FanGraphs Fantasy Baseball


RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. All this GIants fan can say at this point is that I hope you’re right.

    Comment by Menthol — July 23, 2012 @ 4:49 pm

  2. I think the appropriate ranking is either Top-10, or outside the top 40-50.
    Put it this way: he’s not likely to be the 25th best pitcher ROS. If he’s truly this bad, he shouldn’t be ranked at all; if not, based on his established talent level and current K-Rate, a top-10 ranking is justifiable.

    Comment by TheTinDoor — July 23, 2012 @ 4:55 pm

  3. A big part of the flack stems from how people — I assume — think about “#6″.

    I suspect the thought was: why so high? You’d never have to “pay” that much for him (imagine a ROS draft, no way anybody jumps on Lincecum over Cole Hamels, right?) So while your explanation works, and he’s already on his way to a nice second half, a provocative ranking is always fun.

    Comment by Matt NW — July 23, 2012 @ 5:04 pm

  4. It’s a fair system but it doesn’t take into account the relatively high risk that something may actually be seriously wrong with Lincecum. His velocity is still down from last year. What if he’s trying to pitch through an injury like Dan Haren? We don’t know.

    Obviously he has to regress at some point, but it’s not automatic, and it’s not guaranteed that he’ll come all the way back.

    Comment by Ian — July 23, 2012 @ 5:07 pm

  5. “After looking at several different formulas, I ended up using one that only looked at the K% and BB% for the pitchers.”

    A formula that completely dismisses everything other than these two percentages is beyond worthless. I get that these are the foundation of a pitcher’s success/failure but you have to look at more than just that for anyone to take that ranking system seriously. Your outsmarting yourself.

    Comment by Jason — July 23, 2012 @ 5:21 pm

  6. I tried to trade for him a few weeks ago, but his owner wouldn’t bite.

    Comment by Corey — July 23, 2012 @ 5:49 pm

  7. you’re*

    Comment by Luke — July 23, 2012 @ 5:51 pm

  8. I as well.

    I know everyone hates reading about anyone else’s fantasy team, but this is Rotographs, so here are a couple data points:
    1 for 1 offers that were rejected (about a month ago)
    :My Lester for his Lincecum
    My Rasmus for his Lincecum
    My Rios for his Lincecum

    No im trrying to decide if sending Crawford for Lincecum would be stupid or worthwhile. Thoughts?

    Comment by cs3 — July 23, 2012 @ 6:10 pm

  9. I traded Adam Dunn (I had excess power thanks to Trumbo) and Wandy Rodriguez for Timmy 4 starts ago. Since then he had two consecutive putrid starts followed by back to back gems. He has the Pads at home this week so there is the potential for him to string three good starts together which he has not done all season. Unless there is an unknown injury three consecutive Tim-esque starts could give his confidence, which has to have taken a major hit this year, a boost he sorely needs. Anyone who has played sports knows that a positive state of mind is so critical to success. I hope your 6th ranking is spot on.

    Comment by Aaron — July 23, 2012 @ 6:23 pm

  10. Just what additionally should I look at. I have a correlation of .72. Most of the rest of the pitchers look good with everyone else’s ranking. I like the KISS method the most which actually keeps me from outsmarting myself.

    Comment by Jeff Zimmerman — July 23, 2012 @ 7:38 pm

  11. Adam Dunn hurts. I was able to swing Freddy Freeman and Jeremy Hellickson for Timmy this afternoon. I feel like I made out like a bandit.

    Comment by Frito Bandito — July 23, 2012 @ 8:17 pm

  12. Jeff Zimmerman is consistently the worst writer on FanGraphs. The difference between a 1.8 BB/9 and a 4.7 BB/9 is the difference between an excellent walk rate and one of the worst walk rates in the league. Additionally, while Lincecum is posting an elite strikeout rate this year, an 11.7 K/9 is off the charts. The peripherals you listed for Greinke are very similar to those put up by Pedro Martinez at the peak of his career. Lincecum’s season thus far is much more analogous to Gio Gonzalez circa 2009 – an excellent strikeout rate being counteracted by a putrid walk rate and terrible luck on balls in play. But even if Gonzalez hadn’t been unlucky in 2009, his lack of control would have limited him to being a league average pitcher – certainly not one of the 6 best in the game.

    Comment by Andrew — July 23, 2012 @ 8:31 pm

  13. also the terrible BB rate has a direct adverse influence on his ability to pitch deep into games, accumulate wins, and rack up even more K’s

    Comment by cs3 — July 23, 2012 @ 9:51 pm

  14. Sweet, I am at least consistent.

    Comment by Jeff Zimmerman — July 24, 2012 @ 10:29 am

  15. You’ve tried harder than I did, but when mine was rejected I also realized that I was dealing with a Giants fan. The approach that I thought would work (but didn’t) was to trade a stable, decent starting pitcher for Lincecum, so Lincecum’s owner gets stability and I get a potential explosion and also a potential absolute bust. I thought that would work partly because Lincecum’s owner was already in first place. I don’t know about Crawford for Linecum. If your offers are being rejected without a proposed counter-offer I guess I would take that to mean that Lincecum’s owner just isn’t interested in trading Lincecum.

    Comment by Corey — July 24, 2012 @ 11:44 am

  16. Yeah, comparing a pitcher who had a crazy-good 6.5 K/BB ratio to one with a barely-average 2.09 K/BB ratio is kinda ridiculous. Of course, those were both only half-season numbers… But Lincecum’s peripheral stats do not suggest a turn-around like Greinke, which was suppose to be the premise and “proof” of your article.

    Plenty of minor league pitchers out there who, when you look at their K rates you go “OMFG!!!!”, then you check out the unsightly BB rate, and you go, “Oh… Maybe not so much.” Greinke was a total fluke, but Lincecum? He’s just average. Not 6.08 ERA, but average. Certainly not deserving of being rated the 6th-best fantasy starter for the rest of the season. For an article that purports to focus only on K% and BB%, there sure seems to be a lot of stats being thrown around that has nothing to do with Ks and BBs.

    Comment by Phillie697 — July 24, 2012 @ 12:56 pm

  17. I’m pretty surprised Bud Norris has been in the league since 2003.

    Comment by Big Jgke — July 24, 2012 @ 1:48 pm

  18. From what I’ve seen, Lincecum has just made some really really terrible pitches this year. Frankly I think you can spend days, weeks, maybe even months pouring through numbers and analysis, but you won’t find anything that points to “lack of focus”

    At times he looks like vintage Lincecum, while at other times he just looks lost, like when he forgot how many outs there were the other day and started walking towards the dugout with only 2 outs.

    I think his problems are partially mental, and partially physical, because the drop in velocity is definitely something that is concerning.

    That and he just hasn’t pitched well out of the stretch this year, being unable to strand runners effectively. He might be turning it around, I don’t know, but I wouldn’t hold my breath having watched way too many of his starts this year.

    I wish I could have those precious hours back.

    Comment by thalooch — July 24, 2012 @ 2:24 pm

  19. You beat me to it. The writer might be right, and the Lincecum’s K/W at the time of the article was still okay, but to say the difference between 4.7 and 1.8 is a ‘couple of walks’ (apraphrased), is a gross understatement. Over 198 IPs in a season, that equates to an additional 64 walks.

    The second editorial also sounded like someone selling you something. He says that Lincecum had great peripherals, like Greinke. Greinke had an otherworldly 6.5 K/W, while Lincecum had a very pedestrian 2.09 K/W. Even if he is proven otherwise correct, those two statements are plain wrong.

    Comment by Joebreidey — July 24, 2012 @ 3:25 pm

  20. I wouldn’t go so far as to trash Zimmerman’s writing, but the article is bad. Real bad. And I say that as a Lincecum owner.

    Comparing Greinke’s first half to Lincecum’s first half is useless, given the magnitude of the difference between their peripherals and their stuff.

    And a formula based only on K% and BB%, although not entirely useless, is not very helpful.

    Lincecum should be better, but it’s pretty clear at this point that he’s lost a step and can truly only hope to recover and be “good”. I see him as a #15-#20 starter from here on out.

    Comment by Brian — July 24, 2012 @ 4:49 pm

  21. A correlation of .72 is good on the whole, but not necessarily good enough to justify ranking the 6th-worst pitcher as the 6th-best moving forward.

    Comment by Dingbat — July 24, 2012 @ 5:38 pm

  22. You did. A fried bandit.

    Comment by Dingbat — July 24, 2012 @ 5:38 pm

  23. you lost all credibility at “a few more walks”. really? 1.8 vs 4.7 bb/9?
    tell me: how is that not flat-out dishonest?
    you sound like a used car salesman, not an “analyst”.

    Comment by robert — July 25, 2012 @ 9:03 pm

  24. Lincecum barely throws 90 mph these days, and throws in a pitchers’ park. Look at his teammates, they dominated(while even Zito has done decent considering.)

    I believe he might bounce back after this season for a year or two, but considering he’s seemed pretty hittable with insane walk ratios the past few seasons I have no tricky statistics with which to support my argument.

    Honestly, he’s 5’10 at best, and has lost velocity season after season… his career WHIP is now almost 1.23 while guys like Verlander who are older just see theirs drop.

    Comment by Kyle — July 26, 2012 @ 12:53 am

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>

Close this window.

0.110 Powered by WordPress