starting pitcher averages...
by ryan c on Oct 14, 2009 6:09 PM EDT
55 comments
in 2008 (numbers for 2009, post-steroid era, should be very similar) compliments of 2 posters from bravesjournal:
here are the requirements:
A #1 should give the team 200+ innings before the playoffs. Drop about 20 innings for each spot down so that a #5 is giving you @130-160 innings at an ERA of league average +50-75 points.
Set a minimum cut-off of 13 games started and 73 innings pitched, that gives me 80 pitchers, which is exactly 5 per team. Breaking those pitchers up into 5 groups of 16 pitchers each based on ERA, and then getting the average ERA for that group based on total earned runs and total innings pitched, here are the averages:
#1: 3.01
#2: 3.75
#3: 4.23
#4: 4.89
#5: 5.84
with this average, the braves had 2 aces, one #3, one #4, then tommy hanson, who didnt qualify because of innings, but would have been an ace, and tim hudson, who also didnt qualify due to innings, but would have been a #2. so, if all goes well and the braves are able to find some sucker to take lowe, the braves could have 3 legitimate aces, one #2, and one #3.
I'm guessing there must be some buffer for the labels, so i would be willing to guess it would be along these lines:
#1- 3.38 or lower
#2- 3.39-4.04
#3-4.05-4.56
#4-4.57-5.33
#5- 5.33-higher
With the buffer, we had 2 aces, two #3s, then timmy and tommy who dont qualify, but would be a 2 and an ace.
This fanpost has been edited from its original content, and in no way does it include anything concerning Kris Medlen :)
Be nice! I'm going to do my best...
0 recs |
55 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Now how’d they do this? It is based off of team’s original five starters or ranked per each team’s best five in order? Like would Vazquez (best starter) be considered our 1 or Lowe (opening day). I assume it’s best per team in which case some of these are skewed by teams having awful starters toward the back of the rotation, but thanks for posting
by McCann's the Man on Oct 14, 2009 6:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think rating them based off one stat, and a flawed one at that, is simplifying it a bit too much. There’s many other factors that determine the value of a pitcher. Interesting read though.
by blindsided789 on Oct 14, 2009 9:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
yeah...
i do realize its a little on the simple side, but when factrong in 80 different pitchers, era probably balances itself out quite nicely. so, the eras for the labels are probably pretty accurate, but the individual pitcher might be skewed.
i’m guess these numbers should be looked at in more of a “career era” rather than a single year, but only for post-steroid baseball pitchers. i have been interested for quite some time about the labeling of an “ace”. this is probably the best that i’ve found. i take no credit for the research. i’m only the messenger. so i’m not tooting my own horn.
My opinion cant be wrong. It's my opinion. Those who don't like it can piss up a rope.
by ryan c on Oct 14, 2009 10:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i dont understand how ERA is a flawed stat…its one of the best ways to judge a pitcher’s performance
by Hcgadawgs on Oct 15, 2009 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
...you may have just opened a can of worms
"If I have asthma, they won't let me scuba. And if I can’t scuba, then what’s this all been about?? What am I working toward??"
by Doghnut on Oct 15, 2009 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
From what I can gather
ERA may not be a perfect stat, but it’s far less flawed than a certain other pitching stat- coughwinlosscough. Some of the trick comes in with “well that defender should have gotten a better read and that wouldn’t be a hit” or “That bobble should have been scored an error instead of a hit.” But the real hang-up is usually where the un/earned run argument comes in- a lot of people argue that a pitcher worth his salt shouldn’t have let a runner who reached on an error end up scoring anyway, so therefore ANY run should be earned.
Plus, if there’ a guy on third who scores on an error, that’s an earned run, even though it’s not the pitcher’s fault. A runner is only eligible to score an unearned run if he REACHES on an error, not scores as a result of one. So the whole thing does get a little sticky. Personally I try to avoid judging anyone based solely on ERA, but if you can look at ERA and WHIP numbers you can usually discern where someone’s “true ERA:” probably lies. High WHIPs and decent ERAs tell you there was some luck involved in keeping that ERA down. Conversely, looking at a guy like Dan Haren who had a 1.003 WHIP this year (lower than Chris Carpenter’s!) but a 3.14 ERA tells you the ERA is a little deceptively high.
