Angels Sign Pineiro

The Angels signed Joel Pineiro to a two-year, 16 million dollar deal. Seemingly out of nowhere Pineiro had a near-5-win season last year, as his walk and fly ball rates were microscopic. He is due for some regression as no one can be expected to walk on only 1.1 batter per nine. But as I talked about before, I think the change in Pineiro’s pitch use frequencies — throwing more sinkers — insulates him from some regression. Another way of seeing this is the change in the height of Pineiro’s fastballs.

In 2009 Pineiro threw his fastball much lower in the zone than he did previously. This supports the increase in ground balls in 2009.

But one important thing to consider with all those ground balls is the infield defense Pineiro plays in front of. By UZR the Cardinals had just an average defense in 2009, but Pineiro gave up a lower slugging on grounders than the average NL pitcher (0.236 for Pineiro versus 0.256 for average). Using the technique from yesterday’s post I looked at the number and slugging of Pineiro’s ground balls based on their angle compared to average. I took a suggestion of Sal Paradise and got rid of the numbers, so the color is the slugging percentage and the size of the slice is the relative number of grounders to that slice.

Pineiro does much better in slices 3, 4, 7 and 8. These are the slices straight at either the second baseman or the shortstop — the ones with the lowest slugging — and for Pineiro these slices were even better than average. Pineiro got fewer grounders down the right-field line and more down the left-field line, but those down the left-field line had a lower slugging than for the average RHP.

Looking to 2010, Pineiro will most likely pitch in front of an infield of Kendry Morales, Howie Kendrick, Erick Aybar and Brandon Wood. The right side of the infield should be good: both Jeff Zimmerman’s UZR projections and Sean Smith’s CHONE defensive projections have the pair at +5 runs together. But the two systems diverge on Aybar and Wood. UZR likes Aybar at short, giving him +7.1 UZR/150 over 2000 innings. Add in regression and aging, and Zimmerman projects +5 in 2010. But CHONE’s defensive projection, which is based on Smith’s TotalZone defensive system, projects him at -2. Wood doesn’t have much time in the Bigs — thus little UZR data — so I think it is better to go with TotalZone, which covers time in the minors. Those numbers are not pretty and CHONE projects him at -6 at third. I might defer to UZR — it draws on the BIS data set which is considered better than the Retrosheet data set on which TotalZone is based — for Aybar, but TotalZone for Wood. In all, the infield will probably be about +5 runs over average. So that should not be an issue for Pineiro.

Pineiro should be a safe bet to provide at least 2.5 wins and has a good shot at maybe four wins in 2010, and then maybe a little bit less in 2011. So the price is solid even in today’s down market. With Hideki Matsui and Pineiro the Angels have added some nice pieces, but with their coming regression and the Mariners’ additions, the AL West should be competitive in 2010.




Print This Post



Dave Allen's other baseball work can be found at Baseball Analysts.

71 Responses to “Angels Sign Pineiro”

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
  1. Those are just about the coolest charts I’ve ever seen.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Dave Allen says:

      Thanks David. As I note above they are based on Sal Paradise’s suggestion for my original chart in the Jeter post. Now that I look at them I realize they are basically a knock-off of Florence Nightingale’s 150-year-old polar-area diagrams!

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Rangers Fan says:

        Dave, I clicked on that regression link (Angels), and it seems that a few of those regressions (Aybar and Rivera) are mainly based on defense, and I have a hard time believing and understanding that Aybar will go from a career UZR/150 of 7 to -3 next year. Rivera has also historically been a good defender, and he is looking at about the same type of regression.

        As a Rangers fan, I would love for it to be true, but I just don’t see it happening.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Hey says:

        Rangers Fan, you would be wise not to take those defensive projections seriously. A lot of them are a joke. CHONE uses TotalZone in his defensive projections. Just stick to UZR.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • vivaelpujols says:

        Hey, there is nothing wrong with CHONE’s defensive projections. Total Zone is only a little bit worse than UZR, and it’s made up for by the fact that CHONE uses minor league fielding data, and weights the Fans Scouting Report IIRC.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • apple says:

        How do we know which is better when they often give different results? Also, if we knew what is right, we wouldn’t need these metrics, would we?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  2. Tom B says:

    i like the sized slices better than the % charts on the Jeter article. good stuff.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  3. JoeR43 says:

    Hey Dave, you use R for your charts, right?

