As he leaped from rookie ball to the big leagues in a few short seasons, right-hander Trevor Cahill had little problem making opposing hitters whiff.

A California prep product taken in the 2nd round of the 2006 amateur draft, Cahill dominated the competition in A-Ball and Double-A. In 105.1 frames in the Low-A Midwest League in 2007, the 6-3 hurler punched out ten batters per nine innings with 3.42 BB/9. Cahill then took on the High-A California League and AA Texas League in 2008. His combined line? 124.1 IP, 9.8 K/9 and 3.6 BB/9.

Sure, Cahill’s command sometimes abandoned him. But he drew as much praise as any pitching prospect in the game. And why not? In addition to all of those K’s, Cahill was a groundball machine. He burned worms at a 56.4% clip in 2007 and kept the ball on the ground 61.5% of the time in 2008. Generally, strikeouts and groundballs have an inverse relationship: one comes at the expense of the other. It’s rare to find a young pitcher so adept at making batters whiff or chop the ball into the dirt when they do manage to make contact.

Heading into the 2009 season, Baseball America ranked Cahill as the second-best prospect in the Oakland A’s system (Brett Anderson was first). BA complemented Cahill’s two-seam fastball “with outstanding sink and running life, enabling him to rack up both grounders and swinging strikes.” But that was just the tip of the iceberg as far as his repertoire was concerned: Cahill also came equipped with a “nasty 79-81 MPH knuckle curve,” a low-80’s slider and a developing changeup.

Cahill figured to open the ’09 campaign at AAA Sacramento. Instead, the A’s jumped the 21 year-old up to the majors. While his minor league tag-team partner Anderson made a seamless transition (3.61 xFIP in 175.1 IP), Cahill just tried to keep his head above water.

In 178.2 innings pitched, Cahill compiled a 4.92 xFIP. While he racked up the whiffs in the minors, he K’d just 4.53 batters per nine frames, while issuing 3.63 BB/9. Cahill’s punch out rate was 8th-lowest among starters tossing at least 150 frames. He displayed slight groundball tendencies (47.8 GB%), but he didn’t wage a ground assault on hitters, either.

While scouts loved Cahill’s expansive collection of pitches, the young righty nearly abandoned his breaking stuff during his rookie year. Cahill threw both his fastball and sinker around 30 percent of the time, while showing hitters his changeup about 29 percent. That low-80’s slider appeared just under seven percent of the time, with the spike curve all but forgotten (less than 4 percent of his pitches).

Cahill’s pair of fastballs weren’t especially effective, with a run value of -0.79 per 100 pitches. He pulled the string more efficiently (+0.67). But when Cahill did try to break off a slider or curveball, he often missed the mark (-1.21 for the slider, -1.54 for the curve).

Trevor’s often fell behind in the count. His first-pitch strike percentage was only 54.2%, well below the 58.2% MLB average. Finding himself in hitter’s counts so frequently might have discouraged Cahill from going to his breaking stuff. With a fastball-changeup approach, his overall contact rate was 82.1% (80.5% MLB average).

Left-handers gave Cahill some problems in the minors (his walk rate ballooned to 4.83 per nine innings vs. lefties), though nothing especially alarming. But southpaw batters battered Cahill in his introduction to the big leagues.

Baseball-Reference offers a handy stat called sOPS+, which compares a player’s performance in a given split to the league average. 100 is average. For pitchers, a mark below 100 is above-average, while a figure above 100 indicates the pitcher fared worse than the league average.

With his fastball and sinker tailing in on righties, Cahill held same-handed hitters to a 91 sOPS+ (nine percent better than the league average). But lefties? They throttled him for a 134 sOPS+.

Right-handers struggled to get their arms extended with so many pitches coming down and in. But southpaws rarely saw a pitch on the inside half of the plate:

Cahill vs. LHB, courtesy of Trip Somers’ Texas Leaguers blog:

See all that white area on the inside corner? Lefties rarely had to contend with anything in on the hands. They didn’t whiff much against Cahill:

Cahill vs. LHB (data from Baseball-Reference)
Strikeout/PA%: 11.4%
AL Avg. for RHP vs. LHB: 17.5%

Cahill didn’t exactly cause many righties to come up empty either (12 K/PA%, compared to the 17.9% AL average for RHP vs. RHB). But he did at least get same-side batters to hit the ball on the ground often. Lefties? Not as much.

Cahill vs. RHB: 52.6 GB%
Cahill vs. LHB: 45.3 GB%

(Data from Baseball Prospectus)

Trevor Cahill didn’t exactly burst onto the scene in 2009, but he really shouldn’t have been expected to do so. He had little experience above A-Ball prior to this past season, and he did manage to avoid getting embarrassed in the majors at an age where most guys are toiling in the lower levels of the minors or gearing up for their junior season in college.

