Joakim Soria Needs a Better Agent
by royalsreview on May 4, 2008 4:50 PM EDT
in News
36 comments
After another scoreless ninth, there's no reason not to resume the Soria discussion from last night.-RR
-----
Seriously.
In twelve thirteen innings pitched this season, Joakim has allowed three hits, walked one, and struck out fifteen. He has not allowed a run. As I listened to the 9th in my truck tonight, I was struck with a bittersweet realization: what Soria is doing, literally, cannot be topped and won't last forever. What we're seeing is an extremely rare level of brilliance. I hope we enjoy it as long as it lasts.
He should be getting five times the media attention and blog & fan devotion that Banny has received, not the other way around.
Call me weird, but a guy who is just totally dominant is always going to be more compelling to me than a guy who gives a good quote.
0 recs |
36 comments
Email
Print
Comments
A few things
1. So far, Soria has been 12 innings
2. Soria had a really good year last year, but he certainly wasn’t this dominant
3. Soria is a reliever, while Bannister is a starter
4. Bannister hasn’t received attention and devotion because he’s a great or dominant pitcher. The attention and devotion came from having a great rookie season, for doing this in a very unconventional way, and because he has a knowledge of pitching and advanced pitching analysis which rivals both MLB pitching coaches and gifted sabermetricians.
5. Your last sentence implied that Soria is dominant, while Bannister merely “gives a good quote.” Soria is a very, very good pitcher who has been truly dominant this season. Bannister is a very good starting pitcher whose pitching and baseball intelligence are truly impressive. In the very least, Bannister is impressive in ways that 99.9% of baseball players are not.
I probably disagree with you.
by NYRoyal on May 4, 2008 12:02 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
yes, yes, all valid
what the hell, lets go point by point (but not contentiously)
1. Yes, 12 innings is a problem and a limiting factor.
2. What was dude’s ERA? it was in the 2.00s. Not HOF worthy or anything, but still awesome.
3. Yes, see above. But, he’s also a closer. Don’t closers usually get more mythologized?
4. Even though he has a great backstory, isn’t it eventually supposed to be about baseball?
5. I think you are overstating Banny. He’s not a 1 in a 1000 pitcher, unless MAYBE you impose some strict handed-ness paradigms and assume he’ll be 3.50 ERA good for the next five years. He’s Steve Traschel with a good backstory.
by royalsreview on May 4, 2008 12:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok
2. Soria had a very good rookie season and only part of the time as a closer. And he wasn’t entirely dominant as a closer. Saves are overrated, but he did have some blown saves.
3. Closers do get mythologized. But not after 7 saves.
4. Backstory? He had a GREAT rookie season and was third in ROY voting. Isn’t that baseball? And he’s had a very, very good start this season. His attention and devotion is as much about his actual performance on the field as it is about the “backstory.” And it isn’t just “he studies baseball, isn’t that cool!” It’s about succeeding by studying the game. It’s about using his mind to succeed despite only ok stuff. So Bannister has excellent performance plus a good story.
5. What I said was “Bannister is impresive in ways that 99.9% of baseball players are not.” I didn’t say that he’s a better pitcher than 99.9% of pitchers. He is impressive because of how he succeeds with limited sutff. He is impressive because he succeeds by studying the game, studying pitching, studying stats and advanced metrics. He wins with his head like no one I’ve seen before.
You may dismiss Bannister as a mediocre pitcher (like Trachsel), but he certainly hasn’t performed like a mediocre pitcher. Despite the “blah, he’s mediocre at best” analysis from most, he’s continued to succeed. Shouldn’t a pitcher with a great story AND truly impressive performance get a lot of attention and devotion? By the way, how good will Bannister have to pitch and for how long before you stop dismissing him as merely mediocre? You know, not all pitchers with mediocre stuff end up having the same results.
I probably disagree with you.
by NYRoyal on May 4, 2008 1:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know where I said he was mediocre
He’s not the first guy who doesn’t throw hard to have some success as a starter. It’s really not that rare.
