PDA

View Full Version : ESPN article about A's SP Brandon McCarthy and Sabermetrics



Redsfan320
03-15-2012, 07:55 PM
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7602264/oakland-brandon-mccarthy-writing-moneyball-next-chapter-reinventing-analytics-espn-magazine

Thought this was a pretty cool article. Check it out!

320

dougdirt
03-15-2012, 07:57 PM
Read that earlier. Loved it.

Spitball
03-15-2012, 10:42 PM
Love his wife.

_Sir_Charles_
03-15-2012, 11:22 PM
That's the first time I've ever seen any practical use of Sabermetrics. EVER. I see people crunch numbers all the time and use them to explain why someone does what they do, but I've never seen anybody take that data and alter their approach to improve those numbers in the future.

I'll be honest, I've never really "climbed on board" the sabermetric train as it were. I'm still not a huge fan of them as it still just boils down to number crunching. But if it can change a player's approach for the better...sign me up.

dougdirt
03-16-2012, 01:36 AM
That's the first time I've ever seen any practical use of Sabermetrics. EVER. I see people crunch numbers all the time and use them to explain why someone does what they do, but I've never seen anybody take that data and alter their approach to improve those numbers in the future.

I'll be honest, I've never really "climbed on board" the sabermetric train as it were. I'm still not a huge fan of them as it still just boils down to number crunching. But if it can change a player's approach for the better...sign me up.
It can change a players approach. While it may not change their ability, it can change their results and production. But, as the article notes, while front offices know this, managers and players generally don't care about it.

Brian Bannister got really into Pitch F/X data for himself and opponents and used it to his advantage a few years ago. I can't remember exactly which pitcher it was, maybe Jojo can, but a Mariners pitcher took the advice from USSMariner.com after they looked at his pitch selection from one year to the next and noticed he was going about things quite a bit different and it was harming his results.

savafan
03-16-2012, 02:04 AM
That was a good read. To be honest, I don't really get the advanced metrics, though I think I would like to. It is hard breaking away from the traditional numbers you were raised on.

One question though. Isn't McCarthy's strategy similar to the "pitch to contact" strategy that Dan O'Brien tried to institute here that went unsuccessful? If so, why didn't it work for Reds' pitchers?

mth123
03-16-2012, 02:45 AM
That was a good read. To be honest, I don't really get the advanced metrics, though I think I would like to. It is hard breaking away from the traditional numbers you were raised on.

One question though. Isn't McCarthy's strategy similar to the "pitch to contact" strategy that Dan O'Brien tried to institute here that went unsuccessful? If so, why didn't it work for Reds' pitchers?

Because they were crummy pitchers.

edabbs44
03-16-2012, 06:16 AM
It can change a players approach. While it may not change their ability, it can change their results and production. But, as the article notes, while front offices know this, managers and players generally don't care about it.

Brian Bannister got really into Pitch F/X data for himself and opponents and used it to his advantage a few years ago. I can't remember exactly which pitcher it was, maybe Jojo can, but a Mariners pitcher took the advice from USSMariner.com after they looked at his pitch selection from one year to the next and noticed he was going about things quite a bit different and it was harming his results.

It doesn't seem like Bannister is a great case study for sabermetrics.

PuffyPig
03-16-2012, 06:21 AM
That was a good read. To be honest, I don't really get the advanced metrics, though I think I would like to. It is hard breaking away from the traditional numbers you were raised on.

One question though. Isn't McCarthy's strategy similar to the "pitch to contact" strategy that Dan O'Brien tried to institute here that went unsuccessful? If so, why didn't it work for Reds' pitchers?

McCarthy isn't pitch to contact, he's pitching to groundballs.

An extreme groundball pitcher can be successful without K's if his control is good.

His K rate was 6.49, with an exceptional 1.32 W-rate. So he K's a moderate amount, walks no one, and has an extreme GB rate. Recipe for success. That's not "pitching simply to contact".

savafan
03-16-2012, 07:28 AM
McCarthy isn't pitch to contact, he's pitching to groundballs.

An extreme groundball pitcher can be successful without K's if his control is good.

His K rate was 6.49, with an exceptional 1.32 W-rate. So he K's a moderate amount, walks no one, and has an extreme GB rate. Recipe for success. That's not "pitching simply to contact".

I see. Was it the change to his pitching delivery that induced more ground balls than fly balls?

mattfeet
03-16-2012, 07:38 AM
Love his wife.

