jojo
05-12-2007, 08:10 PM
The best pitch in baseball is…… a strike. Recently there was a thread (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=57416&highlight=jojo+leverage) suggesting that strike two is the pitch that specifically gives the pitcher the greatest advantage over the hitter. Since strike one is a prerequisite for strike two, it stands to reason then that the ability to throw strikes is essential to a pitcher’s success. Despite differences of opinions on several issues, when it comes to evaluating pitchers, statheads and scouts alike agree that the ideal pitcher would excel in the following characteristics and in this order:
command (low BB/9) > “make ‘em miss” ability (high K/9) >>>>> groundball tendencies (high GB%).
Throwing strikes is essential to success at the major league level. However that in and of itself doesn’t guarantee effectiveness since too much is left up to the defense and to chance (pitchers can’t control the fate of a pitch once it is put into play). The ability to throw strikes that are difficult to hit greatly increases a pitcher’s effectiveness and separates him into a whole other class of arm. Also, since a pitcher can’t control whether a flyball is a harmless out or a homerun and since groundballs lead to more double plays, a pitcher that induces groundballs gains an advantage. However, desirable ball in play (BIP) tendencies don’t trump the ability to make batters miss for reasons that are obvious (see the '07 Reds bullpen). The reality is that most pitchers are aggregate compromises of the peripheral trifecta. Therefore, prospects that fit the ideal are rightfully held in highest regard (everybody knows who King Felix is for instance even though at the tender age of 21 he hasn’t really accomplished anything yet).
The Reds have a stud arm in Louisville in Homer Bailey that every team in the major leagues finds desirable (power arm with GB tendencies). So the question becomes, why is Bobby Livingston (a junkballer that scouts have largely soured on) pitching against LA tomorrow rather than Homer? Homer has a dominating ERA of 1.83 in Louisville while Livingston’s ERA is 3.23. Consequently several opinions that aren’t very complementary of the Reds FO have been floated on local sports talk radio recently to explain why the Reds chose Bobby (i.e. service time and PR issues). However the two’s peripheral trifecta suggest another answer that perhaps reflects more favorably upon the Reds FO as well as possibly surprises a lot of Reds fans. Here’s a summary chart of the two pitchers' '07 Louisville peripherals thru today:
http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/5403/homerbobby2ym4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
This indicates several things:
1. While Homer’s ERA looks dominating, in reality he hasn’t been nearly as effective as his ERA suggests. A closer look at his peripherals is revealing. His FIP is a more human 4.05 (solid but not dominating). His BABIP is an unsustainable .200 and his HR rate is also low enough to expect a regression to the mean. His ERA isn’t reflective of where his true performance level has been so far in Louisville.
2. Homer’s command/”make ‘em miss” peripherals raise flags. Homer’s K rate isn’t that impressive while his walk rate is indicative of command issues. In 2006, only 2 qualified starting pitchers in the majors had both a BB/G greater than 4 and an ERA under 4.00 (Zito and Zambrano). There were no such pitchers in 2005 or 2004. In 2006, both Zambrano and Zito were greatly aided by positive bumps in luck factors (i.e. high LOB%) that likely artificially lowered their ERAs in an unrepeatable fashion. The command issues are really a red flag. Also Homer’s INN/G is a low 5.2 a game. His K rate likely indicates a trend for him to rely less on his fastball as he tries to establish his change and breaking stuff since there have been no reports of velocity issues. Basically his peripherals indicate he’s a pitcher still learning to pitch and working on endurance. I think it’s reasonable to wonder if Homer will even break into the Reds rotation before the middle of ’08. I'd love to hear some of the zone's resident minor league experts comment on this issue.
3. Livingston has been the more effective pitcher in Louisville this season and it hasn’t even been close. His FIP is excellent. He has extreme groundball tendencies that are a step up from Homer’s good ones. Livingston’s K rate has rebounded to levels before Seattle gave up on him while his BB rate has simply been obscene. While I’m skeptical these will translate into the majors consistently (sample size may be a factor here), his current performance is difficult to ignore. He’s clearly a pitcher who has nothing to gain by pitching more innings in the minors having logged over at least 130 innings three previous seasons (two seasons over 170). He doesn't need to learn about adjusting to the second and third times thru the lineup, pacing himself, or work on endurance. He's a reasonable bet to eat innings.
