Chris Archer

[bill hAll Star]

Pitching a lot in Fenway, Yankee Stadium and Camden Yards doesn't help the HR rate. Yes the NL Central has some HR parks, including of course Miller Park, but the AL East is absolutely loaded with HR hitting greats in ways that the NL Central is not....

 

9 games @Fenway/@NYY/@Camden/@Toronto each = 36 games = roughly 5 starts/year.

 

81 games @Tropicana now switched to @Miller = ~16 starts/year.

 

Also factor in that Cincy and Chicago in summer are pretty much equal to the AL East parks he goes to so take that 5 number from above and let's call it 3.

 

So he's traded out 16 more games at a HR park and got back 2 from switching divisions of road parks. I'd say he's got it harder now stadium-wise. Just say out of the 32-34 games he started in years past that he'd pitch 8 or 9 in hitter's parks. That number should now be about 20-23 depending on how many he gets/avoids in the NL West.

 

Factor in that he's not facing the DH for the most part anymore and I'll call it a wash.

[Humans Need Water]

Here are a few, provided from Archer's 1st big league season in 2012 through 2017.

 

SO/9 -11.0, 7.1, 8.0, 10.7, 10.4, 11.1

BB/9 - 4.0, 2.7, 3.3, 2.8, 3.0, 2.7

FIP - 3.40, 4.07, 3.39, 2.9, 3.81, 3.40

HR/9 - 0.9, 1.0, 0.6, 0.8, 1.3, 1.2

SO/BB - 2.77, 2.66, 2.40, 3.82, 3.48, 4.15

 

Aside from the spike in HR rate, Archer has been consistent to improving on these peripheals.

 

Taking a closer look at the HR rate, here is the MLB-wide HR rate for the same years (2012/2017):

1.02, 0.96, 0.86, 1.01, 1.16, 1.26

 

So, the spike in Archer's HR rate over the last two seasons correlates directly to the MLB-wide spike in homers as well - probably more of an indicator of a league-wide shift towards homers moreso than Archer suddenly becoming a mediocre pitcher. Archer's HR/9 rates actually line up similarly to the league-wide variations, too. If we're suddenly concerned about trading for or signing a veteran starter whose HR rate climbed the past two seasons, there aren't going to be any pitchers worth acquiring.

Then why did Nelson and Chase just significantly drop their HR9 while pitching in one of the worst pitchers parks?

 

cherry picking more than I did - Nelson significantly lowered his HR rate from 2016-2017. He had a bad year in 2016 (so much so that he was an afterthought for the 2017 rotation, many here wanted him moved to the pen or traded), so lowering that rate back to his career average isn't surprising given he was a different pitcher in 2017.

 

Anderson definitely made a huge jump in production during 2017, but he also doesn't have near the body of work Archer has - Anderson hasn't pitched over 153 innings in a season yet.

I don't cherry pick. You said it was a league wide shift. Anderson and Nelson disagreed - again - while pitching in one of the worst pitchers parks. So why didn't this league wide shift affect them rather Archer instead? And 2yrs straight as well. Your response to that was Anderson doesn't have the body of work Archer does nor has he pitched 153 innings - both which have absolutely nothing to do with HR9. They made adjustments and improved - Archer did not - 2yrs straight.

 

Cherry picking is what you (self-admitted) and everyone else does that will sell their mother for Archer. xFIP, K9, BB9, WAR is what you all point to while negating H9, whip, HR9, contact rates, GB/LD/FB rates, decrease in usage of fastball (best pitch), ERA (while having a much better defense than the Brewers and pitching in a much better park for pitchers than Miller Park), ERA+ puts him an average MLB pitcher 2yrs running (which includes factors like park/opponent), this happening at ages 27 and 28, etc. There is no outlier when it's 2yrs straight of all this.

 

Maybe try looking at the entire picture instead of a few metrics. Yeah, it's great he throws a lot of innings but that's merely a bonus. If we targeted a guy with much worse metrics and a 5 ERA but he threw 200 innings annually what would your response be to someone defending that pitcher using that as a selling point? Yeah, the same applies here.