Bottom line- ERA, like W-L, has to be taken with a grain of salt, and is not an end-all-be-all performance indicator.
by J-Freak on Oct 15, 2009 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah i agree, but also it all evens out in the end…what i mean is that yeah people will make errors and runs that shouldn’t have scored will score, but maybe the next inning someone will make a great defense play that saves the pitchers ass..alot of times that goes unnoticed…so i think ERA is correct MOST of the time
by Hcgadawgs on Oct 15, 2009 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know that I’d say it’s right most of the time, because every ERA is a little wonky, but I would say it’s always in the right ballpark, as in it’s not off by a whole lot. Like I said, it’s a much better indicator than record. but I’ll still take WHIP and K/BB stats anytime I can get them.
by J-Freak on Oct 15, 2009 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, WHIP is good too, i guess ERA just looks at the bigger pitcher
by Hcgadawgs on Oct 15, 2009 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
NO, NO, NO, NO!
ERA and WHIP make no distinction between an inning in which a pitcher Ks the side, and one in which three fly balls are hammered to the deepest part of the park and caught for outs. Since we have tools like FIP and tRA that actually show what the pitcher contributes there is little to no reason to continue looking at ERA and WHIP, let alone looking at only ERA and WHIP.
Mat Gamel is way too cool for double consonants.
by VivaLosBravos on Oct 15, 2009 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
By asking this question.. you better be ready for the answer and accept that ERA is severely flawed and there are readily capable alternatives that do a much better job at quantifying the importance of a good pitcher.
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Oct 15, 2009 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here is my argument for and against era....
look no furthur than Jorge Sosa. In 2005, Jorge Sosa went 13-3 with a 2.55 era, but was almost allowing 1 1/2 batters per inning to reach base. If any of you are like me, you can probably remember Jorge escaping bases-loaded jam after bases-loaded jam and somehow putting together a decent start.
Bottom line: It was luck.
and it was proven every year following…
5.42 era 1.51 whip
4.47 era 1.33 whip
7.06 era 1.89 whip
6.45 era 1.79 whip
and prior:
5.53 era 1.43 whip
4.62 era 1.53 whip
5.53 era 1.55 whip
The obvious downside to era is the 2005 season where he was still allowing a ton of baserunners but kept getting out of jams, but if you take his career era and whip it really shows his true colors:
4.72 era 1.48 whip
This is what I mean by evening out. If enough data is factored in to the equation, the outliers, good and bad, will even out. Factoring in 80 pitchers and thousands of innings, the era is legit.
Looking at one year of Jorge Sosa’s career and saying that he was “good” is completely inaccurate, hence the downside of era.
My opinion cant be wrong. It's my opinion. Those who don't like it can piss up a rope.
by ryan c on Oct 15, 2009 1:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
or you could just ignore WHIP, see that his FIP was 2 runs higher than his ERA, notice that his strand rate was an absolutely ridiculous 85.1, and infer that some major regression was due.
Mat Gamel is way too cool for double consonants.
by VivaLosBravos on Oct 15, 2009 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
or you can just realize…SHIT! its JORGE SOSA.. he’s obviously not any good
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Oct 15, 2009 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
FIP doesn’t even factor in hits or earned runs…i don’t understand how its completely legit
by Hcgadawgs on Oct 15, 2009 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's not completely legit
because it doesn’t consider batted ball types, and assumes pitchers have control over HR/FB rates (which they don’t), but if you have to rely on one number to judge a pitcher, it’s definitely better than ERA, and is even scaled to ERA to facilitate the transition.
Mat Gamel is way too cool for double consonants.
by VivaLosBravos on Oct 15, 2009 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
which is why its humorous that he was signed for a decent salary upon leaving ATL
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Oct 15, 2009 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
since when is pitching out of a jam luck??
when it comes down to it, it doesn’t matter how many hits or where the balls were hit…it matters how many runs scored…therefore ERA is reflective of how good the pitcher is. im not saying its the best..but it works
by Hcgadawgs on Oct 15, 2009 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but i get what your saying with the other stuff ryan c
by Hcgadawgs on Oct 15, 2009 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A few other factors are involved....
Peter Moylan, who is a groundball pitcher might give up some groundball singles, and he might get himself out of the jam by inducing a double play. Not luck.
Jorge Sosa would:
1. walk a guy,
2. give up a single,
3. hit a guy
4. “induce” a liner to first for a double play (that could have easily been a double)
5. give up another walk
6. then strand all 3 runners on a ball hit to the warning track. Pure luck.
I remember Joe Simpson saying that Jorge Sosa should always pitch from the stretch because he gave up too many hits/walks from the windup. Well, he tried that with the Mets…Joe was wrong. Maybe Jorge should try the Gonzo rock. Oh, who am i kidding…he blows.
