FG on Fox: Stephen Strasburg’s Next Level
Stephen Strasburg was hyped from before he was ever drafted, and when he made his big-league debut, he captured the national interest like few other prospects ever have or ever will. But a hyped Strasburg meant there would be a post-hyped Strasburg, and while people still recognize that he has electric, occasionally unhittable stuff, it’s felt before like something’s been missing. Maybe it’s on us for setting our expectations too high, or maybe it’s on us for not being patient enough, but Strasburg felt incomplete, and it wasn’t only the fans who felt so.
Last spring, a big-league pitcher remarked that his teammates would rather face Strasburg than Jordan Zimmermann. Against Strasburg, they were more comfortable, and while his numbers were clearly good, the point is that Strasburg didn’t feel like a whole pitcher.
And now? Now he feels a lot more like a whole pitcher. Some of it is just clearing 200 innings, but this year’s version of Strasburg has taken a step forward. This year’s version of Strasburg is maybe the ace of a staff full of aces, as he’s crossed more tasks off a shrinking to-do list.
Here’s the simplest way to put it: Strasburg, in 2014, threw more strikes. In 2012 and 2013, he threw strikes about 63% of the time. The average for a National League starter was about 64%. This season, Strasburg threw strikes about 67% of the time, one of the higher figures in the league. So, where Strasburg used to walk 7-8% of opposing hitters, this year he walked 5%, which is particularly low given his frequency of getting into deep counts.
Read the rest on Just A Bit Outside.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.
Thanks for this. Great article. Watching Strasburg this year has been fascinating … he’ll mow a team down for a while then give up a 3 run HR and ruin everything. It’s inexplicable. I watched him a lot in the first half and it felt like that every start.
How does one explain something like that? How do you explain his .293/.341/.525 line against in high leverage situations this year? Small sample?
I too believe we have yet to see the best of Strasburg. But I have no idea. What a wonderful game.
Over the last 5 years (Strasburg’s career), he’s #1 among all starters in xFIP and SIERA, but only ranked #16 in ERA.
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=150&type=8&season=2014&month=0&season1=2010&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=18,a
His babip and strand rate don’t really suggest someone who should do much worse that his FIP. His splits with bases empty v. runners on v. runners in scoring position are very similar.
His career BABIP, LOB% (at least for someone with so few runners in the first place), and especially his HR/FB% are all below average. None of them are extreme, but together they add up to 0.29 runs/9.
His career babip is .297. The league average babip over his career happens to be .297. The LOB% is luck; as I already stated, his splits are very similar and can be discounted as unlucky sequencing.
If you looked at my argument, I referred to FIP so xFIP (and homerun normalization) don’t affect my argument.
Paul, not sure what argument you were making, or why you think I was disagreeing with it.
I was just noting that there’s a gap between Strasburg’s xFIP/SIERA and his actual runs allowed. And then I noted that the gap is due to a combination of sequencing, HR/FB%, and balls in play. Whether the gap between talent and results is due to luck or other factors, it definitely exists.
And BABIP the last 5 years has been around .293. Not a big difference from Strasburg’s .297, but it exists.
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2014&month=0&season1=2010&ind=0&team=0,ss&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0