Brewers talking with Jeff Suppan

[And That]

If the Brewers ever have Braun at 3B, Weeks at 2B and Fielder at 1B this year, there will be putrid IF defense at that point. This is why I'd rather have Hall in the IF and Weeks in CF. We can't do anything about Prince's D at first, but we can put Hall at either 2B or 3B, and/or Koskie at 3B and/or Graffy or Council at 2B, with Hardy at SS.

[sbrylski]

Another thing about Weeks is that he will get to a lot of balls, which is what helps the pitcher. If he throws it away the run will be credited to an error, not to Suppan.

[And That]

Another thing about Weeks is that he will get to a lot of balls, which is what helps the pitcher.

 

He'll get to a lot of balls in CF, too. And Hall will get to almost all of the balls Weeks would get to at 2B, without the errors. Hence my wish to move Weeks to CF.

[theavrock]

Quote:

---

Fielder and Weeks are both poor defenders, as far as I'm concerned.

---

 

Ok Weeks I can see the argument, but to his credit he was getting better. Unless my memory is wrong Bill Hall's fielding wasn't where it is right now when he first was brought up by the Brewers. Week's defense will only get better especially with the marked improvement he has made.

 

Prince had a .992 fielding percentage last year. As a rookie he made 11 errors the whole year. Sorry but he is far from a poor defender. Mark Teixara (who was the AL Gold Glove winner at 1b) had a .997 fielding percentage. Prince wasn't a Gold Glover there and probably never will be but he is in no way a poor defender.

[hermanator34]

This is not an endorsment of Suppan but-

 

If the Brewers ever have Braun at 3B, Weeks at 2B and Fielder at 1B this year, there will be putrid IF defense at that point.

 

I don't disagree, but what's the point? We don't bother to assmeble a decent pitching staff because our defense sucks anyways?

[laserbomb]

If his ground/fly ratio were a little more extreme and he struck more out, they could play Hall really shallow for 5 infielders in some situations. Hardy and Koskie could have the left side set, Hall could play behind second, and Weeks could cover for some of Fielder's range and have shorter, easier throws to make to first. Not that that'd make his evolution easier, learning a whole other set of throws, but it'd be interesting to see in a video game or something.

 

Hart, Nix and Gross have all played center and could cover some ground, although they couldn't cheat too much to the center and away from the lines. I kind of miss Rich Donnelly and his alignment printouts. If Dave Bush struggles through the first inning in some of his starts, they could think about moving a defender to the outfield stands, too.

 

Who has some insight about how well this guy fields his position (for someone who leans on that D)? I read (I think earlier in this thread) his pickoff move isn't great and he's slow to home.

 

Step into my...

I'd rather not, but thanks anyway for asking.

[DHonks]

Prince wasn't a Gold Glover there and probably never will be but he is in no way a poor defender.

 

1b is still the toughest position to gauge. Prince is far better with lateral range and arm strength than Overbay was. However, Lyle was much better with glovework...that is, when he got his glove on it, he almost always recorded an out.

 

Prince is young enough that he can get much better. Remember, his dad was a very good fielder until his later years. And we all know Prince is more agile than his father was.

[sbrylski]

Prince wasn't a Gold Glover there and probably never will be but he is in no way a poor defender.

 

Fielding % doesn't tell the whole story. Poor throws are credited to the fielder, but a good 1B can save some.

[brettac1]

Prince had a .992 fielding percentage last year. As a rookie he made 11 errors the whole year. Sorry but he is far from a poor defender.

 

I could care less what his fielding percentage was. It's an almost useless stat because of the fact that errors are ruled on by the official scorer. Like DHonks said - he isn't very good with the glove, especially when it comes to bending over and picking it. Unless you expect him to lose weight and gain flexibility as he gets older, he's probably not going to improve that. Using PMR from Baseball Musings, he was slightly below average.

[laserbomb]

But if Prince is traded in a couple of years, we'd still have a couple years of Suppan left to try to make up for it.

