Time to Trade Chris Sale?

[Iwritecode]

Is there a stat out there that shows the team win/loss record for a particular pitcher's start? Like say a pitcher made 33 starts in a season. What was the team's win/loss record for those 33 games? Or is that something you would have to calculate by hand?

 

I'm just curious how that stat would look for Quintana compared to other top-tier starters.

[iamshack]

I'm not exactly sure what you mean here. Is the argument that Vazquez didn't live up to his talent level? I think everyone would agree there, but that happens to most pitchers, so I'm not sure how looking at win-loss record is a good indicator of this.

Have you ever watched the show Cutthroat Kitchen? Where the contestants start out with an amount of money which they then use to bid for the opportunity to make their opponents deal with all sorts of disadvantages or handicaps? For example, you can make your opponent cook his meal over candlelight as opposed to the professional range that you are allowed to utilize. Or perhaps your opponent has to cook his meal while riding a tricycle while you are allowed to cook entirely unencumbered. At the end of the allotted cooking time, a judge comes in, and, completely unaware of what took place in regards to who bid what or who had to cook with what disadvantages, they simply judge the the final dishes, as if all things were completely equal.

 

You are essentially playing the role of judge in this competition, and you're only viewing the final dishes. You aren't considering what went in to actually producing the outcomes you are evaluating. You're simply tasting the dish afterwards and saying, "Yes, it makes sense that he lost because this dish is pretty mediocre."

 

What Tony is saying is that he actually watched Javy pitch. And in this analogy, Javy had all kinds of chances to cook without riding the f***ing tricycle and still managed to lose all the time.

[ChiSox59]

Is there a stat out there that shows the team win/loss record for a particular pitcher's start? Like say a pitcher made 33 starts in a season. What was the team's win/loss record for those 33 games? Or is that something you would have to calculate by hand?

 

I'm just curious how that stat would look for Quintana compared to other top-tier starters.

 

Yes.

[ptatc]

He's actually pitched at his best in high leverage situations and with runners on base this year.

Ok. Since I really hadn't looked at Strasburg and Quintana until you brought it up, I need to change my answer. the two are almost identical in all stats except for 3, wins, xFIP and the pitching stat i think is the most telling of performance SIERA. Strasburg has a big lead in all three of those. Giving Quintana credit for being in the AL, i need to go with Strasburg as having the better season.

[TitoMB345]

You're fired.

?

[OmarComing25]

Ok. Since I really hadn't looked at Strasburg and Quintana until you brought it up, I need to change my answer. the two are almost identical in all stats except for 3, wins, xFIP and the pitching stat i think is the most telling of performance SIERA. Strasburg has a big lead in all three of those. Giving Quintana credit for being in the AL, i need to go with Strasburg as having the better season.

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2016/5/11...n-fly-ball-rate

 

For his career, Quintana's been essentially league average when it comes to the distribution of batted balls allowed, but his HR/FB has been below league average for each of his five seasons with the Pale Hose. Since 2014, it cratered. Over that period, Quintana has given up 425 fly balls, only 27 of which have left the yard. HR/FB rate stabilizes at around 400 fly balls. His expected number of home runs has also matched his actual total pretty closely so, while he can't possibly match his early 2016 HR/FB rate, it appears that his well below league average performance has legs.

 

This is also supported by batted ball data, which we've had access to through Statcast for the past two seasons. While Quintana's percentile rank for average exit velocity on all balls is middling, his average exit velocity on fly balls is among the best in the league. In this case, the higher the percentile, the weaker the contact relative to his peers.

 

EXIT VELO (ALL) EXIT VELO (FB)

2015 46th percentile (min 250 events) 84th percentile (min 50 FB)

2016 36th percentile (min 25 events) 86th percentile (min 10 FB)

Quintana has pretty much always been below average in HR/FB rate (8.1% for his career, just 6.5% over the last three seasons), especially in the last three years, which xFIP normalizes. Strasburg on the other hand has always been above the league average (11.6% for his career, 12.8% over the last three seasons), as he has been a below-average contact-manager in his career and given up a lot of loud contact. Using xFIP in this comparison isn't the best, as these guys are both examples of pitchers who are consistently above or below that normalized homerun rate. Strasburg's homerun rate is nearly double Quintana's over the last three seasons, so it's not really fair to normalize their rates.

Edited June 22, 2016 by OmarComing25

[Iwritecode]

Yes.

 

What's it called?

[OmarComing25]

Have you ever watched the show Cutthroat Kitchen? Where the contestants start out with an amount of money which they then use to bid for the opportunity to make their opponents deal with all sorts of disadvantages or handicaps? For example, you can make your opponent cook his meal over candlelight as opposed to the professional range that you are allowed to utilize. Or perhaps your opponent has to cook his meal while riding a tricycle while you are allowed to cook entirely unencumbered. At the end of the allotted cooking time, a judge comes in, and, completely unaware of what took place in regards to who bid what or who had to cook with what disadvantages, they simply judge the the final dishes, as if all things were completely equal.

 

You are essentially playing the role of judge in this competition, and you're only viewing the final dishes. You aren't considering what went in to actually producing the outcomes you are evaluating. You're simply tasting the dish afterwards and saying, "Yes, it makes sense that he lost because this dish is pretty mediocre."

 

What Tony is saying is that he actually watched Javy pitch. And in this analogy, Javy had all kinds of chances to cook without riding the f***ing tricycle and still managed to lose all the time.

Aren't we all the judges in this competition? There's so much we don't know. We weren't in Javy's head, we have no idea what he went through on his path to the big leagues, what adversity he had to overcome, what days he had to pitch over discomfort or some kind of physical ailment or when he was feeling 100% healthy. I watched him pitch too, he was as frustrating as anyone, because it was clear he had a talented arm, but there are dozens of examples of pitchers nearly every year with talented arms who also never live up to their potentials. Since there's so much we don't know, we can only make judgments on the information we do know, like the judge had to.

Edited June 22, 2016 by OmarComing25

[greg775]

So teams should depend on lesser talented middle relief pitchers for individual wins? That's how I would build a successful team.

 

I'll never be convinced that wins are meaningless for starting pitchers.

Wins are very important. I love how the sabes people love their advanced stats and yet the established baseball announcers and former players who are color analysts ONLY mention the traditional stats - wins, losses, ERA, strikeouts, walks. That said, I wish we'd trade Q to a team that could score him some runs for his sake. It's like Pavlov here - Q on the mound, the hitters don't hit.

Edited June 22, 2016 by greg775

[iamshack]

Aren't we all the judges in this competition? There's so much we don't know. We weren't in Javy's head, we have no idea what he went through on his path to the big leagues, what adversity he had to overcome, what days he had to pitch over discomfort or some kind of physical ailment or when he was feeling 100% healthy. I watched him pitch too, he was as frustrating as anyone, because it was clear he had a talented arm, but there are dozens of examples of pitchers nearly every year with talented arms who also never live up to their potentials. Since there's so much we don't know, we can only make judgments on the information we do know, like the judge had to.

Well, again, to Tony's point, I'll take all available data points from which to make judgments, not just the most mathematically-oriented ones.

[NCsoxfan]

This is semi-unrelated, but news is out that the Bulls are trading Derrick Rose to the Knicks. This essentially means the Bulls are rebuilding, so would Reinsdorf want both of his teams rebuilding at once?

[hogan873]

Wins are very important. I love how the sabes people love their advanced stats and yet the established baseball announcers and former players who are color analysts ONLY mention the traditional stats - wins, losses, ERA, strikeouts, walks. That said, I wish we'd trade Q to a team that could score him some runs for his sake. It's like Pavlov here - Q on the mound, the hitters don't hit.

Wins are important, especially to the common fan. And you're right that the color announcers tend only to mention the traditional stats. Steve Stone did mention the other day that WHIP is an important stat, especially for relievers. Oftentimes you'll see a closer with a losing record but good other stats because those occasional blown saves can turn into losses.