Same here! :lol: :beerme:

Outstanding article, too. Thanks for sharing.

-Matt

bucksfan2
03-16-2012, 08:45 AM
I don't quite see how this is a Saber adjustment. When he adjusted from a four seemer to a two seemer it seemed like that was the big change. I can see where that could be saber aided, but it has to deal with developing and perfecting a new pitch.

I did find this quote funny from a Saber perspective.

"I wanted ground balls and worse contact. I wanted to attack the zone and get deep into games." By the time McCarthy came off the DL in September 2009, he'd made a decision: He was going to become Roy Halladay.
All along I thought balls in play were bad and K's were good. It seemed like McCarthy brought a mix of traditional and saber information to develop this conclusion, get ground balls and get weak contact.

I think Saber has a place in the front office when evaluating players. While the information is available to players I just don't see how it is any more useful than information that has been out there for decades. Ground balls are better than fly balls, walks are bad, using pitch F/X data really isn't anything that hasn't been done before. Pitch F/X is just a better system of charting pitches. Fly balls leave the park, ground balls don't isn't anything new.

I could be wrong but I just don't know how a pitcher knowing his BABIP or WAR helps him on the field. When its about making outs, I don't understand how a pitcher can say to himself one day "I was just unlucky".

CySeymour
03-16-2012, 09:26 AM
McCarthy isn't pitch to contact, he's pitching to groundballs.

An extreme groundball pitcher can be successful without K's if his control is good.

His K rate was 6.49, with an exceptional 1.32 W-rate. So he K's a moderate amount, walks no one, and has an extreme GB rate. Recipe for success. That's not "pitching simply to contact".

Plus he only gave up 11 home runs. Eleven! I know he pitches in Oakland, but that is still amazing. Very limited amount of walks and home runs equals a valuable major league pitcher.

CySeymour
03-16-2012, 09:36 AM
Just doing a quick stat comparison, it appears to me that Mike Leake is similar to McCarthy. Leake did allow 23 homers last season compared to 11 for McCarthy, but the difference in ballparks should be noted. McCarthy's walk rate was significantly lower the Leake's, 1.3 compared to 2.0. Leake k'd 6.3 per 9 and McCarthy k'd 6.5 per 9.

_Sir_Charles_
03-16-2012, 11:27 AM
I see. Was it the change to his pitching delivery that induced more ground balls than fly balls?

I think it was more his pitch selection. He added 2 new pitches that are more prone to induce grounders if I read it correctly.

The Operator
03-16-2012, 11:59 AM
I don't quite see how this is a Saber adjustment. When he adjusted from a four seemer to a two seemer it seemed like that was the big change. I may be wrong but I think the Saber aspect of it is that he looked at some of the advanced metrics on his own performances, and then decided to alter his arsenal.


I could be wrong but I just don't know how a pitcher knowing his BABIP or WAR helps him on the field. When its about making outs, I don't understand how a pitcher can say to himself one day "I was just unlucky".I could imagine it helping a lot. Confidence is a huge part of the game. If you're going through a huge slump but someone shows you statistical evidence that you're having a run of extreme bad luck, you're less likely to lose confidence and/or alter your swing or approach to try and break out of it.

Spitball
03-16-2012, 12:04 PM
McCarthy isn't pitch to contact, he's pitching to groundballs.

An extreme groundball pitcher can be successful without K's if his control is good.

His K rate was 6.49, with an exceptional 1.32 W-rate. So he K's a moderate amount, walks no one, and has an extreme GB rate. Recipe for success. That's not "pitching simply to contact".

I disagree. That is pitching to contact.

Pitching to contact is throwing pitches for strikes early in the count. But, the location of those pitches is important. They must invite contact in locations where they won't produce solid contact. Depending on the pitcher, he will hope to induce groundballs or flyballs, but not linedrives.

And, pitching to contact is not necessarilly about avoiding strikeouts. Inviting contact can produce more at bats where the pitcher is ahead in the count because he is throwing strikes. Pitching to contact does not mean a pitcher won't try for a strikeout when he is ahead in the count...or in certain strategic situations (like man on third and less that two outs).

Pitching to contact is not chuck and duck. It is about throwing strikes in various locations and speeds that will induce non-solid contact in the form of a grounder or flyball. It should still produce strikeouts because they happen when pitchers are pitching ahead in counts. So, pitching to contact pitchers do K a moderate amount, walk few or no one, and have an extreme GB or FB rates.

