my account:
premium blogad:
blogads:
advertisement:
advertisement:
sitemeter:
advertisement:
|
|
|
January 23, 2008
Back to the Pen?
It is well known that Aaron Heilman would love to have a spot in the rotation again, leaving his bullpen job behind. He has been vocal about this in the past, but the Mets wisely used him in the role in which he was needed rather than attempting to appease a player’s demands. What I plan to look at today is a bit of Heilman’s history to see if it’s in his best interests to remain in the bullpen or move to the rotation. While Aaron Heilman always seems to be focused on returning to the rotation, it may not be in the Mets’ best interest to move him there, for a variety of reasons. Past attempts to make Heilman a starter were not successful ventures, and considering the weaknesses that the 2007 Mets’ bullpen displayed, there are places where his talents are needed more. The Mets have defined their stance on Heilman’s utility clearly, so the focus of this piece will be on Heilman’s capabilities outside of the Mets’ desires. Heilman certainly looks like an imposing starter, with his frame, build, and fastball, but thanks to poor development of his secondary pitches, he has been relegated to a role in the bullpen. Back in 2002, Heilman was the Mets’ top prospect according to Baseball America, ahead of a few guys you may have heard of, namely Jose Reyes and David Wright. In addition to his low-to-mid 90’s fastball, Heilman had a plus slider, and “decent changeup and splitter.” There were a few nits to be picked though:
His quick rise through the minors did nothing to change what scouts felt about him, as Heilman’s ceiling was considered that of a No.3 starter. His slider lacked consistency, and after a full year in the pros, his changeup and splitter still needed work. The Mets attempted to use him as a starter in 2003 anyway, with poor results coming over 14 appearances and 13 starts. Heilman’s ERA was a staggering 6.75, and he walked 5.7 hitters per nine innings pitched while allowing 1.8 homers. Upon returning to Triple-A Norfolk for much of the 2004 season, Heilman continued to struggle. He struck out 7.3 hitters per nine, but he also walked almost four batters over the same frame. Baseball Prospectus’s Peripheral ERA, or PERA, gives you an idea of what a pitcher’s ERA should be based on their peripherals. His 2004 campaign at Norfolk would have translated to a PERA of 5.22 in the major leagues, which is not all that impressive for a 25-year old who was supposed to be on the fast track to the majors. He had five starts for the Mets that year, and they went about as well as expected, given his poor showing in the minors. His ERA was 5.46, and he walked over four batters per nine while continuing to dish out a significant number of homers. Baseball Prospectus 2005 was not pleased with this turn of events:
With expectations a bit lower than before heading into 2005, Heilman managed to put together a fine season split between the rotation and bullpen. He managed to keep opponents at bay from both positions, but he was clearly superior as a reliever. Opponents hit .247/.308/.377 against Heilman as a starter, and just .207/.293/.249 against him as a reliever. His 2006 season was disappointing for those expecting another 2005, as his numbers looked about the same as his overall line from 2005, rather than like the ridiculous effort he put up as a reliever. His strikeout rate fell, but he managed to keep his walks and homers allowed down, helping to balance out the extra baserunners he allowed to score. ERA for a reliever is somewhat deceiving; Heilman allowed half of his inherited runners to score, and as Baseball Prospectus 2007 puts it, he did this “while leaving a few messes of his own for other relievers to clean up.” Thanks to this, his Fair Run Average was 4.14, which doesn’t look anywhere near as shiny as his actual ERA. 2007 was more of the same in the ERA department, but Heilman’s strikeout rate dipped even further to just 6.6 per nine, while his homers jumped up to 0.8 per nine. A .263 BABIP may have saved his season line somewhat, especially with his 21% liner rate, which was league-average. His FIP was 3.82, and his Fair Run Average was 3.69. Since his success was based significantly on his ability to keep runners off of the basepaths—despite batted ball tendencies that lead one to believe he would allow more baserunners—the idea of making him a starter at this stage in the game is past iffy and closer to pointless. Nate Silver has shown us that you can expect a pitcher to have an ERA about 25% higher in a starting role than a relief one. This is based on research done to see where Jon Papelbon belonged more on the Red Sox, who could have used him as either a closer or as a starter. As Silver goes on to point out, you can’t just compare reliever ERA and starter ERA, as they are two different things. In fact, he sets the replacement level for the two groups at a 5:4 ratio, with 5.00 representing replacement level for starters and 4.00 for relievers. Given that, it doesn’t appear as if Heilman is too far off of the path from being a replacement level reliever given his recent drops in strikeout rate and the idea that luck may have carried him through much of 2007. Remember how Heilman had issues refining his secondary pitches, and thus struggled as a starter in the majors? That hasn’t changed over the years, especially with Heilman moving to the pen and focusing on two pitches for the most part. Taking a look at his Pitch Profile in Graphical Player 2008 shows us that he throws a ton of fastballs, ranging from 88-95 with most falling in the middle of the range, and also a changeup that hangs around the high-70’s and mid-80’s. He’s basically cut the other pitches he used to fool around with out of his repertoire, or at the least avoids using them consistently. Part of the reason he is in the pen is due to his inability to refine the pitches that would have made him an acceptable starter. If we are assuming that an ERA of 4.00 for a reliever is the same as an ERA of 5.00 for a starter, then Heilman, with his potentially newfound issues, would be a solid bet to approach replacement level as a starter. Since he seems to have succeeded in the bullpen thus far and can be easily discarded if he were to stop pitching effectively, moving him to the rotation is certainly not in his best interests, nor the Mets’. Marc Normandin writes weekly at Baseball Prospectus and is a regular contributor to Heater. You can e-mail him here. 27 Responses to “Back to the Pen?”Leave a ReplyYou must be logged in to post a comment. |
advertisement:latest poll:
recommended journals:
recent user journals:
advertisement:recent articles:
rss/syndication:your ad here:advertisement: |
Loading ...