 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/neutralized-stats.cgi?request=1&id=archech01&sum=0&t=p&offset=0&to_yr=2017&to_lg=NL&to_tm=MIL&orderby=year_ID&number_matched=1&order_by_asc=1

 

FmrBeerMan informed me that Baseball Reference allows you to neutralize pitching stats based on certain parks and years. The link above is for 2017 - it adjusts to pitching all games in the 2017 scoring environments at Miller Park using his peripherals every year. Keep ignoring him shifting to Miller Park as if that won't affect anything or offset coming to the NL and out of the AL East.

 

Again, nobody is saying they hate Archer and we shouldn't target him. Our rotation is improved with him - but it's also improved with a lot of others as options as well. We're saying there are red flags the past 2yrs that shouldn't be ignored and it's not worth Brinson + Ortiz/Burnes + another Top 10 + potentially a low level (Eric L dude from Fangraphs said a fair trade was Santana, Burnes, Erceg - that's absurd when factoring in everything).

[Mudville9]

I don't think the Rays would go for it, but it would be nice to include Santana in the deal to ease the prospect load.

 

Something like Santana, Ortiz, Harrison, Gatewood. That is a big haul for one player, but if we didn't have to give up Brinson, Hader, Burnes I would be tempted. That would be a nice rotation when Nelson comes back, although our offense would take a big hit with Santana gone.

[KeithStone53151]

I don't think the Rays would go for it, but it would be nice to include Santana in the deal to ease the prospect load.

 

Something like Santana, Ortiz, Harrison, Gatewood. That is a big haul for one player, but if we didn't have to give up Brinson, Hader, Burnes I would be tempted. That would be a nice rotation when Nelson comes back, although our offense would take a big hit with Santana gone.

 

That's still too much. I'm thinking closer to Santana, Peralta, 1 or 2 lower end guys. Think Supak/Ponce and Peyton Henry.

[Mudville9]

I don't think the Rays would go for it, but it would be nice to include Santana in the deal to ease the prospect load.

 

Something like Santana, Ortiz, Harrison, Gatewood. That is a big haul for one player, but if we didn't have to give up Brinson, Hader, Burnes I would be tempted. That would be a nice rotation when Nelson comes back, although our offense would take a big hit with Santana gone.

 

That's still too much. I'm thinking closer to Santana, Peralta, 1 or 2 lower end guys. Think Supak/Ponce and Peyton Henry.

 

Even better! Get it done DS!

[monty57]

I don't know if Tampa will go for it, but Stearns is definitely going to try to use Santana as the headliner instead of Brinson. If he's the headliner, we're trading a younger, cheaper MLB-proven player, so he could potentially limit the quality/quantity of prospects we'd have to send.

 

Meanwhile, we'd greatly improve our rotation and still have an OF of Braun/Phillips/Brinson with Broxton as a solid backup.

[pacopete4]

I think I'd rather give them Brinson. He'll probably give them about 100 games a season.

[JackNicholson1974]

Id rather trade Brinson than Santana.

[monty57]

I think that as a general rule, when the Brewers have a solid prospect who is ready to replace a "proven" player, they should try to move the "proven" player to make room for the prospect. The "proven" player should get them more in trade while the prospect will give the Brewers more team control and years of playing for well below market value.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Again, nobody is saying they hate Archer and we shouldn't target him. Our rotation is improved with him - but it's also improved with a lot of others as options as well

 

What are all these other better options that give the brewers 4 years of a starter in his prime for well under 10 million per season and how are they acquired?

[monty57]

Again, nobody is saying they hate Archer and we shouldn't target him. Our rotation is improved with him - but it's also improved with a lot of others as options as well

 

What are all these other better options that give the brewers 4 years of a starter in his prime for well under 10 million per season and how are they acquired?

 

Not in free agency. If both options are executed Archer will be 4 years / $33.75M. The Cubs just signed Chatwood for 3 years / $38M.

 

By trade? Per Fangraphs WAR, Archer was tied with Kershaw at #9 in 2017. Greinke was #7, so we could probably trade for him if we had the ability to pay him $34-35M per year for the next four seasons. I don't think there are many others out there in this tier of pitching that are available.

