Legitimate Rotation?

STLToday has a new article up about Matt Clement and the Cardinals legitimatized rotation, including this quote from Mozeliak:

"We definitely feel we're better than where we were yesterday," Mozeliak said. "When you look at Pineiro and Clement with a more seasoned Wainwright and Looper, it's coming together as a solid, legitimate rotation. Potentially adding Carpenter after the All-Star break gives it even a better look."

But is it really time to call the rotation legitimate? Some synonyms for legitimate we can insert here are genuine, valid, logical, normal, but all imply the same thing: will this rotation be able to make it through the year as a league average unit?

Last year, the Cardinals compiled a 4.65 team ERA, above the NL average of 4.43 and without a doubt helped by a decent bullpen. Cardinals starters as a whole compiled a 48-72 record, 5.04 ERA, 889.0 IP, 987 H, 321 BB, and 532 SO, spanning 12 pitchers. To get a good look at the rotation we were working with in 2007, I used only the top five starters in terms of games started. Using only the top five, the picture looks like this:

Pitcher	GS	ERA	FIP	IP	K/9	K/BB	HR/9	BABIP
Wainwright	32	3.70	3.86	202.0	6.06	1.94	0.58	.315
Looper	30	4.94	4.78	175.0	4.47	1.71	1.13	.284
Wells	26	5.70	4.82	162.2	6.75	1.56	1.05	.332
Reyes	20	6.04	5.21	107.1	6.20	1.72	1.34	.287
Thompson	17	4.73	5.92	109.0	3.69	1.33	1.60	.301
Total	125	5.02	4.92	756	5.43	1.65	1.14	.304

Wells and Reyes drive the ERA sky-high, while Thomson lowers the K/9 with a dreadful 3.69 ratio. Nevertheless, pretty darn bad. Compared with the rest of the NL Central, the damage continues to show:

Team	Starters' ERA
Cubs	4.19
Brewers	4.55
Astros	4.71
Reds	4.86
Pirates	5.02
Cards	5.04

We simply weren't up to snuff, despite being in one of the worst divisions in baseball. I think it's safe to say that last year's rotation was not legitimate, despite the many efforts to make it so. Even newcomers Joel Pineiro and Todd Wellemeyer couldn't do enough to erase the damage the top five starting pitchers left, as the starters' ERA increased when it went from the top five to all twelve. As far as the Central division, the Reds had a better starters' ERA than us, a marvel considering the ballpark they play in and the condition of their own rotation.

So how are we now, in 2008? Let's head back to the Bill James projections on Fangraphs.com.

Pitcher	GS	ERA	FIP	IP	K/9	K/BB	HR/9	BABIP
Wainwright	31	4.06	3.89	213.0	6.76	2.32	0.76	.320
Looper	30	3.98	4.35	183.0	5.07	1.75	0.84	.295
Pineiro	27	4.53	4.67	173.0	5.67	1.95	1.14	.306
Mulder	23	4.34	4.63	143.0	5.54	1.87	1.07	.300
Clement	15	4.17	4.42	95.0	7.77	1.91	0.95	.298
Total	126	4.22	4.39	807	6.16	1.96	0.95	.304

Remembering that Bill James projections are just that - projections - and that Braden Looper's 2008 looks outrageously optimistic, you can see just how bad 2007 was and the improvement made by adding Pineiro and Clement to the mix in 2008. I expect Clement to get more starts than 15, but chances are there will be an injury down the line and somebody's numbers will decrease. Like always, when that happens someone else will step in - be it Wellemeyer, Reyes (if he's still on the club), Thompson, Tyler Johnson, or Carpenter. The main conclusion we can make here is that the Cardinals went after guys who are going to keep the ball in the park, and they are willing to sacrifice some walks for some added K's, mostly a result of Clement.

But would I call the 2008 rotation legitimate? The answer is yes, since this is a group that will give you league average numbers and build on a terrible '07. The Cardinals made some logical, sensible, legitimate moves this off-season, keeping out of the Silva sweepstakes and other bad deals around the free agent market. In the process, we have built an OK rotation, but don't hold your breath for a championship run in '08.