aaron is a rare combination of a hoosier and a fighting irishman. you can take your stats and put’em in base zero. the man wants to have a chance to start for the mets and i don’t see where he hasn’t earned at least another chance to try. what in god’s green earth do the mets have to lose by giving aaron a chance in ST? expeshally if sanchez and padilla reurtn to form?
Heilman should have been in the rotation in 2006. He pitched a one hitter his last start attempt. He should have been given a chance. Instead, they brought in Lima, Gonzalez and I think Omar’s grandmother to pitch in 06. He dropped his other pitches that he was developing for starting and did not use them because Peterson told him not to use them. I think tendonitis or some other elbow disorder is responsible for his drop in strikeouts. If his arm is not healthy, he may no longer be able to start (or effectively relieve). Or maybe pitching longer once every five days is easier on his arm than pitching 3 of 5 days. Regardless, he earned his right to show that his one hitter wasn’t a fluke. But Willie and Omar played games with him and then buried him there. If he does start in the future, I suppose it will only be for another team. I am pretty confidant that the Heilman of 06 could have won at least 15 games as a starter. Whether he still can depends on whether he has influential tendonitis.
omar needs to recognize that his “stack the bullpen” theory backfired. i hope he does not mortgage the farm to obtain santana, whose best days are certainly behind him. if sanchez and/or padilla even look remotely like they can perform , i would let aaron compete and most likely win a starting spot this spring.
Not quite true. His last start, he allowed 4 runs over 5.2 innings against the Cardinals. The one-hitter was his second-to-last start.
aaron is a product of his warped mets upbringing. the guy was drafted on the 1st round 3 times by 3 diff teams as a starting pitcher. he comes to the mets and the same brain trust that said kazmir would never amount to anything goes ahead and farqs with his arm angle. that finally gets straightened out (no pun) and aaron hurls a one-hitter mets classic. then back to the pen to wait behind kristy benson, zambrainless and the clown crew (lima, soler, et. al.) peterson tells him drop your slider and forkball so you can emphasize getting thru the line-up once as a set-up man for over-the-hill bigmouth wags. now for years the bitch on heilman is he can only get through the line-up once….
Good piece, Marc. While many of the knocks on Heilman’s potential as a starter have been discussed before, it’s helpful to have them summarized and backed up with some sophisticated metrics.
There are three reasons, I think, that fans cling to the hope that Aaron will succeed as a starter:
1. He wants it, badly. He’s just not content where he is.
2. He’s a homegrown and by now very familiar–if not exactly beloved–presence on the Mets staff. Many feel he’s “earned” the chance to start, whatever that means. It would conclude the narrative in a satisfying way if he transitioned to starter.
3. Several writers have mentioned over the past year or so that he improved his secondary pitches during his last stint in AAA and under the tutelage of Prof. Rick and now possesses the arsenal to thrive as a starter. (If true, this would mean his prior stats as a starter are largely irrelevant). You’re clearly skeptical. Would you mind elaborating a bit more on the source of your skepticism?
I look at it more simply and say…
Which do the Mets need more? An above-average set-up man or yet another unproven #5 starter with a minimum of solid pitches?
But we are definitely on the same page in general, Marc.
