Cy Young Voting and the Impact of a Catcher
I have an NL Cy Young ballot this year, and with 10 days left in the regular season, I legitimately don’t know who I’m going to vote for. If I was the kind of voter who looked only at run prevention and credited that entirely to the pitcher on the mound, it might be a fairly easy decision in favor of Zack Greinke, given that he’s at +9.4 RA9-WAR, putting him in pretty historic company in terms of keeping runs off the board. If I went solely by the measures that we have a pretty good idea are primarily influenced by the pitcher and not his defenders behind him, it would be pretty easy to cast a vote for Clayton Kershaw, given that he’s leading the fielding in FIP-based WAR by a pretty good margin.
But as we’ve discussed many times here over the years, both of those extremes are clearly incorrect; giving a pitcher no credit or blame for all the non-HR contact he allows is definitely wrong, but so is assigning the entirety of the results of those balls in play to him and pretending that defense does not play a role in run prevention. In reality, a pitcher should get credit (or blame) for some of the impact of events that FIP does not capture, so FIP-based WAR is definitely an incomplete measure of a pitcher’s performance. How much credit or blame should be assigned isn’t entirely clear, and if you just throw your hands up in the air and split the credit down the middle — blending FIP-based and RA9-based WAR together — you’ll note that Jake Arrieta ends up in the top spot, though the differences between all three pitchers at that point are so small as to be insignificant.
As you probably know if you’re reading FanGraphs, I’m not going to simply cast my vote based on total run prevention, since I believe in attempting to isolate player performance when handing out individual awards, and simply using run prevention metrics and pretending like defense isn’t a thing strikes me as a particularly lazy shortcut. But I’m also not going to just use FIP, and not just because it ignores a bunch of plays that do matter; it also has (albeit to a smaller degree) issues with teammate interaction. As our ability to measure a catcher’s impact on balls and strikes has grown, it has become clear that no pitching event is really “fielding independent”, and a pitcher’s walks, strikeouts, and home run rates are indeed impacted by the performance of the guy he’s throwing the ball to.
Just as we attempt to adjust for things like park factors, knowing that the dimensions of his home field and the weather he pitched in are variables that impact results but are out of his control, it makes sense to also account for the receiving ability of the guy a pitcher is throwing to. If one pitcher is consistently throwing pitches on the corner and not getting calls because his team’s catcher isn’t that great at fooling umpires, do we really want to hold those pitches against him? Or if he’s getting called strikes on pitches well below the knees because of the skill of his catcher, do we want to give him 100% of the credit for those strikeouts?
In theory, catcher framing is another variable to attempt to control for, and in this particular instance, it could indeed end up making a bit of a difference. For instance, here are the batters faced totals, by catcher, for the two Dodger pitchers in the Cy Young race:
| Pitcher | Grandal | Ellis | Grandal% | Ellis% |
| Clayton Kershaw | 329 | 497 | 40% | 60% |
| Zack Greinke | 571 | 171 | 77% | 23% |
While Kershaw has had a more even split of the two Dodgers catchers, with a slight lean towards Ellis, Greinke has primarily been caught by Yasmani Grandal. And by nearly every framing metric out there, Grandal is one of the best catchers in baseball at stealing strikes for his pitcher, so it’s likely that Greinke has benefited to some degree by pitching to a high-quality receiver, while Kershaw has probably not gotten as much support from his catchers. And StatCorner’s data on their pitching pages backs this up to some extent, as Greinke is listed to have 8.6% of his out-of-zone pitches taken for strikes, while Kershaw is only at 7.6%.
So, on the surface, this is something we’d want to try and account for, which would boost Kershaw’s numbers relative to Greinke’s. But the more I think about this, the less sure I am that this is something we should actually assume is an outside variable, because the identify of the catcher on the days a specific pitcher takes the mound is not random or outside the pitcher’s control. It is well known that Kershaw loves throwing to Ellis, and that the two are very close friends. After Kershaw reportedly asked for Ellis to catch him in his first start of the year, Ellis said this:
“It’s really special that (Kershaw) enjoys throwing to me,” Ellis said. “We have a good rapport, good chemistry and we kind of lean on each other out there. If I can add my two percent to his day of making it great, that’s pretty much all he really needs. It’s special when I can call that one or two pitches an outing that’s a separator for us.”
The Dodgers didn’t allow Kershaw to have Ellis as his personal catcher this year, but it’s not a coincidence that 18 of the 49 games Ellis has started this year have come when Kershaw is on the mound. So, unlike a park effect or the performance of the bullpen in games he leaves runners on when removed mid-inning, we can’t really say that this is a variable outside of Kershaw’s control. His preference to throw to Ellis is his choice, and if he gains some extra comfort in throwing to Ellis instead of Grandal, the trade-off he’s making is getting fewer borderline pitches called strikes. But he’s making that choice, so giving him a boost for having to throw to an inferior defensive catcher doesn’t seem right.
