Sox Pitching Staff Discussion

[moonslav59]

I have nothing against the argument that you presented, and nothing against the stats that you quoted. They are all good stats to use and, as always, the more you look at, the better the story you'll get. I'm not sure that one particular stat is clearly better than any of the others.

 

That said, Siera and xFIP are the two best predictors of future ERA. If I were going to make a bet on who will be our best pitcher going forward, I would go with Price, then Porcello, then Wright, in that order.

 

I'm not sure any stat is better that another at predicting future performance. I'd like to see your evidence on that one.

 

SIERA and xFIP are heavily dependent on K rates, and I think that makes Price's 2016 season look better than it is and Wright's worse than it is.

 

Who knows what comes next?

 

[cp176]

I thought Pomeranz looked very good out there tonight. I like how quickly he works. 93/94 mph fb with an 81/82 mph curve (really a big old hook). He throws a cutter but not very often. I feel really pretty good about what I saw from him. He could a good one for quite some time! Big-strong-young!

[a700hitter]

I thought Pomeranz looked very good out there tonight. I like how quickly he works. 93/94 mph fb with an 81/82 mph curve (really a big old hook). He throws a cutter but not very often. I feel really pretty good about what I saw from him. He could a good one for quite some time! Big-strong-young!

There didn't seem to be any negative carryover from his terrible start. It looks like he shook that one off.

[sk7326]

I'm not sure any stat is better that another at predicting future performance. I'd like to see your evidence on that one.

 

SIERA and xFIP are heavily dependent on K rates, and I think that makes Price's 2016 season look better than it is and Wright's worse than it is.

 

Who knows what comes next?

 

 

Well, FIP is a little simplistic since it implies zero control of non homerun batted balls - which is not always true, although it is a fair first approximation. ERA can be very team dependent (and indeed the definition of an earned run - is largely byzantine and kind of stupid)

[iortiz]

He is going to pitch well most of the times. Now our biggest hole is the BP, aside Ziegler we are in trouble.

[sk7326]

Price's bWAR is 1.5, which seems realistic.

 

So can we say that bWAR for pitchers is more reliable than fWAR?

 

No - because the truth underpinning the differences is very squishy (which is why measuring it is so difficult). Do pitchers influence non-homerun outcomes? Fangraphs by using FIP says no. Baseball reference - by starting with runs allowed, puts more in the pitcher's court (it adjusts for team defense and stuff later). The answer - I think is "pitchers can". But it is not a lock - and not all pitchers with good results get consistently good batted ball results. But some do - and that has to be respected.

 

It'd be nice if the stat offered a one-stop place to say "he's good" or whatever. But that there are a couple of flavors each with different key assumptions provides more information.

 

Price has had a significant BABIP spike and homerun-FB spike, while the K-rate and walk rate have not really changed. For the most part "betting the fluke" is the percentage play. Doesn't make the game watching easier though.

[moonslav59]

Well, FIP is a little simplistic since it implies zero control of non homerun batted balls - which is not always true, although it is a fair first approximation. ERA can be very team dependent (and indeed the definition of an earned run - is largely byzantine and kind of stupid)

 

ERA- takes a little bit of the luck out of the ERA, but surely it is flawed as well.

 

WHIP is also fielder dependent and so is flawed as well.

 

However, metrics that rely too heavily on K rates do not give enough credit to pitchers who are consistently getting batters out in other ways, no matter how well the team behind them is defensively or how the park fits their skillset.

 

Wright and Porcello have both clearly been better than Price this year, but Price's K rate jumps him over both of them in WAR. To me, that is a major flaw in WAR--too much dependence on FIP and xFIP.

 

[sk7326]

ERA- takes a little bit of the luck out of the ERA, but surely it is flawed as well.

 

WHIP is also fielder dependent and so is flawed as well.

 

However, metrics that rely too heavily on K rates do not give enough credit to pitchers who are consistently getting batters out in other ways, no matter how well the team behind them is defensively or how the park fits their skillset.

 

Wright and Porcello have both clearly been better than Price this year, but Price's K rate jumps him over both of them in WAR. To me, that is a major flaw in WAR--too much dependence on FIP and xFIP.

