Blackburn looks good

by snolls on Jun 30, 2009 11:40 AM EDT Comment 15 comments

Excluding a couple of bad early starts on the road, Blackburn has looked really good this year. The question is, how valuable is this guy really going to be?

I'm starting to think he's deserving of some pretty significant respect. He has been pretty consistent this year, and his numbers are great for a ground ball pitcher.

Stats, with ranking of pitchers with at least 75 IP (97 pitchers total, or about 3 / team)

IP/S: 6.7 (?)

IP: 107 (13th)

ERA: 3.10 (18th)

OBP against: .313 (34th)

GB%: 47% (34th)

FB: 28% (46th)

HR/9: .75 (23rd)

LD: 19% (53rd)

DP%: (53rd)

Blackburn is a ground-ball pitcher. As long as he keeps the ball on the ground (check), his keys to success are low OBP against (check), avoid HRs, and get deep into games (check, at least lately). Combine that with a few double plays and you're going to be pretty valuable. None of these stats are noteworthy on their own (slightly above average, in all), but combined they are pretty powerful. His ERA is better than I would expect based on this, which probably indicates that some regression should be expected, but overall, this is pretty solid.

When Blackburn was putting up the great statistics in AA and AAA, he got wide respect for his likelihood to contribute in the big leagues, but the knock was that he had a mid or back end starter. However, if Blackburn could continue to replicate this kind of success, which is awfully similar to the success he showed in the minors, he could be a front end of the rotation starter. He'll never be a stopper (Santana, Lincecum, etc.), because he doesn't have that type of stuff, but he could he be a #1/#2 type pitcher? I'm picturing the type of pitcher who can give you 200 IP, with an ERA of around 4.00 or better, year to year. What do you all think?

Poll

What is Blackburn's ceiling, and how likely is he to reach it?

Perennial 200+ IP, <4.00 ERA, very likely

14 votes

Perennial 200+IP, <4.00 ERA, but unlikely

20 votes

He'll get the innings, but ERA mid 4's is his ceiling, likely

12 votes

Consistent innings, and mid 4's ERA are more of a maybe, probably a back-end guy for his career

2 votes

48 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 15 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Though

Even though I’m proposing it as possible, I guess I don’t like my “very likely” option. Oh well, I still say he has that ceiling. I’ll call it 50/50.

by snolls on Jun 30, 2009 11:44 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I know I've never been his biggest fan

But he absolutely deserves a ton of credit for his performance.

However, I don’t see his future as being all that bright. I think he’ll stick around, and be OK, but I think he’s overperforming his talent right now.

Here’s the thing: it took me a while to figure it out, but I finally did. He’s been very successful, both last year and this year, with runners in scoring position. That’s how he’s done so well with what can only be called mediocre peripherals.

Now, the question is whether that’s a skill that he can sustain or not. My belief is that it is not. Maybe I’m wrong, but if I’m right, and his performance with RISP reverts, those numbers start looking not so good.

Even this year, as good as he’s been, his peripherals have taken a turn for the worse. Less Ks, more walks. Even at his levels of last season, it’s tough.

I wonder what his value is around the league. If it’s possible to sell high, I would seriously consider it.

by Eric in Madison on Jun 30, 2009 12:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Sell high

I would sell high as well, but I don’t think the league values him very highly. He’s probably closer to Perkins in trade value, but I think of him as closer to Slowey than Perkins in potential.

I agree that he’s overperforming his talent, but I think that he will continue to be above average in terms of keeping runners from scoring. In order to be a good pitcher, of the contact pitcher mold, you need to be successful at this. There are a couple of factors that can make you successful at this:
a) groundballs – ground balls improve the chances of force outs, double plays, and reduce the changes of players getting extra bases
b) avoiding the hard hit balls and especially the extra base hits (ISO against .130, 30th), avoiding home runs, deep sac flies, and line drives.

I’m not syaing he’ll be able to sustain what he’s done, but it does seem that this has been a consistent quality since AA (ability to give up hits without runs). I think the tremendous movement on his pitches is the key, and is the difference between him and Baker or Slowey, who have (usually) better peripherals, but still give up the runs.

by snolls on Jun 30, 2009 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hasn’t Derek Lowe made quite a living with similar stuff as Blackburn?

I don’t understand all the fussing about the lack of strikeouts. I think he pitches to contact until he gets in a jam.

by Dale on Jun 30, 2009 4:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Blackburn is the ace. You don't trade the ace

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jun 30, 2009 4:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Well, I say he is definately pitcing a little ahead of himself right now...

I say most good years he will be a solid #2 starter for us and some of the average/not so good years he’ll be a #3 starter for us. (kind of like 2008)

but so far in 2009 he is in over his head no doubt, he can’t keep this up and we need to compensate accordingly (like getting the next Edwin Jackson) Because Blackburn is having a career year and once/ if we were to reach the post-season he may come falling back down to earth and even if he does not I FULLY expect him to come crashing back down to earth in 2010.

by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Jun 30, 2009 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Your Projections

of 200 IP/ERA around 4 seem pretty accurate. His FIP at 4.08 this year and 4.30 for his career. But his groundball rate has increased every year, which in turn has lowered the line drive % and henceforth the BABIP against. So the numbers could get better.

I think a front of the rotation of Slowey/Blackburn/Baker, not necessarily in that order, will be extremely competitive for the next few years.

by matty_b on Jun 30, 2009 5:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

agreed

and it makes me like Perkins, Liriano, Swarzak a lot more, because they won’t have as much pressue. When your #4 and #5 pitchers are made up of the best of that group, you have to feel pretty good.

Also – Swarzak should start in the bullpen. He needs to start facing MLB hitters, but in a lower pressure role. Hopefully he will some later this year, and consistently next April, until he is ready to be pitch 7 innings against MLB hitting.

by snolls on Jun 30, 2009 5:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

hasnt Swarzak already

proved that he can pitch 7 innings very effectively? Perkins/Liriano needs to go to the pen with Henn being sent down, and Swarzak takes one of their roles in the starting rotation. Swarzak has great movement on his fastball (as we saw against the cubbies). He has a really nice arsenal of pitches that he can locate really well. Swarzak is another Slowey/Radke.

by 33MorneauMVP on Jul 1, 2009 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't say he's quite in that company

His control is not as precise. But he does have better stuff. I liken him more to Baker than Slowey.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jul 1, 2009 1:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

proven?

He had a cup of coffee at the major league leve, and you think he’s ready to be a Slowey/Radke?

The guy is one of our top pitching prospects, and there is a lot of reason to be hopeful. Still, he’s going to need some adjustment. His brief appearance doesn’t prove anything (small sample size, small sample size, small sample size). I really like the development methodology of bringing your pitching prospects up to be the long-relief / 7th inning guy. If they are pitching really well, you use them in higher leverage situations. By pitching them in the bullpen, you get cheap, good talent in the bullpen (as opposed to Luis Ayala), and they get exposure to talented hitters. There will still be an adjustment when they have to start, and face a big league lineup 3-4 times through, but they should be able to develop faster.

by snolls on Jul 1, 2009 9:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm.. groundballer who eats innings

Can I point you to Carlos Silva in 2004-2005? You don’t trade a guy like that, you let him pitch while he’s cheap and trade him when he gets expensive. There would have to be a really good return (Tulowitzki?) to deal Blackburn.

by DJL44 on Jul 1, 2009 12:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Silva's a different animal

Silva doesn’t have good secondary stuff. Never did. He relied on his sinker almost exclusively. It’s a wonder he was even as successful as he was.

Blackburn has a good breaking ball and change. He’s more of a conventional pitcher with good movement on his fastball. Those kinds of guys tend to have long careers. I’m not saying he’s in this class, but does anybody remember a guy like that who recently retired by the name of Maddux?

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jul 2, 2009 9:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Swarzak

has proven very little. The Twins are the best example of why he pitched well in his few starts. We tend to STINK against new pitchers because we have not had time to study them. Swarzak benefited from people not knowing him. This is the reason why Slowey versus first time starter for Detroit on Friday is making me very nervous for our club.

If Ozzie Guillen likes Punto that much, I vote we send him down to Chicago. Punto and Guillen deserve each other.

by FoulJack on Jul 2, 2009 12:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think the two words in the baseball lexicon I hate most are "proven" and "seasoning"

Proven: are we making sourdough bread here?
Seasoning: are we running a Curry house?

How can a guy “prove” anything if he doesn’t get the opportunity?

I’m not necessarily advocating a trade of a starting pitcher to make room for Swarzak tomorrow, but on the other hand, I would be reasonably comfortable if they decided to go that route. It’s not as if the Twins don’t have needs to address. It seems to me they are in decent shape to address a need with pitching. Does it have a downside? Sure. It’s not a given that Swarzak or anyone else steps right in and does the job. But you have to give to get, and the Twins have a relative luxury in that not only does nobody in their own rotation need to be replaced, but they have a good prospect who has already gotten a taste waiting in the wings. Many teams would try to use that luxury.

by Eric in Madison on Jul 2, 2009 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs