The Unluckiest April Pitchers
When discussing the early season productivity of a player it is important to remember that the barometric statistics analyzed by those on television often have better evaluative indicators beneath the surface. Many of these indicators deal with luck, or a lack of luck, and provide a more telling window into what should be expected from the player in the coming weeks and months. Dave Cameron wrote earlier today about Nick Johnson and how, based on his high percentage of line drives but low BABIP, Johnson has experienced an unlucky streak this month. Using a slightly expanded method to the ones currently used to determine luck (relative to GB/FB/LD and BABIP) I decided to figure out the unluckiest pitchers of the month.
Initially the method consisted solely of BABIP and the difference between FIP and ERA (FIP-ERA) but I then extended it to include their current W-L records. Though anyone at least casually versed in statistical analysis will explain the faults of a W-L record, fans that simply love the game without analyzing anything equate W-L records to quality.
A pre-requisite also found its way into the criteria in that the FIP could not be above 4.30, a cutoff I usually look for when determining the difference between good and average. This way players like CC Sabathia and Barry Zito could be avoided; players who, despite having large FIP and ERA discrepancies, still had very high FIP and ERA counts. In summation, the players I considered to be the unluckiest were those with high FIP and ERA discrepancies, a high BABIP against, and a W-L record that does not do a good job of representing the quality of games pitched. This left me with the following four candidates:
- Nate Robertson: 6.91 ERA, 4.18 FIP, -2.73 FIP-ERA, .333 BABIP, 0-3 W-L
Nick Blackburn: 3.45 ERA, 2.72 FIP, -0.73 FIP-ERA, .347 BABIP, 1-1 W-L
Ian Snell: 4.45 ERA, 3.03 FIP, -1.42 FIP-ERA, .358 BABIP, 2-1 W-L
Zach Duke: 5.34 ERA, 3.97 FIP, -1.36 FIP-ERA, .369 BABIP, 0-2 W-L
So, of these guys, whom do you consider to be the unluckiest this month?
bryan said,
April 29, 2008 @ 7:58 pm
So babip is almost entirely based on defense and luck, but what about slugging pct. on balls in play or wOBA on balls in play?
Eric Seidman said,
April 29, 2008 @ 8:06 pm
Bryan, that’s a really interesting point. It actually reminds me of a discussion I had with RJ Anderson of Beyond the Box Score about using TBIP instead of WHIP, because, in a similar fashion to batting average, WHIP essentially says that all hits are singles. The TBIP would measure the total bases given up per innings pitched and SLGBIP would basically measure the same thing.
Edgar for Mayor said,
April 29, 2008 @ 8:11 pm
Felix Hernandez? Anyone?
Eric Seidman said,
April 29, 2008 @ 8:13 pm
Felix Hernandez is 2-1 with a 2.22 ERA, a 3.31 FIP, and a .298 BABIP.
Mitch W said,
April 29, 2008 @ 8:30 pm
Wow, pretty timely! I read this right after watching Snell’s defense betray him big time tonight. I’d have to say he’s the unluckiest of that group, b/c he has the best stuff. On a good team, he’d probably be a big winner.
Mitch W said,
April 29, 2008 @ 8:36 pm
I’ve been a little confused about how BABIP is essentially considered luck. I understand that the outcome of balls hit in play are not under the pitchers control to the extent that Ks,BBs, and HRs are, but if those balls are ripped or weakly grounded out or popped up is a significant difference. You touch on that above, but then don’t factor it into your analysis, I think. Shouldn’t % of line drives allowed be a siginifcant factor to accompany BABIP?
Eric Seidman said,
April 29, 2008 @ 8:59 pm
Mitch, Dave Studeman found, at The Hardball Times back in 2005, that LD% correlated well with BABIP. Essentially, that the BABIP for a player could accurately be determined by adding the LD% to .120. So, if someone gives up 20.0% line drives it could be expected his BABIP against would be .320. It’s more of the skill for a batter than lack of skill for the pitcher. We could definitely look at the difference in the actual BABIP vs expected BABIP; anyone with a higher BABIP than expected would be unlucky.
dan said,
April 29, 2008 @ 9:37 pm
Edgar for Mayor prompted me to look at Felix’s stats…. he and Stottlemeyer said he’d be trying to throw more groundballs this year instead of going for K’s. But his K/9 is right at his career high, and his GB% is below 50% for the first time in his career after having it at 60.8% last year. I guess that plan went out the window.