Right now, Bannister is 5th on the Royals pitching staff in VORP, well behind Greinke and equally trailing three bullpen guys - Ramirez (we need to start obsessing over this guy too), Mahay and Soria - and 52nd overall in the AL. This is Boof Bonser’s ‘hood.
Neyer said in an interview at Viva El Birdos that he thinks Banny might be the first post-modern pitcher, and I appreciate that he is self-aware and uses stats and reads books. Bully for him.
Obviously, we can appreciate both, and I’m glad they are both Royals. Soria even supports the mythology of Dayton Moore, since he was a Rule 5/Rule V guy. I’d like to see a wave of stories about what he’s doing…
by royalsreview on May 4, 2008 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trachsel = mediocre
I think you are underselling Bannister’s peformance. First, there was last year’s excellent performance. Then there is this year. Instead of more of my comments, I’ll post a recent quote from Rany on Bannister this year:
Bannister has a 4.04 ERA and Greinke has a 1.47 ERA, but there isn’t a dime’s worth of difference in their real performance this season. Against Bannister, opposing hitters are batting .224/.273/.343; against Greinke they’re at .215/.262/.348. The difference is that Bannister had to pitch in Arlington the night there were gale-force winds blowing to right field, and that with runners in scoring position this year hitters are 8-for-22 against him. (Against Greinke, they’re 3-for-34.) They’re both on pace to be among the 15 best starters in the league this year.
I think Bannister has earned his attention/devotion, both last year and this year.
I probably disagree with you.
by NYRoyal on May 4, 2008 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love Rany
I think he’s missing the mark slightly there, though. Banny very well may end up a top 15 starter, but Greinke may end up a top 3.
Rany’s correct in saying that they’ve more or less been the same pitcher, but there’s a difference between what they’ve done and what they will do.
I think it just comes down to striking opponents out, and Greinke still has the edge there.
This space intentionally left blank.
by marbotty on May 4, 2008 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think he's saying that they are equally good and will have similar 2008 seasons
I just think he’s saying that they’ve been essentially equally effective this year so far. I agree with you that Greinke has the brighter future (both in 2008 and beyond).
I probably disagree with you.
by NYRoyal on May 4, 2008 6:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trachsel, Banny, and Tapani
Hey all—I’ve been lurking for a while, but figured I’d finally join up and post something. In addition to being a Royals fan, I’ve always had a bit of a Cubs devotion (which I guess just means I’m deeply dedicated to disliking the Cardinals). I had a few thoughts on the whole “Is Banny like Trachsel”/ “Is Banny mediocre” issue.
1. Comparing the rookie years of Banny and Trachsel is kinda eerie.
Trachsel (CHC, 1994): 9-7, 146 IP, 3.21 ERA, 130 ERA+, 108 K, 54 BB, 1.28 WHIP. 4th Place in NL ROY voting.
Bannister (KC, 2007): 12-9, 165 IP, 3.87 ERA, 121 ERA+, 77 K, 44 BB, 1.21 WHIP, 3rd Place in AL ROY voting.
Obviously there are some differences here (Trachsel both walked and struck out more guys; Bannister gave up fewer homers), but all things considered, those rookie years are more similar than not (well, except that Trachsel was 23 and Banny was 26).
2. Is Trachsel mediocre? I’m really not so sure. I might be blinded by my memory of his performance in the play-in game against the Giants in ‘98, but you don’t pitch 16 years and rack up 142 wins (admittedly against 157 losses) without being better than, say, replacement level. Trachsel was never a staff ace, to be sure, but does anyone really think Bannister is going to be a staff ace? If, over the next few years, the Royals get a Trachsel-in-the-mid-to-late-90’s level of performance from Bannister, could we really complain? There is way more than “mediocre value” in a guy who can eat 200+ innings a season at an ERA+ of 100 (Trachsel’s career number, which was higher 5 years ago). I think Bannister could be better than that, but heck, if the ‘03 Royals had had 2 or 3 starters that good to slot in behind Darell May, they might have gone to the playoffs.
