Justin Masterson – Elite Starting Pitcher?
When one is asked to name the game’s very best starting pitchers, a tight circle of names usually dominate the discussion. Clayton Kershaw likely gains the most mentions, with Felix Hernandez and Cliff Lee among the names closely behind. Justin Verlander and Cole Hamels had off years in 2013, arguably dropping back in the pack a bit. Matt Harvey and Jose Fernandez entered the fray loudly last season, and Stephen Strasburg’s pedigree is as good as anyone’s. Justin Masterson? Doubt his name comes up very often. Should it? Let’s take a look at some batted ball profiles and make the call.
14 pitchers were somewhat arbitrarily selected for this analysis, but are not purported to be the sum total of baseball’s elite group. The aforementioned Verlander and Hamels, to name two, were left off due to their 2013 “struggles”. First, let’s take a look at this group’s 2013 K, BB and batted ball type frequencies:
| Bumgarner | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 26.1% | 131 | 92 |
| BB | 8.1% | 106 | 65 |
| POP | 7.0% | 92 | 47 |
| FLY | 28.3% | 101 | 51 |
| LD | 20.2% | 94 | 25 |
| GB | 44.5% | 104 | 62 |
| — | — | — | — |
| Darvish | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 34.2% | 172 | 99 |
| BB | 9.9% | 128 | 87 |
| POP | 10.4% | 137 | 85 |
| FLY | 31.2% | 111 | 79 |
| LD | 20.1% | 94 | 24 |
| GB | 38.3% | 89 | 22 |
| — | — | — | — |
| J.Fernandez | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 28.3% | 142 | 96 |
| BB | 8.8% | 114 | 72 |
| POP | 7.9% | 105 | 60 |
| FLY | 28.4% | 101 | 52 |
| LD | 21.6% | 101 | 54 |
| GB | 42.1% | 98 | 41 |
| — | — | — | — |
| Harvey | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 28.4% | 143 | 98 |
| BB | 4.6% | 60 | 5 |
| POP | 8.7% | 114 | 73 |
| FLY | 24.9% | 89 | 23 |
| LD | 21.1% | 98 | 43 |
| GB | 45.3% | 106 | 70 |
| — | — | — | — |
| F.Hernandez | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 27.8% | 140 | 95 |
| BB | 5.9% | 77 | 18 |
| POP | 5.6% | 75 | 24 |
| FLY | 25.1% | 89 | 26 |
| LD | 21.6% | 101 | 52 |
| GB | 47.7% | 111 | 82 |
| — | — | — | — |
| Iwakuma | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 22.3% | 112 | 74 |
| BB | 5.1% | 66 | 10 |
| POP | 6.0% | 79 | 28 |
| FLY | 31.1% | 111 | 77 |
| LD | 19.9% | 93 | 23 |
| GB | 43.0% | 100 | 50 |
| — | — | — | — |
| Kershaw | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 26.2% | 132 | 93 |
| BB | 5.9% | 76 | 16 |
| POP | 8.5% | 112 | 69 |
| FLY | 24.0% | 86 | 16 |
| LD | 23.2% | 108 | 84 |
| GB | 44.3% | 103 | 60 |
| — | — | — | — |
| C.Lee | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 26.0% | 131 | 91 |
| BB | 3.8% | 49 | 2 |
| POP | 6.0% | 79 | 29 |
| FLY | 28.9% | 103 | 57 |
| LD | 23.0% | 107 | 82 |
| GB | 42.1% | 98 | 42 |
| — | — | — | — |
| Masterson | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 25.6% | 129 | 91 |
| BB | 10.0% | 130 | 89 |
| POP | 5.5% | 73 | 21 |
| FLY | 21.6% | 77 | 7 |
| LD | 18.2% | 85 | 5 |
| GB | 54.7% | 127 | 95 |
| — | — | — | — |
| D.Price | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 21.0% | 106 | 63 |
| BB | 3.8% | 49 | 1 |
| POP | 8.5% | 112 | 70 |
| FLY | 26.2% | 93 | 37 |
| LD | 21.4% | 100 | 46 |
| GB | 43.9% | 102 | 57 |
| — | — | — | — |
| Sale | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 28.2% | 142 | 96 |
| BB | 5.7% | 75 | 14 |
| POP | 7.0% | 92 | 47 |
| FLY | 27.6% | 98 | 44 |
| LD | 21.6% | 100 | 51 |
| GB | 43.9% | 102 | 56 |
| — | — | — | — |
| Scherzer | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 29.4% | 148 | 98 |
| BB | 6.9% | 89 | 35 |
| POP | 11.2% | 147 | 88 |
| FLY | 37.1% | 132 | 97 |
| LD | 18.8% | 88 | 11 |
| GB | 32.9% | 77 | 6 |
| — | — | — | — |
| Strasburg | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 27.7% | 140 | 95 |
| BB | 8.0% | 104 | 62 |
| POP | 7.2% | 95 | 50 |
| FLY | 27.1% | 97 | 42 |
| LD | 18.3% | 85 | 7 |
| GB | 47.4% | 110 | 81 |
| — | — | — | — |
| Wainwright | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 24.0% | 121 | 83 |
| BB | 3.8% | 50 | 3 |
| POP | 6.4% | 84 | 35 |
| FLY | 23.9% | 85 | 14 |
| LD | 22.5% | 105 | 72 |
| GB | 47.2% | 110 | 79 |
In addition to the rate data presented, each percentage is also expressed relative to the MLB average, scaled to 100, and as a percentile rank.
First, it’s pretty obvious that we’re talking about the starting pitching elite here – the LOWEST K rate belongs to David Price, with a percentile rank of 63 – and his BB percentile rank is 1. 12 of the 14 pitchers listed have relative K rates of 120 or higher, and fully half weigh in with relative K rates of 140 and percentile ranks of 95 or higher. Clearly, missing bats is a huge part of being an elite starting pitcher.
A low BB rate doesn’t appear to be quite as necessary as a high K rate – 5 of the 14 have BB percentile ranks of 60 or higher. 6 of the 14 have popup percentile ranks higher than 60 – those are free outs, my friends, and they correlate well from year to year. Only 3 of the 14 are fly ball-oriented, with percentile ranks of 77 or higher. Line drive rates, as you might expect, are all over the board. 9 of the 14 have above average ground ball rates, including 4 with percentile ranks of 79 or higher. The bottom line – elite starters come in many varieties, but it sure does help to get a lot of K’s and amass a bunch of free outs, be they popups or weak ground balls.
How do Justin Masterson’s frequencies stack up? His relative K rate was a career high 129 in 2013, for a percentile rank of 91. That clearly makes him a fit within this group. Every pitcher listed who reaches a percentile rank of 90 or high once repeated or improved that level in at least one additional subsequent year. His BB rate is the highest of the group, with a percentile rank of 89. This is the most concerning aspect of Masterson’s portfolio. Control has never been his strong suit, with his arm action and delivery representing scouts’ long-term concerns, which many thought would limit him to a career as a bullpen specialist.
Within this group of pitchers, there are some success stories involving control improvement – Kershaw had a BB percentile ranking of 99 in 2009, but he was just 21. David Price had a 74 percentile rank in 2010 at age 24, and Matt Scherzer a 71 in 2010 at age 25. Can we expect Masterson’s BB rate to improve in the future? As recently as 2011, it was better than league average, but his K rate was much lower then. He has traded some walks for some more missed bats, and the short-term results have been positive on balance.
Now we get to the core of Masterson’s game. The pitchers on this list do at least one thing as well as or better than just about any other pitcher in baseball. Yu Darvish gets strikeouts. Felix Hernandez excels across the board while carrying an exceedingly heavy workload year in and year out. Cliff Lee – and now David Price – walk no one. Max Scherzer has a lethal strikeout/popup combination. Clayton Kershaw basically does all of the above.
Justin Masterson induces ground balls – and lots of them. In five years as a starting pitcher, he has posted ground ball percentile ranks of 95, 98, 89, 95 and 95, respectively. Obviously, very high grounder rates mean very low fly ball rates, but in Masterson’s case, they have also meant very low line drive rates. He has never posted a higher than MLB average line drive rate, and his LD percentile ranks have been below 10 in three of the last five seasons.
