(function() { (function(){function b(g){this.t={};this.tick=function(h,m,f){var n=void 0!=f?f:(new Date).getTime();this.t[h]=[n,m];if(void 0==f)try{window.console.timeStamp("CSI/"+h)}catch(q){}};this.getStartTickTime=function(){return this.t.start[0]};this.tick("start",null,g)}var a;if(window.performance)var e=(a=window.performance.timing)&&a.responseStart;var p=0=c&&(window.jstiming.srt=e-c)}if(a){var d=window.jstiming.load; 0=c&&(d.tick("_wtsrt",void 0,c),d.tick("wtsrt_","_wtsrt",e),d.tick("tbsd_","wtsrt_"))}try{a=null,window.chrome&&window.chrome.csi&&(a=Math.floor(window.chrome.csi().pageT),d&&0=b&&window.jstiming.load.tick("aft")};var k=!1;function l(){k||(k=!0,window.jstiming.load.tick("firstScrollTime"))}window.addEventListener?window.addEventListener("scroll",l,!1):window.attachEvent("onscroll",l); })();

Thursday, September 16, 2004

Since he's pitching tonight and we're only about 3 weeks away from the end of the year I think it is an appropriate time to take a look at the signing of Miguel Batista. After watching last winter unfold it is easy to see JP Ricciardi preferred Batista to Kelvim Escobar. Escobar went on to sign a three year $18.75 million dollar deal with the Angels. Batista signed with Toronto for three years for a total of $13.1 million. So how have they done thus far?

Escobar: 10-10, 3.86 ERA, 184 IP, 79 ER, 173 H, 169 SO, 67 BB, 19 HR

Batista: 10-11, 4.64 ERA, 188 IP, 97 ER, 192 H, 96 SO, 88 BB, 20 HR

When the deal went down and the Jays were able to pick up Batista, I was a big fan. I really thought he was an undervalued pitcher due to his time in the bullpen in Arizona and I was sick of seeing Escobar's inconsistencies. But, looking at the above numbers, the Angels got the better player. The above also shows you how bad a stat W/L is when it comes to judging pitchers. Escobar does not look so good because he's 10-10 on a team who might make the playoffs. While Batista is 10-11 on a team that might lose 100 games. Based on W/L records alone, it looks like Batista is the far superior pitcher.

Another reason this is an easy comparison is because they're only separated by 4 innings. Escobar has a superior ERA while giving up 19 less runs. Batista's ERA on the season is a brutal 4.64. I'd like to find something positive in Batista's stats but I just don't see it. He's walked 88 to Escobar's 67 and he's K'd 96 to Escobar's 169. The comparison is not even close.

There were a lot of people who did not agree with spending all that money on Escobar and thought the Jays did very well by signing Batista at the price they did. I was definitely one of those people. But, if the Jays got a bargain with Batista. Then, based on the improved performance the Angels have seen out of Escobar, I'd say they got the bargain.

I still do like Batista and think he can be a solid pitcher for us over the next couple of years. But, right now he's the #4 on the staff behind Halladay, Lilly and Bush.