PuffyPig
03-16-2012, 03:21 PM
I disagree. That is pitching to contact.

Pitching to contact is throwing pitches for strikes early in the count. But, the location of those pitches is important. They must invite contact in locations where they won't produce solid contact. Depending on the pitcher, he will hope to induce groundballs or flyballs, but not linedrives.



Since 70% of LD's result in hits, if a pitcher could induce groudballs and fbyballs (and thereby prevent LD's) he could control BABIP.

A pitcher can control his GB and FB rate, but he can't control his LD rate. Now, to the extent some believe a pitcher has marginal control over BABIP, it would follow that he would have marginal control over his LD rate.

Pitching to contact only works for a successful pitcher if he has decent control and limits FB's (and therefore HR's).

Spitball
03-16-2012, 04:00 PM
Since 70% of LD's result in hits, if a pitcher could induce groudballs and fbyballs (and thereby prevent LD's) he could control BABIP.

A pitcher can control his GB and FB rate, but he can't control his LD rate. Now, to the extent some believe a pitcher has marginal control over BABIP, it would follow that he would have marginal control over his LD rate.

Pitching to contact only works for a successful pitcher if he has decent control and limits FB's (and therefore HR's).

The chances for groundballs and flyballs can be increased by location, type of pitch, speed variation.

Also, a pitcher can get a statistical advantage in an at bat by getting ahead in the count. Really, pitching to contact involves throwing strikes and getting ahead in the count before expanding the zone. Contact will happen, but it does in most cases for all pitchers. Even Justin Verlander gets nearly 2/3 of his outs on flyballs.

Dave Duncan is the name most commonly associated with the term pitch to contact (or invite contact), but it really is an old concept.

PuffyPig
03-16-2012, 06:50 PM
Also, a pitcher can get a statistical advantage in an at bat by getting ahead in the count.

Of course, throwing strikes early means you can get hit hard early too.

PuffyPig
03-16-2012, 06:52 PM
The chances for groundballs and flyballs can be increased by location, type of pitch, speed variation.



Of course, pitching low in the strike zone will give you more GB's, high will give you more FB's. You can't decrease your LD rate ( on balls put into play), other than through randomness.

dougdirt
03-16-2012, 07:02 PM
You can't decrease your LD rate ( on balls put into play), other than through randomness.

I don't think that is completely accurate. If you have been tipping pitches without knowing it and finally find it out, you might be able to. Going from 80% fastballs to 60% might do wonders too. Now, both of those are very unlikely to have happened over long periods of time. Assuming that a pitcher is of actual MLB quality, you are probably pretty close to being right.

Spitball
03-16-2012, 08:53 PM
Of course, pitching low in the strike zone will give you more GB's, high will give you more FB's. You can't decrease your LD rate ( on balls put into play), other than through randomness.

Changing speeds to keep hitters off their pitches is even more important. A hitter on his front foot is not likely to make solid contact. Changing locations and eye levels is also important. Location within the strike zone is the key. The elements of pitching to contact are the elements of effective pitching.

Throw strikes and get ahead in the count. Change speeds and locations. Reduce the chances for solid contact. Invite contact. Get ahead in the count. Expand the zone. That is the recipe for success...and has been for years.

PuffyPig
03-16-2012, 11:18 PM
Throw strikes and get ahead in the count. Change speeds and locations. Reduce the chances for solid contact. Invite contact. Get ahead in the count. Expand the zone. That is the recipe for success...and has been for years.

That explains how you get strike outs too.

But by inviting contact you invite hits and runs. Because once you give up contact, you more or less give up control.

Because you simply cannot induce weak contact. If you could, you could easily control BABIP.

AtomicDumpling
03-17-2012, 02:56 AM
Plus he only gave up 11 home runs. Eleven! I know he pitches in Oakland, but that is still amazing. Very limited amount of walks and home runs equals a valuable major league pitcher.

You touched on a key point regarding McCarthy's FIP of 2.86, which was 5th-best in baseball last year. The number of home runs a pitcher allows is a big component of the FIP formula. However in reality the pitcher does not have much control over his HR/FB rate, so there is a considerable luck variable in his HR rate. (Pitchers give up more/less home runs per fly ball based on luck rather than skill.) HR rate is also strongly affected by ballpark, which works in McCarthy's favor as well because he pitches in Oakland's huge yard.

