Rick Porcello Should Have A Job By Now

Rick Porcello’s time with the Mets in 2020 began by allowing seven runs in two innings to the Braves. A normal season would have offered him many more starts to help his numbers recover from that performance, but as it was, he took to the mound just 11 more times. So despite giving up two runs or fewer in five of his remaining appearances, his ERA for the season landed at an unsightly 5.64 — the second straight year in which it finished above 5.50.

With that in mind, it isn’t a huge surprise that Porcello, 32, is still unemployed one week before the regular season begins. Throughout his 12-year career, his value rests more on the quantity of his innings than the quality — over 2,000 in total now, and a pre-2020 average of 185 a year. It makes sense that teams would want to be cautious if his skills seem to be deteriorating. I’m not convinced that’s the case. The Porcello of last season bore a lot of resemblance to the Porcello of years before, including the one when he won a Cy Young award. He’s still deserving of a big league job. Let’s find him one.

It’s hard to assess how good or bad Porcello actually was last year. His ERA was the worst of his career, but his 3.33 FIP was his best. At 1.7 WAR, he was just inside of our top 25 pitchers in baseball, tied with Sonny Gray. Mets fans likely thought of him as a disaster, but he actually would have been the most valuable pitcher on 14 different teams.

Rick Porcello vs. Your Team’s Best Guy, 2020
Name Team IP K/9 BB/9 HR/9 FIP WAR
Rick Porcello NYM 59.0 8.24 2.29 0.76 3.33 1.7
Zac Gallen ARI 72.0 10.25 3.13 1.13 3.66 1.5
Max Fried ATL 56.0 8.04 3.05 0.32 3.10 1.5
Keegan Akin BAL 25.2 12.27 3.51 1.05 3.27 0.8
Nathan Eovaldi BOS 48.1 9.68 1.30 1.49 3.87 0.9
Spencer Turnbull DET 56.2 8.10 4.61 0.32 3.49 1.4
Brad Keller KCR 54.2 5.76 2.80 0.33 3.43 1.3
Pablo López MIA 57.1 9.26 2.83 0.63 3.09 1.6
Gerrit Cole NYY 73.0 11.59 2.10 1.73 3.89 1.5
Liam Hendriks OAK 25.1 13.14 1.07 0.36 1.14 1.4
Joe Musgrove PIT 39.2 12.48 3.63 1.13 3.42 1.0
Kevin Gausman SFG 59.2 11.92 2.41 1.21 3.09 1.6
Adam Wainwright STL 65.2 7.40 2.06 1.23 4.11 1.1
Tyler Glasnow TBR 57.1 14.28 3.45 1.73 3.66 1.2
Lance Lynn TEX 84.0 9.54 2.68 1.39 4.19 1.3

So was he one of the worst starters in baseball, or was he a borderline ace? The answer is somewhere in between. He got a little bit lucky on his HR/FB rate, and after accounting for that, his xFIP jumped to 4.38 — still on the right side of league average, but just barely. Everywhere else, he was unlucky. His .373 BABIP was the highest of any pitcher with at least 40 innings, and his 59.5% LOB rate was second-lowest. He was legitimately good at limiting homers and was his typically stingy self when it came to free passes, but when batters put a ball in play, he often got burned.

And when it comes to Porcello, the ball is in play quite frequently. He doesn’t miss any bats, and I mean that literally. He had the fourth-lowest swinging strike rate (6.4%) of any pitcher with at least 40 innings pitched last season, and his CSW% — the percentage of his pitches that resulted in either a called strike or a whiff — was baseball’s third-lowest, at 24%. Considering those numbers, it’s kind of shocking he managed to strike out 20.7% of the batters he faced, a better rate than 40 other pitchers in baseball who threw 40 or more innings in 2020.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

How scary is his opponents’ contact rate against him? On its face, not very. While Porcello’s CSW% did dip to a career low last year, it wasn’t a stark departure from his career average of 26.1%. His whiff rates on their own have also been low throughout his career. His deserved strikeout rate is probably below what he actually recorded in 2020, but this is someone who managed to be a valuable pitcher for the first several years of his career despite struggling to drag his strikeout rate above six per nine innings. Getting hitters to flail wildly before walking back to the dugout isn’t a requirement for his success.

