Comments on: Pitching Trio of the Month

By: Tom Au

Tom Au — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:00:46 +0000

As a matter of fact, I do have a Pirate pitching trio of the month–and I’m not being facetious. They are three relievers:

Pitcher WPA Rank (National League)
Tyler Yates 0.93 3
Matt Capps 0.91 7
John Grabow 0.90 9

And don’t write off the starters. Paul Maholm is an unlikely star, who just pitched a complete game and has an ERA of 3.23 (although his sabermetric ERA is a somewhat worse 3.89). Zach Duke has improved a lot over last year, judging by his sabermetric ERA of 3.66 rather than his actual ERA of 5.34. Ian Snell, the ace, doesn’t look like anything special with his 4.45 ERA; until you realize that his sabermetric ERA 2.93 is (1HR, 9 BBs, 21 Ks in 30 1/3 innings).

Maybe I’m biased, as a former Pittsburgher. But this is the most exciting Pirates team I’ve seen since the early 1990s, and one that has for a change been unlucky, rather than not good. They’ve had injuries to Jack Wilson and Freddy Sanchez in the early going. And who would have thought that veteran (and now bought out) “Matty Mo” would have been such a drag (not counting the five losses in his starts, the 10-15 Pirates would be 10-10).

By: Eric Seidman

Eric Seidman — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:33:43 +0000

For me, it’s tough. I love Felix, and I do think Silva is a solid #3-4 type pitcher but I got to watch Kyle Lohse a lot last year and he really surprised me. He had a propensity for getting into jams right before he would naturally exit the game. As in he would pitch 6 strong innings, get one out in the seventh, and then give up a walk and a double or something along those lines. The historical ones I agree, Cubs for me and by a very slight margin over the Astros. VERY slight. It’s hard to answer questions like that without our hindsight coming into play, too, but it’s pretty weird to think that Carlos Zambrano was the #3 starter.

By: doorbot

doorbot — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:27:50 +0000

To the question (sorry): I’d take the Mariners and hope the team wins one behind the so-so back end guys…and of the historical trios I’d take the 2003 Cubs, just barely over the 2005 Astros, but really only due to age and possibly hindsight/bias.

By: Eric Seidman

Eric Seidman — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:24:18 +0000

Yeah, that’s a good point. Weird. I’ll update it to reflect that.

By: doorbot

doorbot — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:22:11 +0000

Jake Westbrook does though, instead of C.C. I mean, which makes the Indians far and away the leader without Sabathia.

Is this a sorting problem? The grid claims min IP is N/A, but some default threshold is being applied.

By: Eric Seidman

Eric Seidman — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:15:53 +0000

Clearly he would be a better choice than Washburn, but I’m curious to hear thoughts on these three combos.

By: Eric Seidman

Eric Seidman — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:14:54 +0000

Because Bedard does not qualify for inclusion when you look at the WPA leaders. I went to the Major League leaders, sorted by team, and it automatically includes those that qualify.

By: doorbot

doorbot — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:12:14 +0000

Um, then why choose Washburn? He has a lower WPA so far this season than Bedard (0.28 to 0.18)?

By: Eric Seidman

Eric Seidman — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 04:15:49 +0000

Because the question is relative to the three combinations I mentioned. Of course there are better threesomes out there, but as of right now, these three groupings have resulted in the highest threesome WPAs. It’s not like I’m ignoring them but rather curious for the choice of these three. No substitutions, no other rotations, just these three.

By: willkoky

willkoky — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 04:13:51 +0000

I’d take the Padres. But why not Santana, Maine, Oli or Pedro?