FanGraphs Baseball


RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Teams may not be worried about Wilson going forward this offseason, but teams will use it against him as bargaining power when negotiating a deal.

    Comment by Albert Lyu — October 25, 2011 @ 9:18 am

  2. I heard Curt Schilling on sports talk radio in Boston this morning say that Wilson’s post – season will cost him ‘an enormous amount amount’ of money. It may well do so, although Schilling speculated that it would mean $15m rather than $18 or $19m. Either way, that doesn’t qualify as ‘worried,’ only as ‘bargaining chip’ for bidders.

    Comment by designated quitter — October 25, 2011 @ 10:13 am

  3. Frankly, 67 starts is a small sample size as well, in the context of Wilson looking for a 4, 5 or 6 year deal (based on what the market will accept this year). We can agree that Wilson is a different pitcher in the postseason: the K% is way down and the BB% is way up. The GB/FB is way down, the LD% is way up, and the HR/FB is way up. I’m not sure what that is, but I want to be careful about attributing it all to small sample size.

    Comment by Toz — October 25, 2011 @ 10:13 am

  4. I think we should be careful automatically attributing postseason results to SSS, especially when we’re discussing pitchers. At the end of the postseason pitchers are fatigued and approaching the end of the their effective innings capacity, and it may be that some pitchers do not have the endurance to pitch effectively in the postseason.

    Whether that is the case for Wilson, I don’t think anyone knows, but it’s something that should at least be in the conversation–especially for a recently converted reliever.

    Comment by Tim — October 25, 2011 @ 10:24 am

  5. You’re trying to say that two years of starts is too small to trust, but the much smaller sample of postseason starts show that “Wilson is a different pitcher in the postseason.” That doesn’t make sense.

    Comment by t ball — October 25, 2011 @ 10:39 am

  6. Ummm, except for 2009, A-Rod *has* been terrible in the post-season ;)

    Comment by John Franco — October 25, 2011 @ 11:19 am

  7. check his career post season stats buddy. he was pretty good for the mariners in october

    Comment by cliff lee's changeup — October 25, 2011 @ 11:31 am

  8. John wins, you and Chris lose. A-Rod’s been terrible in the post-season for the Yankees, so that narrative has held up. Never mind how illogical its basis may be.

    Comment by Richie — October 25, 2011 @ 12:05 pm

  9. Wouldn’t it make more sense to trust what he’s done in 76 career starts? Why privilege one subset of his overall results against another, especially when the second subset (though smaller) is against a higher caliber of competition?

    Comment by The Ancient Mariner — October 25, 2011 @ 12:23 pm

  10. I think it’s a red flag. Are runs supressed during the postseason? Hence don’t pitchers usually perform better?

    There are plenty of pitchers out there (specifically relievers) that just look scared shtless in the postseason.

    Comment by Sean — October 25, 2011 @ 12:46 pm

  11. The empirical test for this would be, do quality starters who spit the bit in the postseason perform worse the following year than they’d otherwise figure to? My anecdotal impression is ‘nah’, but if your aim is to take a good look at it, that’s where you’d start.

    Comment by Richie — October 25, 2011 @ 1:07 pm

  12. I don’t think A-Rod’s a great example here. His regular season OPS is 953, and his postseason OPS is 884 (in 299 PA). He’s still a dangerous hitter, but his performance tails off in the postseason for whatever reason.

    Comment by Dunston — October 25, 2011 @ 1:09 pm

  13. Isn’t BABIP suppressed in the postseason too?

    I dare you to find a pitcher with an inflated postseason BABIP and tell me that you’d trust him in a big spot. Betcha can’t find one.

    Comment by Sean — October 25, 2011 @ 1:14 pm

  14. Wilson’s career postseason BABIP is actually .035 lower than his career regular-season BABIP (.252 vs. .287). As for a trustworthy pitcher with an inflated postseason BABIP, browsing the top of the 2011 fWAR standings gives you Sabathia (.336 vs. .291) and Verlander (.330 vs. .285).

