Comparing Max Scherzer to Rick Porcello
I think an axiom of sports is that you always prefer the player you know to the player you don't know. You end up overrating your players and overrating your prospects, while underrating other players and underrating other prospects. Maybe not on purpose, but it just seems to work out that way.
So I shouldn't have been shocked when quite a few Bless You Boys readers were confused over why I thought Max Scherzer is clearly the Tigers' No. 2 pitcher, while they are confident that Rick Porcello is the second-best on the team.
Porcello, after all, had a remarkable rookie campaign. His month of May was so incredible he was achieving things that put his name in the same sentence of Cy Young or Doc Gooden. After a stumble, he was the Tigers' most consistent and successful starter during the final six weeks of the season and stepped onto the national stage with an incredible six-inning performance in Game 163. All before he could even legally drink alcohol.
When you've got a guy like that on your team, you're not even noticing the headlines and accolades of a 25-year-old in the National League doing some pretty nice things himself.
He started his MLB career by throwing 4-1/3 perfect innings for a major league record for relievers. Seven of those were strikeouts. The Astros didn't get the ball in play until the sixth batter, and just one batter got the ball out of the infield, Scout.com reports.
SI's Tom Verducci wrote:
Scherzer has big-time stuff. Last year at age 24 he averaged more than a strikeout an inning over 30 starts -- something that's been done by only 20 other pitchers that young in baseball history.
Dave Golebieski noted at Fangraphs Scherzer's 3.88 xFIP ranked him in the top 20 among NL starters and wrote:
There’s little doubt that Scherzer has the talent to become one of the top 20-30 starters in the majors. Few pitchers combine his ability to miss bats with quality control. The question is: can he hold up physically?
And yes, Scherzer pitched in the National League, but he also pitched in ballparks favorable to hitters. Sixteen of his starts came at home at Chase Field (which saw 19.3% more runs scored than average), while another two came at Coors Field (24.7% more) and one at Sun Life Stadium (13.6% more). That's two-thirds of his starts at three of the top four hitters parks.
So it's not as if Scherzer is exactly a slouch either. From a Tigers fan's standpoint, this is kind of a win-win situation. Well, maybe.
Looking at some of the projection systems shows the advantage sits soundly in Scherzer's favor, while Porcello could be in for a reality check.
Looking at Fangraphs for freely available information:
For Scherzer, Bill James' system sees a 3.58 FIP translating to a 3.80 ERA and 194 strikeouts in 180 innings. It also believes his home run/9 innings rate will drop to 0.80 from 0.99, likely because Comerica Park supresses home runs better than average. CHONE has him with a 4.00 FIP, 4.27 ERA and 127 strikeouts in 137 innings. Clearly, it has injury worries.
For Porcello, the James' system has a 4.71 FIP and 4.25 ERA. It's got a slight uptick in striketouts to 105 in 190 innings, but Porcello isn't a strikeout pitcher, so no big deal. The HR/9 rate remains steady at 1.20. CHONE projects more strikeouts, but a 4.93 FIP and 5.08 ERA to go along with 69 strikeouts in 124 innings. So it's pretty conservative about the inning total with Porcello, too.
Baseball Prospectus' data is proprietary, but suffice it to say it shows similar projections for both players.
"Ah!" you might think. "What about the ground ball rate? Don't these projection systems underrate ground ball pitchers? Porcello will do better than they think."
Don't be so sure. Using B-Pro's newly created SIERA statistic, which uses consistent peripheral statistics so (they contend) it should be a useful tool for projection. SIERA includes ground balls. BYB's Mike Rogers used the formula to look at some of the Tigers' pitchers from last year and found Porcello to have a 4.59 SIERA. Scherzer's was 3.53.
Obviously, both pitchers have such a limited major league track record, so it's hard to say their peripheral stats will remain exactly the same year-to-year. Both should experience some growth. My personal belief, shared by some others, is that Porcello will show an increased strikeout rate this year. He showed his secondary pitches are good for swings-and-misses, but he didn't use them all that often in 2009 because he was said to be limiting his pitch count. In Game 163 -- with no reason to hold back anything -- he struck out eight. Many hope that is the true Porcello.
Wishful thinking, to some extent. But he's clearly a good young pitcher who should continue to improve.
That doesn't mean a step back isn't possible in 2010. He did throw 50 more innings than his previous season, which was played at Advanced-A, rather a step down from the MLB. That could have lingering effects and cause a "sophomore slump."
