Tim Lincecum

[Freakshow]

Top seasons by Starting Pitchers 2000-2009, sorted by ERA+.

Ave Game Score: 60+
ERA+: 150+
IP: 220+

Rk	Player	       GmScA	ERA+	WHIP	 IP	Year	Age
1	Zack Greinke	63	205	1.07	229.1	2009	25
2	Randy Johnson	67	197	1.03	260.0	2002	38
3	Randy Johnson	67	188	1.01	249.2	2001	37
4	Johan Santana	65	182	0.92	228.0	2004	25
5	Randy Johnson	64	181	1.12	248.2	2000	36
6	Randy Johnson	65	177	0.90	245.2	2004	40
7	Andy Pettitte	60	177	1.03	222.1	2005	33
8	Tim Lincecum	64	176	1.05	225.1	2009	25
9	Felix Hernandez	61	174	1.14	238.2	2009	23
10	Kevin Brown	63	169	0.99	230.0	2000	35
11	Tim Lincecum	62	169	1.17	227.0	2008	24
12	Cliff Lee	60	168	1.11	223.1	2008	29
13	Johan Santana	60	166	1.15	234.1	2008	29
14	Ben Sheets	63	162	0.98	237.0	2004	25
15	Johan Santana	62	161	1.00	233.2	2006	27
16	Curt Schilling	63	157	1.08	256.2	2001	34
17	C.C. Sabathia	62	157	1.12	253.0	2008	27
18	Jake Peavy	62	157	1.06	223.1	2007	26
19	Roy Halladay	60	155	1.13	239.0	2009	32
20	Johan Santana	63	155	0.97	231.2	2005	26
21	Roy Halladay	60	152	1.05	246.0	2008	31

[Fuzzy Bear]

Isn't that what I said?

I think it's important to specify that Gooden's workload came at age 19-20, and not just "as a young pitcher".

A "young pitcher" could be a guy up to age 25-26. In those years, a pitcher's arm is more physically developed, whereas at age 19, a pitcher's arm is still developing.

Most young pitchers at age 19-20 are in A ball, period, and aren't racking up the workload that Gooden racked up at that age. Gooden got the starting nod at an early age because he was the best, but he was still 19 as a rookie, and 20 as a sophomore. I am convinced that Gooden's arm wouldn't have been damaged by the same workload had he been a 23 year old rookie.

[Cubsfan97]

I think another factor is did the player deserve the awards he got? Last year Lincecum deserved the Cy Young, but this yearm he deserved consideration, but he did not deserve the award. Not to take anything away from him, he had a great season, but I think Chris Carpenter had a better year. Sure, he pitched a few less innings than Lincecum, but was there any doubt as to what Carpenter was going to do if he pitched a few extra games?

I dont think award winning should be just accepted, I think they should look at the years voting for times he won an award and see if he truly was the winner, or just given the award.

[bob]

Even though i personally wanted Carp to win this year, Lincecum was a good choice. Carp would have also been a good choice. Maybe in the past when we've had definite bad choices for MVP/CYA the winner and runner up could have that taken into consideration when evaluating their career highlights, but not in this instance.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

I think it's important to specify that Gooden's workload came at age 19-20, and not just "as a young pitcher".

Sure. I think it is obvious that Godden's "young pitcher" phase was age 19-20. Plus in ap revious post I mentioned Gooden's 1984-87 seasons.

A "young pitcher" could be a guy up to age 25-26. In those years, a pitcher's arm is more physically developed, whereas at age 19, a pitcher's arm is still developing.

I think Gooden's case is well known enough to understand that he was a "young pitcher" at age 19-21.

Most young pitchers at age 19-20 are in A ball, period, and aren't racking up the workload that Gooden racked up at that age. Gooden got the starting nod at an early age because he was the best, but he was still 19 as a rookie, and 20 as a sophomore. I am convinced that Gooden's arm wouldn't have been damaged by the same workload had he been a 23 year old rookie.

I agree with that. The Mets simply destroyed Gooden's arm by insane overuse.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

I think another factor is did the player deserve the awards he got? Last year Lincecum deserved the Cy Young, but this yearm he deserved consideration, but he did not deserve the award. Not to take anything away from him, he had a great season, but I think Chris Carpenter had a better year. Sure, he pitched a few less innings than Lincecum, but was there any doubt as to what Carpenter was going to do if he pitched a few extra games?