 

All told, Archer's probably comparable to Quintana, for whom the Cubs gave up a boatload of prospects last season. If we want to get someone who is somewhat cost controlled for more than a year or two, we're either going to have to get him from the farm or give up a whole lot of young talent in trade.

 

I'm not all in on trading for Archer, but I'm not against it. It just depends on the price. We can afford to part with one of Santana / Brinson, as we have a lot of good MLB ready outfielders. I hate losing high-minors pitching, as someone like Burns or Ortiz has the potential to give us six solid years. Stearns needs to determine what guys he's comfortable giving up, and if the price tag is too high, we don't make the trade.

[FmrBeerMan]

Again, nobody is saying they hate Archer and we shouldn't target him. Our rotation is improved with him - but it's also improved with a lot of others as options as well

 

What are all these other better options that give the brewers 4 years of a starter in his prime for well under 10 million per season and how are they acquired?

 

Not in free agency. If both options are executed Archer will be 4 years / $33.75M. The Cubs just signed Chatwood for 3 years / $38M.

 

By trade? Per Fangraphs WAR, Archer was tied with Kershaw at #9 in 2017. Greinke was #7, so we could probably trade for him if we had the ability to pay him $34-35M per year for the next four seasons. I don't think there are many others out there in this tier of pitching that are available.

 

All told, Archer's probably comparable to Quintana, for whom the Cubs gave up a boatload of prospects last season. If we want to get someone who is somewhat cost controlled for more than a year or two, we're either going to have to get him from the farm or give up a whole lot of young talent in trade.

 

I'm not all in on trading for Archer, but I'm not against it. It just depends on the price. We can afford to part with one of Santana / Brinson, as we have a lot of good MLB ready outfielders. I hate losing high-minors pitching, as someone like Burns or Ortiz has the potential to give us six solid years. Stearns needs to determine what guys he's comfortable giving up, and if the price tag is too high, we don't make the trade.

 

 

But it is all subjective. Yes fangraphs has him 7th. Baseball Reference has him 155th. I would rather give a couple bounce back candidates a shot at that point, or a vet looking to hold on for one more year like CC (48th) rather than sell the farm for Archer. The guys that are being talked about being traded like Ortiz, Brinson, Dubon are 100% going to play in the Majors guys. Guys that it hurts for a small market to give up.

 

Like it was said above Brewers should be looking to move vets and bring up prospects all the time. That is the approach I would love to seem them take. Then buy guys at the deadline by trading in 1 for 1 ones, like we did last year with Swarzak. To me that is key to having sustainable long term success for Milwaukee.

[brewcrewdue80]

My thought just now, is think about this. Tampa has been living off of the trade returns from SPs for how long now? The notion when the rebuild was evidently needed in '13 and '14 and that beginnings were to get in to a mold that Tampa succeeds with, small market 90win seasons. You know how close we are to doing that? Rather than throw away two the likes of Hader/Woodruff/Ortiz/Burnes/Peralta on down to maybe Ponce/Lemons/Bickford, we take what we have from the minors, and a guy like Nelson is pawned off after this season or '19's trade deadline. We're in foreign territory in that we actually have a minors that has quality SP options beyond 1 every 5years. We added 2 last season, and it stands to add 2 more this year with 3-4 not far behind. I want to that come to fruition. Before seeing it explode in our unlucky franchise' face. We're not the Cardinals who find gold out of poop. So what will happen is we trade for Archer at the cost of Woodruff/Ortiz and end up 1.5BWar Archer while Tampa enjoys a 2.5-3.5 WAR from those two.

 

We can't fill mistake moves that hurt the franchise as much as these trade ideas with FA signings like the Cubs do. What was a large/long window for the Cubs franchise, is now curious beyond the next 2 years.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Like it was said above Brewers should be looking to move vets and bring up prospects all the time.