And, to take this a step farther, Kershaw’s preference for Ellis actually degrades the Dodgers offense on the nights he pitches as well; Grandal has cooled off a bit lately, but he’s still posted a 123 wRC+ this season, a bit better than the 109 wRC+ Ellis is running. It’s not a huge difference, but Kershaw’s catcher preference does force the team to put a line-up on the field that is less likely to score runs; perhaps this should be a small negative against Kershaw as well? Or maybe it should be no factor, since Ellis was going to have to draw some starts regardless, and the distribution of when he starts is mostly irrelevant; in this instance, Kershaw would essentially be sacrificing his own numbers by taking Ellis’ starts, but the overall net effect on the team would be close to zero.
In reality, these factors aren’t going to move the needle dramatically, but since I’m not judging by either ERA or FIP, I see this as a very close race between three pitchers all having excellent seasons, so my vote could end going one way or another based on a small factor here or there. I’m doing my best to try and explore every possible avenue for determining who really had the best season, including considering the value a pitcher puts up at the plate on days he pitches. And, at this point, I don’t think we have really clear answers on a lot of these smaller variables; we’re still struggling with the big variable of how to handle non-HR contact.
So, I’ll put this question to you guys. Should the identity of the catcher that Kershaw and Greinke have thrown to be a factor, even a small one, in determining my Cy Young vote? Should I penalize Greinke for getting to throw to the better-framing catcher more often, or should I penalize Kershaw for having a preference for pitching to the guy we think is an inferior defender, based on what we think we can measure at this point in time? Or should we just admit that there is so much going on beyond simply framing marginal pitches that we can’t really quantify the impact of a catcher on a pitcher’s results, and I should just go back to focusing on how to distribute credit for Greinke’s .180 BABIP with runners in scoring position?
I have 10 days to figure this out. I’m pretty sure it’s not going to be an easy call, as even going down paths like this one tend to lead to muddy conclusions with no obvious right answer, at least to me. I think the only thing I can say with any real certainty is that evaluating pitching is still really hard.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
You can decide how much weight to apply to RA9 and FIP-based WAR, but I think given the uncertainty about how precise each of these measures are in terms of individual pitcher performance, Arrieta is probably the guy most-deserving of your vote (since he tops Greinke and Kershaw when combining the two approaches).
*He is in a three-way tie with Kershaw and Greinke when combining approaches.
7.4, 7.5 and 7.6 WAR are statistically indistinguishable when it comes to WAR. WAR is not that precise.
Tie-breaker goes to the guy that threw a no-hitter.
Tie-breaker goes to the guy Carlos Quentin hates the most.
Tie breaker goes to the guy who can actually field his position and hit the ball. That would be Zack Greinke.
The no hitter is included in the already referenced RA-9 WAR.
I believe that’s an overly simplistic way of dealing with the issue, because Greinke’s got a good lead over Arrieta (and Kershaw) in RA9, and Kershaw’s got a great lead over Arrieta (and Greinke) in FIP and xFIP. Splitting the difference isn’t giving any of the pitchers enough credit. Yesterday I went through and compared all 3 pitchers with several different categories, and the race truly is the greatest Cy Young race I’ve ever seen.
The thing I think people need to consider is, yes, Greinke and then Arrieta have big leads in ERA, but WHY do they? They all have a HR/9 from 0.42-0.59, a fairly small difference. They all have between 6.1-6.4 H/9. They all have from 1.56-2.00 BB/9. They all have between a .508-.533 OPS allowed. With all of these things so similar, why does Kershaw have an ERA so much higher than Greinke and Arrieta? Is it because he’s been a worse pitcher this year? Well judging by all of the above numbers, plus the more than 2 K/9 more than Greinke and Arrieta, that doesn’t look to be the case.
Could it be that while Kershaw has allowed 5 home runs with runners on base, Greinke and Arrieta have only allowed 4? Could it be that relievers are allowing more runners to score for Kershaw than Greinke or Arrieta? That one I don’t know for sure, but I believe 6 of 9 inherited runners have scored for Kershaw from the bullpen. Could it be that despite incredibly similar batted ball statistics, Greinke and Arrieta are just BETTER this season at not allowing runs? Or could it be simply good luck for the first two and bad luck for Kershaw? Just a few things off the top of my head are:
– opening day Uribe didn’t hurry on a slow grounded from Derek Norris and Norris beat it out, causing a run to score.
– A cold day in Colorado, De La Rosa hit what should have been an inning ending chopper up the middle, but the ground was frozen and the ball goes over Kershaw’s head and scores 2 runs.
– Early in the season the Giants had a game with 4 or 5 infield singles against Kershaw.
Of course stuff like this can happen to any pitcher at any time, but that really just underscores my point that it all has happened to Kershaw in 2015. As a Dodger fan I’ve watched Greinke as much as I’ve watched Kershaw, and I’m blanking on any big, memorable moments like this for him. I’d be interested to hear from any Cubs fans or anyone else if he’s had any unlucky moments like this in 2015.
All of this said, it is obviously still an incredibly close race, and anyone who wins will be deserving at this point. But I think simply by splitting down the middle and giving it to any of the pitchers on that logic is faulty.
