The Bullpen Has Saved, and Killed, the White Sox

On Monday, the White Sox lost 1-0, so that makes things fairly uncomplicated — they lost because they didn’t score. It happens. Also, they ran into Matt Harvey, and the Mets had reportedly identified a problem with Harvey’s mechanics beforehand, so if Harvey’s back on track now, well, there’s no shame in losing to him. Matt Harvey is an ace, and sometimes aces shut people out.

That’s how the White Sox lost their most recent game. Now let’s talk about the previous games.

Sunday, the White Sox played the Royals, and the White Sox led the Royals. Here’s the win expectancy chart:

whitesox3

When the White Sox bullpen took over, they had a win expectancy of 84%. Saturday, the White Sox played the Royals, and the White Sox led the Royals. Here’s the win expectancy chart:

whitesox2

When the White Sox bullpen took over, they had a win expectancy of 97%. Friday, the White Sox played the Royals, and the White Sox led the Royals. Here’s the win expectancy chart:

whitesox1

When the White Sox bullpen took over, they had a win expectancy of 86%. If you followed the series, I’m not showing you anything you didn’t already realize — there’s nothing subtle about a late-inning comeback, much less a few of them. The Royals have grown accustomed to such clutch-ness. As for the White Sox, it was more or less rock bottom for a bullpen unit that has struggled in May after a phenomenal opening month.

To an extent, you could say the White Sox have gone as the bullpen has gone. I don’t spend a lot of time focusing on Win Probability Added, or WPA, but I do like using it for relievers, since so much of their value is about context. And, the White Sox started hot. Through the end of April, they were 17-8, and they had baseball’s second-highest bullpen WPA. It’s not like that was the only thing working; the team had, and has, quality starters. But the bullpen hardly gave opponents anything. It had a WPA nearly two wins better than the average.

May has turned into a very different story. The White Sox’s run production is actually up, and the rotation has only somewhat regressed. Yet the team has a monthly record of 10-17, owing to the fact that the bullpen has baseball’s lowest WPA since the calendar turned. It’s not simply that a strength turned into less of a strength. It’s that a strength turned into a crippling weakness, with the May bullpen WPA being nearly four wins worse than the average.

Here’s a plot for every team, showing April bullpen WPA and May bullpen WPA. The relationship isn’t that tight, because bullpens function semi-randomly, but I’ve highlighted the White Sox because they still stand out.

bullpenswpa

Second-best, to first-worst. The White Sox aren’t totally alone; Oakland’s bullpen WPA dropped 3.2 wins between months. But the White Sox dropped 5.4 wins between months. The Astros improved by 3.1 wins, and the Brewers improved by 2.4 wins, and the White Sox got worse by about that same amount combined. No other bullpen showed that kind of WPA drop between months. No team’s rotation showed that kind of WPA drop between months. No team’s lineup showed that kind of WPA drop between months. The bullpen has been extremely volatile, and team records are sensitive to that, due to how bullpens pitch with higher leverage.

Of every White Sox reliever to pitch in April, only Jake Petricka and Zach Duke had a negative WPA. Of every White Sox reliever to pitch in May, only Dan Jennings has had a positive WPA. Matt Purke is in second, at an even 0.00. I don’t want to be too mean to anyone in particular when an entire unit has failed, but Matt Albers finished May with a WPA of -1.50, which is tied for the lowest mark in baseball for the month if I’m reading this right. We have these statistics called Shutdowns and Meltdowns. Click that if you don’t know them! In April, Albers had eight Shutdowns and zero Meltdowns. In May, he’s had one Shutdown and six Meltdowns. They’ve pretty much all been worse, so Albers hasn’t been the only villain, but he’s been the most villainous, and the White Sox have lost because of it.

When a bullpen fails, everything looks worse. Everyone’s more dejected, and that dejection colors perspectives, and fans start asking about the manager. It’s arguably the worst way to lose, but if it’s any consolation, we actually project the White Sox bullpen to be one of the better ones. And it was just good a month ago, so some of these lousy results can simply be dismissed as unfortunate. Nevertheless, the losses all count, and as Rick Hahn gets looking at rotation candidates like James Shields, he might also consider giving his bullpen a shot in the arm. The bullpen helped get the White Sox off to an outstanding start, but that raised expectations, and for a few weeks they haven’t been met. This can be salvaged, but it’ll take work in a competitive division. I know these are virtually empty statements but there’s an opportunity here, and Hahn can’t focus on the rotation alone.

