Cliff Lee Anyone?

[MWM]

Statistically minded people play in the land of probability, not absolutes. They fully understand that sometime there will be exceptions where they are dead wrong. It happens. This could be one of those cases. They also understand that the statistics are never the only evidence that should be used im making decisions. Reports from reliable scouts should always be considered along with the quantitative reports. No one should ever look at one without the other.

[Dom Heffner]

FCB- I agree that Cliff Lee is not going to be this lucky all year, but sometimes it happens.

[Dom Heffner]

That's not what I'm saying--but even "corrected" his numbers are going to be very, very good.

Which means he is going to regress, and you are going to have numbers that look good due to a good start.

He is still Cliff Lee people. Tigers don't turn into chairs and Cliff Lee isn't going to turn into something this good.

The high KK/BB ratio for me is unsustainable. We'll see.

When the hits start falling in at a normal rate his WHIP and ERA are going to go up and he's going to be Cliff Freakin' Lee.

[*BaseClogger*]

Now seems like a good time to point out Cliff Lee's 2.84 xFIP thus far...

[Dom Heffner]

All I'm saying is that the guy, for his entire life, has a 2:1, 3:1 K/BB ration and now that he has a 44:4 rate over 7 starts, everyone acts like he would have been a great addition.

7 starts, people. If this would have been from June 3 to July 15 last year, no one would have noticed.

He will regress. He is Cliff Lee. 7 starts does not a season make. These numbers are not sustainable.

Johnny Cueto was the savior of the world after one start, how do you all feel about him now?

I'm still waiting for my private message to take the bet on the .212 BAPIP lasting all year.

I mean- for someone to say all the SABR folks were wrong and then point to a 7 start sample size as your evidence. Good gracious.

You know, Justin Upton was on pace to hit 530 homeruns on April 5, I guess Baseball Prospectus got it wrong with him. Mark Reynolds was proving people wrong, too, until he got a little dose of correction.

[smith288]

Im going to say he will end up with a 15-8 3.00 Era by the end of the year.

Good...but not THIS good.

[REDREAD]

FCB- his peripherals indicate luck. They do.

A pitcher cannot expect only 21 percent of the balls put in play against to fall in as hits when much, much better pitchers aren't having the same type of success.

I will bet anyone on here an opening day ticket to next year's game a GABP that Cliff Lee does not sustain a .212 BAPIP the entire season.

I don't expect Cliff Lee to win the Cy Young award (which he would if he maintained this hot start over the entire season). Just like I don't expect Volquez to maintain an ERA under 2.00 for the entire season.

My contention was always that Lee is a very solid starter, that might've been able to be picked up for cheap. I expected him to improve significantly this year. The guy is talented. He will come down to earth a little bit, but he's pitching well due to talent, not luck.

[Dom Heffner]

He will come down to earth a little bit, but he's pitching well due to talent, not luck.

If you are saying that he will come down to earth, you are admitting that his success is due to luck.

If this is talent, then it would be no problem to sustain this. Talent does not come down to earth.

He is getting very lucky, and while his services would have been great to have, no GM should base decisions while running a several hundred million dollar a year business on the chance that someone gets lucky.

Cliff Lee is a decent pitcher. He has had some success. This kind of success, however, is luck based, and I wouldn't pay a dime for it.

Should we chase after Xavier Nady? Or should we think he is truly George Brett under all the 7 week old shiny veneer?

I don't expect Cliff Lee to win the Cy Young award (which he would if he maintained this hot start over the entire season).

If Cliff Lee kept this up, he would be the greatest pitcher of all time. Think about that, think about Cliff Lee, and then think about that .212 BAPIP.

[Benihana]

If you are saying that he will come down to earth, you are admitting that his success is due to luck.

If this is talent, then it would be no problem to sustain this. Talent does not come down to earth.

He is getting very lucky, and while his services would have been great to have, no GM should base decisions while running a several hundred million dollar a year business on the chance that someone gets lucky.

Cliff Lee is a decent pitcher. He has had some success. This kind of success, however, is luck based, and I wouldn't pay a dime for it.

Should we chase after Xavier Nady? Or should we think he is truly George Brett under all the 7 week old shiny veneer?



If Cliff Lee kept this up, he would be the greatest pitcher of all time. Think about that, think about Cliff Lee, and then think about that .212 BAPIP.

This logic is extremely flawed. Edinson Volquez will surely "come back to Earth" but it's not because he lacks talent. Sure there may be some luck involved with putting up astronomical numbers, but it's mainly due to talent, in both Volquez's case as well as Lee's.

Obviously, Cliff Lee will not have an 0.67 ERA for the entire season. If he did, he would be the best pitcher in baseball history. However, he may have an ERA around 3.00, and it wouldn't just be because he got lucky for the first month of the season.

[REDREAD]

If you are saying that he will come down to earth, you are admitting that his success is due to luck.

Not really. It's possible for a player to be awesome for a month and then come back down to above average. Pitchers talk about being in the "zone",
and so forth. I would ask you to prove that Lee is simply a benefiicary of luck, and BABIP doesn't prove it. IIRC, the guy that originally posted that theory even came back and revised it a bit.

If this is talent, then it would be no problem to sustain this. Talent does not come down to earth.

