Weavers

by LA Seitz on May 14, 2007 4:48 PM PDT Comment 24 comments

Jeff's career got off to a pretty impressive start (if you stop counting at 14). So did Jered's. Since Jered just finished up start #25, I figured that would be a good time to compare. Couple of caveats:

Jeff was a year younger when he made his debut.
Jeff's first 25 starts all came in the same season.
Jeff pitched for a really crappy team.

Let's get to the numbers:

Jeff: 25 starts, 8-10, 5.23 ERA, 144.2 IP, 101 K, 1.304 WHIP, 22 Homers
Jered: 25 starts, 13-5, 2.79 ERA, 155.1 IP, 135 K, 1.127 WHIP, 18 Homers

If we dig a little deeper, we find that Jeff was 6-3 with a 2.93 ERA after 14 starts. Jered was 9-2 with a 2.33 ERA. Both look pretty damn good. But one of the main cries of the skeptics has been "wait 'til the league sees Jered twice". Assuming that MLB teams actually have an advanced scouting budget, I'm guessing that most teams are prepared for Jered at this point. So let's see how each fared over his next 11 starts.

Jered: 66.1 IP, 3.26 ERA, 9 HR, 61 K
Jeff: 58.2 IP, 8.59 ERA, 16 HR, 40 K

So, how many starts until we stop hearing the "Jeff got off to a great start, too" argument? 30? 50? 100?

Does anyone out there still think Jered is destined to be another Jeff?

This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.

0 recs | Comment 24 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I never thought that

and poo-poohed those who extolled such superstitious analysis - someone (maybe me) pointed out that Mike and Greg Maddux were brothers to the skeptics.

Maybe it is the Jeff Loathing or the $scott Bora$ envy, but a legion of blogging scolds have been Jered-H8rz from Day 1 - but King Mullet is mowing the lawn of every major league lineup as handily as he slices up their paltry screeds passing for analysis.

by Rev Halofan on May 14, 2007 4:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Jared Is

an EXTREME fly ball pitcher. Look at his home run totals, he is a mere 4 homers away from his brother. One bad outing and he might catch him.

If Jared loses any sort of command, and he keeps the ball in the air, he has no control if the ball is a pop up or a home run. His ERA could inflate in two starts much faster than a ground ball pitcher can.

Jared Weaver needs to be perfect or lucky otherwise his name may as well be Jeff.

by Pwn on May 14, 2007 5:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The other way of expressing that

is that Jeff's home run rate is twice that of Jered's, and (as of this morning) in three fewer innings, as well.

On the other hand: Jered's WHIP is now 1.579, a huge jump from last year's 1.033. If there's any one portentious number in his recent resume, it's that, though his six-hitter through seven was a good step toward reducing that number.

Ervin Santana To AAA!

by scareduck on May 14, 2007 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll give WTY the benefit of the doubt

for now since his first couple of starts where he got hit hard were his first starts back from injury and were essentially still Spring Training for him to some extent.

He's trending well of late so we shall see. In my opinion the one thing that WTY has over his older brother is a killer instinct. Sure they both tend to show frustration when things aren't going their way but I think WTY handles adversity better and that goes a LONG way for me.

DarkAngel hath spoken....

by darkangel01 on May 14, 2007 6:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

WHIP

Throw out one completely anomalous start and it's 1.27, which, yes, is a jump over his ridiculous WHIP of last year. I don't remember anyone ever expecting him to keep that up. It's also just about what John Lackey put up last season, and he's struck just under 1 per inning.

by LA Seitz on May 14, 2007 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The reply before the reply

I plan on posting something more substantial about this later on. That said, the Yankees have fired all their advance scouts, and are supposedly doing everything with video.

The window for Jered to be a Jeff-ian collapse gets smaller with each good start, it's true. I'm pleased with that development to be sure; "I told you so" is a hollow game when you're watching your team lose. That said, I still think a similar career arc was a reasonable concern at the time, something the "trade him or shut up" people who were harassing me at the time refused to acknowledge. Is there something intrinsically wrong with acknowledging that young players, no matter how hyped, have downside risks?

Ervin Santana To AAA!

by scareduck on May 14, 2007 5:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

nothing intrinsically wrong with criticism

...but notice that Roger Ebert reviews the film after it has been released. The problem with "Sky is Falling" as forecasting is that when it does, everyone is bitter and nobody cares that someone called it - success in predicting failure has a thousand parents who are then hated by everyone else.

by Rev Halofan on May 14, 2007 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

So what?

That said, the Yankees have fired all their advance scouts, and are supposedly doing everything with video.

So they've fired live scouts and are using video. What's the difference? Are they scouting or aren't they?

by LA Seitz on May 14, 2007 6:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Answer

Is there something intrinsically wrong with acknowledging that young players, no matter how hyped, have downside risks?

Nope. But there is something wrong with knee-jerk pessimism about young players, since it's the kind of thinking that makes us all wince when we hear names like "Thon," "Lansford," "Brunansky" and so on.

by mattwelch on May 14, 2007 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wince Trifecta

That is more wincing in one retort than I am used to in a day of posting!

by Rev Halofan on May 14, 2007 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Weren't

you just being pessimistic about our group the other day?

by higdog on May 14, 2007 7:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Only....