[Ennder]

Quote:

---

Anyone who has been around for that long, and had as much success as Jeff is certainly going to be a #3 or better on 95% of MLB teams, including ours. With apologies to Dave Bush, Soup would bump him down in the rotation. Sure, Bush had a fine 2006, but has a long, long way to go to prove he's every bit as reliable an option as Suppan.

---

 

I strongly disagree with this. Bush has been better than Suppan for 3 years in a row even if one of those seasons was a partial year. The only thing Suppan has on Bush is that he played on a better team with an amazing defense. Suppan would be the clear #4 starter on the team in my opinion though he'd be the #3 on most teams and would even be the #2 on a couple of teams.

 

However adding Suppan to the mix would give the Brewers the best or 2nd best starting rotation in the NL.

[BritInWI]

Quote:

---

Like DHonks said - he isn't very good with the glove

---

 

Brett - I agree and disagree. I didn't see DHonks say anything about Fielder's ability, just that Overbay was better. That being said, like you I'd be nervous about giving Suppan a contract that large - "market value" be damned, the Brewers payroll is only so big, and what would a contract like that do to arbitration or extension negotiations with a pitcher who is IMO better, like Capuano?

 

Now if Mark A is prepared to cough up the dollars to pay Cappy accordingly....

[joshjs]

I think a ground ball pitcher would have a generally positive effect on the defense, regardless of its current state. They'd have to be on their toes a lot more than they would with Davis on the mound.

 

Projections from a year and half ago have no relevance.

 

That's a bit dramatic, although I did debate whether to put that line in there, due to how old the projections are and how biased I am toward BP. But no, BP didn't predict that he'd be successful for two or three months to ultimately have a middling season. But they projected he'd regress. And they were right.

 

Suppan's PECOTA weighted mean projections for last season were 4.10 ERA and 1.33 WHIP. His actuals were 4.12/1.45. That's pretty darn close. And those aren't bad numbers. But I see more regression, and I don't want this guy for four years.

[Invader3K]

I don't think a pitching acquisition should or shouldn't be made based on the defensive capabilities of an extremely young infield.

[TooLiveBrew]

Quote:

---

Bush has been better than Suppan for 3 years in a row even if one of those seasons was a partial year. The only thing Suppan has on Bush is that he played on a better team with an amazing defense

---

I see what you're getting at here; I was surprised to see the numbers on Bush. Remarkably, even with a 1.254 WHIP & 99 ERA+, only 5 undearned runs, and an excellent BB/K ratio (29/75 in 136 1/3 IP), Bush somehow went 5-11 in 2005.

 

Now, I don't give Dave a free pass, as he certainly had some agency in those games, and getting only 5 wins in 24 starts is unacceptable. However, the numbers just don't seem to add up. I wonder if there are some other stats out there that tell more of the story.

 

In particular, what about Double Plays Induced? I wonder if Suppan has gotten out of more jams due to his ability to get a ground ball. Another one - maybe Earned Runs/IP (is there any point in using that over ERA? Or is it just a wash?). It seems like an ER/IP ratio over .50 is not so great, while one under .50 is desirable. That's about the only 'stat' I can find where Suppan has the clear edge over Bush.

 

As far as the "amazing defense" argument, I'll only take that with several grains of salt. Soup went 10-7 in 21 starts for the 2003 Pirates, who finished 75-87, with a pedestrian team fielding % -- nothing near the Card's statistical success from recent years. That seems to break the idea that the much of his success is really not his, but his fielders'. I agree a good defense is a plus, but it really is not an accurate barometer, as shown here. (I'd argue it's wwwaaayyyy more that stellar Cardinals offense than it is their D -- Brewer fans saw all year long in 2006 how much harder it is on a SP when his offense isn't giving him any margin for error)

 

In fact, the 2005 Blue Jays fielded extremely well as a team, yet Bush ends up at 5-11. Perhaps I'm finding some statistical anomalies, but it seems the notion of "good defense makes decent pitcher look great" has been debunked, IMO. If someone has numbers or evidence to prove othewise, please let me know. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

So, while I was surprised to see the statistical success Bush has had, indisputably better than any 3-year stretch of Suppan's career, the bottom line is that the W-L record still really, really matters with a pitcher. What good are all those nice peripherals if they don't add up to wins? My point is that, while Bush has racked up some nice supporting stats, Suppan has been able to accrue the wins (even before joining St L). Even if his seasonal stats don't beat Bush's, the guy is at least equal to him, and, IMO the tie-breaker is his durability and longer track record.

 

I don't suggest Bush is not durable, nor that he won't have a fine career. Just that Suppan's higher value right now is completely understandable & explainable

[theavrock]

Ok so maybe fielding percentage was the wrong stat to use, but is there some stat that would accuratley judge his performance? All I can remember is watching him I never had to wince wondering if he was going to make a play. I just can't see people calling him a poor defender. As far as I was concerned last year, for a rookie he did a pretty good job.

[igor67]

I guess I would contend somewhat with characterizing ST louis as having a great defense. Rolen and Pujols are certainly very good to outstanding. But Belliard and Eckstein? Seem like average guys to my recollection, and average guys up the middle doesn't make for an outstanding defense merely a good one.

[Team Canada]

I think a ground ball pitcher would have a generally positive effect on the defense, regardless of its current state. They'd have to be on their toes a lot more than they would with Davis on the mound.

 

Heck, any pitcher who throws strikes might have a positive effect.

[brettac1]

I don't think a pitching acquisition should or shouldn't be made based on the defensive capabilities of an extremely young infield.

 

I don't think so, either, that wasn't what I was saying. When a pitcher is bad enough that poor defense can lead to him having a 5.00 ERA, he isn't worth $10 million a year. Bad defense played a sizable part in Davis' 4.91 ERA last year.

[cancer47]

One man's 4+ ERA isn't the same as another man's, depending on the "standard deviation"? I'm not statistician, but when people start throwing out various averages, I sometimes wonder what's better? IA guy who's generally giving up 4+ runs a game, or somebody who gives up 12 one game, and throws shutouts the next two? Not there's anybody that's that extreme, and maybe this should be another thread, but just wondering which is better overall? To me, it wothe second example, but hey, that's just me...

[PeaveyFury]

When a pitcher is bad enough that poor defense can lead to him having a 5.00 ERA, he isn't worth $10 million a year.

 

Has there been anything to show that he'd have a 5.00 ERA, or is that just some random number?

[brettac1]

Just that his FIP last year was 4.68, and he declined a little bit from 2005, and that he'd be a year older with a bad defense behind him, and he's just generally a marginal pitcher.

[Never Outhustled]

Initially, I was scared of paying Suppan $10 million 4 years from now, but then I realized that in 4 years that will be chump change.

 

MLB revenue, according to ESPN radio, has increased 11% each of the last 5 years. With labor peace already at hand for the next several years I see nothing but prosperity in baseballs future. This will lead to continual escalation of player salaries.

 

Suppan will likely be in decline around 2009-2010. However, I'd guess conservatively that he'd still be 1 of the top 100-150 starting pitchers. This means someone will still have a need for him in their rotation, despite the $10 million salary. That salary by then will likely be the going rate for marginal starters.

[sbrylski]

I sometimes wonder what's better? IA guy who's generally giving up 4+ runs a game, or somebody who gives up 12 one game, and throws shutouts the next two? Not there's anybody that's that extreme, and maybe this should be another thread, but just wondering which is better overall? To me, it wothe second example, but hey, that's just me...

 

You are correct sir.

 

The more inconsistent the pitcher, the more games he is likely to win.

 

EDIT: Link to study

[DHonks]

Bad defense played a sizable part in Davis' 4.91 ERA last year.

 

not as big of a part as walks!