In order for Cahill to live up to his promise, he’s going to have to dust off his breaking pitches and keep lefties from getting so comfortable in the batter’s box. He has a lot of work to do, but don’t get too discouraged. Cahill will only be 22 years old in 2010. There’s plenty of time for him to rediscover his whiff-inducing ways.

The Mets endured an unfortunate 2009 season where injuries to the team’s superstars severely hampered their season. The injury bug stayed away from former first round pick Mike Pelfrey as he logged 31 starts and 184 innings. But Pelfrey finished the year with a sore 5.03 ERA.

There’s reason for optimism when Pelfrey’s season is placed under the microscope but there also appears room for possible adjustments as well. Pelfrey will be 26 at the outset of the 2010 season and the Mets need Pelfrey to step up and become a force in the middle of the rotation especially after Oliver Perez’s disastrous 2009 season.

In 2008 Pelfrey logged 201 innings with a 3.72 ERA accompanied with a 4.93 K/9 rate, 2.87 BB/9 rate, and an insanely low 0.54 HR/9 rate. His shockingly low HR/9 rate helped aid him to a solid 3.96 FIP. There was natural reason to expect his home run rate to increase in 2010 and it did to 0.88 home runs allowed per nine innings. Pelfrey’s strikeout rate increased to 5.22 per nine but his BB/9 unfortunately swelled to 3.22. All of this added up to a 4.39 FIP.

Pelfrey’s FIP looks much better than his 5.03 ERA and fantasy owners should also expect his .321 BABIP to regress closer to the league average around .300. His 66.7% LOB rate should also move closer to the league average of 72% (his 2008 LOB was 74%). Pelfrey is known for his sinker and in 2009 51% of his balls hit in play were of the ground ball variety. In 2008 he had a 49% ground ball rate. Pelfrey received no help from his defense in 2009 but it figures to improve if the Mets regulars can stay healthy and on the field though the potential addition of Jason Bay in left field wouldn’t improve the teams UZR prospects. The Mets had the leagues second lowest UZR at an astounding -47.3. Interestingly enough the Mets were without a doubt the National League’s worst team with the leather as the Nationals had the second lowest mark in the NL at -26.7 which is over 20 runs better than the Mets. In 2008 the Mets had a 27.1 UZR as a team.

Despite striking out more hitters Pelfrey’s contact rate on pitches he threw outside the strike zone leaped from 68% in 2008 to 77 percent in 2009. The league average during both years was 62%. This is an interesting mystery and no definite answer may lay in the data. But his run values per pitch certainly stand out. In 2008 Pelfrey tore hitters up with his fastball and it resulted in 21.9 runs above average on the season. But in 2009 his fastball was worth -8.2 runs below average. Something happened with Pelfrey’s fastball in 2009. Hitters were definitely doing more with it when they saw it.

Pelfrey’s fastball velocity during both years remained nearly the same at 92-93 mph. But his Pitch F/X data reveals something about his fastball. While Pelfrey’s horizontal movement on the pitch remained nearly static (-7.7 X in 2008 and -7.9 X in 2009) his vertical movement on the pitch tells another story.

Here’s his vertical movement on his fastball over his first three years in the league:

2007 (only 99 pitches): 7.8 Z
2008: 7.4 Z
2009: 6.5 Z

Pelfrey’s sinker was diving about an inch more than it had been in years past. Pelfrey’s sinker has always been his bread and butter and during his last season of prospect eligibility before the 2007 season Baseball America ranked him number one in the Mets system and raved about the pitch in the scouting report: “There are few pitchers in the minors whose fastball can rival Pelfrey’s. His two-seamer sits at 92-95 mph with fierce sink and late life and rates as a 70 on the 20-80 scouting scale.”

The difference is small and we are only talking about nearly an inch here between the difference of vertical movement on Pelfrey’s fastball from 2008 compared to 2009. Baseball is said to be a game of inches and an inch is often times the difference between a sky high pop up and a home run in this game.

Pelfrey’s sinker had a bit more sink and/or late life but it seemed to negatively affect him and he paid dearly according to the run values we have available per pitch. Why? That is what we are not exactly sure of and extra movement on a pitch typically helps a pitcher and enhances his repertoire. This extra bite hurt him and it could be statistical noise over the course of the season but hitters handled the pitch very well and did make contact with it at a great rate when it found its way outside of the strike zone.

Either way, Pelfrey should improve upon his 2009 showing next season with a little more help from his defense and a normal increase in his left on base rate. Pelfrey’s proven to be durable early in his career and his FIP vindicates his poor 2009 ERA. Pelfrey should be a good source of wins next season with the Mets having many injured regulars returning to the line up.

