Marquis signs with Nationals

[BREWCREW5]

2 years for 15 million. Not a horrible deal.

 

http://masnsports.com/2009/12/nats-to-sign-jason-marquis.html

[bigredrobbo]

Clock on "Brewers should have signed him" starting in 3....2....1......

[Invader3K]

Yeah, would have been nice, but even that contract is out of the Brewers budget at this point, apparently.

[Ennder]

Marquis isn't that much of an upgrade over Suppan so I can see why they didn't make that move. It would have been nice having that depth so Parra could start in AAA though and become the answer when someone gets hurt instead of potentially the problem even if someone doesn't. I think if they are going to get another pitcher it is going to be someone clearly better than what we have and not just marginally better. Someone with some upside and obviously it will come with either heavy injury risk or via trade.

[brewmann04]

Looks like the mets lost out on another Pitcher does not look like we getting Maine.

[BREWCREW5]

Marquis isn't that much of an upgrade over Suppan so I can see why they didn't make that move.

 

Are you serious? Marquis was a had a 4.01 ERA last year. Suppan had a 5.29.

 

If Suppan was a free agent, he would probably try to sign as a long man out of the bullpen or trying to sign 1 mil/ 1 year incentive laden deal with the likes of the Pirates or Royals.

 

Still amazes me how every free agent pitcher is compared to Jeff Suppan, it really does.

[rluzinski]

Chone projections have Suppan at a 5.35 ERA next year. Marquis is at 4.73 but that's league and park neutral. He'll have something like a projected 4.5 ERA in Washington. I agree that Marquis is probably much better than Suppan, let's not restrict ourselves to just one year of data.

[dadofandrew]

Marquis had a 6+ ERA one year too. Gotta look at more than a single season, or your ability to project is nil.

 

I like Jason for what he is, a solid innings eater.

[Funketown]

Still amazes me how every free agent pitcher is compared to Jeff Suppan, it really does.

I think it depends on how the comparison is made. When analyzing a potential move for the Brewers, a pitcher's value above Jeff Suppan is a huge part of how valuable that player would be to the Brewers. Signing Jason Marquis would essentially move Suppan to long relief, and Marquis to the 5 spot, so from the Brewers' perspective, a comparison should be made, whether or not their pitching styles are similar.

[BREWCREW5]

We live in a world of "what have you done for me lately though".

[JoeHova]

Still amazes me how every free agent pitcher is compared to Jeff Suppan, it really does.

You better get used to it because every time a Wisconsin team makes (or doesn't make) what appears to be a stupid (or at least suboptimal) move, Suppan is going to be brought up. He should be because signing him is arguably the worst move in Wisconsin sports history. Their are other contenders, of course (trading Kareem, dumping Sheffield, taking Surhoff over Bonds, hiring Bart Starr as coach, etc.), but by crippling the first good team the Brewers have had in a generation, he has really earned any negative comparisons thrown his way.

[RockCoCougars]

Still amazes me how every free agent pitcher is compared to Jeff Suppan, it really does.

You better get used to it because every time a Wisconsin team makes (or doesn't make) what appears to be a stupid (or at least suboptimal) move, Suppan is going to be brought up. He should be because signing him is arguably the worst move in Wisconsin sports history. Their are other contenders, of course (trading Kareem, dumping Sheffield, taking Surhoff over Bonds, hiring Bart Starr as coach, etc.), but by crippling the first good team the Brewers have had in a generation, he has really earned any negative comparisons thrown his way.

Kind of off topic, but an interesting take. Suppan definitely ranks right up there with worst blunders in Wisconsin sports history.

 

My take.....

 

The Kareem trade was unavoidable because he wanted to go, and it actually helped result in the good Bucks teams of the 80's by bringing Winters and Bridgeman to town. Had David Meyers not retired, this trade could have actually been tilted for the Bucks.

 

The Sheffield trade was also unavoidable, but because Bando pretty much got low return for him, it would rank right up there. To be fair, Sheffield, albeit quite young, hadn't really played to his potential before the trade and was coming off a mystery illness (if my recollection is correct). Top 10 for sure.

 

The Starr hiring was probably not the best in hindsight, but I think there have been worse hires in state history. I would actually argue that his predecesor Devine was a worse hire. The thing with Starr was probably that they let him hang around too long.

 

I get a kick out of the Surhoff/Bonds thing because 20 years ago it was Will Clark. Simply put, the baseball draft is a crapshoot, Surhoff had a long career and outplayed most #1 overall picks by far. I don't count that one as a blunder.

 

Anyway, Suppan is definitely Top 5 in my opinion. My vote for #1 is the Packer's selection of Tony Mandarich over Barry Sanders, Deion Sanders and Derrick Thomas. Number 2 would probably be the Paul Molitor debacle. Number 3 would probably be the Bucks drafting Kent Benson (this could have been number one if he hadn't been traded for Bob Lanier). If we are going with college sports as well, I would put Don Morton and the veer in the top 5 as well. How did this guy get a head coaching job in the Big 10?

