The Phrase "Big Game Pitcher" Should be Outlawed Forever at BF.net

[pitchleague]

I would definitely keep Suppan around as a #5 pitcher. I just wish his salary wasn't so high. The guy makes 30+ starts for 10 years in a row--that's one thing you look for in a pitcher, a guy that can go every day. Sure he has his ups and his downs and his pretty mediocre numbers, but it's a rubber arm pitcher that is good for a 5th spot in the rotation.

 

I highly doubt that he's going anywhere as his salary will scare everyone away. I'll take him every 5th day with the occasional skipped start and pray that those are the days that the offense will go off against other teams' #5 starters.

[rluzinski]

I didn't really mean this to turn into a "evaluate Suppan" thread. I'm simply talking about how pitchers like him can become overvalued by fans and other teams by picking up a "big game pitcher" label. It's pretty obvious that someone important in the Brewers organization did just that when Suppan was signed and it's probably why I had to suffer through watching him start game 4 today. That's the only explanation I can come up with for why he would have been given the start, especially with Gallardo available.

 

I find it odd that the person who chooses to call CC Sabathia "terrible" is often the one to step to Ben Sheets' defense injury after injury that he sustains.

 

I think everyone else knew what I was talking about but I was talking about their respective starts in the NLDS. I should have just said great and terrible results, anyway. CC had a bad start and having limited rest probably didn't help him. I'm not going to hold that against him. He's still far and away my first choice for a big game. Bush is a mediocre pitcher that pitched pretty well yesterday but that doesn't make him a big game pitcher.

 

So, you can rest easy tonight knowing that I don't think CC is terrible.

[AdvantageSchneider]

Do people on this board apply that term that much to Suppan? I think it's more of the mainstream media that does that then anyone here.

[rluzinski]

I won't pretend to know what percentage but sure. When Suppan was signed, a great deal of the people who were in favor of it sighted his "big game pitching" as a main factor. There were even a few who wanted Suppan to pitch game 1 because "that's what he was signed for."

[logan82]

Please add "innings eater" to the list also.

[phxMILWfan]

I understand rluzinski's point. My biggest issue is how people view #4 and 5 starters. I've always been disappointed with that. From Ned sending the Dave Bush's and Wes Obermueller's out for another inning when taking them out after 6 innings 1 or 2 runs would do wonders for their confidence. How many times have we seen a Dave Bush type hit for him self in the bottom of the sixth, make an out, then give up a hit to the first hitter and then get pulled? It was maddening. If these types of pitchers would be removed in a positive way, they feel better about their start and the bullpen comes in to the bases empty. I thought one of Ned's biggest faults was this scenario. I see other managers do it too, don't want this to turn into a Ned bashing thread. I hope I've made my point about back of the rotation starters being treated as such and appreciated for what they bring to the team instead of complained about because they aren't staff aces.

[Tbadder]

It is true there are big game pitchers. It is also true this is a temporary designation. Just like life. Usually we're dead, but for one stirring moment we're alive, and it counts for something. Lets pretend that Bush continued to be a hot pitcher and the Crew took the World Series. He would be a big game pitcher. It is measurable; it is important. It doesn't make it less real because it won't happen again. And isn't it a fact statistically that if something happens it is more likely to happen again, than if something never happened and then suddenly appeared? So the designation "big game pitcher" would seem reasonable even if it is flawed (like all performance).

[rluzinski]

"Lets pretend that Bush continued to be a hot pitcher and the Crew took the World Series. He would be a big game pitcher."

 

The correct thing to say is that Bush was a big time pitcher in the 2008 playoffs. To say "is", implies that his 2008 performance suggests that he should continue to perform better than his career norms in important games. An innate skill. I don't think that would be a very fair assumption.

 

I think baseball fans do not always understand how important the is/was distinction is. Bill Hall was clutch in 2005. Player X has killed this team, in the past. Pitcher Y has been great on the road this year. Descriptive, not necessarily predictive.

 

"I think that if the phrase "Big Game Pitcher" is outlawed, that the phrase "mid-season acquisitions are only worth a win or two at most" probably will be as well."