If you use the Playground Interpretation of analysis. Saying that the Angels are giving an alarming number of at bats to people showing zero power is not remotely like saying that the Angels' prospects probably won't pan out. In fact, even in pointing this bit of obviousness out I feel like I've wasted 60 precious seconds of my life.

I think Mike Napoli will be a better hitter than Joe Ferguson, Howie Kendrick will win batting titles with 60-plus XBHs, Casey Kotchman will finish this year at around .275/.340/.450 & have a Wally Joyner-like career, and Reggie Willits is a legitimate leadoff man (though not a .350 hitter). I think Santana will right the ship, Weaver will be the league's best #2 starter, and Saunders will be Jarrod Washburn II. I think this is the best crop of young players in the team's history, even better than the 1978-82 crop they utterly, utterly squandered.

Also, we've got a bunch of singles-hitters. The end.

by mattwelch on May 14, 2007 9:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

common sense

Statiscal analysis is important, but it should always be balanced with common sense. Case it point: Jered Weaver. Weaver is an extraordinarily talented young pitcher with an impressive pedigree. Every organization in baseball would love to have Jered. He had a slow start, largely because of a fairly minor injury and an abbreviated spring training, as dark angel points out, and we're prepared to dismiss his obvious gifts because the numbers tell us so! How many starts are we talking about? Jered has not only excelled, but dominated, on every level of organized baseball - from college to triple A to his brief career in the major leagues - so I'm not too concerned about him this year. If Jered remains healthy we have a very good, if not great, pitcher on our hands.

by Johnny Angel on May 14, 2007 8:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

This argument isn't strictly statistics...

it's familial as well. Since Jeff and Jered are of the same genetic makeup, have identical professions, are of similar build, mechanics, career starts and otherwise, it is fair to compare the two.

HOWEVER, you are correct in saying there is a limit to that comparison. The two brothers are anything but the same player and will continue to diverge as their careers progress. Look at certain brother-brother careers played in tandem around the league: B-Mo, J-Mo, Y-Mo, all catchers, two played for the Angels, all known for extremely different facets of their game (B-Mo his offense more recently, J-Mo his defensive prowess, Y-mo for his unprecedented untapped talent); Vladimir and Wilton Guerrero, 'nuff said; Brian and Marcus Giles; Pedro and his nameless brother Martinez; and more.

Obviously, comparing simply along numerical or genetic lines is unfair; each player is his own and every factor that influences his life will dictate the course of his baseball career.

With that said I hope to be optimistic and to see a Jered Weaver that is destined for the HoF rather than one destined to be like his brother, mired in a two digit ERA and downturn of a once prospective career.

by shiftyeyedgoat on May 15, 2007 6:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I couldn't have said it better myself

"When you don't know that you don't know, it's a lot different than when you do know that you don't know" - Bill Parcells

by johnnyangel101 on May 14, 2007 9:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Fremont bitches just lost to KC

Angels Baseball 2007!............I need a drink.

by hauldog on May 14, 2007 9:58 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The Numbers...

First, Jered's relevant stats.

Notice his HR/F (homeruns/flyballs) rate of 8.4%. Many, many people smarter than you and I have proven that this statistic hovers around 12% and and significant deviation is largely based on luck. It's not in the pitcher's control, and yet Jered is avoiding 33% of the homeruns he should be giving up. Expecting that to be a sustainable skill is folly.

What happens when Jered Weaver stops getting this lucky, or worse, finds a patch where he gets a little unlucky?

If he'd have given up a "normal" amount of homeruns this year, his ERA would be around 4.25. If he happened to be as unlucky as he was lucky, it would be approaching 5.00.

The moral of the story? Jered Weaver is certainly no chump. But is he a HOF-bound golden boy? Nah. He'll come back to earth.

by oneiric232 on May 15, 2007 10:58 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

12 percent

that rate was arrived at in the golden age of JUICE ... HRS are down all around the MLB, the stats will need adjusting.

by Rev Halofan on May 15, 2007 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

HOF

But is he a HOF-bound golden boy? Nah. He'll come back to earth.

Since when does "Not Jeff" = "HOF-bound golden boy"?

by LA Seitz on May 15, 2007 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

True, that

Kelvim Escobar ain't going to Cooperstown, but I don't think you can find an Angels fan who wants to get rid of him, either.

Ervin Santana To AAA!

by scareduck on May 15, 2007 3:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll remind you of that statement...

... next time he gets shelled two games in a row.

by mattwelch on May 15, 2007 5:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll settle

For a Bert Blyleven-esque Non-HOF career. You?

DarkAngel hath spoken....

by darkangel01 on May 15, 2007 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jered's FB rate is a little misleading

Here's where stats can go too far (and I'm a big believer in statistical analysis). Anybody who has ever watched Jered pitch will notice, very quickly, that he induces a LOT of popups. Because of his deceptive delivery, he does a very good job of keeping (righthanded) hitters off-balance.

Well, technically, those popups are flyballs. But not all fly balls are created equally. Jered is NOT the second coming of Jim Slaton.

If you take away his one disaster start, his ERA is 2.66. He'll be just fine...

"When you don't know that you don't know, it's a lot different than when you do know that you don't know" - Bill Parcells

by johnnyangel101 on May 16, 2007 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs