I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Here is the problem those viewing Arroyo through an ERA prism have with trying to characterize the sabermetric view of Arroyo as cookie cutter-it doesn't hold water. Rather than simply looking at ERA and ascribing everything to Arroyo (a true cookie cutter approach), a sabermetric view looks at the issue from a great many angles (including ERA) in an effort to estimate Arroyo's worth.
For instance, here is a picture of Arroyo as a Red versus the average major league production at starter (average of ALL starts) between 2006-2013 based upon examining the pitcher trifecta (peripherals intrinsic to a repeatable skills set) and luck/randomness metrics (things that tend to regress):
First, who agrees the above is a "cookie cutter" approach?Code:Make 'em miss Command BatBall Luck ERA FIP K/9 K% Contact% SwStr% BB/9 BB% GB% BABIP LOB% HR/FB Arroyo 4.05 4.6 5.92 15.7 83.8 7.1 2.31 6.1 40.9 0.278 75.1 12.0 MLBave 4.32 3.95 6.68 17.3 81.2 8.2 3.01 7.8 44.1 0.300 71.4 10.6
Second, based upon using multiple ways to look at Arroyo vs average production from starters, is it really possible to argue that Arroyo was an above average starter during his tenure as a Red (keep in mind that he'd compare even less favorably if the baseline was only starts from NL pitchers because AL pitchers have to face the DH)? Is it really compelling to argue that WAR undervalued Arroyo when he was below average in so many ways? Is it a crazy argument to suggest that his ERA outperformed his FIP largely because of the defense behind him when he had a BABIP and LOB% that where better than average (flags that are consistent with playing in front of great defenses especially given Arroyo's metrics demonstrating he gives up much more contact than an average pitcher does)?
Some want to argue that Arroyo is one of those guys who has a special ability to induce lower than expected BABIP and that is why his ERA out performs his FIP. In other words, they view Arroyo through the cookie cutter ERA approach and ascribe the totality of run prevention to his credit. However its been demonstrated that Arroyo's ERA has largely been driven by a lower BABIP which largely correlates to the strength of the defense behind him as is shown below.
Interpreting Arroyo's lower than expected ERA as largely a reflection of his defense creates a consistent picture with his pitch to contact skill set and the dramatic evolution of the Reds defense that was orchestrated behind him during his tenure as a Red. Understanding that it's his defense rather than a special inherent ability to control quality of contact also explains why he sustained a higher than expected HR/FB%. He allowed contact and that means HRs too. On the other hand, it makes no sense that he'd have such a sustained HR/FB% if his low ERA and low BABIP was the product of inducing poor contact. In other words, he gives up lots of contact and when you look at results of contact that can't be influenced by the defense behind him, his results are poorer than expected.
The notion that Arroyo possesses some special skill because his ERA out performed his FIP is inconsistent with too many other attributes for Arroyo while again, it largely ignores the impact of the Reds' defense. Meanwhile the overall view of Arroyo using a multifaceted sabermetric view is very consistent with a characterization that concludes Arroyo is a high contact guy with command but no out pitch especially against lefties who benefited greatly by the Reds evolution from chonically disastrous defense to league leading defense and who really acrued his value mostly through having a rubber arm and burning alot of innings.
Here again is an argument for why Arroyo's ERA was driven by a lower than expected BABIP that was the product of his defense rather than an inherent special skill:
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showp...&postcount=721
If you've managed to read all the way to this point, let me ask you again, does it pass the sniff test to describe the approach embodied in the mass of text above as "cookie cutter"?My take on Arroyo?
His ERA has been driven by his BABIP both of which have dramatically improved with the significant improvement of the defense behind him. In other words, significant interaction between his performance and the Reds defense is a large reason why he's outperformed his peripherals so dramatically (i.e. his ERA has been better than his FIP would predict) over the last several seasons. Or to say it another way, put him in front of the Reds defense of 2006-2008 and his ERA would be much closer to his FIP.
Why do I argue this?
Here is a breakdown of Arroyo by year showing his ERA, FIP and BABIP. When the FIP-ERA is positive, it means his ERA was lower than his peripherals would predict (i.e. his ERA outperformed his FIP):
It's important to note that Arroyo's ERA has outperformed his FIP in 5 of the 6 seasons he's been a Red. But many would agree his 2006 ERA was an anomaly that was unsustainble. Certainly the magnitude of difference between his FIP and ERA spanning the 2009-2011 seasons would not have been expected based upon his prior performance or legitimately ascribed to a skillset. Realizing some may argue this point, below follow a few tables that hopefully demonstrate why one might make the above statement.Code:Arroyo Season ERA FIP FIP-ERA BABIP 2006 3.29 4.15 0.86 0.271 2007 4.23 4.57 0.34 0.309 2008 4.77 4.5 -0.27 0.314 2009 3.84 4.78 0.94 0.265 2010 3.88 4.61 0.73 0.239 2011 5.07 5.71 0.64 0.278
Here's the same breakdown for the Reds' pitching staff over the same years:
Here are the BABIP for the Reds staff and Arroyo for the two periods of his tenure as a Red (2006-2008 where the Reds had one of the worst defenses in the league and 2009-2011 where the Reds had one of the best defenses in the league):Code:Reds Season ERA FIP FIP-ERA BABIP 2006 4.51 4.63 0.12 0.31 2007 4.94 4.55 -0.39 0.31 2008 4.55 4.53 -0.02 0.312 2009 4.18 4.66 0.48 0.283 2010 4.01 4.18 0.17 0.288 2011 4.16 4.45 0.29 0.282
The data above indicates that for the period of 2009-2011 when Arroyo's ERA has significantly outperformed his FIP despite declining peripherals, the Red's staff as a whole has consistently outtperformed it's FIP as well. The third table suggests the reason why-the dramatically improved defense has driven a large part of this outcome. So he did not outperform his FIP independent of significant influence by his defense.Code:BABIP by defensive performance Reds Arroyo 2006-08 0.311 0.298 2009-11 0.284 0.261 Decrease -0.026 -0.037
So in other words, if the Reds were to pay market value for Arroyo's production over the last several seasons, they'd essentially be "paying double" for the cost associated with building their defense. This also can explain why Arroyo does not have a great deal of trade value despite his ERA's.
All of that said, a look at Arroyo as a Reds does seem to suggest he has outperformed his peripherals to a greater degree than can solely be explained by the impact of the defense behind him. So there may be room to poke at something interesting here, albeit a minor effect. However, when looking at his time as a Pirate and BoSock, he displayed no discernible ability to consistently outperform his peripherals.
The ultimate take home? If they can get a legit arm for their rotation, they should. At least Arroyo should not be a rationale for preventing such a trade.
Also, when did properly placing a pitcher's performance into context suddenly become diminishing the player (i.e. who is really the biased one in that scenario-the accused or the accuser?)?
The guy threw strikes and burnt innings. The quality of those innings were significantly impacted by the quality of the defense behind him. Is that even a controversial statement? A mutli-faceted look at his numbers seems to support the notion that it's not a controversial statement at all.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
I compare him to Arroyo because I see people exasperatedly trying to explain away their terrible analysis and projection when it comes to both guys. I don't know how high Leake's K/9 will climb. If you're looking at the three big peripherals, I'd say Ks rank 3rd when considering what matters for him. #1 would be BB/9. If he can can drop it below 2.00, that would have a positive effect. It also might have some spillover effect on his K/9 (see Arroyo, Bronson 2012-3). #2 is HR/9, which he had down to 1.00 last season. If he keeps that there, or lowers it (not easy when working in the GAB), that would shield him against a higher BABIP tripping him up. More K/9 would be nice, but his is workable (evidenced by the fact that it already works) and I'm not worried about it dropping in his late 20s.
Last edited by M2; 04-17-2014 at 11:29 PM.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
One thing to consider that is being overlooked by the responses. I'm not talking about now, I'm trying to project out in the future. I never said he was the best - hence the question mark. No one knows for sure, but in no way am I talking about right now. Keep that in mind when you respond.
I think most people would accuse me over being "over analytical" but I guess everyone can define adjectives however they want in a democratic community.
I find value in Leake too and have described him as an inarguable success story for the Reds. We apparently estimate a player's true worth/production using very different methodologies however.
First there really isn't anything cookie cutter about examining a pitcher based upon his peripherals and luck/randomness metrics while considering the quality of defense behind him and the environment in which he played. I'll be less democratic here and say that's a pretty inarguable position. I'd also suggest describing the use of such an approach in a thread that invites discussion on Leake's value/skillset as "solely to diminish" is a tell concerning bias and it's not my bias that's being illuminated.
The 2013 Ms had one of the worst defenses I've had the displeasure of watching. Honest question-how do you think Leake's counting stats would change if he had the exact peripherals as he had in 2013 but pitched in front of the Ms rather than in front of the Reds defense?
Leake burning somewhere near 180-200 innings from the back of your rotation is a good thing until you have to buy Leake on the open market.
Last edited by jojo; 04-17-2014 at 06:48 PM.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
It's too bad these magical gloves didn't rally for Elizardo Ramirez and Eric Milton like they did for Arroyo.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
The notion that Bronson Arroyo was anything remotely close to below average as a Red is literally absolutely hysterical.
joshua (04-26-2014),markymark69 (04-17-2014),REDREAD (04-18-2014)
That's the problem with the assertion that Arroyo merely was the lucky benefactor of the Reds improved defense. Over the same time frame, Cueto, Bailey and Harang all did not show any benefit from that said defense. While the Reds defense improved, their numbers did not. Only Arroyo's improved.
That tells me that Arroyo was the one pitcher who knew how to best capitalize on a strong defense, a skill that clearly not every pitcher has.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
And for the umpteenth time, that ignores the fact that the Reds staff changed in personal during those years, and those new pitcher were the reason why the production was better. They added Masset and Rhodes, who made up most of the improvement.
None of the pitchers who pitched for the Reds in both 2008 and 2009 improved, except for Arroyo. Here are the numbers of the players who pitched for the Reds in both 2008 and 2009... for the umpteenth time.
2008 ERA - BABIP
Harang - .301
Cueto - .298
Cordero - .302
Burton - .301
Arroyo - .314
2009 BABIP
Harang - .331
Cueto - .291
Cordero - .301
Burton - .298
Arroyo - .265
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
Brutus (04-17-2014)
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |