Skin Blues wrote:
lastingsgriller wrote:I am pretty neutral here... But I did not have him in my top 5 or even top 6.
I think the counter argument to yours is that in his second season as a starting pitcher he improved his whip from 1.25 to 1.19 (which is not considerably bad). His era improved from 3.35 to 2.94. So he is clearly progressing along a learning curve. Additionally the move from tex to laa should create significant improvements due to ballpark factor, defense behind him and getting out of Texas heat.
1.19 WHIP is good if he can repeat it. However none of the top projection systems thinks he can. Steamer is as good as it gets at projecting pitchers and they have him down for a 1.33 WHIP. Bill James has 1.23. ZiPS is 1.27. Mine is somewhere in between. Even last year's 1.19 only puts him 29th amongst qualified starting pitchers so you can see why he loses points there. WHIP has such a small fluctuation (it's per inning as opposed to per 9 innings like ERA, so any differences are reduced by a factor of 9) that it's hard to comprehend what that difference means. The small gap between Haren and Wilson's projected WHIP is the same in practical terms as the difference in ERA between Clayton Kershaw and Yovani Gallardo. Which is to say: pretty big.
So yes... I'd like to hear the argument for CJ Wilson over Dan Haren.
And how exactly Steamer came up with that ridiculous 1,33 WHIP?
He didnt have that high WHIP as a starter. Ever.
Is there a reason that everyone thinks he can't improve? Especially after leaving Arlington.
Or every 'top projection system' just plays it safe.
Haren 3,18 ERA 1,04 WHIP, 7,7 K/9
Wilson 2,57 ERA, 1,17 WHIP, 8.2 K/9
So why Wilson over Haren?
The same reason I took JJ and Hamels over Licecum and Haren, although I have the latter two ahead of them on my draft board.
But they all have similar value, so it's just personal.