PDA

View Full Version : Mark Buehrle by the numbers


JackParkman
05-25-2005, 03:14 PM
Interesting blurb in Barry Rozner's column in the Daily Herald today.

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/rozner.asp?id=53853



E-mailer Whitley from Ravenswood did his own digging, and he makes this comparison of Mark Buehrle “to three certain Hall of Famers from the preceding generation of starting pitchers whose early years make for a fair comparison’’ today:

•Greg Maddux (60-53) in his first 136 games started, 911 innings, 3.68 ERA and 1.36 WHIP.

•Tom Glavine (53-52) in 139 games started, 893 innings, 3.81 ERA and 1.28 WHIP.

•Roger Clemens (78-34) in 139 games started, 1031 innings, 3.05 ERA and 1.12 WHIP.

•Buehrle (69-45) in 139 games started, 987 innings, 3.76 ERA and 1.24 WHIP.

mikehuff
05-25-2005, 03:19 PM
Whitley from Ravenswood? That's the same guy that would alway email to to the Murph and Fred show on the Score. Murph had a ****** for that guy.

1951Campbell
05-25-2005, 03:24 PM
E-mailer Whitley from Ravenswood did his own digging, and he makes this comparison of Mark Buehrle “to three certain Hall of Famers from the preceding generation of starting pitchers whose early years make for a fair comparison’’ today:

What? No Kerry Wood comparison?

JackParkman
05-25-2005, 03:41 PM
What? No Kerry Wood comparison?

For good measure:

Kerry Wood: 142 games started, 902 IP, 59-41, 3.62 ERA, 1.26 WHIP.

Frater Perdurabo
05-25-2005, 04:01 PM
•Greg Maddux (60-53) in his first 136 games started, 911 innings, 3.68 ERA and 1.36 WHIP.

•Tom Glavine (53-52) in 139 games started, 893 innings, 3.81 ERA and 1.28 WHIP.

•Roger Clemens (78-34) in 139 games started, 1031 innings, 3.05 ERA and 1.12 WHIP.

•Buehrle (69-45) in 139 games started, 987 innings, 3.76 ERA and 1.24 WHIP.

I knew Buehrle compared well to Maddux, but I didn't realize he compared that favorably! Think about it. Buehrle's ERA is just .08 higher than Maddux's; and Maddux began in the NL (no DH) and in the pre-juiced era.

The Wimperoo
05-25-2005, 04:09 PM
I knew Buehrle compared well to Maddux, but I didn't realize he compared that favorably! Think about it. Buehrle's ERA is just .08 higher than Maddux's; and Maddux began in the NL (no DH) and in the pre-juiced era.

He's always played in the NL which is obviously a plus to your ERA. I don't have the stats in front of me, but isn't Atlanta a pretty good pitcher's park?

BaseballTonyght
05-25-2005, 04:17 PM
...isn't Atlanta a pretty good pitcher's park?

Negative, very good hitters park.

mantis1212
05-25-2005, 04:22 PM
Interesting blurb in Barry Rozner's column in the Daily Herald today.

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/rozner.asp?id=53853



E-mailer Whitley from Ravenswood did his own digging, and he makes this comparison of Mark Buehrle “to three certain Hall of Famers from the preceding generation of starting pitchers whose early years make for a fair comparison’’ today:

•Greg Maddux (60-53) in his first 136 games started, 911 innings, 3.68 ERA and 1.36 WHIP.

•Tom Glavine (53-52) in 139 games started, 893 innings, 3.81 ERA and 1.28 WHIP.

•Roger Clemens (78-34) in 139 games started, 1031 innings, 3.05 ERA and 1.12 WHIP.

•Buehrle (69-45) in 139 games started, 987 innings, 3.76 ERA and 1.24 WHIP.

This really is pretty amazing, and I think proves the fact the Buehrle is the most underrated pitcher in baseball.

