There has been a lot of unrest by the fans towards Zack Wheeler so far here in 2014. Wheeler had the misfortune of being the Mets’ top prospect to follow directly after Matt Harvey and inevitably his production gets compared to Harvey’s and comes up short. Of course, even in a vacuum, Wheeler’s 4.31 ERA does not wow anyone. But the question remains: What should we expect from Wheeler this year?

Last year, Wheeler was ranked by Baseball America as the #11 prospect. A season ago, Wheeler’s baseball age was 23. BA lists its top 100 prospects going back to 1990. So I went back and looked at all pitchers ranked in the top 20 from 1990-2012, eliminated the international free agents like Jose Contreras who were MLB-ready when they came to this country and looked for guys who were at least 21 in the year that BA ranked them.

Then I compiled what – if anything – they did in the majors the following season. The hope was that this would comprise a group of Wheeler’s peers – similarly-aged, high-ranking prospects – and see what they did the first year after they got that top 20 ranking. For people who made the top 20 multiple times, I took the year they were closest to Wheeler in age, with the exception of Paul Wilson. I took an earlier year with Wilson so that we could get a full season in the majors pitched the following year, rather than a DNP.

Here are our results:

IP ER H BB Year ERA WHIP BB/9 Age BA Slot
Ben McDonald 126.3 68 125 43 1990 4.85 1.330 3.06 22 2
Darryl Kile 143.7 63 144 84 1990 3.95 1.587 5.26 21 11
Mike Harkey 18.7 11 21 6 1990 5.29 1.444 2.89 23 14
Mike Stanton 78 25 62 21 1990 2.88 1.064 2.42 23 18
Pat Combs 64.3 35 64 43 1990 4.90 1.664 6.02 23 20
Willie Banks 71 45 80 37 1991 5.70 1.648 4.69 22 15
Mike Mussina 241 68 212 46 1991 2.54 1.071 1.72 22 19
Roger Salked 14.3 4 13 4 1992 2.52 1.189 2.52 21 3
Arthur Rhodes 85.7 62 91 49 1992 6.51 1.634 5.15 22 5
Mark Wohlers 48 24 37 22 1992 4.50 1.229 4.13 22 13
Todd Van Poppel 116.7 79 108 89 1993 6.09 1.688 6.86 21 7
Jason Bere 141.7 60 119 80 1993 3.81 1.404 5.08 22 8
Allen Watson 115.2 71 130 53 1993 5.55 1.589 4.14 22 9
Ty Hill         1993 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 21 10
Tavo Alvarez         1993 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 21 17
Brad Pennington 6 8 9 8 1993 12.00 2.833 12.00 24 18
James Baldwin 14.7 21 32 9 1994 12.86 2.789 5.51 22 8
Darren Dreifort         1994 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 22 11
Steve Karsay         1994 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 22 12
Chan Ho Park 4 2 2 2 1994 4.50 1.000 4.50 21 14
Brien Taylor         1994 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 22 18
Jeff Granger         1994 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 22 19
Armando Benitez 14.3 6 7 6 1995 3.78 0.909 3.78 22 11
Bill Pulsipher         1995 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 21 12
Alan Benes 191 104 192 87 1995 4.90 1.461 4.10 23 14
Antonio Osuna 84 28 65 32 1995 3.00 1.155 3.43 22 15
Paul Wilson 149 89 157 71 1995 5.38 1.530 4.29 22 16
Billy Wagner 51.7 14 28 30 1995 2.44 1.122 5.22 23 17
Dustin Hermanson 13.7 13 18 4 1995 8.54 1.606 2.63 22 18
Jason Schmidt 187.7 96 193 76 1996 4.60 1.433 3.64 23 11
Matt Drews         1996 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 21 12
Bartolo Colon 94 59 107 45 1996 5.65 1.617 4.31 23 15
Rocky Coppinger 20 14 21 16 1996 6.30 1.850 7.20 22 19
Kerry Wood         1998 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 21 4
Kris Benson 196.7 89 184 83 1998 4.07 1.357 3.80 23 7
Carl Pavano 104 65 117 35 1998 5.63 1.462 3.03 22 9
