Jenks article on ESPN/Fangraphs

[Real]

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/tmi-mlb/po...ost%3fid%3d1779

 

I join many others in welcoming Bill Simmons to the statistical revolution in baseball. While statistics have always been an integral part of baseball, we have learned to tinker with them to more accurately reflect what happens on the field, and more importantly, what will happen. One of the more difficult puzzles to crack has been evaluating pitchers due to how entangled their performance is with that of their defenders. Accepting the move from ERA to Fielding Independent Pitching is probably the single biggest step one can take on the right path of separating the two, and Simmons has made that leap.

 

The Sports Guy made the case for FIP in his piece by referencing White Sox closer Bobby Jenks, who posted a decent 3.71 ERA last year, but whose secondary stats added up to a more mediocre 4.47 FIP. Given that Jenks’ ERA was significantly lower than his FIP, he concluded that Jenks wasn’t as good as his traditional numbers made him appear. While this is usually true, and the process he used to make his conclusion works most of the time, there is one more important number to check.

[joeynach]

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/tmi-mlb/po...ost%3fid%3d1779

 

If his FIP is significantly higher than his actual ERA doent that imply that Jenks defense behind him was exceptional?

[Ozzie Ball]

My insider subscription expired a few day ago but I'm guessing the "one more important number to check. " is his xFIP, which for Jenks last year was 3.63. xFIP is believed to be a better predictor of future success than FIP, so nothing to worry about here.

[chw42]

If his FIP is significantly higher than his actual ERA doent that imply that Jenks defense behind him was exceptional?

 

Not exactly.

 

FIP measures everything a pitcher can control. So HR, HBP, BB (not IBB), and K are in the formula.

 

Of course, the part where it is not perfect is where it does not take hits other than home runs into account at all.

 

xFIP is better anyways.

 

Hopefully, when hit f/x comes out, we can get something better and more accurate.

Edited April 7, 2010 by chw42

[Jordan4life_2007]

Not exactly.

 

FIP measures everything a pitcher can control. So HR, HBP, BB (not IBB), and K are in the formula.

 

Of course, the part where it is not perfect is where it does not take hits other than home runs into account at all.

 

xFIP is better anyways.

 

Hopefully, when hit f/x comes out, we can get something better and more accurate.

 

Is that statistic actually coming out?

[chw42]

Is that statistic actually coming out?

 

Well I don't know what they'll do with the data they get from hit f/x, but eventually, it will at some point.

[Dick Allen]

All I know is his success rate when entering with a 1 run lead last year was 50%. He had a bunch of lay up saves. Bobby had a bad year last year.

[DBAHO]

xFIP is better anyways.

And Bobby had a xFIP of 3.63 last season FWIW.

 

Also looking at Bobby's numbers, his GB% went down by about 10% from the previous few seasons, while his HR/9 increased dramatically.

 

He fixes those 2 things, he'll be back to where he was. Of course that's easier said than done.

[PeavyTime]

All I know is his success rate when entering with a 1 run lead last year was 50%. He had a bunch of lay up saves. Bobby had a bad year last year.

 

+1

 

All these ridiculous stats are meaningless

[SoxFan562004]

shocking Simmons gets on board with something then acts like he's an expert