Beyond the Box Score

Finish this sentence:

2012-05-16T20:15:10Z

By now, most if not all you have seen that terrible moment from last night when Brett Lawrie threw his helmet down after a couple questionable calls by the ump -- and it either hit or grazed the ump when he did so. Check it out:

(h/t to reddit)

As far as I know, he hasn't been suspended yet, but he should be. And outside of the most outrageous, unacceptably violent and/or intolerant behavior by the ump preceding the scene shown in the .gif, the tirade is beneath the dignity of Major League Baseball and arguments to the contrary can be dismissed. Which isn't to say the ump is without fault, of course.

But then Peter Gammons tweeted this lil' doozy out this afternoon:

If Delmon Young had done what Brett Lawrie did...
— Peter Gammons (@pgammo) May 16, 2012

I think I'll just leave this here without further comment. Feel free to finish the sentence.

Derek Lowe, Pitching to Contact?

2012-05-16T17:34:53Z

1. Derek Lowe is the 2012 MLB leader in ERA.
2. Derek Lowe pitched a shutout last night, May 15th, 2012.
3. Nobody expected either of the above. What gives?

Our friend Harry Pavlidis of The Hardball Times takes a look at Lowe's pitch types vs. contact rates and concludes that Lowe is "pitching to contact" (shudder). But there are several quick lessons that can help us answer the question posed above.

First, we know ERA is suspect because it fails to include (exclude) defense, and a closer look shows that he's benefiting from his defense this season while actually pitching much the same as seasons past. Here's a good, simple lesson on why ERA is flawed:

One might expect Lowe's ERA to regress to the mean.

Note that Harry's analysis is still essentially correct -- Lowe just isn't getting whiffs at all this season compared to his career marks:

The question, beyond the range of this analysis, is whether or not he's doing it on purpose.

For fun, here's a look at Lowe as he edges up to the "not quite Hall of Fame" zone:

Nearly 50 WAR -- quite a career indeed. But Hall-of-Fame worthy? Probably not.

Bryce Harper, Mike Trout, and the Race for History

2012-05-15T16:00:34Z

There are currently two position players in baseball that are younger than 21: one of them, Mike Trout, is 20 years old; the other, Bryce Harper, is 19. Harper and Trout came in at #1 and #3, respectively, on Baseball America's top 100 prospects for 2012, as well as Minor League Ball's top 120 prospects. I need not explain that these are two extremely talented players who -- if they live up to the hype -- have marvelous careers ahead of them.

But it's worth noting that they've already accomplished a lot, just being in the majors already. In fact, if they can continue to be moderately productive for the rest of the season, they'll both put their names up alongside some pretty rare and special company.

Let's first examine the case of Trout. During the expansion era (since 1961), only 32 20-year-olds have appeared in 100+ games in a single season. Given that Trout has already appeared in 14 games, and that the Los Angeles Angels have 126 games left on their schedule, he's a pretty safe bet to reach that arbitrary mark of 100. That, alone, would put him in a unique class of players -- many of whom went on to produce at elite levels.

But let's expand the criteria. Let's look at pure age-20 production. Tossing away the playing time threshold, we get 31 position players -- in that 50+ year span -- who have topped 1 WAR at age 20. Guys like Alex Rodriguez, Johnny Bench, Roberto Alomar, et al. Trout is probably an even safer bet to join these ranks, as he currently sits at 0.6 WAR on the season.

It's hard to project a player like Trout -- a guy who isn't yet an established major-leaguer -- but a reasonable if pessimistic projection for the rest of the season would simply be his career numbers. In 54 games (196 plate appearances), he's hit .239/.301/.420 (103 OPS+), amassing a whopping 1.1 WAR -- in large part due to his great baserunning and fielding value. If Trout can merely continue along at the pace he's maintained throughout his entire career, and he comes to the plate another 450 times, that would put him at 2.5 WAR for the rest of the season. Add that to the 0.5 WAR he's already accumulated, and that would put him at 3.0 WAR for 2012 -- placing him 12th on the all-time list of 20-year-old players. That would put him right between Elvis Andrus and Joe Torre...not bad.

And given that Trout has gotten off to a scorching start (136 OPS+), this is perhaps a conservative estimate. Consider, for example, that ZiPS projects him to post a .337 wOBA over the rest of the season -- as compared to his career mark of .322.

Bryce Harper is an even more intriguing case, as that one year in age difference is very significant. If Harper reaches that 100-game threshold, he'd be eighth player to do that since 1961. Moreover, only a select few have actually been productive at that age. Eleven 19-year-old position players in that time span have topped 0.5 WAR. That's it. And interestingly enough, Trout is one of those guys.

Can Harper put himself in that company? I think so. He hasn't exactly raked since his call-up, but he's hitting .232/.313/.393. ZiPS projection system has him hitting .236/.314/.402 over 402 plate appearances the rest of the way, which would be worth 1.3 WAR (though do note that this is Fangraphs' implementation of WAR, as opposed to Baseball-Reference's). These projections should probably be taken with a grain of salt for a guy like Harper -- I'd presume he's prone to deviate greatly from these projections, in whatever direction. But just being worth 0.5 WAR would be historic -- and I think that's highly attainable for him.