 

As far as Quintana, I've had to correct my wife and son multiple times when they've said that he's not very good. They're looking at his record without looking at one of the other most basic stats for a pitcher: ERA. Quintana's run support is horrendous. He's 5-7, and he has the lowest ERA on the team (2.63).

 

The argument has been that wins don't matter as much when you're looking at a pitcher's value. That I will agree with. To say that Quintana is not nearly as valuable as Sale because he's 5-7 while Sale is 12-2 is very shortsighted. The other traditional stats and the advanced stats matter in regards to his value.

[ptatc]

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2016/5/11...n-fly-ball-rate

 

 

Quintana has pretty much always been below average in HR/FB rate (8.1% for his career, just 6.5% over the last three seasons), especially in the last three years, which xFIP normalizes. Strasburg on the other hand has always been above the league average (11.6% for his career, 12.8% over the last three seasons), as he has been a below-average contact-manager in his career and given up a lot of loud contact. Using xFIP in this comparison isn't the best, as these guys are both examples of pitchers who are consistently above or below that normalized homerun rate. Strasburg's homerun rate is nearly double Quintana's over the last three seasons, so it's not really fair to normalize their rates.

The HR rate is only part of the equation for xFIP. You are pointing out the very flaw in using stats that I was talking about. They are purely dependent on what people perceive as important. XFIP may not be the best in this case in your view, however many view it as the gold standard. As stated I like the way SIERA is designed and Strasburg is the clear winner here as well as well as wins.

[ptatc]

Aren't we all the judges in this competition? There's so much we don't know. We weren't in Javy's head, we have no idea what he went through on his path to the big leagues, what adversity he had to overcome, what days he had to pitch over discomfort or some kind of physical ailment or when he was feeling 100% healthy. I watched him pitch too, he was as frustrating as anyone, because it was clear he had a talented arm, but there are dozens of examples of pitchers nearly every year with talented arms who also never live up to their potentials. Since there's so much we don't know, we can only make judgments on the information we do know, like the judge had to.

If this is true, why just flat out ignore any information that can add to the discussion?

[ptatc]

Wins are important, especially to the common fan. And you're right that the color announcers tend only to mention the traditional stats. Steve Stone did mention the other day that WHIP is an important stat, especially for relievers. Oftentimes you'll see a closer with a losing record but good other stats because those occasional blown saves can turn into losses.

 

As far as Quintana, I've had to correct my wife and son multiple times when they've said that he's not very good. They're looking at his record without looking at one of the other most basic stats for a pitcher: ERA. Quintana's run support is horrendous. He's 5-7, and he has the lowest ERA on the team (2.63).

 

The argument has been that wins don't matter as much when you're looking at a pitcher's value. That I will agree with. To say that Quintana is not nearly as valuable as Sale because he's 5-7 while Sale is 12-2 is very shortsighted. The other traditional stats and the advanced stats matter in regards to his value.

This wasn't where the discussion started. Everyone will agree that wins don't matter as much as other. However, the discussion are wins meaningless thus should be totally ignored and not involved in the discussion.

[OmarComing25]

If this is true, why just flat out ignore any information that can add to the discussion?

Because I still can't think of an example where W-L record actually adds to the discussion. Looking at W-L record tells you nothing about how good a pitcher is. Yes, the good pitchers tend to have good records and the bad pitchers tend to have bad records, but there's way too many examples where it lies to be meaningful. Shelby Miller led the MLB in losses last year at 6-17 and yet was one of the best pitchers in baseball. Drew Hutchison had the 7th worst ERA last year among SP with at least 100 IP yet he had a 13-5 record. All the variables pointed out in this thread (how deep a pitcher goes into games, how he pitches in close games/high leverage situations, etc.) are important but can't be gleaned from a pitcher's W-L record (and for every example of a pitcher who didn't get wins because he didn't go deep enough into games or pitched poorly in close games, there's a counter-example of a pitcher who did the same but was bailed out by their offense). If a pitchers' W-L record tells me nothing about how well a pitcher pitched, then why bother with it? A pitcher can get spotted a 5-run lead, then immediately give up 6 runs the next inning, but then be bailed out by the offense and still get the win. On the other hand, a pitcher can throw a no-hitter and give up runs due to 2 errors by the defense and take a loss. It provides zero context. Give me a specific example where it provides meaningful discussion about a pitcher, because there haven't been any in this thread to this point.

