SubscribeAs we look at 2010’s LIMA candidates, let’s start off by looking at some guys who meet the statistical LIMA qualifications, but probably miss the “low investment” requirement. They were good enough last year that they aren’t going to come cheap. However, there’s still room for them to take another step forward in 2010, much like LIMA-qualifiers Felix Hernandez and Matt Cain did in 2009.
The pitchers in this group for 2010 are:
Josh Johnson
Jair Jurrjens
Wandy Rodriguez
Clayton Kershaw
Tommy Hanson
With the LIMA strategy, you’re obviously going to be passing on the big names (Halladay, Sabathia, Greinke, etc.) so that you can use that money for hitting. But maybe you can still target one of these guys as your staff ace. You can get similar production as you would from the household names in the top-tier, but at a bit better price.
With this tier of LIMA pitchers, there’s both good news and bad news. The good news: All of them were very good in 2009, although Hanson’s limited innings pitched capped his value a bit. The bad news: They are all projected for significant decline in 2010.
While I know the math behind the projections is — on the whole — solid, I can’t help but feel that these pitchers are being underestimated a little. Take a look at the projected ERA’s compared to last year:
2009 Actual ERA
Josh Johnson 3.23
Jair Jurrjens 2.60
Wandy Rodriguez 3.02
Clayton Kershaw 2.79
Tommy Hanson 2.89
Average 2.91
2010 Projected ERA
Josh Johnson 3.47
Jair Jurrjens 3.71
Wandy Rodriguez 3.74
Clayton Kershaw 3.65
Tommy Hanson 4.17
Average 3.74
Does that seem a little pessimistic to anyone else? They are projected to give up the same number of earned runs in 2010 as in 2009 (300) while pitching 200 fewer innings, and the result is an average ERA jump from 2.91 to 3.74!
One good sign for their future is that adding ZiPS would make these projections all a little brighter — across the board increases in IP and a significant improvement in ERA for Hanson, Kershaw, and Jurrjens. Based on last year’s results where the projections tended to miss the improvements made by LIMA pitchers, I’m going to err on the optimistic side this year.
So, no, I’m not going to stop bidding on Tommy Hanson at $5.
Related posts:
When looking at ERA projections, you can’t really look at the raw numbers, you have to look at what the average projected ERA is for the league. How do their projected xERA numbers compare to their xERA numbers from last year?
@Molson: You are right; many players will have a worse projected ERA than they actually put up the year before, and they will still be worth the same. Their xERA can improve even if their ERA declines, because the projected pitchers have worse ERAs on the whole.
In this case, however, I was just referencing ERA as a shorthand way of indicating the projected decline. In xERA terms, Wandy’s ERA was 10 ER above average in 2009, and is only projected as 1 ER better than average in 2010. That’s true of all of these pitchers, and they are all projected to lose $5-7 from their 2009 value.