 

In general, yes that's the ideal approach - but if you do that exclusively you're nothing more than a glorified farm system for big market teams serious about winning titles. At certain points, you need to pull the trigger on adding veteran pieces via trade or free agency that fill holes on a team serious about contending. Having a farm full of mid level prospects in danger of going elsewhere via rule 5 next offseason seems like a pretty good time to package a bunch of them for MLB talent that is still under team control at better than market rates. I'm not saying send everyone in the top 100 to get archer, but to me losing Brinson's 6 yrs of control to gain 4 yrs of a pitcher archer's ability at a lucroy-esque contract is well worth it. I'd rather santana headline that trade, but in all likelihood it would take Brinson to get it done with tampa. I'd be more hesitant if archer's asking price includes more than 1 of the brewers' minor league arms with promise.

 

I'd argue the brewers have the flexibility as an organization this offseason to sign a fa pitcher like Sabathia and trade for a quality starter like Archer, too.

[JohnBriggs12]

I don't know if Tampa will go for it, but Stearns is definitely going to try to use Santana as the headliner instead of Brinson. If he's the headliner, we're trading a younger, cheaper MLB-proven player, so he could potentially limit the quality/quantity of prospects we'd have to send.

 

Meanwhile, we'd greatly improve our rotation and still have an OF of Braun/Phillips/Brinson with Broxton as a solid backup.

 

If they trade Santana, I think they go out and get a veteran bat that will allow them to ease in Brinson. Someone like Ethier or Melky Cabrera would make a ton of sense as either would be fine options to spell Braun once or twice a week also. I still think Broxton gets dealt either separately or as part of the deal. I don't see the need to keep 3 guys who'd primary position is CF, especially a backup with severe contact issues.

 

As for Archer, he's a 5 inning ace, not a true ace. Most of the runs and HR he allows are in 6th and 7th innings. With the Brewers still short in the bullpen, I don't think his impact will be all that great.

[And That]

But it is all subjective. Yes fangraphs has him 7th. Baseball Reference has him 155th.

Baseball Prospectus has him 11th. I'm not saying disregard B-R in this case, but they are the clear outlier.

 

His HR/FB ratio doesn't bother me that much. It's around league average for a starter, which means to me that he's not getting hurt too much by it. Coupled with the fact that he's been a GB pitcher for most of his career, I do not think he's predisposed to blow up if he started pitching half of his games in Milwaukee.

 

It does worry me that his GB% dropped precipitously in 2017, but it's a one year thing. I guess I'd have to dig into it a little more as far as why his GB% dropped. I mean, from what I saw from him his slider was as disgusting as ever. Perhaps he was having FB command issues? I dunno.

 

Complete aside, but he's really freaking fun to watch pitch. I know that shouldn't go into the Brewers trading for him, but he's passionate about his craft. I like guys that jaw at the other team, as long as it doesn't cross a line. I would be more likely to buy a ticket to a Brewers game and drive 400 miles if I knew Archer was pitching in a Brewers uni. He's one of the few pitchers in baseball I would say that about. Grienke, who the Brewers may have an off chance at getting, would be another.

[brewcrewdue80]

But it is all subjective. Yes fangraphs has him 7th. Baseball Reference has him 155th.

Baseball Prospectus has him 11th. I'm not saying disregard B-R in this case, but they are the clear outlier.

 

His HR/FB ratio doesn't bother me that much. It's around league average for a starter, which means to me that he's not getting hurt too much by it. Coupled with the fact that he's been a GB pitcher for most of his career, I do not think he's predisposed to blow up if he started pitching half of his games in Milwaukee.

 

It does worry me that his GB% dropped precipitously in 2017, but it's a one year thing. I guess I'd have to dig into it a little more as far as why his GB% dropped. I mean, from what I saw from him his slider was as disgusting as ever. Perhaps he was having FB command issues? I dunno.

 

Complete aside, but he's really freaking fun to watch pitch. I know that shouldn't go into the Brewers trading for him, but he's passionate about his craft. I like guys that jaw at the other team, as long as it doesn't cross a line. I would be more likely to buy a ticket to a Brewers game and drive 400 miles if I knew Archer was pitching in a Brewers uni. He's one of the few pitchers in baseball I would say that about. Grienke, who the Brewers may have an off chance at getting, would be another.