Why did the White Sox suddenly start losing? Mostly because the bullpen gave out. That was made most evident over the weekend, and no team’s bullpen is really this bad, at least outside of Cincinnati. As the bullpen regains form, so, too, should the White Sox as a whole. But this does point to an area of potential improvement. There are a few places for the White Sox to add to their depth.





Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.

26 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Krisco
7 years ago

Rick Hahn might want to trade for Mike Trout, too. But that isn’t going to happen either, because there might be only 2 players worth trading for in the Sox’ whole farm system. And the Sox seem reluctant to let either of them go.

Chris Kmember
7 years ago
Reply to  Krisco

I know those words, but that sign makes no sense.

Proviatoes
7 years ago
Reply to  Krisco

huh? The White Sox aren’t going to trade for Mike Trout, because… even their best two prospects are not worth him.

But, I get what you’re saying, adding some bullpen arms is a lot like trading for Mike Trout…. uh huh.

Krisco
7 years ago
Reply to  Proviatoes

The article listed James Shields and bullpen upgrades as shopping list items for the White Sox. My point is that they’re not any more likely to pull the trigger on Shields than they are to trade for Trout, because they’re not willing (and/or able) to pay the necessary price in prospects.

You’re right, though, I used an example that was maybe a little too extreme. I don’t think the Angels would take anything short of Sale and Rodon for Trout.

cornflake5000
7 years ago
Reply to  Krisco

I understood what you were saying… I think Hahn is usually pretty transparent about what he hopes to accomplish… they just don’t have the assets, or willing to trade their two biggest assets.

7 years ago
Reply to  Krisco

Shields is an older pitcher who has been pretty good after a down year on a bad team, so there is some value there. But at the same time he can opt out of his deal after this season if he has a great year, but if he doesn’t the team that trades for him owes him 44 plus the balance of this year’s contract over the next three seasons. It’s not like he’s Sonny Gray or something. Any major league team has the resources necessary to get Shields, even if that is mostly taking on his contract.

JediHoyer
7 years ago
Reply to  Krisco

If they take all of shields contract they wouldn’t give up anything. Sp is just the last area they should target. Ss, cf, dh, bullpen. That’s where I would focus first. I would rather have jon jay and Fernando Rodney than shields, Maybe even brett Wallace.

cornflake5000
7 years ago
Reply to  JediHoyer

I think they have enough holes that they should be making the trade that adds the most value regardless of position… they’ve got to do a few more buy low deals like they made in the offseason.

Krisco
7 years ago
Reply to  cornflake5000

“Buy low” has been the M.O. for Williams and Hahn for a very long time. The problem with the approach is that you only get to the playoffs when you catch lightning in a bottle and everything falls perfectly into place.

The Mat Latos signing is a good example. Looked like a genius move when he gave up only 2 runs over his first 4 starts (combined). Over the last 5 starts, though, it’s been 4, 4, 5, 5, and 3 earned runs. His xFIP is 5.24 now. Another “buy low” bust, it looks like, right? They run into trouble when guys like Latos come back to Earth, which happens very consistently (and not unexpectedly). It was low risk, but it also now looks very low reward. Not the answer.

If they’re trying to build around Sale and Quintana and win now (and why wouldn’t you, right?) they have no choice but to overpay for FA and trade targets. Doing it on the cheap isn’t going to get them to the playoffs, but it might help make it look like they’re TRYING to get there.

cornflake5000
7 years ago
Reply to  Krisco

I’m looking at their assets (LaRoche’s $13m, Fullmer & Anderson) and then looking at their needs… they can use LaRoche’s money to cover the cost of Shields this year, but I don’t see him opting out of that contract. If they’re willing to trade Fullmer and Anderson, what do you think they can bring back, and is that enough to matter?

I get it, you don’t want to waste Sale & Quintana. Right now the Sox remind me of the Hendry years, but without the assets. He kept trading assets to polish a turd for two seasons after the window closed.

I think however you look at the Sox, they’re in a tough position.

