Mackey: Diamond Has Been Good, But Let's Not Get Carried Away

[Nick Nelson]

2003? Johan was a reliever until the last 2 months of the season, IIRC.

...

It's not WAY too early, but it is early. Look at Radke's early years. Diamond is ahead of him in his progression.

Santana made 18 starts in 2003 and went 11-2 with a 2.85 ERA. They don't make the playoffs without him. He was their best starter. He's also the only pitcher they've won a playoff game behind since 1991.

 

As for the Diamond/Radke comp... by the time Radke was Diamond's age he had pitched almost 900 innings in the majors, more than Diamond has thrown in his pro career. I know Diamond is on a nice run but let's look at this in some context... the guy wasn't on a 40-man roster two years ago and last year he couldn't get out hitters in Triple-A at the same age Radke was winning 20 games for the Twins. Diamond's success right now is mostly tied to an elite walk rate, which is out of character with the rest of his career (averaged about 3 BB/9 in the minors). Radke had an elite walk rate his entire career while showing incredible durability with 220 IP almost every season.

 

Radke was the No. 1 pitcher (or "ace," I guess) on some bad pitching staffs, but it wasn't until better pitchers came along to push him down to No. 2/3 that the Twins actually became a legitimate contender. That's basically my point. To me, there's really no point in designating an ace on a bad team.

[DPJ]

...

He's also the only pitcher they've won a playoff game behind since 1991.

 

Radke and Milton get no love for 2002?

[jokin]

2003? Johan was a reliever until the last 2 months of the season, IIRC.

...

It's not WAY too early, but it is early. Look at Radke's early years. Diamond is ahead of him in his progression.

Santana made 18 starts in 2003 and went 11-2 with a 2.85 ERA. They don't make the playoffs without him. He was their best starter. He's also the only pitcher they've won a playoff game behind since 1991.

 

As for the Diamond/Radke comp... by the time Radke was Diamond's age he had pitched almost 900 innings in the majors, more than Diamond has thrown in his pro career. I know Diamond is on a nice run but let's look at this in some context... the guy wasn't on a 40-man roster two years ago and last year he couldn't get out hitters in Triple-A at the same age Radke was winning 20 games for the Twins. Diamond's success right now is mostly tied to an elite walk rate, which is out of character with the rest of his career (averaged about 3 BB/9 in the minors). Radke had an elite walk rate his entire career while showing incredible durability with 220 IP almost every season.

 

Radke was the No. 1 pitcher (or "ace," I guess) on some bad pitching staffs, but it wasn't until better pitchers came along to push him down to No. 2/3 that the Twins actually became a legitimate contender. That's basically my point. To me, there's really no point in designating an ace on a bad team.

Felix Hernandez? Cliff Lee on multiple bad teams? Steve Carlton on the '72 Phillies.....? ........

[Nick Nelson]

...

He's also the only pitcher they've won a playoff game behind since 1991.

 

Radke and Milton get no love for 2002?

Ah yeah, outside of '02. My bad.

[Willihammer]

Bootera is the ace

 

Booooooooooooo

[Nick Nelson]

Felix Hernandez? Cliff Lee on multiple bad teams? Steve Carlton on the '72 Phillies.....? ........

 

It's not a commentary on the quality of the pitcher. It's a commentary on the term "ace." Felix is clearly an elite pitcher and Seattle's No. 1 starter but if he's never pitching meaningful games why get caught up with labels? In my opinion, an ace is the leader of a good rotation on a contending team who clearly gets the ball in Game One of a postseason series. By my definition, there aren't even close to 30 aces in the league. But that's a separate issue. I realize it's a subjective definition of a subjective term.

 

Anyway, the central point is that Diamond is not going to be the No. 1 pitcher on a good pitching staff. I'll stand by that. Anyone who believes he'll continue to maintain a ~3.00 ERAin the long-term or will be the next Radke or Buehrle is, as Mackey puts it, getting carried away.

[jokin]

Felix Hernandez? Cliff Lee on multiple bad teams? Steve Carlton on the '72 Phillies.....? ........

 

It's not a commentary on the quality of the pitcher. It's a commentary on the term "ace." Felix is clearly an elite pitcher and Seattle's No. 1 starter but if he's never pitching meaningful games why get caught up with labels? In my opinion, an ace is the leader of a good rotation on a contending team who clearly gets the ball in Game One of a postseason series. By my definition, there aren't even close to 30 aces in the league. But that's a separate issue. I realize it's a subjective definition of a subjective term.

 

Anyway, the central point is that Diamond is not going to be the No. 1 pitcher on a good pitching staff. I'll stand by that. Anyone who believes he'll continue to maintain a ~3.00 ERAin the long-term or will be the next Radke or Buehrle is, as Mackey puts it, getting carried away.

 

On this I concur, with the caveat that Mackey gets a little too carried away with his own self-important self more than his characterization that all the fans are in a general uproar getting carried away to nominate Diamond as the next Stephen Strasburg.