Tim Lincecum: 6th Best Fantasy Starter?
Recently here at Rotographs, we released our rest of season rankings for starting pitchers, I had Tim Lincecum rated as the sixth-highest fantasy pitcher. To say the least, I took a little heat for that ranking. I will try to justify the ranking today.
To begin with, here is a comparison between two pitchers from the beginning of the season to the All-Star break.
Pitcher A: 5.66 ERA, 0.347 BABIP, 11.7 K/9, 1.8 BB/9
Pitcher B: 6.08 ERA, 0.335 BABIP, 9.8 K/9, 4.7 BB/9
Both of these pitchers put up a high ERA. They both struck out a ton of batters. Also, they were getting hit around quite a bit as seen by the high BABIPs. The one difference is that Pitcher B walked a few more batters. Pitcher A is Zack Greinke in 2011, while pitcher B is obviously Tim Lincecum this year.
After the horrible start last season, Zack began getting the results in accordance with his peripheral stats. Over the second half of the season, he had 9 wins, a 2.59 ERA, 1.16 WHIP and put up those numbers while his K/9 dropped to 9.4. He is an example of a pitcher who was putting up great peripheral stats, like Lincecum, but just not getting good results. An example of one other pitcher is not how I based my decision on ranking Tim so high, but it shows that pitchers can turn their season around.
I came up with my rankings using a formula I created last fall to rate fantasy pitchers. When I created the formula, I was just wanting to take most of the noise out of determining how to value SP. After looking at several different formulas, I ended up using one that only looked at the K% and BB% for the pitchers. By using percentage values, some levels of pitcher BABIP is taken into account. With the formula, Tim’s 2012 value (no IP used) was 0.159. It was the ninth-highest value of the starting pitchers when I ran the my rankings during the All-Star Break. Some pitchers ranked ahead of him had possible inning limits placed on them, like Chris Sale and Stephen Strasburg, so he moved up to sixth place.
At that point, he may not of seemed to be the sixth best pitcher with a:
6.42 ERA
1.58 WHIP
104 K
3 Wins
Those stats, besides the strikeouts, are horrible. To put their crappiness into perspective, I ranked him with other starters with comparable IP. Here at FanGraphs, we don’t have a way to create leader boards using the All-Star game as a splitting point, so I couldn’t go back and create a ranking of fantasy stats for all pitchers at that point in the season. I had to just use the season stats to date. Taking all the current stats and using Zack Sanders’ method of ranking SP, Tim is the 84th-ranked starting pitcher (of 91 pitchers with at least 100 IP). Those values include his last two starts which were good, so he probably had a lower ranking at the halfway point. Even though he has the 13th-highest strikeout total, he is producing like Kevin Millwood or Rick Porcello.
I can understand the confusion of ranking a pitcher 6th best when he was producing more like the sixth-worst pitcher in the league.
The problem with projecting Timmy is that his level of suckitude, especially when considering his ERA, is unprecedented for a pitcher putting up his K and BB numbers. Looking back over last 10 years of stats for pitchers in the first 4 months of the season, not one pitcher has a Pitcher Valuation Ranking as high as Tim with a comparable ERA. It is not even close. Using pitchers from the last 10 years who had:
1. Pitched at least 80 innings from the start of the season to the end of July
2. Posted an ERA within 0.5 Runs of Lincecum.
None were “better” than him using my pitcher valuation. Here are the top 5:
Rank: Name, Year, Pitcher Valuation, ERA
1. Tim Lincecum, 2012, 0.159, 5.72
2. Carl Pavano, 2009, 0.132, 5.68
3. Bronson Arroyo, 2008, 0.131,5.79
4. Jeremy Bonderman, 2004, 0.125, 6.05
5. Francisco Liriano, 2009, 0.123, 5.60
Looking at it another way, here are pitchers with similar Pitcher Valuations (K and BB are within 1% also) and their corresponding ERA:
Name, Season, Pitcher Valuation, ERA
Tim Lincecum, 2012, 0.159, 5.72
Bud Norris, 2003, 0.161, 3.39
Yovani Gallardo, 2012, 0.158, 3.76
A.J. Burnett, 2005, 0.158, 3.32
Edinson Volquez, 2008, 0.155, 2.74
By having such an extreme difference in talent and results, it is tough to get any good examples of how similar pitchers have performed over the rest of the season. I took 20 pitchers’ with the best Valuation Values and had a similar ERA to Tim this year. With that set of players, I looked to see how they performed from August to the season’s end. Their ROS ERA was, on average, lower by a value of 1.08. Five of the 20 pitchers had an ERA 2 or more runs lower while 3 actually had an ERA greater than their previous ERA.
Even though these pitchers’ K and BB numbers were worse than Lincecum’s, I expected to see more of a change in their ERA. Looking at the numbers a little further, even more regression was at work besides the ERA value. These pitchers saw there Valuation numbers drop in the last two months from 0.112 to 0.092 (K% went from 17.8% to 17.0% and BB% went from 8.4% to 9.8%). Regression was at work with the ERA and with K and BB numbers.
I am not 100% sure how to measure Lincecum’s ROS talent level. Generally, the rest of the pitchers I ranked lined up with the rest of the rankings. I have thought of putting some kind of BABIP and/or LOB value into my formula, but when I originally created the formula they added little if any value. One item I am considering looking into are K% and BB% numbers with runners on base and the bases empty since K and BB rates stabilize quickly. Tim has a distinctive split in 2012 with a 4.1 K/BB value with the bases empty and a 1.2 K/BB value with runners on base. These values are significantly different than his career 3.0 K/BB with the base empty and 2.8 K/BB with runners on base.
Has Tim Lincecum performed like the 6th best pitcher in baseball? Not even close. There is data that points to him being the 6th worst in the league. I will stand by my ranking because, over time, pitchers eventually begin to perform closer to their peripheral stats. Since I released the rankings, Tim as done a good job of making me look good by winning 1 of this starts and posting a 1.20 ERA and 0.867 WHIP. Two games aren’t going to show that he is back, but they help. Sometimes it takes a while for a pitcher to produce according to their strikeout and walk numbers. This season, it is taking Tim a historically long time to start to produce to that level.
All this GIants fan can say at this point is that I hope you’re right.
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.
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.
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.
“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.
you’re*
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.
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.
I tried to trade for him a few weeks ago, but his owner wouldn’t bite.
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?
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.
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.
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.
You did. A fried bandit.
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.
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
Sweet, I am at least consistent.
http://www.despair.com/consistency.html
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.
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.
I’m pretty surprised Bud Norris has been in the league since 2003.
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.
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.
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”.
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.