    I should just have you do all my HW for my Statistics course.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  4. Mike Ketchen says:

    Dave congrats.

    You win the “friggin sweetest saber post of the day award”

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  5. RonDom says:

    Amazing charts that are Amazingly easy to read and figure out. Thank you very much.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  6. Jimbo says:

    Ditto all over the place regarding the sweet graphics.

    So now I’m wondering how much of the Duncan influence will remain? Did a light go off and he’s going to keep that approach? Is he going to get re-tweaked by a new coaching staff?

    Of all the places he could have landed, my gut says he’ll be okay in Anaheim.

    Would have liked to see him return to Seattle tho…

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  7. Xeifrank says:

    I think the Pineiro signing puts tha Angels and Mariners back on equal footing, with perhaps a very slight edge (not within margin of error) to the Angels. Let’s then see if the Angels can do their “magic” and outperform their projected win total(s) again.
    vr, Xei

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Kris says:

      The difference between the teams will be rotation depth – the Halos rotation will give them a legitimate chance to win on most days, and they’ll score their share of runs.

      As frightening as the Ms one/two punch is, they will still struggle to score enough runs to cover spots 3-5 in their rotation.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  8. potcircle says:

    just my opinion, but i like %’s better (or at least they should be included) because else we have to estimate relative differences between mid-tier slices.

    that said, the content is amazing – thank you.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Sal Paradise says:

      I totally agree with this comment.

      And I just want to say thank you again, for listening to what we say and having an open mind about your charting.

      I was impressed when your granderson spray chart looked almost exactly like my one-shot graph on the book blog. Intentionally or not, it doesn’t much matter, the point is that the result is awesome (though if you combined it with the hit tracker online hit positions, it would be even cooler).

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Dave Allen says:

        Sal,
        Yeah that was intentional; a couple days before the Granderson post I did one on Mauer in which I specifically noted that I was basically ripping off your technique.

        I appreciate your comments as they are often very helpful and lead to better charts, with this one and the HR spray chart as two prime examples.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  9. Gabriel says:

    Very neat charts. I know you are experimenting a bit as you improve them. I think that visually I might like having the size of the slices reflect slugging, rather than percent, with the colors representing percent. Why? Because the long slices intuitively make me think that batters mashed the ball.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  10. Lucas A. says:

    Dave, great work as always. Your articles are always top-notch.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  11. DickAlmighty says:

    Pineiro’s 2009 = Blanton’s 2007. Very similar pitchers — career K/9 rates in the 4-5 range; career BB/9 rates in the 2-3 range. In 2007, Blanton put up a 1.57 BB/9, and he suddenly had a sub-4.00 ERA. In 2009, Pineiro put up a 1.14 BB/9, and he suddenly had a sub-4.00 ERA. If you want to see what Pineiro will do in 2010 and 2011, look at what happened when Blanton’s BB/9 rate jumped back up to his career norms in 2008 and 2009.

    Pineiro will be a 4.30-4.80 ERA pitcher for the Angels. He’s just lucky he gets to face the Mariners and A’s offenses so many times; that’ll keep his ERA lower than it should be.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Jimbo says:

      I agree if not for the downward trend in Pineiro’s BB rate over the last 3 seasons. The low BB rate for Blanton looks like a totally unsubstantiated outlier.

      Also, Blanton never displayed a paradigm shift in pitch selection the way JP did last year. So what I get from the post is that regression IS likely in store, but not (necessarily) back to pre-2009 norms.

      Other than the fact Blanton had a good year in 07, do you see any other reason to draw a parallel between the two?

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Matt says:

        A downward trend is one thing, a 50% decrease from one year to another is a completely different animal. I don’t think it’s remotely possible that Pineiro keeps his BB% that insanely low. Doesn’t he pitch in the same league as the walk meisters, A’s & Mariners play? Then you also ignore is plummeting K%. It’s been 5 years since it’s been over 7 per 9IP. This is a horrible contract IMO.

        And to Dummy below, wake me up when Pineiro posts a GB% 25 percent over his career rates again. That screams outlier to me. Finally, his career low 6.5 HR/FB rate is due for a major correction too.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Baseball says:

        http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/is-pinerios-newfound-groundball-success-sustainable

        As for the rest of your post, it’s not worth responding to. Good day ~

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Hey Dummy says:

      Wake me up when Blanton ever posts anything close to a 60% GB %.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        If Pineiro can sustain the 60% GB rate (a big if), he will be better than he was in 2007, 2008; but, he won’t be 2009 good unless he can maintain his sub-1.20 BB/9. Pitchers with sub-5.00 K/9′s walk a very fine line. If Pineiro goes back up to a 2.0-2.5 BB/9 rate (which is where he’s been his entire career), he’s a very average pitcher even with the 4.5 K/9 rate he carried in the NL (facing weaker lineups, and no DH’s). Yes, the GB rate is important, but his unusually low BB/9 last year is unsustainable, and once that comes up, he’s basically a #4 starter.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Hey Dummy says:

        I don’t think anyone expects him to be as good as he was last year. His walk rate should increase, but not by THAT much. It will still be better than what it was in previous years. I think 1.7 BB/9 is just about right. Also, I’m not worried about his GB rate.

        #4? Nah. I think we’ll see a FIP of around 3.9-4.1. That’s a good starter.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        1.7? You know how many SP’s posted a BB/9 of 1.7 or less in 2009? Four (Pineiro, Halladay, Haren, Lee). How about 2008? Seven (Lee, Maddux, Mussina, Halladay, Haren, Shields, and Byrd). How about 2007? Six (Maddux, Byrd, Sabathia, Shields, Blanton, Silva). How about 2006? Eight (Schilling, Lieber, Halladay, Oswalt, Maddux, Mussina, Silva, Bush).

        What does this mean? First, some pitchers (Halladay, Haren, Lee, Maddux, Mussina, and Shields) do actually have great control. Second, some pitchers who do not normally have great control, can find a groove; but, it’s difficult to stay in that groove from one season to the next. Third, VERY FEW pitchers post BB/9′s of 1.7 or lower (6.25 per season, over the last four seasons).

        I’m not saying it can’t happen, I’m just saying the odds of Pineiro putting up a 1.7 BB/9 this year are EXTREMELY low. My guess, he’s back up above 2.0 in 2010. At 2.0 (which is still really low), with a 4.0 K/9 (assuming some reduction in that category based on the NL-to-AL move), he’s a #4 SP (even with a great GB rate).

        But, I could be wrong.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Rays says:

        No, the odds are not low. They’re actually pretty good.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        Rays:
        Wow. That was a pretty convincing argument right there. I’m sold.

        Why the odds are “pretty good” that Pineiro posts a BB/9 of 1.7 ? Does he have a history of posting BB/9′s under 2.00? Nope. Is he moving to the easier league? Nope. Will he get to face pitchers in the AL? Nope.

        You may end up being right, but I don’t think the odds are “pretty good,” or even remotely in your favor.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • CircleChange11 says:

        A big difference in Pineiro is with throwing a lot of sinkers, he found a pitch that he can continually put in the zone that doesn’t get crushed.

        Control + late movement often = success.

        When you add in that the movement moves “away from the barrel” of a RHB’s bat, the movement is that much more important.

        Hitters can “know it’s coming” and still not be able to make the necessary adjustments to prevent them from hitting it into the dirt. If a pitch moves down and in, as sinkers do, then they are often very difficult to hit anywhere other than into the ground.

        The key to Pineiro is going to be his ability (or lack of) to make situational adjustments without the assistance of Duncan, when things start straying from the plan or past success. If he can, essentially, become his “own coach” and understand what adjustments batters are making, leading to the adjustments he needs to make, he should be fine.

        Pitcher’s walk rates go up when they have movement that’s difficult to control, when they have never been able to display consistent control, or when they nibble due to having inferior stuff or are being hit hard. Again, Pineiro threw his sinker for a lot of strikes and it was not hit very hard often. That’s important.

        Movement and placement on fastball’s are a couple of things that allowed Suppan, Weaver, and Looper to have success with Duncan. That success did not transfer elsewhere, we’ll see with Pineiro.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Asdf says:

        Dick..look at how easily batters put the ball in play against him now. His contact% was 87.7% (!). Top 3 in he majors, and 2nd in the NL. It’s higher than that with his two-seamer (over 90%). The more he keeps throwing that pitch, the more contact batters are going to make against him. He’s also not going to generate many swings and misses, which will help him have really quick ABs (thanks to how hittable he has become), leading to less walks. His ball% was also 33%, which is also in the top 10 in the majors. Also, Pineiro has never really had a problem throwing strikes to begin with. So, he throws strikes + he’s extremely hittable now + he won’t generate many swings and misses or strikeouts = the illusion of an impeccable control king.

