Will the fresh perspective of harkening back to old perspectives lead to an infusion of badly needed starting pitching talent?
On Thursday, we looked at some hitters through the lens of Buster Posey’s preference for guys who could drive in runners when they were on base using RBI as the primary stat. Today, let’s examine starting pitchers through the lens of former agent and current San Francisco Giants advisor Jeff Berry, who had this to say about free agency — and, in particular, his client Michael Wacha’s trip through free agency — this past summer on Buster Olney’s Baseball Tonight podcast:
How does a pitcher, Buster, that’s 25-6 over the previous two season[s], who ranks in the top 45 pitchers in Major League history that have over 250 starts — he’s in the top 45 in winning percentage. Of all starters. In the history of baseball. He’s currently fifth in baseball amongst starting pitcher win percentage of 250 games or more, and it goes: Kershaw, Cole, Scherzer, Verlander, Wacha. […] He’s got a pedigree as the first round pick, the NLCS MVP — all those things. When Michael would go south in his career it was because he was hurting. It wasn’t because he forgot how to pitch. But the thing that is inarguable: he wins a ton of games. […] But Kansas City was the only team that was on Michael Wacha in free agency.
So, just like we’ve gone back to RBI supremacy, we’re back to pitcher wins as a major data point. Here’s an artist’s imagining of Jeff Berry reacting to Felix Hernandez’s 2010 AL Cy Young win (when he went 13-12):
I’m joking, of course, because Berry will be an advisor, not the final say on player transactions. He has a wealth of knowledge and experience to offer someone new to the job of baseball operations and the point of this post is not to pillory one guy, it’s to entertain his premise and see if that improves the process for finding good players.
Berry’s comments about his client, Michael Wacha, are made in the context of comparing Wacha’s case to a far more celebrated free agent signing: Tyler Glasnow. On the surface, most people would argue that the intriguing talent of Glasnow beats Wacha’s and that that alone is the basis for the celebratory nature of the Dodgers’ trading and signing for him (5 years, $136 million). The Royals signed Wacha to a 3-year, $51 million deal with a fourth year option for $21 million, so is it just sour grapes from an agent? Berry did retire after this past offseason, seemingly because of his frustrations with the current generation of GMs.
But again, not here to criticize Berry or think his POV will be the primary filter for Buster Posey’s decision-making. I just want to see which pitchers measure up to Michael Wacha. Just to contextualize this even further, the Giants’ leaders (top 5) in pitcher wins:
- Christy Mathewson, 372
- Carl Hubbell, 253
- Juan Marichal, 238
- Mickey Welch, 238
- Amos Rusie, 234
And the top 5 in W-L%:
- Sal Maglie, .693
- Tim Keefe, .680
- Jason Schmidt, .678
- Bill Swift, .672
- Christy Mathewson, .664
Hey! I recognize those names. Also on the list W-L%? Felix Rodriguez (.642). So, you know, I find this to be an imperfect measure, but I think — like the RBI discussion — this is largely a thing with older baseball people who have watched a lot of the game in their lives and have a sense that there is a correlation between certain counting stats that statisticians have discounted in the 21st century and successful players. It’s worth noting that arbitration still uses certain counting stats to determine salaries, so, the new school way of discounting certain numbers could very easily be seen as a bad faith way to depress wages — a practice I think a lot of us would agree is one of the primary goals of data-driven baseball.
Anyway, Wacha went 13-8 for the Royals this season (29 starts), so his career winning percentage dropped to .620, which is now 9th among active starters (min. 100 decisions). There are 60 starters who are .500 or better, so I won’t draw the list out that far. Instead, I’ll look at players who are likely to be available this offseason (via free agency or trade) and have at least 25 wins over last three seasons — I’m sorry, Mr. Berry, but I can’t unlearn the best practice of looking at a 3-year sample. Besides, it makes Michael Wacha look even better: he’s 38-14 since 2022 (.731).
In a moment I’ll quickly go through some names I omitted or who just missed the cut. For now, let’s fling this group at the wall and see if anyone sticks. If the Giants are hesitant to sign a player who has a qualifying offer rejection attached to him (which, again, would cost them two draft picks in addition to $1 million in international bonus pool money — a devastating combination for a team that’s in the early stages of a new rebuild), then Corbin Burnes, Max Fried, and Sean Manaea would seem to fall off that wall instantly.
On top of that, Burnes has seen his strikeout rate decline consistently over the last three seasons: 10.8 K/9, 9.3 K/9, 8.4 K/9 in 2024. Meanwhile, Fried missed time last season with left forearm neuritis, and over the past three seasons has hit the IL with multiple forearm issues as well as blister issues. He’ll start his next deal in his age-31 season. Manaea’s remarkable 2024 season was a great story, but the Mets might be the best spot for him.
I’m not sure 42-year old Justin Verlander, coming off the worst season of his career thanks to shoulder and neck issues, is a worthwhile investment. Besides, if Buster Posey contends the Giants are in the memory-making business, then Justin Verlander has already made a permanent memory in Oracle Park (I know the third home run is off of Al Alburquerque, but this is the only highlight that would embed):
Framber Valdez might be available for a hefty trade package if the Astros are, indeed, cutting payroll — or, at least, trying to be creative with their budget to bring back Alex Bregman. I think it’s highly, highly unlikely the Giants could meet the ask for a great pitcher slated to make just $17.8 million in arbitration, but stranger things have happened.
