2015 Cubs Catch-All thread

[Balta1701]

The bottom 6 teams in NL are far worse than anyone in AL

The things I'm not certain about though are:

 

where do the teams in the middle of the 2 leagues compare? The AL has more of them, but the Giants and Nationals might well be better than the similar ~70 win teams in the AL.

 

And then, where do the teams at the top compare? I keep thinking the Cardinals, for example, can't keep up a .640 winning clip, but after 5 months maybe they're just this good.

[fathom]

Had the misfortune of having Comcast on tv at the restaurant I was at. Pretty sure Kaplan thinks the Cubs deserve a parade for their win today.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Addison Russell for Jeff Samardzija....smh

 

You watch more Cubs baseball than any non-Cubs fan I know. Is it absurd to think Russell will be their best player when it's all said and done?

[fathom]

You watch more Cubs baseball than any non-Cubs fan I know. Is it absurd to think Russell will be their best player when it's all said and done?

 

I truly don't watch a lot since the first month, as it was so aggravating seeing other teams play awful. Typically I only watch mlb.com highlights or last few innings of a game. With that said, he easily could be the best. Talking a possibly 30 homer hitter with elite SS defense. I will be shocked if he's not 2nd best of their young guys after Bryant.

[greg775]

I wonder if the Cubs can beat the Pirates in the WC game. I would think Pitt has the advantage with experience.

[Brian]

I'll take whoever has home field.

[Kyyle23]

I truly don't watch a lot since the first month, as it was so aggravating seeing other teams play awful. Typically I only watch mlb.com highlights or last few innings of a game. With that said, he easily could be the best. Talking a possibly 30 homer hitter with elite SS defense. I will be shocked if he's not 2nd best of their young guys after Bryant.

 

Dude, come on. COME ON. We all see this thread.

[fathom]

Dude, come on. COME ON. We all see this thread.

 

It's the truth. Also probably why their hitters seem so good as I see mostly their highlights only. The only game of theirs I have watched in full since the ASB was the Arrieta no-no.... That taught me a lesson I guess. Not that it matters, but I'm referring to the mlb.com in-game highlights that they have on game day.

Edited September 8, 2015 by fathom

[caulfield12]

It's a heckuva lot more compelling than the White Sox season...that's for sure. Especially getting to watch young hitters with some pop in their bats.

 

At this point, there's general indifference about the team winning games if the youngsters look good...whereas with the Cubs it's such a soap opera with the history of that franchise that you have to watch since the White Sox fan side of you keeps hoping for the disappointment to continue, somehow.

 

 

[Jose Abreu]

It's a heckuva lot more compelling than the White Sox season...that's for sure. Especially getting to watch young hitters with some pop in their bats.

As a White Sox fan, it's not more compelling than our season.

[southsider2k5]

Dude, come on. COME ON. We all see this thread.

 

So true.

[OmarComing25]

I'll take whoever has home field.

The road team did win both Wildcard playoffs last year. I'm not sure homefield will make that much of a difference, coin-toss either way.

[Brian]

The road team did win both Wildcard playoffs last year. I'm not sure homefield will make that much of a difference, coin-toss either way.

 

It feels like the Cubs are the most dominant home team while they are mediocre on the road. Outside of yesterday.

[OmarComing25]

It feels like the Cubs are the most dominant home team while they are mediocre on the road. Outside of yesterday.

43-28 at home, 36-29 on the road. Only 8 teams in the MLB have a winning road record, the Cubs are only behind the Rangers and Cardinals in road winning percentage. The Pirates, however, are 46-21 at home and only 35-34 on the road, so if they fall behind the Cubs that could be big. Still think it'll be mostly a toss-up no matter where they play it though.

Edited September 8, 2015 by OmarComing25

[fathom]

It feels like the Cubs are the most dominant home team while they are mediocre on the road. Outside of yesterday.

 

As we've discussed, you hope to avoid playing the one game WC playoff at Wrigley in case the wind is blowing out. Bryant's offense is all world at home and mediocre on the road. Given Arrieta's ability to avoid the long ball lately, the Cubs would seemingly be in good position at home for the 1 game if wind is howling out.

[fathom]

43-28 at home, 36-29 on the road. Only 8 teams in the MLB have a winning road record, the Cubs are only behind the Rangers and Cardinals in road winning percentage. The Pirates, however, are 46-21 at home and only 35-34 on the road, so if they fall behind the Cubs that could be big. Still think it'll be mostly a toss-up no matter where they play it though.

 

Something of concern as well is the Pirates have sucked big time against the NL Central this year.

[Balta1701]

Something of concern as well is the Pirates have sucked big time against the NL Central this year.

For some reason the Reds destroy Gerrit Cole but he's 6-1 career with a 2.93 ERA against the Cubs, 1.50 ERA against them in 2 starts this year.

[Chisoxfn]

Sequencing is the order you give up hits. Let's say two pitchers give up a walk, a single, and a homer in an inning. If Pitcher A gives up the homer first, then the other two, he ends up giving up only one run. If Pitcher B gives up the walk and single first and then the home run, he gives up three runs. ERA says Pitcher B was three times worse than Pitcher A. FIP says they were the same, because in a way they essentially did the same thing.