But he didn't pitch those extra games, though. We can't give credit to what Carpenter might have done in those few extra starts. In September Lincecum missed one start. What if he had made that start and threw a 15 K complete game shutout? Now Liuncecum has 16 wins, 2.38 ERA, 276 Ks. Or Lincecum could have been bombed in that missed start.

I dont think award winning should be just accepted, I think they should look at the years voting for times he won an award and see if he truly was the winner, or just given the award.

This should only be applied when there is an obviously huge gap in performace like Welch/Clemens in 1990 or Colon/Santana in 2005. It is not obvious that Carpenter was superior to Lincecum in 2009. A great case can be made for either pitcher. Can a great case be made for Welch over Clemens or Colon over Santana?

[jalbright]

I dont think award winning should be just accepted, I think they should look at the years voting for times he won an award and see if he truly was the winner, or just given the award.

This should only be applied when there is an obviously huge gap in performace like Welch/Clemens in 1990 or Colon/Santana in 2005. It is not obvious that Carpenter was superior to Lincecum in 2009. A great case can be made for either pitcher. Can a great case be made for Welch over Clemens or Colon over Santana?

To me, the best answer to this issue is award shares. If a guy's a clear winner (like Lincecum in 2008) he'll get a higher award share (86% in 2008). When it's a close call, like 2009, he'll get less (Lincecum gets 62% in 2009). That way, you recognize that he was at least arguably the best pitcher in the league twice, but recognize that it was an easier call in 2008 than 2009.

[Cowtipper]

Lincecum had a semi-normal, though still great season in 2010, going 16-10 with a 3.43 ERA. At this point, I think it is still too early to tell one way or the other whether he is on a Hall of Fame pace. Give him one more year.

[Paul Wendt]

Seeing his name here I expected to read that he pitched a no-hitter this afternoon.

[jjpm74]

Lincecum had a semi-normal, though still great season in 2010, going 16-10 with a 3.43 ERA. At this point, I think it is still too early to tell one way or the other whether he is on a Hall of Fame pace. Give him one more year.

Lincecum had amazing years in 2008 and 2009. In 2010, he came back down to earth, but just pitched a CG SHO in the playoffs. I still think that he is the type of pitcher who relies heavily on a dominating fastball. Lincecum is a great pitcher, but he will need to establish a few other pitches, and demonstrate an ability to battle even when he doesn't have his good stuff. It is too early to think of him as a HOFer.

[Cowtipper]

I think it's safe to say Lincecum has the makings of a future Hall of Famer, now that he has five years under his belt. This year, he had a 2.74 ERA and 130 ERA+ despite posting a losing record. For the fifth straight year in a row, he averaged over a strikeout per inning.

[9RoyHobbsRF]

Although he struck out 220 and trimmed last year's 3.43 ERA to 2.74, the Giants scored one run or fewer in 16 of his 33 starts and were shut out in 10 of them.

He was just 7-7 on the road, even though he entered Sunday (the last Sunday of the RS) with the lowest road ERA (2.06) in the major leagues.

"It was hard to believe he's 13-14," Giants manager Bruce Bochy said.

That's putting it mildly.

Lincecum became the sixth pitcher in modern major league history to finish with a sub-2.75 ERA, at least 200 strikeouts -- and a losing record.

Milwaukee's Ben Sheets was the previous entrant to that club, in 2004. Three of the other four are Hall of Famers, including Gaylord Perry, who was 15-17 with 230 strikeouts and a 2.61 ERA for the Giants in 1967. Even Cy Young, the genuine article, was 18-19 with a 1.82 ERA and 210 strikeouts for the Boston Americans in 1905






I

I think it's safe to say Lincecum has the makings of a future Hall of Famer, now that he has five years under his belt. This year, he had a 2.74 ERA and 130 ERA+ despite posting a losing record. For the fifth straight year in a row, he averaged over a strikeout per inning.

[dominik]

Lincecum is having a AJesque year.

Of course this is not his real talent level and he will get better but let's be pessimistic and say this is really the start of his decline and he will continue to be a 3.8-4.3 ERA pitcher till he is 36-37: would he still make the hall?

I mean he had a monster start with 2 CYs and another very good season so his peak already might be enough.

Of course he can make this discussion obsolete if he returns to his old dominance which I won't rule out at all but if not, has he done enough?

[jjpm74]

Lincecum is having a AJesque year.

Of course this is not his real talent level and he will get better but let's be pessimistic and say this is really the start of his decline and he will continue to be a 3.8-4.3 ERA pitcher till he is 36-37: would he still make the hall?

I mean he had a monster start with 2 CYs and another very good season so his peak already might be enough.

Of course he can make this discussion obsolete if he returns to his old dominance which I won't rule out at all but if not, has he done enough?

No, he has not. He definitely needs to bounce back and as I said 2 years ago, establish some other pitches and show that he has the brain to go with the talent.

[Matthew C.]

I mean he had a monster start with 2 CYs and another very good season so his peak already might be enough.

Are his top 3-4 years better than Bret Saberhagen's or Orel Hershiser's? I don't know, it is debatable. He definitely needs to do more, but I am not willing to write him off yet either.

[Los Bravos]

Are his top 3-4 years better than Bret Saberhagen's or Orel Hershiser's?

Exactly the two I thought of, Sabes in particular.

He definitely needs to do more, but I am not willing to write him off yet either.

Probably better to have these struggles early in your career as opposed to later.

[drstrangelove]

Lincecum is having a AJesque year.

Actually, AJ was at 83-84 for ERA+ and Timmy is at 55, so we are talking a world of difference that is more than startling since Tim's high point was 2 Cy Youngs. 83 is at or perhaps a tad above replacement; 55 is possible not adequate to make it out of AA.

To give this a perspective, I heard that the WSJ had an article that said a 55 ERA+ is the lowest for any pitcher in a season with 95 or more innings since.......1901. That's right.

[jjpm74]

Actually, AJ was at 83-84 for ERA+ and Timmy is at 55, so we are talking a world of difference that is more than startling since Tim's high point was 2 Cy Youngs. 83 is at or perhaps a tad above replacement; 55 is possible not adequate to make it out of AA.

To give this a perspective, I heard that the WSJ had an article that said a 55 ERA+ is the lowest for any pitcher in a season with 95 or more innings since.......1901. That's right.

To go even further, Jamie Moyer at 49 years old had a WAR of 0.1 in 55 innings and an 83 ERA+ and no one wants him. Lincecum has a -2.0 WAR in 96.2 IPs and only 1 more win than Moyer had. Lincecum is having one of the worst years of any starter in the history of baseball.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I suspect that there is something the matter here (duh). Hiding an injury, or the seriousness of an injury comes to mind.

This is Lincecum's 1st BAD year, so it may be an abberation. Jim Palmer had a poor 1974, sandwiched right in the middle of eight (8) 20 win seasons. Perhaps there's a mechanical problem that can be fixed. Perhaps Lincecum will rebound in the second half of the season.

If Lincecum is no longer a star, he will not go into the HOF. Win totals are going up again, and Lincecum's W-L records will cause an undervaluing of his career. But if Lincecum can come back to be a winning starter and post a couple of Cy Young-quality seasons (even if he doesn't win the award), he'll be back in the running if he makes it to 200 wins. Lincecum's fall-off is scary, but pitchers have less predictable career progressions than hitters, and the possiblity of a bounce-back, even if it takes a year or two, is more real then when, say, a 34 year old LF loses 30 points on his BA.

[dominik]

To go even further, Jamie Moyer at 49 years old had a WAR of 0.1 in 55 innings and an 83 ERA+ and no one wants him. Lincecum has a -2.0 WAR in 96.2 IPs and only 1 more win than Moyer had. Lincecum is having one of the worst years of any starter in the history of baseball.

so lincecum is the adam dunn of pitchers.

but as long as he comes back like dunn this season...

[willshad]

Lincecum is still averaging over a strikeout an inning. I wouldn't write him off just yet.

[Zoltan]

To go even further, Jamie Moyer at 49 years old had a WAR of 0.1 in 55 innings and an 83 ERA+ and no one wants him. Lincecum has a -2.0 WAR in 96.2 IPs and only 1 more win than Moyer had. Lincecum is having one of the worst years of any starter in the history of baseball.

Wow. I knew he was going bad this year, but that bad?

Personally, I think its mechanical. Tim has one of the most unique, complex deliveries i have ever seen. Its no shock he may fall into a funk where he can not keep his delivery consistant for 100 pitches a start.

[3and2Fastball]

Over the course of the last 5 starts, Lincecum has a 2.48 ERA and a 9.6 K/9 .... is he back now?

[SamtheBravesFan]

His hits are still a little up and his walk rate has increased overall. Back now? He's on a good streak: four quality starts, team is 4-0 in each of them.