Tomoyuki Sugano is on the Giants radar and would seem to be a low cost, creative move that would befit a team trying to compete on a budget. I’m not in love with his age and strikeout totals, but maybe that’s why the Giants are focusing more on the human element. The computer tells me he’s not going to be good — or, at least, what I think they need — but the scouts must say otherwise.
Sonny Gray might also carry a high trade cost, but he seems like the exact kind of guy they’d want to have in the fold and if, indeed, Jeff Berry is a “gunslinger,” then maybe he’ll contribute to a creative deal that lands him. I’m sticking to my prediction the team will seek to acquire him (even though I don’t think they should), if for no other reason than to make people around here happy when I’m wrong.
The two World Series-winning Rangers couldn’t be different. Perez is a pitch to contact lefty while Eovaldi is a high velocity righty. Perez pitched for the Pirates & Padres in 2024 and turned his season around after going from Pittsburgh (5.20 ERA / 4.95 FIP) to San Diego (3.86 ERA / 4.82 FIP). Most importantBerry, the Padres were 8-2 in the 10 starts he made for them, so he kept his team in the game and gave them a chance to win. Compared to Eovaldi, he won’t cost nearly as much.
Eovaldi declined his player option for 2025 but will be looking for one last big deal as he starts his age-35 season in 2025. Between the regular season and postseason, he’s thrown 1,652 major league innings and just based on his four-seam fastball velocity (his primary pitch), any team acquiring him would be acquiring the downside. Here’s his FB velocity in 3-year increments:
2016-2018: 98 mph
2019-2021: 97 mph
2022-2024: 95 mph
Not in love with that, either, but if he has the heart of a lion and the personality of a winner, then he’s probably on their radar, too, although compared to the rest of the field, he’s not going to come at any sort of discount. Sonny Gray’s $25 million AAV is probably his floor.
That leaves Blake Snell. I think the Giants should simply re-sign him.
Again, this post isn’t about making fun of Jeff Berry. I admit my own bias against these cranky-sounding older generation guys banging the same drum they’ve banged for 20 years about Moneyball. It’s an endless — ENDLESS! — battle and I was sick of it 15 years ago. I am not yet at the age where I’ve internalized that a person or a cohort can be stubborn for their entire lives and eventually bend the world to their whims. Jeff Berry and Bobby Evans were both effectively out of baseball, but now they’re back with a once-premier franchise for the purposes of bringing it back to glory. What a world!
Now, obviously, Jeff Berry is a very successful baseball person and I am a very successful moron. The real truth is that as much as I’m suspicious of this particular messenger, I actually vibe with his message. Also from that Olney interview:
Moneyball was obviously a great book and movie, but the reality is the A’s didn’t win with a low payroll because of Billy Beane’s Magic Efficiency Dust. They won with a low payroll because of the great job their scouting department did in building out 90% of the team and the team’s WAR through their domestic and international amateur signs.
But the Moneyball narrative — it was so good and so well conveyed that it — literally launched an efficiency revolution and it created an entire industry in these front offices that duped owners, media, agents, fans, and I think even duped the players.
He also called the analytics-driven crowd “fake intelligentsia.” He’s right! The turn of the 21st century has seen a digital revolution, and just like the industrial revolution at the turn of last century, this new technology is primarily a cudgel for capital. “Efficiency” is another term for “cost reduction” which is a phrase meant to obfuscate “profit.” WAR is the wage killer.
So, I agree in principle, though not totally in practice. Still, it’s worth pointing out the other guys who survive the Berry filter. Logan Webb is 39-32 over the past three seasons, which isn’t great win percentage-wise (.549), but those are a lot of wins (6th in MLB). As for those who are definitely available:
There’s Nick Pivetta (26-33, .441), who was an unBerryvable 6-12 in 2024, but more importantly, turned down the qualifying offer. There’s also Shane Bieber (21-14, .600). No qualifying offer, but he’ll miss the start of 2025 as he recovers from Tommy John surgery. Seems like neither is worth the cost or the risk.
And I’ll close with these five who might be available for trade as sort of distressed assets:
- Miles Mikolas, who’s underwater like Pivetta (31-37) and could be available from a cost-conscious Cardinals team in their rebuild, but he’s effectively Tomoyuki Sugano, so why not just sign him for less?
- Jordan Montgomery (27-24, .529) is a pretty good pitcher who had a really bad 2024. He’ll make $22.5 million in 2025 .The Diamondbacks might be motivated to move him — and he ready to leave — but it’s always tricky when it’s an intra-division exchange.
- Jameson Taillon (34-23, .597) — if the Cubs are looking to cut payroll and they can’t entice the Giants to take Cody Bellinger, here’s a salary ($18 million in each of the next two seasons) that might work, but it doesn’t seem like a huge upgrade and the acquisition cost (prospects) doesn’t seem to be better than signing some of the other free agents.
- Chris Bassitt (41-31, .569) or Kevin Gausman (38-30, .559). I’m not certain where Toronto plans to go this offseason, but maybe moving a player or two to get better in other areas makes sense. Both players are on the downsides of their career but either could potentially stabilize the rotation. Plus, it’d be kind of funny if Buster Posey traded for Kevin Gausman.
Subtracting acquisition cost, most of the guys here can help the Giants in 2025; though, really, a case could be made that all of them could. Let’s be honest: if the Giants signed Martin Perez or traded for Miles Mikolas we’d rationalize it by deferring to Buster Posey & the front office group’s decades of experience. That’s not a bad thing, and grinding experience into a new form of Magic Efficiency Dust would be a fun new theater of the Moneyball war.