2011 Starting Pitching Staff

[SoxFanForsyth]

Hey guys

 

Here's a quick little read I wrote this morning. A little bit encouraging in terms of starting pitching.

 

Red Sox Pitching - Behind the Numbers

 

Well guys. I have decided to do a little digging in my free time, just to see exactly how good of a pitching staff we have this year. What I've found is really, really intriguing.

 

I went through the game logs for each pitcher, and took out their 3 worst games. Most of the time, these were games in which the pitcher allowed a very high amount of ER in a very low amount of innings. I then recalculated the pitcher's ERA to see exactly what kind of a pitcher we are getting for the majority of their IP. Here's what I found.

 

Lester - Jon had 3 really bad outings, in which he threw a combined 12 IP and allowed a combined 24 Earned Runs (18.00 ERA). But out of his entire year (208 IP), that only represents 6%. So how, then, does Jon throw for the remaining 94% of his season? Here's how.

 

196 IP, 2.34 ERA, 9.83 K/9, 3.31 BB/9. Pretty much elite, outstanding, you name it.

 

Lackey - 3 really bat outings, Lackey threw 14 IP allowing 21 ER (13.50 ERA). This accounted for 6.5% of his total year, so for the other 93.5%, Lackey did the following:

 

201 IP, 3.76 ERA, 6.49 K/9, 2.78 BB/9. Very formidable, especially in the AL East.

 

Buchholz. How can Buch's 2.33 ERA get any better? Well, lets just take a look. Buchholz had 3 outings in which he allowed 15 ER in 10 IP, posting a 13.50 ERA. This accounted for 6% of his total starts, so for the other 94% of his starts, Buchholz posted the following.

 

163.2 IP, 1.65 ERA, 6.38 K/9, 3.02 BB/9. Yeah. Buchholz posted a 1.65 ERA in 94% of the games he pitched. Unreal.

 

Beckett. Oh boy. Not much could go right for Beckett last year, he had a terrible, terrible injury ridden year. But we'll take a look. In Beckett's 3 worst outings, he threw 13 IP and allowed 24 ER (16.62 ERA). This accounted for 10% of his starts. So for the remaining 90%, it wasn't SO bad.

 

114.2 IP, 4.55 ERA, 7.77 K/9, 2.90 BB/9. That's much, much more manageable than his horrific 5.76 ERA. It's comforting to know that he can at least pitch like an average pitcher 90% of the time even in his worst season.

 

DiceK. Worst 3 outings - 14 IP, 21 ER (again, 13.50 ERA, strange that this number keeps coming up). This represents 9% of his total starts, so lets see how DiceK did in 91% of his starts.

 

139.2 IP, 3.80 ERA, 7.86 K/9, 4.12 BB/9. From a number 5 starter, I'll take that all day, every day.

 

So to recap, here's what we got from our SP last year, which was considered a let down.

 

Lester - 94%: 2.34 ERA, 9.83 K/9, 3.31 BB/9

Lackey - 93.5%: 3.76 ERA, 6.49 K/9, 2.78 BB/9

Buchholz - 94%: 1.65 ERA, 6.38 K/9, 3.02 BB/9

Beckett - 90%: 4.55 ERA, 7.77 K/9, 2.90 BB/9

DiceK - 91%: 3.80 ERA, 7.86 K/9, 4.12 BB/9

 

That, my friends, is encouraging.

[ORS]

While I understand the intent of your exercise, in my opinion, 4 of those pitchers remain as question marks going into the season. Was Buchholz really that good, or does he revert back to where FIP had him? Can Lackey turn back the clock and pitch like he did in LA? Will we get more of the same nibbling BS and high numbers of runners on base from Matsuzaka? WTF is the deal with Beckett?

 

There's reason for optimism, but there's reason to hold it in check until we see what we've got, too. And, that's where I am right now.

[BSN07]

While I understand the intent of your exercise, in my opinion, 4 of those pitchers remain as question marks going into the season. Was Buchholz really that good, or does he revert back to where FIP had him? Can Lackey turn back the clock and pitch like he did in LA? Will we get more of the same nibbling BS and high numbers of runners on base from Matsuzaka? WTF is the deal with Beckett?

 

There's reason for optimism, but there's reason to hold it in check until we see what we've got, too. And, that's where I am right now.

 

Well said. I agree totally.

