A look at Strikeout-challenged starting staffs in Royals history

by loyal2sdad on Jul 27, 2011 4:49 PM EDT

I noticed that Hochevar is leading the 2011 Royals pitching staff in Ks with a startingly low total of 66. Considering the new 6 man rotation, which means Luke might only have 10 starts left, and considering he averages about 4.5 K per 9 IP, I decided a little research was in order. Just how many times have the Royals had their strikeout leader fail to post at least 100 Ks in a season?

The answer is twice. In 1983, Paul Splittorff actually LED the team with the grand total of 61 Ks. The other time will be not be a surprise to RR readers. It was Mark Redman (All-Star!) with 76 Ks in 2006.

The 2006 starting staff was actually a LOT worse than 1983 - but 1983 deserves a few "shudders" of its own. Consider these stats for the top 6 pitchers in games started that season (K/9, ERA+, and age):

Vida Blue 5.6, 68, 33

Gaylord Perry 4.3, 96, 44

Steve Renko 4.0, 95, 38

Paul Splittorff 3.5, 112, 36

Larry Gura 3.4, 83, 35

Buddy Black 3.2, 108, 26

Those 6 pitchers accounted for 126 starts. 807 IP produced 279 walks and only 323 strikeouts.

Of course, strikeouts weren't the same animal in 1983 as they are today, and of course, a serious look at 2006 shows that staff to be infinitely worse than 83's. Here are the ERA+ figures for the top 5 in games started in 2006:

Luke Hudson 92

Scott Elarton 88

Odalis Perez 84

Mark Redman 82

Runelvys Hernandez 73

Egads. I set out researching this because I was upset with the lack of strikeout ability in our current rotation. This little excercise actually managed to make me feel a bit better. After all, at least the current team has two relatively young pitchers with strikeout ability - Paulino and Duffy. Is it enough? Of course not - but it's a start. Things looked MUCH bleaker, pitching wise, in the summer of 1983. In short order, the team's fortunes were turned around by the arrival of a bunch of young, talented pitchers almost all at once. Yes, it is difficult for that to come together like it did in 1984 - but it is at least possible. Throw in that the 2011 staff is arguably ahead of where the 1983 staff was, and there you have it - PARADE!

Tweet Comment 7 comments | 3 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I do realize the whole point of this is in terms of strikeouts as a counting stat,

but I see a little room for optimism. Our leading two starters in K/9 are Paulino and Duffy, neither of whom were here before late May (I know, I know, SSS).

Francis’s 4.51 K/9 has been a particular disappointment.

Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room!

by KeepItCopacetic on Jul 26, 2011 4:58 PM EDT reply actions

One way to be optimistic:

It really shouldn’t be that hard to upgrade from Francis/Chen/Davies/Hochevar. As you point out, the two most promising rotation members weren’t even here to start the season. Moore will need to perhaps identify another sleeper in a trade, free agent signing, another guy or two needs to develop, and perhaps one needs to be successfully converted from current relief core.

I honestly researched this from a point of despair/frustration – but came out realizing things could be worse. Maybe the odds of a decent rotation suddenly emerging in a one or two year span are long – but not so long that we should give up on it happening.

If strikeouts are indeed fascist - then find me some starters that believe in fascism

by loyal2sdad on Jul 26, 2011 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions

things could always be worse

"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell

by buddyball on Jul 27, 2011 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Fun memories...

L2d

Shoot me an email

by Freneau on Jul 26, 2011 11:26 PM EDT reply actions

oh, that 2006 pitching staff was really, really bad

"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell

by buddyball on Jul 27, 2011 5:36 PM EDT reply actions

I don't understand why the Royals aren't going after Wandry Rodriguez

They have the money to take on his contract especially after Meche retired. The Astros aren’t asking for much more than cap relief since they have to have a much lower salary cap next year. He’d probably only cost 2-3 C+ level prospects and would really bolster the rotation.

"You need to get real!"

by MJ5 on Jul 28, 2011 4:17 AM EDT up reply actions

There's something about him that is turning off most GMs, beyond the contract.

I don’t know what it is, but it could be a number of things. His ability to succeed in the AL, his strikeout numbers are down, while his HR/9 numbers are up perhaps. This combined with his age is a good reason for a GM to be cautious.

SBN's most random and mysterious lurker
though I do love Royals Review
Follow me on Twitter if you want: Lum_SM

by Lum on Jul 28, 2011 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions