TB/NYY and COL/SD Open Thread
With two marquee match-ups getting underway tonight, we’d like to offer you guys an opportunity to watch them with your fellow FanGraphs readers. Feel free to use this thread as an open discussion about either game.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
One thing I’d like to be noted when discussing the Rockies:
They have the most valuable pitching staff in MLB. By quite a bit.
That 4th best GB/FB ratio has a lot to do with it – seems they found pitchers that can succeed in that park, even if Ubaldo would do well in any park of course.
Oh I agree. I’m just saying that the Rockies have been VERY effective as a pitching staff. Their pitching is the strength of the team and may very well be the best in the NL West race down the stretch.
giants and pads also have excellent pitching. do you think the rockies’ staff is significantly better?
he said valuable, which I guess means trade value…
Fangraphs WAR. They’ve been 1st in MLB most of 2010 and 2009. Park factors and such
The Yanks and they Rays are basically playing which team gets home field advantage through the playoffs, aren’t they?
The Twins are only 2 games back of the best record and have a pretty soft schedule. I don’t know about the Rays’, but the Yankees’ schedule is nasty from here on out.
I guess they’re effectively 3 games back since they don’t have the tie-breaker with either team.
If you were the Twins, who would you be rooting for? Who would you rather play in the first round of 5, assuming that it will be at Target Field?
I would much rather play the Yankees in a 5 game series than in a potential 7.
Not that it would matter in the end, the Twins are bound to curl up in the fetal position.
As a Giants fan I don’t know who to root for. If the Padres win they get first place. But I’m way more worried about the Rockies than the Padres
A dogfight and a split while the Giants sweep is the correct answer. Or: an injury-ridden dogfight and a split if you’re that rabid of a fan haha.
I know this situation. When the AL East is a little more competitive, as a Yankee fan, rooting between the Red Sox and the Rays is a hard choice. I tend to root against the Sox as a rule but I have to swallow hard if I’m rooting for Kevin Youkilis’ or Jonathan Papelbon’s ugly mug.
Per your situation, I’d root more for the Padres. They simply don’t have a ton of offense, even with Ludwick and Tejada adding in veteran presence. The Rox are hot, CarGo’s hot, they have young, talented pitchers and De La Rosa is pitching like an ace.
I forgot it was a 4 game series. Injury ridden dogfight it is!!! But seriously the Rockies pitching frightens me. De La Rosa and Ubaldo is a pretty good 1-2 pair, and I like Chacin a lot as a prospect. Lets hope Cargo covers more ground than we think and crashes into Tulo chasing a bases loaded pop up!
I hate how the commenters for YES keep saying that the Cy winner is going to be on the mound in Tropicana tonight. Price has even less of a case for the award than CC, doesn’t he?
Dave has very clearly omitted the real game of the night — i.e. Washington at Atlanta, featuring Yunesky Maya’s nasty slide- and curvepieces.
I would appreciate it if you would refer to the location by its real name – Hotlanta, though sometimes “The ATL” is also acceptable. Thanks.
How would you grade CC’s career?
K/9 = B-
BB/9 = A-
GB% = B+
Durability = A+
Overratedness = A
I don’t think you can be overrated when you’ve thrown as many quality innings as CC has over the past 7 years. Don’t forget his 2007 (241IP; 3.14FIP; 3.52xFIP; 7.1WAR) and 2008 (253IP; 2.91FIP; 3.10xFIP; 7.5WAR) seasons either. He was legitimately the best pitcher in baseball those 2 seasons…
Yeah, I’m not trying to troll, here, I really would like to know what grades others would give him in those categories. I’ve just always why CC has his reputation and one of the best of the best, why a top five pitcher in MLB and not a top ten. Even in 2007 he was third in FIP, tenth in xFIP, although he did lead in K/BB. In 2008 he was again third in FIP but he was first in xFIP.
Just how much should we factor in durability when evaluating starters?