What Porcello has to do is make sure batters aren’t happy with the contact they make against him, and that certainly was not the case last year. Hitters’ expected wOBA on contact — xwOBACON, if you’re hungry — was .412, the 19th-highest out of 133 pitchers who faced at least 150 batters last season. His real wOBACON of .404 wasn’t much better. That isn’t necessarily a sign that Porcello is unplayable; among the pitchers with worse xwOBACONs were Jack Flaherty and Max Scherzer. But it is a sign that his crazy-high BABIP can’t be chalked up just to bad luck. And while Flaherty and Scherzer strike out enough batters to minimize the impact of bad rate stats on balls in play, Porcello doesn’t have that luxury.

The culprit here isn’t hard to find. Want to keep your opponents from getting hits on balls in play? Don’t let them hit line drives. Liners resulted in a BABIP of .599 last year, while ground balls had a BABIP of .237, and fly balls had a BABIP of .089. Porcello, wouldn’t you know it, gave up a ton of line drives; 27.1% of all his batted balls, as a matter of fact. Unlike his low whiff rates, that’s not something he’s had to overcome in the past.

There could be a few different things at work here. It could be short season funkiness, turning what might have otherwise been a typical season into an outlier. Who he faced also likely had an impact: six of his 12 starts came against the Nationals and Braves, who ranked second and third respectively in line-drive rate last year. Maybe, though, Porcello’s stuff was just more hittable. He didn’t lose any velocity last season, but he did see a drop in his spin rate, as well as some noticeable dips in movement.

I know the curveball stands out a bit on these charts, but try to ignore those; they were just 5% of his pitches last year. What’s more important is the sinker and slider data. Porcello significantly increased the usage of both those offerings last year to a combined 71.8%, making them his two primary pitches. Those happen to be the only two pitches with increased line-drive rates, and the jump for both was significant.

Porcello was throwing a lot of flat pitches last year, and opponents were squaring them up easily. It’s not hard to understand why that kept him off teams’ shopping lists earlier in the winter.

I think there’s something to be salvaged here, though. Porcello still throws a ton of strikes, even with his secondary stuff; his breaking stuff could be more potent if thrown outside the zone more often. He also still has his durability: He’s been on the injured list just once in his career, all the way back in 2015. There’s a chance that things could get even worse if his strikeouts regress to match his CSW rates and his contact doesn’t improve, but I think there’s at least as good of a chance he figures out a couple of tricks to bring that ERA back to league-average or better.

That’s not the most enthusiastic endorsement of a free-agent pitcher, but it describes someone who could help a lot of teams. The Diamondbacks, Reds, Athletics, Cardinals and Giants have all lost at least one member of their projected rotation to injury this spring. Porcello’s presence wouldn’t be a quick fix, since he’s missed enough of spring training that he would need to build up before appearing in a regular-season game. But some of those holes are will still exist in a month or so, and they aren’t the only ones. Hopeful contenders like the White Sox, Red Sox, and Cleveland all have question marks in the back of their rotations, and there enough injury questions with teams like the Yankees, Blue Jays and Angels that a durable pitcher like Porcello could mean a lot down the stretch.

I have no insight into what Porcello has been asking for this winter, or that he and his agent haven’t demanded a multi-year deal. But I have my doubts that’s the case. He wasn’t a great pitcher last year, and chances are he won’t be this season either, but it’s bizarre that there has been so little interest in him this winter. But while it’s too late for Porcello to make a difference to anyone in April, I wouldn’t count out him helping in September.





Tony is a contributor for FanGraphs. He began writing for Red Reporter in 2016, and has also covered prep sports for the Times West Virginian and college sports for Ohio University's The Post. He can be found on Twitter at @_TonyWolfe_.

56 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Brad Lipton
5 years ago

I don’t think you can write this article, with this title, without a paragraph commenting on his agent’s history (and history with clients like this). It is a pretty big hole in an article like this.

To make an in-passing comment like you did at the end does not give this issue the treatment it deserves.