        Will he have a 1.14 BB/9? No. Will he have around a 1.7-.1.8 BB/9? Yes.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        ASDF:
        I cannot argue that you are wrong (as I explain below, to a chorus of “thumbs down” votes, from people who apparently think they know the future). All I can say is, the odds are against Pineiro having a BB/9 of 1.7-1.8. Even if he does have great control (and I admit he’s always had better-than-above-average control), there simply are not that many guys who can put up BB/9 rates that low, and Pineiro’s history doesn’t suggest he’s a guy who can put up BB/9 rates under 2.00 consistently. A lot of people have bought into the idea that Joel Pineiro is a legit frontline SP. I’m skeptical. Only time will tell who’s correct.

        Dick

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Asdf says:

        He is a different pitcher. The Pineiro from before 2009 is completely different than today’s version. His BB% will be lower than before because of the benefits his new pitch brings.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        That’s a valid opinion. I don’t share it, but it’s totally valid.

        Interesting stat: In his 32 starts last season, Pineiro faced a top-15 offense (i.e., a team that finished the season in the top half of the majors in run-scoring) ten times… Has anyone factored luck-in-scheduling to Pineiro’s success last season? The guy happened to face a bottom-half offense in almost 70% of his starts. Slightly easier to put up a low ERA when you constantly face impotent offenses.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        Actually, not that interesting, given that ten of the top 15 offenses in the big leagues were in the AL.

        But, it does go to show that moving to the AL will affect his ERA (just because AL teams score more runs).

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Phillip says:

        You’re a major tool, DickAlmighty. Stop embarrassing yourself.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        Phillip –
        Valid opinion. You’re entitled to it. Not going to stop “embarrassing myself.” Stop telling people you don’t know what do to.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • CircleChange11 says:

        You’re a major tool, DickAlmighty

        I can;t be the only one that thinks it’s hilarious that someone just called ‘DickAlmighty’ a “major tool”.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  12. West says:

    The AL is a different monster, I see his ERA being around 4.80, 4.50 if he’s lucky. His only value will come from innings pitched.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Hey Dummy says:

      And you would be dead wrong.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        The people who give a “thumbs up” to a comment like this are idiots. Anyone who claims, before a season is played, to know that someone else’s projection about a particular player is “dead wrong,” is, himself, dead wrong.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        I take it by the six “thumbs down” to my comment that at least six people think they know more than they do.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Makavelli says:

        Or it’s just that nobody agrees with you. Don’t be such a big baby and cry about it. Take it like a man.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        Makavelli:
        If nobody agrees with me that a projection about a player’s future performance cannot be wrong, then we’ve got big problems.

        It impossible for a projection to be wrong. After the season has been played, it is possible for a projection to be wrong. However, before the season is played, no one knows if anyone’s opinion about what a player will do in the future is right or wrong. All these projections (including the ones at FanGraphs) are just opinions about future performance.

        Saying a projection is dead wrong is like saying someone’s call on a coinflip is wrong. “Heads.” “Nope, you’re wrong.” That makes no sense. You’ll know after the flip if the call was wrong; before the flip, you know nothing.

        I’m not being a big baby, I’m definitely not crying, and I don’t need to take anything “like a man.” Try being responsive to people’s posts, instead of using stupid cliches that have no relevance to the conversation.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Joel C. says:

        In response to Mr.Almighty, it is possible for a projection to be wrong before the season starts.

        So if someone’s projection for Pineiro’s 2010 season is 27-4 with a 7.10 ERA and 278 K’s that would seem _____?

        Unrealistic would be the polite answer but ridiculous and wrong are also good choices.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        Joel C:
        Ridiculous? Yes. Unrealistic? Yes. Wrong? No. I can predict a coin will turn up heads 100 consecutive times. It’s a preposterous prediction, but it’s not wrong (until it is wrong).

