A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    Today's pitching matchup is a perfect one for you, moon: Doubront vs. McCarthy Smile 

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to mef429's comment:

    In response to zbellino's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    ERA- is a little more transparent in my opinion .... and correct me if I'm wrong, but ERA- is also park/league adjusted. 

    It's just a better stat. 

     



    thank you but that didn't really answer my question.... how does it differ from ERA+

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ERA+ is a measuer of how much better the league average pitches than the pitcher who  is being measured. 

    ERA- is a park adjusted measure of how much better that pitcher is against the field. 

    ERA+ doesn't really make sense to me. 

    It's much easier to wrap your head around how one person fares against the average, than how well the average fairs compared to the pitcher. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to zbellino's comment:

    ERA+ is a measuer of how much better the league average pitches than the pitcher who  is being measured. 

    ERA- is a park adjusted measure of how much better that pitcher is against the field. 

    ERA+ doesn't really make sense to me. 

    It's much easier to wrap your head around how one person fares against the average, than how well the average fairs compared to the pitcher. 



    Somebody better clarify the ERA+ and ERA- difference.

    It seems to me that ERA+ is by far the more widely used.  As I understand it, ERA+ is park-adjusted.  Jake Peavy's career ERA+ of 115 indicates that he has been 15% better than average.   

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to BurritoT-'s comment:

    I await Part IV before I lend my usual in-depth contributions.......



    Reason enough to make Part III the last segment.

    Wink

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     

    In response to zbellino's comment:

     

     

     

    ERA+ is a measuer of how much better the league average pitches than the pitcher who  is being measured. 

    ERA- is a park adjusted measure of how much better that pitcher is against the field. 

    ERA+ doesn't really make sense to me. 

    It's much easier to wrap your head around how one person fares against the average, than how well the average fairs compared to the pitcher. 

     

     



    Somebody better clarify the ERA+ and ERA- difference.

     

     

    It seems to me that ERA+ is by far the more widely used.  As I understand it, ERA+ is park-adjusted.  Jake Peavy's career ERA+ of 115 indicates that he has been 15% better than average.   

     

     



    Sorry I'm trying to be clear. ERA+ isn't more widely used, it's the Baseball Reference stat. ERA- is the fangraphs stat.

    Peavy's career ERA+ does not mean he has been 15% better than average. It means the the average has been 15% worse than Peavy. There is a difference. 

    His career ERA- of 86 means he has been 14% better than the league over his career. He allows just 86% of the league average pitcher's runs in that time. 

    ERA+ =  100*LgERA/ERA

    ERA- = 100*ERA/LgERA

    I was wrong, both are park adjusted. Neither are league adjusted.

    A high ERA+ is better, a low ERA- is better.

    EAR+ ... as you can see... tells you about how the league averages against the pitcher. 

    Remove the 100 from the formula and you are just producing a ratio expressed as a decimal *100. 

    If league avg ERA is 4 and your pitcher has an ERA of 3 then the *league* has an era of 1.33 of your pitcher, or really IT allows 133% of the runs your pitcher allows. Hence, your ERA+ would be 133.33~. It's not a measure of how your pitcher is better than the league ... it's a measure of how much worse or better the league is from your pitcher. 

    With ERA- if league average ERA is 4 and your pitcher's is 3 you reverse it. You get 3/4. Your pitcher has an ERA .75 of league average. Your ERA- would be 75 after the 100*  multiplication ... more clearly expressed by saying ... your pitcher yields 75% the runs of a league average pitcher. Or his ERA is 25% better than the league's ERA. 

    The very concept of a.) measuring how your pitcher performs, and b.) having less runs be better ... is a LOT more transparent to me. It just makes more sense than having this high score of the league against your pitcher mean your pitcher is good. 

    In the end .... what is more clear? Considering allowing LESS runs is always better ... what is more clear? Saying that the league average pitcher gives up 4% more runs than Peavy? Or that Peavy is giving up 96% of the runs an average pitcher gives up?

    In this case, his ERA+ is currently 104 and his ERA- is currently 96.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to zbellino's comment:



    Sorry I'm trying to be clear. ERA+ isn't more widely used, it's the Baseball Reference stat. ERA- is the fangraphs stat.



    Fair enough.  When I said more widely used, I was thinking of columnists like Chad Finn, who uses stats a lot.

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    Either way, both ERA- and ERA+ are better than ERA alone, but also should not be the only stats used to judge a pitcher's performance and skillset.

