Defense, Contact Quality, and the NL Cy Young
This year’s National League Cy Young race invites multiple interesting questions about how best to evaluate pitching performance. Jacob deGrom, for example, is the league’s leader in ERA by a healthy amount; however, he’s also recorded only as many wins as reliever Jeremy Jeffress. Max Scherzer is having another great season, but his .255 BABIP compels one to consider whether his 2.31 ERA is the product of luck or defense (although the Nationals have recorded below-average defensive numbers both by UZR and DRS). Aaron Nola, meanwhile, has recorded a similarly low BABIP even as Philadelphia has produced NL-worst figures both by UZR and DRS. Finally, while the race has been viewed as a three-person contest for some time, it’s also possible Patrick Corbin has inserted himself into the conversation with a fantastic second half.
Sorting through the candidates is difficult. Ultimately, one’s choice for Cy Young will depend on how one weighs what a pitcher can and cannot control — and how best to quantify those effects. To start, here are some general metrics that should be familiar to FanGraphs readers.
| Metric | Max Scherzer | Jacob deGrom | Aaron Nola | Patrick Corbin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IP | 202.2 | 188 | 188.2 | 179.2 |
| K% | 34.4% | 31.3% | 26.6% | 31.3% |
| BB% | 5.8% | 5.7% | 6.8% | 5.9% |
| HR/9 | 0.93 | 0.43 | 0.62 | 0.65 |
| BABIP | .255 | .290 | .251 | .293 |
| ERA | 2.31 | 1.68 | 2.29 | 3.01 |
| FIP | 2.66 | 2.08 | 2.86 | 2.38 |
| WAR | 6.7 | 7.3 | 5.4 | 6.0 |
Orange=2nd Place
Based on these numbers, Jacob deGrom is the pretty clear favorite for Cy honors, with Max Scherzer an equally clear runner-up. What’s less clear, however, is that the results of a vote would produce a similar outcome, as both pitcher wins and other versions of WAR are likely to influence writers — and arrive at different conclusions than the figures here. Below, I’ve included some different versions of WAR, each of which paint the field in a different light.
| Metric | Max Scherzer | Jacob deGrom | Aaron Nola | Patrick Corbin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WAR | 6.7 | 7.3 | 5.4 | 6.0 |
| RA9/WAR | 7.6 | 7.9 | 7.3 | 5.7 |
| BRef | 8.7 | 8.1 | 9.4 | 4.4 |
| BPro | 7.2 | 6.6 | 6.1 | 5.5 |
Orange=2nd Place
Here we see a version of reality that suggests greater parity in the race. Averaging the numbers above, we’d still put deGrom first, Scherzer second, and Nola third, but Scherzer actually places ahead of deGrom in two of the four metrics, while Nola and Scherzer are more closely situated. Examining how each of WAR metrics arrives at its destination can help inform how to use them. Last week, Eno Sarris took a look at some of these same issues in a discussion of how large a role luck ought to play in Cy Young voting. There is also the question of what defines “luck” in the context of pitching, what sort of control a pitcher exerts over certain outcomes, and what role a a pitcher’s park ought to play in our evaluations of him.
The metrics above all feature different inputs which, naturally, lead to different results. In the version of WAR used at FanGraphs, those inputs are innings, strikeouts, infield flies, walks, and home runs — along with factors for league and park. DeGrom leads by this particular measure because his strikeout, walk, and homer numbers are all great. Scherzer has good walk and strikeout numbers but a closer-to-average home-run rate. Nola features slightly inferior (although still excellent) strikeout and walk numbers — plus a good home-run rate — but he falls behind Corbin, who has good numbers in all three.
The next metric, RA9, is another version of WAR carried at FanGraphs — one which, in this case, simply considers the number of runs a pitcher allows while also factoring for league and park. That’s how Nola, with the very good ERA, jumps up near Scherzer, though still short of deGrom. RA9 includes runs that were scored or not scored due to defense and sequencing, but does not try to make any adjustments for those factors.