So in summary: Livingston is pitching tomorrow because he can throw strikes and he gives the Reds a better chance of winning than Homer does right now.
I wonder how many reds fans would be surprised by that statement?
command (low BB/9) > “make ‘em miss” ability (high K/9) >>>>> groundball tendencies (high GB%).
Throwing strikes is essential to success at the major league level. However that in and of itself doesn’t guarantee effectiveness since too much is left up to the defense and to chance (pitchers can’t control the fate of a pitch once it is put into play). The ability to throw strikes that are difficult to hit greatly increases a pitcher’s effectiveness and separates him into a whole other class of arm. Also, since a pitcher can’t control whether a flyball is a harmless out or a homerun and since groundballs lead to more double plays, a pitcher that induces groundballs gains an advantage. However, desirable ball in play (BIP) tendencies don’t trump the ability to make batters miss for reasons that are obvious (see the '07 Reds bullpen). The reality is that most pitchers are aggregate compromises of the peripheral trifecta. Therefore, prospects that fit the ideal are rightfully held in highest regard (everybody knows who King Felix is for instance even though at the tender age of 21 he hasn’t really accomplished anything yet).
The Reds have a stud arm in Louisville in Homer Bailey that every team in the major leagues finds desirable (power arm with GB tendencies). So the question becomes, why is Bobby Livingston (a junkballer that scouts have largely soured on) pitching against LA tomorrow rather than Homer? Homer has a dominating ERA of 1.83 in Louisville while Livingston’s ERA is 3.23. Consequently several opinions that aren’t very complementary of the Reds FO have been floated on local sports talk radio recently to explain why the Reds chose Bobby (i.e. service time and PR issues). However the two’s peripheral trifecta suggest another answer that perhaps reflects more favorably upon the Reds FO as well as possibly surprises a lot of Reds fans. Here’s a summary chart of the two pitchers' '07 Louisville peripherals thru today:
http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/5403/homerbobby2ym4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
This indicates several things:
1. While Homer’s ERA looks dominating, in reality he hasn’t been nearly as effective as his ERA suggests. A closer look at his peripherals is revealing. His FIP is a more human 4.05 (solid but not dominating). His BABIP is an unsustainable .200 and his HR rate is also low enough to expect a regression to the mean. His ERA isn’t reflective of where his true performance level has been so far in Louisville.
2. Homer’s command/”make ‘em miss” peripherals raise flags. Homer’s K rate isn’t that impressive while his walk rate is indicative of command issues. In 2006, only 2 qualified starting pitchers in the majors had both a BB/G greater than 4 and an ERA under 4.00 (Zito and Zambrano). There were no such pitchers in 2005 or 2004. In 2006, both Zambrano and Zito were greatly aided by positive bumps in luck factors (i.e. high LOB%) that likely artificially lowered their ERAs in an unrepeatable fashion. The command issues are really a red flag. Also Homer’s INN/G is a low 5.2 a game. His K rate likely indicates a trend for him to rely less on his fastball as he tries to establish his change and breaking stuff since there have been no reports of velocity issues. Basically his peripherals indicate he’s a pitcher still learning to pitch and working on endurance. I think it’s reasonable to wonder if Homer will even break into the Reds rotation before the middle of ’08. I'd love to hear some of the zone's resident minor league experts comment on this issue.
3. Livingston has been the more effective pitcher in Louisville this season and it hasn’t even been close. His FIP is excellent. He has extreme groundball tendencies that are a step up from Homer’s good ones. Livingston’s K rate has rebounded to levels before Seattle gave up on him while his BB rate has simply been obscene. While I’m skeptical these will translate into the majors consistently (sample size may be a factor here), his current performance is difficult to ignore. He’s clearly a pitcher who has nothing to gain by pitching more innings in the minors having logged over at least 130 innings three previous seasons (two seasons over 170). He doesn't need to learn about adjusting to the second and third times thru the lineup, pacing himself, or work on endurance. He's a reasonable bet to eat innings.
So in summary: Livingston is pitching tomorrow because he can throw strikes and he gives the Reds a better chance of winning than Homer does right now.
I wonder how many reds fans would be surprised by that statement?