Scherzer, meanwhile, was traded because the Diamondbacks were not certain his mechanics can stand up to full season after full season after full season. He threw 61 more professional innings in 2009 than he did in 2008 -- and he spent half of that season in Triple-A. He, too, could see lingering effects.
Or both players could be healthy and continue to show growth in their games. That, obviously, is the hope around these parts. But it's only a hope at this point.
In any case, both players should "wow" Tigers fans for years to come. Just don't be surprised if Scherzer has the better season in 2010.
37 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
For me, the only reason to pick Porcello over Scherzer is if you think Max will be hurt. I don’t, so I’ll take Scherzer in 2010, 2011, 2012, etc etc. I just think he’s the better pitcher. I don’t think Porcello will ever reach Scherzer’s abilities to strike batters out and if given the choice between a high K pitcher and a high-GB pitcher, I’ll take the K’s.
My old blog is Tigers By The Numbers.
Now I write at Bless You Boys.
Like music? See what I'm listening to at my Last.fm account.
In a vacuum I totally agree
But there was this one guy who sticks out in my mind who had a pretty serviceable career, and he only struck out about 6 guys per 9. Greg something or other. If Porcello is going to have that kind of a career, I wouldn’t mind.
NO
BAD CHRIS.
Greg Maddux is one of several players that should never be used as a comparable pitcher (along with Jamie Moyer). His control and knowledge of pitching ability is second to none, and frankly we’ll never see a pitcher remotely like him. Doc Holliday is probably Porcello’s ultimate upside.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Feb 27, 2010 6:28 PM EST up reply actions
I picture you with a rolled up newspaper
or maybe a rolled up Bill James Annual.
by Kurt Mensching on Feb 27, 2010 6:39 PM EST up reply actions
My BP 2010 or Sickles Prospect Book
They’re the closest large heavy objects to me.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Feb 28, 2010 4:57 AM EST up reply actions
I was talking about Greg Cadaret
Geez. LOL. No seriously, though, I wasn’t comparing Porcello in any way to Maddux stylistically. The larger point being the we all too often worship at the altar of K, when there is a species of pitcher who keeps the walks down as well as the ball on the ground and in the park that can be successful. Porcello’s ceiling probably isn’t even as high as that of Halladay (Roy has won a Cy Young – I never see Porcello doing that).
I also should've added that
if K’s were the be-all and end-all of pitching, Daniel Cabrera would be freaking awesome (at least the early career model).
I'd say his ceiling is Halladay
Insofar as the best he could ever do is potential HOF’er and Cy winner Halladay- he has that kind of an arm. He might end up as our Mark Buehrle or Derek Lowe, which wouldn’t be shabby at all.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Feb 28, 2010 4:58 AM EST up reply actions
Porcello,
I don’t think he is the clear No. 3 at all. There are some things you see when you watch a game that just sticks out, and this is a big, calm, smart kid out there. Maturity, pitch selection, etc. I love the fire. He doesn’t wear it on his sleave like K-Rod, but you can see it bubbling up some times.
No two arms are created equal and very very seldom can rookie SP do what he did down the stretch. Sherzer at 3 will help take off pressure and let him assimilate to his surroundings, and if he is any kind of injury risk why slot him at two? If he goes down who do you want to fill in to match against other teams no. 2’s?
Remember Porcello being one of the few Tigers (IMO) to retaliate when we went through that BRUTAL stretch against Texas, Boston, White Sox, etc. where everyone on our team it seemed was getting HBP. THAN COMES THE YOUK SLAM for Porcello! Thats the mentality of my No.2 SP. A guy that when JV is down, wanted to and COULD elevate his game in HUGE match-ups.
Sherzer may be better statistically, but Porcello can beat teams in our division! FINALLY! Everyone knows I love my fangraphs, but I kinda tend to think like La Russa, some stats you have to ignore and just go with what you have witnessed.
by Fien SHOULD CLOSE on Feb 27, 2010 2:40 PM EST up reply actions
When Scherzer wins 14 games in a season
you can mention him in the same sentence with Porcello. But as of right now, Scherzer is No. 3.
because clearly it was scherzer's fault his team sucked
we aren’t really using wins to quantify a pitcher, are we?
by Kurt Mensching on Feb 27, 2010 4:05 PM EST up reply actions
Wins are one measure
not the ultimate, by any means, but there’s definitely a knack to winning, IMO. Jack Morris had it. Porcello also had the better ERA, OBA, and WPA. An examination of the stats shows the two pitchers much closer than I would have thought, but I have more confidence in Porcello both in 2010 and going forward. I have some concern about Scherzer’s delivery and the impact on his health.
