IVIE 2010: Pitchers

We covered Padres hitters yesterday. As promised, here are the 2010 IVIE projections for pitchers:


                 N    IP  ERA
Jon Garland     22 206.1 4.00
Kevin Correia   22 191.1 4.15
Clayton Richard 21 165.1 4.31
Chris Young     23 149.2 3.91
Mat Latos       22 134.1 3.78
Wade LeBlanc    20  88.2 4.51
Tim Stauffer    19  88.1 4.44
Cesar Carrillo  11  47.0 4.43
Cesar Ramos     11  36.2 4.67
Ernesto Frieri	 9  25.2 4.56


  • Our respondents gave Garland a very tight range of IP (175 to 246) and ERA (3.65 to 4.44)
  • Correia’s projection seems a shade optimistic to me, especially the innings
  • Richard is the anti-Garland (we have him at 42 to 210 IP, 3.14 to 6.12 ERA)
  • One respondent thought Young would pitch 267 IP; remove that, and his projected total slips to 144.1 IP
  • I’d add half a run to Latos’ ERA
  • LeBlanc’s line looks about right to me, although he might be a nice sleeper
  • One respondent, presumably thinking of something else at the time, put Carrillo at 110 IP, 3.81 ERA
  • If given the opportunity, Ramos is capable of much worse

If the Padres front five can put up those kinds of numbers, they might sniff .500 this year. I just don’t see more than one, maybe two, doing what we’ve projected them to do. Wouldn’t it be nice to be wrong about that?


                 N   IP   ERA
Edward Mujica   19  76.1 3.93
Luke Gregerson  20  73.1 3.29
Heath Bell      20  70.0 2.77
Mike Adams      20  65.0 2.54
Joe Thatcher    19  53.1 3.47
Luis Perdomo    15  49.1 4.50
Adam Russell    17  44.4 4.16
Ryan Webb       17  40.2 4.24
Aaron Poreda    16  40.1 3.92
Radhames Liz    10  24.1 4.83


  • A repeat performance might be asking a bit much from Gregerson
  • Three respondents gave Adams a sub-2.00 ERA; can he stay healthy?
  • Perdomo’s projection surprises me; I don’t see a big-league pitcher here
  • Apparently I’m not the only one who has trouble telling the difference between Russell and Webb (although the Padres seem to like Russell)
  • Poreda’s projection is proudly sponsored by crack, helping people make bad decisions for a quarter of a century; extra credit to the person that put him at 78.2 IP, 2.30 ERA
  • Liz was voted most likely to follow Eulogio de la Cruz to Japan

Incidentally, I forgot to poll for Sean Gallagher. I had him written in my notebook (80 IP, 4.72 ERA) but somehow missed his name when setting up the surveys. If you’d like to make a guess for Gallagher, feel free to leave it in the comments.

Tagged as: ,

5 Responses »

  1. I am just curious why so many are pessimistic about Padres pitching?

    Why can’t some of the Padres pitchers like Correia and Stauffer and LeBlanc repeat their 2009 numbers?

    Why do so many think Garland will not improve on his 2010 numbers even though he is coming to an extreme hitter’s park?

    Why is Richard expected to regress after a good, but not great, rookie season?

    Did the NL West teams sign some uber-sluggers I have not heard about? Did they move the fences in at Petco?

    I am hoping you can shed some light on it for me, Geoff.

  2. Ugh! Hard to swallow when we project our “#1″ starter to throw only 149.2 innings. Oh well, more opportuntity for the young guys to show what they have.

  3. @Websoulsurfer: I can’t speak for anyone else who submitted guesses, but here is my take on some of these guys:

    Correia: Coming into 2009, his career ERA was 4.59 and his high for IP was 110. His peripheral numbers last year were not bad, but neither were they anything special. If he meets our projection, I’ll be very happy.

    Stauffer: The main concerns here are injuries (missed all of ’08) and lack of overwhelming success in high minors (4.62 ERA, 6.12 K/9 in 463.1 IP at Triple-A). I’d love to see him have a career, and he’s already overcome tremendous odds to get this far, but at his age and with his stuff, he’s a couple bad starts from done.

    LeBlanc: I really like this kid. He was a completely different pitcher when he came up for good last year. If he stays aggressive, he could surprise some people, but it’s difficult to project such success based on his track record.

    Garland: His ERA has been between 4.01 and 4.90 every year since 2002 (except ’05, when it was 3.50). His career ERA is 4.42. He’s 30 years old. I’m assuming we expect him to do what he always does, only a little better because of Petco Park.

    Richard: We’ve got him pegged to duplicate last year (153 IP, 4.41 ERA in 2009, 165.1 IP, 4.31 ERA in 2009). I personally have him a little higher than that (4.60) because of his spotty command.

    Some of these guys may well exceed their projections (LeBlanc, maybe Richard), but others could fall short (Correia seems a good bet). With the exception of Garland and Bell, who are known quantities, there is a lot of risk on this staff. It’s hard to project great things from these guys. This doesn’t mean it can’t happen, just that if it does, it will come as something of a surprise.

  4. I imagine that Petco makes ERA projections hard to do, but more advanced park-adjusted metric projections wouldn’t be easy either.

    I’d be ecstatic if the starting staff ended up with 1000 league-average innings. Any pitcher or player can have a fluke year (pitchers especially do so as Cardinals), but Gardland is the only starter who looks all that likely to be above-average for 170+ innings. Latos and Young have health / workload questions, the other starters have stuff questions.

    Padre fans have seen bullpens go from a strength to an open sore before. Relievers are a volatile lot. It wouldn’t be a shock to see a strong group performance, but it wouldn’t be a shock to see several contributing arms from last year struggle quite a bit either.