If you see reports about Pelfrey working on his mechanics or trying to alter his sinker to return to prior form as spring training approaches try to remember his poor 2009 run value on his fastball. Perhaps if Pelfrey goes back to his old ways he’ll see more improvement or if he sticks with what he was doing last year he’ll enjoy the extra strikeouts and rely on his defense to help him out a bit more. 2010 will tell us a lot about Mike Pelfrey and his sinker but label him as a sleeper for your drafts. He could be had towards the middle rounds and he would offer your team some intriguing upside.

According to MLB.com’s Ian Browne and Sports Illustrated’s Jon Heyman, free agent RHP John Lackey has signed a five-year, $85 million deal with the Boston Red Sox.

The 31 year-old has been remarkably consistent, posting xFIP marks of 3.99 in 2007, 3.88 in 2008 and 3.92 in 2009. Lackey has punched out 7.2 batters per nine innings during his big league career, while also displaying plus control with 2.64 BB/9.

Lackey comes at batters with a 90-92 MPH fastball, a low-80’s slider, a high-70’s curveball and a seldom-used low-80’s changeup. His heater is a decent pitch (+0.19 during his career). But his breaking stuff shines. The 6-6, 245 pound righty’s slider has been worth +0.29 runs per 100 tosses, while his curve checks in at +1.03. Lackey’s reluctance to pull the string seems well-grounded (-1.3 runs/100 for the changeup).

Big John’s recent opponent contact rates are middle-of-the-pack (80-81 percent, right around the league average), and his 8.55 swinging strike percentage over the past three seasons is above-average, but not elite (the average for starters is 7.8 percent).

Lackey’s contact rates have been trending upward lately, too:

In-Zone Contact%
2005: 86.3
2006: 88.9
2007: 90.6
2008: 91.3
2009: 91.3

(87-88% MLB average)

Overall Contact%
2005: 76.5
2006: 79.4
2007: 80.3
2008: 81.5
2009: 80.4

Because of the extra contact, it would be wise to expect a few less punch outs in the years to come.

Where Lackey really shines is getting ahead of the hitter: his first-pitch strike percentage from 2007-2009 is 64.5%, which ranks 5th among starters during that time period. He’s adept at putting the hitter in an 0-1 hole, but then he tends to rely on the batter’s impatience. Lackey’s overall percentage of pitches within the strike zone is just 46.5% since 2007, compared to the 49-51% MLB average. Hitters are chasing a lot of those out-of-zone offerings, though: Lackey’s outside-swing percentage from 2007-2009 is 29.7%. That ranks 6th among starters over that period.

Lackey averaged nearly 211 innings pitched per season from 2003-2007, but he has experienced some health issues over the past two years. He hit the DL with a triceps strain in 2008, delaying the start of his season until mid-May and limiting him to 163.1 IP. In 2009, Lackey suffered a right forearm strain that also kept him from toeing the rubber until the middle of May. He tossed 176.1 frames this past season.

The move from Angel Stadium to Fenway Park will likely hurt Lackey’s numbers a bit:

Three-year park factors for Angel Stadium and Fenway (data courtesy of ESPN.com)

Angel Stadium
Runs:1.04
HR: 1.01
H: 1.03
2B: 1.06
3B: 0.72

Fenway Park
Runs: 1.11
HR: 0.90
H: 1.06
2B: 1.44
3B: 0.87

Angel Stadium has played like a slight hitter’s park over the past few years, increasing run scoring by four percent. Fenway, meanwhile, has inflated run scoring by 11 percent compared to a neutral ball park. Homers are hard to come by for righties, but the Green Monster is a doubles-making machine.

If the terms of the deal are correct, then the Red Sox are valuing Lackey as something like a four WAR per season pitcher moving forward. It’s a mark he easily surpassed from 2005-2007, and basically matched in 2009. But there are certainly risks inherent in handing out a five-year deal to a guy who hasn’t been healthy enough to throw a pitch in April in each of the past two seasons. Perhaps the biggest mistake teams make is handing out free agent deals based on past performance.

Overall, Lackey’s contract seems like a gamble by Boston. But given the club’s deep coffers and position on the win curve, it’s defensible. As Dave Cameron explained, each additional win added to a team on the cusp of the playoffs is extremely valuable. The Rays have an absurd collection of young talent and a canny front office. The Yankees are coming off a World Series win. A.L. East baseball is not for the faint of heart.

Fantasy owners shouldn’t hesitate to draft Lackey relatively high entering next season. Luckily, you only have to worry about how he’ll perform in 2010, not 2014. His value takes a slight ding with the move to Fenway, and his health problems are mildly disconcerting. But Lackey still looks like a top 30-40 starter for 2010.

After examining some of the interesting hitters non-tendered, let’s now turn our focus toward the hurlers let go by teams on Saturday. I only included CHONE projections for a select few, as many of these pitchers are still on the rehab trail.

Jose Arredondo

Arredondo was a revelation out of the Angels bullpen in 2008 (8.11 K/9, 3.25 BB/9, 3.62 xFIP), but he endured a nightmarish 2009 campaign and is now set to undergo Tommy John surgery. The small righty with big stuff wasn’t nearly as bad in 2009 as his 6.00 ERA would indicate, as his BABIP was .339 and his strand rate was just 64.9%. Arredondo’s xFIP was 4.03. He missed more bats (9.4 K/9), but his control suffered (4.6 BB/9). Jose also whiffed a bunch of batters (10.5 K/9) and walked the yard (6.1 BB/9) in 20.2 innings at AAA.

Matt Capps (56 IP, 6.91 K/9, 2.41 BB/9, 1.13 HR/9)

Capps was something of a surprise non-tender, but his reputation might surpass his actual contribution at this point. To be sure, he’s nowhere near as bad as his 5.80 ERA in 2009 would suggest: his BABIP was a stunning .370. Capps has excellent control (career 1.66 BB/9), but he doesn’t whiff many batters for a late-game reliever (6.89 K/9). An extreme fly ball pitcher (career 36 GB%), Capps benefitted from abnormally low home run/fly ball rates in 2007 (4.4%) and 2008 (6.8%). In ’09, that figure regressed to 13.5%. Check out Capps’ ERA and xFIP numbers from 2007 to 2009:

2007: 2.28 ERA, 4.31 xFIP
2008: 3.02 ERA, 3.95 xFIP
2009: 5.80 ERA, 4.37 xFIP

Add in Capps’ recent health problems (DL stints for a shoulder injury in ’08 and an elbow malady in ’09), and the non-tender begins to make more sense.

Mike MacDougal (55 IP, 6.71 K/9, 5.56 BB/9, 0.65 HR/9)

The Nationals wisely let the control-challenged, injury-prone MacDougal walk, rather than going to arbitration with a guy whose surface stats (20 saves in 21 chances, 4.31 ERA) far exceeded his peripherals (5.63 K/9, 6.29 BB/9, 4.99 xFIP). MacDougal was as wild as ever in 2009, and his stuff missed few bats. The 32 year-old righty decided to chuck mid-90’s heater after mid-90’s heater (Mac tossed his fastball almost 90% of the time in 2009). Subsequently, his contact rate spiked to 83.9%, compared to a career 78.2% average.

Adam Miller

Sigh. The electric right-hander was once the pride of the Indians organization, and for good reason. His mid-90’s heat and sinister slider fooled plenty of batters in the minors. But injuries have ruined Miller’s career. Elbow problems slowed him a few years ago, and a pair of surgeries on his right middle finger could possibly end his career before it even got started.

(Update: Miller and Reyes have been re-signed by the Indians.)

Scott Olsen

Have you seen Olsen’s career? In 2006, the lefty looked like one of the more valuable commodities in the N.L. At 22 years old, Olsen posted a 4.07 xFIP in 180.2 IP, whiffing 8.27 hitters per nine innings and displaying an excellent slider and changeup.

After a mediocre 2007 season (4.95 xFIP), Olsen’s velocity fell off a cliff in 2008. So did his ability to make hitters miss: 8.27 K/9 in ’06, 6.78 in ’07, and just 5.04 per nine in ’08. A trade to the Nationals did little to revive his velocity and career, and Olsen underwent surgery to repair a torn labrum in July. Perhaps Washington will bring the soon-to-be 26 year-old back at a lower cost, but his stock has plummeted.

Anthony Reyes

The former Cardinals prospect has a fantastic minor league track record. However, Reyes likes to work up in the zone with his high-80’s-low-90’s fastball. That has led to a ton of fly balls (35.9 GB%) and dingers (1.35 HR/9) in the big leagues. His career line in the majors: 5.05 xFIP, 6.29 K/9 and 3.65 BB/9 in 293.1 frames.

Reyes’ career has also been marred by elbow ailments, and he underwent Tommy John surgery this past June after an abysmal performance with the Indians. The 28 year-old has a pair of decent secondary pitches in a mid-70’s curveball (+0.13 runs/100 career) and a mid-70’s changeup (+0.32 runs/100). He’s going to have to learn to keep that heater down, though, lest it continue to get scorched (-0.52 runs/100).

(Update: Reyes and Miller have been re-signed by the Indians.)

Chien-Ming Wang (103 IP, 5.42 K/9, 3.15 BB/9, 0.61 HR/9)

Which sinkerballer’s career has imploded more: Wang’s or Fausto Carmona’s?

Wang (30 in March) had a mind-bending 9.64 ERA in 42 frames this past season: a .397 BABIP and a 53.1% strand rate will do that. He was the most groundball-centric pitcher in the big leagues earlier in his career, getting worm-burners over 60% of the time from 2007-2009. But during injury-plagued 2008 and 2009 campaigns (season-ending Lisfranc problem in ’08, a hip ailment and a shoulder injury requiring season-ending surgery in ’09), Wang’s groundball rate fell to around 53-54%.

