One Intense Royals Preview, Part II

Posted: March 13th, 2008 | Filed under: Baseball | 33 Comments »

A few announcements first. At some point, in the next little while, we’re going to have an extended conversation with Bill James, in part to sell many more copies of his typically fascinating book, Bill James Gold Mine 2008, and in part because I’m just out of words here. I’m also hoping to have some conversations with other friends who have written wonderful books about non-baseball subjects, maybe a Q&A with an actor, someone in a band, hell, we might just turn this thing into the Internet’s Charlie Rose.*

*Maybe we can go with a black background … haven’t changed the look of this site in a few days.

– I would ask all of you Royals fans — and baseball fans of other teams too — to go to my wife Margo’s blog and suggest a new potential favorite Royals player for our oldest daughter Elizabeth. As you may have picked up, Elizabeth is very much a princess and rainbows girl — she will not root for football teams that wear green, for instance, because she does not like the color green — and so whenever she shows even the slightest interest in baseball we all more or less jump.* And we don’t need any wise-guy comments about saddling her with the Royals — hey, my Dad saddled me with the 1970s Indians. It’s a family tradition.

*I should tell her that her favorite player might be a retired Royals player. When she was very little, this player came off the field during spring training and said to me, “Can I hold her?” I said yes, and he held Elizabeth, and he twirled her around until she giggled, he played with her for a a while, then he went back on the field and kept waving to her. Strangely that player was … Jason Grimsley. True true.

– Here’s a fun interview that our own Sam Mellinger had with the brilliant Ken Tremendous/Michael Schur/Mose Schrute/Fire Joe Morgan killer. It appears that Michael too has run into the “I have no idea why this blog has taken over my life” syndrome. I live in fear, by the way, of FJM taking one of my blogs and ripping it. That’s why I make them so long … I figure he will look at them and say, “Eh, not worth it.”

And finally we’ve got the second and final part of our Royals Preview, which will also include quite a bit of cherry picking off of Bill James Online. We have some non-Royals stuff on here if you want to stick with it … and if you don’t want to stick with it, why not go here and do the right thing?*

*It appears that I may be scheduled for 18 or so radio interviews on Monday and Tuesday to discuss The Soul of Baseball, which is flat frightening. I predict by interview 13, I’m ripping Hillary for her stance on NAFTA.**

**By the way … did you even know Geraldine Ferraro was ALIVE before the last few days? I don’t mean that as a slight or a negative way … I really thought I remembered a news story about her dying. I’m glad to see that she’s alive and well and still trying to bring America together (According to CNN, this is the SECOND time she has talked about an African American presidential candidate having the good fortune of being black: “In an April 15, 1988, article in The Washington Post, Ferraro is quoted as saying that because of his ‘radical’ views, ‘If Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn’t be in the race” Damn, black people are SO lucky when it comes to politics — it’s no wonder we haven’t had a white president in so long).

* * *

Royals pitching:

No. 1 starter: Gil Meche
Zips projection: 9-11, 4.55 ERA, 188 IP, 126 K, 66 W
Bill James projections: 10-13, 4.33 ERA, 210 IP, 159 K, 71 W

Last season, we at the paper decided to come up with something called the Meche-o-Meter. I think a lot of people had a lot of different ideas about what the Meche-o-Meter should be … let’s be honest, we were just giddy about the Royals having a starter who did not begin as a Canadian softball pitcher*. That’s something a lot of people outside of Kansas City never really understood when the Royals paid Meche $55 million for five year — they were saying that Meche wasn’t worth that much money.

But you know that old line about how much a canteen of water is worth in the desert? Many people clearly did not appreciate just how bad Royals pitching had been in the 21st Century. And even if they did appreciate it, they had not LIVED it, they had not spent the dog days thinking, “OK, who is pitching tonight? Jose Lima? Damn, OK, that’s a loss, but tomorrow we got, oh, Zack Greinke, he’s been awful lately, that’s probably a loss but, you know, then it’s, oh, Mike Wood, yeah, that’s a loss too, but after that there’s, oh, Runelvys Hernanez, loss, but, yeah, Kyle Snyder after that, yeah, that’s really a loss too.”

