Sean Marshall's bad luck

[RedsManRick]

Sean Marshall is striking out more than 12 batters per 9 IP, walking a hair over 2 and allowing 1 homer. Combined, this figures suggest an ERA exactly in line with the 2.26 he put up last year.

Unfortunately, his ERA is 4.24. Maybe he's just making a lot mistakes? Well, his GB/FB rate is up and his LD% is down. What gives? A .435 BABIP.

There's an article on Baseball Prospectus right now that looks at a very similar reliever from a results standpoint who's going through the same problem, Johnny Venters. He's got a .449 BABIP that is a big reason why he looks like he's scuffling despite pitching pretty well.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...d=17163#114372

The article actually looks at his hits allowed and judges them based on luck and finds, not surprisingly, that he suffered from a rash of bloops and seeing-eye singles.

We can't automatically assume the same for Marshall, but I'd be willing to bet on a similar finding. If somebody had the time & energy, it would certainly be interesting to take a look.

[RedlegJake]

I read a piece on Marshall that said except for an unlucky hit or two he really is pitching as well as he ever has. I'm not worried a bit.

[wheels]

Marshall is as lockdown as he was last year. There is zero doubt in my mind.

I believe Dusty is terribly overreacting. To the detriment of both Chapman and Marshall.

[The Voice of IH]

Marshall is as lockdown as he was last year. There is zero doubt in my mind.

I believe Dusty is terribly overreacting. To the detriment of both Chapman and Marshall.

I don't think it is to any detriment of anyone. Chapman gets to pitch in high pressure situations, grow as a ball player and limit his innings. Marshall already has a deal, and is back in the role that he feels most comfortable in.

[dougdirt]

I don't think it is to any detriment of anyone. Chapman gets to pitch in high pressure situations, grow as a ball player and limit his innings. Marshall already has a deal, and is back in the role that he feels most comfortable in.

Has Marshall said he is more comfortable as a set up man?

[reds44]

I don't understand how it is to the detriment of anyone. Marshall may be as lockdown as he ever was, but Chapman is about as lockdown as anyone has ever been right now.

[dougdirt]

I don't understand how it is to the detriment of anyone. Marshall may be as lockdown as he ever was, but Chapman is about as lockdown as anyone has ever been right now.

Well, if you planned to see Chapman start at all this year, it is a detriment to that because a team isn't going to remove their closer mid-year to put him in the rotation.

[Johnny Footstool]

I don't think it is to any detriment of anyone. Chapman gets to pitch in high pressure situations, grow as a ball player and limit his innings.

Which of those things wasn't Chapman doing before Dusty made him the closer?

[757690]

I don’t have a subscription to BP, so I don’t know how they are backing up their claim that Venters’ BABIP was mostly due to luck. I’ll just assume it accurate.

But I understand BABIP differently than they do, and don’t think a high BABIP is a result of bad luck, nor do I think that a pitcher can’t control his BABIP. I think BABIP is just like any other stat, something that pitchers can control with skill and talent. However, for some reason, most pitchers in the majors that last long enough for there to be enough data on the matter, possess very similar skill and talent in regards to controlling their BABIP.

It’s just like any player's other stats, when just looking at that player. Let’s take Arroyo for example. Since 2004, he has had a BB rate between 2-3 per 9 innings and a K/BB rate between 2-3. That is his skill and talent level for those stats. We can guess pretty accurately that his current walk level of 1.3 will likely rise and his K/BB rate of 5 will likely lower. We can guess this because we can assume based on his past that his BB rate will be between 2-3 and his K/BB rate will be between 2-3 as well. And if they don’t regress back to his career levels this season, we can assume they will next season.

The same is true for his BABIP. It will likely be in the .280-.300 range, just like most other pitchers, and when it did drop to a significantly lower rate of .239 in 2010, it went back up to .278 in 2011. It currently is .324 this season, so we can guess that it will lower over the course of the season, probably near his career average of .283.

