Should we sound the alarm on Zito?

Loss of Velocity

I heard he was only hitting 83-84 on his fastball. Without a good fastball, his curve isn't so great.

by metsfan @ Minor League Ball on Mar 16, 2008 11:31 PM EDT reply actions

Fangraphs to the rescue

yup, he's def lost velocity over the last 3 years

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=944&position=P

he's also favoring his change-up more than he used to compared to his breaking pitches

Go Jays

by providence bruins on Mar 17, 2008 12:07 AM EDT up reply actions

According to PITCH/fx, Barry not only didn't have very good control of his curve last season, it wasn't very effective when he DID get it over. That is the scariest thing about Barry -- aside from his having precisely no strikeouts in 12 spring training innings, of course.

by sharksrog on Mar 17, 2008 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions

Yep

I also read this. When you may lose a velocity contest to Moyer and Trachsel, you can expect not to win any more Cy's.

by killa on Mar 17, 2008 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions

Sound the Alarm?

He was one of the worst regular pitchers in the NL last year....

by Dfarth on Mar 16, 2008 11:34 PM EDT reply actions

well yeah but

I'm more talking about the alarm of the total collapse. the alarm that he's starting to lose it has been sounded a long time ago ;)

by RollingWave on Mar 16, 2008 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

After looking at Barry's stats, that was probably a little much...

by Dfarth on Mar 16, 2008 11:44 PM EDT up reply actions

uh what?

197 IP of 98 ERA+ is not "one of the worst pitchers".
Its solid average

Where do you get this stuff?

by nms on Mar 17, 2008 2:49 AM EDT up reply actions

Re:

Obviously you can't read. Look one comment above yours.

by Dfarth on Mar 17, 2008 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions

Not Really

Barry Zito WASN'T one of the worst regular pitcher in the NL last year. 17 of the other 42 pitchers who pitched enough innings to qualify for the ERA title last season had ERA's that were worse than Barry's.

I know it doesn't seem that way, Farth, but don't forget to do your homework before expressing your opinions.

by sharksrog on Mar 17, 2008 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Kiss My A$$

How about you read all the replies before expressing your opinion.

by Dfarth on Mar 17, 2008 8:50 PM EDT up reply actions

lol

make a dumb comment then get upset at others for jumping on it ...

by pedrophile on Mar 18, 2008 12:01 AM EDT up reply actions

the alarm was sounded

about two years ago. the giants weren't listening.

by larry on Mar 16, 2008 11:34 PM EDT reply actions

someone humor me

is it possible in any way he is just slumping LOL

Marcello on Tim Lincecum's 2008: "Yeah, he only pitched 180 innings last year, who knows if he can handle 200?!?!??"

by realityconquest on Mar 16, 2008 11:58 PM EDT reply actions

Sure

Lots of guys go into three year slumps during what should be their peak years.

I say give him a couple more years and he could definitely turn this around and get back to almost league average.

by alskor on Mar 17, 2008 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions

I think most players

would kill for 3-year slumps that include pitching 450ish innigns with ERA+s of 113, 116 and 98.

And I'm pretty damn sure 197 IP of 98 ERA+ IS pretty much league average for a starter

What are you talking about?

by nms on Mar 17, 2008 2:51 AM EDT up reply actions

Zito

almost all talk regarding has to be framed within the bounds ofhis contract. Sure its not bad performance, but in year 1 of a 100m contract there wasn't too much to write home about.

It's not like there was a statistical anomaly. Living in the bay area and getting to see his last few years in oakland along with last year in SF, it is pretty easy to see just why every last year of this contract could be brutal.

He just doesn't look the same.

by wildthang on Mar 17, 2008 3:36 AM EDT up reply actions

well the poster i was responding to

was clearly scoffing at the idea of Zito being even an average SP relative to the rest of the league, which he clearly already is

by nms on Mar 17, 2008 4:12 AM EDT up reply actions

The Problem is

Money. I don't think anyone is arguing that he isn't a somewhat effective pitcher - he can be. He can also stink up the place bad enough to get booed at home when he gave up nine runs in less than 3 IP.

So he's league average. You don't drop that kind of coin and expect a #3 or #4 starter out of it. No major disrespect to Zito, but the blame falls on the Giants for not understanding what they were getting into. Ultimately, Sabean will lose his job because of it. For a while, I thought that he should be allowed to keep his job long enough to see a real rebuilding effort through. Unfortunately, he's up to his old tricks again; signing whatever "veteran" he wants regardless of any sort of organizational depth at that position. Did he not get the memo that the "Win Now With Barry" program doesn't apply to Barry Zito?

The real shame of the Zito contract may come in a couple years, when the Giants are so burdened by this contract (as well as Rowand's) that they can't afford to keep Cain and Lincecum.

At least the park is beautiful, and we won't have a problem getting tickets anytime in the next decade...

I'm proud to have seen #756

by Azantor on Mar 17, 2008 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions

No

I think when someone says MAYBE he can be league average again someday they ARE in fact saying is not an effective pitcher regardless of whether is salary is 6 figure or 8.

by nms on Mar 17, 2008 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm not even sure what your argument is

Obviously, his salary has nothing to do with weather or not he's "League Average". But to discount it from the thought process is shortsighted.

Yes, he was a very effective pitcher during his early years in Oakland. However, in the years since his Cy Young, his K/9, BB/9 and HR/9 aren't exactly stellar.

So, if he's "league average" and not stellar that'd be perfectly acceptable if he was making 6 figures. Since he's making 8, you expect a little more from him.

If you pay for first row lower box seats, you expect a little more than what you'd see in the nosebleeds, even though the game is the same, and could qualify for "League Average".

I'm proud to have seen #756

by Azantor on Mar 17, 2008 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions

my argument

was a response to a SPECIFIC comment another poster made. That other posters opinion was that, basially, Zito would be lucky to return to being merely league average which i felt was false because the facts showed him to be already league average.

I'm not "shortsightedly" discounting his salary from the thought process, I was responding to a specific post saying that he was NOT league average regardless of salary.

And you say... "So, if he's "league average" and not stellar that'd be perfectly acceptable if he was making 6 figures. Since he's making 8, you expect a little more from him. "

6 figures is a damn BARGAIN for league average, a league average pitcher these days, in free agency, seems to be worth 3/21 or something

by nms on Mar 18, 2008 2:00 AM EDT up reply actions

just don't tell that to kyle lohse

by wildthang on Mar 18, 2008 3:17 AM EDT up reply actions

well

striking out 0 guys after facing about 50 is a little more then a usual slump .... even for ST. and it's not like he's just getting lot of easy outs along the way or something....

by RollingWave on Mar 17, 2008 1:26 AM EDT up reply actions

I'm guessing

I'm guessing Barry has faced closer to 60 batters this spring. Clearly he is scuffling.

And, yes, his decline last season was predictable, and I'm pretty sure nearly all of us who post here predicted it. But he was NOT one of the worst regular pitchers in the league last season. And in fact, he was quite good at the end of the season.

The true question is whether he will be the very poor pitcher he was over the first three-quarters of last season or the rather good one he was the last quarter. My guess has been that he would wind up in between and forge an ERA improvement of something like .40 runs.

But he has done little if anything this spring to support such optimism. It is, however, only spring.

The question is whether it is time to get concerned about Zito. I would argue that it is actually too LATE. :)

by sharksrog on Mar 17, 2008 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions

yes

!!!!!

Jack Cust is this year's Marcus Thames

by Team Moneyball on Mar 17, 2008 12:09 AM EDT reply actions

And to think the Mariners offered him

a $100m contract of their own. Sheeeeeeeeesh. I am so happy he's not on my team. I mean, really, who in the world thought signing Zito long term for big money was a GOOD idea? That's about on par with the Hampton contract, if not worse.

by elrey34 on Mar 17, 2008 1:48 AM EDT reply actions

I expected

decline. but he's doing it a lot faster then I expected. I thought the move the the NL would have at least helped a little...

by RollingWave on Mar 17, 2008 1:54 AM EDT up reply actions

+1

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Mar 17, 2008 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions

One Could Have

One could have made an argument last winter that moving to the NL would help Barry Zito's ERA. After all, guys who have made that switch in recent years have cut about a quarter of a run on average from their ERA's.

But if one took the time to look at how Barry had pitched against the American League and the National League during the months of interleague play over his career, one would have seen that Barry actually pitched a bit better against the AL than the NL during those months.

That said, Barry actually pitched MUCH better against NL teams than AL teams last season. What killed Barry was a couple of outings against his former teammates with the A's and one against the Red Sox.

by sharksrog on Mar 17, 2008 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions

OK enough

Zito will bounce back and post a solid 10-16 record with a strong 5.28 ERA. Stop hating.

"Motivation, being good is a lot better than being pathetic." - thefasterblade, Project Prospect

by PujolsJunkie on Mar 17, 2008 2:21 AM EDT reply actions

nah

A 5.28 ERA won't be good enough for 10-16 on that team.

by BobbyMac on Mar 17, 2008 3:33 AM EDT up reply actions

It will be plenty good enough

when Lincecum and Cain go a combined 8-36 with a 2.38 ERA.