Found the stats on relievers allowing inherited runners to score:
Kershaw – 6 of 9
Greinke – 1 of 7
Arrieta – 2 of 8
If you equalize this by removing 4 earned runs from Kershaw, his ERA drops by 0.16.
Normally I’d say “big deal”, but in a comparison that’s too close to call I think this is very relevant. Great point.
If we are going to look into inherited runners, should we also maybe investigate other factors contributing to (or limiting) run scoring that is missed by FIP – like stranding runners, pick-offs, caught stealing, inducing GDPs, etc?
From what I see here: http://www.sportingcharts.com/mlb/stats/pitching-pickoffs-leaders/2015/ , here: http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/pitching/_/league/nl/type/opponent-batting/order/false , and here: http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/pitching/_/league/nl/sort/GIDPs/qualified/false/type/expanded it looks like Kershaw is significantly better at controlling the run game than either of his competitors, but that he is significantly worse at getting GDPs than they are.
Since Arrieta is so bad at letting runners steal on him, maybe we should be a little incredulous of his sparkling ERA; I think we should be surprised that more of those steals didn’t lead to runs and chalk it up to good luck. Shouldn’t we charge Arrieta with some extra runs beyond what his ERA shows? Or maybe he is countering that with all his GDPs.
Greinke, on the other hand, both limits the run game and induces GDPs.
I think we have got to say that the case for Arrieta gets somewhat worse when you look at further details beyond ERA – whether that is FIP, SB, K% – BB%, or BABIP. The award has got to go to one of the two Dodgers this year, right?
Where did you find inherited runners scoring by starter!? I went Internet hunting for those the other day and couldn’t find them anywhere, only totals by reliever.
They were linked to me by someone on another blog. I don’t know where to search besides some page on baseball reference. It was a page with a bunch of different unusual stats by team and then by player. I’m trying to find it now and I’ve got no idea where to get it. The stat was called something like Bequeathed Runners Scored or something.
you should obviously vote for Arrieta! He’s pitching against the Cards and Pirates while Kershaw gets the non-LA NL West teams, i.e. a suckfest.
The rockies have the best offense in the NL. And The Cardinals don’t have a very good offense at all.
I don’t think a huge difference can be made based on teams faced.
The Cardinals wRC+ is 96 (same as the Cubs but lower than the Pirates). The Rockies is 84, basically the worst in the NL. They just happen to play lots of games at Coors Field instead of Busch Stadium.
Yes, but Kershaw didn’t face the Rockies on PNC Park or AT&T Park, so I think it’s okay to evaluate the Rockies offence without park-adjusted metrics if you want to measure Kershaw’s performance against them. Rockies have a wOBA of .320, good for 2nd in the NL, while the Cardinals have .311, 8th. The top 4 teams in wOBA in the NL are teams from the NL West (Dodgers are in 1st), so you could conclude that Kershaw faced stronger competition than Arrieta.
Actually, the NL Central is well known to be the strongest division in baseball. Arrieta has pitched 12 games vs. playoff teams, Kershaw 9, Greineke 7, by my count, based on the teams currently looking like they’re in. Arrieta has faced tougher competition by this measure.
What on earth are you talking about
Using B-R’s RA9opp stat, which is an estimate at the average runs per game a pitcher’s opponents have been, these three are within 0.05 runs of each other. Greinke is at 4.23, Arrieta at 4.20, and Kershaw at 4.19. The Dodgers are actually the lowest-scoring team in their division, while the Pirates are the only other NL Central team above league average.
RA9avg considers that, as well as things like park, to guess what RA/9 an average pitcher would allows given the same conditions, like defense, park, and opponents.
Greinke: 4.16
Kershaw: 4.18
Arrieta: 4.29
So it’s not the opponents that make a difference here, but probably mostly home park.
It’s a good thing you don’t realize that the NL Central has a bunch of crappy hitting teams this season, while the Giants, Dbacks, and kind of Rockies (Coors) are good hitting teams.
Look at the Fangraphs leaderboards, and you’ll s that what you say is true only before park adjustments (wOBA). Adjust for park – wRC+ – and the Diamondbacks and Rockies drop
Yeah but for the purpose of this exercise we really wouldn’t want to adjust for park would we? Grienke and Kershaw don’t get to face those hitters on a neutral field. Half the time they are pitching in those parks that inflate offence a good deal.
What Bip shows above is probably the best comparison, because it takes into account opponents, park, and defense to arrive at a normalized number. It says that Arrieta has faced the toughest schedule – expected to give up the most runs – but only by a small amount.
Arrieta also gets to face the Brewers and Reds which are 90 loss teams. You can’t really fault a pitcher for playing in a particularly bad division or reward them for being a good one.
So you have a vote for the NL Cy Young….and you only mention Arrieta’s name once in passing?
Pretty damned shameful.
Lol calm down, he doesn’t dismiss Arrieta at all, it’s just that the FRAMING of this article’s analysis is aided by the fact that Kershaw and Greinke share catchers.
I’m a Cubs fan, rooting for Arrieta, won’t be upset whichever of the three wins.
I’m a Cubs fan too. I think once again, Kershaw is the best, and it’s a tossup between Greinke & Arrieta. Any of the three could win it, but Kershaw is generational. (and by best, I mean both this particular year and overall)
The only thing shameful here is to take the Cy Young award so seriously that you would think to use the work “shameful”.
But the article is specifically comparing the two Dodger candidates, who share Dodger catchers, since both Dodger pitchers happen to throw to Dodger catchers.
Aside from all this technical gobbledygook, Arrieta is going to win, because he won 20 games, and that proves he’s the best.
How awful it must be to be so angry and spiteful all the time. I feel fortunate to have things in life that give me pleasure. I can come to fangraphs, read and learn a little, and feel like I’ve gotten something out of it. I hope you’re able to figure out a way to enjoy the site and just generally get some pleasure out of life.
Arrieta gets to throw to Montero and Ross, who are on par with Grandal framing-wise, so Kershaw definitely gets a slight boost when factoring in framing.
I am not sure how this should influence your decision making, and furthermore I am not sure how good this metric even is, but this article (http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/12880518/mlb-best-game-caller-dodgers-catcher-aj-ellis) claims that Ellis is one of the best game callers in baseball. I do not know enough about the methodology to conclude whether that is true or not, but perhaps some of what Ellis takes away in framing he adds back on game calling and opponent preparation? I would also tend to think that Ellis would probably play close to once a week anyway, so distributing more of his starts to Kershaw should not be a major penalty, but I am a Dodger fan and big AJ Ellis supporter so take however much you want of this with a grain of salt.
“It’s not a huge difference, but Kershaw’s catcher preference does force the team to put a line-up on the field that is less likely to score runs; perhaps this should be a small negative against Kershaw as well? Or maybe it should be no factor, since Ellis was going to have to draw some starts regardless, and the distribution of when he starts is mostly irrelevant; in this instance, Kershaw would essentially be sacrificing his own numbers by taking Ellis’ starts, but the overall net effect on the team would be close to zero.”
AS you say, Ellis is going to start SOME games. So might as well be with the pitcher most likely to give up the least amount of runs and give the Dodgers the best chance at winning!
(I’d vote Greinke-Arrieta-Kershaw right now).
“If one pitcher is consistently throwing pitches on the corner and not getting calls because his team’s catcher isn’t that great at fooling umpires, do we really want to hold those pitches against him?”
That says it all for me. I understand that until calls are automated, pitch framing is a very valuable skill, but so is the ability to rob a bank without getting caught. I think it’s bad enough that catchers and pitchers are benefiting from gaming the system, so if the playing field can be leveled a little, by giving a benefit to pitcher who isn’t getting as much framing value, why not? For me, the argument that Kershaw has freely chosen to use the inferior framer more often is negated. He’s rejecting a benefit (or maybe not fully capable of being comfortable with it) that shouldn’t be a benefit in the first place.
But I understand the counter arguments here. I just wish automation could start now, so we wouldn’t have to deal with this problem.
It’s not like the probability of hitting a pitch immediately drops to zero outside the zone. Most of these “stolen strikes” are going to be less than an inch or two outside the strikezone and are probably indistinguishable from actual strikes in real time.
I wouldn’t focus on the catcher performance. Blend RA/9 and FIP. Arrieta ends up the best here, as he’s just a few points lower by ERA- vs Greinke and FIP- via Kershaw.
One disagreement – the Dodgers have been using Ellis mostly as a platoon, because Grandal hasn’t really hit well against left-handed pitching. So I don’t think Ellis is bringing down the offense as much as the wRC shows, because I think Grandal’s wRC would be lower if he faced lefty pitching more often.
Ellis has caught Kershaw seven times facing a righty (4/6, 4/11, 5/26, 6/1, 6/12, 7/18, 8/23). With Grandal having a concussion and shoulder injuries, I would agree that you would not expect that from a personal catcher. I think it really is more coincidental and chance than Dave realized, though it is a minor point.
If I may make a suggestion:
MLB Network recently showed the AL leaders in opponent exit velocity (for pitchers).
I don’t know weather or not you have enough connections to get it done. But if you can get them to show you the NL leaders in opponent exit velocity, that could be a big help.
Exit velocity, by itself, is kind of useless.
I have reached out to the guys at BAM, however, and asked for more detailed Statcast data to try and help break down the contact credit/blame quandry.
Some of this is publicly available, like through baseball savant:
MLB rank: average exit velo
1. Kershaw: 84.86
2. Arrieta: 85.17
39. Greinke: 87.77
75. median – Trevor Bauer: 88.52
150. last – Matt Wisler: 90.78
I think the main issues are that this data might not be that reliable, since some batted balls are seemingly excluded, and also that we don’t fully know how to interpret this data.
Though I will note that the difference in quality of the typical pitchers at the top and bottom of this leaderboard is quite noticeable.