 

 

There ya go. It's around League Average. Not Ace average. Kluber .9, Scherzer 1.0, Gonzalez .9, Strasburg Baseball leading .7, Verlander 1.2, Grienke 1.1, Sale 1.0, Stroman .9, Carrasco .9, Severino 1.0 Top 10 BWAR pitchers rates HR/9

 

Archer was 1.3 and 1.2. I get it's nitpicking such a small amount but with his innings pitched that amounts to 4-7 more HRs given up per season than what the other Aces are giving up. HRs are a true outcome. It's his difference of being a 3.3ERA pitcher and a 4ERA pitcher. Miller Park isn't reducing his HR rate. 4.05ERA last two seasons Giving him 6 runs less makes him a 3.78ERA 10 less is 3.6 ERA. Based on his career 1.46runs given up avg on HRs dropping 5 HR is 7.3 runs. That puts the ERA between 3.6 and 3.78 for last 2 seasons.

I'd venture that is the average "better Archer than last 2 seasons" Archer. Not the former 3.2-3.3 Archer.

 

Hader-3.26 minors ERA

Ortiz-3.07 minors ERA

Woodruff-3.29 " "

Burnes-1.74 " "

Peralta-3.28 " "

 

I know most likely these guys won't pitch to that same ERA but .5 increase is under 3.8ERA so what is Archer adding to the rotation for a 6IP starter? Career best 6.2IP per start in '15.

 

Know how HRs are glossy for batters? That is how I'm seeing Archer is the Ks for Pitchers.

Archer was 4th in baseball in Ks, but the only one to have an ERA above 4. Degrom was 3.53, Carrasco 3.29, Verlander 3.36, and Carlos Martinez 3.64 to be over a 3ERA. The other 5 were below 3 ERAs.

 

All those 5 SPs we are looking forward to are at AA to ML. At any point with AA experience you could see one promoted to the ML club. skipping AAA. Especially the stats Burnes and Peralta are putting up.

 

There is one thing you'd get with Archer...most likely..a full season of starts. But that just brings me to my advocate in a pitcher-Lance Lynn who you can just sign for say 45-70million. Who's crutch this past season was HRs given up(:O) but something he must have been near tops in baseball with .8, .8, .6, .6, and .7/9 rates his previous 5 seasons started(if .7 by Strasburg led baseball this year)

Lynn still managed a 3.43 ERA this season with his bad return from TJ surgery. Yeah his Fip was up there, but you know what the HR rate compared to Archer's just not the Ks Lynn doesn't produce. What must be the difference? Lynn's career Hard hit rate is below 29% while Archer has had 1 season below 30%. Something at 39% this year. A stat Fangraphs doesn't list? Hits per 9. BRef does and Archer's career is 8.0 but 8.2 in '16 to 8.6 this last season. Stats that would be fearful more when you're giving up a higher Hard hit pct than previous.

 

And that is my final Chris Archer post as I can't put up any more numbers to my side of the argument against Archer in trade when a guy like Lynn is out there to be signed(Chatwood prevously) Or the amount of Minor League near ready pitchers in the system to pull from.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Archers hr rate through his entire career has hovered around the league average, meaning that he doesn't need to be exceptional in that category to put up the quality pitching numbers he has during his career. Many of the ace caliber pitchers listed in the post above saw their hr rates jump significantly in 2017 as well. Why? Because everyone is trying to hit hrs now.

 

Signing Lynn will cost the brewers 20 plus million over 4 yrs at least, that's a dumb move for a small market team that has prospects whose best value to the organization is trade bait. I would much rather have archer than Lynn for the next 4 seasons.

[FmrBeerMan]

Archers hr rate through his entire career has hovered around the league average, meaning that he doesn't need to be exceptional in that category to put up the quality pitching numbers he has during his career. Many of the ace caliber pitchers listed in the post above saw their hr rates jump significantly in 2017 as well. Why? Because everyone is trying to hit hrs now.

 

Signing Lynn will cost the brewers 20 plus million over 4 yrs at least, that's a dumb move for a small market team that has prospects whose best value to the organization is trade bait. I would much rather have archer than Lynn for the next 4 seasons.