Edited June 22, 2016 by OmarComing25

[Kyyle23]

Wins are very important. I love how the sabes people love their advanced stats and yet the established baseball announcers and former players who are color analysts ONLY mention the traditional stats - wins, losses, ERA, strikeouts, walks. That said, I wish we'd trade Q to a team that could score him some runs for his sake. It's like Pavlov here - Q on the mound, the hitters don't hit.

 

greg, this is the second time i have seen you use Pavlov in an example today. Thats just strange

[hi8is]

Just do it after the WS when Groome becomes available.

 

Moncada, Benintendi, Espinoza, Groome, Swihart

Give me Devers too, mofos.

[Jose Abreu]

greg, this is the second time i have seen you use Pavlov in an example today. Thats just strange

Nothing wrong with a little psychological reference! Well, nevermind, using the same one twice in a day is kinda weird

[hogan873]

Nothing wrong with a little psychological reference! Well, nevermind, using the same one twice in a day is kinda weird

What do you call a psychologist safely stealing a base?

 

A Freudian Slide.

[iamshack]

Because I still can't think of an example where W-L record actually adds to the discussion. Looking at W-L record tells you nothing about how good a pitcher is. Yes, the good pitchers tend to have good records and the bad pitchers tend to have bad records, but there's way too many examples where it lies to be meaningful. Shelby Miller led the MLB in losses last year at 6-17 and yet was one of the best pitchers in baseball. Drew Hutchison had the 7th worst ERA last year among SP with at least 100 IP yet he had a 13-5 record. All the variables pointed out in this thread (how deep a pitcher goes into games, how he pitches in close games/high leverage situations, etc.) are important but can't be gleaned from a pitcher's W-L record (and for every example of a pitcher who didn't get wins because he didn't go deep enough into games or pitched poorly in close games, there's a counter-example of a pitcher who did the same but was bailed out by their offense). If a pitchers' W-L record tells me nothing about how well a pitcher pitched, then why bother with it? A pitcher can get spotted a 5-run lead, then immediately give up 6 runs the next inning, but then be bailed out by the offense and still get the win. On the other hand, a pitcher can throw a no-hitter and give up runs due to 2 errors by the defense and take a loss. It provides zero context. Give me a specific example where it provides meaningful discussion about a pitcher, because there haven't been any in this thread to this point.

That is the point you aren't seeing. If you dismiss the ability to "win" as a skill than there will be no context we can provide that you simply won't either attribute to other factors or dismiss as not meaningful.

 

Are there not some pitchers whose W-L record would belie some other more "contextual" stats which one could study to determine if they possessed some sort of inherent ability to retain a lead or simply to win?

[ptatc]

Because I still can't think of an example where W-L record actually adds to the discussion. Looking at W-L record tells you nothing about how good a pitcher is. Yes, the good pitchers tend to have good records and the bad pitchers tend to have bad records, but there's way too many examples where it lies to be meaningful. Shelby Miller led the MLB in losses last year at 6-17 and yet was one of the best pitchers in baseball. Drew Hutchison had the 7th worst ERA last year among SP with at least 100 IP yet he had a 13-5 record. All the variables pointed out in this thread (how deep a pitcher goes into games, how he pitches in close games/high leverage situations, etc.) are important but can't be gleaned from a pitcher's W-L record (and for every example of a pitcher who didn't get wins because he didn't go deep enough into games or pitched poorly in close games, there's a counter-example of a pitcher who did the same but was bailed out by their offense). If a pitchers' W-L record tells me nothing about how well a pitcher pitched, then why bother with it? A pitcher can get spotted a 5-run lead, then immediately give up 6 runs the next inning, but then be bailed out by the offense and still get the win. On the other hand, a pitcher can throw a no-hitter and give up runs due to 2 errors by the defense and take a loss. It provides zero context. Give me a specific example where it provides meaningful discussion about a pitcher, because there haven't been any in this thread to this point.

not sure where you get the Miller was one of the best pitchers as his FIP, xFIP and SIERA all have him around 50th.