Lunch AngleMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  Brad Lipton

what’s the story with Porcello’s agent? I consume more baseball news than anyone I know and I have no idea what you’re referring to

Nasty Nate
5 years ago
Reply to  Lunch Angle

Scott Boras’ veteran-but-not-superstar clients routinely go deep into spring training and even the season itself without signing a new deal. They don’t just accept best offer available over the winter.

Lunch AngleMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  Nasty Nate

Are you guys assuming that Porcello’s agent is Scott Boras? Rick Porcello’s agent is Jim Murray, best as I can tell from google. Porcello hasn’t been a Boras client since 2009

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  Lunch Angle

Yeah Porcello is with Excel Sports Management, where Jim Murray works (at least since 2019). So I think you’re right about this.

MikeD
5 years ago
Reply to  Nasty Nate

Two problems here. One, Boras is not his agent. Two, Boras regularly takes both his star players and non-star players deep into the offseason before signing, and data shows his players (stars and non-stars) do quite well. He does what his clients want him to do. We just saw that with Lance McCullers. He wanted to stay in Houston, Boras worked out the best deal for him he could, although there’s no doubt he advised McCullers to play out 2021 and file for free agency for the best chance to maximize his value.

martyvan90Member since 2017
5 years ago
Reply to  Lunch Angle

Lunch Angle, it’s a good point Brad makes. Tony does a great job with the analytics analysis. The last paragraph addresses the agent which may be a part of why Rick Porcello doesn’t’t have a job yet. He woulda liked more on the agent/ask. As Tony said there isn’t much there… To some the title does imply something nefarious because of the site’s dominant narrative- owners evil. I didn’t take the article that way but some reasonably might.
As I read the really good article I began to realize declining players (or players believed to be in decline…) compete with the host of organization 4A arms. Those arms are often exposed in late Spring Training and early season starts. The Cy Younger will soon have a job with a team whose back end plans are exposed, as they gain confidence in other elements of their chances and realize they’ll soon have butts in seats.

EFF51
5 years ago
Reply to  martyvan90

Agree with your comment about this site being consistently biased against owners. I wonder how many players are actually hurt by being associated with Scott Boras.

It seems Boras deserves as much scorn as the owners do. And if we get a work stoppage in 2022 is will be in part due to agents like Boras incredible influence on the Players union

lettowvorbeck
5 years ago
Reply to  Lunch Angle

Vacuous claim.

Greg SimonsMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  Brad Lipton

It’s interesting that most baseball fans have an opinion on just one agent. Yes, he’s quite outspoken, but I would imagine he’s not the only agent trying to get the most money for the players he reps. I don’t know if it means anything that virtually no one knows anything about any other agents, but it’s interesting and certainly drives a narrative.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  Greg Simons

My only issue with Boras is that he has a philosophy that doesn’t get tailored enough to the individual client. It works great for guys like Bryce Harper and not so great for guys like Stephen Drew. Whether he just isn’t flexible enough or it’s an ego thing, I think he could do better.

I used to dislike him for other reasons (like with JD Drew drafting fiasco) but I’ve come to realize that much of the concerns about Boras including that one fall under a “don’t hate the player, hate the game” situation. The compensation rules in baseball are pretty warped, and a lot of the things we don’t like about agents and free agency are in response to that.

Of course, none of this is relevant because as noted above, Boras is not Porcello’s agent and hasn’t been for quite some time.

MikeD
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I don’t see it quite that way. Boras at times will sign deals quickly. Many times now his strategy is to go deep into the off season, but he’s done that with big stars and lesser ones. We’ve also seen him sign extensions for his players before hitting free agency. Just happened this weekend with Lance McCullers. Ultimately, it’s the player who will dictate what he wants and then Boras figures the best strategy to get there. Does it work 100%? No, not for Boras or any agent, but there’s a reason he’s viewed as the most successful player agent. All players have benefited from him as he’s helped push overall contract values higher.

I do remember years back someone did a study on Boras’ clients, and on average they did significantly better than other agents. I wonder if that’s changed? Or even taking a look at his star players vs. other agents star players, and his less-than-star players vs. other agents less-than-star players. Seems like something Fangraphs would good at !

synco
5 years ago
Reply to  Greg Simons

What people need to realize about agents is that it’s the player, not the agent. They hire Boras to be the way he is.

