Why are pitchers paid a gajillion dollars?

[PopcornTreeCt]

A top of the league pitcher wins around 20 games a year...out of 162, that's 12% of the season they get W's. I'm probably just naive but how is that worth all the money they get paid? If you give huge contracts to Kobe Bryant or Peyton Manning they're gonna get you more than 12%. I imagine it has to do with the fact that great pitchers are hard to come by. Please enlighten me.

[Arpeggi]

Because there are only about 10 pitchers who can win 20 games a year. 10 out of 1000+ players.

[dx23]

And actually they pitch more games than 20. It's a real demanding position that takes the toll than any other one in baseball, except catching. Having a good pitcher is a luxury.

[Birrman54]

also, your best two pitchers probably make two appearances each in a 7 game series. That can mean the difference in the playoffs.

The Orioles (a terrible offense and bullpen) was 19-9 in Erik Bedard's starts last year, that's worth money, a good pitcher can control the outcome of the game far more than any individual hitter.

You can make a case though, that hitters tend to be more consistent and less injury prone than pitchers, making 'home grown' pitching with free agent hitters an effective strategy.

[twikoff]

because there arent enough quality pitchers that can get big league hitters out

if you are going to ask that question.. you might as well ask why any sports player earns the kindof dough they do

whats the league minimum for an mlb player? 350k?
some people get paid pretty well to ride the bench

[TallGuyMe]

and on a side note, if you want to get your kid into the bigs, and he isn't a good enough pitcher, push him towards playing catcher... there is a short supply of those as well...

[bauermj]

I wouldn't judge a starting pitcher by his W total.

[wabio]

- Low supply, high demand (especially for lefties).
- It's much harder to develop pitchers than hitters in the minors, and your chances of success are much lower.
- Good pitching beats good hitting (just like defense in football and basketball).
- You will have a much better chance of reaching (and winning) the playoffs with two solid starters than two big bats. ('07 Padres vs. '07 Marlins or Rangers).
- On average, sabermetrics show an ace pitcher will win your club more games (above average) than a big hitter. Two ace pitchers might result in a 25 game swing. That's huge. (Compare the outlook of the '07 Mariners to the '08 Mariners).

[FantasticVSDoom]

Because good pitching beats good hitting... Dont you ever listen to Tim McCarver? He's a pure analytical genius!!!!!

[brainee]

A top of the league pitcher wins around 20 games a year...out of 162, that's 12% of the season they get W's. I'm probably just naive but how is that worth all the money they get paid? If you give huge contracts to Kobe Bryant or Peyton Manning they're gonna get you more than 12%. I imagine it has to do with the fact that great pitchers are hard to come by. Please enlighten me.

Many good responses so far. A problem I have with this reasoning is that even though a top SP will appear in only 30-35 regular season games, they have a far greater impact on the outcome of that game that any position player. And it's not fair to compare different sports. Basketball is played such that a single player can contribute to every single possession. And in football the offense flows completely through the QB. But baseball? As great as a position player might be, they only get about 5 plate appearances a game. And maybe will have the ball hit to them 5 or 6 times on defense (and most of those would be routine plays). But the pitcher completely dominates the play when his team is in the field. So much so that it more than balances out the fact he'll appear in only 20% of the games. And a stud pitcher - a proven perennial Cy Young challenger? Absolute gold, and deserving to be some of the most highly paid players in the league.

There is a problem I see, and that is that SPs seem to be criminally overpaid. Mega-contracts for proven greats, I understand. Mega-contracts for guys with only 1 good year (or even worse, a proven mediocre pitcher) ... I don't get at all. And teams do it all the time. And the point's been made about how injury prone SPs are. I think it just reflects how desperate teams are to have an ace - even if they have to lie to themselves (at great expense) into thinking they have an ace when they don't.

[Arpeggi]

Also good pitchers pitch a lot of innings, keeping the bullpen fresh. It's more than 30-35 games a year.

[matta]

The Orioles (a terrible offense and bullpen) was 19-9 in Erik Bedard's starts last year, that's worth money, a good pitcher can control the outcome of the game far more than any individual hitter.

So, Bedard was worth about 7 games for the O's. (0.426 * 28 = 12).

A batter of similar value (based on what Bedard would likely make on the open market) is probably worth about 60 RBIs over the course of a season over a replacement player. I'm willing to bet that 60 RBIs is worth more than 7 wins.

[Mr. Cinema]

I wish the MLB had non-guaranteed contracts like the NFL. That way, pitchers like Kevin Brown and Mike Hampton wouldn't make $15 million a season and not have to play a single game.

[matta]

I wish the MLB had non-guaranteed contracts like the NFL. That way, pitchers like Kevin Brown and Mike Hampton wouldn't make $15 million a season and not have to play a single game.

I think there is a risk premium built into those salaries. I can't imagine how high non-guaranteed, non-salary cap salaries would get.

[Mikael79]

It's always a supply and demand situation. Look at some of the 7 foot centers in the NBA today - they're nowhere near as good as the centers of the early 90s (for example), and some of the stiffs today make crazy money just because there is a short supply.

Premier pitchers in the MLB are worth the money they are paid. As a Twins fan, I could always count on Johan Santana before we dealt him to the Mets, and that's a big-time premium to have.