David Appelman said,
April 29, 2008 @ 11:30 pm
What about CC? CC has been incredibly unlucky. FIP doesn’t even tell the whole story. .373 BABIP, 60% LOB%. Still decent strikeout rates, BB/9 is a little high, but will probably come down.
Eric Seidman said,
April 29, 2008 @ 11:33 pm
I included him in the article. He and Zito didn’t meet the FIP under 4.30 requirement. I have no doubt CC will end up with a solid season but with this I was looking more for being unlucky because of higher numbers that mask good numbers. Sabathia’s FIP is still pretty high despite his large discrepancy.
Choo said,
April 30, 2008 @ 3:54 am
Blackburn not only has the best K/BB ratio of the group, but he yet to allow a single homer. I would say he has experienced the worst luck so far. Of the four unlucky pitchers mentioned, I think you have to exclude Duke for his weak K/BB ratio in comparison to the other three - or just in general for that matter.
In order of worst luck:
Blackburn
Robertson
Snell
Duke
Eric Seidman said,
April 30, 2008 @ 9:44 am
Choo, very good stuff.
Mitch W said,
April 30, 2008 @ 10:06 am
Thanks for the info. in your comment above, Eric. Interesting.
Eric Seidman said,
April 30, 2008 @ 10:11 am
So if we look at Nick Blackburn over the last two years we get this:
2007: 25.6 LD%, xBABIP of .376, BABIP of .406
2008: 17.6 LD%, xBABIP of .296, BABIP of .347
Tom Au said,
April 30, 2008 @ 10:48 am
Here are my standings based on my calculations (SabERA is calculated by 3.00+(13*HR+3BB-2K)/IP). The difference is with ERA, and “unluckiness” is measured by this difference between theoretical and actual performance. Snell’s figures are updated for last night’s game vs. the Mets.
Player ERA SabERA Difference Rank
Robertson 6.91 3.87 3.03 1
Duke 5.34 3.66 1.68 2
Snell 4.93 3.73 1.20 3
Blackburn 3.45 2.43 1.02 4
Blackburn is clearly the best pitcher of the four, but his actual results are most nearly reflective of his theoretical ones (compared to the others). Robertson is (by a small margin) the “worst” of the four, but his actual results do him the least justice, which is why he ranks tops in this exercise.
I disagree with Choo that Duke should be excluded because of his low strikeout total, because Duke also gives up few walks and home runs. Because Ks are less valuable than BBs and HRs, I wouldn’t at all mind having a pitcher with 0 HRs, O BBs and O Ks, who only has to worry about BABIP.
I note with interest that two of the four starters in this group are Pirates. Does this mean that we can expect this team to “regress” toward .500 when their pitchers’ actual ERAs regress downward toward their hypotheticals?
Dave Cameron said,
April 30, 2008 @ 10:55 am
So, you took FIP, changed the constant, and renamed it SabERA? Why?
Eric Seidman said,
April 30, 2008 @ 10:56 am
Yeah, Tom, what you’re referring to as SabERA is already around, with the name FIP, which can be found here at Fangraphs. The constant is around 3.20.
Tom Au said,
April 30, 2008 @ 11:26 am
I guess I had an old formula (and a made-up) name for this concept.
Choo said,
April 30, 2008 @ 3:50 pm
The reason I would exclude Duke based on his poor K/BB ratio is because a poor K/BB ratio expands the window of opportunity for bad luck to rear its ugly head. Keeping a hitter from putting the ball into play, whether the results is good (K) or bad (BB), is the most controllable factor a pitcher has regarding his outcome. When a pitcher like Duke fails to generate a healthy disparity between K’s (2.83 K/9) and BB’s (2.51 K/BB), his bad luck is essentially watered down – i.e. he is creating more precarious situations for himself by allowing hitters to put the ball in play.
NOTE: I don’t claim to be a certified sabermatrician, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
On a side note, I ran FIP-ERA for all of the SP’s last night. Interesting stuff. Johnny Cueto was one of the first pitchers to catch my eye. How would explain his numbers so far? Are they the result of bad luck or just what happens when extremely good outings are mixed with extremely poor ones? HR’s (1.54 HR/9) combined with a brutal LOB% (52.3%), but an average BABIP (.285) and outstanding K/9 (8.49) and BB/9 (1.54)? Excluding what I see when I watch him pitch on TV, I have idea what to make of his immediate future.