Now would we say that Arroyo’s current 5.0 K/BB rate is due mostly to luck? No, at least I don’t think we should. It most likely is due to the fact that Arroyo is in a grove; that in these first 10 starts of 2013, has been able to be exceptional at controlling his K/BB rate. And, as usually happens, we can assume that this grove will end, and he will have a few starts during this season in which he is not very good at controlling his K/BB rate, which will raise his season’s rate back to his career norms. When this happens, is this bad luck or a slump? Is this a result of bad luck or of Arroyo not making quality pitches? I would say it’s the latter on both counts. In fact, that is what we have said about players when their stats decrease. We don’t say it’s bad luck, we say they aren’t doing something right and need to fix it, and most good players usually do fix it.

I think the same thing happens with BABIP. Currently Marshall has a very high BABIP. Some of that is due to luck, but I would imagine that most of it is due to him throwing too many hittable pitches. He’s in a BABIP slump, and just like if he were in a K slump or HR slump, we would expect him to get out of it and eventually, by season’s end, have his K or HR or BABIP rates in range with his career rates. Not because he will no longer have bad luck, but because he will no longer throw as many hittable pitches.

The only difference between K, HR, BB rates and BABIP rates is that, for some reason, most pitchers have similar BABIP rates while they do not for most other stats. At least, that is how I understand BABIP.

[dougdirt]

If Marshall were throwing so many hittable strikes, then his strikeout rate wouldn't be elite.

[757690]

If Marshall were throwing so many hittable strikes, then his strikeout rate wouldn't be elite.

Why are they mutually exclusive?

Zach Grienke this year has two games in which he pitched a combined 6 innings, struck out a combined 8 batters, yet gave up a combined 19 hits and 15 runs.

I constantly see relievers give up multiple runs and strike out the side in the same inning.

[Cooper]

That is one convoluted post there 757690.

[dougdirt]

Why are they mutually exclusive?

Well, generally because you can't be both highly hittable and highly unhittable. It simply defies logic.

Zach Grienke this year has two games in which he pitched a combined 6 innings, struck out a combined 8 batters, yet gave up a combined 19 hits and 15 runs.

That is a situation where K/9 is misleading because he wasn't facing your typical number of hitters in his innings. In those 6 innings, he faced 39 batters. That is about 40% more than he typically faces in 6 innings. So his K/9 was 'high', but 8 out of 39 is 21%, which again is good, but not the same elite number that his 12/9ip would suggest.

I constantly see relievers give up multiple runs and strike out the side in the same inning.

Again, in a small sample size, that works. In the larger sample size though, you aren't going to see that happening and contribute it to some sort of skillset.

[PuffyPig]

But I understand BABIP differently than they do, and don’t think a high BABIP is a result of bad luck, nor do I think that a pitcher can’t control his BABIP. I think BABIP is just like any other stat, something that pitchers can control with skill and talent. However, for some reason, most pitchers in the majors that last long enough for there to be enough data on the matter, possess very similar skill and talent in regards to controlling their BABIP.

So, even though BABIP is a controllable stat, for some reason no one ever does, or at least controls it in the exact same manner.

The only logical explanation for that statement is that pitchers have little or no control over their BABIP.

I've never heard the explanation that all pitchers can control BABIP, but they all control it virtually the same. Even if true, it means that BABIP is not being controlled.

[757690]

Well, generally because you can't be both highly hittable and highly unhittable. It simply defies logic.

That is a situation where K/9 is misleading because he wasn't facing your typical number of hitters in his innings. In those 6 innings, he faced 39 batters. That is about 40% more than he typically faces in 6 innings. So his K/9 was 'high', but 8 out of 39 is 21%, which again is good, but not the same elite number that his 12/9ip would suggest.

Again, in a small sample size, that works. In the larger sample size though, you aren't going to see that happening and contribute it to some sort of skillset.

1) It is not illogical that a pitcher can throw many unhittable pitches in an inning and a few very hittable ones. Happens all the time.

2) Greinke for his career strikes out 21% of all batters he faces. So for those two games, he was exactly on pace in terms of strike outs.

3) We see hitters strike out three times in a game and go 3-6 with two doubles and a homer all the time too. Are you saying there is no skill set attributed to his hitting? Was it all luck? Was it all out of his control?