Anyway, Trout and Harper have created a lot of buzz, and rightfully so. They're insanely talented players and it's going to be great to watch them blossom into stars over the next several years. But it's worth taking a step back and appreciating that, by just being here -- by being productive major-leaguers at such a young age -- they've already done (or rather, already will do) something very few others have done.

A Graphic Look at Jake Peavy: Actual vs Projected (Surprise, He's Overachieving!)

2012-05-15T13:01:17Z

It certainly has been surprising that Jake Peavy has seemed to have found his 2007-self, the one who pitched 223.1 and a career best 2.24 FIP (not to mention, this was his Cy Young-winning season). Last Thursday, David Schoenfield proclaimed Peavy as the best pitcher in baseball, and while only 7 starts into the season he's laying claim to the title of the best pitcher in the AL. Always hard to judge this early into the season, is this just a hot start, or is he set to drop off sometime soon?

Peavy has offically won the Pitcher of the Month award for the AL, so others are recognizing his accomplishments so far. With a FIP of 2.24, he's leading the AL and above names like Jered Weaver (2.25) and another unlikely one, Jason Hammel (2.54). His BABIP isn't of 0.236 is reminiscent of Jeremy Hellickson's last season of 0.223. Although these BABIP numbers do usually fluctuate from year-to-year, over the past 3 seasons, Jered Weaver is a notable AL pitcher that seems to have somewhat consistent numbers:

2009: .278

2010: .276

2011: .250

Something to note from ESPN Stats and Info, this is Jake Peavy 2.0:

To make up for a decline in velocity, Peavy has exercised control. Among American League starting pitchers, Peavy's strikeout-to-walk ratio of 6.29 is tops. Peavy's never finished a season with a strikeout-walk ratio higher than 4.32 (2005).

Now the OLIVER-projected 3.7 WAR for the full season seems to be showing a drop off at some point during the season, but even that puts him closer to his mid-2000's form and is a happy improvement for a pitcher that has been battling injuries the past 4 seasons. Best of luck the rest of the season. At the least, I've picked him up in a fantasy league of mine for the time being.

Check out more infographics on FUNGraphs or follow me on @cobradave

A PITCHf/x Look At Eight Rookie Starters

2012-05-14T16:00:56Z

MLB debuts are awesome to see, for a ton of reasons. One of the more obscure reasons for pitchers is that we get to see them under the PITCHf/x microscope and dissect their arsenal scientifically rather than relying on secondhand information. In many cases, the consensus doesn’t match up well with the Pitch F/X information.

To give just one example, let’s take a look at what Baseball America said about Zach Stewart in its past few Prospect Handbooks:

2009: "[His] 93-96 mph fastball and 82-85 mph slider give him a pair of potential out pitches."

2010: "Stewart’s bread and butter is his hard sinker, which sits at 92-94 mph and touches 95. He also offers a sharp 82-85 mph slider."

2011: "His fastball sits in the low 90s and routinely reaches 95-96 mph, featuring above-average sink. His mid-80s slider has depth and misses bats."

Zach Stewart finally made his debut in late 2011, and he averaged 90.8 mph on his fastball that season. This year, moved to the bullpen, he’s seen his velocity decline to 89.4 mph, while his slider has just sat at 82.

Therefore, Stewart has arrived in the majors with significantly less velocity than advertised, which significantly affects how he projects going forward. Long considered a high-upside player, his current incarnation appears to just be a generic sinker-slider pitcher who could be a fifth starter or middle reliever.

With that in mind, I’m going to take a look at eight starting pitchers that have recently debuted and see what pitches they’ve arrived in the major leagues with.

Drew Pomeranz

The 2011 Baseball America Prospect Handbook was not alone in crediting Pomeranz with good velocity, saying "His fastball sits in the low 90’s and touches 95 mph." I was thus somewhat alarmed when Pomeranz arrived in Colorado last year working at a mere 87-92, averaging 89.6 mph on his fastball.

When I brought this up to others, most wrote it off, mentioning that it was the end of his first professional season, so he was tired, and he was also fresh off returning from an appendectomy. An offseason of rest, they said, would bring his velocity back up.

And it did bring his velocity up…all the way to 89.7 mph. And this is where we need to start worrying.

If you want to be optimistic, you can note that a similar mysterious velocity loss happened to another NL West lefty starter who was a top-10 draft pick, Madison Bumgarner, and ultimately it was just a temporary thing. But if this is basically all there is to Pomeranz, he’s going to struggle. He has a very good curveball that pairs excellent vertical drop with surprising velocity, occasionally reaching up to 81 mph, but he lacks much of a changeup, going to his third pitch just 7% of the time in his young career.

Without big velocity or a changeup to worry about, hitters appear to be focusing on Pomeranz’s curveball when they step into the box, determined not to chase the pitch as it dips below the strike zone. As a result, he has recorded just 54 strikes in 121 curves in his career (44.6%), with just eight (6.6%) being swinging strikes. The pitch is also getting squeezed by umpires a fair amount:

And if Pomeranz doesn’t have that curveball working, he is essentially reduced to throwing fastball after fastball, a formula that isn’t going to work at his present velocity. He does present good deception and gets solid sink on the ball, and it actually has a higher swinging strike rate than the curve in his MLB career, but only a select few starters can survive with a fastball usage of nearly 75%, and Pomeranz’s velocity limitations would seem to make him an awfully poor bet to do so in the short term (Then again, Bartolo Colon sort of turns that idea on its head, doesn’t he?).

That’s not to write off Pomeranz’s future—we’ve been through this drill before with Bumgarner, for one. In fact, if we want to run wild with comps, Pomeranz’s mechanics bear a resemblance to Cliff Lee’s, which makes this a convenient time to remember that Lee was in pitching purgatory as late as his age-28 season, before finally getting his velocity up from 87-92 to 90-93 and instantly morphing into a Cy Young pitcher. And it’s not like Pomeranz has imploded out there—he actually owns a 3.61 FIP across his nine MLB starts, though he’s been hit around a fair bit (28.8% LD, .328 BABIP). And finally, he’s 23 and has time to try to come up with something else that’ll get his MLB career moving forward. Maybe it’s a throwing program to add velocity. Maybe it’s really working on the changeup. Maybe it’s adding a slider, two-seamer, or cutter.

So, there’s still plenty of hope, but major success is likely to elude Pomeranz until and unless he does show his supposed consistent low-90s velocity or comes up with a third pitch that rounds out his arsenal.

Jarrod Parker

Like Pomeranz, Parker debuted last season; in his case, he started the final game of 2011 as his MLB debut. After four solid starts in Triple-A with his new organization this year, Parker has come up to Oakland and posted a 2.10 ERA in four starts despite barely striking out more batters than he’s walked.

The 2011 Prospect Handbook seems to have overestimated his velocity as well, claiming Parker "sat 94-95 mph and touched 97." In the big leagues, he’s worked mostly at 89-95 mph, averaging 92.1, with his fastball.

The pitch has lacked effectiveness thus far. It does bring solid velocity to the table, but he lacks great command of it:

Therefore, he only has gotten strikes on 60.8% of the fastballs he’s thrown in his major league career, including a paltry 3.8% whiff rate. The pitch also doesn’t boast huge movement, which has led to a lot of flies and liners in his five MLB starts, with a low 34% grounder rate.

On a happier note, Parker already boasts a legitimate plus changeup as a 23-year-old. The pitch arrives at 79-83 mph with good sink, giving him a fantastic 11 mph separation between the fastball and changeup. It’s an out pitch to lefthanders, who have really struggled with Parker thus far. He turns to it a quarter of the time against them, basically becoming a two-pitch pitcher. The changeup boasts an impressive 18.1% whiff rate in Parker’s young career.

He also throws a slider in the low 80s with impressive tilt and depth, though he’s turned to it just about 10% of the time thus far and uses it almost exclusively against righties.

The three pitches give him enough looks to be an effective starting pitcher, but the question will be how well he can command his stuff. He’s putting a shade under 40% of his pitches in the strike zone, and that’s already started to catch up to him, as his 12 walks in 25 2/3 innings indicates. He’s also getting first-pitch strikes just over half the time, and batters have often been ahead in counts and gotten to sit on pitches. Parker won’t be stranding 86% of baserunners forever, so he’ll need to adjust when his luck inevitably corrects. He has the talent to do it, but that doesn’t mean we should necessarily assume he will.

Drew Smyly

Smyly surprised many by winning the Tigers’ fifth starter job, and he’s run with it, striking out 34 batters in 34 innings and posting a 1.65 ERA. Unlike Pomeranz and Parker, he generates a ton of swinging strikes (10.2%), so even if his strand rate luck regresses, he’ll still have great numbers if he can continue pitching at this level.

Smyly comes from a very high arm slot, so his fastball is very straight, but it gives him good leverage and plane to the plate. The pitch has reached as high as 96 mph this year, but it’s averaged just 91.5, as he’ll change speeds anywhere from 88 to 96. Still, he brings the ball with above-average velocity for a lefty starter, and the pitch has been good enough to get a solid strike rate (66%) and whiff rate (6.9%).

Smyly is rather unique in that the horizontal movement of his fastball and slider has a very small separation. His fastball lacks the six inches or so of armside run common to four-seamers, running only an average of three or four inches from right to left. Conversely, his slider does not possess the usual glove-side break, failing to cross the vertical axis and moving sort of like a "sinking cutter." The fastball only has 2-3 more inches of horizontal run compared to the slider, which is probably the smallest difference I’ve seen from any pitcher in that aspect. At the same time, however, the pitches have a 10-inch difference in vertical movement, so the slider is almost like a really short 12-to-6 curveball.

Unconventional as his slider—which arrives at 78-83 mph—is, it has proven to be an effective out pitch for Smyly, who leans on it 24% of the time. It has generated a fantastic 19.7% whiff rate.