"Motivation, being good is a lot better than being pathetic." - thefasterblade, Project Prospect

by PujolsJunkie on Mar 17, 2008 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions

It depends

Whether Barry Zito could post a 10-16 record with a 5.28 ERA on the Giants this season would depend on the run and bullpen support he receives. Last season Matt Cain was 7-16 with a better ERA than Noah Lowry, who went 14-8.

by sharksrog on Mar 17, 2008 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions

ive been sounding the alarm on him for the last

3-4 years. i dont think ive ever seen him throw a fastball over 91. hes never had a great fastball. and to be honest, i have never though his curveball was that great- it just kind sinks lazily in my opinion. what he has had in the last few years before 2007 was fantastic control. when you can spot the ball perfectly, you can makeup for not having outstanding stuff. but when youre control is off, you get pounded. go back and look at his stats. he has a lot of games where he just blows up, and others where he is almost unhittable. i have always thought he was extremely overrated, especially by fantasy players. i would not touch him with a 10 ft pole. i remember when tom hicks was trying to sign him to play for the rangers. i was praying to god every night that hicks was not that stupid. if your fantasy pitching staff is built around zito, you are in a whole lotta trouble...

by rangersfan24 on Mar 17, 2008 11:21 AM EDT reply actions

Sirens Wail

The Alarm is sounding as we speak.

by DrBGiantsfan on Mar 17, 2008 12:34 PM EDT reply actions

Zito

I too have been watching him for years, living in the bay area...outside of the one incredible season he had with the A's, he's just never been a 'dominant' pitcher. Even before his decline in the past few years, he would throw way too many pitches to make it past the 5th or 6th inning with any regularity even in games in which he was pitching well, and against good teams he would more often than not get pounded...quality hitters will make him work, and if he doesn't have pinpoint command of his curve (or depending on the umpire's strikezone), he can easily get into situations where guys will just sit on anything other than the curve, and things can unravel really quick when this happens.

Zito has always gotten a little too much credit (in my opinion) since he's a nice guy, very approachable, doesn't give the same bland quotes that most athletes give, etc, but I've always kind of thought of him as a middle of the rotation starter, not an ace.

With how strong the NL West has become, this year it could get pretty ugly for both him and the Giants...hopefully enough to actually get that organization to change direction, but probably not.

by southboundpachyderm on Mar 17, 2008 2:26 PM EDT reply actions

ehhh

before last year he pitched 220-230 IP almost every year in his full seasons. so i'm having some difficulties seeing how that "can't get out of the 5th/6th " statement holds up.

I think he's just another classic case of a guy overworked early and lost effectiveness sooner than expected. (D-train might be heading down this road too) as oppose to blowing out body parts. that's a darker side of moneyball . Beanes got every penny worth outta him and it probably shortened his career in the process.

by RollingWave on Mar 17, 2008 9:30 PM EDT up reply actions

Cy Young

He stole the Cy he got from Pedro anyway. The only reason he got it is that writers pay an inordinate amount of attention to wins, at the expense of all statistics that really determine a pitcher's worth.

by MontrealMets on Mar 17, 2008 4:26 PM EDT reply actions

I agree -- sort of

Pedro is my favorite non-Giant pitcher, so I sort of agree that he rather than Barry should have won the 2002 AL Cy Young Award. But there have been several other times when the differential between the winner and one or more of the runners-up has been greater than that particular season.

by sharksrog on Mar 17, 2008 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions

While crude...

ERA+ does a decent job here:

Pedro: 202 ERA+ (200 IP)
Zito: 158 ERA+ (229 IP)

Even if you give Pedro an ERA+ of 0 over those 30 IP difference he still winds up with a 176 ERA+ for an 18 point difference.

Derek Lowe had a 177 ERA+ over 220 IP. So Zito wasn't even the 3rd best that year. He got it because instead of 20 or 21 wins for D-Lowe and Pedro, he got 23.

Another awful cy young award was 2005:

Colon: 122 ERA+ (223 IP)
Santana: 155 ERA+ (232 IP)

So more than a 33 point difference. However when you give Pedro the benefit of the doubt and give him an easy 100 ERA+ it goes to 189 ERA+ or 31. So I think its fair to say that Pedro's snub in 2002 is pretty equal to Snatana's in 2005.

by jspearlj1 on Mar 17, 2008 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions

Pretty good argument

You make a pretty good argument here.

by sharksrog on Mar 17, 2008 6:51 PM EDT up reply actions

Using some other numbers:

By Win Shares:
Zito: 25
Pedro: 21

VORP:
Zito: 75.3
Pedro: 70.1

WARP3:
Zito: 9.7
Pedro: 9.8

Pretty close across the board, with Zito surprisingly taking the lead in two of them. I personally think Pedro had the better year, but its not an open and shut case. Meanwhile, Santana completely destroys Colon in all categories in 2005, making it one of the worst decisions ever, IMHO,

(WS, VORP, WARP3)
Satana (23, 73.0, 9.5)
Colon(19, 49.1, 7.5)

by SuperBean on Mar 18, 2008 10:47 PM EDT up reply actions

To the comment about not being 3rd best:

Halladay had a 158 ERA+ as well... in over 239 IP.

Not to take anythign away from the year Zito did have. It was great. But its sad to see that he wasn't even in the top 2 pitchers in the game and arguably not even the top 3.

by jspearlj1 on Mar 17, 2008 5:35 PM EDT reply actions