 

 

I would submit that the pitchers who consistently get batters out strike out a lot of them - the world of low strikeout, consistently effective is pretty small. strikeouts might be fascist, but they do a pretty good job at measuring a pitcher's effectiveness. (and obviously rate based)

[moonslav59]

I would submit that the pitchers who consistently get batters out strike out a lot of them - the world of low strikeout, consistently effective is pretty small. strikeouts might be fascist, but they do a pretty good job at measuring a pitcher's effectiveness. (and obviously rate based)

 

There's a long list of great pitchers who do not rely on high K rates.

 

While I get the idea that a pitcher's ability to get outs without them hitting it is a huge asset, but sometimes big K pitchers let up big hits as well trying too hard for the K.

 

Over the past 25 years, some of the best pitchers had K rates below 6.7:

Greg Maddux 6.18 (4th best ERA- at 71)

Andy Pettitte 6.65 (34th best ERA- at 86.)

Tom Glavine 5.35 (22nd best ERA- at 82 with a 14% K rate)

Mark Buehrle 5.11 (39th best ERA- at 87 with a 13.6% K%)

Tim Hudson 5.99 (29th best ERA-)

Bartolo Colon 6.69

Jamie Moyer 5.33

 

Jimmy Key had an 82 ERA- after 1992 with just a 15.3% K rate.

Dennis Martinez had a 13.2 K% and an 84 ERA- after 1992.

Ken Hill had a 90 ERA- and 13.7% K%.

 

Certainly high K rate pitchers populate the top pitcher lists, but there are times when high K% pitchers aren't top ERA- pitchers. From 1992-2016, there are 236 pitchers with over 1,000 IP, and this is what I found:

 

Liriano had a 100 ERA- but the 9th best K% at 23%.

O Perez 110 ERA- and 16th best K% at 22.9%

H Nomo 101 ERA- and 17th best K%.

I Kennedy 102 ERA- and 25th best K%.

B Norris 112 ERA- and 33rd best K%.

Dempster 104 ERA- and 45th best K%.

Volquez 109 ERA- and 49th best K%.

 

Ricky Nolasco and Jason Bere both had K rates 4-5 % better than Buehrle and others, but had ERA-'s of 114!

 

Ks do not always equate to greatness, just as low K rates don't always equate to poor pitching.

 

[cp176]

There didn't seem to be any negative carryover from his terrible start. It looks like he shook that one off.

 

None! He is a big kid too. he throws a little harder than I thought he did. His curve is a classic hook. Snaps right off the table. I really did enjoy watching him work. Just 27!

[kenmeister]

I thought Pomeranz looked very good out there tonight. I like how quickly he works. 93/94 mph fb with an 81/82 mph curve (really a big old hook). He throws a cutter but not very often. I feel really pretty good about what I saw from him. He could a good one for quite some time! Big-strong-young!

 

Agreed; big sigh of relief!

 

Next I want to see E-Rod cement his post-all-star effectiveness, and then really I think the attention shifts to somehow fixing that bullpen. That Carson Smith injury had a huge impact on the season.

[Kimmi]

I'm not sure any stat is better that another at predicting future performance. I'd like to see your evidence on that one.

 

SIERA and xFIP are heavily dependent on K rates, and I think that makes Price's 2016 season look better than it is and Wright's worse than it is.

 

Who knows what comes next?

 

 

From Fangraphs:

 

"xFIP has one of the highest correlations with future ERA of all the pitching metrics. Only SIERA out-paces it."

 

Here are some links to studies, if you're so inclined to read them:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/are-pitching-projections-better-than-era-estimators/

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/should-we-be-using-era-estimators/

 

I do agree with you that Price's high K rate makes his season look better than Wright's in terms of WAR. IMO, Price's stats are fluky this year because he is one of the best in terms Ks, but the worst in terms of hits allowed. There are always going to be exceptions when it comes to stats. But in general, K/B ratio, and therefore stats like SIERA and xFIP, do a pretty good job at how good a pitcher is performing.

 

That is not to discount ERA-, WHIP, and OPSa in any way, as I like those stats too.

