Sox sign Brad Penny and Josh Bard

[Dojji]

you think that the one yr' date=' below market signings of injured pitchers have a high probability of success? Really?[/quote']

 

Have to understand the relative standard of success. If a pitcher signed to a below-market, 1 year deal has an ERA+ of 100, as cheap as he signed for, that's a success because it provides a market level value for the resources spent.

 

Meanwhile you could argue that considering the elite level the Yankees new hires have to play at to match their salaries the standard of success for them is absurdly high -- making even a modest chance of success for the Boston players a better gamble in the final analysis

[a700hitter]

And to be fair' date=' you can't argue with a700's basic premise, yet while that is true his lack of optimism on the probablility of Baldelli/Smoltz/Penny being productive is simply unbelievable.[/quote']I am optimistic about Saito, who seems healthy and who is throwing very well already. I don't have any cause for optimism about Penny who already has shoulder fatigue without having pitched an inning or Smoltz who is 41 and coming off major shoulder surgery. Baldelli is just a 4th OF. I don't get too optimistic about 4th OFs. When I go to a game and the 4th OF is playing in place of Drew or Bay, I'm just pissed off.

[TheKilo]

I'm a loser but I love hearing quotes like this:

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2009/04/updates_red_sox_20.html

 

Penny, meanwhile, was very optimistic about his outing down in the clubhouse. He said he feels better now than at any point last season, even Opening Day, which he started for the Los Angeles Dodgers. "Oh, yeah," Penny said. "I probably topped out at 89." Today, he reached 96 miles per hour on one pitch.

 

The Red Sox want to wait to make it official, but in Penny's mind, it's a closed issue: He knows he can start on April 12, the first date the Red Sox need a starter. No matter what, he's going to be with the Red Sox in Fenway Park for Opening Day, which he'll experience for the first time.

 

"Can't wait," he said. "Can't wait."

[BoSox21]

better believe theyre gonna save Masterson to pitch two innings when Penny starts though

[Gom]

I'm a loser but I love hearing quotes like this:

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2009/04/updates_red_sox_20.html

 

I agree wholeheartedly with the first half of that sentence.

[TheKilo]

no u

[BSN07]

He has looked like he has gotten stronger every outing. If he can pitch 5-6 innings an outing, that would be great.

[riverside sluggers]

Decent spring by Penny. In 3 games he gave up 5 runs in 12 innings for a 3.75 ERA. Just 1 walk while striking out 6

 

Reports has his fastball in the 93-96 range. Lets see what he's got on April 12 vs the Angels

[mvp 78]

After watching penny in LA the past two years, I have to say I'm not looking forward to the back of our rotation. He has great stuff, but has never really been able to put it all together. I just see the AL East hitting him really, really hard.

[riverside sluggers]

Last year, yes was by far his worst year in the majors... but 2007 he was electric, he started the all-star game and posted a 3.03 ERA while pitching over 200 innings

[BoSox21]

After watching penny in LA the past two years' date=' I have to say I'm not looking forward to the back of our rotation. He has great stuff, but has never really been able to put it all together. I just see the AL East hitting him really, really hard.[/quote']

 

16-4 with a 3.03 ERA in 2007, 3rd in Cy Young voting. Seems he had it together pretty well that year.

[mvp 78]

16-4 with a 3.03 ERA in 2007' date=' 3rd in Cy Young voting. Seems he had it together pretty well that year.[/quote']

 

He gets hit hard. He'll never pitch that well outside of the NL West.

There's always more to the story than just numbers.

[TheKilo]

^^That's what someone always says when the numbers don't back up their statements.

[jacksonianmarch]

Lets look at that 2007 season. As we know, W/L is not the best way to tell how good a pitcher was and ERA can be misleading. So, yes, Brad Penny had a phenomenal W/L record and ERA in 2007, but here's a breakdown

 

First of all, he was in the NL West. A division that doesnt face the DH and a division that was weaker offensively than the other 2 in the NL.

 

Second, Brad Penny's WHIP was 1.31. Not bad, but not great either. You would expect a WHIP in the 1.31 range if you were talking about a sinkerballer, you know, the groundballs do find holes, but the GIDPs make up for it. Well, Penny was right at 1 for 2007 and sits in the 0.9 GO/AO range for his career. So he isnt a sinkerballer.