        I’m not arguing that all projections are created equal; a ridiculous projection like the one you suggest (27-4 with 278 K’s and a 7.20 ERA) wouldn’t be worthy of any attention at all. But, my initial response was to Hey Dummy, who said West’s projection of a 4.50-4.80 ERA for Pineiro was “dead wrong.” Pineiro’s got a 4.40 career ERA (slightly higher in the AL). Unless Hey Dummy has some information that none of the rest of us have (like a magic 8-ball that tells the future), he has no basis for calling a 4.50-4.80 ERA projection for Pineiro “dead wrong.” Am I wrong?

        Look at it this way: What if Pineiro manages to put up a 1.50 BB/9 in 2010 and he maintains his “stellar” 4.5 K/9 rate, but his BABIP jumps to .400. His ERA would probably be above 4.50, maybe even above 5.00. Or what if an unusually high number of his baserunners end up scoring (say, 40% score instead of the league-average rate of approximately 30%)? What if he has terrible luck this year? All of these possibilities are up in the air? For someone to call a totally reasonable projection like a 4.50-4.80 ERA “dead wrong” is totally absurd.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        And by the way, a jump in BABIP for Pineiro wouldn’t be all that unlikely since groundballs are more like to end up as hits than flyballs. Pineiro had a low BABIP last year (for a guy with a 60% GB rate). If his BABIP jumps, his ERA will follow.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Hey Dummy says:

        Oh please. What if Johan Santana allows 40 HRs in 200 innings? What if Alex Rodriguez finishes with a .230 BABIP? What if…

        The point is, that’s not realistic or reasonable. You don’t “expect” any of that to happen. Saying Pineiro will finish with a 4.80 ERA is based on what exactly? If you consider that to be a reasonable and realistic expectation, well, you’re crazier than West is. West is dead wrong if he thinks that’s a realistic outcome. It’s an idiotic one.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Hey Dummy says:

        And I don’t think anyone is disputing that Pineiro won’t be as good this season. I doubt he’ll have another 3.27 FIP season. So what exactly is your point?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        My point is, you’re a donkey for calling a perfectly reasonable projection “dead wrong.” You ask what a projection calling for Pineiro to finish with a 4.50-4.80 ERA is based on? Look at his career numbers. That’s basically his career average ERA in the AL. THAT’s what it’s based on.

        Yes, Pineiro developed a sinker with Dave Duncan, and had a career year last year. But players change from season to season. Luck changes from season to season. He doesn’t have Dave Duncan anymore. He doesn’t pitch in the NL Central (the worst division in baseball) anymore. Hell, his sinker may not be as effective as last year.

        It’s not like predicting a 4.50-4.80 ERA for Joel Pineiro is the same as predicting A-Rod to have a .230 BABIP for an entire season, or predicting Johan to give up 40 HR’s. You act as if a 4.50-4.80 ERA for Pineiro is completely outside the realm of possibility. It’s not. That’s my point.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • DickAlmighty says:

        Here’s another way to make this point — if we had been having this conversation last offseason, and West had predicted that Pineiro would put up a 3.50 ERA for the 2009 season, you probably would have said: “And you would be dead wrong.” And your statement would have looked correct to most of the people on this message — Pineiro had never put up such a good ERA before, why would you expect him to do so in 2009? And yet, you would have been dead wrong. So, what makes you think you’re right now?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Joel C. says:

        4.8 ERA for Piniero is perfectly reasonable as a projection. To suggest that he couldn’t regress to that level as Hey Dummy suggests is a mistake in my opinion.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • vivaelpujols says:

        The +1′s shouldn’t be about whether you agree with the comment or not. They should be whether the comment is worth reading. “Hey Dummy’s” comment is absolutely not worth reading nor does it add anything to the discussion.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  13. Sky Kalkman says:

    Huh, I was just trying to make similar plots in Excel yesterday — four categories with two data points each, so four baseball fields meeting at their home plates to make a full circle, with infields and outfields all different sizes. I failed.

    If anyone knows how to do that (in Excel) please send me an email. Thanks.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  14. Xave says:

    Dave, I’m a little confused. First you attributed Pineiro’s increased ground ball % to an increase in the number of sinkers thrown, but then then after the chart you attributed it to a change in the placement of fastballs (and that’s what chart represents). It could be that both things are true (and even related to each other), but that is not made explicit.