[Kimmi]

I thought Pomeranz looked very good out there tonight. I like how quickly he works. 93/94 mph fb with an 81/82 mph curve (really a big old hook). He throws a cutter but not very often. I feel really pretty good about what I saw from him. He could a good one for quite some time! Big-strong-young!

 

Agreed. I am encouraged by what I saw last night.

[Kimmi]

I would submit that the pitchers who consistently get batters out strike out a lot of them - the world of low strikeout, consistently effective is pretty small. strikeouts might be fascist, but they do a pretty good job at measuring a pitcher's effectiveness. (and obviously rate based)

 

I am your biggest fan.

[cp176]

Agreed. I am encouraged by what I saw last night.

 

Couple of things from last night - Ramirez has got a cute little boy. He was in the outfield while the Tigers were taking bp. That red seat is a literal mile from home plate. The seats don't get any more comfortable as the years go by but that ballpark is still just a great place to watch a game. I really like the youth movement and will not be disappointed to see more of it.

[Kimmi]

ERA- takes a little bit of the luck out of the ERA, but surely it is flawed as well.

 

WHIP is also fielder dependent and so is flawed as well.

 

However, metrics that rely too heavily on K rates do not give enough credit to pitchers who are consistently getting batters out in other ways, no matter how well the team behind them is defensively or how the park fits their skillset.

 

Wright and Porcello have both clearly been better than Price this year, but Price's K rate jumps him over both of them in WAR. To me, that is a major flaw in WAR--too much dependence on FIP and xFIP.

 

 

All stats have their flaws, even xFIP and WAR.

 

That said, I think you might be underestimating K rates a bit. Here's a nice excerpt from my and MVP's favorite site:

 

"Here’s what SIERA tells us:

 

Strikeouts are good…even better than FIP suggests. High strikeout pitchers generate weaker contact, which means they allow fewer hits (AKA have lower BABIPs) and have lower homerun rates. The same can be said of relievers, as they enter the game for a short period of time and pitch with more intensity.

 

Also, high strikeout pitchers can increase their groundball rate in double play situations. Situational pitching is a skill for pitchers with dominant stuff."

[Kimmi]

Couple of things from last night - Ramirez has got a cute little boy. He was in the outfield while the Tigers were taking bp. That red seat is a literal mile from home plate. The seats don't get any more comfortable as the years go by but that ballpark is still just a great place to watch a game. I really like the youth movement and will not be disappointed to see more of it.

 

I like the youth movement as well, and have always been in favor of home grown players over free agent superstars. It sounds like you enjoyed the game, despite the loss.

[cp176]

I like the youth movement as well, and have always been in favor of home grown players over free agent superstars. It sounds like you enjoyed the game, despite the loss.

 

We did enjoy it. I really like the overall athleticism of the team. I thought that they were going to hit but Verlander is still tough. When JBJ scored from first on Shaw's double to right, it was a real display of what youth and speed can do .

[moonslav59]

All stats have their flaws, even xFIP and WAR.

 

That said, I think you might be underestimating K rates a bit. Here's a nice excerpt from my and MVP's favorite site:

 

"Here’s what SIERA tells us:

 

Strikeouts are good…even better than FIP suggests. High strikeout pitchers generate weaker contact, which means they allow fewer hits (AKA have lower BABIPs) and have lower homerun rates. The same can be said of relievers, as they enter the game for a short period of time and pitch with more intensity.

 

Also, high strikeout pitchers can increase their groundball rate in double play situations. Situational pitching is a skill for pitchers with dominant stuff."

 

It's just not true. Many high K pitchers allow way more hits than low K pitchers.