[JoeHova]

It's true that Surhoff had a nice career but I think that because the Packers (Mandarich, maybe Hawk, Holliday, Ahmad Carroll, Jamal Reynolds, T-Buck, Rich Campbell, etc.) and Bucks (Russ Lee, Benson, Day, Grayer, Traylor, Respert, Bogut to some extent, etc.) often get bashed for making bad draft picks that it's only fair to point out that the Brewers passed on the 2nd best player of all-time when they had the first pick in the draft.

[endaround]

The Forrest Gregg hire was much worse than the Starr hire. Ahh the Gregg years! When .500 was the ultimate goal!

[Invader3K]

No Brewers move will probably top letting Paul Molitor leave as worse in my mind. That move was a middle finger to the fan base and signaled nearly a decade and a half of abysmal Brewers baseball. I don't care that he had injuries in his past...he was a top flight hitter at the time and beloved by the fans. You don't let someone like that just walk away after giving him an insulting low ball offer.

 

Anyway, it's just a shame that such a relatively moderate free agent signing (we're paying him "only" $12.5 million this year, not a fortune by some teams' standards), has seemingly crippled the Brewers payroll flexibility so badly. What's more frustrating is that Melvin and Attanasio should have seen this coming and moved to try and do something about it.

[Ennder]

Chone projections have Suppan at a 5.35 ERA next year

 

I think that is a bad projection is the basis for my opinion. He hasn't had an xFIP or ERA that high any of the last 3 years so I don't see a compelling reason to expect it to jump that much. I'd put Marquis at something like a 4.70 and Suppan at like a 4.90-5.00 range, a marginal difference.

 

Are you serious? Marquis was a had a 4.01 ERA last year. Suppan had a 5.29.

 

ERA over a single season is useless. Over the past 4 years Suppan has had an xFIP trend of 4.66, 4.90, 4.79, 5.26 and that 5.26 came mostly due to a bad 2 starts to start the year, the rest of the season it was right in the expected 4.90ish range so I'm not ready to assume it is some new level and not just variance. Marquis trend has been 5.44, 4.98, 4.91, 4.41. If last years growth in GB% sticks maybe he is a larger upgrade over Suppan but I have to see him do it again, he's had spikes like that in the past and they went away the next season.

 

I'd expect Marquis and Suppan to be within 0.25 in true talent most likely, with 0.50 being the upper limit if you really assume Suppan is 'done'. Not sure that is worth spending that kind of money to improve that small amount. I don't think signing Marquis for $7.5M to put Suppan in the bullpen is a smart use of resources. The $7.5M could be better used elsewhere.

 

Now signing him and moving Parra to AAA as injury depth has a bit of merit. That way if Suppan really is 'done' you have Parra to come fill in for him and if someone gets hurt we go to Parra. That also lets Parra work on his fastball in the minors with less pressure to start the year and if he gets things together he can be brought up and we can push Suppan to the bullpen if need be. So if that were the plan I'd have been ok with the signing.

[burniebrewer]

The Nationals are in the playoffs now, I guess.

 

Any team Marquis has ever played on made the playoffs. Congrats Nats!

 

(Obvious sarcasm, just not blue.)

[JohnBriggs12]

Why is anyone comparing this signing to the Brewers signing of Suppan? There is a $25 million dollar difference. At worst, Marquis figures to be about what Suppan figured to be 3 years ago when the Brewers paid him $40 million. If Marquis pitches like he did last year, it's a real nice pickup for the Nats.

 

They won't make the playoffs, but the Nats figure to be greatly improved if they can add a bullpen arm or two.

[Ennder]

People aren't comparing Marquis to Suppan from the signing, they are trying to decide if it would have been worth replacing Suppan with that contract for Marquis.

[joepepsi]

I don't think Suppan is one of the worst blunders in Wisconsin Sports History. Is he overpaid? Heck, yes! But he's also averaged 32 starts, 182 innings and a 4.93 ERA a year over the first 3 years of his contract. That's not great but it's not without value either. Bill Hall's contract was much worse. So are contracts to people like Riske or Higuera who weren't able to play for much of the term.

[hawing]

So are contracts to people like Riske or Higuera who weren't able to play for much of the term.

Or Jeffrey Hammonds. At least Suppan was present for his bobblehead day.

 

Still, back to Marquis...I guess if the Nats become a contender now we'll know that at least some STL spare parts are magic.

Not the ones the Brewers have, but some.

[rluzinski]

He hasn't had an xFIP or ERA that high any of the last 3 years so I don't see a compelling reason to expect it to jump that much. I'd put Marquis at something like a 4.70 and Suppan at like a 4.90-5.00 range, a marginal difference.