Marc, In your second sentence, you summarize your feelings by writing that the Mets “wisely” use him a relief role. Then in the next sentence, you write that you will examine where he belongs. But we already knew what to expect for the next few paragraphs based on your second sentence. Some of the stats you bring up do make some sense, but you don’t even bring up the one hitter in his next to last (sorry Alex, I should never rely on my memory) start that might suggest that just maybe, he had it figured out (four runs in 5.2 innings isn’t grounds for banishing him either). Your stats don’t consider that Piazza played better where psychologically he was more comfortable, and just maybe it might be true for AH also. Unfortunately, convincing you or any other Metsgeek isn’t going to get him a single start. If Willie paraded in the group of clowns in 2006 (as BC wrote) that he did rather than go for AH when Dirty had the eighth covered very nicely, only a trade will make Aaron a starter in this life time.
i hold out hope for aaron to start for us. if sanchez can regain his 2006 form and santana is not on our roster, aaron might be viewed by mgt as available for the starting rotation
If the Mets do make this Santana trade, I would strongly prefer (and possibly the Twins also) that the Mets add Heilman and subtract Humber. If healthy, Heilman can go on to win 15 for the Twins and Humber can go on to win 13-15 for the Mets.
bcuster, I hope that your hope comes true but that would mean Willie and Omar admitting that they made a mistake in 2006. Sorry BC, it just won’t happen.
aaron’s fate was sealed after the kazmir trade. aaron was not given a fair chance to start because mgt was desperate to justify first sans-braino, then benson’s presence on the team. after those losers drifted away into nothingness, aaron became a victim of his own success in the bp.
i read an interview heilman gave to the south bend tribune last summer. i posted it here. aaron was as frank as he ever has been about his current role. he wants to start for very pragmatic reasons: higher pay, a more predictable work routine and for the health of his arm. he said specifically that he feels his career will be cut short if he stays in the pen much longer. the one question aaron would not answer concerned his willingness to be traded in order to start
Well, I am sure he would be “willing” to be traded to start, but its not exactly like that is in his control anyway.
I tend to want to give Heilman a chance to start with the turmoil we have in the 5th position right now. However, in order for that to happen we would have to first have Sanchez and Padilla looking like they can actually make a difference in the pen before I consider it. Heilman-Wagner is still important to this team now, if Sanchez/Padilla look healthy and effective (a big IF), then we have a bit of room to see what Heilman can do as a starter. (I certainly don’t agree that we only need one of them to be “remotely close” to perform, we need BOTH effective and healthy before it makes any sense to me).
I just don’t see it happening, and while I am a big fan of Heilman, I am not that upset about that.
BCuster, can you post again the link for the Heilman interview? I am sure that Heilman would prefer to start for the Mets rather than start for KC, but I think he would prefer to start for KC than to relieve for the Mets. He is certainly right about salary. I am sure he would be able to demand and get twice as much if he were winning 15 games as a starter, rather than being a very good 7th and 8th inning man. When does Heilman become a free agent?
eli, i will look for the link to that interview. i would like to re-read it myself. i think aaron becomes a f/a in 2009.
Thanks bcuster. I assume you mean by 2009, after the 2008 season. If I understand it correctly, Aaron is a Met for at most, only one more year.
sorry, eli. i am having difficulty locating the material. the interview may have been on the local tv stations, not the sbt… i will keep trying.
I think we have Heilman locked up for 2 more years.
Heilman has only amassed slightly more than three years of service time, according to Cot’s. Since he finished his third season last year, he was arbitration-eligible for the first time this year.
So after 2008, he still has two seasons left before free agency.
Even if Sanchez is immediately an effective bullpen arm, that’s still… Wagner Heilman Feliciano Sanchez as immediately effective short relievers and Sosa as the long-man… with Wise as a question mark and Schoeneweis getting too many innings.
Even if Sanchez AND one of Smith and Padilla are immediately effective short relievers, you’re still left to question Wise and if Sosa ends up getting pulled to spot-start for an injury to the starting rotations.
I argue that unless you have five effective short relievers OTHER than Heilman, experimenting with Heilman as a starter hurts the Mets more than it helps.
If the Mets had bullpen depth at the end of ‘07, if they had competent arms to go to after Smith flamed out and after Wags/Heilman/Feliciano ground down under the weight of a rotation that couldn’t pitch deep…
If their backs hadn’t been against the wall to the point where they were either overusing their three good short-relievers to the point of exhaustion or using Mota Schoeneweis and Sele in high-leverage roles in which they could not be relied upon on a consistent basis?
The Great Collapse doesn’t happen. The Mets still peter out at the end of the season but they get at least two of those losses back and they make the playoffs.
Maybe they don’t DO anything in the playoffs but they make them.
Until there is enough legitimately effective bullpen depth to avoid that kind of collapse, Heilman is a set-up man.
14 out of 21 responses from only 2 people– that must be a record! Congratulations bcuster and eli!