    What I’m trying to say is, if a guy throws half sinkers and half 4-seamers one year, and then 70% sinkers and 30% 4-seamers the next year, that might not actually result in a difference in the average height of these pitches, but since the sinkers have more downward movement, it would still increase the pitcher’s ground ball percentage.

    Did he start throwing lower in the zone while keeping his percentage of sinkers constant? If so, the chart you made is useful.

    Did he start throwing more sinkers relative to the total number of fastballs? If so, I would like to see a chart comparing the average vertical movement on his fastballs pre-2009 and 2009.

    And if both are the case, which I would guess is most likely, than both charts are useful.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Dave Allen says:

      It could be that both things are true (and even related to each other)

      Yes.

      He throws more sinkers AND those sinkers tend to be lower in the zone than his four-seam fastballs. The result of more sinkers is that as a whole his fastball are lower in the zone and he gets more grounders. Sorry if it was not clear at first.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Xave says:

        Thanks Dave, and just a quick and mostly meaningless follow-up: despite the fact that both of those things are true, I would argue that the fact that he throws a higher percentage of sinkers is the more important fact to highlight, since it’s probably the cause of the lower fastball height. This is speculative, but I would guess that when Pineiro decided to be more of a ground-ball pitcher (or however he went about making this decision), his decision was to throw more sinkers – NOT to throw lower in the zone. The fact that he throws more sinkers LEADS to those pitches being lower in the zone.

        And if all that is true, I would personally be more interested in stats and figures focusing on his sinker % and vertical movement than on average fastball height.

        But that’s just me, and it’s mostly semantics anyway.

        Keep up the good work.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Dave Allen says:

        I would argue that the fact that he throws a higher percentage of sinkers is the more important fact to highlight, since it’s probably the cause of the lower fastball height. This is speculative, but I would guess that when Pineiro decided to be more of a ground-ball pitcher (or however he went about making this decision), his decision was to throw more sinkers – NOT to throw lower in the zone.

        I agree with this 100%, so you are probably right that highlighting the change in sinker frequency would have been than the change in pitch height. I went with pitch height because I showed the change in sinker frequency in an earlier post, linked in this one, and didn’t want to repeat myself. So I thought pitch height would be a different, but still germane, thing to show.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  15. Gary says:

    He could be good, he could be a #4 starter, but there’s a good chance, like 25%, that he just craters and provides zero value. I’m kind of betting on the latter.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  16. CircleChange11 says:

    What happened to Pineiro following the 2003 season?

    That seems to be where he fell off and needed to “comeback” from.

    He’s had good 200 IP seasons in both the NL and AL, but the question remains as to whether he can continue it.

    25% = good chance that he craters? I would call 25% a “good chance”. Doesn;t that men there’s 75% chance he does provide value? There’s probably a similar % chance (as to your 25%) that Pineiro is “really good” (3.5 to 4 WAR).

    They’re only paying him for “2 WAR” if the simple math is correct … which is where he performed consistently as a Mariner.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  17. Henry says:

    There’s a good chance Pineiro will be a +3.5-4 player this season

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  18. hamandcheese says:

    There is a 100% chance that Joel Pineiro will have black hair this season. Wait, what is the point of this?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  19. Sean says:

    I have such a nerd boner for these graphs. They’re beautiful.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  20. William says:

    When I finish last in my fantasy baseball league, I can at least be glad I thought of something that came true … and I still think their poor outfield is a good reason for him to be there, from a team perspective (from “Angels in the Outfield” comment thread):

    “January 2, 2010 at 1:42 pm
    I agree with your analysis of their outfield, and reading it reminded me of a thought I had a while back about the Angles, their loss of Lackey, and their contrasting outfield/infield defense: When I was looking at Pineiro a while back, I hit on the Angels as a great home for him. For him to repeat his 09 season, he needs to prove that 2-seamer was legit and not just a cover up for a flukey great season, and, if it is for real, then he would do quite well to leave a team with a subpar infield and arive at a team with a plus one. And, even without Figgins, the Angels look perfect … not only because of their infield D, but also due to their lack of outfield D. If you have a guy who keeps the ball in capable hands AND out of incapable ones, that seems pretty smart to me.”

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  21. pounded clown says:

    Good….the less sinkerballers the Phillies have to face the better.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current day month ye@r *