Archive for Brandon Webb

Commenter Derek mentioned last week that neither Dan Haren nor Brandon Webb had crossed our 30-ballot threshold, so this edition of our Fan Projection Targets goes out to him. Today’s targets, in no particular order, are: Dan Haren, Brandon Webb, and Billy Buckner. Now go project the hell out of them.

Haren cemented his place among the majors’ best starters last year, posting a 3.08 xFIP while topping 200 IP for the fifth consecutive year.

Webb, after having also having topped 200 IP for five consecutive years, pitched all of four innings last year while dealing with shoulder problems.

Though he had a 6.40 ERA last year, Buckner’s 3.95 xFIP suggests that he has the skill to succeed. He’s tentatively slated as Arizona’s fifth starter.

The Diamondbacks have been a disappointment so far this season, failing to distance themselves from their NL West rivals on several occasions. Now, with a month and a half remaining, they face the serious possibility of losing the division and missing the post-season. None of these woes can really be attributed to Brandon Webb or Dan Haren, however, as both pitchers have been fantastic this year.

A couple months ago that I would take Webb over Haren in a crucial situation but that there weren’t any other twosomes I would want to headline my rotation. Granted, a CC Sabathia/Ben Sheets twosome may give them a run for their money now that Sabathia is in the senior circuit, but Webb/Haren have both put together great seasons. Which one is having the better year right now, though? Even though we know and understand that W-L records are terrible evaluative barometers, it’s pretty hard to look at Webb’s 18-4 mark and completely disregard it. That’s what we need to do, however, to get a clear picture of everything. Here are some comparisons:

Webb: 2.85 ERA, 1.11 WHIP
Haren: 2.96 ERA, 1.03 WHIP

Webb: 177 IP, 154 H, 9 HR
Haren: 167 IP, 143 H, 14 HR

Webb: 7.37 K/9, 2.14 BB/9, 3.45 K/BB
Haren: 8.41 K/9, 1.56 BB/9, 5.38 K/BB

Webb: 2.96 FIP, .291 BABIP, 72.8% LOB
Haren: 2.91 FIP, .291 BABIP, 74.3% LOB

Webb: 2.12 WPA/LI, 2.66 REW, 26.73 BRAA
Haren: 3.23 WPA/LI, 3.14 REW, 31.68 BRAA

The first two comparisons may lean towards Webb, but after that it is pretty tough to argue that Haren has not been the better pitcher to date. He doesn’t walk anyone, has a great strikeout rate, isn’t posting an unsustainably high strand rate, and his BABIP isn’t abnormally low either. On top of that, his context-neutral contributions are over one full win better than Webb, while his wins based on shifts in run expectancy are almost a half-win better.

One of the aspects I touched on last time dealt with Webb having better numbers in high leverage situations. That has not changed:

Webb: .200/.260/.264, .524 OPS
Haren: .289/.317/.447, .764 OPS

The caveat to this, however, is that Webb has 126 PA in these situations and Haren only has 84. Haren doesn’t seem to be as good under the pressure but he has been good enough this season to avoid these pressure situations. Granted, some of this is also contingent upon the defense and game state but you may be inclined to think that the better a pitcher is, the less high leverage situations he would find himself in. It won’t be true in all cases, but if a pitcher is constantly in the midst of high leverage situations—and he isn’t a late inning reliever—that means runners are constantly reaching base and posing legitimate run-scoring threats.

Just 12.6% of Haren’s PAs this year have been of this nature whereas Webb is under pressure 17.4% of the time. Take from that what you will, or take away nothing from it. If nothing else, it is interesting to note. It looks like Haren has performed better than his sinker-balling teammate this year even though most people are going to be swayed by Webb’s impressive W-L record and slightly lower ERA. Don’t be fooled, though… Haren has been just as effective, if not better. If they do manage to make the playoffs this twosome could prove huge in their World Series chances.