So Masterson’s batted ball frequency profile is this – high K, high BB, with lots of grounders, and few liners. What kind of production, however, did Masterson and the others actually allow on each type of batted ball in 2013, and how do they compare once that production is adjusted for context – ballpark, defense, luck, etc.. Lastly, once their K’s and BB’s are added back to the batted balls, how did these pitchers’ “true talent” performances measure up?
| Bumgarner | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.268 | 0.641 | 80 | 94 | ||||
| LD | 0.624 | 0.812 | 89 | 88 | ||||
| GB | 0.193 | 0.206 | 66 | 106 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.274 | 0.415 | 70 | 83 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.200 | 0.262 | 0.302 | 64 | 74 | 2.77 | 2.46 | 2.85 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| Darvish | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.279 | 0.857 | 118 | 116 | ||||
| LD | 0.648 | 0.898 | 102 | 109 | ||||
| GB | 0.243 | 0.249 | 101 | 120 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.309 | 0.536 | 101 | 107 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.193 | 0.272 | 0.335 | 72 | 76 | 2.83 | 2.81 | 2.93 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| J.Fernandez | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.195 | 0.483 | 44 | 83 | ||||
| LD | 0.567 | 0.722 | 73 | 104 | ||||
| GB | 0.177 | 0.177 | 52 | 94 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.256 | 0.374 | 59 | 96 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.178 | 0.249 | 0.261 | 53 | 79 | 2.19 | 2.07 | 3.06 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| Harvey | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.193 | 0.447 | 40 | 74 | ||||
| LD | 0.688 | 0.833 | 102 | 94 | ||||
| GB | 0.229 | 0.254 | 95 | 96 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.291 | 0.393 | 71 | 80 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.206 | 0.242 | 0.279 | 54 | 61 | 2.27 | 2.10 | 2.36 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| F.Hernandez | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.264 | 0.682 | 85 | 101 | ||||
| LD | 0.739 | 0.991 | 129 | 105 | ||||
| GB | 0.227 | 0.251 | 93 | 101 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.330 | 0.488 | 99 | 97 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.238 | 0.281 | 0.352 | 78 | 77 | 3.04 | 3.04 | 2.98 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| Iwakuma | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.241 | 0.706 | 83 | 129 | ||||
| LD | 0.592 | 0.808 | 84 | 96 | ||||
| GB | 0.200 | 0.219 | 72 | 102 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.280 | 0.474 | 81 | 108 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.216 | 0.255 | 0.367 | 73 | 95 | 2.66 | 2.83 | 3.67 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| Kershaw | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.190 | 0.469 | 42 | 57 | ||||
| LD | 0.571 | 0.671 | 69 | 87 | ||||
| GB | 0.203 | 0.244 | 80 | 97 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.265 | 0.376 | 61 | 79 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.192 | 0.239 | 0.273 | 53 | 65 | 1.83 | 2.04 | 2.52 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| C.Lee | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.237 | 0.653 | 74 | 100 | ||||
| LD | 0.679 | 0.936 | 111 | 105 | ||||
| GB | 0.217 | 0.232 | 83 | 84 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.312 | 0.494 | 94 | 101 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.230 | 0.258 | 0.364 | 73 | 78 | 2.87 | 2.84 | 3.02 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| Masterson | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.292 | 0.755 | 104 | 91 | ||||
| LD | 0.674 | 0.798 | 96 | 97 | ||||
| GB | 0.209 | 0.216 | 75 | 78 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.298 | 0.422 | 78 | 75 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.216 | 0.292 | 0.305 | 73 | 72 | 3.45 | 2.83 | 2.77 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| D.Price | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.282 | 0.718 | 95 | 94 | ||||
| LD | 0.612 | 0.776 | 84 | 98 | ||||
| GB | 0.269 | 0.303 | 133 | 118 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.318 | 0.479 | 94 | 96 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.251 | 0.278 | 0.377 | 82 | 84 | 3.33 | 3.18 | 3.27 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| Sale | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.262 | 0.765 | 98 | 110 | ||||