Smyly also throws a cutter, which, paradoxically, has no more cut than his regular fastball. It does get more sink, however, and is the main pitch Smyly looks to to get groundballs—12 of the 14 balls in play against the pitch have been on the ground, compared to just 11 of 32 for the fastball. The cutter sits comfortably in between the fastball and slider both in terms of velocity and vertical movement. As with the fastball, he varies the speed, throwing the pitch anywhere from 83 to 90, usually averaging around 86-87.

He also has an occasional changeup/splitter in the mid-80s that is not a major part of his arsenal. It does offer a bit more armside run than his other pitches, but it often comes in too hard and flat at this point.

Smyly is a profoundly odd pitcher on the whole—the horizontal movement on all his pitches is shockingly similar, but the vertical movement is strikingly different and he makes a point to vary the velocity on all of his offerings. It’ll be fascinating to see how hitters adapt to this.

Drew Hutchison

Hutchison has posted some eye-popping numbers in the minor leagues, but he’s been up and down in five major league starts, with a 5.53 ERA and 4.04 FIP. He’s another pitcher who seems to have control but lacks command, as he seems to pound the bottom part of the zone without much regard for exactly where in the zone he is:

Thus far, he’s leaned very heavily on his fastball, throwing it 77% of the time. He parks the pitch in the 89-94 mph range, averaging 90.9 thus far. The fastball has some sink, but it seems to be otherwise unremarkable; it has a swinging strike rate of 5.5%, which is solid but unspectacular. For all the control greatness he showed in the minors, he’s gotten strikes with the fastball just 59.4% of the time in the majors. Like Parker, he’s only in the zone around 40% of the time overall, with a first-pitch strike rate just over 50%; both of those numbers will need to come up if he is to find consistent success.

Without the luxury of being ahead in the count, Hutchison has shied away from using his slider and changeup. Of the 76 sliders he’s thrown, he has just six called strikes, because he likes to bury the pitch:

The slider is quite effective in this pattern because Hutchison uses it so judiciously, mainly when he’s ahead in the count. It actually goes for strikes more than the fastball does because batters chase it so often, and it has a 14.5% whiff rate thus far. It’s a power breaker in the 81-86 range, averaging 83.3, and it features good vertical depth.

Hutchison’s changeup is a moving offspeed pitch that lacks good velocity separation (82-86 mph), but does boast plenty of run and sink. He’s turned to the pitch just 7-8% of the time, but there’s reason to think it could play just fine with additional exposure.

In order to become an effective big league starter, Hutchison will need to get better command of his fastball, which will in turn allow him to deploy his secondary pitches with increased frequency and take some pressure off his fastball. Most of the rawness we’re seeing here is probably due to his youth (he’s just 21) and the fact that he’s really just spent half a year above the Midwest League, making 10 starts in High-A and six in Double-A. Give him time and he should be able to settle down.

Joe Wieland

Like Hutchison, Wieland is a guy who put up huge minor league numbers without ever getting credited as having great "stuff." He made five solid starts (24 K, 9 BB in 27 2/3 IP, 4.55 ERA) for the Padres before hitting the DL earlier this month.

Wieland averaged 89.7 mph with his fastball in those starts, but that overall figure is somewhat misleading:

In his first start, he averaged 91 mph; in his final one, he was down to 88. Given that he’s on the DL with an elbow problem, it’s quite possible that his "true" average velocity is closer to the former number than the latter. The last start’s low number is almost certainly due to the elbow issue; the question is whether the three starts before it are as well.

Wieland’s fastball is unfailingly straight, which comes with the standard problems of hittability and flyball tendencies—he’s already been touched up for five homers. However, he does spot the pitch quite well, and hasn’t had the same problems Hutchison has despite coming to the big leagues with only 14 starts of upper-minors experience. He has a 65.7% strike rate with the fastball, getting ahead in counts and being able to turn to his secondary pitches frequently (57.3% fastball usage).

Wieland’s main offspeed weapon is a two-plane curveball in the upper 70s that he likes to bury to the glove side:

Wieland repeats his simple delivery well, so his curveball comes out of his hand looking like a fastball, making it tough to lay off of in two-strike counts. It’s already a huge weapon, generating swinging strikes 19.1% of the time.

Wieland also throws a short low-80s slider and a sinking changeup that both look to be usable offerings, with the slider serving as a third pitch to righties and the changeup as a third pitch to lefties. Since he doesn’t have anything that runs back in on righties and his best pitch is the curveball, he should be a platoon-neutral or even a reverse-platoon-split pitcher, which does seem to be borne out in his splits thus far.

Wieland should be able to succeed in the majors as at least a #4-type starter thanks to his control, platoon neutrality, and curveball. Depending on how hard he ends up throwing and how well he learns to locate within the zone, he could reach higher.

David Phelps

I have said since late 2010 that David Phelps should be the Yankees #5 starter, but it took a year and a heck of a lot of pitching turnover for the 25-year-old righthander to get his shot. He lasted all of two starts, with the following line: 8 2/3 IP, 9 H, 2 R, 1 HR, 4 BB, 8 K. That’s not bad, but it wasn’t enough to keep the Yankees from pushing him back to relief due to the return of Andy Pettitte. Certainly, he’s probably first in line when the inevitable next injury hits.