People clearly did not appreciate that when they said, “Fifty five million for Gil Meche? He’s an average pitcher at best!” that Royals fans were salivating, muttering like Tarzans “Me want average pitcher! Me Give Left Arm For Average Pitching! Not Darrell May Left Arm. Real left arm.”

*I’ve written often about the time in 1999 when the Royals brought in Canadian fast-pitch legend Mike Piechnik into spring training. It seemed to me then the lowest of the low points — there were a half dozen Royals brains gathered around the mound watching a 37-year-old softball pitcher throw underhand 75-mph drop balls while Royals assistant general manager Allard Baird looked at the ground in shame and muttered, “Guys, it’s a balk.”

Looking back now, though, I’m almost charmed by the memory of an organization that frankly had run out of ideas. The Royals had just become desperate, had become that middle-aged person who decides, “Well, maybe a personal ad in the local alternative weekly could bring me happiness.” I’m always inspired by hope, wherever it may come from. I have friends who met through personal ads in local alternative weeklies. Unfortunately Mike Piechnik really was balking on every pitch.

In any case, several people at the paper thought up this Meche-o-Meter concept, which was supposed to determine if Meche was worth the money. Eventually, we got Bill James involved, and he helped us work out a quick-and-dirty system — A quality start and win was worth 3 points, a quality start OR win was worth 2 points, a start that lasted 5 innings was one point, anything else was 0. There were several other standards and qualifications, but those were the main ones. The idea was to see if Meche would get to 55 — his uniform number and his contract total. Here’s how it came out:

8 of Meche’s 9 victories were quality starts: 24 points
1 win was not a quality start: 2 points
15 quality starts without wins: 30 points.
7 starts of five innings or more: 7 points
3 useless starts: 0 points.

So, he got 63 Meche Points, which put him way over the top on the Meche-o-Meter. And while I don’t think anyone would want to push the Meche-o-Meter as a mainstream statistic, I think in this specific instance it really gives you an idea how well Meche pitched. I’m not a huge fan of the quality start as a measuring stick — six innings, three unearned runs hardly seems like the holy grail — but it says something. The guy had FIFTEEN of them without getting a win. By comparison, Josh Beckett had three.

Another way to look at it would be to break down Meche by decision (again, going to BIll James Online for this):

Meche breakdown
Wins, 9 starts, 60 IP, 2.40 ERA
Losses: 13 starts, 81.3 IP, 5.31 ERA
No-Decisions: 12 starts, 74.6 IP, 2.89 ERA.

The number of no-decisions and that ERA are something else. Here are the top 10 ERA guys in the AL last year, their number of no-decisions and ERAs in those games:

C.C. Sabathia: 8 starts, 2.89 ERA
Dan Haren, 10 starts, 3.05 ERA
Justin Verlander, 8 starts, 3.20 ERA
Erik Bedard, 10 starts, 3.26 ERA
Scott Kazmir, 12 starts, 3.33 ERA
C.C. Santana, 5 starts, 3.60 ERA
Josh Beckett: 3 starts, 3.63 ERA
John Lackey, 5 starts, 4.18 ERA
Mark Buehrle, 11 starts, 4.28 ERA
Fausto Carmona: 5 starts, 5.40 ERA
Kelvim Escobar, 5 starts, 6.43 ERA

All of this is to say … what? That Gil Meche deserved better*? Of course. But more, that to many Royals fans who look back, that signing was absolutely enormous. Of course, it’s possible — perhaps even likely, as the projections indicate — that Meche will not have as good a year in 2008. But he was good enough last year that everyone more or less seems to feel he will at least be a DECENT pitcher, and here in this town a decent pitcher is worth twice his weight in Arthur Bryant’s burnt ends.

*There are so many great tidbits in the Bill James Gold Mine, but one of my favorites is his “Turk Farrell Award” which he gives out to unlucky pitchers. For some reason, I had completely missed the story of Turk Farrell. In 1962, the Turk went 10-20 with the old Houston Colt 45s. He lost 20 despite:

– A 3.02 ERA, 7th best in the NL.
– 203 strikeouts, 4th best in the NL.
– A 1.097 WHIP, 2nd best in the NL
– A 3.69 strikeout to walk ratio, 3rd best in the NL.
– Only 7.82 hits allowed per 9, 6th best in the NL.

Of course, I’m bee-to-Coke-can drawn to stuff like this (why do bees attack Coke cans, am I the only one who had noticed this?). I had to know how the Turk did it. I mean, he did pitch in old Colt Stadium, which was a huge pitcher’s park that year. He was on a TERRIBLE team that finished last in pretty much every offensive category — well, anyway, last in runs, homers, on-base and slugging. And remember this was the same year as the ‘62 Mets. Roman Meijas led the club with 76 RBIs. Still …

Well, here are his losses:

Loss 1: 3-2 to Philadelphia; threw 6 innings, gave up 2 runs.
Loss 2: 3-2 to Cubs; relief appearance, went 2 2/3 and gave up a run.
Loss 3: 5-2 to Dodgers; Went 6 innings, gave up 4 earned runs.
Loss 4: 9-6 to Cincinnati; Brutal start, 1 1/3 innings, 6 hits, 4 runs, 3 earned.
Loss 5: 9-2 to Pittsburgh; Brutal start, 4 innings, 6 runs, 4 earned. Defense wasn’t helping either.
Loss 6: 3-1 to Mets; Tough to lose to Mets in ‘62; Went 8 innings, allowed 3 runs.
Loss 7: 2-0 to Mets; Wonder if he’s the only pitcher to lose to those Mets twice … 8 innings, 2 runs.
Loss 8: 2-0 to Philadelphia; 7 innings, 2 runs.
Loss 9: 12-8 to Cincinnati; Back in the pen, team was up 8-3 when Colts pitcher Bob Bruce gave up salami to Frank Robinson. The Turk entered with score 8-7, gave up two unearned runs on wild pitch and catcher throwing error.
Loss 10: 12-11 to Cincinnati; Relief again; came in up 10-9, gave up homer to Frank Robinson, pitched five scoreless innings into the 13th, then had another lead, 11-10. Promptly gave up tying homer to Marty Keough, a single to Frank Robinson, and got taken out and watched Robinson score the game-winner off reliever Hal Woodeshick.
Loss 11: 4-0 to Pittsburgh; 7 innings, 3 runs.
Loss 12: 8-2 to Philadelphia; Bad start, 5 innings, 5 runs.
Loss 13: 3-1 to San Francisco; 7 innings, 3 runs.
Loss 14: 3-1 to Milwaukee; 7 innings, 3 runs.
Loss 15: 3-1 to St. Louis; 7.3 innings, 3 runs … we now have a full-fledged pattern.
Loss 16: 7-1 to Philadelphia; 5 innings and gave up 6 runs, but only three earned.
Loss 17: 7-6 to Cincinnati; Brutal start, 4 innings, 6 runs.
Loss 18: 3-2 to Philadelphia; 8 innings, 3 runs.
Loss 19: 3-1 to Milwaukee; And yet again, 8 innings, 3 runs.
Loss 20: 2-1 to San Francisco; Nice way to finish it, 8 innings, 2 runs.

And you know what? There are a few hard-luck losses in there, but it’s not nearly as bad as I had hoped. He doesn’t have any 1-0 losses, he threw pretty badly in a some of those games. And throwing 7 or 8 innings, giving up 3 runs as he did in seven of those losses, well, considering the time and place that’s not as impressive as it might seem. He had a 4.53 ERA in his 20 losses — pretty bad for 1962 in Colt Stadium. The reason he had a good year is that he was fabulous on those days he won (10 wins, 1.30 ERA, 72 strikeouts, 11 walks in 76 innings) and darned good in his few no-decisions (46 innings, 42 Ks, 2.31 ERA). I’ll try this rundown a little later on with another pitcher who I think had a much, much more hard-luck year.

No. 2 starter: Brian Bannister
Zips: 8-11, 4.84 ERA, 147 IP, 75 K, 43 W
BJ: 10-10, 3.85 ERA, 180 IP, 114 K, 52 W

I’ll have a whole lot more to say about Banny as the year progresses — I have two hours of tape, the best of Banny, talking about stats, pitching and life — but right now I think it’s worth talking for a few minutes about strikeouts. Banny last year won 12 games and posted a nice 121 ERA+ (despite a bad last few starts) but he only struck out 77 in 165 innings. The question seems to be: Can he be successful long term with that few strikeouts?