Yes, that info is missing something like 25% of batted balls, and they seem to be disproportionately weak contact (especially pop-ups).
More generally, I wonder if standard deviation and exit angle matters as much as velocity. Taking an extreme, a pitcher who is half weak pop-ups and grounders but half hard hit liners and fly balls seems like he’d give up a lot of extra base hits, even if the overall BA against is relatively low. By contrast, a steady stream of moderately hit ground balls would be mostly outs with some singles. Both might have the same average exit velocity, but the latter distribution seems preferable for a pitcher.
See here also – http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-limitations-of-the-statcast-data/
No it shouldn’t. I don’t think you can go wrong with any of them really. As a Dodger fan I’d rather you go with Kershaw or Greinke (especially Kershaw) but if you pick Arrietta, or Greinke I can’t even get mad. This is one of those seasons that it’s just that close, like 1a,1b,1c
I think you’re onto something by considering catchers in general, but I don’t think the difference between Grandal and Ellis is enough to make a difference.
If we were talking Wilin Rosario vs. Jonathan Lucroy or something, I think you could make a case that the Rosario pitcher overcame an extra obstacle.
I don’t really know how much you should be considering the catcher or his framing skills in the vote for NL Cy Young. I mean, yes, the catcher definitely plays a part in making a pitcher look better (or worse) by stealing (or losing) strikes, but the pitcher is still the one putting in most of the work.
It’s like voting for, I dunno, the Best Actor Oscar, and you have two actors who put in phenomenal performances that year; either could easily win. But both of them had a lot of help in getting ready for their roles; one had a personal trainer who got them in the right shape, the other had a vocal coach who helped him nail that accent, etc. Are these supporting roles considered when voting for Best Actor? Not really. All that’s considered is the body of the work by the person himself. So should it be for pitchers.
A better analogy would be a nominee for Best Actor who had an excellent supporting cast compared to one who didn’t. Some actors make the performances around them better. Some don’t. Of course, the Oscars are nonsense, as are baseball awards. But whatever.
Baseball awards are far less nonsensical than the Oscars.
Anyone here would take Scherzer over Greinke?
That dude’s second half really killed his very high Cy Young chances.
4.41 ERA 85 Hits 99 K 17 BB 17 HR in 79.2 IP.
Overall he is still having a really good season, but 27 home runs is a little rough.
I think Scherzer pitched better than Greinke in terms of everything he could control, so I would personally put Scherzer ahead of Greinke on my ballot.
Except the fact that he’s given up twice the home runs allowed, which is a huge deal.
If you had said you weren’t putting much stock in pitcher wins I would 100% agree. ERA, however, I see much value in what actually happens vs what another metric says should have happened. Greinke beats his FIP consistently since becoming a Dodger. Is he the luckiest pitcher or is it a skill? With an intellectual athlete like Greinke I’m going to err on the side of skill. He’s evolved as a pitcher. He even knocked on Hersheiser’s door this year with his historic scoreless innings streak. He’s sitting at number 2 in all of baseball in WAR sandwiched between Bryce Harper and Mike Trout. Greinke sat down 28 straight batters in overlapping games. He leads in most metrics. He has been steady as a rock all year. Kershaw started out slow and Arrieta is having an amazing 2 months, but this is for the best pitcher of the year. I can’t think of anybody more deserving than the masterful Zack Greinke. Respectfully, anybody else winning would be like snubbing Pedro Martinez in his prime. Zack is so good he’ll be in the MVP discussion. I don’t believe he’s the MVP of the NL, but the Cy Young–I have no doubt. Thanks for listening to this die hard baseball fan.
unearned runs actually happen.
why would you look at era, when it ignores part of what actually happens and tells us what should have happened?
You’re creating a false dichotomy between ERA and FIP. FIP does not describe what “should have happened”. It simply strips out batted-ball events where the pitcher does not have complete control over the outcome of the play. (Of course, Dave’s point here is that the pitcher might not have complete control over non-batted-ball outcomes due to catcher framing.)
By the same token, ERA does not describe “what actually happens” in terms of run prevention; RA9 does. As Tango has pointed out, ERA sanitizes a pitcher’s performance because it’s asymmetrical: It helps a pitcher when his defense makes an error but doesn’t hurt a pitcher when his defense makes a great play. Furthermore, ERA struggles with sequencing issues (e.g., in the extreme case, if the defense makes an error with two outs and the pitcher then allows five consecutive home runs, ERA pretends those five home runs never happened).
Dave’s question here isn’t whether ERA or FIP is superior. It’s whether catcher framing — which neither of those metrics incorporates — is yet another variable that we need to consider in Cy Young voting.
Thank you.
“Should the identity of the catcher that Kershaw and Greinke have thrown to be a factor, even a small one, in determining my Cy Young vote?”
Yes, definitely. 100%
The fact that he chooses Ellis as hit catcher is a fair point though. That is like choosing to throw some bad pitches.
As far as pitcher hitting, I am 100% agnostic on that point. I have no idea whether to include that in Cy Young criteria. I lean a little towards no, but not much.