3. None of this really matters, though, because the ‘98 Cub Bannister really resembles is Kevin Tapani. Watching Bannister, I’ve always thought “hey, Banny reminds me of Tapani. He doesn’t get K’s, but he induces contact on pitcher’s pitches, keeps the walks under control, and doesn’t kill himself by giving up homers.” Then I look at Baseball Prospectus and Banny’s top “similarity score” for age 26 is (drum roll) Kevin Tapani. It is even worth noting that, like Banny, Tapani didn’t really get a full-time big-league job until he was 26.
And for the record, if Bannister could be as good as late-20’s Tapani (Tapani when he was with the Twins, not the Cubs), we could really have something here. Tapani’s age 27 season (Bannister’s age now) was very good: 16-9, 244 IP (let’s not match that, Trey), 2.99 ERA, 143 ERA+, 135 K, 40 BB (!), and a 1.09 WHIP. Oh, and 7th in the Cy Young voting and a World Series ring.
To put it mildly, here’s hoping that Bannister’s “similarity with Tapani by age” continues.
Oh, and as for the other part of the thread, taking Soria in Round 16 of my Fantasy Draft was one of the better decisions of my fake-sports life. And he should keep the beard.
by Professor Chaos on May 4, 2008 7:22 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
good stuff professor
Kevin Tapani… there’s a name I haven’t heard in years
I wanna know what love is, I want you to show me
by LeoBloom on May 4, 2008 7:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One either believes that Bannister is unique and special or one does not
If you think he’s just like other pitchers who have had his statistical profile, then sure he’s Trachsel or Tapani. But Bannister is unique. He has a knowledge of pitching and approach to pitching which gets him more out of his peripherals than other pitchers. Much more. I wish we could do away with the notion that he’s just like every other “crafty” pitcher with mediocre stuff. He isn’t.
The vast majority of his career, Tapani was no better than a #4 SP. His career ERA+ is 101. Tachsel’s career ERA+ is 100. Right at average. They both had some good seasons and bad seasons and lots and lots of mediocrity. I think he’s going to be better than the persistent mediocrity of guys like Trachsel and Tapani.
I probably disagree with you.
by NYRoyal on May 4, 2008 8:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I largely agree with you.
I actually intended the Tapani comparison as a compliment—Tapani’s 1991 season shows just how well someone who doesn’t have “make the batter look stupid” stuff can do if they limit walks. I really do hope that you’re right that Banny is a unique case because he’s approaching the game from a different place analytically, but if that is the case, there is something to be said for the idea that one thing Banny ought to look is Tapani’s ‘91 season, in order to try to figure out why it was so off-the-charts better than any of other year Tapani ever had. What sticks out to me is only one walk every 6 innings, and only 3 unearned runs all season (in 240 IP).
What I’ve read about Bannister suggests that there might be something to his thoughts about how to limit BABIP, and I sure as heck hope he (and you) are right. But what Tapani in ‘91 shows is that when a pitcher has to pitch to contact, limiting walks is a huge deal. Tapani only did it that well once, and he had a huge year as a result. Bannister’s walk rate so far in his career isn’t as good as Tapani ‘91, but it isn’t that far off Tapani’s career rate. It strikes me as the key stat where a pticher like him needs to excel. I’m sure he knows this, and heck, I’m sure I’m preaching to the choir here.
by Professor Chaos on May 4, 2008 10:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I largely agree with you too
The one thing I would add is Bannister succeeds far beyond his peripherals because he has the consistent ability to induce poor contact. He gets a great deal of routine pop flies and infield pop-ups. He knows which pitches to throw at what times to which batters. He knows the pitches which will induce the contact he’s looking for. I know that for the vast majority of pitchers, a low BABIP is the product of luck. But I think Bannister is one of the few who can postively influence his BABIP.