| LD | 0.658 | 0.816 | 95 | 108 | ||||
| GB | 0.241 | 0.257 | 102 | 87 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.313 | 0.487 | 93 | 98 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.226 | 0.268 | 0.353 | 75 | 78 | 3.07 | 2.88 | 3.01 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| Scherzer | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.223 | 0.585 | 62 | 90 | ||||
| LD | 0.602 | 0.827 | 87 | 95 | ||||
| GB | 0.262 | 0.302 | 128 | 118 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.283 | 0.468 | 81 | 95 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.195 | 0.249 | 0.324 | 64 | 73 | 2.90 | 2.46 | 2.84 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| Strasburg | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.225 | 0.600 | 64 | 120 | ||||
| LD | 0.617 | 0.778 | 85 | 96 | ||||
| GB | 0.248 | 0.262 | 107 | 119 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.286 | 0.425 | 75 | 98 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.203 | 0.266 | 0.302 | 65 | 81 | 3.00 | 2.51 | 3.15 |
| — | — | — | — | |||||
| Wainwright | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.333 | 0.744 | 114 | 85 | ||||
| LD | 0.632 | 0.792 | 89 | 98 | ||||
| GB | 0.228 | 0.245 | 92 | 91 | ||||
| ALL BIP | 0.324 | 0.464 | 93 | 89 | ||||
| ALL PA | 0.244 | 0.273 | 0.349 | 75 | 73 | 2.94 | 2.92 | 2.81 |
For each pitcher, the actual AVG-SLG for each batted ball type is listed. The resulting run value of that performance is measured relative to the MLB average for that batted ball type in the “REL PRD” column, and adjusted for context in the “ADJ PRD” column. Lastly, for each pitcher, their actual ERA, their calculated component ERA based on actual AVG-SLG allowed (which weeds out sequencing), and their “Tru” ERA, adjusted for ballpark, defense, luck, etc., is listed. For purposes of this exercise, SH and SF are included as outs, and HBP are not included in OBP.
From the bottom up, let’s separate these 2013 performances into tiers. Hisashi Iwakuma is the clear laggard in this group. He was saved by Safeco Field – his adjusted relative fly ball production mark of 129 is easily the highest of this group. On all BIP combined, he had an actual relative production mark of 73 – adjusted for context, it jumps to 95.
Iwakuma was a somewhat better than average quality starting pitcher in 2013, and had plenty of innings bulk. He is a great value relative to his contract, though he is expected to miss the very early stages of the 2014 campaign with a right middle finger injury. Of the pitchers listed here, however, he allowed the most authoritative contact, and really doesn’t belong in this discussion.
Next comes the group of Price, Strasburg, Fernandez, Lee and Chris Sale. Price’s K and BB rates both dropped sharply in 2013, as he became more of a pitch-to-contact guy. Though the contact he allowed was a bit weaker than league average, he needs to get the K’s back to have a chance to get to the top of the list. Strasburg’s raw materials may be unparalleled in this group, but he remains a work in progress.
His actual performance on balls in play was helped a great deal by his outfield defense and ballpark. He also needs to add more bulk to his case by pitching more innings. Fernandez’ actual BIP performance was way ahead of all of the pitchers on this list, but was not supported by his hard and soft fly ball and grounder rates. His spacious home park helped him greatly. Lee too allowed much more authoritative contact than his actual numbers suggest, particularly in the air. Sale allowed fairly authoritative fly ball and line drive contact, and virtually league average contact authority overall.
The next tier moving upward includes Hernandez, Darvish, Madison Bumgarner, Scherzer and Wainwright. Hernandez’ greatest assets are his innings bulk and consistent excellence across the board. His control continues to improve, and he remains a strong ground ball generator. His line drive rate, however, has been higher than average the last two seasons, and his overall quality of contact allowed is now roughly average. Darvish overwhelms with his massive K rate, but allowed harder than average contact in all batted ball types – his solid infield defense helped him significantly. Improvement in his quality of contact allowed and his BB rate – his percentile ranks were 94 and 87 in his first two seasons – would propel him to the very top of this list.