[SoxFanForsyth]

The only thing I disagree with is your point about Buchholz. Maybe we have different expectations for him and that's why you consider him a question mark and I don't. Either way, the guy had a 10.2 K/9 throughout the minors, and, as stated above, other than those 3 games where he didn't have good control, his BB/9 was around 3.02 for the remaining games last season.

 

I think that any regression that Buchholz has in terms of ERA due to LOB%, BABIP, etc. will be met with an increase in K/9 and a decrease in BB/9. I don't think it will completely negate the difference between his FIP and ERA, but I do think it will lessen the gap, and I expect Buch to sit around a 3.30 ERA this year with a K/9 around the 7.2-7.3 range, BB/9 in the 3.1 range.

[Will617]

While I understand the point that you're trying to make, I feel like you could do this exercise with a lot of pitchers in the league and get the same results.

[Station 13]

While I understand the point that you're trying to make' date=' I feel like you could do this exercise with a lot of pitchers in the league and get the same results.[/quote']

 

It's cherry picking.

 

But our SP is fine if they do their jobs *90%* the time indicated.

[Dipre]

Why is it cherry-picking? There are legitimate concerns about the pitching staff, and the issue of Bucholz' potential spike in K's and lowering of BB/9 not being enough to overcome the extreme luck he exhibited last season is absolutely legitimate as well.

 

By the way, if you were to use that analysis to judge the pitcher's performance last year, you'd have to remove their three best performances as well to level the playing field. The person who wrote that piece did not do that.

 

If we criticize Yankee fans for being homers, we need to be objective in our analysis.

 

Station 13, if you are referring to the writer of the article as the one doing the cherry-picking, then i agree, and disregard my earlier statement, but you didn't express who you were talking about, and ORS' post was the latest one.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Wow. Ok.

 

All I'm doing in this article is looking at the season a bit differently, kind of outside of the box.

 

Rather than looking at it as "Lackey gave us 215 IP of 4.40 ERA baseball", I am looking at it as "Lackey gave us 201 IP of 3.75 ERA baseball over 29 starts, but that also came with 14 IP of 13.50 ERA baseball over 3 starts".

 

I thought it was an interesting way to look at it, that's it. I didn't know it was going to get critiqued like a thesis.

[Dipre]

I'm not talking about you regarding the article, because you didn't write the article, but the article is a clear example of cherry picking.

 

What i do disagree with you on is on Bucholz. He will be effective in 2011, but there's just no way of knowing to what extent.

[SoxFanForsyth]

But I DID write that article.

[Dipre]

But I DID write that article.

 

Then you're cherry-picking. Go ahead and fix it young'un. Gotta take away the best three starts so you don't skew the sample size.

 

You can take your anger out on me online in MLB The show.

[SoxFanForsyth]

All I'm saying is that I didn't mean for the article to be portrayed as cherry picking, but rather just a different way of looking at how our pitchers performed, that's all.

 

Just trying to portray that "Ok, last year we got a s***** pitcher for 3 starts, but other than that, we had a very formidable pitcher for 29 starts".

 

I am in no way suggesting that any of the pitchers will throw to the effectiveness mentioned in the article during the entirety of 2011, just showing how much a few bad outings can manipulate an entire season's stats.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Cherry picking, to me, is taking the top 5 starts and saying "This is the kind of pitcher he is". That's not what I'm doing. I'm taking the 3 worst starts and saying "Yup. We had a 4.40 ERA pitcher in 2011, but if you look deeper, he really pitched well in 29 of those starts, in which he threw to the tune of a 3.76 ERA."

 

I'm not taking anything away from his 4.40 ERA, or trying to justify it, I'm just saying that in any given start, Lackey has a 94% chance of going out there and posting around a 3.75 ERA based on last years numbers.

 

And I WILL take it out on you in The Show.

[Palodios]

It's cherry picking.

 

But our SP is fine if they do their jobs *90%* the time indicated.

 

There is something to be said about consistency. I'm going to throw out one of my favorite statistics:

 

QS%

Dice-k -- 40%,

Wakefield --47%

Beckett 48%,

Lester 63%,

Lackey 64%.

Buchholz 68%,

Team 55%

 

45% of the time... these guys either gave up 4+ runs, or left the rest of the game to those pesky middle relievers. Its 13th in the majors, but I think that if we're going to say "They're good 90% of the time" its important to look at these numbers.

[Dipre]

Cherry picking, to me, is taking the top 5 starts and saying "This is the kind of pitcher he is". That's not what I'm doing. I'm taking the 3 worst starts and saying "Yup. We had a 4.40 ERA pitcher in 2011, but if you look deeper, he really pitched well in 29 of those starts, in which he threw to the tune of a 3.76 ERA."