Chicago83
05-25-2005, 04:31 PM
No doubt barring any major injury or huge decline in ability Buerhle will be the next Maddux. I remember when they had the Clemens/Maddux 300-game winner matchup earlier in the season and they were talking about if somebody will ever win 300 again. They suggested Santana, Prior, and Bonderman. That's a joke I don't see any of those guys making it except maybe Prior and I doubt it. Buerhle is the only young pitcher right now who has any chance of reaching 300. Buerhle is consistent and does not throw hard so he has a good chance of remaining healthy.

Looking at those comparisions to Maddux and Glavine really surprised me, I didn't realize Buerhle actually had better stats. That's unbelievalbe for a guy in the AL in the home run era. It also made me realize just how good Clemens is, one of the best ever no doubt. I hope he pitches until he's 45 like Nolan Ryan.

MRKARNO
05-25-2005, 05:28 PM
If Buehrle really takes off last year and posts a career year (better than 2001 or what he's on pace for right now), then I think he's on his way to a similar career path as Glavine. His career ERA+, an index which puts all ERAs in perspective based on how they compare to the average ERA in the league and the home ballparks of the pitcher, is already higher than that of Glavine (125 vs 121). I hesitate to say that he's the next Maddux because of what Maddux did in 94 and 95, posting sub-2 ERAs and allowing 4 HRs in 202 innings in that 94 season, but he has it in him to win 300 games and to go to Cooperstown.

One thing that a lot of these pitchers had in common is that they started taking off at this point in their respective careers. A similar year to what Halladay had in his Cy Young year (250+ IP, 20+ wins and a low 3's ERA) would put Buehrle in a great position.

ExpoPuddingHead
05-25-2005, 07:18 PM
I think that Buehrle is definently most comparable to Glavine, not only by their numbers. They are very similar pitchers, leftys with a ton of pitches but no main pitch who use mostly guile to get people out. I can see Buehrle having a career similar to Glavine, out side of him leaivng the Whitesox to go to like the Rockies like when Glavine went to the mets.

Chicago83
05-25-2005, 07:21 PM
Take a look at Jon.

•Jon Garland (54-52) in his first 136 games started, 854 innings, 4.52 ERA and 1.41 WHIP.

He compares very well to Glavine, other than the ERA which can be attributed to the AL and the last few years in a home run hitting park. Garland and Buehrle the next Maddux and Glavine???

MRKARNO, when I said Buehrle would be the next Maddux I almost forgot about those two Cy Young years Maddux had, although I have no reason to believe Buehrle can't do the same. I doubt it will be with a sub 2.00 ERA, but I think Mark has a Cy young award in his future.

All of this is of course speculation, as I'm sure there have been many guys who have started their careers off this well only to fade into obscurity, but it's fun to dream.

Hendu
05-25-2005, 08:39 PM
I honestly could see Buehrle winning 300 games. He leads the league in innings pitched every year and throws strikes more consistently than almost any pitcher I've ever seen. Like Maddux, he should be able to win 15 games per year for the next 10-15 years. However, DJ and Donn Pall had a good point last night: when he gets 2 strikes on the hitter, he still throws pitches over the plate instead of making the hitter chase sthg outside of the strike zone. If he starts doing this more often, he would easily be in the 5-10 k's per game range.

Anyways, we're lucky to have him and I would take Mark over just about any pitcher in baseball, and definitely over any of the over-hyped pitchers on the other side of town.

MRKARNO
05-25-2005, 08:45 PM
If he starts doing this more often, he would easily be in the 5-10 k's per game range.

That's a small range you got there. :D:

White Sox Josh
05-25-2005, 09:16 PM
Negative, very good hitters park.Actually Turner Field is a pitchers park. However Fulton County Stadium was a very good hitters park.

DSpivack
05-25-2005, 09:26 PM
Actually Turner Field is a pitchers park. However Fulton County Stadium was a very good hitters park.

Not to mention the Urinal.

Frater Perdurabo
05-25-2005, 09:28 PM
I honestly could see Buehrle winning 300 games. He leads the league in innings pitched every year and throws strikes more consistently than almost any pitcher I've ever seen. Like Maddux, he should be able to win 15 games per year for the next 10-15 years. However, DJ and Donn Pall had a good point last night: when he gets 2 strikes on the hitter, he still throws pitches over the plate instead of making the hitter chase sthg outside of the strike zone. If he starts doing this more often, he would easily be in the 5-10 k's per game range.

Anyways, we're lucky to have him and I would take Mark over just about any pitcher in baseball, and definitely over any of the over-hyped pitchers on the other side of town.

I think both Buehrle and Garland have the potential to win 300 games each. Both started their MLB careers and began accummulating double-digit win totals at very early ages. Both don't rely on overpowering heat to strike out a lot of guys; both use good location and let opposing hitters make contact for lots of ground ball outs. This allows both of them to avoid high pitch counts even when going deep into games. Over the course of a long career, that adds up to thousands of fewer pitches thrown and much less stress on their arms.

If they stick with the plan, the Sox really are positioned to make a decade-long run much like the 90s Braves. They (like the 90s Braves) are built on great starting pitching with guys at the top of the rotation who don't put much stress on their arms and generally can be counted on to remain healthy from year to year. As long as they have great top-of-the-rotation starting pitching (Buehrle, Garland, Garcia, eventually McCarthy....), they consistently will be able to develop back-of-the-rotation starters, bullpen guys and position players (again, much like the 90s Braves). Consistent winning will translate into higher revenues and higher payrolls, enabling the Sox to fill holes with free agents as needed. I'm not saying it necessarily will happen, but right now they have the foundation for a long run atop the AL Central.

White Sox Josh
05-25-2005, 09:35 PM
I honestly could see Buehrle winning 300 games. He leads the league in innings pitched every year and throws strikes more consistently than almost any pitcher I've ever seen. Like Maddux, he should be able to win 15 games per year for the next 10-15 years. However, DJ and Donn Pall had a good point last night: when he gets 2 strikes on the hitter, he still throws pitches over the plate instead of making the hitter chase sthg outside of the strike zone. If he starts doing this more often, he would easily be in the 5-10 k's per game range.

Anyways, we're lucky to have him and I would take Mark over just about any pitcher in baseball, and definitely over any of the over-hyped pitchers on the other side of town.I agree! Out of all of the pitchers that are under 30 he, Hudson, and Santana (last year was 1st full year of being a starter) have the best chance.

MRKARNO
05-25-2005, 09:57 PM
I think both Buehrle and Garland have the potential to win 300 games each. Both started their MLB careers and began accummulating double-digit win totals at very early ages. Both don't rely on overpowering heat to strike out a lot of guys; both use good location and let opposing hitters make contact for lots of ground ball outs. This allows both of them to avoid high pitch counts even when going deep into games. Over the course of a long career, that adds up to thousands of fewer pitches thrown and much less stress on their arms.

If they stick with the plan, the Sox really are positioned to make a decade-long run much like the 90s Braves. They (like the 90s Braves) are built on great starting pitching with guys at the top of the rotation who don't put much stress on their arms and generally can be counted on to remain healthy from year to year. As long as they have great top-of-the-rotation starting pitching (Buehrle, Garland, Garcia, eventually McCarthy....), they consistently will be able to develop back-of-the-rotation starters, bullpen guys and position players (again, much like the 90s Braves). Consistent winning will translate into higher revenues and higher payrolls, enabling the Sox to fill holes with free agents as needed. I'm not saying it necessarily will happen, but right now they have the foundation for a long run atop the AL Central.

Well to make this even a possibility, the Sox would need to lock up Garland and Buehrle for a long time. I know there's a taboo against giving pitchers a guarenteed contract more than 3 years in advance, but the Sox should:

A. Get rid of Buehrle's '07 option and replace it with an extension through 2009 with an option for 2010

B. Sign Garland to a 3 year contract through 2008 with an '09 option

C. Put a low priority on resigning Pauly if it means that A and B cannot happen

I am most concerned about A. Even if it means 10-12 mil a year. Buehrle must be extended for a very long time. There shouldnt be many concerns as he's been consistant and healthy. Losing Buehrle after 2007 and allowing him to pitch part of his prime years in another city would be as big a mistake as the Cubs losing out on Maddux in his prime to Atlanta.

WagMan
05-25-2005, 10:05 PM
The last thing I want to see is Buehrle winning his 300th as a Cardinal. We need to pay him and pay him now!

White Sox Josh
05-25-2005, 10:35 PM
Well to make this even a possibility, the Sox would need to lock up Garland and Buehrle for a long time. I know there's a taboo against giving pitchers a guarenteed contract more than 3 years in advance, but the Sox should:

A. Get rid of Buehrle's '07 option and replace it with an extension through 2009 with an option for 2010

B. Sign Garland to a 3 year contract through 2008 with an '09 option

C. Put a low priority on resigning Pauly if it means that A and B cannot happen

I am most concerned about A. Even if it means 10-12 mil a year. Buehrle must be extended for a very long time. There shouldnt be many concerns as he's been consistant and healthy. Losing Buehrle after 2007 and allowing him to pitch part of his prime years in another city would be as big a mistake as the Cubs losing out on Maddux in his prime to Atlanta.Offer Buehrle the contract that they offered Colon. What was it like 3yr/36Mil?

BaseballTonyght
05-26-2005, 11:35 AM
Actually Turner Field is a pitchers park. However Fulton County Stadium was a very good hitters park.

Bah, the Hawkaroo is omniscient. Doubter :o:

hold2dibber
05-26-2005, 12:25 PM
A. Get rid of Buehrle's '07 option and replace it with an extension through 2009 with an option for 2010

B. Sign Garland to a 3 year contract through 2008 with an '09 option

C. Put a low priority on resigning Pauly if it means that A and B cannot happen

I am most concerned about A. Even if it means 10-12 mil a year. Buehrle must be extended for a very long time. There shouldnt be many concerns as he's been consistant and healthy. Losing Buehrle after 2007 and allowing him to pitch part of his prime years in another city would be as big a mistake as the Cubs losing out on Maddux in his prime to Atlanta.

Exactly, perfectly, absolutely right. I'd even sign Buehrle through 2010 with a 2011 option. It's a risky move, of course, as any long term contract is for a pitcher, but he's the perfect candidate for taking such a risk (young, healthy, low injury risk (knock on wood), great leader, great teammate, great pitcher).

ondafarm
05-26-2005, 12:29 PM
He's always played in the NL which is obviously a plus to your ERA. I don't have the stats in front of me, but isn't Atlanta a pretty good pitcher's park?

Considering that Maddux broke in with the Flubs, does it matter?

Frater Perdurabo
05-26-2005, 02:10 PM
Exactly, perfectly, absolutely right. I'd even sign Buehrle through 2010 with a 2011 option. It's a risky move, of course, as any long term contract is for a pitcher, but he's the perfect candidate for taking such a risk (young, healthy, low injury risk (knock on wood), great leader, great teammate, great pitcher).

What I would do is sign Buehrle to a 3-year contract and then work out a side agreement with him to renegotiate every offseason for a new three-year contract, so he's always locked up for the next three years. Let me explain:

This offseason, sign him to a new three year contract for 2006, 2007 and 2008.

In December 2006, tear up the contract signed the year before and sign him to a new deal for 2007, 2008 and 2009.

In December 2007, tear up the contract signed the year before and sign him to a new deal for 2008, 2009 and 2010.

This way, he's always got three years of security and gets rewarded for having a great season, while the Sox aren't hamstrung for 5+ years should he suffer a career-ending injury at some point. But Buehrle also is protected in case he has a mediocre year because he's still got three years of security because he doesn't have to sign a new deal if he doesn't want to do so.