Aaron Harang lost Tuesday night, despite pitching well, continuing his general 2008 theme of solid pitching and receiving next to no run support. The loss to the Phillies dropped him to 2-8 on the season; yet, looking at all of his statistics sans W-L would lead many to believe his record would be MUCH better. In the spirit of unluckiness take a look at Harang’s 2008 stacked up next to Matt Cain‘s 2007 and Brandon Webb’s 2004:

Aaron Harang (2008)
13 GS, 88.2 IP, 94 H, 20 BB, 78 K
2-8, 3.86 ERA, 3.68 FIP, 1.29 WHIP, 76.1% LOB
.323 BABIP vs. .313 career BABIP
HR/FB 10.6% vs. 10.2% in 2007 and 10.5% in 2006
2.98 RS/9, 2nd Worst Run Support in NL

Matt Cain (2007)
32 GS, 200 IP, 173 H, 79 BB, 163 K
7-16, 3.65 ERA, 3.78 FIP, 1.26 WHIP, 72.9% LOB
.284 BABIP vs. .271 career BABIP
5.5% HR/FB vs. 7.1% in 2006 and 5.9% in 2005
3.51 RS/9, Worst Run Support in NL/MLB

Brandon Webb (2004)
35 GS, 208 IP, 194 H, 119 BB, 164 K
7-16, 3.59 ERA, 4.41 FIP, 1.50 WHIP, 71.0% LOB
.295 BABIP vs .293 career BABIP
HR/FB 15.0% vs 15.4% in 2003 (career 13.6%)
4.24 RS/9, 8th in NL

Overall, Cain and Harang seem unluckier due to Webb’s much higher FIP and rank in run support. Still, none of these three deserve the W-L records listed here, and if the Reds don’t start scoring for Harang he could easily surpass Cain in this area of unjust results.

By acquiring Dan Haren the Diamondbacks front office made it clear that this team could legitimately contend for a world series title as soon as this year. Placing a clear cut AL ace in Haren alongside one of the game’s best and most consistent in Brandon Webb would provide quite the formidable 1-2 punch.

Almost two months into the season, Webb and Haren have been more than a 1-2 punch; they have been a 1-1A punch, with Webb pitching out of this world and Haren performing like a true ace. In fact, some of their stats are pretty similar too. Take a look.

Brandon Webb
9-0, 2.56 ERA, 2.70 FIP, 0.99 WHIP, 2.88 K/BB
9 GS, 63.1 IP, 46 H, 17 BB, 49 K
70.3% LOB, .253 BABIP, .293 xBABIP
17.3/65.4/17.3 LD/GB/FB (Career: 18.2/64.3/17.5)

Dan Haren
5-2, 3.14 ERA, 3.13 FIP, 0.98 WHIP, 4.50 K/BB
9 GS, 57.1 IP, 46 H, 10 BB, 45 K
68.0% LOB, .260 BABIP, .303 xBABIP
18.3/47.6/34.1 LD/GB/FB (Career: 19.5/45.0/35.5)

Both prevent runners from reaching base but are slightly below average in stranding them. They are also each about forty percentage points better in the BABIP department than their line drive rate would suggest. Webb and Haren have also changed their pitch selection and frequency. Webb is throwing 3% less fastballs and 3% less curveballs; the difference is made up by a 6% increase in changeup usage. Haren, on the other hand has replaced 4% of his splitters/changeups with fastballs.

One glaring difference between the two can be found in their leverage splits. Here are Webb’s:

High: 48 PA, .100/.208/.175, 10 K
Med: 132 PA, .192/.244/.233, 22 K
Low: 75 PA, .264/.293/.347, 17 K

And Haren’s:

High: 31 PA, .308/.367/.462, 6 K
Med: 90 PA, .253/.303/.386, 18 K
Low: 105 PA, .168/.184/.248, 21 K

It seems Webb gets better as the importance level rises whereas Haren performs better as the importance level lessens. Give me Webb over Haren with one game to make or break a season, but give me Webb and Haren over other twosomes, at least right now, with two games on the line.