 

Third, lets look at what made up that WHIP. His BAA was .260 in 2007, which was the lowest he had in LA and the second lowest in his career to his injury shortened 2004. That makes you think he was pretty lucky. Also, he walked 3.2 batters per 9, which is pretty good.

 

Fourth, lets look at his power. In 2007, he struck out 135 batters in 208IP. That comes out to a K/9IP of 5.8, which was the lowest of his career until 2008 struck.

 

Fifth, lets look at luck. His opponent's BABIP, which people seem to use on hitters should also be applicable to pitchers right? In 2007, his BABIP was .260. While the rest of his time in LA, it was .275. Meaning, he was a bit luckier in 2007 than he had been in LA.

 

So overall, I will agree that Penny had a good 2007. He had some good luck. But I think the NL West poses a different offensive dilemma than does the AL East. And coming off a shoulder injury, who knows if he can even get back to that level of performance. Also, how good or bad would 2007 have been if he were pitching in Fenway vs lineups that included Longoria, ARod, Teixeira, Wells, Markakis, etc 76 times a season (19*4) and then having to face lineups with DHs instead of the easy out pitcher?

[ORS]

Hey look, Jacko's already shifted gears. Before, it was Penny won't be anything because he can only throw 85. Now, in light of the evidence s***ing on that, he's shifted gears and is trying to deconstruct how good he was in previous years. And, he's doing a poor job of that to boot. I mean, where the f*** did this come from? Sinkerballers have typical WHIPs?

 

You would expect a WHIP in the 1.31 range if you were talking about a sinkerballer, you know, the groundballs do find holes, but the GIDPs make up for it.

 

This, my friends, is concession. He's moved, and the season hasn't even started yet.

 

Anyway, the league difference, NL to AL, is usually right around 0.20 runs/game. Let's push that to 0.30 to account for the NLW being bad in its league and the ALE being good, offensively that is. His FIP was 3.63, so he was a 3.93 ERA pitcher in the ALE in 2007. I take that at the tail end of the rotation every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[jacksonianmarch]

I havent moved one bit ORS. Penny will be a liability on the sox by yrs end.

 

And do you honestly think that you can calculate how good a pitcher would be in the ALE from NL West numbers? I dont think you can. You are touting a standard rate of exchange of ERAs from NL to AL, but that doesnt take into account a lot of variables like the quality of pitching in the AL and learning the batters which would blow your argument to bits. I am surprised he gained his velocity, but the ability to sustain it will be the toughest test.

[jacksonianmarch]

Also...

 

Career WHIPs of some well known sinkerballers

Wang- 1.29

Webb- 1.24

Carmona- 1.40

Lowe- 1.27

Westbrook- 1.38

Cook- 1.44

 

Its a given that pitchers who induce groundballs will invariably give up more hits. This is because popups and flyballs have the least chance of any type of batted ball of falling in for a hit. Liners and grounders have the best chance of leading to a hit. But then again, you probably already knew that huh skippy.

[ORS]

I havent moved one bit ORS. Penny will be a liability on the sox by yrs end.

 

And do you honestly think that you can calculate how good a pitcher would be in the ALE from NL West numbers? I dont think you can. You are touting a standard rate of exchange of ERAs from NL to AL, but that doesnt take into account a lot of variables like the quality of pitching in the AL and learning the batters which would blow your argument to bits. I am surprised he gained his velocity, but the ability to sustain it will be the toughest test.

I think the method I used to arrive at a league adjustment is more scientific than the WHIP you pulled from your ass for sinkerballers, and yes, I think you can calc the adjustment. Don't give me the BS about the quality of the pitchers in the AL vs. the NL as some insurmountable barrier. There are good and bad pitchers in both leagues. The run differential is the difference in rules (the DH).

 

The new BBRef has league splits, but the splits don't have advanced batting metrics, so I'll approximate the run difference using the original RC formula (OBP * TB ). I'm using the 9th in the order split for the NL because the pitcher usually hits 9th and this will account for their PH replacements.