Baseball-Reference begins with something like FanGraphs’ RA9 calculation but makes further adjustments for opponent and team defense, which is a significant factor in this year’s race. Nola tops the Baseball-Reference WAR leaderboard because of how well he’s prevented runs despite Philadelphia’s poor defense. Generally the effects of these defensive adjustments are muted, but because Nola appears to be headed for one of the 10 best bWAR seasons of the last 50 years, this case invites some scrutiny. Patrick Corbin suffers from the opposite scenario: Arizona has recorded strong defensive numbers, meaning he receives a “penalty” of sorts for his contribution to run-prevention.
Here are the overall team defense numbers by DRS, which Baseball-Reference uses, and UZR, which is included in WAR for position players but not pitchers here at FanGraphs.
| Metric | Max Scherzer | Jacob deGrom | Aaron Nola | Patrick Corbin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UZR | -13.2 | -27.1 | -38.2 | 14.8 |
| DRS | -50 | -79 | -113 | 105 |
There is obviously a much larger spread with the DRS figures, as defensive adjustments alone mean a difference of 24 runs between Nola and Corbin, which is about four times as much as the difference by UZR.
Over at Baseball Prospectus, their Deserved Run Average (DRA) metric accounts for as many aspects of a pitcher’s game as possible and attempts to factor for everything including park, opponent, catcher, umpire, and pitch effectiveness to determine how many runs a pitcher should have allowed with all those variables rendered neutral. By their methods, Scherzer leads over deGrom, with Nola and Corbin a ways behind.
There’s certainly an argument to be made for considering the strength of a defense behind a pitcher, and reason dictates that a defense can help or hurt a pitcher’s run-prevention numbers. Defense alone, however, isn’t going to fully explain the difference between a pitcher’s FIP and ERA. Luck is involved, as well. We can use Statcast information to determine just how much defense and luck might be involved, though it won’t do a good job separating those two factors. For starters, here are the xwOBA and wOBA figures for each of the pitchers above.
| Name | wOBA | xWOBA | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Max Scherzer | .245 | .256 | -.011 |
| Jacob deGrom | .240 | .257 | -.017 |
| Aaron Nola | .247 | .266 | -.019 |
| Patrick Corbin | .256 | .289 | -.033 |
| League | .312 | .322 | -.010 |
In terms of what a pitcher has deserved to concede based on quality of contact, strikeouts, and walks, Scherzer has gotten just about what we might expect, while deGrom and Nola aren’t far off expectations. Corbin is the outlier here, and there is a case to be made that Arizona’s defense is partially responsible for his good fortune. What’s interesting, though, is that Corbin’s ERA is actually much higher than his FIP. This could mean that Corbin has been rather fortunate this year on home runs or that the contact he’s conceded on balls in play has been of higher quality than the sort conceded by other pitchers.
We can remove the most skill-based aspects from above by taking out strikeouts and walks and looking at xwOBA on just batted balls.
| Name | wOBA on Contact | xwOBA on Contact | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Max Scherzer | .340 | .357 | -.017 |
| Jacob deGrom | .317 | .345 | -.028 |
| Aaron Nola | .296 | .325 | -.029 |
| Patrick Corbin | .343 | .397 | -.054 |
| League | .364 | .379 | -.015 |
Here we see almost no effect on Scherzer’s outcomes, with a slight benefit for deGrom and Nola, and then a big help for Corbin. You’ll note that the league-wide numbers are off by 15 points from each other, likely due to a potentially dead baseball, as the estimates on launch angle and exit velocity are based on previous seasons, when the ball was perhaps a bit more lively. As we are looking at numbers between pitchers in this season alone, the comparisons still provide value. What happens when we remove home runs and look solely at batted balls? See below.
| Name | wOBA on BIP | xwOBA on BIP | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Max Scherzer | .256 | .310 | -.054 |
| Jacob deGrom | .287 | .325 | -.038 |
| Aaron Nola | .251 | .296 | -.045 |
| Patrick Corbin | .292 | .361 | -.069 |
| League | .293 | .334 | -.041 |
In theory, these numbers factor in both defense and luck on batted balls this season. As we can see, it appears that, whatever poor defense has victimized Nola has likely been evened out by good fortune. The same is true for deGrom. Scherzer, meanwhile, appears to have received a slight benefit, with Corbin being the recipient of some good defense in Arizona. This probably doesn’t leave the reader with any definite conclusions. We have a better idea about the quality of contact and how defense might have affected run totals — which is to say not much — but the extent to which a pitcher exerts control over that contact is also a matter of debate.
If you believe that a pitcher controls very little of opponent contact — or, alternatively, are unsure of the level of control — the version of WAR hosted here at FanGraphs is your main resource. If you believe that a pitcher is wholly responsible for the quality of contact he concedes and also that defensive quality doesn’t move the needle much in one direction or another, RA9/WAR makes some sense for you. If you believe further adjustment needs to be made for defense, bWAR can provide some help. If you want a more granular look at individual pitches, DRA provides guidance. If you just want something based entirely on xwOBA, a crude attempt is made below.
While the question of value is somewhat objective, there is some subjectivity involved, but if making a decision on the Cy Young, it’s important to have as much information as possible to determine why one pitcher might be better than the other. It isn’t enough to simply prefer one stat over another and blindly rely on it because you generally agree with the methodology. Look at how the results are reached to make the best possible decision.
*****
As promised in the final paragraph above, here’s a rough approximation of WAR based on xwOBA:
| Name | IP | xwoba | xWAR |
|---|---|---|---|
| Max Scherzer | 202.2 | .256 | 7.1 |
| Jacob deGrom | 188.0 | .257 | 6.5 |
| Aaron Nola | 188.2 | .266 | 6.0 |
| Patrick Corbin | 179.2 | .289 | 4.4 |
| Zack Wheeler | 167.1 | .293 | 3.9 |
| Clayton Kershaw | 137.1 | .277 | 3.9 |
| German Marquez | 164.1 | .294 | 3.8 |
| Noah Syndergaard | 128.1 | .277 | 3.8 |
| Mike Foltynewicz | 157.0 | .291 | 3.8 |
| Ross Stripling | 110.1 | .262 | 3.7 |
| Jack Flaherty | 132.1 | .280 | 3.7 |
| Jameson Taillon | 164.0 | .299 | 3.5 |
| Miles Mikolas | 173.2 | .304 | 3.4 |
| Tyler Anderson | 153.2 | .302 | 3.2 |
| Alex Wood | 144.1 | .299 | 3.1 |
| Walker Buehler | 110.2 | .279 | 3.1 |
| Kyle Freeland | 176.1 | .312 | 3.0 |
| Nick Pivetta | 145.0 | .304 | 2.9 |
| Jon Gray | 157.1 | .309 | 2.9 |
| Anibal Sanchez | 113.2 | .288 | 2.8 |
| Kyle Hendricks | 169.2 | .313 | 2.8 |
| Vince Velasquez | 134.0 | .302 | 2.8 |
| Sean Newcomb | 149.1 | .314 | 2.4 |
| Wei-Yin Chen | 118.1 | .305 | 2.3 |
| Zack Greinke | 181.1 | .324 | 2.3 |
| Kenta Maeda | 117.0 | .306 | 2.3 |
| Zach Eflin | 114.0 | .306 | 2.2 |
| Steven Matz | 133.2 | .314 | 2.2 |
| Joe Musgrove | 103.1 | .301 | 2.2 |
| Jake Arrieta | 154.2 | .322 | 2.1 |
| Jhoulys Chacin | 168.0 | .327 | 2.0 |
| Carlos Martinez | 108.2 | .310 | 2.0 |
| Jose Urena | 151.0 | .325 | 1.9 |
| Tanner Roark | 170.1 | .329 | 1.9 |
| Trevor Williams | 148.2 | .330 | 1.6 |
| John Gant | 96.0 | .314 | 1.6 |
| Derek Holland | 152.2 | .331 | 1.6 |
| Stephen Strasburg | 107.0 | .320 | 1.5 |
| Robbie Ray | 97.1 | .317 | 1.5 |
| Madison Bumgarner | 105.2 | .326 | 1.3 |
| Julio Teheran | 159.1 | .338 | 1.3 |
| Junior Guerra | 135.0 | .334 | 1.2 |
| Gio Gonzalez | 151.1 | .337 | 1.2 |
| Joey Lucchesi | 110.1 | .330 | 1.2 |
| Luis Castillo | 148.1 | .338 | 1.2 |
| Brent Suter | 101.1 | .329 | 1.1 |
| Jose Quintana | 147.2 | .339 | 1.1 |
| Rich Hill | 108.2 | .332 | 1.1 |
| Tyson Ross | 143.2 | .339 | 1.1 |
| Luke Weaver | 133.1 | .338 | 1.0 |
| Andrew Suarez | 139.1 | .341 | 1.0 |
| Zack Godley | 159.2 | .343 | 0.9 |
| Mike Montgomery | 107.2 | .336 | 0.9 |