Bumgarner is a stealth candidate. He is a weak contact machine – of all of the pitchers on this list, Bumgarner and three others that we’ve yet to discuss managed contact considerably better than the rest in 2013. Strong team defense also helps his cause. Scherzer is an odd mix. He doesn’t allow many grounders, but they are hit quite hard. He allows a ton of fly balls, and they are not – yet, at least. His current peak is quite high, but his decline could be swift, triggered by an eventual increase in his hard fly rate due to even a slight deterioration of his stuff. Wainwright is a slightly less reliable (health-wise) version of Felix – strong across the board, with an ever-improving BB rate, a strong ground ball tendency, and a sneaky-high line drive rate. Wainwright was hurt a bit by subpar outfield defense in 2013, and was likely a bit better than his actual numbers.
That leaves three guys – Clayton Kershaw, Matt Harvey, and the subject of today’s discussion, Justin Masterson. These three stifled contact better than the rest in 2013. Kershaw totally muzzles hard fly ball contact – it is virtually impossible at present to do serious damage against him in the air. He also paces this group in line drive production allowed, before and after adjusting for context. Add in stellar K and BB skills and a clean health record, and you have the best starting pitcher in the game today.
Matt Harvey’s first full season in the majors was arguably the best posted by a starting pitcher in 2013, but unfortunately, we may not see him until 2015 thanks to Tommy John surgery. His ability to limit fly ball authority was second only to Kershaw, and those two plus Masterson and Wainwright were the only allow lower than average adjusted production on all batted ball types in 2013.
As for Masterson – he does a lot more than allow a bunch of ground balls. He allows a bunch of very weak ground balls. He easily outdistances this group for lowest production allowed on grounders. Surprisingly, after adjustment for ballpark and defense – most of the hard flies he did allow went to RCF/RF, the friendliest part of Jacobs Field – he also rates in the better half with regard to adjusted fly ball production allowed. When all BIP are taken into account, Masterson managed contact better than all of these great hurlers last season. That high BB rate takes its toll once it’s added back into the equation, but Masterson’s 2013 “tru” ERA of 2.77 ranks behind only Harvey and Kershaw once all outcomes are taken into account.
Justin Masterson is not the best, or the third best starting pitcher in baseball. He’s performed at this level for exactly one full season. He has a career OPS+ of 100. He possesses a fairly dramatic normal platoon split for his career, though he has begun to handle lefties at a very acceptable rate of late, as his slider has evolved into a legitimate out pitch against both lefties and righties. He may not have the delivery or arm action of an elite starter, or the diverse repertoire of an elite starter, but Justin Masterson possesses a singular elite skill, that along with solid complementary abilities could very well propel him into near-term discussions of the game’s upper tiers of starting pitchers.
Love the concept. It would be much easier to view by putting pictures along the x-axis and stats along the Y. Perhaps with the current Y axis as sub headers and the data on the x-axis repeated below each Y?
Great work.
But this is impossible. What about FIP? Who will think of the FIP?
FIP is dead, the era of understanding some contact outs are not defense reliant is finally upon us!
“understanding some contact outs are not defense [dependent]”
This has always been a tenet of DIPS. Rather than attempting to incorporate a bad estimate of this “ratio of responsibility”, FIP is designed to completely exclude the grey area altogether.
FIP isn’t Fielding Independent enough.
After developing the idea that pitcher’s batted ball FL/LD/GB profile is a skill and not just pure luck, FIP is show to throw away predictive information that factors into a pitcher’s fielding independent information.
That essentially kills FIP if you believe that, the theory of FIP being a useful stat is predicated on the point that the pitcher has no control of how a baseball is hit, only of whether it gets hit at all or not.
It’s still a useful stat. It’s just not the end-all be-all determinant of pitcher performance.
Virtually no one has that belief.
“So little control/influence that it is prohibitively difficult to measure” and “no control/influence” are meaningfully distinct.
I thought the point of FIP was to say that the pitcher has no control over the baseball after it is hit–hence the fielding independent term–not how it is hit. Otherwise, pitchers wouldn’t be penalized for homeruns in FIP.
They may be meaningfully distinct, but both are incorrect.
We know that isn’t true. If it were, you wouldn’t have guys like Matt Cain, Bronson Arroyo and Jeremy Guthrie who out-perform their FIP by large margins almost every year. Some pitchers are capable of inducing weak contact and hence “breaking” the FIP model.
“We know that isn’t true. If it were, you wouldn’t have guys like Matt Cain, Bronson Arroyo and Jeremy Guthrie who out-perform their FIP by large margins almost every year.”
Utter nonsense, broken, anti-statistical thinking.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/a-random-walk-with-fip/
@NS: That random walk article is hopelessly flawed.
First, it considers only a binomial distribution, which treats beating your FIP by 0.001 the same as beating it by 1.0. Considering we know the distribution of FIP fairly well (and can at least use a normal approximation), why would anyone possibly do that? Can you imagine if we did that with poker players? “Well, you won the last 3 tournaments, but odds were that someone would, do that even if all poker players were completely equal, given the number of tournaments…”
Second, it (almost) completely ignores the difference between systematic and random error. We know, basically to a certainty, that FIP undervalues certain BIP outcomes. Even an idiot could explain why a high pop fly rate is beneficial, and there is evidence that this is a repeatable skill. Likewise, a high GB% can be quite useful (assuming you have the defense to back it up). If you only want to assign pitcher credit, you can probably ignore GB%, but you certainly can’t ignore IFFB% or even FB%.
No, that is a non sequitur. When you use PA instead of IP, FIP is fielding independent.
The fact that there is more information to capture about a pitcher’s performance & skill than that which is completely independent of fielding is not a revelation. It was known when FIP was created.
Great article. All the more reason why the Indians should lock him up long-term.
Who has the better next two years and five years–Masterson or Tanaka?
(FWIW my money’s on Masterson)
The reason we can’t call Masterson ‘Elite’ is his splits:
2013 vL: wOBA=.316
2013 vR: wOBA=.238
career vL: wOBA=.344
career vR: wOBA=.270
So, he’s marginally better than average against 25% of hitters, and absolutely destroys 75% of them, and thats bad?
This sounds a lot like complaining that Matt Carpenter isn’t elite because he doesn’t hit enough homeruns.
For reference, Felix Hernandez looks like this:
2013: vs L: .295
vs R: .270
So Masterson is 35 points better against 75% of hitters, and 20 points worse against 25% of hitters. I don’t think thats a bad thing.
75%? You sure about that?
Masterson faced 494 lefty batters last year and 309 righty… how is that 25%? It’s over 60%.
Felix Hernandez also faced more lefty batters than right batters last year.
I’m not sure where you plucked the 75%/25% but it seems dead wrong (and even worse the majority is actually in the wrong direction). Still think it’s not a big deal?
Yeah, it was mentioned in the recent article about the Diamondbacks signing Arroyo; righties with fairly big platoon splits will see something like, what was it, 50% left handed batters in the NL and close to 60% in the AL (due to the DH)?
% lefties in population < 25% <<<< % of lefty at bats << % of lefty at bats against righties with big splits
Masterson’s problem is consistency.
Last year he had a 1.07 ERA in his 14 wins and a 7.53 ERA in his 10 losses. The year before it was 1.30 in his 11 wins and 8.56 in 15 losses.
I realize that wins and losses are problematic but I think it highlights that when he’s on, he’s on. And when he’s off, his team is going to have very little chance of winning.
BTW, I looked at this a while a go and I believe those ERA differences between wins and losses are among the largest in history.
Ubaldo Jimenez, 2013:
In 13 Wins: .96 ERA
In 9 losses: 7.29 ERA
Which is basically exactly the same.
Corey Kluber 2013:
In 11 wins: 2.82 ERA
in 5 losses: 7.62 ERA
So Kluber is just as bad when he’s off, in about the same amount of starts, but not nearly as good when hes on. Hrm.
This is meaningless.
And thats just the first 2 pitchers I looked at, on his team.
So he’s about the same as two other mid-rotation pitchers? Interesting.
How about you look at how he compares to actual 1/2 starters.
Using Baseball Reference’s split finder, since 2000 there have been 1,127 pitcher seasons of 20+ starts and 10+ victories.
