A Realistic View at 2021: Part II

[notin]

Dalbec has way more value than Santana.

 

I know it sounds whacked, but 2 month rentals don't have much value.

 

Yes, Barlow has a lot of value. I was just being sarcastic.

 

BTV accepts this trade:

 

Dalbec for Santana & Staumont

 

 

Santana is under contract for 2022 with an AAV of $8.8 million…

[notin]

Dalbec has way more value than Santana.

 

I know it sounds whacked, but 2 month rentals don't have much value.

 

Yes, Barlow has a lot of value. I was just being sarcastic.

 

BTV accepts this trade:

 

Dalbec for Santana & Staumont

 

 

I doubt they deal Staumont. Those 100mph arms tend to get longer looks.

 

BTV gives Santana a surplus value of 3.6, which gives a slew of options for Boston. Santana plus Barlow raises the price considerably and suggests Jeter Downs would be the cost…

[moonslav59]

Santana is under contract for 2022 with an AAV of $8.8 million…

 

I wasn't aware. Thanks.

 

That is not a bad contract.

[moonslav59]

I doubt they deal Staumont. Those 100mph arms tend to get longer looks.

 

BTV gives Santana a surplus value of 3.6, which gives a slew of options for Boston. Santana plus Barlow raises the price considerably and suggests Jeter Downs would be the cost…

 

Barlow was a joke.

 

I'd give Dalbec & Potts for Santana & Staumont (Maybe Dalbec & Groome)

[notin]

Dalbec has way more value than Santana.

 

I know it sounds whacked, but 2 month rentals don't have much value.

 

Yes, Barlow has a lot of value. I was just being sarcastic.

 

BTV accepts this trade:

 

Dalbec for Santana & Staumont

 

 

Barlow was a joke.

 

I'd give Dalbec & Potts for Santana & Staumont (Maybe Dalbec & Groome)

 

But would KC?

 

I think Staumont has more promise than either Dalbec or Groome. If they’re in the market got a young, cheap, controllable 3b, they might bite. But they also might prefer keeping their e pitching assets…

[iortiz]

Right, but:

-iortiz keeps quoting Porcello's Fangraphs data as if it's the most valid.

-Porcello pitched well in 2020 according to FanGraphs data.

 

His ERA in 2020 was 5+. It is Bum's ERA in my book. it doesn't matter how you slice it.

 

Fangraph's fav run prevention stat, SIERA, says that Porcello owns a 4.4 SIERA in 2020. That's below average in their scale. His 2020 xFIP is in the same neighborhood. His ERA- was 133 (very awful, out of chart). If you are going to consider only his FIP (3.3) which is not an exclusively stat of fangraphs, you would be likely doing a bad analysis/cherry picking since most of his RPE stats including ERA are below average and close to awful as I presented.

 

You like bWAR? his bWAR was 0.2. His fWAR should be taken with grain of salt since it considers FIP.

 

Yeah I like FG over BBR but his bad years don't change the fact that he's been awful in his last several years regardless the source.

Edited July 26, 2021 by iortiz

[Bellhorn04]

His ERA in 2020 was 5+. It is Bum's ERA in my book. it doesn't matter how you slice it.

 

Fangraph's fav run prevention stat, SIERA, says that Porcello owns a 4.4 SIERA in 2020. That's below average in their scale. His 2020 xFIP is in the same neighborhood. His ERA- was 133 (very awful, out of chart). If you are going to consider only his FIP (3.3) which is not an exclusively stat of fangraphs, you would be likely doing a bad analysis/cherry picking since most of his RPE stats including ERA are below average and close to awful as I presented.

 

You like bWAR? his bWAR was 0.2. His fWAR should be taken with grain of salt since it considers FIP.

 

Yeah I like FG over BBR but his bad years don't change the fact that he's been awful in his last several years regardless the source.

 

You're making my head spin a little now. We've been talking about his fWAR over and over. Now you're saying to take it with salt.

[iortiz]

You're making my head spin a little now. We've been talking about his fWAR over and over. Now you're saying to take it with salt.

 

We were talking about his career fWAR Bell, which as I said it still has flaws specially for contact pitchers, but it is still a decent indicator of value in large samples —11+ years.

 

His 2020 fWAR should be taken with a grain of salt not only because is one-year analysis but a 60-game season.

Edited July 26, 2021 by iortiz

[dgalehouse]

The flaws in ERA should tend to balance out over a long career. It is still the simplest, best stat for determining a pitcher's performance. The whole idea is to not allow the opponent to score runs. Some folks want to make everything complicated. And that's okay. But I still think career ERA tells the story in an easy to compute nutshell. The other stats serve to build and explain the bottom line , which is ERA.

[Bellhorn04]

The flaws in ERA should tend to balance out over a long career. It is still the simplest, best stat for determining a pitcher's performance. The whole idea is to not allow the opponent to score runs. Some folks want to make everything complicated. And that's okay. But I still think career ERA tells the story in an easy to compute nutshell. The other stats serve to build and explain the bottom line , which is ERA.

