Q.  The debates are heating up these days!

A.   I loooov eet.

The fact that you're seeing various blogs show their teeth :- ) really just means that people are getting into the game, driving the paint, throwing some elbows. 

Nice to have a winter that really matters.  And y'better b'lee dat this one does.

Jackson is a hot topic, naturally, and if Zduriencik's org values dynamic exchange, so can we. 

We're crackin' peanuts in the bleachers and maybe talking a little smack.  Don't go all Team Jacob and wolf out on me.  :- )

.

Q.  Did SSI ignore Edwin Jackson's pre-2009 "track record" and unduly minimize his second-half fade?

A.  If you bring this slop into the paint (big smile frat-guys), you know Dr. D is going to take the charge:

As far as "ignoring" Jackson's travails before 2009, seeing as we put up an entire post milestoning his career  before predicting him. 

Sometimes 1H - 2H splits matter and sometimes they don't.  Pitchers commonly fatigue late in the year, and every roto champ is ready to account for that.

As we all know, it would not be reasonable to focus on Jarrod Washburn's 2009 while ignoring his prior track record.  And it would not have been reasonable to focus on Gil Meche's 2007 while ignoring that prior track record. 

It would not be reasonable to focus on David Aardsma's 2009 while ignoring that prior track record.  It would not have been reasonable to focus on Tim Wakefield's 162 ERA+ in 2002 while ignoring his prior track record.

It was, however, reasonable to focus on Randy Johnson's 1993 while weighting his prior (high-BB) track record lightly.   It was reasonable to weigh Chris Carpenter's 2004 season more heavily than his prior (high-BB) track record.   It was reasonable to weigh Roy Halladay's first good season heavily and to discount the walks and wild pitches before that.

Of course, you already know why one pitcher's "track record" weighs heavily and another's doesn't.   Washburn and Meche and Aardsma and Wakefield had "track records."   They had portfolios of performances that established predictable levels of performance.

Brandon Morrow doesn't have a track record in any useful sense.  His level of ability is hard to decipher even looking backward, much less looking forward.

Roy Halladay, and Chris Carpenter, and Randy Johnson, before they got good, didn't have "track records" in the sense of having career arcs.  They had periods of experimentation.

.

=== Jackson's First 25 Starts in 2009 ===

You have a hot young pitcher who gets his head beat in for 4 years -- and then all of a sudden he strings 25 of the dominating starts you were looking for -- that's not a "track record."  That's a young, erratic talent leaping a pleateau.

Picture Brandon Morrow going out next year and running off his first 25 starts -- 25 -- and giving up 0-3 runs in every start but two -- going into late August.

Don't miss the link above.  Carefully review Edwin Jackson's game logs from Opening Day until September.  You won't believe your eyes.  Remember Felix?

.....

And then Brandon Morrow, having thrown 7, 8, 9 innings through July and August -- getting gassed in September and blowing his stats.  So that they look only "very good" at the end of the year.  So guys go "forget about 1H/2H splits.  That's not how this works."  :- )

Next winter, you wouldn't be talking about Morrow's "track record" of struggles in 2007 and 2008.  That is because Morrow is a 95-99 mph pitcher who just put it together.  What happened before he put it together will not be relevant.

.

=== Missed Bats ===

Edwin Jackson got fewer strikeouts than other 97-mph pitchers, because he uses two (2) pitches -- and the slider, before 2009, often fritzed out on him.

He's throwing nothing but FB's against hitters who dial up for fastball only and let sliders go by.   And we're demanding 8 strikeouts, with one pitch, or we're not interested?

So how many K's did he get?  4?   ... no, Jackson's career K rate is 6.3.  That's a good strikeout rate for anybody, much less for a guy with one pitch.

.

Part II