He’s still recovering from that June shoulder surgery, and he isn’t expected to take a big league mound until late spring or early summer. If Wang can get healthy, he and his 4.22 career xFIP could still be of use to clubs.

Mark Worrell

A righty reliever with a wacky delivery, Worrell was acquired by the Padres (along with Luke Gregerson) in last winter’s Khalil Greene trade.

While Gregerson was extremely effective out of the ‘pen for San Diego, Worrell underwent Tommy John surgery and missed the ’09 season. Worrell has missed a ton of bats in the minors. He could re-sign with the Padres as he continues his rehab.

The Yankees, Tigers, and Diamondbacks have just finished up a deal that involves Max Scherzer, Edwin Jackson, Curtis Granderson, Ian Kennedy and Austin Jackson.

Yankees Receive: Granderson
Tigers Receive: Scherzer, A. Jackson, Daniel Schlereth, Phil Coke
D’Backs Receive: E. Jackson, Kennedy

Without arguing about who won the deal, let’s analyze how this may change each player’s fantasy value.

Granderson – Grandy moves to a park that is heaven for left handed power hitters. Granderson hit 30 jacks while playing in Detroit, so I am salivating at the chances Grandy will have for dingers in New Yankee Stadium. It is unclear where Grandy fits in the Yankees lineup, but he will likely hit second behind Derek Jeter. While Johnny Damon occupied this spot last year, it is going to take a very cheap deal for him to return to New York next year.

Scherzer – Moving to the AL won’t help Scherzer, nor will the defense behind him. Scherzer is a strikeout machine, and should perform just fine in the AL. The possibility of more run support and added wins will be an added plus for Scherzer going into drafts.

A. Jackson – I doubt he starts the year in the bigs, but I think he ends the year starting for the Tigers. This is what would have likely happened in New York, so Jackson’s value doesn’t take much of a hit.

Schlereth – He has a great strikeout rate, but a terrible walk rate. His ERA will certainly be lower next year due to his BABIP and LOB%. Depending on what happens with Fernando Rodney and Brandon Lyon, Schlereth could compete for the closers role.

Coke – Coke will likely compete with Schlereth for the closers job, but all of this is just speculation because we aren’t sure what the Tigers plan to do with their bullpen during the remainder of the offseason.

E. Jackson – Jackson’s 13 wins last year now seem to be hard to reach in 2010. Jackson’s new defense is good, but not spectacular. Jackson will continue to be overvalued in fantasy drafts, but this will knock him down a few spots.

Kennedy – It’s unclear where he will start the year. The D’Backs seem to be having an option competition for a rotation spot or two, but don’t be surprised to see Kennedy spend another half-season in the minors waiting for an injury to occur.

Out of all the players dealt, Granderson’s value will rise the most. He looked to be a sleeper candidate going into the year, but this trade will bring him back into the limelight and raise his value to what it should have been in the first place. Those of you who used a keeper spot on Grandy, I salute you.

The St. Louis Cardinals have reportedly come to terms with RHP Brad Penny on a one-year, $7.5M deal, with $1.5M in possible incentives.

Following an injury-marred 2008 season with the Dodgers, Penny inked a one-year, $5M deal with the Red Sox last season. Brad ended up getting the boot in Boston in late August, then latched on with the Giants in September.

The oft-cited narrative for Penny’s ’09 campaign is this: he got eaten alive in the A.L., scurried back to the N.L. and then pitched well with San Francisco. However, his numbers suggest that he was neither the scrub of his Red Sox days nor the resurgent ace of his Giants tenure:

Penny’s 2009 peripherals, by team

Red Sox: 6.08 K/9, 2.87 BB/9, 2.12 K/BB, .333 BABIP, 64.4 LOB%, 4.49 FIP
Giants: 4.32 K/9, 1.94 BB/9, 2.22 K/BB, .211 BABIP, 81.8 LOB%, 4.35 FIP

Penny’s BABIP was 122 points higher with Boston. His rate of stranding runners on base was extremely low with the Red Sox, before going through the roof with San Francisco.

Overall, the 31 year-old posted a 4.46 FIP in 173.1 IP. That FIP was about four-tenths of a run below his actual 4.88 ERA. He whiffed 5.66 batters per nine innings, with 2.65 BB/9.

While Penny tosses a curveball, a splitter and the occasional slider, his success has always been predicated on his fastball. The 6-4, 240 pound Penny chucked his heater 71.1% of the time in 2009, one of the five highest rates among starters.