Why would you even feel compelled to use xFIP for a pitcher with such a long track record? Since 2002, the league HR/FB has been 10.7%. Last year it was 10%. Suppan's HR/FB% the last 3 years as been 11.7% and he'll be 35 next year:

	Age	IP	FB	HR	HR/FB
2007	32	206	245	18	7.3%
2008	33	178	191	30	15.7%
2009	34	162	186	25	13.4%
		546	622	73	11.7%

I would not be expecting a league average HR/FB at this point in his career. While I agree with you to be skeptical of one year's worth of data (ERA, for instance), we are talking about 546 IP over thee seasons.

Let's look at the rest of the data:

	Age	IP	ERA	FIP	xFIP
2007	32	206	4.62	4.42	4.90
2008	33	178	4.96	5.51	4.79
2009	34	162	5.29	5.70	4.65
		546	4.96	5.21	4.78

Looking at just that, 4.95 ERA projection for Suppan in 2010 looks pretty optimistic. By any measure, he's had to bad years in a row and he is also another year older.

Over the past 4 years Suppan has had an xFIP trend of 4.66, 4.90, 4.79, 5.26 and that 5.26 came mostly due to a bad 2 starts to start the year, the rest of the season it was right in the expected 4.90ish range so I'm not ready to assume it is some new level and not just variance.

As I'm sure know by now, I'm am not fond of selectively removing data for no good reason. Does it really matter when he had those two bad starts? If one had been in April and the other in August, would it not be OK to remove them, then? It's not like Suppan was pitching through a publicly known injury (at least not one I'm aware of).

In the end, your projection of Suppan is your project, so I'm not going to argue that you are wrong. I just thing the statistical evidence you are using to support your opinion is not very compelling.

[Ennder]

Why would you even feel compelled to use xFIP for a pitcher with such a long track record?

 

Because it is the best tool we have for small samples of data and at this point the large sample(his career) doesn't really mean much.

 

As I'm sure know by now, I'm am not fond of selectively removing data for no good reason

 

I didn't remove it, I said that given the fact that 2 bad starts at the start of the season is all it took to see a jump in xFIP I'm not going to assume that it is some new trend and not just variance.

 

Looking at just that, 4.95 ERA projection for Suppan in 2010 looks pretty optimistic

FIP is the weakest of the 3 stats you looked at and his ERA is right where I would project it over that timeframe.. Seems like somewhere in the 4.90-5.00 range is perfectly within expectations to me. I was just eyeballing it so maybe the 5.00 is more likely than the 4.90 but I don't see any reason to project something as high as 5.35.

[Polish Falcons]

Kind of off topic, but an interesting take. Suppan definitely ranks right up there with worst blunders in Wisconsin sports history.

Sorry to keep up the off topic stray but drafting Offensive Lineman Tony Mandrich #2 over Barry Sanders #3 was by far the worst Wisconsin sports move at least in my lifetime. First of all offensive lineman don't deserve to be drafted that high under any circumstance and second of all Barry Sanders an extremely high rated college RB to the point where nobody was surprised by his extremely successful career. The top 5 in that draft were Troy Aikman · Tony Mandarich · Barry Sanders · Derrick Thomas · Deion Sanders.

 

Comparitively Suppan was signed as a free agent when the Brewers needed a SP and the market was not very impressive.

[rluzinski]

Because it is the best tool we have for small samples of data and at this point the large sample(his career) doesn't really mean much.

 

What you are suggesting is that best way to predict a pitcher's future HR/FB is to simply use the league average HR/FB, no matter what the sample size is. I don't believe that is correct. I find a lot of fantasy baseball websites talking about how much better xFIP is compared to FIP but it seems like they are always limiting themselves to one year of data (looking for over and undervalued players?). Furthermore, it seems that they suggest there are only two choices; either use the league average HR/FB or use the pitcher's actual HR/FB. The third choice, of course, is use a number somewhere inbetween.

 

I believe that the correct way to project HR/FB is to use a weighted average of the last 2-3 years (most recent years weighted more), adjust for the pitcher's park and then regress some amount towards league average. Maybe you regress 75% toward the league. I don't know. Finally, add the park factor back in.

 

There's some discussion on the topic here:

 

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/pitching_components/

 

I think the 2007 Hardball Times Annual had a study that concluded a pitcher's HR/FB was basically irrelevant. I have 06, 08 and 09 but not 07! Anyone have it here?

 

I didn't remove it, I said that given the fact that 2 bad starts at the start of the season is all it took to see a jump in xFIP I'm not going to assume that it is some new trend and not just variance.

 

Trend? If you appreciate the statistical noise associated with small samples, I would think you should appreciate that looking for trends in that small sample won't get you very far. Unless I know for a fact that a player was significantly hurt, I just throw it all into the data bucket.

 

FIP is the weakest of the 3 stats you looked at and his ERA is right where I would project it over that timeframe.

 

You damn FIP because it uses actual HR numbers but ERA is better? It not only uses actual HR rate but also includes the dreaded BABIP!