Keppinger had 7 hits in a row. How come he can't maintain that over the course of a season and never make an out again? Were his 7 hits luck? No, they were all legitimate hits. This is not an easy game. It's also not a static situation. The opponents make adjustments. Keppinger had a great 2-3 day stretch there, but came back to earth (which is still good).

He is getting very lucky, and while his services would have been great to have, no GM should base decisions while running a several hundred million dollar a year business on the chance that someone gets lucky.

Every trade is a risk. Some work out and some don't. When you are a team like the Reds that needs a talent infusion, guys like Hamitlon, Lee, Phillips, etc are good targets. Lee's multiyear contract wasn't necessarily a bad thing.
It possibly makes it easier to pick him up after a bad year.

Cliff Lee is a decent pitcher. He has had some success. This kind of success, however, is luck based, and I wouldn't pay a dime for it.

Was Lee's 2005 and 2006 season also luck? Because if he pitches to that level, his contract is a bargain. No one is saying that Lee will maintain an ERA below 1.00. But can we at least concede that Lee has made adjustments after last season which have dramatically helped his performance? If he finishes the season with 200IP and a 3.5-4.0 ERA, he's still a great asset.

Should we chase after Xavier Nady? Or should we think he is truly George Brett under all the 7 week old shiny veneer?

Haven't watched Nady so I don't have a particular opinion on him.
I have seen Lee quite a bit and that's why I suggested we target him during the offseason.
If this season is pure luck for Lee, how about flipping it and saying that last season was pure bad luck? I'm not saying that, but can't the luck reasoning work both ways? Is Bronson struggling this season purely on bad luck, while Volquez is having good luck? I don't think so. If luck has such a huge impact on a player's performance, then there's really no point in making any trade for pitching.. just load up on cheap guys and hope they all get lucky. IMO, the luck factor is way overblown. Lee is pitching great. Give him credit for that.
He's not going to have a sub 1.00 ERA all season, because no pitcher in this era can do that, but he's going to have a good season.

If Cliff Lee kept this up, he would be the greatest pitcher of all time. Think about that, think about Cliff Lee, and then think about that .212 BAPIP.

I think you put far too much weight into BABIP proving luck. Good pitchers have a low BABIP. Just look at MArainno Rivera in his prime.

[Dom Heffner]

This logic is extremely flawed. Edinson Volquez will surely "come back to Earth" but it's not because he lacks talent. Sure there may be some luck involved with putting up astronomical numbers, but it's mainly due to talent, in both Volquez's case as well as Lee's.

Actually, my argument is spot on. Lee's BAPIP suggests he is getting his good numbers due to luck. Volquez's peripherals suggest he is benefitting more so form skill than Lee is.

The reason we have BAPIP is to show who is lucky and who isn't. Cliff Lee is ninth in the majors - maybe even higher after yesterday- while Volquez is not in the top 20.

The .067 ERA is sustainable if the pitcher's skill dictates that it is. Cliff Lee's skill set does not in any way shape or form say that it is. We agree on this, I guess, but the difference between Volquez and Lee is that Volquez appears to be getting where he is on his won merit, not by the luck of balls not dropping in for hits. At least to the extent that Cliff Lee is benefitting.

I don't think that Volquez will allow 5 runs for every 45 he pitches, but it is more believable than Cliff Lee allowing 4 every 44 IP.

Time will tell.

[fearofpopvol1]

I think if I were the Indians, I'd sell high on Lee at some point this year and move him.

[RedsManRick]

Adam Dunn has the talent to hit a ball 500 feet. He even has the talent to do it a few at bats in a row. Expecting him to do it every at bat would be silly.

Lee has the talent to shut out teams. He even has the talent to do it a few starts in a row. Expecting him to do it every start would be silly.

Talent is both the ability to something and the ability to sustain that performance over time. There are lots of pitchers with the talent to shut out a team. But no player has the "talent", the ability to sustain the performance Lee has put up to date over the course of 200 IP. Over the course of a given season, it's quite likely that some SP will have an incredibly dominant stretch of starts. Lee happens to be the guy getting that this year. Yes, he's pitching very well. He's at the peak of his game. But the reality is that it won't last all year.

Yes, he's getting "lucky" (good defense, only 1 HR). His BABIP is 50 points lower than it should be given the batted ball types he's allowed. Let's remember, Luis Gonzalez hit 57 HR one year. Was, he lucky or good? The answer is yes. Same with Lee.

"Luck", aka variance, can happen even over long stretches. You have to be capable of doing the basic event, but the duration is where the variance comes in. Flip a coin 35 times. I bet you end up with at least one stretch of 5 heads or tails in a row. That's just how it works.

[Bill]

I mentioned Lee just last week in a thread stating I was wrong about dealing for him. Apparently the Indians willingness to send him to AAA and leaving him off the playoff roster finally served as a wake up call for him. He has listened to what the coaches have been tryinig to sell him this year and that is the difference.

There is an article floating out there that suggests it is part luck but that Lee has also been throwing a lot more fastballs challenging guys and less offspeed stuff. Getting ahead in the count has to help.

Btw, so far I'm right on the Laffey call- 0.86 whip and a sub 2.00 since being called up. Laffey is perfect for GABP with his sinker and excellent groundball ratio. I'd go for him and Shoppach.

[flyer85]

pitcher with good stuff having a hot start(making quality pitches) with a healthy dose of good fortune.