Nasty Nate
5 years ago

I think “unemployed” is a slightly misleading word to use in situations like this. He could “have a job” as a baseball pitcher any time he wants. But he has earned enough in his career that he can wait for a situation he likes. That’s a good thing! Presumably he wants some combination of salary, role, and team that makes it worth his time and effort. So it’s only a mystery of “why does no one want him?” if we neglect his choice in the matter. And then it’s a much less mysterious question, such as “why doesn’t this super-wealthy guy want to sweat it out for a chance to be the long reliever or 5th starter for a 100-loss Pirates team for short (to him) money?”

AnonMember since 2020
5 years ago

Have to agree – looks like the same guy. His EV and HardHIt% numbers were right in line. He just gave up an insane number of line drives. One thing that would worry me though is that using the graphing feature, he spent the whole year at or above his rolling 10-game average for LD%.

That said, you touched on it but it probably should be emphasized a little more – he faced brutal competition. He made 3 starts against the #1 offense (by wOBA) and 10 of 12 against top 10 offenses (#1, 5, 7 and 10). Even when he got what seemed like a breather, it was still the Orioles (a surprising #14 last year) and the Marlins (who were a not THAT terrible 21st). Compare that to Bauer who faced 1 top 10 offense (#8 White Sox) and had every single one of his 10 other starts against bottom 13 offenses, including 2 against the worst offense (Pirates)

Going to be a lot of weird stats out of last year’s short schedule against only 9 other teams. . . .

stakhanovitamix
5 years ago

I respect FIP, I really do- it’s just really difficult to wrap my head around the idea that 73 innings of Gerrit Cole allowing a 2.84 ERA provided less actual value than 59 innings of Porcello allowing an ERA of 5.64. For the sake of comparison, Cole’s bWAR was 2.1 compared to 0.2 for Porcello…

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
5 years ago

You may respect FIP but it is this type of joke that simply forces me to feel it adds nothing to my understanding of the game. I often get ridiculed for hating some of the modern attempts at quantifying baseball but what you bring up is all the ammunition anybody with any reason needs to cast a very suspicious eye on what is being presented. This comparison is absolutely absurd, ridiculous, asinine and any other synonym that is applicable.

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  bosoxforlife

It just all a matter of understanding statistics. If you do then FIP is one of the best stats ever.

stakhanovitamix
5 years ago
Reply to  NATS Fan

I understand statistics, but thanks for assuming otherwise. My concern is that fWAR based on FIP creates value based on unprovable assumptions. In this case, FIP suggests that, pitching to the same opponents and with the same defense behind them, Porcello would have put up better numbers than Cole. There’s obviously no way to prove that hypothetical, but do you find it plausible? I totally get that FIP is useful in the case of someone like Porcello to show that they were better than their surface numbers indicate, and that they may have been harmed by a bad defense. But I think there’s too much that still can’t be accounted for in FIP if you’re going to use it as the basis for a metric as important as pitcher WAR.

martyvan90Member since 2017
5 years ago

Fair enough, but all models have assumptions. I don’t say that to be flippant or to sound uninformed. Rather your point is one we should always keep in mind.

shampain
5 years ago
Reply to  martyvan90

Yeah, but not all models assume that pitchers have *zero* impact on the quality of contact. When we talk about pitching we talk about GB%, we talk about LD% (this whole article is basically about that), hard-hit%, etc. And we do so because we understand that those things are related to pitcher quality.

If pitchers have control over whether a bat misses a ball then they probably have at least partial control over how a bat misses a ball, in other words.

But then we ignore all that and assign WAR value based on the opposite premise, and then we calculate $/WAR and make inferences about that too.

For a long time FIP was better at predicting the future than ERA, but that doesn’t mean it’s accurate representation of value and it also doesn’t mean that it’s the most predictive stat now.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  NATS Fan

FIP really is one of the best baseball stats ever. I’m not sure how well it’s going to hold up now that we have statcast data but for about 40 years it was a really good insight to isolate pitcher-controlled performance like that .