 

I'm not taking anything away from his 4.40 ERA, or trying to justify it, I'm just saying that in any given start, Lackey has a 94% chance of going out there and posting around a 3.75 ERA based on last years numbers.

 

The problem with disregarding the worst three but keeping the best three is that it skews the sample size towards the good end. That's really all there is to it.

 

And I WILL take it out on you in The Show.

 

Many have tried, few have succeeded. Consider yourself challenged.

[SoxFanForsyth]

A sample size is used to generate expectations. I am not proclaiming any expectation for next year. All I'm doing is looking at last year differently than "Lackey had a 4.40 ERA". It's like if I took 5 tests, got 4 95's and a 60. My average would be an 88, but you could also look at it as 80% of the time I made a 95, and I had one bad test that skewed my average.

[Dipre]

A sample size is used to generate expectations. I am not proclaiming any expectation for next year. All I'm doing is looking at last year differently than "Lackey had a 4.40 ERA". It's like if I took 5 tests' date=' got 4 95's and a 60. My average would be an 88, but you could also look at it as 80% of the time I made a 95, and I had one bad test that skewed my average.[/quote']

 

It's also, in this case, used to evaluate past performance, and said past performance needs to be evaluated on "even ground". You are not implicitly trying to generate expectations, but the reader will obviously use that and attempt to relate it to future performance.

[jacksonianmarch]

Then you're cherry-picking. Go ahead and fix it young'un. Gotta take away the best three starts so you don't skew the sample size.

 

You can take your anger out on me online in MLB The show.

 

the best three starts dont make up for the 3 bad ones. I tried doing that a few yrs ago for the yanks, but even with the best three starts removed, the ERA was way lower since the runs allowed in the three bad starts significantly outweighs the lack of runs in the other 3. For the most part, all pitchers have bad days. Trying to root them out and extrapolate anything from only their mediocre to phenomenal days is cherry picking

[SoxSport]

Buchholz might have won the Cy if he hadn't gotten bombed his next to last outing in the season.

Lasted one inning, gave up a bunch of runs which kicked his era up over 2. Having said that, his BABIP

was very low, so his ERA may increase this year. That stat has some significance--baseball is a game of inches, and statistics have a way of evening out.

 

Lester and Buchholz were incredibly successful last year in a very tough division. Lester probably has a better chance of repeating, but you never know. Buchholz has looked good enough in ST.

 

All this talk about winning 100 games, I think 90-95 is more realistic in that division. I see Texas is throwing 2 left handers at them in the first 3 games down there. Just watch teams stack left handed pitchers against them this year.

[Palodios]

All this talk about winning 100 games' date=' I think 90-95 is more realistic in that division. I see Texas is throwing 2 left handers at them in the first 3 games down there. Just watch teams stack left handed pitchers against them this year.[/quote']

 

Dig up the "Are the Red Sox too lefthanded?" post. Its not that bad as long as they're smart enough to use Cameron/McDonald as needed. The problem is that in the first two games of the season, Tito is not subbing out any starters, except possibly Salty/Scutaro.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Fortunately the 2nd game is against Colby Lewis, a RHP, so the Sox should be able to handle him pretty well. CJ Wilson does worry me a bit, though, as he has been a Red Sox killer his entire career (1.42 career ERA vs BOS). Hopefully Lester comes out and throws like he can, but I see a low scoring game on our hands the first game.

 

Having said that - Colby Lewis being a RHP should get roughed up by our line up, and Matt Harrison (LHP starting Sunday for TEX) has gotten roughed up by the Sox before, posting a career 8.25 ERA vs BOS.

 

Lester has a career 2.94 ERA vs TEX, and posted a 1.69 ERA vs TEX in 2010.

Lackey has a career 5.74 ERA vs TEX, but posted a 2.57 ERA vs TEX in 2010.

Buchholz has a career 3.24 ERA vs TEX, and posted a 4.05 ERA vs TEX in 2010.

 

Just a quick preview.

[Dojji]

I'm not even going to worry about individual games until about July. I've seen bad starts kill a season, but generally those who want to blame exclusively the bad start are exaggerating its significance. So in the meantime, I'm going to do what I do every early season -- just enjoy the ride and be glad they're back.