    Comment by Spoilt Victorian Child — October 25, 2011 @ 3:06 pm

  15. Especially with all of his xFIP component stats worse in the postseason. How fast do K%, BB% stabilize again?

    Comment by Jake — October 25, 2011 @ 3:21 pm

  16. If you take out 2009, the ‘year of the a-rod’ (an admittedly transcendent postseason)…you’re left with a horrible postseason player. with the yankees, in the playoffs minus ’09, a-rod has an OPS of .706 with 15 rbis. that is garbage production and represents a fairly accurate narrative. one great postseason out of 8 chances? look at swisher. dude can’t hit in the playoffs either. we just need to accept that some players can’t handle the pressure/raised stakes and/or better pitching in october.

    Comment by Troy — October 25, 2011 @ 3:50 pm

  17. Does anyone think that a pitcher like Wilson, who has been converted from starter to reliever back to starter, (thus logging less innings in the process) has a longer shelf life than a pitcher of a similar age who has been a starter the whole time and throwing a lot more innings?

    Comment by bryan — October 25, 2011 @ 4:34 pm

  18. I wonder if CJ is just worse in cooler weather. He has trouble finding his feel for pitches when the ball and his fingers are not in 90 + degree weather. That would explain everything very well. Someone should do a study of this as it would not be that small a sample to find all the starts of his career in 70 or less degree weather.

    Also many pitchers pitch worse at night than in the day time. According to ESPN splits this season he has been worse at night, but not the previous 3 seasons, so this may be sample size, but maybe not.

    Comment by kick me in the GO NATS — October 25, 2011 @ 9:27 pm

  19. Or how about the real answer… we don’t actually know. We can come up with educated approximations, but there’s no definitive answer.

    Comment by Franklin Stubbs — October 26, 2011 @ 3:37 am

  20. Came here to post the same thing. Obviously you weigh the 67 starts more heavily, but why would you ignore 9 starts especially when they are on average more recent than the other 67 starts.

    Id probably give him a bit of a pass for being worse against playoff teams rather than punish him for it though given that the lineups hes been facing are going to be better than average.

    I think its reasonable to take a million/year off of what you were planning to offer him before the playoffs purely based on perceived talent level without taking into account whatever decreased leverage other people are talking about in the comments.

    Comment by Silencio — October 26, 2011 @ 3:58 am

  21. Look. All I know is what I see. When the lights shine brightest CJ Wilson looks like a #3 starter–which is pretty close to what he really was on a staff that once featured Cliff Lee as a #1 a year ago. Whenever Wilson takes the mound in a tight game my gut feeling is that he’ll crack before the other team’s ace does. Frankly, he reminds me a lot of Barry Zito–and I’m not talking about the Zito who was once really good in back his Oakland days. I’m talking about the guitar-strumming, happy go lucky, past-his-prime version that San Francisco paid dearly for to their lasting detriment (considering their limited payroll…)

    I’m just sayin’….

    Santa Monica

    Comment by Clifford — October 26, 2011 @ 10:40 am

  22. If you take out the best numbers of any player over a certain period of time, the remaining stats will be low. That’s how averages work. If you find yourself making an argument that starts with adjusting the numbers to fit your argument, then don’t continue with the argument. “Tim Lincecum had poor numbers in 2009….if you only look at the stats from the games he lost.”

    Comment by adr3 — October 26, 2011 @ 12:46 pm

  23. If we take away Arod’s numbers from the 05-07 postseason’s (roughly the same ABs as 09) his numbers are awesome! Point is you can’t pick and choose what numbers you want look at. Arod’s been a decent postseason player as a whole through out his career.

    Comment by Joe — October 26, 2011 @ 8:42 pm

  24. That runs are suppressed in the postseason does not entail that pitchers perform better, especially starting pitchers. The adjustment in bullpen use and the tendency of managers to play conservative ball usually drives down the run-environment. Of course, it seems not to have happened this year.

    Comment by LTG — November 1, 2011 @ 6:38 pm

  25. Also, the extra day of rest which eliminates the need for a crappy #5 pitcher, and sometimes a crappy #4.

    Comment by NeatoTorpedo — November 6, 2011 @ 3:14 pm

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current ye@r *

Close this window.

0.163 Powered by WordPress