BryzMember since 2019
5 years ago

It’s a matter of understanding what they had control over. Cole was the beneficiary of good luck, whereas Porcello had bad luck. You’re arguing that Cole’s luck was a sign of skill and thus should be rewarded while Porcello’s luck was also skill and he should be debited. However, FIP is saying that Porcello did more right to be successful than Cole.

Did Cole provide more value to his team than Porcello because he did a better job limiting (earned) runs? Of course. But fWAR states that Porcello was more successful than Cole in the fields that pitchers can control, which are strikeouts, infield pop-ups, walks, and home runs.

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  Bryz

What numbers indicate luck? The only stat that Porcello has the edge is HR’s. Hits per inning is embarrassing for Porcello, K’s aren’t even close and how about WHIP. Cole 0.95 and Porcello an awful 1.5 .Please don’t try to claim that the pitcher has no control after he has thrown the ball. Pitchers absolutely have the ability to control the quality of contact by the hitter. Mariano Rivera wasn’t given a rocking chair made from broken bats for any reason other than he was able to induce weak contact almost at will. Kyle Hendricks does the same today and his reward is to be the most underrated player in the game today. How can one of the most effective pitchers in the game over the past six years have not made the MLB best 100 list until this year and then only at #84? When I see something like that my thought is garbage in, garbage out. What is being inputted? Things like that along with this farce concerning Cole and Porcello are what causes doubt about much of what being claimed.

Dmjn53
5 years ago
Reply to  bosoxforlife

Well Hendricks and Rivera are two tremendous outliers, albeit for different reasons

stakhanovitamix
5 years ago
Reply to  Bryz

Does fWAR state that “Porcello was more successful than Cole in the fields that pitchers can control”, or is that FIP? My understanding- correct me if I’m wrong- is that fWAR tries to estimate the value provided by a given player, controlling for external factors. The author of this piece uses fWAR to bolster their argument that Porcello deserves a job , but the table provided suggests that he outperformed Cole (and Max Fried) last year. Porcello seems like a clear case of someone whose value is inflated by using FIP in the valuation.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago

Porcello ran a .346 wOBA last year. That’s not good! That’s something like 10%-15% worse than league average.

If you limit the xwOBA leaderboards to pitchers who had 100 or more balls in play (which is a decent approximation for starters in 2020), then Porcello was 101 out of 134. That’s better than several pitchers who scored major league deals this offseason (Arrieta, Lester, and Chase Anderson) so the fact that he didn’t land a major league deal is a bit unfair. But all those guys are 5th starters at this point, so he’s probably not making someone’s playoff rotation unless he has a major resurgence or a lot of guys get injured.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago

FIP and its various descendants (like SIERA) were really the best thing we had up until really recently. It’s an outstanding measurement because it filters out everything that could contaminate pitcher performance.

I’m starting to re-evaluate whether FIP (and SIERA-type descendants) are really our best option in the age of Statcast. While barrel % and other related things might not be repeatable skills for pitchers they are isolated from fielding just like walks, strikeouts, and home runs (and ground balls) are. So I think the future is probably something like an xwOBA-based WAR, and then we get to argue how much forcing hitters into certain launch angles or inducing weak contact is a repeatable skill, and how much of it is just dumb luck. But even so, it’s worth noting that xwOBA and FIP are pretty highly correlated simply because the walks, strikeouts, and home runs make up a lot of plate appearances and don’t require any estimation about what happens.

awalnohaMember since 2017
5 years ago

Have agree here FWar has Porcello at 1.7but RWar (baseball reference) has him at .2. I’ve argued that FWar overrates certain guys like Porcello and underrates other guys like Kyle Hendricks for example. BWar reflects the value from what the results of outcome on the field, while FWar tend to show value on “what should have been”. According to RWar Porcello is not very good because he allows too many runs. I like both War metrics for different reasons.

Also agree that Porcello should be pitching this year as a big league, if he wants to. Good article related to all batted ball data.

BenZobrist4MVP
5 years ago

Has anyone other than Porcello ever won a Cy Young award, but never been an All Star their entire career? I know Saberhagen, Santana, Kluber and Arrieta were all not All Stars in the seasons they first won the Cy Young, and had never previously been All Stars, but they were alll selected to All Star games later. To this point at least, Porcello never has been.

