I saw a disturbing post from Carrie Muscat at MLB.com, or at least a disturbing headline to the effect that Scott Feldman would start for the Cubs on Opening Day. Turns out when you read the article it merely implies that because Scott Baker is unlikely to be ready to pitch in the majors by the beginning of the season, Feldman is likely to be the teams fourth or fifth starter.
Still, Scott Feldman? I know a lot of stat guys think his underlying numbers are good, or really not as bad as his performance indicates, but listen, this guy is not now a first-rate starting pitcher, and, what's more, he has always been better in relief throughout his career. So lets not kid ourselves, Feldman is more of a question than an answer.
The Cubs have made it a priority to improve their starting pitching during the off-season. Seeing such an alarming headline as that alluded to above rather got me thinking just how much they had succeeded.
Last year, having dumped Carlos Zambrano in favor of Chris Volstad, the Cubs came into the season with seven potential starters. Volstad was joined by Ryan Dempster, Matt Garza, Paul Maholm, Jeff Samardzija, Travis Wood, and Randy Wells.
A pretty iffy bunch to say the least. Dempster, Wood, Wells, and Volstad were coming off down seasons. Samardzija was taking on a new role. Really only Garza and Maholm were consistent players from a statistical point-of-view.
I looked up a bunch of statistical measures and settled on WAR, wins above replacement, as a measuring tool. Maybe not the best, but as good as any without getting into a whole lot of obscure reasoning. Adding up the prior season's, 2011, WARs for all seven gave a total of 6.2. Looked at another way, the average total WARs for the same group for their careers to that point was 7.5 (the sum of each season's WAR divided by the number of seasons).
Their collective achievement for 2012 was 6.9. Dempster and Maholm had better than average years, though, of course, they were traded away at the deadline, so some of their production contributed to the success of other teams. Samardzija had a good year. Garza got hurt. Wood was a wash. Volstad was worse than he had been in the past, much worse, which is really saying something since he had been pretty bad in 2011. Wells continued a downward spiral.
Just to give you an idea, the combined WAR for the Giants five starters going into last year was 12.6 and the average career WAR for the same five is 11.6. In other words, these guys are good. Statistically you can say that their staff is almost twice as likely to contribute to a victory as the Cubs staff was.
I ran the same stats summary for this season, again using seven potential starters. Besides the returning trio of Garza, Samardzija, and Wood, I have added in Feldman, Baker, Villanueva, and Edwin Jackson.
Surprisingly, the combined WAR for the seven in 2012 is 6.0, less than a similar figure for the likely Cubs starters in 2011. This number should probably be taken with more than a grain of salt as their two best pitchers, Garza and Baker, are coming off seasons that were curtailed by injury. In Baker's case, he missed the entire season, so that his WAR for 2012 is zero.
The career average for this group is likely a better predictor of performance, but that is only 6.8. Just from this admittedly cursory analysis, you have to conclude that the Cubs rotation is still an iffy proposition. Garza and Baker are the best, followed by Samardzija, but Garza and Baker are coming off injuries and Samardzija is going into only his second year as a full-time starter.
Jackson had what is arguably a down year statistically with a division winning team, so you have to wonder whether he is a definite upgrade or a relatively expensive wash. Of the others, Villanueva has some upside but more likely winds up in the bullpen. Feldman doesn't look like much from his past performances as a starter. Wood has some upside as well and may be this season's Samardzija if he gets the chance.
Still, of the additions, only Baker looks like a potential difference-maker in this rotation based on past history and only if he regains the form he displayed prior to surgery.
Which is not to say their starting pitching disqualifies them from any improvement, just that it does not guarantee any improvement. Put another way, the Giants win because of their pitching. This year, much as last, the Cubs will not win because of their pitching.
Last year the Cubs lost and lost a lot but whilst their staff was intact, they did not lose because of their starting pitching. They lost because they didn't score runs. This year looks like more of the same.