 

But it really hasn’t. In the two years he produced well. The two years that everyone seems to basing his career on they were .26 and .21 below the league average. The other years were he is a four ERA pitcher they have been at the league average. What that tells me is he does need to be exceptional in that category to be the pitcher we would want buying. Then moving to Miller Park that seems unlikely.

[superfly]

Archers hr rate through his entire career has hovered around the league average, meaning that he doesn't need to be exceptional in that category to put up the quality pitching numbers he has during his career. Many of the ace caliber pitchers listed in the post above saw their hr rates jump significantly in 2017 as well. Why? Because everyone is trying to hit hrs now.

 

Signing Lynn will cost the brewers 20 plus million over 4 yrs at least, that's a dumb move for a small market team that has prospects whose best value to the organization is trade bait. I would much rather have archer than Lynn for the next 4 seasons.

 

But it really hasn’t. In the two years he produced well. The two years that everyone seems to basing his career on they were .26 and .21 below the league average. The other years were he is a four ERA pitcher they have been at the league average. What that tells me is he does need to be exceptional in that category to be the pitcher we would want buying. Then moving to Miller Park that seems unlikely.

 

Kershaw's ERA would go up too if he played in Yankee Stadium, Fenway, and Camden. Miller Park would also be like this, except the NL has pitchers. PNC, Busch, and GABP are all middle of the road or worse hitting environments than any of those AL East venues. I like Lynn but if STL doesn't see value there I will definitely say no thanks. Does the name Jeff Suppan ring a bell?

[billymac]

Archers hr rate through his entire career has hovered around the league average, meaning that he doesn't need to be exceptional in that category to put up the quality pitching numbers he has during his career. Many of the ace caliber pitchers listed in the post above saw their hr rates jump significantly in 2017 as well. Why? Because everyone is trying to hit hrs now.

 

Signing Lynn will cost the brewers 20 plus million over 4 yrs at least, that's a dumb move for a small market team that has prospects whose best value to the organization is trade bait. I would much rather have archer than Lynn for the next 4 seasons.

 

But it really hasn’t. In the two years he produced well. The two years that everyone seems to basing his career on they were .26 and .21 below the league average. The other years were he is a four ERA pitcher they have been at the league average. What that tells me is he does need to be exceptional in that category to be the pitcher we would want buying. Then moving to Miller Park that seems unlikely.

 

Kershaw's ERA would go up too if he played in Yankee Stadium, Fenway, and Camden. Miller Park would also be like this, except the NL has pitchers. PNC, Busch, and GABP are all middle of the road or worse hitting environments than any of those AL East venues. I like Lynn but if STL doesn't see value there I will definitely say no thanks. Does the name Jeff Suppan ring a bell?

 

Suppan and Lynn aren’t even close. Suppans previous 4 STL Year’s were FIPs of average 4.8, Lynn’s are around 3.4, same ages, not even close

[SRB]

 

Except he had a 3.22 ERA in 2013 (128 IP), a 3.33 ERA in 2014 (194 IP), and a 3.23 ERA in 2015 (212 IP). The entire premise of baseball analytics suggests that his 2016-2017 ERA is the outlier.

 

He's not Kershaw or Sale, no, but those kind of guys are not available to the Brewers for four years on a cheap contract. Archer reportedly is.

 

You are trying to suggest that 2 full and consecutive seasons of starts are outliers? Reeeeeeeally?

 

Yes, because ERA is not a great stat and a handful of flukey starts out of two full seasons can dramatically impact ERA. That's why advanced metrics are more predictive of future performance, and Archer's peripherals and durability are both elite.

[NOMAAM]

I'm betting the Rays wait until in season to trade Archer. To further drive up the price.

[Lathund]

This past season his K/9 and BB/9 were as good as they'd ever been. FIP and xFIP (Who are both better predictors of future ERA than past ERA is) right around 3.4. A career high BABIP helps explain things. Even with that, his slightly better than league average ERA (4.07) becomes more valuable when it's over 200+ innings. I'm not convinvced he's worth the (likely) high asking price, at the point this team is at right now, and he's not a "true ace" type of pitcher; but he's nonetheless very good.

[trwi7]

You tend to have higher BABIPs when the contact you give up is hard, which Archer's is. I don't know why some are so willing to ignore that.