I'd slot Max at 2
this year atleast, I think he will have a better year than Ricky P. He’s got a couple more years under his belt, and he should be able to put up some good numbers pitching at Copa. Down the road I think Porcello will eventually be better, but I sure am excited to have our 1-2-3 around for quite a few years. I think the big difference maker this year will come down to Bondo… he needs to bounce back and be effective because those 4 and 5 spots worry me right now.
Not a big issue
Personally, this is a non-issue to me, at least until (and if) the Tigers make the playoffs. That’s when rotation order really matters. I’m just glad they’re both on the team.
That said, I’d probably slot Porcello second because he’s not the new addition to the team. He’d probably be fine with a shift back to 3, but I wouldn’t risk chemistry issues right now. Scherzer is the new guy to the team, and he’s the one that has to earn that 2nd spot in the rotation, not the other way around (in my opinion). Oh, and Porcello has the hip-toss advantage over Scherzer (1-0).
I don't know there would be a chemistry issue, since Porcello is already used to the third spot
If EJax had come back, I think he still would have been the #2 starter, and Scherzer was essentially brought in to replace Jackson. I don’t know if Porcello ever had that #2 spot locked, either in his mind, or in Leyland’s.
Official BYB Juju Consultant...now accepting rally creature applications!
One benefit Scherzer had, though,
was pitching 75.1 innings against the five worst offenses in the NL. Three of those teams (Astros, Pirates, and Padres) averaged less than 4 runs per game over the whole season. In those 75.1 innings, he had a 3.82 ERA. In the remaining 89 innings against the top 11 offenses, he had a 4.45 ERA.
Also.
I don’t think it would be unfair to say the top 11 offenses in the NL are more consistent with what Scherzer will face in the AL. Against those top 11, he had a K/9 of 8.05, even with the pitcher in the lineup. So if in 2010 Scherzer has a K/9 closer to 7.5, I won’t be surprised. Based on the archived games I watched him pitch, he’ll have to locate his slider better if he wants to meet any of the strikeout projections on Fangraphs.
by StringTheory on Feb 26, 2010 10:30 PM EST up reply actions
That's a pretty valid point
but the Royals and Indians probably aren’t going to score a whole lot of runs, either. And at some point he’ll be up against the likes of Seattle or Oakland. Yeah, there’s pretty crappy offenses in the AL, too.
Does anyone thing Jim Leyland knows what xFIP or SIERA even are?
Porcello has the better ERA and more wins. He’s the #2 starter. That’s just how it is.
I think the general consensus
at least as far as I can tell, is that Max is a welcome addition to the Tiger Beat.
Kid Rick 4 lyfe, though.
max fits in nicely
and as Alli points out he is a welcome addition to the Tigers. But for now, there is no comparison to Kid Rick.
Welcome to Detroit, NO sissies allowed
by Detroitchik on Feb 27, 2010 12:57 AM EST up reply actions
Max has awesome eyes.
Kool faktor 10.
Also, his response to his best pitch wins points. If he had said: the pitch that makes Nick Punto cry and retire, he’d be my favorite player of all time.
Competition
I think this competition between the young pitchers could be the factor that helps the Tigs make it to the post season this year. With so many younger pitchers taking the mound I can’t help but feel that friendly rivalries between the young stars will help them develop as players. Could you imagine a season of Porcello and Scherzer trying to one up each other every game they take the mound, all for the #2 spot behind Verlander?
Pitch Count
In some cases, I’d want Porcello as my number 2 because he’s more likely to get deeper into ball games than Scherzer.
Scherzer will probably throw his 100 pitch in the 5th or 6th inning in most games, so we’ll have to reserve our bullpen the game before Max starts. It just so happens that the bullpen should be good and rested after Verlander starts, so I’d probably slot Scherzer at #2. It’s not because Scherzer is better than Porcello, it’s because the bullpen will need to get their work in. I think Porcello is going to be the most efficient starting pitcher on the team.
Max will be #2
Didn’t think there was a doubt, we were trading #2 for a #2.
by 77bestrookieclassever on Feb 27, 2010 3:46 AM EST reply actions
Mixin' it up
Projection systems aside…
Naming a “No. 2” or “No. 3” starter really is not that big of an issue, but for the sake of mixin’ it up I’d probably put Porcello after Verlander to give opponents a different look the next day – that’s probably the best strategy when the talent is so tight-knit.
Scherzer is most like JV in that he’s a power pitcher. While Porcello technically throws more fastballs according to FanGraphs, it’s slower and his two-seamer moves much like a screw ball almost, which he relies on that and his other off-speed the most. Pitching is all about keeping hitters off balance so what better way to do that than by showing the cheese one day, craftier workmanship the next, and followed up by the cheese again?
Detroit Bad Boys- SB Nation's Detroit Pistons Blog
Twitter
to add on to that....
I agree with Kurt’s closing sentiments —specifically in that you shouldn’t be surprised if Scherzer has a better year in 2010.
Either way, I’m giddy and looking forward to our 1-3 punch.
Detroit Bad Boys- SB Nation's Detroit Pistons Blog
Twitter
sorry,
i would have added my post to this one instead of Mike’s if I would have read further. it just adds to the argument that Porcello may be our better option for No. 2 even if his stats aren’t as good as Sherzer’s. I like the point you make, I didn’t even think of mixing up looks….
by Fien SHOULD CLOSE on Feb 27, 2010 3:03 PM EST up reply actions
Big picture
I think you’re happy if you have either Scherzer or Porcello. The good thing is, the Tigers have both!
good stuff kurt
sounds like we got a keeper in the trade. i knew he was a strikeout pitcher, and i think porcello will get more k’s as he gains experience…lets just hope they both stay healthy…cant wait for april !! Go Tigers
For the record
I really don’t give a rat’s arse who is slotted second or third in the rotation. I think that even the change up of styles thing from day to day is over rated. I think the the “need” for a lefty in the rotation is purely ficticious. But in terms of whether Porcello or Scherzer will be more productive in 2010 and beyond, I’d bet on Porcello. I think that this kid “gets it”, big time! I did get to see Scherzer pitch quite a bit, living out here on the left coast in So Cal (behind the orange curtain). No question that Max has one massive upside, but I get the feeling the the possibilities are much larger than the probabilities with Scherzer. It’s just a feeling that I get about his ability to command his pitches, about his over reliance on the heater and how far a pitcher can get relying on the one ball so heavily. Give me a mix of at least 40% change ups and sliders (Max has basically three pitches), and I’ll be more impressed.
I see the distinct possibility of a transition to the AL where hitters take the heater away from him, forcing him to throw secondary offerings, and that’s what will determine his present and future success in the show. Like Bondo, he thinks of the change as an offering that he can mix in against lefties. I’d like to see him not afraid to bust a slider in on their hands, or toss a change to a righty, even if it’s just a “show me” pitch to keep em guessing. Let them sit on the heater, and I think he’ll struggle.
Porcello, on the other hand, doesn’t try to blow every batter away. He understands that, to get the max innings out of his deal, he needs to get quick outs, and a K can be a costly effort in terms of getting worked.
good point about K's.
I think thats what screwed with JV his down year, trying to get every hitter out instead of pitching to contact in certain situations, and skyrocketed his pitch count early in games…
by Fien SHOULD CLOSE on Feb 28, 2010 12:30 AM EST up reply actions
Wait what?
JV’s problem that year was because he was pitching to contact (thank you, Chuck Hernandez). His velocity was down, and he got hammered most of the year.
Last year he got his velocity back, threw a ton of pitches (there were many instances where his pitch count skyrocketed early in games), and had one of the best pitching seasons in Tigers history.
Strikeout pitchers throw a ton of pitches, and are usually not that efficient. That’s just how it works.
Conventional wisdom fail
Did you know that Top 10 pitchers in pitches/inning over the past 3 seasons are as follows (K/9 rate in parenthesis):
Scott Kazmir 17.8 (9.3)
Barry Zito 17.3 (6.4)
Doug Davis 17.2 (6.7)
Edwin Jackson 17.0 (6.4)
Gil Meche 17.0 (7.0)
Justin Verlander 16.8 (8.6)
Ian Snell 16.8 (7.0)
Jered Weaver 16.7 (7.2)
Chad Billingsley 16.7 (8.6)
Carlos Zambrano 16.6 (7.2)
The lesson? Pitchers who don’t throw a lot of strikes are usually not that efficient. It has nothing to do with how many strikeouts they have.

by 



