Phelps usually worked in long stints in the bullpen, so he saw no loss of velocity in his two starts. Like Hutchison, he works at 89-94, averaging 91. Unlike Hutchison, he has good command of his fastball and does a good job pounding the glove side with it:

This results in a 65.2% strike rate with the pitch, including a 27.3% called strike rate and 6.1% whiff rate.

Phelps had a reputation for being mostly a fastball guy who lacked a put-away offspeed pitch, and that seems to largely be true. He does have a curveball, a cutter, and a changeup, and these pitches significantly lessen the pressure on Phelps’ solid-average, but not excellent, fastball—Phelps has gone offspeed 43.3% of the time this year. None of the three offerings, however, has a whiff rate higher than the curve’s 11.4%, so he doesn’t have a bigtime "out pitch." The curve is a surprisingly hard (78-82 mph) breaker, and Phelps pounds the zone with the cutter (72.1% strikes), so he’s been able to coax some value out of those two offerings. Like Smyly, the changeup is a distant fourth pitch that is used exclusively to opposite-side batters.

It all adds up to a guy who is more than the sum of his parts; none of Phelps’ pitches wow you, but he’s got three solid pitches and a fourth usable one, and he commands all of them and doesn’t have any obvious weaknesses. The Yankees have high standards, but for almost any other team, Phelps would be a great guy to plug into the back of the rotation.

Pat Corbin

Another pitcher that skipped Triple-A, Corbin has made three decent starts for Arizona, with a 4.50 ERA and 4.20 FIP to go with a 12/5 K/BB in 16 innings. That screams "competence, but not domination." What a weird thing to scream.

Anyway, Corbin is another pitcher who has turned to his fastball over 70% of the time thus far. Unlike Pomeranz and Hutchison, however, Corbin shows as throwing both a four-seamer and a two-seamer on Pitch F/X; perhaps it’s no coincidence he has a 48% groundball rate in his three starts. However, neither pitch (if they are two different pitches) shows a whole lot of sink, but both show excellent armside run. Both pitches sit in the 88-92 mph range, averaging right around 90. The "four-seamer" is listed as going for strikes 59.1% of the time, with the "two-seamer" at 74.4%; they combine to be at a solid 65.8%, though neither generates much in the way of swinging strikes (3.6%).

Corbin throws a soft, slurvy slider in the upper 70s that he has struggled with in the big leagues, often putting it in some downright silly locations:

The pitch doesn’t have much going for it to begin with, so in a way, Corbin is cutting his losses with it, where the worst that can happen is that it goes for a ball. However, often it seems that the best outcome it can generate is a ball, which is a problem, given that the slider is his primary offspeed pitch. This is the sort of pattern you see a lot with guys who skipped Triple-A—Double-A batters might chase a bunch of these pitches, but major league hitters won’t, and Triple-A exposure gives pitchers a bit of a "bridge" between the two to at least somewhat adapt to that reality. Corbin doesn’t have the benefit of that bridge, so he hasn’t made this adjustment yet. Even when he does, it may not be for the better in the short time, because the slider needs a ton of tightening to be effective against big-leaguers.

Corbin also throws a nice running changeup in the 78-82 mph range that has had far more success than the slider in a tiny sample (17 of 25 strikes, four swinging strikes). He’d be far better served making that his primary offspeed offering for the time being, especially against righties.

There’s a fair amount to like here. Corbin presents a good, repeatable motion that features good deception, he gets great running action on his pitches, and he has above-average command for his age. The big question is if he’ll be able to come up with a breaking pitch that can really round out his arsenal. With it, he could be a solid #3 starter; without it, he’ll be pushed toward the back of a rotation or even to situational work.

Christian Friedrich

I suppose it’s appropriate that Pomeranz and Friedrich are the bookends of this piece. They’re both big lefties who were first-round picks whose scouting reports boiled down to "hellacious curve and solid fastball," and they both pitch for the Rockies. In a lot of ways, Pomeranz is Friedrich 2.0, and that’s probably how most Rockies fans think of them. Friedrich is nearing his 25^th birthday and is about two years removed from being highly-touted, as strings of injuries and mediocre performance stalled his career in the upper minors. Pomeranz, on the other hand, sped to the majors in his first pro season and is seen as a rising star.

If you’re jaded by what I wrote about Pomeranz above, you’ve probably long given up hope on Friedrich turning into much of anything; after all, just last year, the guy had a 5.00 ERA in Double-A. How could he possibly succeed in Coors Field?

The lefthander made his MLB debut earlier this month, and to date, that’s his only MLB start, so I’m working with a tiny sample here, but here’s the stunning thing: Not only does his stuff appear to be better than Pomeranz’s, it appears to be superior than that of all the other seven pitchers on this list. And that, of course, includes impressive names like Parker, Smyly, and Hutchison.

Friedrich’s fastball, unlike Pomeranz’s, actually does sit in the low 90s. It averaged 92.4 mph in his start, which automatically excites me; the pitch was in the 91-94 range consistently. As with most high-slot pitchers, the pitch lacks sink, and perhaps we should worry that this is a Colorado pitcher who only saw four of the 15 balls in play against him stay on the ground, but for now, that’s a minor quibble. Friedrich did a great job throwing the pitch for strikes:

With the fastball going for strikes 39 of 53 times, including five whiffs, Friedrich could turn to his other three pitches to put batters away.

