Friday, November 30, 2007

Stark reminds us what we are trading for

Jason Stark writes;
"How great, how dominating, is Johan Santana?
So we took a look at his totally insane numbers. Let's start with this:
• Santana has now led the American League in fewest baserunners allowed per nine innings in four straight seasons. So who else, you ask, has done that?
How about nobody?

Ok, not bad, what else Jason?

"But over those same four seasons, Santana has also finished either first or second in the league in strikeouts. (And it could easily be four first-place finishes in a row, if rain hadn't forced him to exit early in his final start this year.)
And that's where Santana separates himself from Koufax and Hubbell.
Koufax slipped to fourth in strikeouts in 1964. Hubbell tumbled to sixth in whiffs in 1934.
So Santana is the only pitcher in history to run off a four-year stretch combining that kind of strikeout domination while allowing so few baserunners to run around. "

But Jason is he really striking that many out? Give us some perspective here;

"Over these last four years, Santana has averaged more than a strikeout an inning, pitched at least 219 innings in every season and piled up at least 4.5 whiffs for every walk in each of those years. Let's put that in perspective.
The only other pitcher in history to do that four straight seasons was Randy Johnson (from 1999-2002).

Yeah but he is no Mo, imagine if we could have Mo go seven innings?

"Now here's the final thing that astounds us about Santana: He has better numbers as a starter than a lot of closers -- even great closers -- have pitching one inning at a time. Check this out.
Santana 9.50
J.J. Putz 9.14
Huston Street 9.14
Joe Nathan 9.10
Mariano Rivera 8.09
Santana .273
Troy Percival .277
Putz .281
Nathan .288
Eric Gagne .290
Bobby Jenks .294
Brad Lidge .304
Jason Isringhausen .317"

Like I said before, Johan is pretty damn good. Enjoy Minnesota Phil, we'll miss ya.


paul said...

If no one in history has had the 4 year stretch Santana has had, what are the odds that he reels off another 2-4 years in a row like that? And if early on in the course of a 6 year contract, he ends up being just a really good pitcher instead of a great one, will it have been worth giving up Hughes and the other player(s) on whom they could have used that 25 mill per year to get? I guess my point is, I think the odds of Hughes becoming a very good pitcher are about the same as Santana slipping down to being a very good pitcher... so it is not worth trading 2-3 other good young prospects and spending 150 million dollars for him.

BombersGM said...

I go back on forth on this. Sometimes I agree with your point and feel that Johan is due for a downswing and other times I think it is a no brainer this guy is the best pitcher in baseball, period. It is a tough one. But I continue to ask myself this, how would I feel if Boston got him? The answer, afraid, very afraid.

Search This Blog