Ignorant Conversation of the Day (Mea Culpa)

Conversation:

Me: The Boston Red Sox's number 1 through number 5 pitchers are all better than any of the Pittsburgh Pirates' starting pitchers.

Lapsed (due to horrific play) but Lifelong Baseball Fan: Even Snell? Didn't he have good statistics?

Me: The Red Sox pitchers won games.

Lapsed but Lifelong Baseball Fan: Well look who Snell pitched for and look who they pitched for.

Me: Snell's run support was, like, 80th, in the league, and that's counting the couple of games where the Pirates put up a lot of runs.
(Editor's Note: 80th was evidently hyperbole, but if you fuss with this page, you really can have quite a bit of fun. If combing through depressing stats during another playoff-free offseason is your thing, of course.)

Lapsed but Lifelong Baseball Fan: Seriously? All their pitchers are better than ours?

Me: (dubiously) Fine. I don't really follow the American League (editor's note: too many really good baseball teams tend to make me incredibly bitter), so I'll look up the 2007 statistics online.


Here is what I discovered, using only pretty "basic" statistics because I'm lazy:

Josh Beckett: Record: 20-7, ERA 3.27, K 194, BB 40 WHIP 1.14. BAA: .245 DIPS:3.04
Commentary: Yeah. To state the starkly obvious, the Pirates had no starting pitcher close to the statistics of the majors' only 20 game winner.

Curt Schilling: Record: 9-8 ERA: 3.87, K 101 BB 23 WHIP 1.25 BAA .275 DIPS:4.06
Commentary: While his statistics are obviously not as pristine as Beckett's, and although two starting Bucco pitchers (barely) bested him when it comes to ERA, look at the BB rate. Even missing time this season, Curt Schilling is still Curt freaking Schilling. Argue as an optimistic (or delusional, depending on one's perspective) hopeful might that you might want the upside of a young pitcher with room for growth, at this present moment and in another statement of the seriously obvious, there's no starting Bucco pitcher who'd be able to take a number 2 job off Curt Schilling.


Daisuke Matsuzaka: Record: 15-12, ERA: 4.40, K 201 BB 80 WHIP 1.32, BAA .246 DIPS: 4.09
Commentary: Lots of strikeouts, and too many walks. Speaking only in terms of statistics, his statistics seem somewhat equivalent to those of year-long Ian Snell or of Tom Gorzelanny prior to his final three starts. Snell and Gorzy both edged him in ERA, but Matsuzaka holds an advantage over both in K's and in BAA. Still, depending on the identity and composition of the opposing team, in something that sort of shocked me, you might have wanted to pick and choose among Matsuzaka, Snell, and Gorzy.

Tim Wakefield: W: 17-12, ERA: 4.76, K: 110 BB:64 WHIP:1.35, BAA:.264 DIPS: 4.61
Commentary: An ERA that eerily resembles Ian Snell's 2006 ERA. Still, the WHIP is basically a match of Snell's and the BAA is the same. Considering only two statistics, if you wanted an ERA a full run lower and more strikeouts, you wanted the 2007 Ian Snell over the 2007 Tim Wakefield. But if you're considering "crafty veteran" intangibles not possessed by most youthful Bucco players, Tim Wakefield's 2007 statistics indicate he still knew how to pitch this season.

So, there you have it. The best two pitchers for the Pittsburgh Pirates this season would have been, at best, the third and fourth starting pitchers for the 96-game winning Boston Red Sox. The Pirates' best two pitchers in 2007 would have been, most likely, at best, back-of-the-rotation starters for a team that wins 96 games. However, it's highly likely that Tom Gorzelanny would have won at least 15 games, and it's pretty likely Ian Snell would have finished with a win-loss record above .500.

Just for hilarity, let's look at run support in 2007:

Beckett: 6.59

Schilling: 4.29

Matsuzaka: 5.72

Wakefield: 5.76

I'll let you guess which Bucco pitcher averaged 4.02 run support per nine innings versus 5.40 run support per nine innings, figures which ranked 42nd out of 45 eligible NL pitchers and which ranked 17th of 45 eligible NL pitchers. (Hint: It has a lot to do with the won-loss disparity between the two pitchers, though it should also be noted that the bullpen was definitely not kind to the pitcher who, according to the statistics, received more run support, although the bullpen wasn't exactly kind to the other pitcher, either.)

As a blogger/writer, I know I'm supposed to wrap some "tidy bow" to summarize this piece, but really, there's not much of a summary I can offer.


Depressing: Two of the best players for the 2007 Pittsburgh Pirates, their 2 best starting pitchers, would not and should not be the best two starting pitchers for a team that wins 96 games, based on their 2007 performance, as indicated only by statistics sans won-loss records.

Theoretically Uplifting: Two of the best players on the 2007 Pittsburgh Pirates, their 2 best starting pitchers, could play a legitimate role, one that doesn't involve merely watching and cheering, on a team that wins 96 games.

Realistically: Two of the best performers for the 2007 Pirates are not what was wrong with the 2007 team. Provided that the twin miracles of good health and no regression occur, the 2 pitchers could (a huge could, given those two previous variables I have come to count as miracles when it comes to Pirate pitchers) improve upon statistically good seasons.

Anyhow, though, I just thought of this piece as an eye-opener: Look at the statistics of the Red Sox's top 2 pitchers and think about the progress that would have to be made by Pittsburgh's top 2 pitchers. Take a gander at the Red Sox's three and four guys and think about what would need to happen to pitchers assuming the 3 and 4 spots in the Pittsburgh rotation.

From the cold, hard perspective (note Schilling still managed a winning record, albeit barely, despite low run support), look at just how good the pitching really is for a team that wins 96 games.

As for hitting? Not even going there. At least not until it comes time for "player profiles" and answering that dreaded but enlightening question of "What role would such a player, statistically speaking, have on a team that wins 90 games?"