The offering Friedrich is best known for is his curveball, a truly jaw-dropping mid-70s offering that presents an incredible 23-inch vertical movement difference from the fastball. He threw 15 of them in his start, getting just one whiff (from the opposing pitcher) and seven strikes, but it’s a weapon that hitters will always have to step in looking for, which creates some value even when the results of the pitch itself aren’t particularly good.

In his start, Friedrich got more out of his slider, which drew three whiffs in ten pitches. It’s a short mid-80s pitch which presents a dramatically different look than the curve, almost like a big cutter.

To top it all off, Friedrich has a fading changeup he can dial down to the low 80s, giving him yet another speed and giving him a pitch that really tails away from righties.

All three offspeed pitches have a lot going for them, and the fastball is good in its own right. As long as Friedrich continues to pound the fastball in there and get ahead of hitters to set up the offspeed pitches, he’s going to be a heck of a pitcher even if he occasionally hangs a curve and watches it get blasted up into the thin Colorado air. The fact that he’s suddenly arrived in the big leagues totally intact and then some after all the stagnation is a huge boost to the Rockies franchise, and Friedrich could be a bigtime impact pitcher if he can stay healthy and he retains this sort of fastball velocity and command.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I hope that was an enjoyable look at what these eight guys bring to the table right now and where that might lead them in the future. In future pieces, I’ll look at some of the rookie relievers, and perhaps even some comeback players. Of course, none of this work would be possible without the great Pitch F/X databases at Texas Leaguers, Brooks Baseball, and FanGraphs.

Their Iconic Season was not their Most Valuable

2012-05-14T13:01:20Z

When you think of Carl Yastrzemski, you think of 1967. When you think of Steve Carlton, you think of 1972.

You should—those were by far their best seasons.

In 1967, Yaz was worth 12.0 WAR as he captured the AL's Triple Crown. He hit .326/.418/.622 with 44 homers and 121 RBI in an offensively depressed era. He was even worth 23 runs in the field (which looks questionable until you see he had 22 the year before and 25 the year after. In 1967, Yaz was simply legit. His next-best season was 1968 with 10.0 WAR. Interestingly, that's the year he won the batting title with a .301 average. Now there's a lesson in era adjustments.

Steve Carlton's 1972 season was special because he won 27 games for a 59-win team. Beyond the wins, he led the league with a 1.97 ERA, 310 Ks and a 182 ERA+. He was worth 11.7 WAR (actually 12.1 if you add his offensive value). His next-best season was 1980, when he again led the league in wins, innings, and strikeouts while accumulating 9.9 WAR (9.8 with offense).

When you think of Roger Maris, what season pops into your mind? How about Babe Ruth? Lefty Grove? Ted Williams? Sometimes a player's iconic year does not match up with his most valuable one.

I'm sure most fans associate the name Roger Maris with the number 61—as in 61 home runs, 1961, and the film 61*. Maris had a historic 1961 season, surpassing Babe Ruth's single-season home run mark and driving in a ton of runs. For his effort, he earned 6.7 WAR and the MVP Award. His most valuable season, however, actually came the previous year in 1960—his first MVP season. While he hit 22 fewer home runs and drove in 29 fewer runs, his OPS+ was nearly on par with 1961 (160 in 1960, 167 in 1961). Because of a big difference in plate appearances, his WAR Batting Runs separate a but more (41 in 1960, 54 in 1961). In the field, however, Maris was worth 19 runs in 1960 and just a single run in 1961, giving him a 1960 WAR total of 7.3, or 0.6 more than his record-breaking season.

Fred Lynn is actually the player who inspired this research. Most associate Lynn with his Rookie of the Year/MVP campaign in 1975. Lynn led the league in doubles (47), slugging (.566), and runs scored (103) en route to 7.1 WAR. That's a magnificent number for a rookie and an appropriate one for an MVP. Four years later, in 1979, Lynn was actually worth 8.5 WAR. He led the league in every slash/rate stat (.333/.423/.637/1.059 OPS/176 OPS+), compiling 54 WAR batting runs (compared to 41 in 1975). He was nearly equal on defense in each season (8 runs in 1975, 9 runs in 1979), so the difference lies in the offense.

Many associate Joe DiMaggio and Ted Williams with their epic 1941 season. DiMaggio hit in 56 straight games and captured the MVP. Williams became the last player to hit .400. 1941 was indeed DiMaggio's best year (at 8.6 WAR). That total was dwarfed by Williams' 10.1 WAR, however. The crazy thing? That wasn't Williams' most valuable season.

Williams won two Triple Crowns, so it would make sense if these were his most valuable seasons. His 1942 season was, in fact, worth 10.2 WAR. He also won the Triple Crown in 1947 with a 9.5 WAR season. But Williams' most valuable season was not 1941 and not either of his Triple Crown seasons. Remarkably, it was the first season he returned from World War II—1946. Williams was worth 87 WAR batting runs (bested only by his 101 in 1941) but also scored well defensively, worth 4 runs. His traditional numbers included a .342/.497/.667 slash line, a 215 OPS+, 38 HR, and 123 RBI. He was worth 10.7 WAR.