That is where xFIP comes in to save the day. xFIP uses a regression factor to compensate for the wild extremes a pitcher sees in his HR rate from season to season and ballpark to ballpark. McCarthy's xFIP was 3.30 in 2011, which was 19th-best in baseball -- still very good but not sensational like his FIP was.

Then there is SIERA, which factors in batted ball types (ground balls, fly balls and line drives) into the equation, unlike FIP and xFIP which only consider strikeouts, walks, HBP and home runs. FIP and xFIP assume league-average BABIPs for all pitchers. SIERA assumes better BABIPs for high-strikeout pitchers. McCarthy's SIERA was 3.49 and was 30th-best in baseball -- still very good but not nearly as impressive as his FIP.

McCarthy's stellar FIP was driven primarily by his fantastic walk rate of 1.32 walks per nine innings, which was 3rd best in baseball behind Josh Tomlin and Dan Haren. Once you factor in his mediocre strikeout rate and lucky HR/FB rate his xFIP and SIERA begin to fall back to the pack. It appears some of the changes he made in his philosophy were more effective than others in improving his performance. The reduced walks were more effective than the improved ground ball rate.

The key things a pitcher needs to control in order of importance are his strikeouts per nine innings, his walks per nine innings and his ground ball to fly ball ratio. Pitchers that are effective in those ratios are likely to consistently have good seasons. Pitchers who lag in one or more of those categories may have good seasons here or there if they get BABIP-lucky or home run rate lucky, but by and large will be less effective. Roy Halladay, Zach Greinke, Justin Verlander, Tim Lincecum, Cliff Lee, Felix Hernandez and Dan Haren are the consistently good studs of SIERA. Guys like Jair Jurrjens, Jeremy Hellickson and even Johnny Cueto to some extent may be expected to see significant performance drops from the great stats they put up in 2011.

FIP = ((13*HR)+(3*(BB+HBP-IBB))-(2*K))/IP + constant
xFIP = ((13*(FB% * League-average HR/FB rate))+(3*(BB+HBP-IBB))-(2*K))/IP + constant

SIERA has proven more accurate in predicting ERA than either FIP or xFIP.

dougdirt
03-17-2012, 03:09 AM
You touched on a key point regarding McCarthy's FIP of 2.86, which was 5th-best in baseball last year. The number of home runs a pitcher allows is a big component of the FIP formula. However in reality the pitcher does not have much control over his HR rate, so there is a considerable luck variable in his HR rate. (Most pitchers give up more/less home runs based on luck rather than skill.) HR rate is also strongly affected by ballpark, which works in McCarthy's favor as well because he pitches in Oakland's huge yard.


A big time groundball pitcher is going to control his home run rate by limiting the amount of fly balls he gives up.

Spitball
03-17-2012, 02:39 PM
That explains how you get strike outs too.

I explained that.


But by inviting contact you invite hits and runs. Because once you give up contact, you more or less give up control.

Okay, which pitchers get 100% of their outs without contact? How about 50% of their outs without contact? How about 33%?

Pitchers cannot avoid contact a majority of the time...or anywhere close. If pitchers are not getting most of their outs without contact, they need to optimize the majority of those confrontations. Inviting soft contact gives the pitcher a better opportunity to pitch ahead in the count. Pitching ahead in the count absolutely improves a pitcher's chances of getting an out a majority of the time.



Because you simply cannot induce weak contact. If you could, you could easily control BABIP.

You simply cannot avoid contact a majority of the time. Pitching to (inviting) contact is about making pitches that are in the zone but not to the batter's strengths.

It is not about throwing belt high down the middle. Location within the zone is the key to success.

http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2006/11/generalities_in.php

PuffyPig
03-17-2012, 02:49 PM
Inviting soft contact gives the pitcher a better opportunity to pitch ahead in the count.
http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2006/11/generalities_in.php

Inviting soft contact sounds an awful lot like controlling BABIP.

You can invite contact low in the strike zone and get more ground balls, which will mean less FB's (and less HR's).

The pitching to contact theory is not about inducing weak contact as a pitcher cannot control that.

Inducing contact is all about limiting walks. As long as you can limit walks without giving up a ton of FB's, you should be fine.