Here's the list from Fangraphs of pitchers who allowed the highest hits determined to be "soft": with LD% (K% rank out of 60 pitchers with 2000+ IP)

1) Hamels 19.8% (4th)

2) Halladay 19.3 (24th)

3) Zito 20.3 (36th)

4) Verlander 20.1 (7th)

5) Sabathia 20.5 (16th)

6) J Vazquez 20.6 (13th)

7) Buehrle 20.3 (56th)

8) Peavy 19.6 (9th)

9) Greinke 20.9 (11th)

10) Arroyo 19.9 (43rd)

11) Oswalt 20.6 (21th)

12) Hudson 18.5 (40th)

 

So, out of the top 12 "soft hit" pitchers, 5 are in the top 4th in K%, 6 are in the top 3rd. Certainly having a high K rate seems to help induce softer hit balls, but then there are guys like Buehrel, Maddux, Hudson and Glavine. Buehrle was nearly last in K%. 4 pitchers were ranked 34th or lower out of 60 in K%.

 

Hudson and Beuhrle are both in the top 10 for lowest FB%:

2) Hudson 23.4%

8) Buehrle 34.3%

 

Here is the list of lowest BAbip since 1992 (2000+ IP), how many of these guys were high K% guys? (K%)

.273 Zito (17.2%)

.275 Wakefield (15.0)

.276 W Williams (15.4)

.279 Moyer (14.0)

.279 Maddux (17.1)

 

Isn't this proof enough the opposite may be more like the truth?

 

.280 Pedro Martinez (27.2 finally a high K pitcher)

.281 Hudson 16.0

.282 Appier 18.5

.282 Glavine 14.1

.282 Leiter 19.1

.282 Arroyo 15.2

.284 Peavy 22.4 (the second high K% pitcher on this list)

.284 F Garcia 16.9

.285 Trachel 14.8

 

Out of the best 14 BAbip pitchers, only 2 are high K% guys.

 

Of the lowest 15 K% pitchers only 10 had a BAbip over .290 (two under .280)

Of the highest 15 K% pitchers 9 had a BAbip over .290 (none under .280)

 

Sorry, I'm just not seeing a clear correlation between Ks and inducing weaker hits or rather many low K pitchers do better inducing weak hits than high K pitchers.

 

 

 

[Bellhorn04]

This debate is popcorn-worthy.

[Jack Flap]

[FredLynn]

This debate is popcorn-worthy.

 

Its pillow worthy

[moonslav59]

My philosophy is that some K pitchers seem to care more about getting more Ks than not allowing a hit.

 

Then, there's guys like Buch who try so hard not to allow a hit by picking corners that they walk guys too much.

 

There are many examples of very successful low K pitchers who do not allow a lot of hits or walks, and when they do get hit, the hits are often weak or on the ground.

 

Mark Buehrle had a 13.6% K%, and yet he wasa very good pitcher for many teams- good fielding/bad fielding, big park/small park, no matter what. Only 25% of the balls hit off Buehrle were "hard hit". That places him at 20th out of 25 pitchers with 2,000+ IP since 1992. Let's say you compare him to a SP'er with a 23.6 K% (10% more than Buehrle), that means that over 800 batters, Buehrle Ks about 80 less than player X. If he allows 25% hard hits, that would mean that's an added 20 hard hits vs the higher K pitcher. 20 out of 800 is only a 2.5% overall increase in hard hit balls in total. If you add 2.5% to Buehrle's 25.4% hard hit rate, he'd be at 27.9% which would place him tied with Greinke at #11th--about middle of the road.

 

I get the argument that K pitchers have less balls put in play, so that may make up for a higher BAbip, but it is not always a clear advantage.

 

 

[Nick]

Moon, where do we rank in one run games compared to Baltimore and Toronto?

[Kimmi]

Sorry, I'm just not seeing a clear correlation between Ks and inducing weaker hits or rather many low K pitchers do better inducing weak hits than high K pitchers.

 

I'm going by what Fangraphs and THT have said regarding this. They do not make claims like this without having the extensive research to back it up. Sorry, but listing some counterexamples is just that. Listing counterexamples. It does not disprove the hypothesis. There are always going to be exceptions to the rule.

 

From Fangraphs:

 

Looking at all 3,328 pitcher-seasons (with at least 40 innings pitched) between 2002 and 2010, I sorted players into four groups by strikeout rate. The higher the strikeout rate, the lower the BABIP and HR/FB at each level of strikeout rate.

 

STRIKEOUT GROUP/BABIP/HR/FB

 

HIGH / .286 / 9.1%

MEDIUM-HIGH / .295 / 10.2%

MEDIUM-LOW / .298 / 10.7%

LOW / .301 / 10.7%

 

Pitchers do have some control over their BABIPs, but there’s too much noise in their actual numbers to infer their true skill levels. Weaver has had BABIPs as low as .238 and as high as .316 during his career. Still, small sample sizes of peripherals say more about BABIP skill level in a way that BABIP alone cannot.

[Kimmi]

My philosophy is that some K pitchers seem to care more about getting more Ks than not allowing a hit.

 

Then, there's guys like Buch who try so hard not to allow a hit by picking corners that they walk guys too much.

 

There are many examples of very successful low K pitchers who do not allow a lot of hits or walks, and when they do get hit, the hits are often weak or on the ground.

 

Mark Buehrle had a 13.6% K%, and yet he wasa very good pitcher for many teams- good fielding/bad fielding, big park/small park, no matter what. Only 25% of the balls hit off Buehrle were "hard hit". That places him at 20th out of 25 pitchers with 2,000+ IP since 1992. Let's say you compare him to a SP'er with a 23.6 K% (10% more than Buehrle), that means that over 800 batters, Buehrle Ks about 80 less than player X. If he allows 25% hard hits, that would mean that's an added 20 hard hits vs the higher K pitcher. 20 out of 800 is only a 2.5% overall increase in hard hit balls in total. If you add 2.5% to Buehrle's 25.4% hard hit rate, he'd be at 27.9% which would place him tied with Greinke at #11th--about middle of the road.

 

I get the argument that K pitchers have less balls put in play, so that may make up for a higher BAbip, but it is not always a clear advantage.

 

 

As I just stated, there are going to be exceptions. In general, however, it is true that pitchers with higher K rates have lower BABIPs and lower HR/FB ratios. It's not just that they have fewer balls in play. It's also that the balls in play result in hits less often.

[Kimmi]

Moon, where do we rank in one run games compared to Baltimore and Toronto?

 

I'm not Moon, but this question is right up my alley.

 

Here is a great site for that information:

 

http://proxy.espn.go.com/mlb/standings/_/type/expanded

[Nick]

I'm not Moon, but this question is right up my alley.

 

Here is a great site for that information:

 

http://proxy.espn.go.com/mlb/standings/_/type/expanded

 

Thx....Toronto could have been way ahead had it not for 10-18 record in 1 run games....

[SoxnCycles]

I'm not Moon, but this question is right up my alley.

 

Here is a great site for that information:

 

http://proxy.espn.go.com/mlb/standings/_/type/expanded

 

ESPN...

[moonslav59]

As I just stated, there are going to be exceptions. In general, however, it is true that pitchers with higher K rates have lower BABIPs and lower HR/FB ratios. It's not just that they have fewer balls in play. It's also that the balls in play result in hits less often.

 

So, what do you do with the "exceptions" to the rule?

 

There are a lot of exceptions, and penalizing them for a lack of Ks is just downright wrong.

 

Thanks for the eye-opening stats. It goes counter to my more individualized research. xFIP is seriously flawed when it ends up placing Price so high in this year's rankings. Price's high K rate this year has been near useless. He has failed miserably to get outs.

 

My point is that WAR relies too heavily on xFIP. Placing Price as the 13th best SP'er this year out of 258 is a joke. Out of 109 SP'ers with 80+ IP this year, Price places 8th in xFIP at 3.24.

 

Here's a look the top 10 SP'er rankings by stat or metric:

 

WAR...... xFIP ........ ERA_

Kershaw .....Kershaw.... Kershaw

Fernandez ..Fernandez..Carrasco

Syndergaard Synderg..Fulmer

Aaron Nola ..J Cueto.... Bumgarner

Stasburg.....Kluber...... Hendricks

Scherzer......Bumgarner..Fernandez

Pineda.........Tanaka....... A Sanchez

Price...........Arrieta........ Syndergaard

deGrom......Quintana..... C Hamels

Kluber....... Strasburg.... J Cueto

 

I still like ERA-, even though I know there are flaws with that as well.