In ’08, he lost zip on his fastball as he dealt with persistent shoulder problems (92.4 MPH, tied for his lowest mark since 2002). But in ’09, Penny picked up that missing velocity (94 MPH). Take a look at his velocity chart. Penny was all over the map in 2008, but he steadily gained speed in 2009:

After posting a gruesome run value of -1.44 per 100 pitches in 2008, Penny’s fastball rebounded for a +0.22 runs/100 value this past season.

Penny and his rediscovered heater should enjoy New Busch Stadium, which is awfully kind to pitchers. Using ESPN’s park factor data, here are the three-year park factors for Busch III:

New Busch Stadium Park Factors, 2007-2009

Runs: 0.93
HR: 0.79
H: 0.99
2B: 0.92
3B: 0.91

(A park factor of 1.00 means that the park is neutral, favoring neither hitters nor pitchers. A park factor below one indicates a pitcher’s park, while a park factor over one means that the stadium favors hitters.)

Since 2007, Busch has suppressed run scoring by seven percent and homers by 21 percent, as compared to a neutral ballpark. The venue isn’t conducive to extra-base mayhem, either. Penny should come to love his new home digs.

While there’s certainly risk in signing a pitcher who essentially lost his whole 2008 season to a shoulder injury, Penny looks like a nice value for the Cardinals. CHONE projects Penny to post a 4.13 ERA in 159 innings, which would be worth 2.1 WAR. If a win costs roughly $4.4M on the free agent market, then the Cards would receive $9.2M in value from the club’s Penny pact.

Penny’s not a top-shelf arm. But as a good starter heading to a pitcher’s park in the N.L., his fantasy value just received a nice boost. It would be wise to pick up a Penny on draft day.

On the surface, Chicago White Sox righty Gavin Floyd appeared to take a step back in 2009. After all, his ERA rose from 3.84 in 2008 to 4.06 this past year, with his win total dipping from 17 to 11 in the process.

Recently, ESPN fantasy analyst Tristan Cockcroft came out with a preliminary top 200 list for the 2010 season. Floyd checked in at number 200. He ranked below starters such as Derek Lowe, Daisuke Matsuzaka and Ervin Santana.

Santana (elbow, triceps) and Matsuzaka (shoulder) lost big chunks of the ’09 season with injury problems. Lowe, meanwhile, pulled off an undesirable trifecta by missing fewer bats, walking more hitters and getting fewer ground balls than usual.

But Floyd? He’s coming off of his best season in the majors, win total and higher ERA aside.

This time last year, I examined Floyd’s 2008 season and came to a rather harsh conclusion:

Floyd’s prospect pedigree, superficial improvement in ERA and big win total might trick some people into believing that he has taken major strides toward becoming an ace-level starter. However, there just isn’t any evidence to suggest that’s really the case. Floyd is worth selecting in the later portion of most drafts, but don’t be the guy that takes him really high and then spends the season wondering why his ERA went up by a run.

Today, I can say that I was wrong about Floyd. And now, I fear that other analysts may be making a similar mistake in underestimating the former Phillies prospect.

In 2008, Floyd struck out 6.32 batters per nine innings. In ’09, his K rate climbed to 7.6 per nine frames. The increase appears to be supported by a drop in contact rate. Opposing batters made contact when swinging at Floyd’s pitches 81.7% of the time in ’08, but just 77.8% in ’09 (80-81% MLB average).

Also, his rate of swinging strikes spiked from 8.4% in ’08 to 9.9% this past year (7.8% average for starting pitchers). Floyd ranked 17th among starters in contact rate and 21st in swinging strike rate.

The soon-to-be 27 year-old also lowered his walk rate a bit, from 3.05 BB/9 in 2008 to 2.75 BB/9 in 2009. Floyd kept the ball on the ground more than in years past, with a 44.3 GB% (41.2% in ’08).

That’s not a massive increase, but it makes a difference. His home run/fly ball rate didn’t change all that much between 2008 (11.8%) and 2009 (11.2%), but his HR/9 figure fell from 1.31 to 0.98. Considering U.S. Cellular Field’s homer-happy tendencies (1.26 HR park factor from 2007-2009), getting a few more grounders can’t hurt.

For most of his major league career, Floyd struggled to retire lefty batters. In 2009, that wasn’t the case. Baseball-Reference keeps track of a stat called sOPS+, which compares a player’s performance in a given split to the league average. An sOPS+ of 100 is league average. A score below 100 for a pitcher means that he was better than the league average, while a score above 100 means he did worse than average. Here are Floyd’s sOPS+ figures vs. lefties since 2006:

2006: 155
2007: 132
2008: 111
2009: 74

While one year of platoon data shouldn’t be taken as definitive proof that Floyd has conquered southpaw batters, there’s other evidence to suggest the improvement is legitimate.