But saying that a pitcher is skilled enough that he can throw borderline strikes low in the strike zone is not about inducing weak contact as it is about throwing pitchers which are hard to hit. But make no mistake, when those balls are put into play, there will be a .300 BABIP.

A pitcher skilled enough to throw borderline strikes low in the strike zone is already ahead of the game.

Spitball
03-17-2012, 03:21 PM
Inviting soft contact sounds an awful lot like controlling BABIP.

You can invite contact low in the strike zone and get more ground balls, which will mean less FB's (and less HR's).

The pitching to contact theory is not about inducing weak contact as a pitcher cannot control that.

Inducing contact is all about limiting walks. As long as you can limit walks without giving up a ton of FB's, you should be fine.

But saying that a pitcher is skilled enough that he can throw borderline strikes low in the strike zone is not about inducing weak contact as it is about throwing pitchers which are hard to hit. But make no mistake, when those balls are put into play, there will be a .300 BABIP.

A pitcher skilled enough to throw borderline strikes low in the strike zone is already ahead of the game.

A pitcher does not have to throw borderline strikes to be effective, but he needs to stay away from too much of the middle. They can't pitch to a batter's strengths like down and in to a lefty.

Pitchers can't totally control BABIP but can influence it. Also, they can't avoid contact as most outs come with contact.

TheNext44
03-17-2012, 04:14 PM
You touched on a key point regarding McCarthy's FIP of 2.86, which was 5th-best in baseball last year. The number of home runs a pitcher allows is a big component of the FIP formula. However in reality the pitcher does not have much control over his HR/FB rate, so there is a considerable luck variable in his HR rate. (Pitchers give up more/less home runs per fly ball based on luck rather than skill.) HR rate is also strongly affected by ballpark, which works in McCarthy's favor as well because he pitches in Oakland's huge yard.

That is where xFIP comes in to save the day. xFIP uses a regression factor to compensate for the wild extremes a pitcher sees in his HR rate from season to season and ballpark to ballpark. McCarthy's xFIP was 3.30 in 2011, which was 19th-best in baseball -- still very good but not sensational like his FIP was.

Then there is SIERA, which factors in batted ball types (ground balls, fly balls and line drives) into the equation, unlike FIP and xFIP which only consider strikeouts, walks, HBP and home runs. FIP and xFIP assume league-average BABIPs for all pitchers. SIERA assumes better BABIPs for high-strikeout pitchers. McCarthy's SIERA was 3.49 and was 30th-best in baseball -- still very good but not nearly as impressive as his FIP.

McCarthy's stellar FIP was driven primarily by his fantastic walk rate of 1.32 walks per nine innings, which was 3rd best in baseball behind Josh Tomlin and Dan Haren. Once you factor in his mediocre strikeout rate and lucky HR/FB rate his xFIP and SIERA begin to fall back to the pack. It appears some of the changes he made in his philosophy were more effective than others in improving his performance. The reduced walks were more effective than the improved ground ball rate.

The key things a pitcher needs to control in order of importance are his strikeouts per nine innings, his walks per nine innings and his ground ball to fly ball ratio. Pitchers that are effective in those ratios are likely to consistently have good seasons. Pitchers who lag in one or more of those categories may have good seasons here or there if they get BABIP-lucky or home run rate lucky, but by and large will be less effective. Roy Halladay, Zach Greinke, Justin Verlander, Tim Lincecum, Cliff Lee, Felix Hernandez and Dan Haren are the consistently good studs of SIERA. Guys like Jair Jurrjens, Jeremy Hellickson and even Johnny Cueto to some extent may be expected to see significant performance drops from the great stats they put up in 2011.

FIP = ((13*HR)+(3*(BB+HBP-IBB))-(2*K))/IP + constant
xFIP = ((13*(FB% * League-average HR/FB rate))+(3*(BB+HBP-IBB))-(2*K))/IP + constant

SIERA has proven more accurate in predicting ERA than either FIP or xFIP.

Thanks for the well written explanation of the advanced pitching stats.. Very informative. :)

Tom Servo
03-17-2012, 04:33 PM
Let the record show that I was hoping the Reds would give McCarthy a shot after the Rangers soured on him. And you all scoffed. :cry:

edabbs44
03-17-2012, 08:00 PM
Let the record show that I was hoping the Reds would give McCarthy a shot after the Rangers soured on him. And you all scoffed. :cry:

I wouldn't cry just yet. One year isn't proof of much.

jojo
03-17-2012, 10:09 PM
It can change a players approach. While it may not change their ability, it can change their results and production. But, as the article notes, while front offices know this, managers and players generally don't care about it.

