http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/09/non-..._medium=twitter

 

Non-Tender Candidate: Phil Humber

By Ben Nicholson-Smith [september 24, 2012 at 12:12pm CST]

 

Five months ago it appeared that Phil Humber could be on the cusp of a breakout season. He had just pitched a perfect game in Seattle, striking out nine Mariners on day that his fastball sat in the 90-95 mph range. Since then Humber has allowed 72 earned runs, including 23 home runs, in 87 2/3 innings. There’s no guarantee the White Sox will tender him a contract this offseason when he’s arbitration eligible for the first time.

 

The White Sox selected Humber off waivers in January of 2011 and he responded with a solid season, pitching 163 innings with a 3.75 ERA and three times as many strikeouts as walks. The right-hander’s numbers have dropped off considerably in 2012. He has a 6.44 ERA with 7.5 K/9, 3.9 BB/9 and a 34.9% ground ball rate in 102 innings this year. Humber’s average fastball velocity is 90.5 mph and he has a swinging strike rate of 7.8%. He has been exceptionally homer-prone, allowing 23 home runs, or 2.0 per nine innings.

 

Humber started the year in Chicago’s rotation, spent a month on the disabled list with a strained elbow midseason, and lost his rotation spot in early August. He has been pitching out of the bullpen since, but Robin Ventura has used Humber sparingly in September, another indication that the White Sox don’t count him among the organization’s most dependable arms.

 

Humber, who turns 30 in December, could obtain a salary in the $2MM range if the White Sox tender him a contract this coming offseason. The perfect game wouldn't make a major difference in an arbitration hearing, but his 2011 season was a strong one, and he has more than 300 MLB innings. Perhaps last year’s success would be enough to create some trade interest in Humber, the third overall selection in 2004.

 

Still, the White Sox don’t appear to view Humber as a $2MM player. If they considered him an essential part of their pitching staff, they’d have asked him to pitch more than twice this month. It means a season that began with a perfect game could end with a non-tender.

That's a no-brainer. He's bad, and can't pitch at the Cell. Later dude.

Was last year a fluke?

Was last year a fluke?

 

It is looking more and more like it was the very definition of a fluke.

Probably not healthy and something certainly changed as he battled walks for basically the first time as a professional. It would be a big and unnecessary risk to keep him around. I think we have plenty of other options.

Was last year a fluke?

 

Not a fluke, but definitely a career year. I think he's worse than his 3.75 ERA, but better than his 6+ ERA this year. I think he'd be a high-4 ERA type guy for this team in the future, but he's certainly replaceable.

This answers a question I was going to ask today about where the heck he's been. I thought I missed a blurb about him going to the DL again.

 

Yeah, 2011 was at best a career year, and more likely a fluke. The Sox have plenty of other options.

I'd leave it up to Cooper. He probably knows Humber better than anybody.

With the year that Humber has had this year, does it make anyone else wonder if Quintana will repeat something close to his year again next year?

With the year that Humber has had this year, does it make anyone else wonder if Quintana will repeat something close to his year again next year?

 

He's young, I personally think he has no where to go but up.

From what you read from Coop and even Phil himself, it sounds like he's mechanically unstable, for lack of a better description. When he's sound, he's a good pitcher. A really good pitcher. But he seems to have real trouble staying in sync.

With the year that Humber has had this year, does it make anyone else wonder if Quintana will repeat something close to his year again next year?

I'd love to see Quintana be the guy we saw for the first half of the season. But even if he leveled out and became a pitcher somewhere between the first half and how he's pitching now, I'd take that.

 

He's younger than Humber, and I think it's more likely he'll be successful in the future. I'm not sure he's a sub 3.00 ERA pitcher, though.

It's between the ears....

Was last year a fluke?

 

I thought he had a higher BABIP last season, but it was only .275, which is relatively normal.

tired arm....

 

6 of his first 8 starts this year with good. Starting in June, the wheels fell off.

My take: he may not be done. However, we don't need him. We're already bringing back Sale, Q, Danks, Hector, Axelrod at the least. Gavin can be had for a non-exorbitant amount. Peavy wants to work out a way to return. Liriano could probably be had cheaply. Humber is near double digits on the starting pitcher priority list at this point.

If you want a guy we shouldn't have gotten rid of...

 

Try Eric Stults. http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playe...&position=P

 

He's been very effective with the Padres this year. 2.81 ERA, 3.71 FIP. Say what you want about the NL and Petco, but we could have used this guy rather than Humber in July and August.

Humber is exactly why I'm worried about Quintana.

 

Also, man, I miss 2011/April 9 2012 Phil Humber

He is 100% non tender.

Don't lump Q in with Humber. They've had completely different career trajectories. Q has more or less flourished at every level (albeit low until this season). Humber struggled at several levels including the MLB before last season.

I wouldn't non-tender Humber. I understand why you would if you do, but I think he can be traded, albeit for much less than you would have gotten last year (and you probably wouldn't have gotten a ton last year). But you find some guy around 25-29 who needs a change of scenery and is going to make about the same amount as Humber and you have a potential match. Or you trade him for a guy who A-ball who can throw 97 but doesn't know where it's going. The Sox have had good luck developing pitchers like that, so you have a potential match there too.

 

He's too cheap to just flat out get rid of, even though he won't be back with the Sox next year.

I wouldn't non-tender Humber. I understand why you would if you do, but I think he can be traded, albeit for much less than you would have gotten last year (and you probably wouldn't have gotten a ton last year). But you find some guy around 25-29 who needs a change of scenery and is going to make about the same amount as Humber and you have a potential match. Or you trade him for a guy who A-ball who can throw 97 but doesn't know where it's going. The Sox have had good luck developing pitchers like that, so you have a potential match there too.

 

He's too cheap to just flat out get rid of, even though he won't be back with the Sox next year.

 

I regret believing in Phil solely because we could have gotten a horde for him last year.

I don't think it's a no brainer because if the Sox let him go, someone will pick him up for the minimum. Pitchers with success that lasted over a full year always will be given a shot, especially when that was just two years ago with an injury-plagued season in between. He has value to an MLB GM, but that doesn't mean he's worth 2 million. It depends on other moves or planned moves.

It's possible that 2 million dollars basically ruins his already low value.

I wouldn't non-tender Humber. I understand why you would if you do, but I think he can be traded, albeit for much less than you would have gotten last year (and you probably wouldn't have gotten a ton last year). But you find some guy around 25-29 who needs a change of scenery and is going to make about the same amount as Humber and you have a potential match. Or you trade him for a guy who A-ball who can throw 97 but doesn't know where it's going. The Sox have had good luck developing pitchers like that, so you have a potential match there too.

 

He's too cheap to just flat out get rid of, even though he won't be back with the Sox next year.

 

The team that would trade for him, would then have to offer him arbitration, or let him go. For that reason, the Sox options are pretty much non-tender, or pay the man.