Now that Masahiro Tanaka has agreed to terms with the New York Yankees, it appears quite likely that offseason player movement will finally be allowed to resume. In fact, the Rays and Padres kicked off the post-Tanaka era yesterday with a pretty interesting transaction of their own. Seemingly next on the docket would be negotiations for the consensus next three best starting pitchers on the market — Matt Garza, Ubaldo Jimenez, and Ervin Santana. Let’s take a look at those three, and most specifically their 2013 batted-ball profiles, to determine the talent gap among them, and assess the level of investment of which each is worthy.
First, let’s separate the three hurlers’ Ks and BBs from their batted balls to determine their relative dependence on each for success.
|K %||BB %||BIP AVG||BIP SLG||BIP RUN||BIP R:100||TOT AVG||TOT OBP||TOT SLG||TOT RUN||TOT R:100||ACT ERA||ERA:100|
The table above lists each pitcher’s K and BB rates, the AVG and SLG they allowed on all batted balls, and their total slash line allowed to all batters, including the K and BB data. (HBP are not included in OBP and SH and SF are counted as outs for the purposes of this exercise.) The ball in play and total run values are calculated and scaled to MLB average ERA as follows: ((1.7 * Pitcher OBP + Pitcher SLG)/(1.7 * MLB OBP + MLB SLG)) * MLB Average ERA. The estimated run values excluding and including the K and BB data are scaled to 100 in the sixth and 11th columns above. For comparative purposes, the pitchers’ actual ERAs and relative actual ERA scaled to MLB average are listed in the two rightmost columns above. None of the above are adjusted for park factors.
At first glance, there are some similarities among the three pitchers. Garza and Jimenez both allowed about league-average production on their batted balls in 2013, while Santana allowed well under league-average production on batted balls. Garza’s K and BB rates were both slightly better than league average, with his BB rate reaching a career best while his K rate declined for the second year in a row. Jimenez’ K rate reached a career high, and his BB rate, while still much worse than league average, improved greatly from 2012. Santana’s K rate was just below league average, and very consistent with career norms, while his BB rate declined to a career best. Each pitcher’s calculated ERA, based on their K and BB rates and actual batted ball production allowed (10th column above) compares fairly evenly with their actual ERA (12th column) — none of these pitchers were materially affected by sequencing last season.
Now let’s inject each pitcher’s batted-ball frequency profile into the discussion.
|POP %||REL POP #||PCT POP||FLY %||REL FLY #||PCT FLY||LD %||REL LD #||PCT LD||GB %||REL GB #||PCT GB|
Each pitcher’s balls in play allowed are broken down by type above, and the relative frequencies of each are expressed relative to MLB average (scaled to 100) and as a percentile rank among 2013 MLB starting pitchers. Again, a number of similarities exist, particularly between Jimenez and Santana. Garza is much more of a flyball pitcher than the other two, and in 2013 allowed a very high line-drive percentage, which should be expected to regress somewhat in 2014.
Now let’s incorporate into the discussion the production allowed by these pitchers within the three major batted-ball categories (almost all popups are outs, so we’ll ignore production within that fourth category). This will yield some clues regarding the core ability of each pitcher.
|FLY AVG||FLY SLG||R FLY PRD||ADJ FLY||LD AVG||LD SLG||R LD PRD||ADJ LD||GB AVG||GB SLG||R GB PRD||ADJ GB||ALL AVG||ALL SLG||R ALL PRD||ADJ ALL||TRU ERA|
The third, seventh and 11th columns above represent the relative run value for each batted ball type, relative to MLB average, scaled to 100, while the fourth, eighth and 12th include estimated adjustments for team defense, ballpark, luck, etc. The 15th and 16th columns do the same for all batted balls combined.
This is where the differences among the pitchers jump out. First and foremost, let’s talk about Santana. In the first table, we saw that Santana allowed the lowest actual production on batted balls of the three pitchers, and had the lowest calculated and actual ERA of the three last season. In each of the three major batted ball categories, however, Santana was helped significantly by his home park and defense. While he cut his homers allowed from 39 to 26 in 2013, much of this was due to the flyball-stifling nature of his home park. The actual production allowed by Santana on line drives last season was way out of line with MLB norms, thanks both to random luck and exemplary team defense. The same was true to a lesser extent with his groundballs. Put the whole package together, and Santana’s ERA should have been 0.89 higher than it actually was based on the batted ball mix he allowed.
There is nothing quite as earth-shattering in Garza’s profile. The flyball contact he allowed in 2013 yielded less production than the MLB average, even when adjusted for ballpark, defense, etc. If you’re going to allows a lot of flyballs, you absolutely need to control their authority well, and Garza did just that. He did play in front of some exceptional infield defenders in both Chicago and Texas last season, and would have allowed greater production on groundballs in a neutral environment. All in all, however, Garza’s batted-ball profile should have yielded slightly better than league-average production. His ERA adjusted for batted ball authority is 0.10 below his actual 2013 ERA, and just about the same amount higher than his calculated ERA from Table 1. In other words, his 2013 ERA roughly approximates his true-talent level.
As for Jimenez, his line drive and groundball production allowed was about exactly what it should have been, but he was quite unfortunate with regard to flyball production allowed. Adjusting his flyball production allowed for defense, ballpark, etc., moves his overall batted-ball production from almost exactly MLB average to quite a bit better than that. His ERA adjusted for batted-ball authority is very close to his actual 2013 ERA, and 0.25 better than his calculated ERA from Table 1.
This exercise, therefore, gives us a clear pecking order: 1) Jimenez, 2) Garza, and 3) Santana. Obviously, there are other factors to be considered, including the following:
- 2014 Age – Garza = 30; Jimenez = 30; Santana = 31
- Health – Garza = lost half season in 2012 (elbow), first month and a half of 2013 (lat muscle); Jimenez = never missed a start in MLB; Santana = healthy since 09 (elbow/triceps)
- Splits – Garza = minimal reverse split for career; Jimenez = minimal normal split for career; Santana = significant normal split for career
- Repertoire Trends – Garza = FB much less effective in 2013, though velocity stable; Jimenez = FB velocity trending down for several years, has learned to effectively use FB at lower velocity; Santana = lots of damage done to FB over years, velocity stable
Obviously, there is an awful lot more to consider when making a sizable investment in a pitcher. Physical stature, delivery, arm action, as well as personality/makeup all come into play. Based upon the subject matter discussed above, however, one has to conclude that Ubaldo Jimenez is the best of this group of three, the one most worthy of a significant investment. His profile is somewhat unusual for a 30-year-old — especially the elevated walk rate — and there is a history of inconsistency, but there is No. 2 starter upside here, coupled with an ongoing clean bill of health.
Matt Garza is a mid-rotation starter with health questions and negative creep in some key trend areas. If you’re sold on his health, a significant annual salary can be justified, if you can restrain yourself on the number of contract years. Ervin Santana is an innings guy with significant downside risk due to his acute vulnerability to hard flyball contact. If you play your home games in a big park and possess strong outfield defense, he’s worthy of a modest financial outlay, both in terms of dollars and years.
Print This Post