My opinion cant be wrong. It's my opinion. Those who don't like it can piss up a rope.
by ryan c on Oct 15, 2009 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sosa got cut by the Nats in the middle of the year and I was shocked when I saw him at the player’s parking lot in DC at the end of the year. They were playing the Dodgers and apparently he and Ronnie Belliard are good friends. I was pretty upset cause I’d always wanted his autograph on a Braves card.
"At least he didn’t nail the bitchy fat girl from Hell's Kitchen."
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Oct 15, 2009 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
absolutely
If a guy gets as many ground balls as Moylan, it makes sense that he should strand more runners.
Mat Gamel is way too cool for double consonants.
by VivaLosBravos on Oct 15, 2009 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's not how it works
good pitchers will have higher strand rates because they are more likely to get outs with runners on base (since a good pitcher is more likely to get outs in any given situation)
but if a pitcher has poor K/BB rates and doesn’t induce many ground balls, a high strand rate is random variance and isn’t really repeatable.
Jarrod Washburn’s 2005 strand rate was 81.8%, allowing him to post a 3.20 ERA despite a 4.35 FIP. His LOB% regressed to about league average the next three years and he posted ERAs of 4.67, 4.32, and 4.69.
Cole Hamels has FIPed consistently the past 3 seasons at 3.83, 3.72, and 3.72, but his ERA was much higher this year (3.39, 3.09, 4.32). The reason is that instead of posting an unsustainable LOB% (in excessive of 75) for the third consecutive year, he regressed to the mean and stranded only 72%.
It isn’t because Washburn and Hamels lost their “pitching out of a jam skill set,” it’s because they both got lucky for a year or two.
Mat Gamel is way too cool for double consonants.
by VivaLosBravos on Oct 15, 2009 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jurrjens
is also a good example of the ERA/FIP argument. His ERA this year was 2.60, a full run lower than the year before. If you look at his ratios, they were basically the same, except for his BABIP, which was about 40 points lower than the year before. Better defense, less balls finding holes, there are various reasons for this. He got pretty lucky there. His GB rate actually declined by 10%, and his FB rate increased by 13%. Despite the greater number of fly balls hit, his HR/FB actually decreased, which screams luck to me. My point is that taking all ratios into account, Jurrjens really isn’t a 2.60 ERA quality pitcher. His FIP sounds a lot more reasonable (3.68). I still like him a lot though.
by blindsided789 on Oct 15, 2009 11:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
I’m sure some guys can consistently outperform their FIP, but Jurrjens was near the bottom of the list in ERA-FIP leaders this year, and I don’t think anyone’s true disparity will ever be so large.
Mat Gamel is way too cool for double consonants.
by VivaLosBravos on Oct 16, 2009 12:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
has there ever been anyone to overachieve by a significant margin...
for their career? well, at least a career over 10 year? i’d be interested in seeing those numbers.
My opinion cant be wrong. It's my opinion. Those who don't like it can piss up a rope.
by ryan c on Oct 16, 2009 8:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Me too
But I wouldn’t know where to even find that info.
by FineHamAbounds on Oct 16, 2009 8:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
looking at pitchers who have been around for a while
and with low-ish strikeout rates, there really aren’t too many who are off by a significant margin, depending on your meaning of significant. Tom Glavine’s career ERA was about .40 better than his career FIP. Jarrod Washburn’s differential is .50. Barry Zito’s is about .50. I couldn’t really find anyone off by an enormous margin.
by blindsided789 on Oct 16, 2009 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ERA
ERA, Quality Starts and WHIP are the three best ways to look at a guys season and career. They reveal the most about a pitch and what they can bring to a team. Maybe if your looking at two young guys that have very little MLB experience you might break it down more, but its a waste of time for a verteran.
by wcubmac on Oct 16, 2009 9:51 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
...quality starts?
QS = 6 ip, 3 ER
But 5 2/3 ip and 0 ER will get you nothing…
"If I have asthma, they won't let me scuba. And if I can’t scuba, then what’s this all been about?? What am I working toward??"
by Doghnut on Oct 16, 2009 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
absolute bullshit
Mat Gamel is way too cool for double consonants.
by VivaLosBravos on Oct 16, 2009 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, well a good starting pitcher should be able to go deeper in a game..
anyway how many times does a pitcher get taken out of the game with 5 2/3 IP after giving up 0 ER..unless injured, hardly ever…thats nitpicking
by Hcgadawgs on Oct 16, 2009 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
extreme examples aside...
The concept still applies that QS requirements are arbitrary.
Mat Gamel is way too cool for double consonants.
by VivaLosBravos on Oct 16, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
using your own measurements...
qs = 4.5 era…you call that ‘quality’?
"If I have asthma, they won't let me scuba. And if I can’t scuba, then what’s this all been about?? What am I working toward??"
by Doghnut on Oct 16, 2009 6:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
According to this post, that’s a poor number 3 starter or a good number 4….
"At least he didn’t nail the bitchy fat girl from Hell's Kitchen."
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Oct 16, 2009 7:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
true enough
but a lot of times you see people hold up QS stats as a way to prove someone is a great pitcher…its good, but not great
"If I have asthma, they won't let me scuba. And if I can’t scuba, then what’s this all been about?? What am I working toward??"
by Doghnut on Oct 17, 2009 6:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that’s kind of what I was getting at. If you threw up a season’s worth of bare minimum quality starts, you wouldn’t exactly be a top tier pitcher.
"At least he didn’t nail the bitchy fat girl from Hell's Kitchen."
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Oct 17, 2009 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
no...
but you would likely find a sucker to pay you $10 mil/year.
by Mr. Sanchez on Oct 18, 2009 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jeff Suppan!
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Oct 21, 2009 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
QS
Quality starts crushes bullpens. When you have to start throwing your 4th, 5th, and 6th bullpen arms, your going to get beat. Look at the Braves, Gonzo, Soriano, and Moylan what, a combined 2.2 ERA. What did the rest of the pen have? Any major league pitcher having a good game should go 6+ innings. Felix Hernandez, Greinke, Lincecum, Wainwright, and JJ are top 5 in QS. Carpenter made 5 or 6 less starts than the rest of them or he would be up there. Name me 6 better pitchers than those. QS are a great indication of production.
by wcubmac on Oct 16, 2009 2:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Impossible Challenge...
you’ve said you judge pitchers based on Quality Starts, and have told me to find pitchers better than those with the most. I certainly prefer guys like Verlander, Vazquez, Josh Johnson et. al. to Jurrjens and maybe Wainwright, but there’s no way you’ll agree, because QS is how you evaluate pitchers… there’s a high correlation between QS and true talent, but it’s much a much less precise means of evaluation than other metrics.
Mat Gamel is way too cool for double consonants.
by VivaLosBravos on Oct 16, 2009 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the leaders in FIP…Grienke< Lincecum, Vazquez, Carpenter and Verlander
go find me 5 guys who are better than them…
you see any metric will identify the top tier pitchers… at the same time i can watch one game and realize holy shit Timmy is really good…the difference arises among the middle guys… metrics are useless in determining the best pitchers and the worst pitchers, any metric can identify those sets… we use stats to identify the middle…and figure out if Jon Garland and Bronson Arroyo are really better than Matt Cain and Javier Vazquez…
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Oct 21, 2009 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and further any person who looks at one stat, or three stats…is doing a serious disservice to themselves.
to properly understand anything in life… you must look at all the information presented… trying to quantify a pitcher with one stat (even if its the best stat we have) doesnt make any sense, bc there are 100s or 1000s of stats that we have easy access to….by looking at a bunch you are (to steal PWJort’s comments) diversifying the risk of making a mistake.
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
by Swo12bv on Oct 21, 2009 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You almost sound like a grad-school person there…
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Oct 21, 2009 8:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Almost…
"At least he didn’t nail the bitchy fat girl from Hell's Kitchen."
www.dropoutproductions.com
by cbwilk on Oct 21, 2009 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously
All I was saying above is that if I HAD to pick only a stat or two, say for a spur of the moment analysis, I’d go with WHIP and K/BB personally. But I wholeheartedly subscribe to the theory that the more info you have, the better decision you can make.
by J-Freak on Oct 22, 2009 1:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good post
I think we should be using FIP or tRA or something that represents a pitcher’s fundamental skills better than ERA. But nonetheless, great post.
http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/
by PWHjort on Oct 17, 2009 2:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
trade lowe
for someone who can get left handed hitter out and share the closer role with moyland get a free agent set up man or trade for one let gonzo and soriano go blow saves for someone else that and a power hitting outfielder to go with Bmac and sign roachy despite Bobby we will win a worlds title.
TOM STANLEY
by trucker tom on Oct 18, 2009 1:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Oct 18, 2009 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My head exploded after that comment… LOL
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me." Hunter S. Thompson
by mad_dog_maddux on Oct 19, 2009 7:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