I don’t want to re-hash my entire argument, but it can be found here. You may have seen this, but Mike Fast at MVN wrote a 3-part piece on Bannister, analyzing his 2007 pitching in great detail. Part 3 provides some support for my contention that Bannister’s superior pitch selection ability helps keep his BABIP down.
For most pitchers, if you aren’t getting a lot of strikeouts, then you have to give up very, very few walks. This is true, to some degree , of Bannister, but I think it is less crucial for him because of his amazing ability to induce bad contact. In short, “pitching to contact” for Bannister is not like pitching to contact for the vast majority of pitchers.
I probably disagree with you.
by NYRoyal on May 4, 2008 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Completely irrelevant to your discussion
But your screen name has just entered by Screen Name Hall of Fame.
Sometimes you just gotta roll the potato.
by CentralChamps2009 on May 5, 2008 7:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
GREAT GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am just home from another night of watching the game on my neighbor’s big screen TV. His wife took the kids out for pizza and a movie. So, he and I could just wallow in the big blue baseball game. I got to tell you that Butt’s butt looks huge on the big screen. I hope “Chubbo” watches his weight a little. Other than that he did a good job at 1st. I can see him battling for a starting position next season. Then there is T., what can you say about him. He plays a good right field and you can see he is returning to the comfort level with the bat that he had last season.
Lastly… Hochy did everything you expect from him. He looked good in places and like a rookie in other places. But, what I liked was that he worked out of some jams and when he need a K… he went right after the hitter. Good job, H…. When they brought in Soria… we toasted him with a shot of Black Jack and knew that the game was over. He made Peralta, and the big guy look like Tballers. Garko was just overmatched. I know everyone wants him to be starter…but, there is something warm and comforting about having a closer that can slam the door on their fingers and then kick dirt. JoSo is the man. Again, great game…. go Royals…
Tell 'em a hookah smoking caterpillar
Has given you the call. "
by grudz96 on May 4, 2008 12:13 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What You Said
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on May 4, 2008 1:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
unrelated...
but Greinke leads the AL in VORP for pitchers
he’s even ahead of Cliff LEe
by royalsreview on May 4, 2008 12:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
that's because Zack Greinke is boss
Boyfriend of the Year 2008: It's gonna be big!
by loyal2theroyals on May 4, 2008 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Zack Grein-KKKKKKKKK as of last start thank you
A lot of you wont like me... by I assure you my opinion will be voiced GO ROYALS!
by focs on May 4, 2008 6:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's sorta like in the middle of a no-hitter...
...the superstition is you don’t mention a no-hitter.
It’s silly, of course.
But a lot of Roylz fans are looking at Soria and realizing there’s a gem here. And if you mention it…maybe it will go away.
So here we are mentioning it.
(sigh)
It might be fun sometime if a manager of an All Star team pitches nine closers, one inning at a time. Part of the closers’ mystique is that they’re invincible. And great closers seem to be. Could they pitch a 1-2-3 second inning? A 9-pitcher perfect game?
It could happen.
90% of this game is half mental
by MonkeyHawk on May 4, 2008 3:53 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Soria does deserve more attention, devotion and praise, particularly from the national sports media
Not more than Bannister, but more than he’s gotten so far. As the season progresses, he’ll get it.
I probably disagree with you.
by NYRoyal on May 4, 2008 4:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
yea... now that I recall
there was that Buster Olney piece on ESPN linking him to Rivera…
by royalsreview on May 4, 2008 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Off-topic, NY.
But did I miss the May confidence index? Or was that not supposed to be a monthly thing?
by mazoboom on May 4, 2008 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Semi-monthly
I’ve been thinking that it is about time for one. Probably tomorrow.
I probably disagree with you.
by NYRoyal on May 4, 2008 6:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, I wasn't trying to be demanding.
It’s just an interesting thing to me.
by mazoboom on May 4, 2008 6:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's cool
I’m happy to do it. I’m glad you find it interesting. Last weekend would have been a good time to do it, but I’ve just been too swamped.
I probably disagree with you.
by NYRoyal on May 4, 2008 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and not to be a complete hypocrite
hellluva job by Meche today
by royalsreview on May 4, 2008 5:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The closer thing
At least one of your points assume that closers should be mythologized? I think that’s open to question.
No doubt, Soria’s been great. But, without looking at the numbers, remember when everyone was talking about Eric Gagne as the great young closer of our time, the guy who was gong to supplant Rivera and Hoffman? Granted, he was derailed by injuries, but I think a lot of people would be embarrassed reading what they wrote about him during his high point a few years back.
But if one does but into the closer mythology, then one has to buy into the rules of the game for how any player gets noticed—and a closer on a bad team (or a team perceived as bad) isn’t’ going to get any play. If he was on a contender, maybe.
Having written that, yeah, he deserves more attention. However, getting noticed as a “real closer” that might make management think that “we’ve got a guy with the ‘closer mentality’ (sometime I want to post about how that if there is such a closer mentality, it’s created by its own perpetuation by managers and coaches) and not give him an appropriate chance as a starter.
But when would he get the necessary 400 innings of work in the minors?
by devil_fingers on May 4, 2008 6:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
One more thing
where did Neyer write that Bannister was a “post-modern pitcher?” It better not be on ESPN insider. If I can’t even talk myself into subscribing to something as cool as Prospectus, I’m definitely not going to subscribe to ESPN Insider when Neyer’s the only thing worth reading there.
But, sweet bastard, why is all this pseudo-critical crap getting into sportswriting now? Can’t all the New French Thinkers be relegated to dustbin of history (the favorite garbage can of their old Marxists teachers, a la Louis “The Paris Strangler” Althusser, undoubtedly the worst famous philosopher of the last 150 years?)
by devil_fingers on May 4, 2008 6:13 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Or Spell; Is
That supposed to be “interpolate”?
Main Entry: in·ter·po·late
Pronunciation: \in-ˈtər-pə-ˌlāt\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): in·ter·po·lat·ed; in·ter·po·lat·ing
Etymology: Latin interpolatus, past participle of interpolare to refurbish, alter, interpolate, from inter- + -polare (from polire to polish)
Date: 1612
transitive verb
1 a: to alter or corrupt (as a text) by inserting new or foreign matter b: to insert (words) into a text or into a conversation
2: to insert between other things or parts : intercalate
3: to estimate values of (data or a function) between two known values
intransitive verb
: to make insertions (as of estimated values)
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on May 4, 2008 8:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Guess I Should
Have looked up ‘Interpellate” first; I am a lowly HS grad. First time I ever ran across that one, and with good reason.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on May 4, 2008 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You Do Employ
Some creative spelling at times; I also misread “my” as “me”, which called for a verb.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on May 4, 2008 9:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to hijack
sorry… but did you mean “don’t make me?”
I’m often insensitive, so I’d apologize to any followers of the Paris Strangler who are reading this, except I’m not apologizing to crypto-Stalinist babblers. How’s that for fun on a baseball board? I guess I’m doing exactly what I’m mocking. How’s that for reflexivity…
But speaking of which, if that is what Neyer’s referring to about Bannister, wouldn’t “awareness of the medium” or whatever be modernist? You tell me.
Well, enough ruining of the thread for me this morning! Now to mull whether the Office is actually declining, or whether I’m just a crabby old coot.
by devil_fingers on May 5, 2008 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yea
multiple typos in that little blip
Althusser was the big interpellations guy, right?
yea… you could just as easily say bannister is a modernist pitcher… but then again, what was the difference between modernism and post-modernism much anyway? I don’t know. Maybe Banny’s closer to Ford Maddox Ford than Joyce. I don’t know.
I hope Office isn’t declining, but I really dont know. Last episode was a step in the right direction. I hope
by royalsreview on May 5, 2008 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Royals Review
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