And that was after three years off.

To fight in a goddamn war.

In my youth, I always associated Babe Ruth with 1927. After all, that was the year he hit 60 homer and was part of one of the most famous teams ever. While 1927 was Lou Gehrig's career year (11.5 WAR), it wasn't the Babe's.

Thanks to my many hours playing Earl Weaver Baseball, I learned that Ruth was even better in 1921. He hit 59 homers rather than 60, but had .378 batting average (vs. .356 in 1927), 171 RBI (vs. 164), and 457 total bases (vs. 417). WAR backs this up, rating Ruth at 12.6 WAR—a half win ahead of 1927's 12.1 WAR.

1921, however, still wasn't Ruth's most valuable season. It was actually 1923, the year he established career highs in batting average (.393), on base percentage (.545), hits (205), and doubles (45). His 114 WAR batting runs was two fewer than 1921, but he posted a career high 19 runs in the field. (Total Zone rates Ruth as an excellent fielder, worth 79 runs above average over his career.) The combination of offense and defense led to a career high 13.7 wins above replacement—Ruth's best year by a significant margin.

In 1931, Lefty Grove posted a breathtaking 31-4 record with league leading marks in ERA (2.06), strikeouts (175), and winning percentage (.886). He was worth 9.5 WAR as a pitcher. He value offensively was –0.4 WAR, making his net worth 9.1 WAR. He won the MVP award.

In 1936, Grove went "just" 17–12 with a league leading 2.81 ERA. Yet, he was worth 10.7 WAR on the hill. Similarly, Denny McLain was worth 6.8 WAR as a pitcher (and overall) in 1968, the year he was the Majors' last 30-game winner. The very next season, he won seven fewer games with an ERA 0.84 higher, but he was worth 7.5 WAR (7.2 WAR overall).

So, why weren't the iconic seasons worth as much? Both weren't for similar reasons. One small reason is that in the iconic season, both pitchers benefited from better defense behind them. The bigger reason, however, is run environments. Even the difference between 1968 and 1969 was a big one. 1968, of course, was the original Year of the Pitcher. That year, AL teams scored 3.41 runs per game. Just a year later, it was 4.09. That's a big difference. Grove's 1931 season is pretty remarkable because it happened when the run environment in the AL yielded 5.14 runs per game. But in 1936, it was even higher at 5.67.

The idea of iconic seasons not being as valuable as other seasons is not really a novel one. Most saberists know, for example, that Andre Dawson's MVP season in 1987 was far from his best campaign. It was worth 3.7 WAR. Dawson had seven other seasons of 3.7 WAR or better. Let's also take Bob Welch, the last pitcher to win 27 games. Welch was worth just 2.7 WAR that year (1990). He was also better than that in seven other seasons.

Finally, let's look at a couple relievers. I've been banging this drum for a while now, but most consider Dennis Eckersley to be a Hall of Fame reliever. He was much, much more valuable as a starter. His top WAR as a reliever was 3.2 in 1990. He had seven seasons as a starter where he was more valuable than that, including a 7.0 WAR season for the Red Sox in 1978.

And what was Mariano Rivera's most valuable season? Well, that'd of course be the one full season he pitched, but didn't close (1996). He was worth 4.8 WAR that year. His next highest was 4.2. That just shows how much innings pitched factors into WAR—Rivera threw 107.2 innings in 1996 (his career high by 27 IP).

Of course, I've used the new version of WAR published by Baseball-Reference for this research.

The Cardinals and Rangers Are Still Very, Very Good

2012-05-13T21:24:54Z

Last year's World Series between the St. Louis Cardinals and Texas Rangers was an undeniably memorable seven-game showdown, easily the most entertaining Fall Classic since 2001's Yankees/DBacks Series. But what we saw between these two teams in October was perhaps just a taste of the next several years, as both teams have put themselves in positions to dominate for the next few years -- and potentially longer than that.

As of now, the Rangers and Cardinals are both in first place with fairly comfortable leads -- the Rangers four games ahead of the second-place Athletics, and the Cardinals three and half games ahead of Cincinnati. Moreover, both Texas and St. Louis have far-and-away the best run-differentials in baseball. With 194 runs scored and just 121 runs allowed, Texas is sitting at a major-league best +73 run differential. St. Louis, meanwhile, is at +68. No other team in baseball has even half as good a run differential as either of these two teams.

It's still early, but they're both already essentially shoo-ins to make the postseason -- especially with expanded playoffs. Baseball Prospectus' playoff odds has the Rangers and Cardinals at 96.9% and 90.0%, respectively; only one other team -- the New York Yankees (81.7%) is above 75% at this point.

Both teams have been solid pitching-wise -- the Rangers are 2nd in the AL in xFIP and 1st in FIP; the Cardinals are 2nd in the NL in xFIP and 3rd in FIP.

Including Lance Lynn's start from today, the Cardinals' unheralded trio of Lance Lynn, Kyle Lohse, and Jake Westbrook have combined to allow 31 runs over 123 innings. That's a 2.27 RA(!) from a group of Cardinals starters that doesn't include Adam Wainwright, Chris Carpenter, or Jaime Garcia.

And while Rangers starters (the likes of Neftali Feliz, Yu Darvish, Colby Lewis, et al.) have also performed quite well thus far, Texas' bullpen has been even more impressive. They have the major-league lead in each of ERA, FIP, SIERA, and xFIP. Of the 337 batters they've faced to this point, they've struck out 81 and only allowed 14 to reach base via the walk. No bullpen is even close to matching the Rangers' strikeout-to-walk ratio of 5.79 (and, in fact, the Cardinals are tied for 2nd at 3.19).

It's much more than pitching, though. Both teams have been offensive juggernauts. The Cardinals, as a team, are currently hitting .284/.355/.468 (130 wRC+). The Rangers are at .291/.349/.480 (124 wRC+). It's absurd.

Here are the individual wRC+ marks of each Cardinals hitter with 90+ PA: 120, 169, 192, 140, 151, 148, 124. And it's worth noting that neither Lance Berkman nor Allen Craig are among those guys, and that Matt Holliday is actually the lowest among that bunch.

The Rangers offense, on the other hand, has been largely carried by Josh Hamilton, whose numbers are off-the-charts good: a .402/.457/.877 line, .548 wOBA, 256 wRC+, and 18 homers through 122 at-bats. Even as Hamilton inevitably slows his pace though, guys like Nelson Cruz (currently at a sub-.300 wOBA) can be expected to pick up some of the slack.

Now, keep in mind that the Rangers and Cardinals both entered this season with strong farm systems -- the Rangers at #3 in John Sickels' rankings, and the Cardinals at #5. Not only is now the window to win for both teams; now is the window to dominate. These are two incredibly stacked teams, and it's looking like it will remain that way for the foreseeable future.

Three-Pitch Strikeout Rate Leaders & Trailers

2012-05-13T15:00:07Z

Following up on my posts last week about 4-pitch (unintentional) walk rate, I thought I'd do something similar this week and look at the pitchers and hitters who have the highest (and lowest) rates of 3-pitch strikeouts.

I used for my sample the 304 pitchers and 331 hitters who had at least 50 strikeouts since the start of the 2011 season (through the games of Friday, May 11th). Then I simply divided the number of 3-pitch strikeouts by the number of total strikeouts to find 3-Pitch Strikeout Rate (3PK%). Here are the top 10 and bottom 10 hitters and pitchers in this stat:

Top 10 Hitters

Top 10 Pitchers

Bottom 10 Hitters

Bottom 10 Pitchers

For hitters, it seems like two factors mostly determine whether they rank at the top or the bottom of the list. First, a player who likes to work the count will tend to rank near the bottom; Thome, Youkilis, and Barton are prime examples of this. On the opposite end, free-swingers who don't take a lot of pitches, like Hardy, Cabrera, and Molina, will of course have a higher 3PK%.

The other main factor that I can see is the ability to make contact. Vladimir Guerrero is of course the king of this. Players who are able to avoid whiffs, even when swinging at bad pitches, are more likely to extend at-bats with fouls. Having higher whiff rates would then lead to slightly more 3-pitch Ks.

For the pitchers, sheer dominance seems to be a factor, as some of the best relievers in the game make the top 10 (Venters, Romo, Adams, and Papelbon). But that's clearly not all, as several of the bottom 10 are pretty darn good themselves.

I thought good control might be a part of it, but Venters, Sanches and #11 Dontrelle Willis all have walk rates well above 10%, which would seem to make it harder to have 3-pitch strikeouts, but apparently doesn't. I'm guessing that these guys are examples of pitchers who can be "effectively wild" at times. The counter to this would be guys with high walk rates who rank near the bottom, like Kevin Gregg and Juan Cruz. Perhaps when these guys are wild, it's easier for the hitters to recognize and lay off of their pitches.

As for the few starting pitchers who make the lists, I'm not sure what to make of them. Clayton Richard has poor walk and K rates but still gets a high percentage of 3-pitch strikeouts. Daniel Hudson strikes out more, walks fewer, and has better stuff... yet he has a very low percentage of 3-pitch Ks.

Here are some other starters who rank highly: Jeff Karstens (15th), Ivan Nova (17th), Jair Jurrjens (20th), Ricky Nolasco (22nd), and Jaime Garcia (25th). And here are some who rank near the bottom in 3PK%: Kyle Drabek (11th-worst), Javier Vazquez (16th), J.A. Happ (19th), Trevor Cahill (23rd), and, weirdly, Tim Lincecum (24th).

Anyway, I'm not sure this is all that useful, but it's fun to think about.

* Yes, that's Garza as a hitter. He was the only pitcher with enough hitting Ks to qualify; he has 53 Ks in only 86 PAs since 2011, which is 11 more than the 2nd-leading pitcher (Roy Halladay, in a lot more PAs). If Garza's K rate seems extreme, that's because it is. In fact, his career K% of 61.4% (62 Ks in 101 PAs) is the highest of all time among players with at least 100 PAs.