 

If you only look at the number you want you are always going to find what you want. The highlighted example is true. However it's true for all stats. You can make them valid or invalid in your view. take the example we discussed earlier using xFIP. Most people will agree it's a good measure of pitchers, yet you found an example where you didn't think it was.

 

If you want a specific example where wins could help with your decision, look at Cueto and Lester this year. Most of the peripherals are fairly even. i would look at it and give Cueto the edge because of the wins. You will find soemthing else you deem more important to make the decision.

 

you are giving many examples where wins are influenced by other factors, all of which is true. However, when it comes down to it all pitchers want to win and the win also effects all of those. In a tight game they pitch differently than in a blowout. Use the example of Sale he has said all he wants to do is pitch in the playoffs. This is predicated on him winning not having the best BABIP, HR%, FIP, WAR or anything else. He will pitch differently in all of those scenarios. So the win is actually determining his peripherals in many different ways.

 

I think the overall issue is: How do you determine if a pitcher has pitched well? This is truly the discussion. Has he pitched well if he strikes out x number of hitters? walked fewer? To me a primary factor is did the team win the game. Did he contribute to the win. This is why I like the SIERA stat as it looks and many of the variables that the pitcher can control.

 

So to answer your question, if you are trying to put wins in a true equation: Wins+FIPxFB/GB+(BABIP-OPS)= Cy Young, you probably can't. However, you also can't prove that any of the other stats are directly correlated to success either. However, I think the beginning and end of the conversation is how does he contribute to a win. If you can come of with an equation that determines that, now you've got something.

 

 

[ptatc]

That is the point you aren't seeing. If you dismiss the ability to "win" as a skill than there will be no context we can provide that you simply won't either attribute to other factors or dismiss as not meaningful.

 

Are there not some pitchers whose W-L record would belie some other more "contextual" stats which one could study to determine if they possessed some sort of inherent ability to retain a lead or simply to win?

Dammit! I typed for 20 minutes trying to say something and you said it in a single sentence. I'm awful at articulating my thoughts in writing.

 

can you edit my research papers before I send them to the journals?

[SCCWS]

Wins are important, especially to the common fan. And you're right that the color announcers tend only to mention the traditional stats. Steve Stone did mention the other day that WHIP is an important stat, especially for relievers. Oftentimes you'll see a closer with a losing record but good other stats because those occasional blown saves can turn into losses.

 

As far as Quintana, I've had to correct my wife and son multiple times when they've said that he's not very good. They're looking at his record without looking at one of the other most basic stats for a pitcher: ERA. Quintana's run support is horrendous. He's 5-7, and he has the lowest ERA on the team (2.63).

 

The argument has been that wins don't matter as much when you're looking at a pitcher's value. That I will agree with. To say that Quintana is not nearly as valuable as Sale because he's 5-7 while Sale is 12-2 is very shortsighted. The other traditional stats and the advanced stats matter in regards to his value.

 

Agree but to also say Quintana is on a par w Sale is also very shortsighted. They both have pitched on the same team and in the same home field for 5 years and Q is 3 below .500 and Sale is 27 +. Now Q's numbers are definitely affected because he gets terrible run support. But the other problem is we are not talking about a short sample here. We are in the fifth year of each being in the rotation. It may be un-explainable but for some reason the team does not perform behind Q. Put him on Boston and he may be better than Sale w their offense.

 

[gatnom]

I find it interesting that the sort of "statistics aren't everything" crowd are pointing to another statistic, wins, as some sort of indicator of the type of thing statistics can't depict. The thing is that the win statistic is so far removed from what the pitcher can actually control that it is essentially meaningless. It is impossible to parse out whether or not a pitcher consistently gets screwed by things out of control or if he legitimately just melts down in crucial situations. A lack of wins will happen in both of those scenarios.

 

If you were to replace wins by saying something along he lines of scouting how the pitcher performs along with using the statistics for how he performs, I'd be able to go along with that argument.