[VA Sox Fan]

Lester gets some time to think it over

 

Posted by Peter Abraham, Globe Staff May 31, 2011 11:35 AM

By Peter Abraham, Globe Staff

 

Jon Lester had a 5.50 earned average and a 1.53 WHIP in the month of May.

 

To put that in some perspective, only nine other pitchers in baseball (min. 20 innings) were worse this month. We're only talking about six starts, but that is hardly what you expect from the ace of the staff coming out of spring training.

 

Lester allowed 41 hits and walked 17 over 36 innings in May. Control is an issue. The big lefty averaged 2.8 walks per nine innings in 2008 and '09. He averaged 3.6 last season and 3.7 so far this season. His strikeouts have been fairly consistent, so it's not like his stuff isn't there.

 

The pitcher pop psychology term is "executing pitches." When asked what is wrong, Lester invariably says he's not executing.

 

There's also some stubbornness involved. Lester has fallen in love with his cutter, a very good pitch but one that opposing hitters are adjusting to.

 

In 2009, Lester's pitch mix was:

 

Fastball: 54 percent

Cutter: 20 percent

Curveball: 20 percent

Changeup: 6 percent

 

In 2011, it is:

 

Fastball: 47 percent

Cutter: 27 percent

Curveball: 14 percent

Changeup: 10 percent

 

Lester seems to be too intent on tricking hitters instead of attacking them. He also gets frustrated when umpires won't call certain pitches on the corner strikes. His stuff is too good to play that game. Overmatch the hitter and leave the umpire out of it.

 

At some point, Lester needs to get back to pitching off his fastball and using his cutter more as an out pitch. That's part of the reason he is being pushed back in the rotation until next Tuesday in New York.

 

The rotation as it stands now:

 

Tonight vs. Chicago: Alfredo Aceves

Wednesday vs. Chicago: Tim Wakefield

Thursday: Off

Friday vs. Oakland: Clay Buchholz

Saturday vs. Oakland: Josh Beckett

Sunday vs. Oakland: John Lackey

Monday: Off

Tuesday at New York: Lester

Wednesday at New York: Wakefield

Thursday at New York: Buchholz

 

That gives Lester a week to think about what he is doing and how better to execute. The rest can't hurt either after he threw 127 pitches last night.

[Wasatch]

Nice take VA Sox Fan!

[VA Sox Fan]

Nice take VA Sox Fan!

 

Thanks but I have to give the Globe's Peter Abraham all the credit!

[VA Sox Fan]

Buchholz's back an issue

 

Posted by Peter Abraham, Globe Staff June 4, 2011 10:51 AM

 

Clay Buccholz said his lower back didn't necessarily hurt yesterday, but it was on his mind.

 

The Sox are concerned enough that they plan to talk with him about the situation later today.

 

Tim Wakefield will throw a bullpen today. That would make him available to start on Wednesday in New York in Buchholz's place if needed.

[VA Sox Fan]

UPDATE, 12:07 p.m.: Buchholz just met with Terry Francona and Curt Young. He said he would pitch in New York.

[Station 13]

Buchholz push back to Friday now.

[a700hitter]

Buchholz push back to Friday now.

Pretty sure that we already knew this. It had been posted much earlier in the day.

[VA Sox Fan]

TIM-MAY!!!! :thumbsup:

 

Cano: Send Wakefield to Cooperstown

 

Permalink|Comments (18) Posted by Peter Abraham, Globe Staff June 9, 2011 12:58 PM

 

 

By Peter Abraham, Globe Staff

 

NEW YORK — Fox's Ken Rosenthal, one of the best in the business, wrote a terrific column on Tim Wakefield.

 

His jumping off point was Robinson Cano suggesting that Wakefield belongs in the Hall of Fame.

 

"Tell Wakefield he’s got my vote,” Cano told Rosenthal.

 

As somebody who voted for the Hall for Fame for the first time last year, my immediate thought is somebody with a 4.38 earned run average does not merit a place in Cooperstown. But when you look at the big picture — 609 games, 446 starts, 196 wins, even 21 saves — it gives you pause.

 

The longer you're around baseball teams, the more you realize how much value there is in having a pitcher who will take the ball no matter what the situation and give his team a chance to win the game. In the end, when all the statistics are scrubbed away, winning the game is all that really matters. The rest is just something to talk about.

 

Rosenthal admitted that he was wrong for suggesting in spring training that Wakefield was finished. Add me to that list, too. I thought the same thing and I was wrong.

 

I should have asked Robbie Cano what he thought. It really speaks to how well Wakefield is respected in the game when an opposing players says something like that.