Will José Berríos Be an Ace in 2020? What History Tells Us About the Age-26 Season

As we all know, Berrios has faded in the second halves of seasons. If he can maintain for a full season, we have an Ace. Can he and his coaches find a way to do this? That is the number one question.

Max Scherzer has a far better history after age 36. The big thing with pitching is injuries . You can pick a trend and an age but injuries are more likely to be the cause of decline rather than just age

To answer your question:  Yes, probably, maybe.

Berrios would have been amongst the best in the league last year had his terrible August been so-so.  Fix that and the answer will be yes! 

He will rise as high as he can control his curve ball, and be consistent with it.

Don't know if it's release point, feel, or the weather, but Jose and his curve ball are not always in synch. Sometimes it's loopy, sometimes it's sharp, sometimes it sweeps, sometimes he can't throw it for strikes.

That inconsistency, and abandonment of his pitch mix when it's off, allows hitters to sit on the fast ball and change-up.

He will rise as high as he can control his curve ball, and be consistent with it.

 

Don't know if it's release point, feel, or the weather, but Jose and his curve ball are not always in synch. Sometimes it's loopy, sometimes it's sharp, sometimes it sweeps, sometimes he can't throw it for strikes.

 

That inconsistency, and abandonment of his pitch mix when it's off, allows hitters to sit on the fast ball and change-up.

Exactly this.  The curve ball flattens out, I assume is release point related, or mechanics affecting release point.

You forgot Gerrit Cole as a free agent SP. He has become dominant after age 26. He's put up 13.8 fWAR the past two seasons.

Better to look at who the top SP are right now:

• Seven of the 2019 Top Ten SP by fWAR were 30 or older. Eight were over 26. 
• 14 of the top 20 were over the age of 26.

IMO, three characteristics separate "aces" from the masses:

• Talent
• Health
• Continued Improvement (learning how to pitch)

Berrios has a lot of talent and has been healthy. He has a great work ethic. He can get better. He probably won't be a top 5 SP but he has the potential for a Top 10 season or two.

His one potential drawback is his small size. All of the eight older SP in the 2019 Top Ten are 6'2" or taller. Six are at least 6'4". 

You forgot Gerrit Cole as a free agent SP. He has become dominant after age 26. He's put up 13.8 fWAR the past two seasons.

 

Better to look at who the top SP are right now:

• Seven of the 2019 Top Ten SP by fWAR were 30 or older. Eight were over 26.
• 14 of the top 20 were over the age of 26.

IMO, three characteristics separate "aces" from the masses:

• Talent
• Health
• Continued Improvement (learning how to pitch)

Berrios has a lot of talent and has been healthy. He has a great work ethic. He can get better. He probably won't be a top 5 SP but he has the potential for a Top 10 season or two.

 

His one potential drawback is his small size. All of the eight older SP in the 2019 Top Ten are 6'2" or taller. Six are at least 6'4".

The pitchers you’re describing are the exceptions. I don’t know how they help explain anything about aging curves or what to reasonably expect from most other pitchers.

The pitchers you’re describing are the exceptions. I don’t know how they help explain anything about aging curves or what to reasonably expect from most other pitchers.

The question asks if Berrios can become an ace. The data blob is a good first look. The second look is at who are the aces? The answer is a lot of SP over the age of 26. The more relevant question is why are there so many "old" aces if the data blob provides a different answer?

This type of analysis is similar to what epidemiologists use to identify the sources of viruses or bacterial illness. They would get nowhere just looking at "on-average" data.

The question asks if Berrios can become an ace. The data blob is a good first look. The second look is at who are the aces? The answer is a lot of SP over the age of 26. The more relevant question is why are there so many "old" aces if the data blob provides a different answer?

 

This type of analysis is similar to what epidemiologists use to identify the sources of viruses or bacterial illness. They would get nowhere just looking at "on-average" data.

Point taken.

I bet we all wish there was an epidemic of aces.

Point taken.

 

I bet we all wish there was an epidemic of aces.

Yes! It would be like the old days with chicken pox. Send your kid down the street to the house where someone is already sick. Catch the virus and move on. Too bad it's not that catchy.

So here’s what I struggle with.  Nobody wants to define what an “ace” looks like.  Apparently it’s like being in love. You just know it when you see it. If you hit .300 you’re a great hitter.  If you steal 30 bases, you’re speedy.  If you’re over 40 and left handed pitcher, you’re crafty. etc.  Berrios had 14 wins, an ERA under 4.00 and almost 200 strikeouts.   I think there is a legitimate argument that he has “Ace” numbers. (Granted 14 wins isn’t something to tout but I was at a couple of those games he didn’t win and  the offense did not help him out)

 "As you can see, most of these players posted career bests in their age-26 season, proving our aging curve discussed above to be an accurate depiction of a pitcher’s career.".   I like the article and the stats but I kind of laughed at this.    Most of the THREE pitchers sampled PROVED?   As pointed out above you left out Cole and also Ryu.     Without  researching much I am guessing that both those pitchers would have contradicted the thesis.   So if included you could say the majority of these 5 players prove the aging curve is inaccurate but that would be just as wrong.   Samples of 3 or 5 prove nothing even if they were random.    Also , I don't know all the parameters of the graph but I am guessing it is an average of all starting pitchers over a certain period.   It is possible to arrive at an average of a group without actually having any one individual having that trajectory.   The graph is interesting, relevant and maybe indicative.    Personally, I am not all that concerned with whether Berrios is considered an ace or not.    Of course it would be nice if he threw up those kinds of numbers but history is littered with the Zito's beating the Santana's of the world in the playoffs.   I just want guys  capable of throwing gems.   Berrios was, is and hopefully continues to be capable.

I like the thought that was put into this article.  

Yes - there are several examples / outliers that deter this, but there are many that reinforce the point, as well.

One - for example - Greg Maddux won his first Cy Young when he was 26.

BTW - is height *really* a huge factor?

Johan Santana, Maddux and Lincecum were pretty good and they are not that tall.

Not that I'm comparing Berrios to any of them, ability wise...

I think Jose Berrios would really benefit if we were somehow able to find the Nelson Cruz of pitchers.

 

Much like Miguel Sano, Berrios has all the talent in the world and could easily rattle off a handful of Cy Young Award-level seasons before he retires. Unfortunately he, much like Sano did prior to Cruz's arrival, seems to put too much pressure on himself and tends to fall apart physically, mentally, or both right when we need him the most.

 

If we find the pitching version of Nelson Cruz, I think we'll find we have a real ace in Berrios for the next handful of years.

Berrios was learning a lot for E Santana before he left.

I had a nice spreadsheet of comparative Berrios stats but I deleted it given the doom/gloom of TD.

Safe to say he has been an AL top 10 or just about over the last one or two seasons in just about any pitching stat you could want, old school or new school: ERA, K/9, K/BB, WHIP, FIP, he got it.

I think he is criminally underrated for a guy just months older than Kohl Stewart, Stephen Gonslaves, Fernando Romero, or Griffin Jax.