(;-}>
Heilman is a major league pitcher. He should stop pouting and stop giving interviews where he is basically whining publicly about how he is used. If he really would like to start, maybe he just shut it and perfect his slider.
Nails for the win!
i’ll start off by saying that i’m an advocate of moving heilman to the rotation in general, though i’m not sure it’s the best strategy for the mets at the moment (i’d rather see pelfrey in the 5 spot and humber as a swingman with what the mets have now). that said, a few notes about this article:
why mention heilman’s falling k rate as cause for alarm without mentioning his corresponding falling bb rate? is there some reason to think that the drop in the former will continue while the drop in the latter is a fluke? i can’t see any reason why that would be. heilman had the best k/bb rate of his career last year. that doesn’t really portend significant problems, even if his k rate did drop. that doesn’t seem like a fair argument to me.
heilman’s ERA over the last three years have been 3.17, 3.62, 3.03. his FIP have been 2.82, 3.29, 3.85. his k/bb have been 2.9, 2.6, and 3.1. his hr rates have been .52, .55, and .88. and his gb% have been 45.8, 44.9 and 44.9. last year, his homeruns went up even though his gb% didn’t. his k/bb actually got better. there doesn’t seem to be anything strongly suggesting that we should predict decline from last year’s FIP rather than averaging out the last three years and weighting them like most projection systems do. and in fact, most well-known projections see heilman being basically what he has been over the last three years. ZIPS projects a 3.21 ERA; bill james 3.41; Marcel and chone both project 3.62.
it seems unfair to cite falling k rates and low babip and so predict decline from his FIP (which already factors in the low babip, so it’s super unfair to cite that as a baseline and then cite babip as one of the reasons to expect decline from that baseline) without mentioning his falling bb rate and his unluckiness last year with homeruns as well. when you factor it all together, it really doesn’t look like heilman is going to get any worse than what he’s been for the last three years.
if the projections (which are basically in agreement) are more or less correct and heilman will (as silver suggests) be about 25% worse as a starter than as a reliever, his ERA as a starter would probably be somewhere around 4.35. that is far, far different than the 5.00 that is suggested in this article. in fact, that’s a damn good ERA for a 3rd starter. it’s even better for a fifth starter; it would look pretty delicious coming behind pedro, el duque, maine and perez, for instance.
a couple additional notes: i disagree with this article’s assessment of heilman’s secondary pitches. first of all, it is extremely unfair to cite last year’s pitch profile as evidence that he doesn’t have or couldn’t develop satisfactory third and fourth pitches, as it’s just as likely (probably moreso, but i don’t want to seem too certain) that he ditched the secondary pitches because he didn’t need them as a reliever as it is that he ditched them because they didn’t develop. as the article here notes, heilman’s slider was considered plus back in ‘02, and he has a “decent” splitter in addition. the changeup that was considered only decent back then has developed into a plus-plus pitch (i think his changeup’s one of the ten best in baseball or so, personally, but that is anecdotal).
maybe heilman can no longer throw a slider or splitter effectively, but there’s no prima facie evidence that he can’t, so it’s not a good argument to use against the suggestion that we should put him in the rotation to find out. at least let him throw like a starter in spring training and see if he’s still got it.
i’d also like to address heilman’s performance before becoming a starter. not much is made of it here, but the mets altered heilman’s natural delivery early in his career and only allowed him to return to his college delivery in the spring of 2005. a lot of his struggles in the high minors and majors as a starter have been attributed to this monkeying with heilman’s mechanics. there’s no way to know for sure, but i would argue that heilman’s performance as a starter in 2005 after reverting to his natural delivery indicate that he could have been a competent starter if he’d only been allowed to pitch naturally.
it’s a small sample size, but in 42 innings over 7 starts, he struck out 34, walked 13 and had an ERA of 4.71, with the opponents’ batting line of 247/308/377 that marc mentioned. that’s not bad for a 26-year-old pitcher with only 120 major league innings under his belt. a pitcher with those tools and those numbers should be used as a starter. it’s not even that heilman deserves to start in some nebulous ethical sense; he is simply more valuable as a starter.
i’m actually at this point kind of hoping that we trade heilman straight up for huston street, and then billy beane puts heilman in the rotation and flips him next offseason for three top prospects. he could flip him back to us for fmart and mulvey maybe.
Bobby Jones once pitched a one hitter in a playoff game.
For the record — I do agree that the Mets have not given Heilman a fair shot at the rotation insofar as they haven’t allowed him to try starting while pitching with his natural delivery. That said, the right way for Heilman to get into the rotation is to work on his secondary pitches and show up to spring training with a repertoire that demands he be given a shot in the rotation. Not to complain publicly in Notre Dame alumni magazines.