Floyd has shifted his pitch selection in recent years, progressively tossing fewer low-90’s fastballs in favor of more mid-80’s sliders and cutters:

Floyd’s fastball, slider and cutter percentage, by year:

2007: 62.1 fastball (FA) percentage, 7.6 slider (SL) percentage, 6.7 cutter (FC) percentage
2008: 54.9 FA%, 9.2 SL%, 9.4 FC%
2009: 41.5 FA%, 16.3 SL%, 12.7 FC%

Floyd’s fastball has been scorched for a career run value of -0.92 per 100 pitches, making his decision to throw fewer heaters a wise one. His slider and cutter are lumped together on his Pitch Type Values section. Floyd’s Pitch F/X graphs (like this one from a 9/16 start vs. Seattle) show that they’re two distinct pitches, though:

The run value of his slider and cutter combined is +0.58 during the course of his big league career.

With more whiffs, fewer walks and the patented “Cooper Cutter” in his arsenal, Floyd was one of the better starters in the A.L. in 2009. Floyd’s Expected Fielding Independent ERA dropped from 4.61 in ’08 to 3.82 this past season. That placed 8th among A.L. starters.

Gavin Floyd might not be an elite starter, but he’s pretty darned good. Don’t let the win total fool you: Floyd was better than ever in 2009.

Even though this isn’t officially a mailbag post, the idea for this analysis came from someone with a question, who wishes to remain anonymous:

“I’m in a dynasty league, with no rules about rounds or dollar values for keepers. I have Slowey, Joba, and Cueto as potential keepers, but can only keep two of them. Which one should I trade or drop?”

Kevin Slowey only pitched through June, missing the last three months of the season after undergoing surgery on his wrist. Slowey looks poised to return by the beginning of the season, so his injury isn’t of much concern, especially in dynasty leagues. Slowey has superb control, so his WHIP should benefit from it. His high ERA in 2009 was inflated a bit by a fluky BABIP, but his home run rate will need to go down before he can be considered a top fantasy starter.

Joba Chamberlain is a hard player to project, because his role is up in the air. The Yanks are going to give him every opportunity to be a starter, and will be easing up on the “Joba Rules” next season. His strikeout rate as a starter is 8.40 per 9, while his K/9 as a reliever is 11.9. He also walks more batters as a starter, which is not a good sign of possible future success.

Johnny Cueto just finished up his second season as a starter for the Reds, lowering his ERA 40 points, and lowering his FIP 31 points. He did this by lowering his walk and home run rates, but he sacrificed strikeouts to do so. The Reds defense is good, so Cueto’s increased ground ball rate is another good sign. However, he doesn’t have much of an arsenal, and he looks to be maximizing his potential already, without much more of a ceiling to reach.

Of these three, I am keeping Slowey for sure. He is a safe bet to give you wins and a reasonable ERA and WHIP each year, with a decent strikeout total. This leaves the decision between Chamberlain and Cueto. Chamberlain still has more upside than Cueto does, so I would keep him as well. Cueto is a hard guy to cut loose, but you may be able to find a trade partner for him.

To sum it up, in a vacuum I’d rather keep Slowey and Joba over Cueto.

For major league hurlers, calling Petco Park home is the pitching equivalent of winning an all-expenses paid trip to Disney Land. Bring us your homer-prone, your waiver-wire wanderers, your injury-plagued looking for a fresh start. Petco wishes to help you (sorry, Mark Prior: even the Happiest Pitching Place On Earth has its limitations).

Until July of 2009, right-hander Jake Peavy enjoyed the ambiance of Petco. Make no mistake: Peavy has been a very good starter in his own right. But, his home ballpark surely aided him.

Courtesy of ESPN’s park factor numbers, here’s how much Petco has depressed offense over the past three seasons:

Petco Park, 2007-2009:

Runs: 0.76
HR: 0.72
H: 0.85
2B: 0.73
3B: 0.92

(1.00 is neutral. Numbers under 1.00 indicate a park factor favoring pitchers, and numbers over 1.00 favor batters.)

Petco’s a massive pitcher’s park: that’s not breaking news. But the numbers still are staggering. Run-scoring is absolutely smothered in San Diego’s home ballpark.

Peavy was shipped to the White Sox in a deadline day shocker last July 31st. Here are the three-year park factors for his new home:

U.S. Cellular Field, 2007-2009:

Runs: 1.09
HR: 1.26
H: 0.99
2B: 0.89
3B: 0.61

There aren’t that many doubles and triples legged out in the Cell. That’s because those batters are too busy leisurely trotting around the bases, while Hawk Harrelson shrilly does his best to shatter every window in the greater Chicago area.

Over the past three seasons, Peavy has surrendered 0.44 home runs per nine innings at home, and 1.01 HR/9 on the road. The 28 year-old isn’t an extreme fly ball pitcher (41.8 GB%), but his groundball rate is a few ticks below the league average. Some of those flys that were innocuous outs at Petco are likely to carry over the fence at The Cell.

Let’s assume for a moment that Peavy’s strikeout and walk rates mirror his Bill James projection for 2010: 9.08 K/9 and 2.89 BB/9. But instead of his HR/9 average coming in well under 1.00, he gives up roughly one homer per nine frames. That’s about 24 dingers in his projected 215 innings.

That would make Peavy’s projected Fielding Independent ERA about 3.70.

Maybe you feel that James’ K/9 and BB/9 estimates aren’t quite right. Peavy did cruise once he returned to the mound with the Pale Hose. But those projected K and walk ratios are a dead ringer for his career averages in the N.L., in a pitcher’s haven.

There has been a disparity in the level of play between the A.L. and the N.L. Last offseason, Derek Carty of The Hardball Times examined pitchers switching leagues over the 2004-2008 seasons.

He found that those going from the N.L. to the A.L. received a “penalty.” As one might expect based on the A.L. possessing the DH and clearly playing a superior brand of baseball as of late, pitchers moving from the N.L. to the A.L. saw an across-the-board dip in performance. Pitchers going from the Senior Circuit to the Junior Circuit saw their K/9 decline by 0.57, and their BB/9 increase ever so slightly (+0.05).

Let’s apply those marks to Peavy’s projections. Now, his FIP is about 3.85.

None of this is to suggest that owners should shy away from Peavy. However, it is important to consider park and league effects when projecting a guy moving from a pitcher’s paradise in the N.L. to a homer-happy venue in the A.L. Also, his last two seasons have been curtailed by injury.

Peavy’s good. But if you’re looking for another ERA in the low-three’s, you’ll probably be disappointed.

Since he was taken in the supplemental first round of the 2004 draft, Gio Gonzalez has alternately enticed and unnerved major league talent evaluators.

If you squint a little bit, the left-hander has the makings of a top-tier starter. Gonzalez cooks in the low-90’s with his fastball, boasts a big-breaking high-70’s curveball and misses more bats than just about any hurler in the game.

Yet, the 24 year-old has already been traded three times-twice by the White Sox! As good as Gio can look when hitting the corners and garnering jelly-legged swings on that wicked curve, there are other days when he resembles an Oliver Perez/Nuke LaLoosh love child.

During his minor league career, Gonzalez managed to punch out a breathtaking 10.3 batters per nine frames, including 9.7 K/9 at AAA. Unfortunately, his walk rates were equally prodigious: 4.1 BB/9 career in the minors, and 4.6 BB/9 at the AAA level.

Over the 2008 and 2009 seasons, Gio made 30 appearances (24 starts) with the Athletics. The results probably made Oakland pitching coach Curt Young weep: a 6.24 ERA in 132.2 frames. Gonzalez’s underlying numbers help explain why he’s so intriguing and aggravating to GM’s and fantasy players alike.

Gio has whiffed 9.7 batters per nine frames in the show. Opponents have made contact against him 76 percent of the time (80-81% MLB average), a rate commensurate with some of baseball’s top-end starters.

Gonzalez’s trademark curveball has exceptional movement . His yellow hammer breaks away from lefties (in toward righties) about six inches (4 inch MLB average for left-handers). It also drops in the zone 9-10 inches more than a pitch thrown without spin, obliterating the 5 inch average for MLB lefties. Talk about two-plane break.

Of course, all of those swings and misses come at a price. Gonzalez has issued a whopping 5.49 BB/9 in the majors. Gio has located just 45.9% of his pitches within the strike zone, well below the 49-50% MLB average. His first-pitch strike percentage is just 54.2% (58% MLB average).

Gonzalez has been the victim of some poor luck on balls put in play during his short major league stay, with a .345 BABIP between 2008 and 2009. His home run/fly ball rate has also been extremely high, at 16.4% (the MLB average for pitchers is around 11-12 percent). Gonzalez’s Expected Fielding Independent ERA, based on K’s, BB’s and a normalized HR/FB rate, is 4.43 over the 2008-2009 period.

It’s difficult to say what kind of pitcher Gonzalez will become as he gains more experience in the big leagues. We can dream of a day when he’ll still be whiffing bunches of batters, without the walks flowing as freely as Gatorade in the dugouts.

Granted, pitchers almost never make gains in one area without sacrificing in another. For that walk rate to go down, Gonzalez is going to have to toss more pitches around the plate. That means more contact and fewer K’s. But the trade-off would certainly be beneficial. Easier said than done, though.

With abysmal control, Gio has posted peripherals consistent with a mid-rotation starter. He’s far from a finished product, however, as his high-octane style has a way of jamming up the bases. Gonzalez is a nice target in A.L.-only leagues, if you can stomach the occasional 3-inning, 5 walk, “pass me the Tums” outing.