I think you should value durability A LOT. Every time a guy misses a start, whether he is an ace or a number 5 pitcher, the result for the team is that they have to pitch is, on average, a replacement level or below replacement level starter–in other words, a guy who is probably going to go out there and post a 5.50 ERA or worse–maybe much worse. So pitchers who rack up 200-230 IP every year are substantially more valuable than an equivalent pitcher who is missing 4 or 5 or 10 starts a year.
It’s quite possible that my gut reaction to the durability debate is not calibrated properly. Assuming that the best few pitchers are going to post about 7 WAR in 33 or 34 starts then each start is worth almost 1/5 of a Win. If the difference between a “durable” starter and an average starter is four or five starts then we’re talking about roughly one Win based only on durability. That’s significant.
I’d say he’s pretty appropriately rated…. He’s consistently very good – maybe not the standout performer every year, but he’s been consistently productive over a span of years.
The Fangraphs Game Thread; brought to you by Playtex tampons
Is it just me or is “Be Unstoppable” the wrong tag for a tampon?
I have been a Phillies fan my whole life, and after last season’s defeat to the Yankees in the WS, I should be saying CC is overrated. Unfortunately, everyone who says he is is simply a Yankee-hater. I hate Yankees, man, but CC Sabathia is far from overrated. He’s even better now that his groundball rate is up: I’d rather have a pitcher with a solid K/9 (7.32) and an amazing groundball rate (50.7%) because they will throw a lot less pitches and keep your team in the game longer. I know wins are a dead stat, but a 19-6 pitcher can’t be too overrated.
No, if you think about it, a 19-6 pitcher is precisely the kind that gets overrated.
If a guy has a K/9 of only 7.32 and he’s touted as a CY frontrunner then I would definitely consider him overrated. Unless he’s throwing an insane BB/9 of, like, .70 or something (cough, cough).
Did you ever consider the possibility that if he really wanted to, he could probably strikeout more guys at the expense of innings/wins? K/9 and other rate stats really only matter for relievers (since relievers are essentially guys who can’t cut for more than 1-2 innings as starters). What’s relevant for starters is whether they can get K’s when it matters.
I’ll accept your argument if you accept that
“when it matters” = every single batter faced by a pitcher
That’s a disingenuous and futile retort…
If the bases are empty and there’s two outs, does it really matter whether it’s a strikeout or a popout? If the bases are loaded and there’s two outs, does it really matter whether it’s a strikeout or a popout? In the real world where real wins matter more than fantasy points, xFIP, and WAR, strikeouts really only matter when you have runner on 3rd and less than two outs. The myth of K/9 being a meaningful metric for evaluating starters needs to be debunked. It’s a peripheral of marginal importance, nothing more.
Outs are outs, and anyone who knows anything about body mechanics and modern medicine would appreciate that maximizing the ratio of pitches/outs is desirable, not just for winning games (e.g., by going longer into games and minimizing the toll on the bullpen), but for the sake of one’s personal well being. Typically, that’s not achieved by trying to maximize strikeouts.
Your stance doen’t hold water, which is presumably why you left a snide remark as opposed to your verbose replies previously. It was apparent reading them that you were motivated by a personal dislike of CC as opposed to anything objective.
James:
I would be interested to see if some pitchers, over the long term (career), do actually strike batters out more often in “clutch” situations. My guess would be that, in a career, a pitcher’s K rates stay pretty constant regardless of situation,
In Sabathia’s case, he seems to perform worst in the more crucial situations, according to baseball reference:
RISP: 2.3 K/BB, 20.5 K/100 PA
No Runners: 2.9 K/BB, 21.3 K/100 PA
Runner on 3B, less than 2 out: 1.8 K/BB, 16.7 K/100 PA
Runner on 3B, with 2 outs: 2.2 K/BB, 23.5 K/100 PA
I use K/BB rates and K rates because they are, indeed, important stats. To argue that K/9 is a marginal peripheral statistic is a very incorrect statement. I agree with your point about reducing pitches thrown per out so as to go deeper into games (and seasons), but K/9 is definitely an important component.
The linear correlation coefficient between K/9 and Runs/9 is -0.35. This comes from a sample of 2,750 pitcher seasons of at least 100 innings over the last 20 years. Considering all of the little things that go into pitching, for any one stat to have such a high correlation is a strong statement that K/9 is important to successful pitching (preventing runs). On a side note, K/BB has a correlation coefficient to R/9 of -0.51. Ratio stats measure efficiency to some degree, and are therefore very important to pitching in this case.
How good is the actual correlation? The coefficient is important, but only if the correlation is good to begin with.
The R2 on those observations is what?
I think you’re confusing the CORRELATION coefficient with the coefficient in the linear regression formula.
The correlation coefficient, basically R, is -0.35, and thus the R^2 is about 0.13, suggesting that K/9 explains approximately 13% of all fluctuations in R/9.
The coefficient in the linear regression formula is -0.23. A rise in K/9 by one additional strikeout per 9 innings averages a drop in R/9 by about 0.23, all else being equal (of course, this relationship is likely not linear at its extremes, but within the intervals of K/9 commonly seen it’s probably a good estimation).
The P-value of K/9 was virtually 0, indicating the regression believes with almost 100% certainty that K/9 is affecting R/9.
I’m not confusing anything.
The coefficient in the linear regression is useless if the correlation is no good. An R2 of .13 in my view is a somewhat questionable correlation – not meaningless, but not solid either.
You can draw a linear regression line through any scatter plot and get a slope – it is only meaningful if the correlation is good to begin with.
And that p-value (if I’m not mistaken) says that the variable almost cretainly impacts R/9…. but that doesn’t mean it is almost certainly impacting it by the factor of the linear regression
Again I may be mistaken but quoting a p value which says K/BB or K/9 impact runs/game is not the same as saying it impacts it by -.23 (or whatever the linear coefficient is).
Also you’re runner on 3rd #’s are way too small to do any sort of meaningful analysis (they amount to what would ~10-15 starts each) and they are way too small to say you are actually isolating the 2 out vs less than 2 out variable when there are hundreds of other factors (score, opponent. handedness, etc) that could be impacting data sets that small. That would be like drawing meaning between SO/BB rates of a pitcher in Apr/May vs Jun/Jul in a given year and assume there are no other variables in play (park opponent, rest, etc..)
James,
Again, I’ll buy your reasoning if you can show me that “inducing pop-ups” is a significant, repeatable skill for pitchers as much as inducing strike-outs is. It’s not accurate to say that the choice is between a K and a pop-up with no men on base; the choice is between a K and a ball in play. I don’t care how many outs or how many men on base, a K is a better outcome than a ball in play.
Aaron – I’ve now seen that argument a lot of times in SABR circles, but there is one key issue with your question of is a K or a ball in play a better outcome:
A pitcher can attempt to strike every guy out, but you can’t ethat will be the outcome, that is only the outcome 20-25% of the time (or less depending on how good the pitcher is). The rest of the time the pitcher will walk the batter or give up a ball in play anyway so you are really doing an apples to orange comparison. You are predicting the outcome in one case (the K) and leaving the outcome open (ball in play) in the other case.
If you assume the pitcher has zero control over a ball in play,, the outcomes you want to compare is a ball in play vs OBP (or wOBA if you prefer) when going for a strikeout. So the question becomes is a pitcher “pitching to contact” (for lack of a better phrase) reducing his walk rate to account for the fewer strikeouts and more hits from the extra balls in play. The answer is probably no. But the secondary question then becomes in certain situations (2 out noone on or a big lead or a specific spot in the order) – is the extra risk of a man on base worth the benefit of pitch efficiency in low leverage situations?
If you simply listen to a game on TBS you’ll hear Smoltz talk about this from time to time. He’ll mention in certain situations when there’s 2 strikes he’ll go after the strikeout, while in other circumstances depending on the count and situation he won’t. You may disagree with his logic, but to say MLB pitchers do not alter their approach on striking batters out is wrong.
