first pitch: 7:15 p.m., PT
television: Channel 4
matchup: Adam Eaton (12-7, 5.83 ERA) vs Kevin Correia (2-5, 4.31 ERA)
preview: Padres.com
magic number: 15
[Note: When I first started working on this, the matchup was supposed to be between Eaton and Jason Schmidt. No such luck, but I thought the comparison between the two was interesting enough to post, so that's what you're getting. Also, Barry Bonds is scheduled to return to the Giants lineup Monday night. We'll talk more about that after it actually happens, hopefully in the context of how the Padres won despite his presence.]
Because Jason Schmidt shows up at #8 on Adam Eaton‘s list of similar pitchers through age 26 at Baseball-Reference.com, because both pitchers hail from the state of Washington, and because we all get a good junior-high-school laugh when we say Eaton-Schmidt, I decided to take a look at how these two pitchers compared with one another at roughly the same stage in their careers. Thanks to David Pinto’s Day by Day Database, it was a breeze:
Adam Eaton vs Jason Schmidt through Approximately 770 Innings
|
Age |
GS |
IP |
ERA |
H/9 |
HR/9 |
BB/9 |
SO/9 |
Eaton |
27 yrs, 10 mos |
126 |
768.0 |
4.29 |
8.81 |
1.13 |
3.19 |
7.01 |
Schmidt |
27 yrs, 4 mos |
123 |
770.0 |
4.52 |
10.29 |
0.95 |
3.79 |
6.59 |
You already know this, but I have to say it anyway. The following is not a representation of what Eaton will do in the future. It is merely a look at what someone who exhibited characteristics similar to those of Eaton at roughly the same stage in their careers went on to do. The best we can do is speculate that Eaton might follow a similar path. With that disclaimer out of the way, here’s what Schmidt has done:
Jason Schmidt Since Inning 770
|
GS |
IP |
ERA |
H/9 |
HR/9 |
BB/9 |
SO/9 |
Schmidt |
147 |
960.2 |
3.49 |
7.43 |
0.71 |
3.34 |
9.13 |
Basically, Schmidt made huge strides in hit prevention, home run prevention, and strikeouts, and a more modest improvement in walk prevention. That’s a recipe for a major breakthrough.
What about individual game dominance (where dominance is arbitrarily defined as 7+ IP, 10+ SO, or 2+ (IP-H))? Have a look:
Dominant Starts for Adam Eaton and Jason Schmidt
|
7+ IP |
10+ SO |
2+ (IP-H) |
Eaton |
46 (36.5% of starts) |
5 (4.0%) |
41 (32.5%) |
early Schmidt |
56 (45.5% of starts) |
3 (2.4%) |
34 (27.6%) |
late Schmidt |
77 (52.4% of starts) |
22 (15.0%) |
61 (41.5%) |
This still tells us more about Schmidt than about Eaton, but it’s instructive in its way. Schmidt started going deeper into games (a relative strength of his to begin with), and kicked his dominant games into high gear. I don’t know how those numbers compare with the entire league, but here’s what the Padres starters have done since 2000 (through September 9, 2005), a span of 950 games:
Dominant Starts for San Diego Padres, 2000 – 2005
7+ IP |
10+ SO |
2+ (IP-H) |
308 (32.4% of starts) |
26 (2.7%) |
245 (25.8%) |
Schmidt’s early-career high-strikeout and low-hit games are fairly well in line with a decent sample of Padres starters. Again, his ability to go deep into games has always been pretty good. Eaton’s numbers are all slightly above average among Padres starters. Maybe it would help to see how Eaton compares with another current Padre, Jake Peavy:
Dominant Starts for Jake Peavy
7+ IP |
10+ SO |
2+ (IP-H) |
35 (34.0% of starts) |
10 (9.7%) |
37 (35.9%) |
Not much help, but this does point up just how terrific Schmidt has been over the past 5 years. I think Peavy has taken over the title of best starting pitcher in the NL West (keep your eye on the Giants’ Matt Cain, though), but he’s still not approaching some of the dominance that Schmidt has displayed over the latter part of his career.
So, what does any of this have to do with Eaton? It’s pretty clear that he and Schmidt share a lot of characteristics through their first 770 or so innings in the big leagues. It’s also clear that Schmidt made a monumental leap and was able maintain his new level of performance for a very long time. Also ― and this is where things get a little more subjective ― if you watch Schmidt, he’s got #1 starter stuff. Eaton? Not quite. He has a great arm, but he’s probably closer to Andy Ashby than Kevin Brown, if you get my drift. And there’s certainly no shame in that.
To summarize: Could Eaton take a leap similar to the one Schmidt took? Yes, but don’t count on it. Is it reasonable, based on their early-career numbers, to expect such a leap from Eaton? Probably not; more likely, Schmidt is the aberration. Does this mean Eaton won’t take a step up at some point in the near future? No, but it probably won’t be as big as the one Schmidt took. What is the most likely scenario for Eaton? Slow, steady improvement over the next few years; with no statistical evidence whatsoever to back me up on this, I believe the Eaton we saw earlier in the year before he landed on the DL is the Eaton we’re going to see in 2006.
Recent Comments