| Matt Harvey | 138.2 | .343 | 0.8 |
| Chase Anderson | 150.1 | .346 | 0.8 |
| Ty Blach | 110.0 | .345 | 0.6 |
| Trevor Richards | 102.2 | .345 | 0.5 |
| Ivan Nova | 146.2 | .351 | 0.5 |
| Eric Lauer | 95.2 | .346 | 0.4 |
| Chad Bettis | 112.0 | .349 | 0.4 |
| Tyler Mahle | 109.0 | .348 | 0.4 |
| Sal Romano | 134.2 | .354 | 0.2 |
| Jon Lester | 158.0 | .360 | 0.0 |
| Clayton Richard | 158.2 | .362 | -0.2 |
| Dan Straily | 122.1 | .369 | -0.4 |
| Chris Stratton | 126.1 | .374 | -0.7 |
| Tyler Chatwood | 103.2 | .378 | -0.9 |
| Homer Bailey | 106.1 | .382 | -1.0 |
Craig Edwards can be found on twitter @craigjedwards.
Based on the LOLCOORS effect used to downgrade Rockies hitters, shouldn’t Kyle Freeland receive a similar bump among the pitchers?
Especially with the interesting conversations by Jeff/Ben surrounding Freeland’s merits and soft-contact skills, I definitely wanted his numbers included in this analysis
fWAR: 3.4
bWAR: 6.9
A sub-3 ERA in Coors gives him the 4th lowest ERA- in the NL. And his potential FIP-beating skills (heat maps showing pinpoint command, soft-contact, ground balls, etc.) hints that his value is probably closer to his bWAR than his fWAR
Freeland’s bWAR is higher than any starter in the AL.
That is truly amazing.
His home/road splits are even more amazing
Freealnd’s road ERA is 3.51
And his home (Coors) ERA is 2.21… I’m not sure I see your point, unless your just doing the ol’ quote a Rockies players split without any other stat or context to try to argue that they are not good enough.
Pretty sure the point is that having a 2.21 ERA at Coors Field is amazing, considering he’s made roughly half his starts there this season.
Great work.
What are the chances an actual Cy Young award voter does this much work to decide who to vote for? I’m guessing zero….
I’m not even sure they *should* — I’d like to see more argument about what makes this or that or the other indicator the right one to look at here. It seems to me like we’re in another prediction-vs.-retrospect trap as we often get into around the awards, where some of the contact-quality numbers are probably better indicators of underlying/predictive “skill” but that isn’t really what the award is for (the Cy Young is not the same as the “Who Would You Pick Next Year?”).
I understand where you’re coming from but please note that I said “does this much work” not “does this exact type of analysis”.
Yes, it’s a good point, I’m just saying I want EVEN MORE work to be done (possibly to obviate some of this work).
xwOBA is a performance stat though. it’s just not telling you the same thing as ERA.
I’ll just point out that Scherzer’s BABIP this year is in line with what he’s done with that stat for four of the past five years.
From a purely anecdotal pov, it seems easy to see Scherzer being slightly penalized and receive a lot of second place votes for being the “boring” choice, while DeGrom has a pretty compelling narrative being the possible LORD WINBUSTER, and also the pity (yes, pity) points when you look at his body of work this season and see 8-8.
Scherzer’s going to get a lot of second place votes because he has a worse ERA and FIP than deGrom, not because his dominance has become boring. We’re really not even close to that yet with him.
