ramble2 wrote:thejusman1 wrote:I've drafted Nolasco two years in a row now... he has all the peripherals of an elite pitcher, sure, but he just can't put it together. I don't know if I'm going to draft him for a third consecutive year (and chances are this is when he puts together an NL Cy Young-esque season).
I've never been sold on Nolasco. You'll get a good K and BB rate, but he seems to get hit. It's like he's figured out that to pitch well you want to make batters either miss or make them earn their way on base, but his stuff just isn't good enough to challenge MLB hitters. Maybe we've got it all wrong with Nolasco--maybe his peripherals suggest that he's actually maxing out his talent, and not that he's unlucky. Maybe if he weren't as smart a pitcher he'd have already pitched his way out of the majors. I don't know, I haven't watched him pitch and don't have the scouting skills to evaluate his stuff.
That said, I'd definitely take a flyer if he falls far enough. There's enough good pitching out there that he could be around pretty late. If you've got a decent staff already and can tolerate a mid-4 ERA he's a great guy to boost your K/IP. That's no small thing in any league with a IP limit (be it H2H or roto).
Maybe he doesn't have it anymore, but he has been downright dominant for 100 innings at a time. That's not a huge sample, but it's not that small either. If you see a pitcher make 15 starts in a row where he puts up elite numbers (not just good), it's hard to say that that player's stuff just isn't good enough to challenge MLB hitters. If you're right, to be skeptical, it's because he's lost it, not that he never had it.
I agree that as cheaply as he's coming in drafts, he's probably being valued pretty fairly, but I'm not totally convinced he's done just yet.