Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

Yesterday Gerry asked "3. Finally, as much as I love Halladay and the value he has delivered to the team, what are the prospects for a 32 year old pitcher with 2000 innings and a lot of heavy workload in his arm? While Doc has delivered tremendous value to the Jays, will he continue to deliver it trhough age 37? I don't know the answer to this question but I am sure the Jays have analysed it and have an opinion. Someone here could look at comparables and see how they held up through age 37."

I had a quick and dirty look using the Play Index at Baseball Reference.

I was interested in pitchers in recent history who had a similiar workload to Doc and had produced similiar results - i.e. top of the rotation workhorse type starters. Doc is in his age 32 season, he will likely end this year at a touch over 2000 IP and has a career ERA+ of 132. So I looked for guys who had pitched since 1980, had racked up at least 1750 Innings and an ERA+ of 120 or better by the age of 32.

This produced 16 pitchers (aside from Doc himself):

This threw up most of the names that would be expected. The most notable pitcher missing is Randy Johnson who was a bit shy of the Innings Pitched mark.

I then had a quick look to see how these guys did between ages 33 and 37.

Seasons stands for the number of years they pitched (ie not out injured or retired) and '180/120' is the number of years they had at least 180 Innings Pitched and an ERA+ north of 120, which is what I arbitrarily decided to use as a proxy for a good season. The results show that Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, Brown, Mussina, Cone and Smoltz held up pretty well post 32 - i.e. they were durable and had successful seasons. Whilst Key, Appier, Martinez, Saberhagen, Steib and Rijo either weren't around or weren't having as much success as they'd previously enjoyed.

Posted by Gwyn on Wednesday, July 08 2009 @ 11:01 AM EDT.

Doc's Comparables | 10 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Mike Green - Wednesday, July 08 2009 @ 11:20 AM EDT (#202309) #

Most of the guys who faded quickly after age 32 were pretty predictable by that point. Appier hadn't had a good season for 3 years. Saberhagen was injured his entire age 32 year. Rijo hadn't pitched for 2 years. Martinez and Key were great pitchers but smaller in stature and not able to throw 240-250 innings in a year.

There is always the risk that a pitcher will come down with arm trouble, as Stieb did, but it is less likely for an established pitcher like Halladay than for a younger pitcher.

It should be noted also that if you throw out Halladay's age 21-23 years as irrelevant to his current expected level of performance, he is closer to the top of the comparable class (i.e. Maddux/Clemens) than to the bottom.

Denoit - Wednesday, July 08 2009 @ 11:30 AM EDT (#202310) #

Halladays work ethic and size have to be taken into account. He is a big man that is in great shape, I dont see any reason he couldnt pitch untill he is 40. He will have to adapt and change his style somewhat when he loses the velocity on his fastball. He has great controll and thats the biggest thing he will need. The one thing he lacks is a good changeup that could help him later in his career. I would be very surprised if he didnt make it to 37.

FisherCat - Wednesday, July 08 2009 @ 12:07 PM EDT (#202319) #

I don't know the answer to this question but I am sure the Jays have analysed it and have an opinion.

I read this line in your post and thought 'these are the same guys that were probably asked to analyze Vernon Wells a few years back and we see where that analysis has put us today'!

Ozzieball - Wednesday, July 08 2009 @ 12:30 PM EDT (#202322) #

Yeah those silly Jays injury analysts not taking into account shoulder cysts and broken wrists.

Pistol - Wednesday, July 08 2009 @ 12:52 PM EDT (#202326) #

The results show that Clemens, Maddux, Glavine, Brown, Mussina, Cone and Smoltz held up pretty well post 32 - i.e. they were durable and had successful seasons. Whilst Key, Appier, Martinez, Saberhagen, Steib and Rijo either weren't around or weren't having as much success as they'd previously enjoyed.

So the guys that held up were the ones that pitched this decade and the ones that didn't hold up pitched in the 80s. The only exception is Pedro.

AWeb - Wednesday, July 08 2009 @ 01:06 PM EDT (#202330) #

Yeah those silly Jays injury analysts not taking into account shoulder cysts and broken wrists.

Well, I might be remembering wrong, but I actually thought the shoulder problem was known before the contract was signed. Obviously the broken wrist couldn't be planned for (but since he hit just fine last year after returning, I can't tink of any reason why it would be making him worse off now). The contract was seemingly structered anticipating continued boom times and escalating salary levels. That was the main problem of the contract, assuming that salaries would continue to skyrocket, and 23 million/year wouldn't look like so much by 2011. Unless the free agent market goes insane this offseason (and given the US economy, that's not happening), Wells will be among the top paid players in the game. I hope his back-to-back 3 hit games point to a return to hitting form.

Dr B - Wednesday, July 08 2009 @ 02:55 PM EDT (#202340) #

Yeah those silly Jays injury analysts not taking into account shoulder cysts and broken wrists.

Over a 7 year contract you should take into account the probabilities of injuries. Every year there is a possibility that an event, such as a broken wrist, say, occurs. It's a small risk, but you do use the probablilities to factor into your expected return. With the kind of money Wells is geting paid (or Halladay) it's a lot of money even for small probabilities.

But anyway, it's a little beside the point. More important In the case of Wells and Halladay are the natural decline of the player with age; this would include wear and tear injuries.

As FisherCat suggests, these analyses were not done, uh, well with Wells. If you want exhibit B, I give you BJ Ryan.

PeteMoss - Wednesday, July 08 2009 @ 03:18 PM EDT (#202345) #

Bottom line is that unless you're the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs or Mets (and really the Yankees are the only true exception to the rule) if you're going to give a guy a giant long-term contract it better be for one of the best players in the league and someone low risk. Wells never fit the rule and his contract is going to hinder the team until it expires. Its odd that JP signed the deal as you recall when he 1st came to the Jays he was a man on a mission getting rid of Delgado's large contract and then makes the same mistake a few years later.

I love Halladay and he is the best pitcher in baseball but at this point the team may be better off dealing him and getting guys who will be cheap until that terrible Wells contract expires and then you can decide who of the young guys are going to need to be paid.

David B - Wednesday, July 08 2009 @ 03:57 PM EDT (#202356) #

B.J. Released....it's about time.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/postedsports/archive/2009/07/08/blue-jays-give-b-j-ryan-unconditional-release.aspx

Jevant - Wednesday, July 08 2009 @ 04:28 PM EDT (#202362) #

I guess that takes care of that, then.

Doc's Comparables | 10 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.