If we stay healthy, I think our rotation is average with upside.

 

I played with some numbers, and I think this is a little too optimistic.

 

Best case scenario is that the Marlins get 200 IP from each of their 1 to 4 starters. That assumes that you get the 2010 version of Josh Johnson for the whole season (2.30 ERA) and the 2-5 starters basically repeat their 2011 numbers. Put all of that together and you get a team ERA of around 3.80, which is roughly about what I would consider the median for NL rotations in 2011.

 

If Johnson gives you 200 IP, but that ERA slides back to around 3.20, you have a team ERA around 4.05, which is a tad below average. If Buehrle also gives you an ERA around 4.00 (he posted a 4.28 ERA in 2010), it's definitely a below average rotation.

 

I would say that if everything goes well, the rotation is average at best with little upside. That isn't good enough for me. They need to find someone better than Nolasco/Volstad.

 

Buehrle's making a move to the National League.

 

I don't see why we should expect regression. If anything, his ERA should be lower than it normally was in the American League, now getting to face the pitchers/weaker bottom of the order's in the NL.

Wow. Settle down.

 

I was just curious because it seems odd that you keep lobbying for guys like Danks, Zambrano, Dempster, Garza, and Castro much more frequently than players from other teams. It's kind of bizarre.

 

And if you haven't noticed, I'm far from the only person who has some issues with the Bell signing. And it is a relevant point of discussion when we are talking about the holes that need to be filled with limited funds, which seem to result in the neglect of the rotation.

 

It’s the offseason… it’s what people do. We throw out names, 99% of them are most unlikely to happen, but that’s what makes the offseason fun. Being from the midwest, I'd obviously be more likely to throw out names of teams I see more of... especially since they're both in the process of rebuilding.

 

As for Dempster.. after his brutal 1st month, 24 of his next 29 starts he gave up 3 or less runs. I wouldn't say that sucks. While he's not the Gio Gonzalez-type that we can plug into the rotation for the next 5 years, you could do a lot worse for a year.

I also don't see how he can say if everything goes well, it's an average rotation. If everything goes well, we'll have a great rotation.

If we stay healthy, I think our rotation is average with upside.

 

I played with some numbers, and I think this is a little too optimistic.

 

Best case scenario is that the Marlins get 200 IP from each of their 1 to 4 starters. That assumes that you get the 2010 version of Josh Johnson for the whole season (2.30 ERA) and the 2-5 starters basically repeat their 2011 numbers. Put all of that together and you get a team ERA of around 3.80, which is roughly about what I would consider the median for NL rotations in 2011.

 

If Johnson gives you 200 IP, but that ERA slides back to around 3.20, you have a team ERA around 4.05, which is a tad below average. If Buehrle also gives you an ERA around 4.00 (he posted a 4.28 ERA in 2010), it's definitely a below average rotation.

 

I would say that if everything goes well, the rotation is average at best with little upside. That isn't good enough for me. They need to find someone better than Nolasco/Volstad.

 

I disagree.

 

This is an above average rotation, with huge upside coming from Nolasco. The average ERA in the MLB is 4.08, and in the NL it's 3.95. This rotation with a healthy JJ should finish around 3.80-3.85. That would put us around 11-15. If everything goes right, this is a top 10 rotation.

 

 

If you want to see how the Marlins stack up against other teams, it's probably better to look at the median rather than the average of all the teams (the average doesn't really tell you very much). The median was around 3.77 in 2011, which is the cut off for the top eight teams (and where the Marlins should be aiming). They can just get to that figure if Johnson gives a full season of 2.30 ERA baseball. That is being fairly optimistic.

 

And I'm not sure where Nolasco's "huge upside" is coming from at this point.

Yeah, if "everything goes well" Josh Johnson is Josh Johnson, Mark Buehrle is Mark Buehrle, Anibal Sanchez is Anibal Sanchez, and Ricky Nolasco lives up to his peripherals. All capable of 200+ innings if they stay healthy...if everything goes well.

 

This is all irrelevant anyway because I'm absolutely positive that we're adding another pitcher. They've already said they're not done, pitching is a priority, and they've been disappointed with Volstad for awhile now. I'd be shocked if Chris Volstad was in our rotation next year.

If we stay healthy, I think our rotation is average with upside.

 

I played with some numbers, and I think this is a little too optimistic.

 

Best case scenario is that the Marlins get 200 IP from each of their 1 to 4 starters. That assumes that you get the 2010 version of Josh Johnson for the whole season (2.30 ERA) and the 2-5 starters basically repeat their 2011 numbers. Put all of that together and you get a team ERA of around 3.80, which is roughly about what I would consider the median for NL rotations in 2011.

 

If Johnson gives you 200 IP, but that ERA slides back to around 3.20, you have a team ERA around 4.05, which is a tad below average. If Buehrle also gives you an ERA around 4.00 (he posted a 4.28 ERA in 2010), it's definitely a below average rotation.

 

I would say that if everything goes well, the rotation is average at best with little upside. That isn't good enough for me. They need to find someone better than Nolasco/Volstad.

 

Buehrle's making a move to the National League.

 

I don't see why we should expect regression. If anything, his ERA should be lower than it normally was in the American League, now getting to face the pitchers/weaker bottom of the order's in the NL.

I'm not expect a regression. Since he will be a year older, however, I think a repeat of his 2011 numbers is a decent projection, which would place the overall rotation as being average at best. If he does regress, though, the rotation will be a little below that threshold.

If we stay healthy, I think our rotation is average with upside.

 

I played with some numbers, and I think this is a little too optimistic.

 

Best case scenario is that the Marlins get 200 IP from each of their 1 to 4 starters. That assumes that you get the 2010 version of Josh Johnson for the whole season (2.30 ERA) and the 2-5 starters basically repeat their 2011 numbers. Put all of that together and you get a team ERA of around 3.80, which is roughly about what I would consider the median for NL rotations in 2011.

 

If Johnson gives you 200 IP, but that ERA slides back to around 3.20, you have a team ERA around 4.05, which is a tad below average. If Buehrle also gives you an ERA around 4.00 (he posted a 4.28 ERA in 2010), it's definitely a below average rotation.

 

I would say that if everything goes well, the rotation is average at best with little upside. That isn't good enough for me. They need to find someone better than Nolasco/Volstad.

 

I disagree.

 

This is an above average rotation, with huge upside coming from Nolasco. The average ERA in the MLB is 4.08, and in the NL it's 3.95. This rotation with a healthy JJ should finish around 3.80-3.85. That would put us around 11-15. If everything goes right, this is a top 10 rotation.

 

 

If you want to see how the Marlins stack up against other teams, it's probably better to look at the median rather than the average of all the teams (the average doesn't really tell you very much). The median was around 3.77 in 2011, which is the cut off for the top eight teams (and where the Marlins should be aiming). They can just get to that figure if Johnson gives a full season of 2.30 ERA baseball. That is being fairly optimistic.

 

And I'm not sure where Nolasco's "huge upside" is coming from at this point.

 

Where did you get 3.77 at?

 

His upside comes from his peripherals and his 2008 season. He's shown he can be a very good pitcher.

Yeah, if "everything goes well" Josh Johnson is Josh Johnson, Mark Buehrle is Mark Buehrle, Anibal Sanchez is Anibal Sanchez, and Ricky Nolasco lives up to his peripherals. All capable of 200+ innings if they stay healthy...if everything goes well.

 

...Then you are looking at maybe an average rotation.

 

But it is rare that everything goes well. That's why the Marlins need to add another starter.

I also don't see how he can say if everything goes well, it's an average rotation. If everything goes well, we'll have a great rotation.

 

 

so far ricky nolasco has not proven that he can shake the inconsistency nor that he can repeat his 2008 season which is his only season below a 4.50 ERA.

 

Volstad has not come anywhere close to his 2008 numbers as well. after he finally improved at the end of 2010 we thought he may have turned the corner but he proved that he very much had not. again last year he had the same solid finish but im not buying it again.

 

there is no reason to believe that everything will go well because it never really has gone well.

 

if im the marlins, though he is overpaid, im making ricky nolasco my #5 at best and looking for a proven #2 or #3.

The problem is that he's been having those horrid outings the past 3 seasons. He needs to miss more bats like he used to.

 

 

At the end of the day, it only hurts the team two times in a 162-game season.

 

It sucks for him more than it does for the team.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if Nolasco won 15 games next year. People have just gotten tired of his inconsistencies, but he's not dreadful.

 

Also, while his K's declined last year (and hopefully they go up some), he did get more groundballs and limited the amount of HR's he gave up compared to previous seasons.

Yeah, if "everything goes well" Josh Johnson is Josh Johnson, Mark Buehrle is Mark Buehrle, Anibal Sanchez is Anibal Sanchez, and Ricky Nolasco lives up to his peripherals. All capable of 200+ innings if they stay healthy...if everything goes well.

 

...Then you are looking at maybe an average rotation.

 

But it is rare that everything goes well. That's why the Marlins need to add another starter.

 

If all those things happen, it's an above average rotation.

 

Also, with our lineup and bullpen, an average rotation might not be the worst thing in the world.

JJ- 2.50

Sanchez- 3.50

Buehrle- 3.75

Nolasco- 4.00

Volstad-5.00

 

This is possible. And this is an above average rotation. It's era comes out to 3.75. This would put us in the top 10 in baseball.

If we stay healthy, I think our rotation is average with upside.

 

I played with some numbers, and I think this is a little too optimistic.

 

Best case scenario is that the Marlins get 200 IP from each of their 1 to 4 starters. That assumes that you get the 2010 version of Josh Johnson for the whole season (2.30 ERA) and the 2-5 starters basically repeat their 2011 numbers. Put all of that together and you get a team ERA of around 3.80, which is roughly about what I would consider the median for NL rotations in 2011.

 

If Johnson gives you 200 IP, but that ERA slides back to around 3.20, you have a team ERA around 4.05, which is a tad below average. If Buehrle also gives you an ERA around 4.00 (he posted a 4.28 ERA in 2010), it's definitely a below average rotation.

 

I would say that if everything goes well, the rotation is average at best with little upside. That isn't good enough for me. They need to find someone better than Nolasco/Volstad.

 

I disagree.

 

This is an above average rotation, with huge upside coming from Nolasco. The average ERA in the MLB is 4.08, and in the NL it's 3.95. This rotation with a healthy JJ should finish around 3.80-3.85. That would put us around 11-15. If everything goes right, this is a top 10 rotation.

 

 

If you want to see how the Marlins stack up against other teams, it's probably better to look at the median rather than the average of all the teams (the average doesn't really tell you very much). The median was around 3.77 in 2011, which is the cut off for the top eight teams (and where the Marlins should be aiming). They can just get to that figure if Johnson gives a full season of 2.30 ERA baseball. That is being fairly optimistic.

 

And I'm not sure where Nolasco's "huge upside" is coming from at this point.

 

Where did you get 3.77 at?

 

His upside comes from his peripherals and his 2008 season. He's shown he can be a very good pitcher.

Look at the starter ERA's for all of the NL teams in 2011 and calculate the median. It's around that number.

 

And suggesting that Nolasco is going to suddenly show "huge upside" is blindly optimistic. 2008 is ancient history and I'm not sure that his peripherals indicate that there is much improvement on the horizon. His FB% rate is down, but so is his K%, which has been pretty important to his past success. I like seeing more groundballs, but he got smacked around hard last season by hitters. Seeing a "high upside" caliber year does not seem in the cards.

JJ- 2.50

Sanchez- 3.50

Buehrle- 3.75

Nolasco- 4.00

Volstad-5.00

 

This is possible. And this is an above average rotation. It's era comes out to 3.75. This would put us in the top 10 in baseball.

 

I think Nolasco's will be higher but also think Buehrle's ERA will be closer to 3 than 4. Also won't surprise me to see Anibal have a really strong year, building off last season and pitching for a contract.

JJ- 2.50

Sanchez- 3.50

Buehrle- 3.75

Nolasco- 4.00

Volstad-5.00

 

This is possible. And this is an above average rotation. It's era comes out to 3.75. This would put us in the top 10 in baseball.

 

It's possible, but probably too blindly optimistic. Nolasco hasn't put an ERA under 4.50 over the past three seasons. Anibal has average around a 3.66 over the past three seasons. An ERA around 3.50 is not impossible, but still incredibly generous. And that's not even addressing the concerns of Johnson's health.

Nolasco's peripherals suggest he's pitching like a mid-3 ERA guy. Of course, he's rarely ever lived up to that so we shouldn't expect that. However, expecting something in between is fair. A low-4 ERA/200+ inning guy is a fine #4/great #5.

JJ-2.75

Sanchez-3.50

Buehrle-3.50

Nolasco-4.25

Volstad-5

 

Comes out to 3.8.

JJ- 2.50

Sanchez- 3.50

Buehrle- 3.75

Nolasco- 4.00

Volstad-5.00

 

This is possible. And this is an above average rotation. It's era comes out to 3.75. This would put us in the top 10 in baseball.

 

It's possible, but probably too blindly optimistic. Nolasco hasn't put an ERA under 4.50 over the past three seasons. Anibal has average around a 3.66 over the past three seasons. An ERA around 3.50 is not impossible, but still incredibly generous. And that's not even addressing the concerns of Johnson's health.

 

Your point on Nolasco is fair, but there's nothing blindly optimistic about expecting Anibal to improve. His K/9 went up over 9 last year. He's become a different pitcher, and is perfectly capable of being a lot better.

 

The main issue with our rotation is health. We'll add another arm to replace Volstad.

JJ- 2.50

Sanchez- 3.50

Buehrle- 3.75

Nolasco- 4.00

Volstad-5.00

 

This is possible. And this is an above average rotation. It's era comes out to 3.75. This would put us in the top 10 in baseball.

 

It's possible, but probably too blindly optimistic. Nolasco hasn't put an ERA under 4.50 over the past three seasons. Anibal has average around a 3.66 over the past three seasons. An ERA around 3.50 is not impossible, but still incredibly generous. And that's not even addressing the concerns of Johnson's health.

 

We're not here to discuss health issues. We're here to discuss what we expect them to do.

 

JJ- 2.50

Buehrle-3.50

Sanchez-3.66

Nolasco-4.50

Volstad-5

 

Comes out to 3.832..which is 10th in baseball.

Nolasco's peripherals suggest he's pitching like a mid-3 ERA guy. Of course, he's rarely ever lived up to that so we shouldn't expect that. However, expecting something in between is fair. A low-4 ERA/200+ inning guy is a fine #4/great #5.

 

It's hard for flyball pitchers to keep the ERA down, especially with the dwindling strikeout rate. Nolasco became more of a groundball pitcher this past year, but got hit around a ton. I don't see a starter here waiting to break out into something better than a mid-4s guy.

either way if we have the money to get a solid starter and get rid of volstad why the f*** wouldnt we do it.

 

im more against volstad than nolasco.

Nolasco's peripherals suggest he's pitching like a mid-3 ERA guy. Of course, he's rarely ever lived up to that so we shouldn't expect that. However, expecting something in between is fair. A low-4 ERA/200+ inning guy is a fine #4/great #5.

 

It's hard for flyball pitchers to keep the ERA down, especially with the dwindling strikeout rate. Nolasco became more of a groundball pitcher this past year, but got hit around a ton. I don't see a starter here waiting to break out into something better than a mid-4s guy.

 

He just has certain games where it looks like he has no business being in the big leagues for whatever reason.

 

It's a silly excuse, but when you give up 20 ER's in 4.1 innings, that's very extreme and likely to not happen again. I mean, don't you think that's a bit of an anamoly?

 

He had 33 starts last year. Take away 2 starts and he finishes with a 3.88 ERA in 201.2 innings and everyone is loving him this offseason.

JJ-2.75

Sanchez-3.50

Buehrle-3.50

Nolasco-4.25

Volstad-5

 

Comes out to 3.8.

 

Nolasco should be around a 4.50.and Anibal around a 3.65. Those are more reasonable and conservative estimates of what to expect from them.

 

And compare the rotation to the rest of the NL. In 2011, the top nine teams in the NL were within 3.80. The number 10 team was the Marlins. If the Marlins project to be the 10th best rotation, they aren't really improving with respect to the rest of the league.

I'm interested to see who the Marlins will acquire as the next SP in FA this winter as it's still a need.

Buehrle was a nice acquisition but don't think it's enough.

 

The Bell acquisition is a curious one to say the least.

 

Sounds to me like Gio is out of the talks because he would require too much in return.

 

Rumors have it that Cespedes will most likely end up with Miami or Detroit.

 

The Yankees will acquire Darvish by overpaying him like they always do with young international pitchers.

Nolasco's peripherals suggest he's pitching like a mid-3 ERA guy. Of course, he's rarely ever lived up to that so we shouldn't expect that. However, expecting something in between is fair. A low-4 ERA/200+ inning guy is a fine #4/great #5.

 

It's hard for flyball pitchers to keep the ERA down, especially with the dwindling strikeout rate. Nolasco became more of a groundball pitcher this past year, but got hit around a ton. I don't see a starter here waiting to break out into something better than a mid-4s guy.

 

He just has certain games where it looks like he has no business being in the big leagues for whatever reason.

 

It's a silly excuse, but when you give up 20 ER's in 4.1 innings, that's very extreme and likely to not happen again. I mean, don't you think that's a bit of an anamoly?

 

He had 33 starts last year. Take away 2 starts and he finishes with a 3.88 ERA in 201.2 innings and everyone is loving him this offseason.

I hate the "take away the starts where he does poorly" argument. Everything matters. If he gives up 20 ER over two starts, he essentially loses two games single handedly.