 

I think ERA+ is an easy and sensible upgrade over ERA. All ERA+ does is adjust the ERA for things like the ballpark and the league averages for that year. It makes perfect sense because baseball does have a lot of quirks. The playing fields are all different dimensions, and run scoring goes up and down from year to year for various reasons.

[mvp 78]

The flaws in wins should tend to balance out over a long career. It is still the simplest, best stat for determining a pitcher's performance. The whole idea is to win all of your starts. Some folks want to make everything complicated. And that's okay. But I still think career wins tell the story in an easy to compute nutshell. The other stats serve to build and explain the bottom line , which is wins.

 

[mvp 78]

I think ERA+ is an easy and sensible upgrade over ERA. All ERA+ does is adjust the ERA for things like the ballpark and the league averages for that year. It makes perfect sense because baseball does have a lot of quirks. The playing fields are all different dimensions, and run scoring goes up and down from year to year for various reasons.

 

If only Yahoo fantasy used ERA+!

[Maxbialystock]

ERA was created to accommodate pitchers. Not only do runs caused by errors by the other players not count, but also runs caused by the pitcher's own errors. Indeed, if a pitcher (like ERod) simply doesn't bother to cover 1b on a grounder to the right, it's a single because pitchers shouldn't be required to contribute to the defense. ERA+ simply furthers the process of accommodating pitchers.

 

Nevertheless, I think ERA is the best measurement for pitchers over the long term. That said, I do agree with Kimmi and others who point that there is value in a pitcher who can be relied upon to pitch 5 or more innings every 5 days and to do that season after season after season.

 

In his 5 seasons with the Sox, Porcello started 28, 33, 33, 33, and 32 games. In 2018, the Sox best season ever, Porcello pitched more innings, 191.1, than Price (176) or Sale (158), had 16 quality starts to their 18 (Price) and 17 (Sale), and had the most wins, 17 (while losing 7). He even pitched 15.1 innings in the postseason with an ERA of 3.52. Only Price (26 innings, ERA 3.46) and Eovaldi (22.1 innings, ERA 1.61) were better.

 

I'm not a Porcello fan, but credit is due.

Edited July 26, 2021 by Maxbialystock

[moonslav59]

I think ERA+ is an easy and sensible upgrade over ERA. All ERA+ does is adjust the ERA for things like the ballpark and the league averages for that year. It makes perfect sense because baseball does have a lot of quirks. The playing fields are all different dimensions, and run scoring goes up and down from year to year for various reasons.

 

Exactly, but ERA + and ERA- don’t really make Porcello look much better.

 

One would think over a long career many things like inherited runners allowed to score or not would all even out, but really there are probably significant variances from pitcher to pitcher.

 

To me, the biggest flaws in ERA is with the E. earned runs are often the result of poor fielding that is not called an error. Whether a ball hit is determined to be a hit or an error is also often arbitrary calls made by the scorer.

 

Park difference can make huge differences.

 

That is one reason I look at stats like OPS against which to me is a stat that is a “run prevention indicator.” It’s been shown to have a high correlation to how many runs are scored.

 

Using multiple categories to definitively value a player makes the most sense.

 

Using just ERA, SIERA and ERA+ will not tell the whole story.

[Bellhorn04]

Exactly, but ERA + and ERA- don’t really make Porcello look much better.

 

His career ERA+ is 99. So in performance he was almost perfectly average.

[moonslav59]

His career ERA+ is 99. So in performance he was almost perfectly average.

 

But WAR, OPS against and xFIP show he’s much better than average.

[iortiz]

But WAR, OPS against and xFIP show he’s much better than average.

 

Actually no. His ERA, FIP, xFIP, SIERA, fWAR, bWAR are between average and below average based on Fangraphs’ charts.

 

Rating RPE

Excellent 2.90

Great 3.20

Above Average 3.50

Average 3.80

Below Average 4.10

Poor 4.40

Awful

[iortiz]

Also, regarding his career OPS against, it is below average. It is 750. League average? 730.

[dgalehouse]

We need a new , more comprehensive stat. One that takes into account not only the dimensions and particular quirks of every ballpark a guy has ever pitched in and the weather conditions on every day or night he pitched. But also , the lifetime OPS of every hitter he faced and the overall ability of every one of his pitcher teammates. Then , we need the CERA of every catcher he threw to , and the defensive ability , or lack of same , of every teammate playing behind him. Then we need an evaluation of all his managers and pitching coaches and their tendencies . And that's just for starters. We need the geek squad to get to work on this now . When they finish , they can start another web site that we can bookmark and refer to daily. Then and only then will we really be able to accurately rank every pitcher who has ever lived. Edited July 27, 2021 by dgalehouse

[Bellhorn04]

Also, regarding his career OPS against, it is below average. It is 750. League average? 730.

 

Yep, and he played in 2 hitter's parks, Comerica and Fenway, so it makes sense that his ERA+ is about average.

[notin]

His career ERA+ is 99. So in performance he was almost perfectly average.

 

But then his IP per season are above average, which has a net positive effect on the rest of the pitching staff…

[Bellhorn04]

But then his IP per season are above average, which has a net positive effect on the rest of the pitching staff…

 

Absolutely.

[iortiz]

Yep, and he played in 2 hitter's parks, Comerica and Fenway, so it makes sense that his ERA+ is about average.

 

Sure, ERA+/ERA- are great indicators and actually they are not far of his other ERA estimators.

 

IMO Skill-Interactive ERA (SIERA) reflects better his profile since it considers BABIP. Porcello is a contact pitcher so SIERA could be a bit more accurate of what Porcello is/was.

 

Said that his main career ERA estimators like FIP, xFIP and SIERA are 4.06, 4.04 and 4.1. All in the same neighborhood which suggest you a 4-4.1 number represents what he is/was.

 

4-4.1 is something between average and below average, based on FanGraphs' charts.

 

Rating SIERA

Excellent 2.90

Great 3.25

Above Average 3.75

Average 3.90

Below Average 4.20

Poor 4.50

Awful 5.00

 

Rating FIP

Excellent 3.20

Great 3.50

Above Average 3.80

Average 4.20

Below Average 4.40

Poor 4.70

Awful 5.00

 

Rating xFIP

Excellent 2.90

Great 3.20

Above Average 3.50

Average 3.80

Below Average 4.10

Poor 4.40

Awful 4.70

Edited July 26, 2021 by iortiz

[Bellhorn04]

We need a new , more comprehensive stat. One that takes into account not only the dimensions and particular quirks of every ballpark a guy has ever pitched in and the weather conditions on every day or night he pitched. But also , the lifetime OPS of every hitter he faced and the overall ability of every one of his pitcher teammates. Then , we need the CERA of every catcher he threw to , and the defensive ability , or lack of same , of every teammate playing behind him. Then we need an evaluation of all his managers and pitching coaches and their tendencies . And that's just for starters. We need the geek squad to get to work on this now . When they finish , they can start another web site that we can bookmark and refer to daily. Then and only then we we really be able to accurately rank every pitcher who has ever lived.

 

Now see here, Dean of Old School, if someone says they think ERA+ is a good stat, that means they take ERA seriously as a stat. And the adjustments that are made are common sense adjustments.

[Larry Cook]

Now see here, Dean of Old School, if someone says they think ERA+ is a good stat, that means they take ERA seriously as a stat. And the adjustments that are made are common sense adjustments.

 

Interesting thought here. Can you tell us if you have had many other nuggets of wisdom during your long and distinguished career at the dmv?

[moonslav59]

From 2009-2020 there were 150 pitchers with 800+ IP. That's 5 pitchers per team x 30 teams (150). This may be a flawed method of determining a pitcher's value in terms of context and how other starters were doing during his era. There are many pitchers in that era that did not reach 800 IP. My guess is most were worse than these 150, but I'm sure some were better, since their career did not overlap fully with 2009-2020, of their career started after 2009, and they have not pitched 80 innings, yet.

 

If you go by the top 30 are #1's, 31-60 is #2's, 61-90 is #3's..., here's how Porcello ranks among his peers in these important categories:

 

19th fWAR (#1 starter)

81st xFIP- (#3 starter)

85th SIERA (#3 starter)

85th K-BB% (#3)

89th WHIP (#3)

95th ERA- (#4)

 

140th in BAbip (.308) could be an indicator he had poor fielding behind him and/or pitched in pitcher's parks more often than others. This is backed up by his low LD% (73rd ranked) and hard hit% (57th ranked).

[iortiz]

As you said, that is a flawed method. I think I told you before. For instance a career 2.6 fWAR pitcher can't be a No. 1 by any means.

 

This is why fangraphs, baseball reference and other sources have their rule-of-thumb charts for each stat which actually consider large samples.

 

In those charts Porcello consistently ranks in most of them, between the Average-Below Average level as I have been presented.

[iortiz]

Also in terms of bWAR, he is a 1.7 bWAR pitcher through 11.4 years. The bWAR average is 1.9 bWAR. He is below average in that category as well.

[notin]

Now see here, Dean of Old School, if someone says they think ERA+ is a good stat, that means they take ERA seriously as a stat. And the adjustments that are made are common sense adjustments.

 

I don’t think Denny will be happy until the only baseball stats people discuss are batting average, ERA and saves. I’m 90% certain he’s written his congressman to have laws passed banning OPS, FIP, fWAR and UZR…

[a700hitter]

Right, but:

-iortiz keeps quoting Porcello's Fangraphs data as if it's the most valid.

-Porcello pitched well in 2020 according to FanGraphs data.

With the exception of his Cy Young season, I don’t think you could find any stats over his last 6 years that could convince me that he wasn’t a borderline bum.