Brian Bannister got really into Pitch F/X data for himself and opponents and used it to his advantage a few years ago. I can't remember exactly which pitcher it was, maybe Jojo can, but a Mariners pitcher took the advice from USSMariner.com after they looked at his pitch selection from one year to the next and noticed he was going about things quite a bit different and it was harming his results.

Legend has it the pitcher was King Felix.

jojo
03-17-2012, 10:19 PM
All along I thought balls in play were bad and K's were good. It seemed like McCarthy brought a mix of traditional and saber information to develop this conclusion, get ground balls and get weak contact.

I think Saber has a place in the front office when evaluating players. While the information is available to players I just don't see how it is any more useful than information that has been out there for decades. Ground balls are better than fly balls, walks are bad, using pitch F/X data really isn't anything that hasn't been done before. Pitch F/X is just a better system of charting pitches. Fly balls leave the park, ground balls don't isn't anything new.

I could be wrong but I just don't know how a pitcher knowing his BABIP or WAR helps him on the field. When its about making outs, I don't understand how a pitcher can say to himself one day "I was just unlucky".

According to McCarthy, he used sabermetrics to evaluate his approach which he dramatically altered as a result which appears to have dramatically altered is results....

jojo
03-17-2012, 10:34 PM
You touched on a key point regarding McCarthy's FIP of 2.86, which was 5th-best in baseball last year. The number of home runs a pitcher allows is a big component of the FIP formula. However in reality the pitcher does not have much control over his HR/FB rate, so there is a considerable luck variable in his HR rate. (Pitchers give up more/less home runs per fly ball based on luck rather than skill.) HR rate is also strongly affected by ballpark, which works in McCarthy's favor as well because he pitches in Oakland's huge yard.

That is where xFIP comes in to save the day. xFIP uses a regression factor to compensate for the wild extremes a pitcher sees in his HR rate from season to season and ballpark to ballpark. McCarthy's xFIP was 3.30 in 2011, which was 19th-best in baseball -- still very good but not sensational like his FIP was.

Then there is SIERA, which factors in batted ball types (ground balls, fly balls and line drives) into the equation, unlike FIP and xFIP which only consider strikeouts, walks, HBP and home runs. FIP and xFIP assume league-average BABIPs for all pitchers. SIERA assumes better BABIPs for high-strikeout pitchers. McCarthy's SIERA was 3.49 and was 30th-best in baseball -- still very good but not nearly as impressive as his FIP.

McCarthy's stellar FIP was driven primarily by his fantastic walk rate of 1.32 walks per nine innings, which was 3rd best in baseball behind Josh Tomlin and Dan Haren. Once you factor in his mediocre strikeout rate and lucky HR/FB rate his xFIP and SIERA begin to fall back to the pack. It appears some of the changes he made in his philosophy were more effective than others in improving his performance. The reduced walks were more effective than the improved ground ball rate.

The key things a pitcher needs to control in order of importance are his strikeouts per nine innings, his walks per nine innings and his ground ball to fly ball ratio. Pitchers that are effective in those ratios are likely to consistently have good seasons. Pitchers who lag in one or more of those categories may have good seasons here or there if they get BABIP-lucky or home run rate lucky, but by and large will be less effective. Roy Halladay, Zach Greinke, Justin Verlander, Tim Lincecum, Cliff Lee, Felix Hernandez and Dan Haren are the consistently good studs of SIERA. Guys like Jair Jurrjens, Jeremy Hellickson and even Johnny Cueto to some extent may be expected to see significant performance drops from the great stats they put up in 2011.

FIP = ((13*HR)+(3*(BB+HBP-IBB))-(2*K))/IP + constant
xFIP = ((13*(FB% * League-average HR/FB rate))+(3*(BB+HBP-IBB))-(2*K))/IP + constant

SIERA has proven more accurate in predicting ERA than either FIP or xFIP.

Doug already poked t the effect of GB% on HRs. Command is actually more important than strikeouts.

dougdirt
03-17-2012, 10:36 PM
Legend has it the pitcher was King Felix.

I thought so, but I wasn't 100% sure on that. He seems to have adjusted well. :laugh: