Clay vs. Joba: A Final Reckoning
Maybe it’s the Red Sox-Yankees rivalry, but the burning question out of this prospect season seems to be which pitcher is better — Clay Buchholz or Joba Chamberlain? Sure, I think it’s partly the rivalry, but mostly I think it’s just hard to differentiate between the two. There’s just no shape of a consensus on the top pitching prospect, like there is on the top hitter Jay Bruce. So now, with most of the annuals and prospect lists out, let’s take final stock of these two before we, you know, actually let things play themselves out.
First the 2007 numbers:
Buchholz: 193 K, 45 BB, 2.31 ERA, 148 IP, 11.74 K/9, 2.74 BB/9, 4.29 K:BB
Chamberlain: 169 K, 33 BB, 2.00 ERA, 112 1/3 IP, 13.54 K/9, 2.64 BB/9, 5.12 K:BB
OK, Chamberlain is the pretty clear winner statistically. Better strikeout rate, better walk rate, a year younger. But with some context, it’s not so clearcut. Points in Buchholz’s favor include: the fact that he’s a converted catcher and pitching-young himself, the fact that he has a more lengthy minor league track record, the fact that he’s in better shape (rumored to have outrun Jacoby Ellsbury in a 60-yard dash with the Lowell Spinners), the fact that he doesn’t have any real injury history, the fact that Chamberlain spent a decent chunk of 2007 pitching in relief and not starting. It’s much closer to a draw than it seems.
Let’s throw this one to the pundits.
First myself:
Buchholz struck out over 11 hitters per nine innings in the minors, while walking just over two. He’s not overpowering in the same way as Chamberlain, but the depth of his repertoire could make him better in the long run.
Admittedly I’m no scout, though. Keith Law is, and he has an appreciation for sabermetrics. He favors Chamberlain and here’s what he has to say:
Chamberlain is best cast as a four-pitch starter who projects as a true No. 1 starter. He has a four-pitch repertoire where all pitches project as average or better: a plus 94-98 mph four-seamer, a toxic 83-87 mph slider with good tilt and variable break, an 11/5 curveball with good depth, and a straight 81-84 mph changeup with good arm speed. The fastball and slider are already big league out pitches and in relief, he can probably get away without the other two pitches. Chamberlain has a great pitcher’s build with broad shoulders and the height to get good downhill plane on his pitches, and his arm is quick.
What about a more strict scouting organization like Baseball America? They ranked Joba third and Clay fourth on their top 100 list. Today they had a roundtable of sorts on this very discussion. Jim Callis favored Buchholz saying:
In terms of pure stuff, I think Buchholz’ curveball and changeup are right up there with Chamberlain’s fastball and slider. I’d love to have either of those guys, but I’d take Buchholz for two reasons. One, his plus fastball and occasional plus slider give him a deeper repertoire. And two, given their pasts and their builds, I think Buchholz is a better bet to stay healthy over the long haul.
However, his colleagues overruled him, with John Manuel having the last say:
Chamberlain’s superior fastball makes him the better bet to be a long-term ace. In fact, it makes him the best pitching prospect to come around since I’ve been at BA, surpassing Josh Beckett and Mark Prior.
The last part is complete hyperbole in my opinion and Manuel is a little suspect on the topic since he covers the Yankees closely for BA and since he ranked Joba the No. 1 prospect in all of baseball over the likes of Jay Bruce and Evan Longoria in the BA Prospect Handbook. Still, it seems like Joba has a bit of an edge in the scouting community because of his fastball, and, I guess, because he feels and looks more like an ace.
Case closed? Not really. Ultimately, the results on the fields are what counts. Until then this is just another contentious topic for baseball fans to debate. I’ll let Kevin Goldstein’s words in the B-Pro annual be the last on the subject:
So why is … he [Chamberlain] not the best pitching prospect in baseball? It’s pretty simple, really — Chamberlain’s stuff isn’t as good as Buchholz’s. Buchholz has three plus pitches to Joba’s two, and Buchholz has better command.
Simple, really? Hardly.
February 28th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Nice analysis. I give an ever-so-slight edge to Buchholz just because of what Callis said about having less injury risk.
February 28th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Everyone seems to think Joba’s fastball is the tiebreaker, but from what I saw from Buchholz last season it’s not like Clay’s fastball is chopped liver. He may not have Joba’s heater, but it’s still an explosive, mid-90s fastball. And give me Clay’s nasty hook over Joba’s righty slider anyday.
February 28th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
No one ever talks about his change. I think it’s his best pitch.
February 29th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
Chamberlain is pretty husky, while Buchholz is pretty thin. Both of those builds seem pretty risky, but I’m not a scout. Their track records and stuff are both off the charts, so the tie-breaker, for me, is the fact that Joba is a year younger (I understand that Clay has not always been a pitcher). I just hope that pressure from the NY media and Hank doesn’t keep Joba in the bullpen for good.
Why isn’t more made of Buchholz’s character? I don’t buy into the importance of intangibles, but it’s just odd that no one really mentions Buchholz’s past transgressions. You hear a lot about the troubled pasts of other players, and you hear a lot about the excellent intangibles of guys like Pedroia - but nothing about any stolen laptops. It just seems like a lot of mainstream “analysts” would use this as a cop out from really picking one or the other.
March 1st, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Maybe because we just don’t hear a lot about Buchholz in the first place yet?
In fairness to Clay, it was a one-time thing, not a track record of poor behavior.
The age might serve as a better tiebreaker if they were hitters, with pitchers my sabermetric hunch is they kind of are what they are even under-25.
March 5th, 2008 at 12:23 am
Pitchers peak at age 24, according to Tango. So all else being equal, Buchholz is more of a finished product than Chamberlain is, i.e., he has less room to improve. This also will make Buchholz more of an injury risk over the next six years than Joba, all else being equal. So I believe this should be a consideration when deciding “who would you rather have?” Although their “stuff” is unlikely to change much, this is only of many factors that determine performance.
As for the Buchholz coverage, maybe it’s just because I spend most of my time in the Boston area, but I hear a lot about him. There’s an interview with him on ESPN’s MLB page right now. I think he got a lot of coverage, especially after the no hitter.
March 5th, 2008 at 2:37 am
Just out of curiosity, why do you say Buchholz is more of an injury risk?
I know that the injury nexus study by Nate Silver and Will Carroll says injury risk gradually increases after age 25, but Chamberlain is still well within the injury nexus for young pitchers, making him a really big injury risk in the next two seasons.
Folks have also cited Joba’s injury history at Nebraska, and conversely Buchholz’s rather lithe, wiry frame is often cited as a reason he won’t hold up well over a full season.
I don’t particularly buy into either, but that statement piqued my curiosity.
As for the media stuff, two random points.
1. Joba Chamberlain was on ESPNNews yesterday.
2. I think Buchholz gets lost in the shuffle in Boston behind the more, ummm, effervescent debuts made by Dustin Pedroia and then Jacoby Ellsbury in the playoffs. Most New York and Boston prospects are going to be overhyped to some extent, but, if anything, I’d argue Buchholz flies under the radar compared to the other Sox youngsters.
March 5th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
There’s no doubt that Joba gets more press than Buchholz, or any other rookie for that matter.
I’ve seen articles from national media outlets about Pedroia giving up his scholarship for the betterment of his college team (ASU?), but I just haven’t seen the same type of press (outside of Yankees sites) about Clay’s laptop thefts. I don’t believe that either is important when it comes to baseball, but that just seemed odd to me. Maybe it’s because he gets less press - that’s certainly possible.
I said he was more of an injury risk over the next 6 years because he is a year older, all else being equal. It’s probably pretty marginal, and of course all else is not equal. I am not sure which bodytype is more of a risk - Chamberlain’s thickness or Clay’s thin frame.
March 13th, 2008 at 3:25 am
[…] Buchholz. Apparently it was on the Howard Stern show, details schmetails. I guess this settles the Joba Chamberlain-Clay Buchholz debate for […]