 

If that's aimed at my CC estimate (which seems like a pretty fair assumption), that's a a pretty big distortion of my conclusions. Here's the post:

 

http://rluzinski.blogspot...hia-be-worth-in-wins.html

 

First of all, I said "worth closer to 2.5 wins". Second, as I tried to explain in the original CC thread, there are all kinds of statistical noise built into this kind of estimates. If I EVER gave the impression that I knew exactly how many wins he would net the Brewers in 2008, I apologize. I didn't think it needed to be said as I most certainly can not see into the future. Even if god came down from the heavens and shared with me every matchup CC would see and every probability of success associated with it, it would still just be an estimate. Play the season twice and you might get 2 wins the first time and 4 wins the next. But play the season a million times and this is what we would expect on average. But as far as I know, god hasn't whispered into my ear regarding this topic, so I have to fight statistical error AND the error of my assumptions.

 

I used a 3.0 ERA assumption. Should I have used something lower? I don't think so but maybe? I've never seen statistical evidence of a "changing leagues" bonus but maybe there is one? Not one that's strong enough to come up with an expected CC ERA of 1.65, right? Should I not have assumed that he would be replacing a 4.75 ERA pitcher? At the time, it was a tough call who he would even be replacing. Considering the arms the Brewers had in the bullpen, I think 4.75 was reasonable. Average 7 IP a start? He ended up averaging 7-2/3 (which is amazing). I used 15 starts, not 17. No way to know that, either. You use the information you have at the time, just like everyone else's estimates evidently did.

 

Is this just a misunderstanding or what?

[DuWayne Steurer]

Russ, I think some people just like it when you're wrong.........even when you're not.

 

There really was no way at all to predict CC would be so devastatingly dominant in half a season. It's not like anybody else can say "we saw this coming".

[rluzinski]

I have a blog FILLED with me being wrong about many things. Bad methodologies, bad assumptions, bad everything. If that's all they need, it would take someone about 5 minutes of reading it for them to get their fill. At this point, I still don't feel that my CC estimate was a bad one.

[treego]

Let's just cut to the chase ... Suppan is a horrible, horrible choice in a do-or-die playoff game when Gallardo and a committee including McClung, Mota, etc. is available to boot. Suppan is the epitome of the batting practice hitter's delight. He throws way too many meatballs down the middle with low velocity. He is a nice guy who got decent results for the Cardinals in the playoffs once upon a time and got a tag that does not stick because it was more-or-less a fluke. Sveum, Yost, and likely Attanasio/Melvin could not bring themselves to a place of courage on this call ... the call to have Suppan step down from big game situations because he is altogether shaky.

[danzig6767]

I don't think more than a few here thought Suppan should have started an elimination game because he was a supposed big game pitcher. In fact, i think it's safe to assume that when it came out that Suppan was going to start, the vast majority here felt a sense of dread. I sure did and was dumbfounded by the choice.

 

The fact that some in the media may have commented that Suppan was a big game pitcher in the past or heading into todays game, oh well, it is what it is. The Brewers employ a guy to be a color man on TV broadcasts that has said in games with a good hitter up, i wouldn't give this guy anything good to hit. Then after that hitter eventually walks and comes around to score later, Bill says walks will kill you. Ummm, brilliant analysis there Bill.

 

The interesting thing about this is if my terrible memory is correct, i believe that i've heard our GM Doug Melvin more than once bring up the big game pitcher stuff in regards to Suppan. Now i'm not sure if that was his way of spinning to the media or if he actually believes or once believed it.

[RU Rah Rah]

I'd call Suppan semi-mediocre rather than plain "terrible." (Hardly a ringing endorsement, either way.) His adjusted ERA's for two years in Milw. have been 97 and 87 -- below average, but not pathetic. I guess the problem here is partly the size of the contract in relation to that middling performance, and the expectations.

 

I agree with the basic premise here. (If I never hear about the 2005 Cardinals again, it will be too soon.)

 

It makes me think about Schilling and his chances of getting into the HOF. I've heard several Buster Olney types say that they think he'll make it because of his "big game" performances.

[cnycerveceros]

I don't think more than a few here thought Suppan should have started an elimination game because he was a supposed big game pitcher. In fact, i think it's safe to assume that when it came out that Suppan was going to start, the vast majority here felt a sense of dread. I sure did and was dumbfounded by the choice.

Yep. Is there any way to calculate a statistic to quantify how overpaid someone is? Like a salary to win-shares ratio? Would that do? I disliked the Suppan signing from day 1 and yesterday the chickens came home to roost. Signed for the wrong reasons and trotted out for the same wrong reasons.

[jeffy]

Sveum, Yost, and likely Attanasio/Melvin could not bring themselves to a place of courage on this call ... the call to have Suppan step down from big game situations because he is altogether shaky.

In the end Sveum, was not a big game manager http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif.

[Fatter than Joey]

I didn't really mean this to turn into a "evaluate Suppan" thread. I'm simply talking about how pitchers like him can become overvalued by fans and other teams by picking up a "big game pitcher" label.

 

I hear you Russ. Regardless of all of the "Suppan is a solid #4-5 starter/Every team wants Soup arguments" the bottom line is as follows....

 

1.) MA did not sign Soup to his current deal, to lock down the #5 spot in the rotation for the next 4 years. MA or DM clearly overvalued Suppan based on the results of a few October games a couple of years ago. That makes them stupid. The structure of the contract seems to all but ensure that Suppan will be difficult to trade.

 

2.) While Suppan clearly sucks, he should not be DFA'd -- and his contract virtually guarantees that he won't be anytime soon. I think the rub between the lovers and the haters is that while Suppan is adequate to hold down the #5 spot in the rotation, there are probably much more cost-effective options, further complicating things is that if Suppan's contract was off the books for 2009 and 2010, the FO may have a little more perceived flexibility in retaining CC.

 

3.) Given Suppan's age -- I am not optimistic about his increased HR and BB rate -- and the fact his IP/Start has slipped under 6. I disagree with the posters who think that teams would be lining up to take Suppan and his salary off our hands. Again, Suppan has value in that he can fill out the back end of your rotation, but I think most GMs will be able to find that sort of pitcher for less than what Soup is making.

 

I think what Russ is basically saying -- is that when we hear that a pitcher is signed because he is "A big game pitcher" -- red flags should be shooting up, just like they do when our blind date has "A pretty face" or "a nice personality". "Big Game Pitcher" and "Innings Eater" is a manufactured and imaginary attribute that is stuck on below average pitchers, that are not helped out by their actual stats.

[rluzinski]

Over the last two years, Suppan has been above replacement level (better than freely avalable AAA vets) but below average. Putting his salary aside (and it's water under the bridge at this point, anyway), he's probably fine as a #5 pitcher. I just didn't like that he got the playoff start and specifically WHY he got the start.

 

And if a remember correctly, Suppan's performance in the playoffs for the Cardinals must have been mentioned dozens of times by Melvin and Mark A., after he was signed.

[JimH5]

I guess the "Big Game Pitcher" label is a nice thing to tag on someone after they have had a great outing in a big game. Sheets was a big game pitcher in that shutout over the Padres, Bush was a big game pitcher in his outing against the Phils. . .

 

But of course, nothing lasts forever, and even Big Game Pitchers gak them up.

 

Except of course, if Derek Jeter were a pitcher. . .

 

He'd be Big Game for sure!!

[Patrick425]

I think that last Friday night game of the regular season is the reason Suppan started on Sunday. It's kind of a catch 22. If Suppan does not pitch at well as he does in that game, the Brewer's possibly don't make the playoffs, at the same time, I think that game helped give Sveum the confidence to start him yesterday.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

The thing is that he didn't pitch well in that game at all. He got very lucky that a lot of hard hit balls were right to his defense and lot of balls went to the warning track. I don't know how Sveum couldn't see that.

[nate82]

Suppan was signed as one of those saying hey look fans we are trying to sign someone in free agency moves that GMs do. It is a dumb move but every year a team will do this. It is suppose to signal to fans that we are trying to win. Suppan was also signed because at the time we signed him we had no one who could pitch 200 innings a year. The only pitcher we had on the staff who could do that was one who would got odd injuries at inopportune times.

 

Was he overpaid yes.

 

I agree "Big Game Pitcher" should be outlawed forever. I hate that phrase.

[endaround]

The Brewers already had Dave Bush, so no Sheets was not the only pitcher who could do that.

[Ennder]

Maybe we'll get CC at a discount since he obviously isn't a big game pitcher given his post season record.

 

Then maybe we can not abuse his arm as much for the next playoff run and he'll pitch just fine and shut up the people who are saying that nonsense~.

[PeaveyFury]

Is this just a misunderstanding or what?

 

It seems that way. There should have been a smiley to let you know that it was just poking fun.

[Nottso]

Craig Counsell is still considered "clutch" by some because of a basehit he had in a world series half a decade ago or so.

Counsell's .412 career batting average with bases loaded might also have something to do with it.