee vs. Santana

Lee

Santana's the guy I really wanted to check out regarding opponents' quality. He's faced the NL East once each, Pittsburgh and Milwaukee, not the best-hitting teams. I was right: he's seen easy opposing batters, just as Lee has (.709 OPS).

I still think that Santana is pitching slightly injured, and that he's a candidate to self-destruct. He's enjoyed a .788 DER behind him thus far--that's certainly not going to last. His ERA isn't much different from what he posted in 2007 AL despite that luck with weak opposition batters, despite great fielding, and despite the weaker overall quality of the NL.

All that said, I'm not saying that Santana is terrible--I'm saying that I'd take a Roy Halladay-caliber pitcher over what I'm seeing from Santana, and I believe that, in 2008, Lee is roughly a Halladay-caliber pitcher.

Thanks! I'll keep that offer in mind. :D

As you said, Cliff Lee had the benefit of pitching against some of the weaker AL teams. He also had a ridiculous .195 BABIP, yea that's right. A BABIP under .250 is usually unsustainable, but a BABIP under .200 is just flat out crazy.

Cliff Lee has a 41% FB rate, and a miniscule 2.6% HR/FB rate. His stuff is not good enough to sustain such a rate, and I fully expect his HR's to rise. In Lee's best year, 2005, he had a 7.9% HR/FB. Once those HR's come, gradually they will, the runners he usually leaves on base won't be left on base. His 82% LOB rate is great, but I doubt its sustainable. Especially in the AL.

How has Cliff Lee been able to succeed? Well, one thing he has done differently for 2008 is throw more fastballs. He throws them at a 77% rate, which IMO is bad, especially considering Lee's 88-91 average fastball. He's been mixing in 3 other pitches, but he's been predominantly heavy on the fastball. An average fastball doesn't equate to the average he's held opposing hitters to, and I expect that to rise. Especially considering his Contact % is 81%.

And you mentioned Santana's .788 DER, well how about Cliff Lee's .809 DER? If your certain Santana's DER will drop, then you must be obsessed Lee's DER will drop. Even if Santana's DER drops, his power stuff still keeps him an elite, while Cliff Lee and his 88-91 fastball doesn't cut it.

On to Lee's K's and BB's we go. Lee's highest K/9 was 8.09 back in 2004, but we've never seen one higher than 7 in about 3-4 years. I doubt he sustains it. Here are the guys Cliff Lee has K'd, and their AB's beside. Stars represent guys who have a 18+% K rate.

Gomez-1
[S]Tolbert- 1
[L]Mauer- 1
[L]Kubel -2**
Monreo - 1**
Harris-2**
[S]Vidro- 1
Beltre- 1**
[L]Ibanez- 1
German-2
[L]Teahan- 1**
Butler- 1
[L]Gordon-1**
Olivo- 2**
Pena Jr. -2**
Buck-1
Brown- 2
Crosby- 2
Murphy- 1
K. Suzuki- 1
Denorfia-1
[L]Sweeney- 1**
[L]Hannahan- 1**
[L]Barton-1**

See the list? I would choose only choose about 5 guys to have an OPS over .800 and average above .270 on this list. Not the greatest hitters now are they. Oh, and he's struck out only 13% of his hitters swinging, and a lot looking. He doesn't have great stuff, and he's not going to fooling hitters much longer.


I honestly don't feel the need to justify Johan Santana, and why he'll be twice the pitcher Cliff Lee is, because it should be obvious.

Yes, but if Cliff Lee's ERA triples it will still be lower than Santana's. Both Santana and Lee have had early luck--but Santana is pitching worse than he did in 2005-2007 despite the luck, whereas Lee has been the best pitcher in MLB.

Furthermore, you mention velocity. Santana didn't reach 92 mph in his last start April 29th. Lee's velocity almost exactly matches Santana's right now; they're both peaking at 91+ mph, not reaching 92 mph.

Let's look at the two pitchers at the end of the season, consider the AL-NL differences, and see who was better.

Santana also has the best changeup in baseball, and his fastball has good movement where as Lee's is just average. And that tripling Lee's ERA thing, and how its still less than Santana's after being tripled tells me nothing about what I should expect of Cliff Lee in the future.

I feel ridiculous even arguing Lee vs. Santana.

Lee got pwnd by Wladdy. Worddddddddd.

Jayhawk obviously puts way too much stock into a small sample size. Which is odd, considering your a stats guy. But you think since Lee started out well that he's a freaking God. And you basically mentioned to EFM earlier that the Mariners suck considering they're below .500 in April. :rolleyes:

Steveox has influenced him for the worse

I'd put them as the best.

I think you're overlooking a few things, most notably that Cliff Lee was a 4.00 ERA AL starting pitcher before recent trouble with a strained abdominal muscle in 2007. But I've not compared Lee to Yahweh; I've compared him to Roy Halladay, given his big head start, and I've given a slight edge to Halladay.

Regarding Santana...as I say, let's check end-of-year results, AL vs. NL considered. I still say that Santana is damaged goods, and I know the tendency of pitchers to decline after their contract seasons. Santana's lost four miles per hour from his fastball for some reason--that's not normal at his age.

Misquoted again. :rolleyes:

I pointed out AS EFM WAS POSTING THAT THE MARINERS SUCK that he had predicted that they'd be 93-69 before the season started. I didn't post that the Mariners sucked...EFM did. :D

I still don't understand why you said that. Basically you were implying that there was no chance of us winning since we had a bad first month, considering you were mocking him for his record prediction.

That's at least what I got from it.

Basically I was reminding him that he had rudely insulted me repeatedly because HE KNEW that the Mariners were going to win 93 games in 2008, and now he's bitching about how the Mariners suck, which had been my original position.

Usually grownups don't trash-talk other grownups because of differences regarding what will happen in the future because one looks like such a complete fucking asshole when wrong if one has done that. If you'll notice, I try mightily to remain polite in these differences of opinion because there's always a chance that I might be mistaken in my prognostication.

EFM wasn't so careful. I'm not saying that he was wrong, nor am I mocking--the season isn't yet done. Thus far, I'm merely pointing out that he's calling himself wrong. :lol:

***

This thread is full of great predictions from others regarding how insane I am to suggest that that guy with a sub-1.00 ERA in the AL might be better than the guy who's quietly lost his fastball in the NL. But here's what I've done:

1) I evaluated starting rotations by their actual performance in 2008 (SNLVAR). I was ridiculed.

2) I've suggested that pitchers who start the season well may continue to excel.

This isn't idiocy nor insanity. It may go contrary to established beliefs, but suggesting that a guy with an 0.96 ERA is pitching well isn't crazy.

I'm not saying Lee isn't pitching well, but I'm saying he won't be this good....or even close, the rest of the way.

And I'm saying that if he hits his 2005-2006 established talent level, he'll post a 3.50 ERA for the season...and that if he's a little bit better, he'll be in the 3.00-3.50 range, which is the Cy Young range in the AL.

you guys are confusing me with all these big words :)

If Roy Halladay throws anthor CG and dosnt get a win he should go shot someone

he's given up 3 runs so far

Only 1 ER. Make it 8 great starts in a row.

7.1 IP, 3 hits, 1 ER, 0 BB, 7 K

And he wins.

doc is a strikeout pitcher again. looks like he wants to win the cy young again.