Among those 1,127 seasons, Masterson’s 2012 season has the 4th largest difference between ERA in wins vs. overall ERA. (1.30 vs. 4.93, a 3.63 difference). His 2013 season ranks 195th.
So his 2012 season is quite unusual. His 2013 not quite as much but still nowhere near the midpoint.
Last year, the league-wide ERA in wins was 1.85
The league-wide ERA in losses was 7.73.
So, Masterson is about normal.
Normal isn’t elite, though, and a huge part of what sets an ace or a number two apart from mid-rotation pitchers is consistency.
In 2012,
Sabathia – 2.60 ERA in wins 4.50 ERA in losses.
Kuroda – 1.60 ERA in wins 5.40 ERA in losses.
Lee – 0.82 ERA in wins 4.77 ERA in losses.
In 2013,
Kershaw – 0.95 ERA in wins 3.77 ERA in losses.
Verlander – 2.21 ERA in wins 5.70 ERA in losses.
Hamels – 1.86 ERA in wins 5.59 ERA in losses.
I have no idea if your premise is correct or incorrect, but you’ll have to do more than show 6 individual pitcher seasons that may have been cherry picked to prove your point.
For instance:
Justin Masterson 2011–2.59 ERA in Wins 4.50 ERA in Losses
That is the exact same as your CC Sabathia 2012 example.
You may be right, but this doesn’t prove it at all.
I looked through a good amount of top-tier pitchers. It pretty much always holds, albeit with a few one year aberrations.
If you go for career numbers, CC is at 2.11/6.44, Verlander’s at 1.84/6.47, Lee’s at 2.02/6.52, Kershaw’s at 1.15/5.58, Hamels is at 2.06/5.80, Felix is at 1.63/6.13, Halladay was 1.95/6.20, Pedro was 1.56/5.57, Johan was at 1.64/6.00, even Mark Buehrle is at 1.87/6.67, and he’s the definition of a two starter.
Masterson’s 1.63/7.61 is a far cry from that level. He’s a solid mid-rotation guy, who can be dominating, but he’s not in the top-tier.
Standard Deviations or gtfo
(But seriously… We can look at this more rigorously, yes?)
So, you’re saying that Masterson is better than almost all of those guys when hes on, and worse when he’s off?
Again, I’m not seeing anything here that says hes worse.
In regards to discussing pitcher consistency via ERA in wins vs loses, I just wanted to point out that during Pedro’s time in the AL, the AL league average ERA was north of 4.50, so his 5.57 ERA in loses really should not be stacked against pitcher playing now when the AL avg ERA is about half a run lower.
The premise is interesting, but crowdsourcing examples and using ERA to compare players from different run scoring environments won’t lead anywhere productive.
For those who are less familiar with these tables, could you please explain what “REL”, “PCT”, “REL PRD”, and “ACT PRD” measure? Thanks.
Figured it out, thanks
Interesting. Talk to me when he does it two years in a row, though.
I haven’t read this yet but yeah I think he’s elite. I’d love him to anchor my staff.
The beauty of grabbing a guy like Masterson is that he does not HAVE to anchor your staff. You can grab him as a #2 or possibly #3 SP. If he can repeat 2013 numbers you have a great 1-2 punch. If he is your anchor you risk having a weaker staff overall if he fails to repeat.
Its really refreshing to see a fangraphs article that acknowledges that not all contact is bad! Great work!
My problem with Masterson is that he is a two trick pony. He has a excellent slider and a decent sinker. Not nothing else.
Very interesting and informative article . I traded Kendys Morales for Masterson and Mesoraco this winter . I liked the trade when I made it ,and I like it even more now .It also enabled me to trade Corbin for Encarnacion,so in effect I traded Morales and corbin for Masterson,Encarnacion ,and Mesoraco .
A Rotographs article the other day mentioned that Masterson has a relatively low SwStk% but a very high looking stk% which is unsustainable. I’m surprised that information didn’t pop up here. I would imagine a considerable regression in looking strikes would negatively impact his overall strikeout totals and would probably decrease his standing among these pitchers.
his SwStk% is pretty damn solid at 9.2%. not an elite level like darvish at 12%, but 9.2 is on par with the likes of a cliff lee or gio gonzalez.
the big concern here is his high BB% last year. If hes going to maintain that, than, like the article says, hes going to have to maintain the high k% to offset it.