The answer to that question is fairly easy: It’s highly unlikely.

But I have a different question: Will his strikeout rate really stay that low? I ask this for three reasons.

1. His minor league strikeout rate was pretty good … he struck out 365 in 417 innings — about 7.9 per nine innings. I realize that’s not everything, but he has shown some strikeout ability.

2. He obviously is a VERY different pitcher from his Dad, but Brian is the son of Floyd Bannister, who did lead the American League in strikeouts in 1983.

3. This Banny quote: “I know how to strike people out. I just save that for when I need it. I’m purposely NOT trying to strike people out when there’s nobody on base. I want them to hit it.”

Now, obviously it’s quote No. 3 that is the most intriguing part of all this … Banny is a very smart guy. Perfect math score on his SAT. Ferocious studier of baseball statistics and physics. If someone else had spoken that same quote, I would have said, “OK, give me a break. Nobody purposely tries NOT to strike people out on a regular basis.” But with Banny … it’s not entirely impossible that he has determined that right now his best opportunity to succeed is to make people hit the ball. I cite two points of evidence:

Stat 1. Banny keeps the ball in the ballpark. Last year he gave up 15 homers in 165 innings; in the upper minors he gave up 19 homers in 216 innings. When you are not afraid to give up home runs, it seems more likely that will challenge hitters with pitches they can hit.

Stat 2: Banny’s Babip — Batting Average on balls in play — was a famously low .262 — he’s been taking hits about this all off-season. Most people think that Babip will go back up, and Banny’s numbers will suffer dramatically. I’m not arguing that point now. Banny seems to think he can keep Babip down, but we’ll get to that another time. For the point I’m making here, I’m just saying that when hitters are not getting hits against you, again, the strikeout may not seem as urgent.

I find it very likely in fact that Banny’s absolutely right: He was NOT trying to strike people out last year.

OK, so let’s say that it’s true, that Banny was not trying to strike people out last year — he was inducing contact on his terms. The question remains: Could he strike out more people if he wanted to? Banny says yes. We’ll see. As you probably know, I believe anything my guy Banny says.

In any case, Bill James expects a pretty similar year to last season, Zips has him taking a step backward. I’ve got a rooting interest here, but I think he has a good year … I just think he’s got a lot of Maddux in him, even if he doesn’t have Maddux stuff*

*I mean Greg Maddux here; Banny’s stuff is as good as Mike Maddux. And he might be a pitching coach down the road too.

No. 3 starter: Zack Greinke
Zips: 9-10, 4.76 ERA, 155 IP, 110 K, 40 W
BJ: 8-11, 4.29 ERA, 170 IP, 129 K, 46 W

I don’t know that I’ve ever liked a player in so many different roles. He’s like the Phillip Seymour Hoffman of pitchers. He came up as the wise-beyond-his-years 20-year-old pitcher who would throw a 94-mph fastball, then bloop a 58-mph curve, then throw a 72-mph something or other … he would quick pitch, try some crazy windup, basically he constantly looked like he was jacking with everybody — hitters and reporters alike. We thought he might be a pitching genius, based on his 8-11, 3.97 ERA, season as that 20-year-old. Sort of Bret Saberhagen meets Satchel Paige.

Or not. As a 21-year-old he was suddenly a lovely 5-17 with a 5.80 ERA. If it had not been Jose Lima’s Herculean season, that would be the worst in Royals history. It turned out that 58-mph curveball, when thrown to an eager Jim Thome, could travel 478 feet. And that 72-mph something or other could get into the gap pretty quickly. And so on. When seeing him that year, it was suddenly apparent that he was not a genius at all, but a confused kid who really was not ready for what he was facing. The next spring he went into Buddy Bell’s office and said he had to go home. And he did.