While pitching to a situation may not have a huge impact on a pitchers #’s and I can understand how people could argue it does not have a significant impact, I don’t understand how people can argue it doesn’t exist at all and a pitcher merely tries to strike every batter out. I’m sure some pitchers do (especially reliever), but I’m sure some don’t and when guys like Smoltz comment on it I don’t see how folks can say it doesn’t exist.
Aaargh typing skills… that first sentence in second paragraph should be “you can’t be sure that will be”
I’m certainly willing to listen when a HOF pitcher talks about his craft but just because he talks about his process doesn’t mean that he’s talking accurately about his process. Tennis players will tell you that they roll their wrists as they hit a top spin shot but that’s not true. Now, a pitcher saying that he will alter his approach based on his mental assessment of the situation is different from an athlete commenting on his physical process but still, assuming that a player is aware of his process and goals can be problematic.
Aside from that you seem to be saying that some pitchers by going for the strikeout are going to be increasing their chances of allowing a walk or some other bad outcome. That may be true but that doesn’t change the fact that a strikeout is a better outcome than a ball in play even if going for a strikeout somehow not the best strategy.
As far as I can tell CC has a Pitch/Batter about .2 to .3 lower than average. If it’s because of choices that he’s made in his pitching strategy then he’s saving himself something like 6 to 8 pitches per start. Is that significant? It doesn’t seem like much but who knows. From what I’ve read it seems like up to a point extra pitches do no harm to a pitcher and past that point they do so it’s hard to tell.
Maybe CC has found the proper balance for himself and that increasing his K/9 to 8.5 would also increase him BB/9 to 3.5. Maybe he’s decided poorly and increasing his K/9 wouldn’t increase his BB/9. Maybe he can’t physically increase his K/9 no matter what he does. Either way, all I’m saying is that with his current numbers he shouldn’t be considered an elite. Very good, yes. A legitimate top of the rotation arm, probably. One of the very best pitchers in baseball, top 5%? Nah. Maybe not even top 10%.
In relationship to the p-value for my regression, the 95% confidence interval for the formula’s coefficient of K/9 was -0.21 to -0.25. So that’s a pretty tight range.
Consider this: I performed a whole multiple regression on the same sample of pitchers using 7 statistics as explanatory variables for R/9. Those 7 x-variables were K/9, HR/9, UIBB/9, IBB/9, HBP/9, LOB% and BABIP.
The R-square for this multiple regression was 0.991, indicating that very little ELSE affects R/9. Every p-value was either 0, or virtually 0.
When I individually ran single-independent-variable regressions for each x-variable from above, I got the following R-square values:
LOB% 0.66
HR/9 0.38
BABIP 0.28
UIBB/9 0.13
K/9 0.13
HBP/9 0.06
IBB/9 0.00
You’ll notice that LOB% and BABIP are, in part, functions of K/9, BB/9, and HR/9 (among other things), and should therefore have higher R^2 values since they can explain more. For the “singular” stats, only HR/9 has a higher R^2 value than K/9, and even 0.38 wouldn’t be considered very strong by itself. My point is, I think you have to use all of these stats (except maybe IBB/9) to get the whole picture. Because R/9 is the function of a complex process involving many random variables, no single one of those variables can possible have a huge R^2, but together they are all important.
If you believe that BABIP is largely uncontrollable, and that LOB%, while it can be affected by pitcher attributes moreso than BABIP, is also largely a product of timing (perhaps luck), then our most important stats to focus on are HR/9, K/9 and BB/9 because pitchers have more demonstrable control over these things.
Which brings me back to my original argument, I think K/9 on of the most important stats for measuring a pitcher’s ability, and predicting his future.
Also, I agree that those runner-on-3rd-stats are not plentiful enough for rigorous stats analysis. That being said, they are the only things we have for gauging whether or not Sabathia changes his approach in “clutch situations,” and they are not pointing in your theory’s direction.
Man I wish I knew how to run those stats analyses.
CC’s GB% is certainly solid this year but it’s certainly not one of the best in baseball, Cy Young shoe in, elite. In fact, he just scrapes into the top twenty in the category.
50.7% isn’t that amazing. It is good for the K/9 he has but if that starts to drop then Yankees fans have something to worry about..
Yeah, it would be a total disaster for the Yankees if he followed up his 19 win season and 20+ win season with a few merely 17 or 18 win seasons. And sure, yeah, wins can overrate. But a guy who consistently adjusts, jsut about always throws strikes, hardly EVER blows up or leaves after 3 or 4 innings is immensely valuable for a team with a high-powered offense like the Yankees. Anyone who has watched CC pitch the last several months who thinks the Yankees have something to worry about it clearly completely insane. The Yankees may have things to worry about, but none of those things have anything to do with CC Sabathia. And if you are watching the game right now you know exactly what I am talking about.
No one is saying that “the Yankees have something to worry about.” The debate is whether CC Sabathia is an elite #1 or a good #1. I would simply contend that a guy with a career K/9 in the mid 7’s and a good-but-not-great BB/9 and GB% can’t be called elite.
Just a note, CC’s Zone % is 46th out of 98 qualifying starters, which could hardly be described as “just about always throws strikes.”
Sorry Dannux but if CC drops below 7 K/9 and his GB% stays constant then there is something to worry about. And CC pitches so long because he gets outs. If the outs stop coming then he doesn’t go as far. And I said for the future. Unless you think he will continue throwing 200 innings to the end of his long contract. In which case, good luck.
Actually, the comment I replied to said that the Yankees DO have something to worry about. But regardless, I hear you. I just don’t see his stuff getting worse. He still sits at 92-93, he still pumps it up to 95 or 96 every now and then. His command is impeccable. He definitely seems to adjust to sutuations and get more K’s in tough spots. I grant, this is rather anecdotal for a Fangraphs discussion, but they guy is really amazing to watch. He is a really smart pitcher who seems to pace himself, and pitch to situations and there are guys like that from time to time who outpitch their peripherals. Not by a lot. But enough to notice. There is just nothing I have noticed that seems to indicate he is slipping at all. As for whether he is “elite” or not, yeah, maybe not this year. Maybe not last year. But he is incredibly reliable, adjusts really well, and his upside is still tremendous when he gets rolling. So I just don’t think he is about to fall off a cliff.
Of the guys in the AL ahead of CC in GB%, only Liriano, hernandez and Lester are ahead of him in k/9. Only Hernandez and Liriano are ahead of him in bb/9. I am not saying that CC is the second best pitcher in the AL, and I understand that these stats can seem a little cherry picked. But he is a tremendously durable groundball pitcher who doesn’t walk many people and still is in the top 20 in K/9. I am just saying he has a variety of skills, 2 of which are improving, one of which is declining. His repertoire is still impressive and not something that has me terribly worried as a Yankee fan.
I didn’t mean he would fall off a cliff at all but to see him become a mid 3 era guy wouldn’t surprise me. Not bad at all but not what he is being paid for.
And the problem I have with “he comes up big at big moments is that it is based on what you remember from a game and not necessarily stats. Like his K/9 is the same in high leverage situations as low leverage and medium leverage situations it is lower. And his K/9 drops below 7 with runners on base.
The reason you think that about CC is that you associate him with exciting moments. With runner on 1st and 3rd and 2outs you remember the strikeout because it made you jump up in celebration. What you end up forgetting by the next day is the single he gave up before that to drive in a run because that was negative. It is how the brain works. Same with judging defense based on what you see.
I get it, James. I do understand that my recollections are anecdotal. I acknowledged that in one of my comments. My broader point is that until the majority of his skills seem to be declining Yankee fans are not going to sweat too much. Most pitchers’ k% decline with runners on base for obvious reasons. And yeah, maybe he has one more year like this, then becomes a mid 3.00 ERA kind of guy for 2 years, then becomes a 4.00 ERA for the last two years. That is fine and that is not something that will be a major issue for the Yankees, so long as he is healthy and eating innings at that rate. Of course he will decline over time–just about every pitcher does. But if we are arguing about whether he is a top 5 pitcher or a top 10 pitcher, then he clearly isn’t declining too rapidly. Right now, everything about what he is doing makes Yankee fans feel pretty good about that contract.