Well now it’s going to be even closer because rain stopped him from pitching Sunday, then yesterday was rained out, which will cost him his last start unless he pitches on 3 days rest. It will at least affect his counting stats. The other thing is hopefully he’s still ready to go after trying to warm up for a start three consecutive days. It’s going to be very close. Sherzer has been more dominant, but DeGrom has simply been more effective.
Not sure I follow the reasoning behind the statement that “Scherzer has been more dominant, but DeGrom has simply been more effective.” DeGrom has compiled more fWAR in fewer innings, which to me would indicate the greater degree of dominance. Scherzer has the edge in Ks, but I don’t view strike outs alone as indicative of dominance. DeGrom has been suffocating the opposition’s ability to hit homers in this era of long balls, which to me is also a form of dominating.
This year should be an interesting test for just how dead the Win is as a stat. deGrom was rained out today so now he has no shot at a 5th start on the last day of the season unless they start him on 3 days’ rest* so his best case is 12 wins. No starter has ever won a CY with fewer than 13 wins (King Felix in 2010). Next after that is Lincecum’s 15 in 2009.
Meanwhile Scherzer has an excellent shot at 20 wins and 300 K with an ERA around 2.25. Personally I think Scherzer wins it.
* & why on earth would the Mets do that? Oh right, it’s the Mets. It would be the most Mets thing possible to run deGrom out there on the last day on short rest in an effort to get him a CY award and have him blow out his arm. Maybe they could do it right after announcing a new 6 year, $200M extension to make it even more Mets-ish.
I agree that deGroom has an uphill battle. The (likely) fewer than 10 wins and potential losing record may be a bridge too far for some voters.
And while people point to Felix and his 13 win season, it’s important to remember that he also threw over 40 more innings than the runner-up (David Price). deGroom won’t have that.
“No starter has ever won a CY with fewer than 13 wins (King Felix in 2010). Next after that is Lincecum’s 15 in 2009.”
Though, likewise, 7.7+ fWAR seasons are pretty rare with less than 13 wins as well.
YEAR PLAYER REC / fWAR
2004 Ben Sheets 12-14 / 8.0
*2018 Jacob deGrom 8-9 / 7.7*
2010 Cliff Lee 12-9 / 7.0
1960 Jim Bunning 11-14 / 6.9
1996 Roger Clemens 10-13 / 6.8
1886 Jim Whitney 12-32 / 6.7
2013 Matt Harvey 9-5 / 6.5
2000 Mike Mussina 11-15 / 6.4
1987 Nolan Ryan 8-16 / 6.4
2018 Chris Sale 12-4 / 6.1
1996 Mike Cuellar 12-10 / 6.1
Seems like a pretty decent bet that deGrom ends up #1 on this list.
Even up it to 15 or fewer wins:
YEAR PLAYER REC / fWAR
1998 Curt Schilling 15-14 / 8.3
2004 Ben Sheets 12-14 / 8.0
1996 Greg Maddux 15-11 / 7.8
*2018 Jacob deGrom 8-9 / 7.7*
2009 Tim Lincecum 15-7 / 7.7
1971 Tom Bradley 15-15 / 7.7
—
Assuming deGrom adds 0 fWAR RoS:
16 win maximum knocks him down to a tie for 7th all-time
17 wins, tied for 14th
Using the full dataset [9552 pitcher-seasons], here are average fWAR per 29 starts for pitchers based on wins per 29 starts:
1-3 0.9 fWAR
4-6 1.3
7-9 1.9
10-12 2.3
13-15 2.8
16-18 3.3
19-21 3.7
22-24 3.7
25-27 4.0
…
So, his fWAR would be a bit atypical for a 20+ game winner, let alone for how many he has.
I like xwOBA, and would agree that Scherzer is a legitimate candidate for the CY Young. But for pitchers, the year to year consistency of xwOBA has yet to be proven. Are we really ready to simply abandon DIPS theory for pitchers now that we have xwOBA? I think there is plenty of evidence that a very small subset of pitchers – namely, extreme fly ball pitchers as well as cutter/knuckleball pitchers – are able to significantly beat their peripherals. For other pitchers, the evidence is a lot less clear.