Krisco
7 years ago
Reply to  cornflake5000

Yeah, they are. And maybe the problem is that they had too many holes to fill in the offseason, and not enough resources to fill them. April looks more and more like a small-sample-size fluke.

Sale and Quintana are pure gold, and Rodon still has time to become that. There isn’t enough talent to support those guys, though, and the back half of the rotation is really going to weigh them down as the season goes on.

JediHoyer
7 years ago
Reply to  cornflake5000

Saying those are their only assets is selling a lot of guys short. Spencer adams, tyler danish, jordan guerrero, trey michalewski, jhoandro alfaro. All those guys have value too. You don’t have to be on everyone’s top 100 list to be an asset.

cornflake5000
7 years ago
Reply to  JediHoyer

What I don’t get is why they aren’t going nuts on the International Market like other big market teams. Even if I’m underselling what they do have, they should be out there gathering assets and being creative.

I personally didn’t think they had much on the MLB roster going into the offseason. I certainly didn’t see them having the best AL record 6 weeks in. I wasn’t sure that they’d even be as good as they are now.

I’m not slamming the fans, but how much more money would they have to spend if another 10,000 a game showed up? (serious question… what kind of player could they add?)

Krisco
7 years ago
Reply to  cornflake5000

It’s a really good question. Good for a Fangraphs article, I’d say. White Sox home attendance has declined every single year for something like the last 9 years at this point. Revenue has to be down, and it’s going to get worse for them once the current TV deal expires. They currently co-own a station with the Cubs, Bulls and Blackhawks, but the Cubs won’t continue as part of that deal once they’re able to negotiate their own full TV deal. And the Cubs are easily the most valuable property in the current arrangement. As it stands, the more people who watch the Cubs on Comcast SportsNet, the more the White Sox benefit (as co-owners). Ironic! Or something!

When the current deal ends, the Cubs will make a mint when they negotiate their next deal. The White Sox… will likely be less fortunate. And they can’t get people to come to their games. Meanwhile, the White Sox front office quietly laid off a bunch of support staff a year or two ago. That’s not conjecture—I know a guy who was part of the layoffs. Times are lean, and getting leaner.

This year’s start might have given them a boost, but it looks like there’s a good chance it’ll be short-lived. South Siders don’t show up to watch a .500 team. And I don’t say that as either a compliment or a criticism of Sox fans; it’s merely an observation.

cornflake5000
7 years ago
Reply to  Krisco

This might sound like an odd question considering Chicago is the 3rd largest market, but I wonder if Chicago can support the Sox. It’s a bit of a hyperbole, but their fansbase seems to be smaller than the Cubs and I don’t think they get the same corporate money either. You’re right, fans won’t show up for a bad team, but they also can’t consistently spend (I know they’ve had some years up there in salary) like a big market club. I am a Cubs fan, but I’m also a baseball fan in general and am proud of the fact that we’re a two team town. I’m well aware in the 70s, Cubs fans didn’t show up either and Wrigley wasn’t always a cash cow… but I sincerely wonder what the Sox can do to grow their organization. Instead of talking about moving the Cubs to Rosemont, I wonder if that would be a good location for the Sox… Maybe somewhere around Oakbrook, where they can still cater to the southern parts of the city and their fanbase, but be in an area with some money. I’m just throwing ideas out there, not really sure what’s feasible.

Krisco
7 years ago
Reply to  cornflake5000

As soon as the White Sox’ lease is up (in 2029), my guess is that they’ll move. The only question is: will it be out to Oak Brook or somewhere else like that in the suburbs, or will it be to a growing urban area somewhere else in the country (Charlotte, San Antonio, etc.)

Here’s a great article about how they got their last stadium deal: http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/ct-cell-at-25-haugh-spt-0522-20160521-column.html

tl/dr: It took an epic backroom deal to get them U.S. Cellular Field—a deal of the kind that isn’t feasible anymore in Chicago’s current financial mess. They were all set to move to St. Petersburg, FL. It was a done deal, but they were saved at the very last second. It won’t happen that way again.

My best guess? Meet your 2030 San Antonio White Sox.

Proviatoes
7 years ago
Reply to  Krisco

2030? Who knows what will happen in 14 years. Predicting the future is hard. Really hard.

Maybe new ownership could help?