When he returned, he was something else … a gas-throwing bullpen guy. Suddenly he was throwing his fastball 96, 97 sometimes even 98 mph. He wasn’t messing around with slow curves anymore; he seemed to believe that his best bet out there was to throw with everything he had and let the chips fall. He started 2007 in the rotation, got rocked again, and was back in the pen throwing ridiculous gas, 99 mph on a couple of occasions. Over a three month period he was 4-1 with a 3.54 ERA and 55 strikeouts in 53 innings. He seemed to like the pen, like the feeling that he might get called into a game at any time.

And then at the end of the year, he was forced back into the rotation … and he was pretty much brilliant. It was only 34 innings, but he gave up 30 hits, struck out 31 and had a 1.85 ERA. In there he had an eight inning, two hit, 10 strikeout, no walk game against the White Sox, an 88 game score, which was, I believe the best for anyone on the Royals all year.

And now he’s at spring training getting smacked around like the panicked woman in “Airplane.”

I think it’s fair to say that I have absolutely no idea what the heck is going to happen to Zack Greinke. He’s 24 years old all season, which seems impossible (he’s younger than Luke Hochevar, for instance) and he has Cy Young stuff* and it would be an amazing story if he could just put it all together. I always root for the amazing stories. And I always root for Zack, who has offered a couple of my favorite bits of wisdom, one being his answer to a reporter’s question. He had just given up a bunch of home runs to the Chicago White Sox, and the reporter — who I think was just trying to make Greinke feel better — said something like, “Well, the White Sox do lead the league in home runs.”

Greinke gave his best blank look — nobody does a better blank look than Greinke — and said: “Well … good for them.”

*People always talk about Cy Young stuff, but few know what Cy Young actually threw. According to the Neyer/James Guide to Pitching, Cy relied on an unorthodox windup and a rising fastball that he could throw to precisely the spot he wanted to hit — Cy Young had remarkable control. Honus Wagner insisted that Young was faster than Walter Johnson. In his later years, according to Christy Mathewson, Cy developed a fabulous curve.

No. 4 starter: Luke Hochevar (I Hope)
Zips: 5-12, 5.98 ERA
BJ: No projection

Hoch has been pitching well in spring, and you get the feeling more and more that the Royals will put him into the rotation. The feeling with him — and I think this is very interesting — is that he’s likely to pitch better in the majors than he has/would in the minors for a variety of reasons.

One of these reasons is that Hochevar is very hard on himself, and as the No. 1 pick in the 2006 draft — and with other picks from the same draft like Tim Lincecum and Andrew Miller already making Major League impacts — he tends to stress out in the minor leagues. He might feel, “Oh man, they paid me all this money, they picked me over those guys, and I’m WAY behind.” There’s some limited evidence of this in the numbers (warning, small sample size ahead):

Hochevar in Class AA: 3-6, 4.69 ERA, 94 K in 94 innings.
Hochevar in Class AAA: 1-3, 5.28 ERA, 44 K in 58 innings.
Hochevar in big leagues: 0-1, 2.13 ERA, 5 K in 12 2/3 innings.
Hochevar in spring training: 0-0, 2.25 ERA, 3 K in 8 innings.

Obviously, you can’t put much stock in the Major League numbers, but … well, like I say, the Royals do believe this is a guy who might perform better in the double decker stadiums, with better umpiring, with more involved scouting, with an accomplished pitching coach, with a sense that he has arrived. It should also be added that his minor-league numbers are somewhat skewed because the Royals: (A) Had Hochevar change his delivery some and (B) Took away his plus slider for much of the time so he could develop his curveball (the Royals, like the Braves, are a fastball, curveball, change-up organization). So with freedom at the Major League level, he could emerge.

I did not like the Hochevar pick for a couple of reasons — one being that EVERYONE was on Andrew Miller, and to me if you’re going to go away from the consensus choice, you better be right; two being that I didn’t like the way he and Scott Boras messed around with the Dodgers. But I think he’s a good kid, he’s good three potentially plus-pitches, maybe four (some see him throwing a plus change-up as he gets better with it). Hochevar could still be a lot of things — a power reliever, a No. 3 starter, a No. 1 starter, a bust, it’s all available — and I think if he keeps pitching well in spring I think he’ll make the club and we’ll begin to see what the Royals have here.