That is a load of s***. You pitch different with runners on. It shouldn't count the same. A solo HR hurts less than a 3 run homer. To count them equal is just absurd. Ask any pitcher in the world and they will tell you they don't pitch the same with no one on vs. with runners on.

[shysocks]

That is a load of s***. You pitch different with runners on. It shouldn't count the same. A solo HR hurts less than a 3 run homer. To count them equal is just absurd. Ask any pitcher in the world and they will tell you they don't pitch the same with no one on vs. with runners on.

You are right. Pitchers in 2015 give up a HR every 36.6 plate appearances with the bases empty and every 39.5 with men on. They walk 6.8% of hitters with the bases empty, compared to 8.5% with runners aboard. Those numbers alone are basically proof of what you say.

 

That said, ERA is terrible at predicting next year's ERA (source), and to attempt to do better, we've got FIP.

[OmarComing25]

That is a load of s***. You pitch different with runners on. It shouldn't count the same. A solo HR hurts less than a 3 run homer. To count them equal is just absurd. Ask any pitcher in the world and they will tell you they don't pitch the same with no one on vs. with runners on.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/era-fip-a...tional-context/

 

 

A pitcher’s HR/FB with bases empty correlates very poorly from year to year (R = .174).

HR/FB with men in scoring position exhibits almost no year-to-year correlation (R = .045).

A pitcher’s BABIP with bases empty correlates more poorly than does his HR/FB (R = .103).

BABIP with men in scoring position exhibits no correlation whatsoever (R = .006).

On average, a pitcher’s HR/FB drops from 10.1 percent with bases empty to 9.2 percent with men in scoring position.

On average, a pitcher’s BABIP drops from .292 with bases empty to .280 with men in scoring position. The latter, however, has a much wider range of observed outcomes and a larger standard deviation than the former. This may lend very modest insight as to how defenses, rather than pitchers, perform under pressure.

 

This wasn’t a particularly rigorous exercise, nor did it reveal any shocking hidden truths. In fact, it more or less confirms something I think is rather intuitive: the difference between a pitcher’s ERA and his FIP is driven largely by luck on balls in play — for xFIP, by luck on balls in play and home runs as a ratio to fly balls — not just generally but situationally.

 

Moreover, and perhaps most importantly: as explained in the previous section, pitchers have little control over when good or bad luck happens mid-game. A pitcher can experience bad luck on balls in play with no men on and suffer a much more tolerable fate (in terms of ERA) than one who experiences the same exact bad luck with men on base.

 

Also, the models potentially, if not certainly, suffer from omitted variable bias (at the expense of keeping the models simple). For example, a pitcher may exhibit losses in command under pressure — missing spots, grooving pitches — or he may change his sequencing and become more predictable. These factors would likely create observable differences in a pitcher’s BABIPs and HR/FBs by situation.

 

Still, I would expect to see those factors reflected in the models specifying xFIP as the explanatory variable given it attempts to capture a pitcher’s inherent skill in a particular situation. Yet, for whatever reason, a meaningful relationship eludes us. It’s also worth mentioning I omit one of the primary situations observed by FanGraphs: “men on base,” which sounds like strictly a man on first base. Including this split would likely add a small degree of explanatory power to the models, but not enough for me to regret excluding it.

There's an incredible amount of variance in pitcher performance with RISP, and almost no consistency from year-to-year. This is true for both hits given up and homerun rates. So pitchers do pitch a bit differently with runners on, but their performance in those situations is not consistent and is generally pretty random from year-to-year.

Edited September 8, 2015 by OmarComing25

[Chisoxfn]

http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/era-fip-a...tional-context/

 

 

 

 

 

There's an incredible amount of variance in pitcher performance with RISP, and almost no consistency from year-to-year. This is true for both hits given up and homerun rates. So pitchers do pitch a bit differently with runners on, but their performance in those situations is not consistent and is generally pretty random from year-to-year.

What is that correlation amongst good and bad pitchers. I'd argue that a correlation would exist over longer periods of time. I don't have that data in front of me, but I bet if you asked pitchers if they pitch different with runners on, their answer would be yes. Whether that makes them better or worse, depends on the pitcher. How do they pitch from the stretch vs. windup...how do they leverage the additional focus with runners on....do they have a go to pitch that they can better leverage in those situations, etc.

[OmarComing25]

What is that correlation amongst good and bad pitchers. I'd argue that a correlation would exist over longer periods of time. I don't have that data in front of me, but I bet if you asked pitchers if they pitch different with runners on, their answer would be yes. Whether that makes them better or worse, depends on the pitcher. How do they pitch from the stretch vs. windup...how do they leverage the additional focus with runners on....do they have a go to pitch that they can better leverage in those situations, etc.

Let's look at Sale's performance with RISP

 

2015: .360 BABIP, 0.73 HR/9, 10% HR/FB, 22.8% Hard-hit%, 20.7% Soft-hit%

2014: .273 BABIP, 0.66 HR/9, 8.7% HR/FB, 19.3% Hard-hit%, 15.8% Soft-hit%

2013: .302 BABIP, 1.28 HR/9, 14.3% HR/FB, 29.5% Hard-hit%, 13.4% Soft-hit%

2012: .214 BABIP, 0.79 HR/9, 11.8% HR/FB, 25.2% Hard-hit%, 15.0% Soft-hit%

 

Seems pretty random to me. Seems he gave up a lot of HR in 2013 due to a lot more hard-hit balls, but he gave up significantly harder contact in 2012 compared to 2015, yet his BABIP was 146 points lower.

 

Now let's look at Danks.

 

2015: .307 BABIP, 0.92 HR/9, 9.1% HR/FB, 32.8% Hard-hit%, 21.1% Soft-hit%

2014: .296 BABIP, 0.18 HR/9, 1.7% HR/FB, 28.1% Hard-hit%, 19.4% Soft-hit%

2013: .256 BABIP, 2.08 HR/9, 22.2% HR/FB, 35.2 Hard-hit%, 14.8% Soft-hit%

2012: .280 BABIP, 0.56 HR/9, 7.7% HR/FB, 31.4% Hard-hit%, 17.7% Soft-hit%

 

BABIP isn't quite as random as Sale's, but his homerun rates are extremely random. I included the batted-ball data to see if it could shed any light (even though they're still not very advanced), but it didn't really. There appears to be some correlation between Hard-hit% and home run rate here, but beyond that there's not a lot of consistency. Granted I only looked at 2 guys and 4 seasons of data, but this backs up the article.

[Chisoxfn]

Let's look at Sale's performance with RISP

 

2015: .360 BABIP, 0.73 HR/9, 10% HR/FB, 22.8% Hard-hit%, 20.7% Soft-hit%

2014: .273 BABIP, 0.66 HR/9, 8.7% HR/FB, 19.3% Hard-hit%, 15.8% Soft-hit%

2013: .302 BABIP, 1.28 HR/9, 14.3% HR/FB, 29.5% Hard-hit%, 13.4% Soft-hit%

2012: .214 BABIP, 0.79 HR/9, 11.8% HR/FB, 25.2% Hard-hit%, 15.0% Soft-hit%

 

Seems pretty random to me. Seems he gave up a lot of HR in 2013 due to a lot more hard-hit balls, but he gave up significantly harder contact in 2012 compared to 2015, yet his BABIP was 146 points lower.

 

Now let's look at Danks.

 

2015: .307 BABIP, 0.92 HR/9, 9.1% HR/FB, 32.8% Hard-hit%, 21.1% Soft-hit%

2014: .296 BABIP, 0.18 HR/9, 1.7% HR/FB, 28.1% Hard-hit%, 19.4% Soft-hit%

2013: .256 BABIP, 2.08 HR/9, 22.2% HR/FB, 35.2 Hard-hit%, 14.8% Soft-hit%

2012: .280 BABIP, 0.56 HR/9, 7.7% HR/FB, 31.4% Hard-hit%, 17.7% Soft-hit%

 

BABIP isn't quite as random as Sale's, but his homerun rates are extremely random. I included the batted-ball data to see if it could shed any light (even though they're still not very advanced), but it didn't really. There appears to be some correlation between Hard-hit% and home run rate here, but beyond that there's not a lot of consistency. Granted I only looked at 2 guys and 4 seasons of data, but this backs up the article.

By random, I think it is all driven by sample size, but the fundamental question I ask is...do pitchers behave different with runners on then without and when that answer is yes, that tells me their is something to some extent flawed in the stat. Pitchers are the one player who truly controls a lot of what they do. I think this is just more you have small sample sizes with HR's and batting with runners in scoring position which means you can have extremes. All that said, if I want to judge someone based upon what happened in the year vs. a predictor of future success, I still put much more weight to ERA then FIP / XFIP. Bottom line, I award people based upon the actual results vs. hypotheticals that don't reflect the reality of actual runs given up.

 

[Jerksticks]

By random, I think it is all driven by sample size, but the fundamental question I ask is...do pitchers behave different with runners on then without and when that answer is yes, that tells me their is something to some extent flawed in the stat. Pitchers are the one player who truly controls a lot of what they do. I think this is just more you have small sample sizes with HR's and batting with runners in scoring position which means you can have extremes. All that said, if I want to judge someone based upon what happened in the year vs. a predictor of future success, I still put much more weight to ERA then FIP / XFIP. Bottom line, I award people based upon the actual results vs. hypotheticals that don't reflect the reality of actual runs given up.

I like this. The problem most people have with ERA is the whole defense behind the pitcher argument. But some might argue from a more presidential position: Did it happen on your watch or not?

[Kalapse]

I like this. The problem most people have with ERA is the whole defense behind the pitcher argument. But some might argue from a more presidential position: Did it happen on your watch or not?

Except ERA DOES attempt to account for the defense behind a pitcher. That's what the 'E' in ERA stands for, it just does a really poor job of it. If you're going to attempt to quantify for what X pitcher alone is responsible why not remove as many variables as possible rather than just accounting for errors and inherited runners scored?