 

2008

[table]League|Position|OBP|TB|RC

AL|DH|.339|3535|1198

NL|9th|.244|2172|530[/table]

 

For the AL, 1198 / 14 (teams) is 86 runs per team, 86 / 162 is .53 runs per game for the position. For the NL, 530 / 16 (teams) is 33 runs per team, 33 / 162 is .20 runs per game. Keep in mind, the RC used doesn't account for SB or SH, which are both positive contributors in the contemporary RC formula. The AL DH rarely steals or sacrafices himself, whereas the NL pitcher regularly sacrafices and the pinch runner is regularly used (the difference in SH+SF+SB for these spots is 706 for the NL vs. 143 for the AL - in the contemporary RC this category has a .52 coefficient). Additionally, this approximation does not account for subsequent pinch hitters for relief pitchers at other batting spots.

 

The difference using this quick version analysis is .33 R/G, with the actuals being .24, .19, .21 the last three years respectively. If the analysis were more in depth and accounted for SB, SH, SF, and the other PH's used for relief pitchers, I have no doubt it would be right in the .20 range (only 300 total addtional RC is required for this, and you almost get that with the quantity difference * the .52 coefficient for the SB+SF+SH category).

 

When the effect of the rule change accounts for the difference in scoring, you can do one of two things. One, you can assume that the rule change is the difference and all other things are equal. In layman's terms, this means the quality of the talent in the NL and AL are the same. This would be the Occam's Razor choice. Two, you assume that the rule difference is not the only difference and that all other differences in talent, parks, weather, etc are in a harmonious balance that makes it look like the only real difference is the rules, and that this balance occurs every year. Color me skeptical.

 

So, back to the original discussion. Yes, I think a league adjustment is perfectly reasonable, and I'm comfortable saying Brad Penny would have been a 4.00 ERA pitcher in the 2007 ALE. No amount of unsupported league difference rhetoric is going to sway me from that. You'll have to prove it.

[Dojji]

I think the method I used to arrive at a league adjustment is more scientific than the WHIP you pulled from your ass for sinkerballers' date=' and yes, I think you can calc the adjustment. Don't give me the BS about the quality of the pitchers in the AL vs. the NL as some insurmountable barrier. There are good and bad pitchers in both leagues. The run differential is the difference in rules (the DH).[/quote']

 

I don't disagree with anything else you said and I admire the smackdown you just laid on Jacko, but this isn't quite true. The general quality of baseball is somewhat higher in the AL without the DH right now. There's a reason the AL is winning the All Star Games and the majority of interleague play games.

 

There is no team in the NL that matches what the Yankees bring as a perennial threat to the league and right now no one in the NL is running their ship as tightly as Epstein's running the Sox or even than the Twins or Rays are being run. In other words there's a definite mismatch in the effectiveness of AL GM's and NL GM's just now. It's probably just a fluke but there it is.

[ORS]

I disagree and my reason is listed in the previous post. The scoring differential aligns very closely with the effect of the rule difference. This either happens because it is the only difference worth noting and all other things are equivalent, or it's a massive coincidence given all the other factors in play.

[mvp 78]

^^That's what someone always says when the numbers don't back up their statements.

 

No it's what someone says when they've actually watched someone pitch throughout a season and doesn't just pull numbers from the internet.

[Dojji]

Ahh yes, the old false dichotomy between looking at numbers and watching and understanding the game. Tried and true tactic of disgruntled old-schoolers everywhere.

 

just once I'd like to post numbers without some opinionated jackass assuming I've never watched a game in my life.

[Cocos Disciples]

^ Totally agree with you there Dojji. I don't get the supposed correlation between taking the time to analyze baseball with statistics, and not watching games.

[rician blast]

There is no team in the NL that matches what the Yankees bring as a perennial threat to the league and right now no one in the NL is running their ship as tightly as Epstein's running the Sox or even than the Twins or Rays are being run.

 

No NL team is a such a perrenial threat becayse they don't have to be...no team in the NL has to battle the Yankees just to get into the playoffs...if the Sox and Angels and Tigers and White Sox didn't have to spend the money they do, they wouldn't. The Yankees spending is directly responsible for other AL teams either spending at the rate they do or running their organizations as they do in order to compete (what you term "tightly run").

 

One the other point, are NL Gm's less capable than AL? Hmm...not sure I buy that.

[AndrewKrylon]

Penny should be a great pickup for Boston. His numbers were down last year, but I think without the pressure of being the #1 ace on the staff, he should be very productive for the Sox next year. Moreover, even if he's inconsistent, he's still good for a couple of big games down the stretch (if he stays healthy).