How Close Is Sonny Gray to Ace Status?

[I wish the twins were good]

1 hour ago, Lou Hennessy said:

Just curious -- How many aces do you think there are in baseball right now?

 

I think I remember Keith Law saying at one point that he somewhat arbitrarily set the cut off for "ace" as one of the top 15 pitchers in baseball. Not all teams have one, but if you assume the best teams have one (or more), that sounds about right. Gray isn't close to being in that group, but he could crack top 50 depending on what metric you're using. 

Fwiw, Fangraphs projects him at 64 by WAR this season, with Joe Ryan coming out the highest at 33, but I'd bet against them on that one if he stays reasonably healthy.

[Cris E]

Sonny Grey is a pretty good pitcher. He's never going to be the best guy in the league, but you're never going to be bummed out that he's starting for you. He'll be clearly above average and keep you in most games.

However Sonny Grey has always had a problem with little injuries. He's only made 30+ starts in a seasons three times, and last year he missed time with hamstring problems and covid, and recovery from those reduced his effectiveness at times. It's to be expected. But when he pitches he's better than most. He's not an ace, but by modern definitions almost no one is. It's just too hard to throw as hard as you have to and to avoid injury while trying to stay ahead of hitters that are watching their last at bats between innings. I can barely imagine anyone doing this anymore.  

[Schmoeman5]

4 minutes ago, Schmoeman5 said:

Thanks for doing the legwork on that. And just looking at those numbers and pitchers, how many of them would you put ahead of Sunny Gray in the rotation if you had that option.

And also that 200 IP baseline wasn't based solely on 1 season. It's year in and year out. And I also said he needed to dominant. Being dominant means for every 10 starts you're getting 8 or 9 quality starts. And when you need an out you get an out. Usually by strikeout. Verlander, Scherzer, and Kershaw did that for 10 years or more. Clemens Maddux Glavine Smoltz Halliday all were dominant for multiple years. Warren Spahn, wow. Blast from the past. Gibson Koufax. Those guys. But as I said, the game has changed. A tired Bob Gibson in 1968 was still better than anyone the Cardinals could bring out of their bullpen. Today you can bring in 2 or 3 guys out of said bullpen with dominant stuff. Although I'd hate to be the manager who tried to take the ball from Gibson

[jkcarew]

FWIW...I grabbed 98 pitchers that made at least 20 starts last year (and zero relief appearances).

Gray ranked 84th among the 98 in IP/Start at a fraction LESS THAN 5 IP/Start. Of course, this probably makes him look like an iron-man on Rocco's staff.  But, still.

[Squirrel]

1 hour ago, Lou Hennessy said:

That's a really good point. The game has certainly changed. Maybe our definition of ace needs to change with it. Regardless, Gray certainly needs to level up if he's going to be in the same conversation as guys like Verlander, DeGrom, Kershaw, etc. 

Instead of talking about who could be an ace, maybe clarify ... who could have an ace-like season? I would guess any one of 3 or 4 of our pitchers could have a career, ace-like season ... I think there is that potential. But ... to be described as a flat out ace? I would guess there aren't many today who could go by that, and no one on the Twins would qualify, imho. I dislike the 'ace' discussions, because we all deem that to be different ... who's the team's ace, who is ace-like, who is an ace ... it gets convoluted and confusing pretty quickly. For me, I like our rotation's potential. No more Bundy/Shoemaker/Happ/Archer types. That makes our rotation much improved over the previous year. But as to an ace ... I think Santana (Johan, not the other one) was our last true ace. I don't see Gray as being that ... but maybe he will pull it out and have an ace-like year. We can hope. And wouldn't that be nice.

[tony&rodney]

3 minutes ago, Schmoeman5 said:

A tired Bob Gibson in 1968 was still better than anyone the Cardinals could bring out of their bullpen.

Get your point about more hot arms today, but wasn't a tired Bob Gibson in 1968 better than any pitcher today too? Every pitcher can lose their edge as they tire but the guys often called "aces" are conditioned to survive without their flames. Verlander, Kershaw, and so on still pitch significant innings and Sandy Alcantara has evolved into an old fashioned ace with his complete games and higher inning counts. 

The game always changes and when teams went to bigger bullpens it naturally brought in more heat from the pen while simultaneously removing pinch hitters and shared positions from the field. MLB actually had to step in and mandate a 13 person pitching staff as the maximum. Some teams had gone to 15 pitchers. MLB then went to 26 players on a roster. 

The game will continue to evolve as those of us over 60 have experienced and those who are younger will experience more changes over the next 60 years. I think it was a big mistake to move the roster size up from 25 players. MLB should expand  by two teams within five years. Perhaps a ceiling of 12 pitchers with more stringent rules for shuttling pitchers back and forth between MLB and MILB would also see an improvement in pitching skills. Until then managers will have the use of huge bullpens with a bevy of guys capable of pitching one inning. Actually, I am thinking we see more innings from our Twins starting staff this summer than we have seen in a few years because I believe the staff has more skill and depth. 

[Schmoeman5]

3 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

Get your point about more hot arms today, but wasn't a tired Bob Gibson in 1968 better than any pitcher today too? Every pitcher can lose their edge as they tire but the guys often called "aces" are conditioned to survive without their flames. Verlander, Kershaw, and so on still pitch significant innings and Sandy Alcantara has evolved into an old fashioned ace with his complete games and higher inning counts. 

The game always changes and when teams went to bigger bullpens it naturally brought in more heat from the pen while simultaneously removing pinch hitters and shared positions from the field. MLB actually had to step in and mandate a 13 person pitching staff as the maximum. Some teams had gone to 15 pitchers. MLB then went to 26 players on a roster. 

The game will continue to evolve as those of us over 60 have experienced and those who are younger will experience more changes over the next 60 years. I think it was a big mistake to move the roster size up from 25 players. MLB should expand  by two teams within five years. Perhaps a ceiling of 12 pitchers with more stringent rules for shuttling pitchers back and forth between MLB and MILB would also see an improvement in pitching skills. Until then managers will have the use of huge bullpens with a bevy of guys capable of pitching one inning. Actually, I am thinking we see more innings from our Twins starting staff this summer than we have seen in a few years because I believe the staff has more skill and depth. 

I totally agree. But when you mention Alcantra, who looks like he could be one of those guys. The GM and manager have to tread lightly. They're all worried about over use and having a young arm flame out after 2 or 3 years. Talk to any Cub fan who still blame Dusty Baker for ruining Kerry Wood and Mark Priors careers

[Richie the Rally Goat]

6 hours ago, LastOnePicked said:

Gray strikes me as much closer to a #3 starter on a contender than an ace. Decent. Pretty good. You wouldn't buy tickets to go watch him pitch, and you wouldn't give away tickets when he's scheduled. The Reds were probably smart to move him when they did.

It is a little bit funny that there's a lot of chatter about playoff starts already. I hope folks remember that this is a team that finished well below .500 for the last two seasons. Let's see if they can survive July June May April Spring Training first.

I would peg him as third in the Twins rotation, maybe 4th if Mahle is 100%, but he is still a very good starting pitcher. Mahle was a mid-season acquisition and got hurt, Lopez was just added. On the old school starting pitching and defense scale, this team got a lot better with Kirilloff at first, Gallo and Kepler in the corner OF and Taylor 4th OF. They could struggle to score runs, but run prevention is much better.

now, just because Gray is down on my pecking order, doesn’t mean I think this is a World Series rotation. They just have a bunch of very good starting pitchers (not an “Ace” in the bunch).

[D.C Twins]

Not very close

[wabene]

After all this discussion of aces and innings pitched there is not one mention of how teams have their starters throw harder and with more effort than in the past. The days of starting pitchers pacing themselves for a deep run into the game are over. Players weren't tougher or more determined in the past. The expectations of how to go about their jobs is what has changed.

 

Sure in any era you can find exceptions, but I venture this is the number one reason why pitchers don't go as long. The Twins and Rocco aren't doing anything the rest of the league isn't doing. 

[jorgenswest]

On 2/10/2023 at 11:29 AM, Lou Hennessy said:

Feels like quite the catch-22 here:

Gray can't be seen as an ace if Rocco pulls him before he faces the order for a third time.

Rocco can't reasonably keep Gray in if he gets nailed when facing the order for a third time. 

The narrative about third time through the order is beyond tiresome. Chris Archer rarely saw the lead of hitter a third time. Joe Ryan saw the lead off hitter the third time every game.

Sonny Gray? There were 5 games he did not see the top of the line up the third time. 

• April 16 - pulled for injury 
• May 7 - first game back from 1st IL trip.
• June 15 - first game back after 2nd IL trip
• September 2 - exited tightness right hamstring
• September 19 - pitched his last game of season. Placed on IL

He saw the top of the line up every other start.

Another thing that is tiresome is the misunderstanding of the skew in the data the third time through. Most of the data for the third time through is from facing the top of the line up. Starters rarely see the bottom of the line up a third time. Unusually Gray’s OPS against third time through happened to be better than second time through last year. It was not a meaningful difference or sample size.

I don’t believe the data supports the persistent statement that Baldelli pulls pitchers before the third time through. He did pull Archer and Bundy frequently before the third time through, he managed many pitchers returning from injury and they often had a shorter first start back. He did not pull Ryan or Gray before the third time seeing the line up.

I also don’t believe data supports a significant change in pitcher skill the third time through. It is true that most starters over their career have poorer numbers the third time through. Most of that drop is simply because the data is heavily skewed to the top of the line up. Why don’t most hitters do best the third time through? Carlos Correa does better the first and second time than the third time. There is skew in the data too. He doesn’t get to face many Bundy’s and Archer’s a third time and is stuck facing the Gray’s and Ryan’s more often.

[tony&rodney]

6 hours ago, wabene said:

After all this discussion of aces and innings pitched there is not one mention of how teams have their starters throw harder and with more effort than in the past. The days of starting pitchers pacing themselves for a deep run into the game are over. Players weren't tougher or more determined in the past. The expectations of how to go about their jobs is what has changed.

 

Sure in any era you can find exceptions, but I venture this is the number one reason why pitchers don't go as long. The Twins and Rocco aren't doing anything the rest of the league isn't doing. 

You are correct that teams mostly follow a similar pattern.

MLB changed the rules on shuttling pitchers back and forth between the majors and minors, raised the roster size, and teams went to bigger bullpens which meant more usage of relievers. I'm not sure why some of these changes were done but when teams can use more pitchers it is tougher for the batters. Additionally, the larger bullpen reduced the number of pinch hitters and platoon situations, leaving guys with horrible splits batting in the last innings because the bench is empty. If teams had 13 pitchers and 17 batters, there would be guys who could be pinch hit specialist who would devour many of the current relief pitchers. I'm opposed to larger rosters and think we should have 13 position and 12 pitchers on a roster. I also believe it would be appropriate to reduce the number of times players can be sent down in any given year (twice). Lastly, it is hard to see where Manfredball has improved the product of MLB.

[ashbury]

1 hour ago, jorgenswest said:

The narrative about third time through the order is beyond tiresome. Chris Archer rarely saw the lead of hitter a third time. Joe Ryan saw the lead off hitter the third time every game.

Sonny Gray? There were 5 games he did not see the top of the line up the third time. 

• April 16 - pulled for injury 
• May 7 - first game back from 1st IL trip.
• June 15 - first game back after 2nd IL trip
• September 2 - exited tightness right hamstring
• September 19 - pitched his last game of season. Placed on IL

He saw the top of the line up every other start.

Another thing that is tiresome is the misunderstanding of the skew in the data the third time through. Most of the data for the third time through is from facing the top of the line up. Starters rarely see the bottom of the line up a third time. Unusually Gray’s OPS against third time through happened to be better than second time through last year. It was not a meaningful difference or sample size.

I don’t believe the data supports the persistent statement that Baldelli pulls pitchers before the third time through. He did pull Archer and Bundy frequently before the third time through, he managed many pitchers returning from injury and they often had a shorter first start back. He did not pull Ryan or Gray before the third time seeing the line up.

I also don’t believe data supports a significant change in pitcher skill the third time through. It is true that most starters over their career have poorer numbers the third time through. Most of that drop is simply because the data is heavily skewed to the top of the line up. Why don’t most hitters do best the third time through? Carlos Correa does better the first and second time than the third time. There is skew in the data too. He doesn’t get to face many Bundy’s and Archer’s a third time and is stuck facing the Gray’s and Ryan’s more often.

Nice analysis.

[Craig Arko]

Somewhere in the neighborhood of the square root of 13.

[old nurse]

The last true ACE was Madison Bumgartner. That has been a decade ago. Regular season success becomes meaningless when in the end you lose in the playoffs. 

[old nurse]

11 hours ago, wabene said:

After all this discussion of aces and innings pitched there is not one mention of how teams have their starters throw harder and with more effort than in the past. The days of starting pitchers pacing themselves for a deep run into the game are over. Players weren't tougher or more determined in the past. The expectations of how to go about their jobs is what has changed.

 

Sure in any era you can find exceptions, but I venture this is the number one reason why pitchers don't go as long. The Twins and Rocco aren't doing anything the rest of the league isn't doing. 

In the late 80s a 90+ fb was not very common. Now it seems like the average for decent pitchers is in the mid 90s. People do not seem to understand that for most they get there through effort. That effort produces more stress, hence more wear and tear leading to IL.  It shouldn’t be that hard to figure out, but it is

[joefish]

Sonny would be the guy I would most want to watch pitch. That nasty running fastball down and in on left handed batters is a pitch of beauty.  

Based on what I saw last season, he would be my #1.

[joefish]

On 2/10/2023 at 12:14 PM, roger said:

Agree with the above comment and also don't care about who on the Twins staff may be or soon be an ACE.  What I see is a staff of more than five starters who are very good.  Give me five starters who are all likely #2 or #3 starters and the team is gonna win a lot of games.

Also agree there aren't a lot of true ACES out there.  Take Kershaw for example, he sure seems like one until the Dodgers get to the playoffs...then not so much.  Like to think that Verlander is an ACE, yet, didn't he struggle in the playoffs/series last year?  The only former Twin I would consider an ACE was Santana.  Liriano could have been, had he not been injured.

And personally, I am saddened with how the game is changing.  Was looking at Spahn's career the other day.  If memory serves, he had 68 shutouts.  Not 68 complete games, that was several hundred, but 68 complete game shutouts.  Would guess there weren't 68 complete games, forget them being shutouts, in all of baseball last year.  Maybe its time for starting pitchers to make a little less cash and give it the shut down relievers, like Duran.

Maybe it's time to make Duran a starter. Let him be our ACE if we need one

 

[Doctor Gast]

On 2/10/2023 at 3:52 PM, Schmoeman5 said:

 Although I'd hate to be the manager who tried to take the ball from Gibson

Or from Jack Morris in game 7 of the '91 WS. Not going to happen.