No. 5 starter (maybe): Brett Tomko
Zips: 8-9, 4.32 ERA, 143 IP, 104 K, 49 W
BJ: 7-8, 4.53 ERA, 137 IP, 87 K, 44 W

You know, his projection numbers are not bad at all. The Royals would take either of those right now. Trouble is, projection Tomko pitched a lot better in spring than real Tomko (1-1, 11.37 ERA, 13 hits in 6 innings). Well, hell, it’s only spring, right?

One of my favorite moments of spring happened when I asked a scout and a very good friend of mine to give me reasons — in a dream world sense — why the Royals could the American League Central. He said, “Well, Meche could win 20.” A big stretch? Sure. But that’s the sort of thing we’re talking about here … dream world stuff, people living up to their maximum potential and then some.

He talked about Billy Butler and Alex Gordon jacking 25 homers each. Not unrealistic. He talked about Brian Bannister winning 15 games. Not unrealistic. And then he said this: “Tomko wins 15.”

I stopped him right there and said, “No seriously.” I mean, come on, it’s a dream world scenario, but we’re supposed to have at least one foot on the ground. But the thing is my frield LOOKED dead serious. Now, I want to say that this friend is not a good scout, he’s a GREAT scout, one of the most respected baseball men in the game, one of the smartest and most passionate baseball people I know. And it seemed to me he was dead serious about Brett Tomko winning 15 games even though:

1. Tomko never actually has won 15 games, even when he was young, not even in his promising rookie season (when he was 11-7 with an 3.43 ERA, his best year).
2. He’s not young anymore — he turns 35 on April 7.
3. He got released by the Dodgers last year after going 2-11 with a 5.80 ERA in a pitcher’s league and a pitcher’s park.

Anyway, I warned him that I would quote him, and he said, “Go ahead, quote me, we’ll see.” I think he was ticked off by that point and saying absurd stuff just because that’s what you do when you get mad. But I also think this is just the way it is sometimes with scouts … apparently Tomko still has really good stuff. Last year in San Diego, after being released, he struck out 26 batters in 27 innings. Scouts, especially passionate ones like my friends, will cling to hope and a pitcher who can still, on occasion, make big league hitters swing and miss.*

*I mentioned my favorite hard-luck pitcher … I’m choosing Sudden Sam McDowell in 1968. He went 15-14 with a 1.81 ERA and a league-leading 283 strikeouts in 269 innings. How does someone lose 14 games with those numbers? Here we go:

Loss 1: 2-1 to Oakland; threw 6 innings, allowed four hits and 2 runs.
Loss 2: 4-1 to Washington; 8 innings, 4 runs, not a good start.
Loss 3: 5-1 to California; 6 innings and 5 runs, but only one was earned. The big problem was Jim Fregosi reaching on a catcher’s interference. Two batters later Chuck Hinton hit a three-run homer.
Loss 4: 3-1 to Detroit; 7 innings, 3 runs.
Loss 5: 1-0 to Oakland; one of the all-time bad losses, 11 innings, 1 run, 14 strikeouts.
Loss 6: 4-1 to Detroit; Gave up 4 runs, but again only 1 was earned. Sudden Sam did not handle the errors well. In this case, Mickey Stanley reached on an error after a walk, and then Dick Tracewski improbably homered, one of eight homers in his career.
Loss 7: 9-2 to Boston; terrible outing, only went 2 1/3 innings and allowed 7 runs, but believe it or not all seven were unearned. Jerry Adair and Reggie Smith both reached on errors in a six-run first inning; George Scott reached on an error to drive in the seventh run in the second.
Loss 8: 2-0 to California; Sam went the distance, struck out 14 and — would you believe it — both runs he allowed were unearned. In the eighth inning, Bobby Knoop reached when Indians first baseman Duke Sims just dropped the throw from the shortstop. A single, walk, bunt, passed ball later, two unearned runs.
Loss 9: 5-0 to Yankees; 8 innings, 2 earned runs, 10 strikeouts.
Loss 10: 6-1 to Detroit; Strangest loss of the year; Gave up a single to Mickey Stanley, a walk to the slugger Dick Tracewski, and he was yanked out of the game, I’m assuming for health reasons. Eddie Fisher came in and allowed both runs to score, and the Indians obviously never got Sudden Sam off the hook.
Loss 11: 1-0 to Yankees; I mean this is getting ridiculous, right? 9 innings, 1 run (at least it was earned) , 7 strikeouts.
Loss 12: 2-0 to Oakland; 7 innings, 1 run, 7 strikeouts.
Loss 13: 4-2 to Washington; at least this one’s legit … 7 1/3 innings, 4 earned runs.
Loss 14: 5-1 to Yankees; 6 1/3 innings, 2 earned runs.

In his losses that year, Sudden Sam struck out 92 in 92 innings, and had a 2.34 ERA. Yes, it was 1968, when runs were pretty darned hard to come by. Still, the Indians heroically scored 11 runs in those 14 games. Throw in two extra innings, that’s an 0.77 ERA if you’re counting at home.

Closer: Joakim Soria
Zips: 3-1, 2.83 ERA, 56 K in 54 innings.
BJ: No projection? Unless I’m missing it … I don’t see anyone between Andy Sonnastine and Rafael Soriano.

I’m over 4,000 words already — and there’s no way that ANYONE cares enough about the Royals to have gotten this far anyway — so I’m not going to write about any of the other starting pitcher candidate (Hideo!) or the bullpen. Instead, I have one last thing to say about Joakim Soria, who was fabulous last year as a Rule 5 rookie.

I brought up something to Rob Neyer — and I mentioned it in the extended AL Central discussion that we had — and apparently it was misunderstood, so let me get it out there.

I’m wondering — and I have not done that much research on this, so I’m still just wondering — if there is a young pitcher (25 or under) who began his career as a SUCCESSFUL CLOSER (not a reliever, OK, I’m talking about a closer, full-time closer, a 9th inning guy who saved games for a whole year) and then later made a successful transition to top-notch starter.

Lots and lots and lots of pitchers started as relievers, from Pedro to Santana, but that’s not what I’m talking about here. It makes a lot of sense to break in a young pitcher in the bullpen. But it’s not as common to break in a young pitcher in the pressure-packed 9th inning reliever role.

John Smoltz of course started as a reliever, became a closer and then went back to starting, but that’s not the same thing. Even so, that’s unique too.

Kelvim Escobar came up as a closer for the second half of the 1997 season in Toronto, and he’s close to what I’m talking about here. But he was not a closer for a full season; it was pretty clear that the Blue Jays saw him all along as a starter. He was a starter the next season, and a full-time starter in 1999. He became a closer AGAIN in 2002, a starter AGAIN in 2003 — it’s been an odd career, and one I doubt anyone would try to recreate.

Adam Wainwright was a closer down the stretch for the Cardinals in 2006, when Jason Isringhausen went down, but he wasn’t a closer very long at all. He looks very promising as a starter now.

Braden Looper grew up as a closer, and the Cardinals are trying to make him a starter now — that didn’t go especially well in 2007, but we’ll see.

Rich Lederer brings up Charlie Hough, though he doesn’t really qualify in my mind because he wasn’t especially young when he was a closer (He was 28 when he saved 18 games for the Dodgers in 1976) and he was thrown into the rotation out of desperation in 1982, when he was 34, and he was a knuckleballer and those guys are their own breed anyway.

Scott Garrelts was a semi-closer for the Giants in the mid-80s, and then he had one really good year as a 27-year-old starter (14-5, 2.28 ERA) and two years later he was out of baseball.

He’s the closest thing I can come to what I’m looking for which is this: A template for Joakim Soria. As you know, he will be the Royals closer this year, and I have every expectation that he will do very well. He seems unflappable, he’s got great movement on his pitches, and he throws strikes. But I think we are all intrigued by what Soria could be as a starter. He really only throws two pitches, which might hold him back, but I I wonder if that’s overrated. He has tremendous presence, he’s a good athlete, he threw a perfect game in Mexico.

The Royals are keeping this option open. But I’m wondering … if Soria is successful as a closer, as I expect him to be, is there any going back? Also, he looks so much like Mariano Rivera on the mound, it’s eerie.

---