Mahoney
5 years ago
Reply to  BenZobrist4MVP

Pete Vuckovich was never an All-Star, despite winning the AL Cy Young Award in 1982. Vuckovich got half of the 28 first-place votes on the ballot thanks to his league-leading .750 winning % and 18 wins , which were second in the league. His 3.34 ERA, though not in the AL top 10, was pretty decent considering that he allowed more than 1.5 batters per inning pitched (223 2/3 IP, 234 H, 102 BB, 105 K). Not surprising he got left off the All-Star team during his Cy Young season.

synco
5 years ago
Reply to  Mahoney

That reads a lot like Bob Welch’s Cy Young-winning 1990 season, in which he was 27-6 yet only ended up with 1.8 WAR. ERA of 2.95 (and as I recall he only got under 3.00 b/c a crucial hit was changed to an error a few hours after the last game he pitched of the season), but his FIP was 4.19.

Mahoney
5 years ago

About that low LOB%: Porcello’s splits with bases empty vs. runners on have been very dramatic in both 2019 and 2020 (great with bases empty, terrible with guys on). I don’t know if he’s been having specific trouble with pitching from the stretch, or if this is just a small-sample fluke, but it makes sense that he’s allowing a lot more runs than his FIP would indicate.

ScottyBMember since 2017
5 years ago

Porcello winning a Cy Young will long stand out as a crazy aberration in MLB history (9th in AL pitching WAR, 5th in ERA in 2016).
Kate Upton was right- Verlander was completely and utterly screwed (1st in WAR, 2nd in ERA)
I’m convinced Cy Young voters gave Verlander the 2019 nod over Cole (this was kinda a 50/50 proposition) to make up for 2016.

bluerum29
5 years ago
Reply to  ScottyB

Crazy aberration on Porcello’s career, sure. But it was still highly justified for him winning the award.

MikeD
5 years ago
Reply to  bluerum29

Not “highly” justified but not exactly unjustified either. In what was viewed as a close field, he was awarded “brownie” points for his win total. A bit of context and thought by a few more voters would have led to either Kluber or Verlander winning. Both better pitchers. Both better seasons.

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  ScottyB

Nobody understands how often Verlander gets screwed better than Kate Upton!

Dmjn53
5 years ago
Reply to  ScottyB

He shouldn’t have won, but the difference between him and Verlander weren’t extreme. Porcello had the lower FIP, HR and walk rate, The gap in ERA was negligible (3.15 to 3.04), as was the gap in fWAR (5.3 to 5.1). The only area Verlander had the clear advantage in was K rate.

Porcello won because he had 22 wins, which is obviously a joke, but there are far, far worse examples of undeserving Cy Young/MVP winners. Bartolo Colon over Santana in 2005 is a somewhat recent example

dl80Member since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  Dmjn53

And Kate rate

ScottyBMember since 2017
5 years ago
Reply to  Dmjn53

Part of the reason I prefer bWar, as it is not completely dominated by FIP.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  Dmjn53

Yeah this really was not a bad outcome. The big reason Porcello won is because Verlander had a bunch of really good games to close out the season and voters had already made up their minds. But as far as these things go, that’s not too bad.

The big problem with bWAR is that DRS is much too touchy, so when you do the defensive adjustments it tends to have outsized influence when the defense isn’t good or is especially good. DRS considered the Tigers’ defense to be awful that year, but it gets really hard to defend once you start looking at how little credit Ian Kinsler got in DRS that year and how they thought that JD Davis’s defense cost the team 22 runs.

(Joe Posnanski broke it down even further in his Porcello vs Verlander article; not sure I can post the link here, but it becomes almost impossible to defend bWAR in this specific instance).