If a pitcher has a super low xwOBA on contact, is that actually skill? Or is that xwOBA on contact just as fluky as BABIP? Until it is proven that it is consistent, I will continue to rely on FIP, xFIP, and SIERA.
Get real. The DIPS theory has been proven to be a myth for years now, even before xwOBA became popular. SIERA is fine, but nobody should be relying on FIP and xFIP as their primary means to analyze pitching skill.
lmao and yet FIP is way better at predicting future ERA than current ERA. DIPS theory has not been proven to be a myth, that’s a straight up lie.
I think Craig wrote about the predictive power of xwOBA for pitchers last year and concluded it’s not really any more predictive than FIP. Which kind of puts us back at the same issue of figuring out which quality of contact results are luck and which are skill
We’ve known for years now that there is some skill involved in limiting BABIP (and wOBA on balls in play), not as much as for hitters, but it does exist. As such, ERA is a better analyzing metric than FIP (though FIP is the better prediction metric), so FanGraphs really needs to get with the program and switch to an ERA based WAR mechanic for pitchers.
Basing WAR on ERA would be better. If you regress all of the pitching metrics against the amount of team wins, team ERA has by far the most significance. A pitcher’s Innings Pitched and ERA encapsulate his net contribution to his Team ERA.
Max and Nola 1-2. Easy. The order of the 2 can be debated
How is it easy to put the Major League ERA leader (by a huge margin) outside the top 2
Because you play to win the game. I loved Harold Reynolds discussion yesterday on mlbnetwork about Steve Carlton in the year he went 27-10 on a team that only won 59 games. 27 wins despite getting only 0.2 more run support than what DeGrom has gotten this year. That is a starting pitcher. Or give me Maddux that rolled out 15+ wins every year. He said as a starting pitcher it is his job every 5th day to go out there and win. Sometimes his team might give him 5 runs, sometimes 1. Whatever that is, that impacts how you have to pitch that day to win.
Scherzer has also had an excellent offensive season, which I believe should be included for consideration.
Considering that the other league, in which the pitchers don’t hit at all, also has a Cy Young award, I couldn’t disagree more. You could factor his hitting into his MVP candidacy, but the Cy Young is purely a pitching award.
Well, that is just like, your opinion, man. There is nothing in the voting instructions precluding the consideration of offense, and since the award is given in the two leagues separately, there is nothing unfair about looking at offense. It is an award for the best pitcher, and pitchers (in NL parks) hit.
The metrics, with exception of IP and Wins, are clear: Jacob deGrom should be the Cy Young winner, absent any turkeys before year end. On any other team, deGrom would have at least 14 wins.
The author’s attempt to create a story around another possible winner is pathetic and has prompted me to register to make this comment.
Guess I’m curious what stats make it “clear” that deGrom is the better choice.
Fangraphs says it should be deGrom, Baseball Prospectus says Scherzer and B-Ref says Nola. Just looking at Scherzer v deGrom: Scherzer strikes out more, deGrom gives up fewer HR and their walk rate is virtually identical. deGrom leads in FIP and xFIP but Scherzer has a better SIERA. Corbin has a better xFIP than both deGrom and Scherzer and his SIERA is better than deGrom but worse than Scherzer. Scherzer has a better WHIP though those 4 are the top 4 by a decent amount. Nola doesn’t do as well in the K and BB stats but is 2nd to deGrom in HR rate and has the highest GB% and lowest Hard% of the 4. If Game Score is your thing Nola is a titch behind deGrom but both are well ahead of Scherzer and Corbin.
Wins are obviously stupid but IP is a completely valid thing to incorporate in an award vote. Innings pitched have real value, or else the Cy Young would go to elite relievers way more often. (NB I am not saying that my opinion is that 10-15 IP are worth half a run of ERA; I do not believe that.)
Why do they play the game? To win.
I think we can pretty much knock out Nola after tonight….
deGrom has a much tougher schedule down the stretch. games at Boston and Nationals followed by the Braves.