#1, #2, #3, #4, #5 pitching categories

[J35J]

I just brought up an interesting idea over in the minor league forum and that is to see what everything thinks a number 1 pitch should be and what a number #2 type pitcher should be, etc, etc, etc.

I just want to see what everyones idea of a #1 type of pitcher is all the way down to your idea of a #5.

This is just a starting point, like I said in the other forum I just threw it together quickly so there is room for improvement. So what I'm looking for is something like this.....

#1 =
210+ IP a year
200+ SO a year
3.30 ERA or less a year
1.10 WHIP or less a year

#2 =
200+ IP
180+ SO
3.75 ERA
1.18 WHIP

#3
185+ IP
160+
4.00 ERA
1.25 WHIP

#4
180+
150+
4.25 ERA
1.35 WHIP

#5
175+
120+
4.50 ERA
1.45 WHIP


Again, like I said, this was just thrown together I will think about it more and refine my categories but I think it would be fun to see what everyones idea of a #1, #2, #3, #4, #5 type pitcher should be, because just because a guy is a #1 pitcher for a certain team doesn't make him a #1 pitcher!!

Anyway, let the debate begin!


Jason

[NikkiSixx]

This is how I would look at it...




#1:
210+ innings
200+ K's
sub 3.00 ERA
1.10 WHIP



#2:
200+ innings
185+ K's
3.30 ERA
1.15 WHIP


#3:
190+ innings
175+ K's
3.50 ERA
1.25 WHIP


#4:
180+ innings
150+ K's
3.75 ERA
1.30 WHIP

#5:
160+ innings
150+ K's
4.00 ERA
1.40 WHIP






I like to have a very good first 3 starting pitchers, and for the back of my rotation I like to have upside.

[Snakes Gould]

yikes you have high expectations... i generally agree with the first post but i want a lefty or two in there also with the number 5 being a young high upside guy and my number 4 being someone who can churn out some innings, regardless of results (not a 6.00 ERA or anything but someone who can get by with a 4.2-4.5 ERA but give me 200 + innings.

[BritSox]

yikes you have high expectations... i generally agree with the first post but i want a lefty or two in there also with the number 5 being a young high upside guy and my number 4 being someone who can churn out some innings, regardless of results (not a 6.00 ERA or anything but someone who can get by with a 4.2-4.5 ERA but give me 200 + innings.

Are we talking #1-5 fantasy or real life starters?

[J35J]

yikes you have high expectations... i generally agree with the first post but i want a lefty or two in there also with the number 5 being a young high upside guy and my number 4 being someone who can churn out some innings, regardless of results (not a 6.00 ERA or anything but someone who can get by with a 4.2-4.5 ERA but give me 200 + innings.

Are we talking #1-5 fantasy or real life starters?

It was actually for real life starters. I guess I shoulda added that as we are in a "fantasy" baseball forum!!

The reason I did all this, is because of a thread in the minor league forum about Anthony Reyes and I think it was Warrick who said he should become a solid #3 type of pitcher and the original poster said he was of the thought that he was suppose to be a #1 or #2 guy. I then posted my categories in there and said that really there isn't even 15-20 #1 starters in all of baseball and that you shouldn't expect rookies to come up and become a #1 guy or even develop into one because a true #1 is or should be an absolute stud.

Anyway........




Jason

[Pogotheostrich]

I don't think K's are as important as IP, WHIP and ERA. K/BB would be more accurate. Plus I'd take a look at HR allowed.

[PlayingWithFire]

I don't think K's are as important as IP, WHIP and ERA. K/BB would be more accurate. Plus I'd take a look at HR allowed.

why does HR allowed and k/bb matter when they would contribute to ERA and WHIP negatively? Sure, K isn't all that important but dominant pitchers usually k a ton.

[Scout]

I don't think K's are as important as IP, WHIP and ERA. K/BB would be more accurate. Plus I'd take a look at HR allowed.

why does HR allowed and k/bb matter when they would contribute to ERA and WHIP negatively? Sure, K isn't all that important but dominant pitchers usually k a ton.

K/BB and HR/9 are the two best indicators of a pitcher's future performance.

[PlayingWithFire]

I don't think K's are as important as IP, WHIP and ERA. K/BB would be more accurate. Plus I'd take a look at HR allowed.

why does HR allowed and k/bb matter when they would contribute to ERA and WHIP negatively? Sure, K isn't all that important but dominant pitchers usually k a ton.

K/BB and HR/9 are the two best indicators of a pitcher's future performance.

we are not talking about the future here are we? We are talking about base on numbers, which category of pitcher do we place them in.

[Pogotheostrich]

I don't think K's are as important as IP, WHIP and ERA. K/BB would be more accurate. Plus I'd take a look at HR allowed.

why does HR allowed and k/bb matter when they would contribute to ERA and WHIP negatively? Sure, K isn't all that important but dominant pitchers usually k a ton.

Cause while ERA and WHIP are great they aren't perfect. HR allowed and K/BB give you a better picture of how good overall the pitcher actually is.