A most interesting Question

From The Book Blog by Tom Tango this morning a non insanely statistical question was posed...

Q1: Today is Jun 15, 2009. The following pitchers have all been declared free agents (yes, in the middle of the season), and you are lucky enough to have the most money available to sign one of these pitchers. You are going to give them a 6-year contract. How much would you give each one?
Cole Hamels (b. 1983) Jair Jurrjens (b. 1986) Stephen Strasburg (b. 1988) Justin Verlander (b. 1983) Chien-Ming Wang (b. 1980)

Q2: Same question, but today is Jun 15, 2008, and you have no knowledge of what has happened in the year that follows.

To answer this fun question we need to break down each of the pitchers before and after said dates...

Let's start with Question 1. It is obvious, to me at least, that Wang is dead last. I would probably sign him to a 1 or 2 year deal, not the 6 in the question,even though he has two 19 win seasons, ever since breaking his foot last year he has not been the same pitcher, and frankly the other 4 have been pitching and pitching well. If I had to offer him a 6-year contract it would be for no more than a base of $4 or $5 million a year($30 million total, which might be a little bit high) with plenty of incentives, which he very well could reach.

I think the most difficult decision is what to do with Strasburg. Most of me says slot him 5th, and give him a contract fitting of someone who has never played professional baseball. Oh wait, I remember now, STEVEN STRASBURG HAS NEVER PITCHED ONE PROFESSIONAL INNING. I think a lot of writers forget that when talking about him. He is 21 years old and is coming off maybe the best college pitching year in history. Mark Prior was of similar age and of similar stature when he was drafted by the Cubs. How did that work out? This notion that he is a 'sure-thing' and that "the risk factors are zero" according to his agent, Scott Boras, are lies. I think Boras is the best agent in the game and that he has to say this on behalf of his client, but I do not believe for one second that if forced to answer truthfully that he would stake his entire reputation on Strasburg being the second coming of Jesus Christ himself. I also believe those (Clay Davenport) who claim that if he pitched for Washington this year he would have a 3.54 ERA, strike out 9.3/9-innings, and be a top 10 pitcher in the National League. That may be the biggest load of projection garbage I have read this year (Another Baseball Prospectus projection, of Matt Wieters being the 5th most valuable player in MLB this year, with a line of .311/.395/.544 is a close second, but at least there are professional baseball numbers to back that up). Ok, so after all that I will admit that Strasburg looks amazing, and I would certainly sign him to a 6-year $35 million deal.

Ok so onto the last 3...

Jair Jurrjens is definitely the 3rd best pitcher on this list, as of now. His ERA+ this season is 147, good for 9th in the National League, and I think he is a solid 2 starter, based on his K/BB ratio along with K/9, which is the best predictor of success. I would say 6-years for $60 million would be a reasonable number for a 23 year old with Major League success. It might even be low balling it a little bit considering he is a top 15 guy in the National League.

Justin Verlander has the best pure stuff of anyone on this list. I would say that when he is on his game he is one of the most intimidating pitchers to face in the big leagues, and he has a no-no to his name. That being said he had an awful year last year thanks to a big drop in his velocity, but has rebounded this year to put up a 1.10 ERA in his last 9 starts in which he has gone 7-0. Not too shabby. Lets look at Hamels v. Verlander since they are the same age.

Age 23 Verlander (2006)- 17-9 186 ip 1.328 WHIP 126 ERA+ 2.07 K/BB ratio
Age 23 Hamels(2007)- 15-5 183.1 ip 1.124 WHIP 136 ERA+ 4.12 K/BB ratio

Age 24 Verlander(2007)- 18-6 201.2 ip 1.230 WHIP 125 ERA+ 2.73 K/BB ratio
Age 24 Hamels (2008)- 14-10 227.1 ip 1.082 WHIP (Led NL) 142 ERA+ 3.70 K/BB ratio.

Verlander's Age 25 (2008) season looked like this, just for some perspective- 11-17 201 ip 1.403 WHIP 92 ERA+ 1.87 K/BB
Hamels Age 25 season(2009) looks similar thus far...4-2 62.1 ip 1.380 WHIP 94 ERA+ 4.67 K/BB ratio

That is why Verlander is 2nd...he is good, but not Hamels good. 6-year $80-$90 million

My 1st choice would be Cole Hamels. Ok, so other than the Jurrjens v. Strasburg debate which I think is a very interesting question, the Hamels v. Verlander debate is just as exciting. Hamels is an ace. There is a difference between a #1 starter and an ace, and that difference is a #1 starter is a good, solid guy who you count on every 5th game to give his all and put your team in position to win. An ace is a guy who you count on to do that AND count on to stop losing streaks and give a boost to your team. For an example of this, Matt Cain has the stuff of a #1 starter, but Tim Lincecum has the stuff of an ace. Hamels is an ace, but he threw 262 1/3 innings last year, by far the most he has ever thrown in a season. His arm has been showing the effects, he has been giving up 10.7 hits/9 innings compared to 7.6 in 2008 and 8.0 in 2007. However, his K/BB ratio has never been better and he pitched an amazing 35 innings last post season, something no one else on this list has done. He has bested Verlander every single year except for this current one(2009) in ERA+, and really only trails in strikeouts to Verlander. 6-years $100 million is a number he will get in the future and I would have no problem giving him that right now.