Matt Clement 180.7 90 190 86 1998 4.48 1.527 4.28 23 16
Bruce Chen 134 49 116 46 1999 3.29 1.209 3.09 22 4
Brad Penny 119.7 64 120 60 1999 4.81 1.504 4.51 21 5
Roy Halladay 67.7 80 107 42 1999 10.64 2.201 5.58 22 12
John Patterson         2000 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 22 10
Mark Mulder 229.3 88 214 51 2000 3.45 1.156 2.00 22 12
Kip Wells 133.3 71 145 61 2000 4.79 1.545 4.12 23 14
A.J. Burnett 173.3 78 145 83 2000 4.05 1.316 4.31 23 20
Jon Rauch 28.7 21 28 14 2001 6.59 1.463 4.39 22 4
Ben Sheets 217.7 100 237 70 2001 4.13 1.410 2.89 22 5
Roy Oswalt 233 78 215 62 2001 3.01 1.189 2.39 23 13
Josh Beckett 142 48 132 56 2001 3.04 1.324 3.55 22 1
Mark Prior 221.3 57 183 50 2002 2.32 1.053 2.03 21 2
Juan Cruz 61 41 66 28 2002 6.05 1.541 4.13 23 6
Ryan Anderson         2002 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 22 14
Dennis Tankersley 0 7 3 4 2002 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 23 16
Nick Neugebauer         2002 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 21 17
Jesse Foppert 1 0 1 0 2003 0.00 1.000 0.00 22 5
Francisco Rodriguez 84 17 51 33 2003 1.82 1.000 3.54 21 10
Adam Wainwright         2003 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 21 18
Dustin McGowan 45.3 32 49 17 2004 6.36 1.457 3.38 22 18
Scott Kazmir 144.7 52 132 52 2005 3.23 1.272 3.23 21 7
Jeff Niemann         2005 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 22 20
Francisco Liriano         2006 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 22 6
Chad Billingsley 147 54 131 64 2006 3.31 1.327 3.92 21 7
Justin Verlander 201.7 82 181 67 2006 3.66 1.230 2.99 23 8
Matt Cain 200 81 173 79 2006 3.65 1.260 3.56 21 10
Phil Hughes 34 25 43 15 2007 6.62 1.706 3.97 21 4
Andrew Miller 107.3 70 120 56 2007 5.87 1.640 4.70 22 10
Tim Lincecum 227 66 182 84 2007 2.62 1.172 3.33 23 11
Yovani Gallardo 24 5 22 8 2007 1.88 1.250 3.00 21 16
Mike Pelfrey 200.7 83 209 64 2007 3.72 1.360 2.87 23 20
Joba Chamberlain 157.3 83 167 76 2008 4.75 1.545 4.35 22 3
Clay Buchholz 92 43 91 36 2008 4.21 1.380 3.52 23 4
Franklin Morales 40 20 38 23 2008 4.50 1.525 5.18 22 8
Homer Bailey 113.3 57 115 52 2008 4.53 1.474 4.13 22 9
Jake McGee         2008 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 21 15
Wade Davis 36.3 15 33 13 2008 3.72 1.267 3.22 22 17
David Price 208.7 63 170 79 2009 2.72 1.193 3.41 23 2
Tommy Hanson 202.7 75 182 56 2009 3.33 1.174 2.49 22 4
Brett Anderson 112.3 35 112 22 2009 2.80 1.193 1.76 21 7
Trevor Cahill 196.7 65 155 63 2009 2.97 1.108 2.88 21 11
Stephen Strasburg 24 4 15 2 2010 1.50 0.708 0.75 21 2
Brian Matusz 49.7 59 81 24 2010 10.68 2.113 4.35 23 5
Neftali Feliz 62.3 19 42 30 2010 2.74 1.156 4.33 22 9
Jeremy Hellickson 177 61 163 59 2011 3.10 1.254 3.00 24 6
Michael Pineda         2011 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 22 16
Mike Montgomery         2011 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 21 19
Chris Sale 192 65 167 51 2011 3.05 1.135 2.39 22 20
Matt Moore 150.3 55 119 76 2012 3.29 1.297 4.55 23 2
Julio Teheran 185.7 66 173 45 2012 3.20 1.174 2.18 21 5
Shelby Miller 173.3 59 152 57 2012 3.06 1.206 2.96 21 8
Trevor Bauer 17 10 15 16 2012 5.29 1.824 8.47 21 9
Gerritt Cole 117.3 42 109 28 2012 3.22 1.168 2.15 21 12
Totals 8061.7 3558 7632 3141 2012 3.97 1.336 3.51  

So, in 1990, BA ranked 22-year-old McDonald the #2 prospect in baseball and in 1993 he delivered a 4.85 ERA in the majors. In all 18 of our 90 players did not even pitch in the majors the following year and Tankersley certainly wishes that he didn’t. Our sample, which is filled with All-Stars, delivered a 3.97 ERA and a 3.51 BB/9 as a group.

My suggestion is that this is the baseline we should be comparing Wheeler to, not what Harvey delivered in 2013. But we can certainly chop the data even further, to see if we can get a better comparison group. Since Wheeler was 23 the year he was ranked in the top 20 by BA, let’s focus on just the pitchers who were the same age. Here’s that group:

IP ER H BB Year ERA WHIP BB/9 Age BA Slot
Mike Harkey 18.7 11 21 6 1990 5.29 1.444 2.89 23 14
Mike Stanton 78 25 62 21 1990 2.88 1.064 2.42 23 18
Pat Combs 64.3 35 64 43 1990 4.90 1.664 6.02 23 20
Alan Benes 191 104 192 87 1995 4.90 1.461 4.10 23 14
Billy Wagner 51.7 14 28 30 1995 2.44 1.122 5.22 23 17
Jason Schmidt 187.7 96 193 76 1996 4.60 1.433 3.64 23 11
Bartolo Colon 94 59 107 45 1996 5.65 1.617 4.31 23 15
Kris Benson 196.7 89 184 83 1998 4.07 1.357 3.80 23 7
Matt Clement 180.7 90 190 86 1998 4.48 1.527 4.28 23 16
Kip Wells 133.3 71 145 61 2000 4.79 1.545 4.12 23 14
A.J. Burnett 173.3 78 145 83 2000 4.05 1.316 4.31 23 20
Roy Oswalt 233 78 215 62 2001 3.01 1.189 2.39 23 13
Juan Cruz 61 41 66 28 2002 6.05 1.541 4.13 23 6
Dennis Tankersley 0 7 3 4 2002 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 23 16
Justin Verlander 201.7 82 181 67 2006 3.66 1.230 2.99 23 8
Tim Lincecum 227 66 182 84 2007 2.62 1.172 3.33 23 11
Mike Pelfrey 200.7 83 209 64 2007 3.72 1.360 2.87 23 20
Clay Buchholz 92 43 91 36 2008 4.21 1.380 3.52 23 4
David Price 208.7 63 170 79 2009 2.72 1.193 3.41 23 2
Brian Matusz 49.7 59 81 24 2010 10.68 2.113 4.35 23 5
Matt Moore 150.3 55 119 76 2012 3.29 1.297 4.55 23 2
  2793.5 1249 2648 1145   4.02 1.358 3.69  

While our sample is significantly reduced, the numbers are still very similar. Both the ERA and BB/9 numbers are slightly higher but nothing that would make our heads turn. And the list is still packed with big-name pitchers and guys who had lengthy, successful careers in the majors.

Clement may not resonate with younger fans but he’s a guy who pitched nine years in the majors and made the All-Star team. Schmidt pitched 14 years in the majors and made three All-Star teams. And that Colon guy has thrown 2,641 innings in the majors, won a Cy Young and is still going. Of course the second list also includes other Cy Young Award winners Lincecum, Price and Verlander.

Some may point out that Wheeler is significantly behind what some of the stars on this list accomplished. That’s a valid point. But his numbers are certainly in line with what Benson, Burnett, Buchholz, Clement, Colon and Schmidt did at the same age. Some guys come up and star right away and others take a while longer.

Schmidt seems like a potentially decent comp. Many people were frustrated when in his age 24 season he put up a 4.60 ERA, a 1.433 WHIP and a 3.64 BB/9 season. When he was 30, he led the league in ERA and WHIP. While that’s a best-case scenario, it just goes to show what a guy in this class can do.

Wheeler has already separated himself from the bottom tier in the initial group, the Hills, Drews and Taylors who never even made the majors. He’s likely better than the guys like Alvarez, Pennington and Watson, who had brief MLB careers. Right now, barring injury, his floor seems to be a guy who has a lengthy, if unimpressive career, like Benes or Benson.

Certainly Mets fans expected Wheeler to be better than Benson. Still, the fact that at this point in time, Benson appears like a reasonable floor should be no reason to view Wheeler as some type of colossal disappointment.

Perhaps we can eliminate “ace” from our hopes for Wheeler. While he’s unlikely to be the next Verlander, anyone who would be disappointed if he turned into Burnett or Colon or Schmidt had unrealistic expectations.

So, when watching Wheeler pitch the rest of this year, look to see if he can go deeper into games while making small improvements with his walk rate. If he ends the year near the age 23 group’s 4.02 ERA and 3.69 BB/9 – consider that a good thing and not a reason to complain.

8 comments on “Why Mets fans should stop complaining about Zack Wheeler”

  • Chris F

    I’d package him and get a trade done before the double header today…there is still 32 minutes!

  • Larry rothstein

    We shouldn’t complain about wheeler. But complain about left field and first base. Young and duda not the answer. Eric Campbell should fit one of those spots

  • Metsense

    I enjoyed getting a perspective of what to expect from a top 20 pitching prospect. Very informative and great research.
    In 2013, there were only 76 NL starting pitchers who threw 70 innings. The number in parenthesis is his NL rank.

    2013: 4.17 FIP (59), 3.42 ERA (33), 0.6 WAR in 17 starts
    Currently there are only 69 NL starting pitchers that have thrown 30 innings. Here is where Wheeler stands so far.
    2014: 3.63 FIP (30),4.31 ERA (50), 0.5 WAR (38) after 10 starts

    In 2014 Wheeler is pitching better than he did in 2013, although his record is not indicative of it. His FIP is currently indicative of a 2-3 starter and also near what the staff projected in the 2014 projections. He has also achieved 83% of his 2013 WAR total in only 59% of his 2014 starts. He should at least earn a 1.5 WAR in 2014 . Currently his ERA is indicative of a #4 starter. If he can maintain his FIP then his ERA should begin to go down. The Mets currently have a #3 starter in Wheeler that they control until 2020 and can pay at minimum salary until 2017. Financially he is a plus. Talent wise his current pitching should be his floor and his realistic ceiling should be a #2 starter. Wheeler is pitching to about what I expected, with room for improvement, so there is no complaints here.

    • Jerry Grote

      Better in 2014? Only if you want to look at it through strained eyes.

      Even with an improved performance against Arizona (based on the rest of his history), he’s giving up around 12% more hits, and his overall ERA reflects the inability to get guys out. That’s not enhanced by the fact that he’s not around the strike zone as well as last year – and last year he wasn’t that great to begin with.

      Bottom line with Wheeler is that he hasn’t improved even since he was in the minor leagues. You want to see improvement, at some point, over what ails this guy. If you can watch him and even begin to say that he controls himself around the strike zone, then we’re watching different games.

      Let’s not sugar coat what we see. I’ve got no case against Wheeler and he’s fine. But I won’t cover up the crap he’s putting out there. Unless his start against Arizona begins a new, *sustained* trend, he hasn’t cured his demons.

  • Patrick Albanesius

    The frustrating part about Wheeler is that he causes his own problems with the walks. However, other than two back-to-back starts against the Marlins on 5-7, and Yankees on 5-13, he hasn’t allowed more than 3 walks in any start this year. That’s a great sign for the long haul. He wanted to be the Opening Day starter, but so far hasn’t pitched to his own goals, not the ones everyone else sets for him. He will continue to improve, and if the Arizona game was any indication, he still has a very bright future.

    • Jerry Grote

      I’ll challenge you on “getting better” once again.

      Look, Wheelers BB/9 was around 4 his entire minor league career. So we have perspective here, we’re talking about 400 innings and what turned him into a real life prospect was his last 220 IP over 2011-2012 when he was walking around 3.6 per 9. He put up 4.1 in his first year in the pros, and this year its up to 4.3.

      When you get above 4, it makes you one of the wildest pitchers in baseball. Occasionally you’ll get a Gio Gonzalez or Ubaldo Jiminez season in there, but walking 4 per game settles in to a 1 or 2 WAR pitcher. Go to fangraphs, run a season-by-season extraction of all starting pitchers with 100 IP, and sort by BB/9.

      That’s it. That’s what we have in Wheeler, and I hate to burst anyone’s bubble but unless his walks get down, he’s not a #2 pitcher and he’s not a #3. Zack Wheeler, right now, is a #4 pitcher and if praise Jesus anyone out there offers us a legitimate hitter for him, make the trade before the GM leaves the room.

      • Chris F

        Exactly!

      • Metsense

        JG, I have no complaints about Wheeler, he is what I expected in 2014 and I will expect more in 2015. We both agree he is at least #4 starter. Your argument and exercise concerning the walks is very enlightening. Oliver Perez could not get his walks down and was above a 4 BB/9, and Met fans bitterly remember him. The Met offense can only be improved externally and if another team offered a legitimate hitter for Wheeler then it should be considered. If any team offers a legitimate hitter for our pitching it should be considered.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 100 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here