It seems from all the above posts that while framing can be a consideration, the case of Ellis/Grandal offsets/nullifies itself as a consideration.
A possible help for your Cy Young vote, had you/would you consider a sort of standard of deviation? Which pitcher of the three has been the most consistent versus putting up mostly gems with a few stinkers?
I was thinking this exactly. In an incredibly tight race, this seems like it could be a tiebreaker, whereas adding up a bunch of small factors like catcher framing, pitcher hitting, etc. just seems like adding more complexity to get to the same place.
I think the ability of the catcher to steal strikes should count against the pitcher, even if Kershaw requested having Ellis catch him. I am firmly in the camp of having some sort of digital strike zone, because I can’t stand the idea that catcher’s can steal strikes. So I think we should do everything we can to eliminate how much a pitcher benefits from that, because it is giving him credit for something he did incorrectly, namely throwing a ball.
Having said that, my CYA order right now would be Kershaw – Arrieta – Greinke. As good as Arietta and Greinke have been, the whiffs and Ks put Kershaw on another level of dominance. He has the highest swinging strike% in baseball, the lowest Z-Contact % in baseball, and he has a legitimate shot at striking out 300 batters. He also has the lowest avg batted ball MPH in baseball (http://baseballsavant.com/apps/hit_leader.php?game_date=&abs=190&sort=3,1&type=pitcher).
And as of right now, he will finish the season with the second-lowest xFIP in a season since 2002 – which is as far back as this site goes (second only to his 2014, btw).
At this point any argument is splitting hairs, because all 3 guys have been exceptional this year. But I personally think the strike out and the whiff are 2 good measures of pitcher dominance, and Kershaw dwarfs the other two in those categories.
In regards to Kershaw getting less strike calls, couldn’t it also be that he probably faces more RH batters than Greinke, and it is more likely to get a borderline pitch to a RH batter called a ball than it is to a LH batter?
123 wRC+ is quite a bit better than a “bit better” than 109 wRC+.
I think it’s only a little better than a “bit better.”
If we had two pitchers with virtually identical numbers, but one pitched to an elite framer while the other pitched to Saltalamacchia, then I might use it as a tie-breaker due to the extreme differences. When you’re talking about solid catchers across the board, I wouldn’t give one pitcher credit because his catcher might have been a little better at framing.
Maybe at some point we’ll be better at quantifying the value of the framer, but at this point do we really know how much to ‘dock’ a pitcher for it? For instance, if Grandal is known as a great framer at pitches an inch outside (to a RH batter), then Greinke is going to intentionally aim an inch outside. One the one hand, yes he’s benefitting from Grandal while another pitcher would have to aim at the black – but on the other hand, Greinke is the one that uses it to his advantage. He’ll approach hitters different based on the framer. It’s not like he would make the same exact pitches regardless of the catcher, and he just happens to benefit from calls with Grandal back there. So Greinke deserves *some* credit for being able to exploit Grandal’s skills.
I hope Mark Melancon is 4th on your list since by WPA he has been worth the second most wins in the NL.
That’s silly. Melancholy is a 1.3 fWAR pitcher who isn’t even close to the most valuable pitcher on his own team – Cole – because a closer by definition throws so many fewer innings.
If you want to use that fact to debate about Melancon’s value versus other closers, or to argue in favor of Hurdle’s bullpen decisions, fine. To argue that it should elevate Melancon to 4th in the Cy Young voting over pitchers who have totaled vastly more WAR is an asinine misuse of WPA.
* Melancon
I agree that it is silly but just piggy backing off of his article the other day about how context should be taken into account for post season awards. If you replace Melancon with a league average pitcher, the Pirates lose nearly 6 more games (by WPA) this year. The same cannot be said about Kershaw/Arrieta. I don’t think Melancon deserves votes but this is the kind of result you will get if you try to introduce context into the situation.
I haven’t seen that article. The Fangraphs library entry for WPA includes many qualifiers about the limitations of WPA and describes it as a “storytelling statistic”. I can’t believe that he was saying to use that as a primary stat, as opposed to a consideration to differentiate between players who are otherwise close in value.
Looking at the Fangraphs front page, I see (i) that Fangraphs very specifically lists starters and relievers separately and (ii) that the leaders by WPA among all pitchers (in order) are:
Greinke
Melancon
Arrieta
Kershaw
Rosenthal
Watson
Price
Betances
Wade Davis
Nobody in their right mind is arguing that Betances or Davis should be close to Price in Cy Young voting.
Amongst hitters, Kris Bryant is ahead of Harper in WPA, and I don’t see any writer on this site arguing that Bryant should be MVP over Harper.
You must have misunderstood the argument and what is meant by “taking context into account”. Particularly for a hitter, there are lots of ways to do that other than WPA.
As a jays’ fan, it’s been fascinating to compare our two catchers this year. The widely respected elite pitch framing Martin vs the oft criticized poor pitch framing Navarro.
I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that most all Jays fans have a new appreciation for Navarro this year given that while he may not rack up good pitch framing numbers, he sure seems to have some sort of skill (maybe “gamecalling”) that really seems to help guys like Buehrle and Estrada in particular. Buehrle of course is famous for letting his catcher call the game while Estrada has clearly established a new pitching pattern this year.
Now this is mostly anecdotal (though not totally – those pitchers have put up better numbers throwing to Navarro), but i’m starting to get the feeling that going overboard on pitch framing might end up hurting our evaluations as much as helping.
So, in short, NO, do not consider catchers in your voting.
Like you, I wonder whether it is fair to evaluate catchers on framing but ignore their game-calling skills.
I agree it’s basically a three way tie. Here are two proposed tie-breakers: 1. quality of opposition. I don’t know which way it cuts, but I would be surprised if Arrieta hasn’t had the toughest opposition pitching in the best division in baseball. 2. Complete games. The ability to finish up a game when you have an iffy bullpen means something. Jake has 4 CG and 3 SHO compared to 1CG for Greinke. Not to mention a No Hitter
Vote for Arrieta.
But Kershaw pitches more inning per start.
and why oh why is there no easy to find IP/GS stat?
imo it’s a hugely important stat that we never see. i never even try to analyze an SP’s performance without calculating his IP/GS first.
Echoing Cornflake’s point, Kershaw has pitched 215 innings in 30 starts, Arrieta is at 216 in 31 starts. It’s basically a wash, so I don’t see that 2nd point as telling us anything.
Plus IP is factored into WAR anyway since it’s a counting stat.
Agreed it’s a wash with Kershaw. But it’s a separator vs. Greinke. If I was voting I’d have Arrieta and Kershaw as 1 and 1a and Greinke as 3.
Ehh, it’s pretty negligible. Greinke has thrown 207.2 innings. A 4% difference in innings pitched is way, way down the list as a tiebreaker. It’s like picking between 2 MVP candidates because one of them missed 5 games.
Also see AB’s point about WAR.
Normally when making a decision between assets with the same expected value (WAR) you go for the one with the least risk. So in this case would there be any merit to identifying which pitcher was more consistent from start to start?
Hey Dave, great article as usual.
You might try Greinke for the fact that there’s not really any point in the year in which he struggled. Not to make quality starts matter or anything, but that’s something that separates one from the other two.
And, for what it’s worth, Greinke also leads each of WPA and RE24 by pretty strong margins … for what it’s worth, especially against the backdrop of FG’s recent convo’s about sequencing.
And I had an exam today so please excuse my brain for looping on you haha.
Yasmani can’t play every day. So I’m helping the team win more games even when I am not pitching by letting Yasmani rest on the days I pitch.
Using BP’s method of letting mixed models sort out who gets credit for what, here are their WARP values:
Greinke 7.31
Kershaw 7.27
Arrieta 7.26
So… do you have a three-sided coin ready?
I’m going to muddy the water a bit more here. If Ellis puts down the fingers that Kershaw wants to see, there’s an added boost to his confidence that it’s the right pitch, and he’s slightly more likely to deliver it as intended. Example: Russell Martin is superior to Dioner Navarro in pitch framing, blocking balls, arm strength, and so on. Yet Dino gets better results with Marco Estrada to the extent that he’s become his personal catcher.
So, until we can read a player’s mind, there will always be those things that we will never be able to quantify.
With the catcher variables mentioned, it seems it would be a subjective decision as to how to weight their importance to the pitcher. Game calling could be just as beneficial as pitch framing so that Ellis could be more beneficial to Kershaw than Grandal to Greinke.
I would look at quality of opposition, both team and individual level.
guys before being decimated by injuries in August the Giants had the best lineup in the national league. and the Rockies and diamondbacks have great lineups and awful parks for pitchers.
yeah the central is the best division overall but it’s mostly cuz they could pitch, right? I mean the Cubs and pirates have good lineups I guess but the nl west is being weirdly maligned as an offense free coast and that’s simply not true.
I admire that you think there is a “right” answer. It is subjective and will always be.
The crazy part is that by the defensive metrics here these three are numbers 1 3 and 4 among all pitchers, with Arrieta .4 runs ahead of both Dodgers.
It may well come down to whether to count hitting, as Greinke is over half a WAR ahead of the other two there.
Just a thought here, but you’ve got it narrowed down to 3 pitchers. How about going back and watching the games they started and then forming an opinion? Maybe something you see will make one stand out
That’s 90 games X 2-1/2 hours=225 hours
Eh, that’s not the most efficient way to form an opinion about a silly award.
Guess you haven’t seen things like DVR where you can skip over parts that dont matter.
Zack has been there consistently all year. The other two seem to have taken the first two months off. Greinke is having a historically incredible year. And his era plus is way higher than the other two. Greinke gets CY.
Given the tangle of complexities in the Dodgers’ catching situation, I would not make it a factor.
I would say, though, that the more advanced metrics often give too little or no weight to sequencing. I feel this is not the right approach to use when judging the MVP or Cy Young awards. This is an approach designed to improve future projections, but when judging past performance one should definitely take into account the gritty details, e.g., it matters whether the three walks and home run came consecutively and in what order they came!
What are Kershaw’s stats pitching to Ellis vs. Grandal? Could it be that the expected decline from Grandal->Ellis doesn’t appear for Kershaw. If he truly feels that Ellis makes him better, maybe it becomes apparent in the results. This could clarify if in this instance it is logical to credit/blame whichever catcher he is working with.
There may end up being an offset between Grandal’s skill of pitch framing and Ellis’ ability in calling a game for Kershaw.
Q: If one pitcher was an extreme groundball P, for whom the manager pulled the normal shortstop and played a defense-only (young Ozzie Smith) non-hitter to grab groundballs, thus improving the P’s ERA (but costing him run support), wouldn’t we OF COURSE note tha he had better defense behind him when measuring his runs saved? Ergo, the C who can throw or frame better *ought* to be considered in your Cy Young vote.
I see your point, and absolutely agree that catcher framing has a role in a pitcher’s performance. The only thing I’m worried about is that the framing does not include the signal calling and confidence a catcher could provide. Think of a big SUV and a small hybrid racing on a very windy course. The SUV may be a able to go faster, therefore it should win. But going into those sharp turns may cause the driver to hesitate or slow down. Now the hybrid is at an advantage due to being able to handle the curves much better.
We don’t have any set way to measure that yet, but i think it also adds some value as well. I don’t know how much it would be an influence, but pitchers do talk a lot about trusting their stuff, and I would think part of that involves trusting the catcher you’re throwing to.
The pitcher’s influence on the choice of catcher ought to make a significant difference. To take an extreme example, R.A. Dickey usually has had Josh Thole catching him over the last 3 years. This leads to less offence, less run support and fewer wins. On the other hand, bullpen support (or lack thereof) also ought to be taken into account.
I don’t know if you would take into account efficiency in the use of run support. Greinke has been hyper-efficient this year, leading to the impressive W/L record. The Dodgers have scored 2 runs or less in 13 of his games this year; it is pretty impressive to come away with only 3 losses. I am not suggesting that this is the most important factor, but perhaps something that one might take into account as a tie-breaker.
Yes, the identity of the catcher should be a factor affecting Cy Young balloting.
You want to try to evaluate the best (or most valuable — to me they are synonyms) pitching performance in the NL during 2015. That’s not the same as the best run prevention while the pitcher is in the game. You should try to separate out park effects, defensive effects of players other than the pitcher, and quality of opposition. I’m more ambivalent about whether to include a pitcher’s batting / baserunning contributions.
Penalize Kershaw for choosing the wrong catcher.
I wonder how much of this effect is offset by the pitcher’s own reputation. Kershaw is going I get a friendly strike zone, regardless, because he’s Kershaw.
I have no opinion on who should get it, but I assert that Kershaw will not get it, which is not a baseball judgement but a judgement upon old timey sportswriters. When all things are equal they will exclude they guy who already has the most awards and that they expect to get more in the future. Plus they will credit the twenty wins, you know it.
Somewhat tangential but – has anyone studied whether there is an incumbent effect in (CY,MVP,SS,GG) awards? That is, some bias towards choosing last year’s winner, or the winner from 2, 3, 4 years back, over and above what their statistics or “intangibles” (nohitters, leaderboard ranks, presence on a playoff team) might otherwise imply? Similar for 2nd, 3rd place finishers. This might be as simple as a linear regression with a small number of nuisance regressors.
In psychology there are what is known as perseveration effects. Seems reasonable to ask whether voters might evidence similar behavior – and, if so, what that might mean for Kershaw in particular.
Holy shit lookit all the comments! And so many numbers!
But when it’s so close, I’m going with what I see, and I’ve never seen a pitcher as dominant as Arrieta, in large part because the world hasn’t seen a guy go on an unhittable run like this since Bob Gibson. I know it’s a season-long award, but holy bullets, how could anybody vote against Arrieta if they’ve seen him pitch in the last two months. Dude’s a fire-bender out there. Fucking Avatar. Can’t wait for the one-game showdown between he and Cole!
My two cents (which since I was born in 1965 probably buys more than your two cents), I think when it is super close in the NL that pitcher defense and hitting should each be factor for a tie breaker for the Cy Young. I am not saying they should be strongly accounted for, but rather when it is super close then the pitchers ability to do the other aspects of his job should get some weight.
Greinke for the NL Cy Young!
Your modern day NL Cy Young voter:
::pulls out NL Cy Young ballot::
::scratches head: while considering pitcher defense, pitcher hitting, and catcher pitch framing::
::Says “screw it!!”::
::Sorts leaderboard by wins and chooses Arrieta::
::Cracks beer and puts on Golden Girls reruns::
I would go with Greinke over Kershaw or Arietta if their pitching seems really close, which seems to be the case this year. Greinke is clearly best hitter, and a pitcher’s hitting does make a difference.