You should pretty much only trust Baseball Reference’s WAR as much as you trust DRS. Which we probably shouldn’t.

marcusthelionMember since 2020
5 years ago

All the FIPping points of the article underscored by the need for teams to manage innings/workloads over a long season amidst the wildcard of COVID… so I’m a bit surprised that Mike Trout hasn’t offered to pay him out of pocket to join the Angels just for the sake of eating innings through August & helping them win games with scores like 7-5, 9-6, etc

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
5 years ago

This article is a exercise in futile speculation. Just what is a pitcher who was awful in 2019 and not much good in 2020 worth? What is he asking for? My answer to my first question is not much more than pocket change. Without knowing what the answer to the second question is there is no way of even hazarding a wild guess as to why Porcello doesn’t have a contract. If he is expecting something similar to last year then it is going to be a long wait

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  bosoxforlife

You did not read the article very well. He wasn’t awful but very unlucky!

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  NATS Fan

But I did watch him in 2019 and he was awful!

mattMember since 2023
5 years ago

How unlucky was porcello really? I’d say his FIP is far more misleading than the ERA was this past year, he really got lit up, his xERA was 5.24. Guys like porcello can really “fool” fip imo, he’s a control over command guy that throws a lot of not good strikes. Yes his babip was unlucky, but he was also legitimately bad

tomerafan
5 years ago

Pitchers who cannot induce swinging strikes will see more balls in play. Balls in play can be unpredictable. Swinging strikes are therefore very, very valuable and pitchers who cannot get batters to swing and miss and want more than the league minimum (or slightly more than that) are not going to have quality offers unless the supply of pitchers becomes much lower.

bohknowsbmore
5 years ago

“ I have no insight into what Porcello has been asking for this winter, or that he and his agent haven’t demanded a multi-year deal. But I have my doubts that’s the case.”

Why do you have doubts? He’s made over $110M in his career. I think it’s reasonable to posit that many teams might be willing to have him, but he’s not biting at just any offer.

SenorGato
5 years ago

This is most likely due to his and the agent’s greed and inability to digest the reality. Alot of people forget that this game, a legal monopoly largely subsidized by the public at multiple levels, experienced Biblical losses in 2020. Perfect example of players not understanding we are all in this together due to their genetic inclination towards greed

ScottyBMember since 2017
5 years ago
Reply to  SenorGato

Is that you, Tom Ricketts?

Greg SimonsMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  SenorGato

So it’s the players who are greedy. Got it. I thought the owners were, too. Silly of me.

BlueJaysBlackboard
5 years ago
Reply to  Greg Simons

You guys obviously don’t pay enough attention to SenorGato’s posts, and therefore totally missed the sarcasm just dripping off this one 😉

terry mesmer
5 years ago

Rick Porcello should not have a job by now. He’s been above league average only four times in 12 years (going by ERA+). He has been terrible in recent years (if you point to his very good 2020 FIP, please glance at his truly awful H/9). Porcello gives up a LOT of hits.

lettowvorbeck
5 years ago

Baseball is a business and the cost of assets is THE determining factor. It’s painfully obvious that Porcello and his agent asked for too much money. Otherwise he would have a uniform on right now. The only reason a car is still on a dealer’s lot is price. End of story.

rhdx
5 years ago

Usually BWAR and FWAR and not too far apart. In Porcello’s case, based on what actually happened instead of an estimate of what ‘should’ have happened, he was worth 0.2 WAR, which is a small fraction of 1.7 WAR. That might explain some of this. That said, I agree he is worthy of a starting role, but would anyone want to pay him more than $8 million and would he want to take that?

MikeD
5 years ago

There can be two truths here:

He was a bit unlucky.

He was still bad.

MLB teams have tons of data. They don’t look at single data points. They combine analytics with heavy scouting. If indeed Porcello was better than many other team’s “best guy”, then he’d have many smart teams trying to sign him. They’ve dug deeper than FIP and don’t like what they’re seeing.

That said. He should be signed, so I believe it’s fair to wonder if his agent at Excel has misread the market, or Porcello is letting part of his ego influence his decision, or maybe both have decided to play the long game, figuring teams will come calling as pitcher injuries begin to mount. The problem with the latter strategy is they likely will still find a contract short on dollars. Sitting at home and missing ST is not going to cause teams to reevaluate him. He is now probably hurting himself by not showing teams he’s better than what he showed in 2020…and 2019, if indeed he is.