The local Rays broadcasters just trotted out their four Cy Young candidates – Sabathia, Price, Cahill, Lester. I don’t think they’ve ever heard of King Felix. According to them, Sabathia and Price are the two best lefties in baseball, and Price is the most dominant pitcher period.
Funny/sad to see the contrast in styles in the Rays organization.
FO: Smart, sabermetrically inclined, one of the best.
Broadcast team: Foolish, idiotic, ignorant, Murray-chass idolatry.
Dewayne Staats and Kevin Kennedy – nice job!
Funny that people totally omit Liriano. Reason the twins are so good? Check. Give them a chance to win every time he pitches? Check. Was he supposed to be this good? Check. Strikeout machine? Check. Do the common yet less effective stats match up (ERA, Wins) with the sabermetrics (FIP, xFIP, tERA)? I believe so.
The announcers (and with MLB fanpack on DirecTV i can notice this all around the country) tend to look at the list of ERA’s (like Kenny Singelton for the Yanks did sometime today) and read off the top 5 names when referring to C.Y. candidates. Cahill, Buchholz, Sabathia, Price. Or wins leaders. It’s silly
There is a good difference between Liriano’s ERA and FIP.
Compare Liriano and Price – Price has more innings, more wins, fewer losses, a better ERA, and a better adjusted ERA. Liriano can’t be favored over Price based on year to date on-field performance.
Liriano has been the most dominating pitcher this year hands down but it’s a shame he won’t win it simply because his ERA is high. He has been better than Price in everything but luck. His K/9, BB/9, and GB% are all better than Price. Price’s ERA is just so ‘good’ it looks like his year has been more dominating when it isn’t the case.
Price has all of 6 more innings in the same 27 starts, insignificant.
Liriano’s FIP, full run better. Liriano’s xFIP, again, a full run better. Liriano has a better strikeout rate, a better walk rate, a superior groundball rate.
You’re absolutely right, Liriano can’t possibly be favored for his on-field performance.
Funny that people totally omit Liriano. Reason the twins are so good? Check. Give them a chance to win every time he pitches? Check
——————-
Liriano has had 6 starts this season where he either didn’t make it out of the 4th or gave up 5+ runs. So that is almost a quarter of his starts he hurt the Twins chances of winning greatly. Far from “giving them a chance to win every time he pitches”
I really did not foresee Tejada being the better acquisition for the Padres than Ludwick. He’s been solid for them.
And this is why wins are a stupid stat
Both CC and Price were dominant tonight and neither of them will be getting a win
I don’t think anyone here is going to argue for the validity of wins.
Anyone coming away impressed with Esmil Rogers? This is my first time seeing him… good stuff, dynamite fastball
and as a converted SS should become more comfortable pitching
He definitely has potential and has had his bright moments, which is why he was rated as the Rockies 4th best prospect before the season by Purple Row. However, he is out of options, so it will be interesting to see how the FO handles him going into 2011.
What was Brett Gardner doing? Why steal 3rd in that situation?
Girardi has CURTIS FREAKING GRANDERSON bunt with one on and no out in order for Colin Curtis to swing away. Jesus. Sometimes I wish I never knew anything about sabermetrics. Maybe ignorance is bliss.
LOL.
I am a Yankee fan, and that was one frustrating game. Gaudin and Mitre before Chamberlain and Robertson? I’m eager to hear what Girardi has to say about the bullpen management tonight.
Mike Adams and Heath Bell are REALLY good.
I was hoping this guy would show up in this thread. Maybe next time.
Don’t worry, he’ll be back with yet another round of petty, middle-school quality insults sometime soon.
Longest 1-0 walk-off HR game since 9/2/01 when Ryan Klekso took Byung-Hyun Kim deep in the bottom of the 13th. It’s happened about 5 times in the 10th inning subsequently.
Any avid Mariner fan remembers Mike Cameron’s walkoff in the bottom of the 19th to win 2-1. It may not have been 1-0, but my little 12-year-old self was excited.