In his 6 year career, he’s produced exactly one 4 win season by both rWAR and fWAR, in 2011.
So no, he is not an elite starting pitcher.
Masterson has two pitches — a league average fastball and plus slider. Even a good slider is going to have a platoon split. He’s not a different pitcher than his career line — 4.03 ERA, 7.5 k/9, 3.5 BB/9 — he just had a good year.
Given his heavy reliance on his fastball average SwStr%, he’s never really going to be on the same level as guys with multiple plus pitches.
the fastball is plus not because it gets whiffs, but because hitters have an exceedingly difficult time putting in the air.
To Rainmaker above–
I would say Masterson is better than the numbers you posted. A 3.81 FIP and 3.82 xFIP in his career paint a picture of a guy who has been the victim of some atrocious defense in Cleveland. You’re also wrong about him being a 2-pitch pitcher. He’s a 3-pitch pitcher who occasionally tosses in a 4th. Only over his last two seasons did he start throwing the slider more, but he throws both a 4-seam fastball and one of the better sinkers in the game, to go along with the aforementioned slider and occasional change up.
Fine, call it a 3.81 FIP, it doesn’t matter — I’m saying he’s that guy, not the 3.35 FIP guy that showed up last year. The other guys on the list have career FIPs with a median of 3.00; that’s a far cry from 3.81.
The data doesn’t support 3 pitches. It shows two fastballs, likely 2-seam fastball and 4-seam fastball, that are so close to each other that in the raw Pitch f/X data they overlap. Go look for yourself — player page>Pitch f/X>Game Charts. I don’t care if you call it a fastball or a sinker, the velocity, horizontal movement, and vertical movement are all in the same pattern…
Masterson’s 4-seam and sinker are not the same, the 4-seam he throws about 3 mph harder, averages 93-94, and the sinker is more 90-91. And the 4-seam doesn’t sink. But yeah, I don’t think you’d call that 3 pitches, just two fastball variations and a slider.
This is one of the best articles I’ve ever read on FanGraphs, bravo Tony. Your work here recently is outstanding and greatly appreciated. You bring a very fresh way of thinking to the site that I think was much needed and have excellent insight. I look forward to more of your articles.
I was hoping the content of this article would be a big, bold “NO.”
Right?
It seems to me that even since his Red Sox days Masterson’s approach to pitching is mismatched with his stuff and style. He throws a lot fastballs high in the zone like an over the top four seam pitcher, always has.
Huh? “throws a lot of fastballs high in the zone” … that is the opposite of what Justin Masterson does.
He’s good, but he hasn’t done anything to make anyone think of him as “elite.” You can over-analyze stuff. If Justin Masterson emerges as an elite starting pitcher, we’ll all know it, and we won’t need to crunch numbers in order to “prove” the supposition.
Last fall, some guy on here tried to “prove” that Rick Porcello was comparable to Max Scherzer. I respect advanced statistical analysis, but I respect the performance of the best team in baseball against both pitchers even more. There’s a reason why the Red Sox hit one guy like a batting-practice machine but could barely touch the other. The same applies here. The Indians may hurt Masterson, but Felix Hernandez has been surrounded by a steaming pile of suck for years, and we still know he’s great.
Felix Hernandez has played his entire career in an extreme pitchers park, with elite defense behind him.
Justin Masterson has played his whole career in hitters park, and had bad defense behind him. I’m not sure why you think these two are related.
As to the “I respect the performance of the best team in baseball against both pitchers”
What am I to make of the fact that Masterson is able to hold the Texas Rangers to a .412 OPS, while Hernandez got shelled to the tune of a .987 OPS?
There’s a reason why the Rangers hit one guy like batting-practice and could barely touch the other.
(that’s how cherry picking goes)
Masterson will probably need to develop something to get lefties out better to make the jump up in class. Until then, he will be nearly elite, and a hell of a better value ( in relation to where they could be had, and what price you’d pay) than almost all the pitchers that were listed in comparison.