    Sox4ever

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to zbellino's comment:

    [QUOTE]

    Sorry I'm trying to be clear. ERA+ isn't more widely used, it's the Baseball Reference stat. ERA- is the fangraphs stat.

     

     



    Fair enough.  When I said more widely used, I was thinking of columnists like Chad Finn, who uses stats a lot.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Gotcha. He does. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    Before yesterday's game, there were 87 pitchers in MLB with over 250 IP since 2012.

    Here are how our starters rank:

    WAR

    24  Peavy      5.6

    27  Lester      5.4

    41  Doubront 4.4

    42  Buchholz  4.4

    51  Dempster 3.9

     

    ERA-

    24  Peavy  85

    26  Buchh  86

    35  Demp   91

    60  Doub   103

    76  Lester 110

     

    WHIP

    10  Peavy  1.11

    40  Buch    1.23

    63  Demp   1.32

    73  Lest     1.38

    82  Doub   1.43

     

    xFIP

    40  Lester      3.81

    45  Doubront 3.85

    49  Peavy      3.91

    56  Dempster 4.02

    58  Buchholz  4.05

     

    Using just these numbers, one could argue that Peavy is our best SP.

    Sox4ever

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Either way, both ERA- and ERA+ are better than ERA alone, but also should not be the only stats used to judge a pitcher's performance and skillset.

    Sox4ever



    That is a fact. 

    There are so many variables in play. 

    Weather ... quality of competition on a given schedule ... matchups, etc. 

    For instance, Peavy is really poorly suited for a HR hitter's park like U.S. Cellular. He is probably much better suited to a park like Fenway that supresses HR power and lefty HR power in particular.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    Go back to include Peavy's poor 2011 season and...

    out of 152 pitchers with 250+ IP (avg 5 per team):

    WAR

    25 Lester  8.9

    26 Peavy  8.8

    46 Demp  6.5

    59 Buchh  5.5

    77 Doub   4.3

    99 Lack    3.8

    ERA-

    27 Buchh  85

    46 Peavy  93

    61 Lester 100

    91 Demp  104

    94 Doub   105

    133 Lack  118

     

    WHIP

    20 Peavy  1.14

    55 Buchh  1.25

    99 Lester  1.33

    116 Demp 1.37

    132 Lack   1.44

    135 Doub  1.45

     

    Updated after last night (2012-2013):

    Peavy:

    22 in WAR at 5.8

    24 in ERA- at 85

    9 in WHIP at 1.10

     

    Sox4ever

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Go back to include Peavy's poor 2011 season and...

    out of 152 pitchers with 250+ IP (avg 5 per team):

    WAR

    25 Lester  8.9

    26 Peavy  8.8

    46 Demp  6.5

    59 Buchh  5.5

    77 Doub   4.3

    99 Lack    3.8

    ERA-

    27 Buchh  85

    46 Peavy  93

    61 Lester 100

    91 Demp  104

    94 Doub   105

    133 Lack  118

     

    WHIP

    20 Peavy  1.14

    55 Buchh  1.25

    99 Lester  1.33

    116 Demp 1.37

    132 Lack   1.44

    135 Doub  1.45

     

    Updated after last night (2012-2013):

    Peavy:

    22 in WAR at 5.8

    24 in ERA- at 85

    9 in WHIP at 1.10

     

    Sox4ever



    It would be interesting to run these Red Sox numbers against the A.L. East competition, say the top three or four starters for the O's, Rays, Yanks, and Jays.

    A kind of A.L. East metric comparison. There aren't too many ERA champs coming out of the division these days, but when you complicate it with park factor, etc, I'd bet the field isn't much better.

    I'd state a case, the A.L. East is the toughest division to pitch in, overall. Only the Trop is not really considered a hitter's park.  

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    Well, here are Peavy's AL East career numbers:

    Boston:  1-2  3.00  1.000

    Balt:        2-0  2.77  0.923

    NYY:        0-4  3.96  1.200

    TBR:        3-1  4.99  1.337

    Tor:         2-0  3.60  1.086

    sample sizes between 13 and 35 IP

     

    Sox4ever

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    There are so many stats and variations of them out there that it is not too hard to find one to suit your purpose. We forget to take into account the human factor.  This is not like the probabilities of rolling the dice. I think we are trying to over analyze things. In baseball , things change. They do not necessarily follow a predictable pattern. Often , recent performance is more telling than past history. The various new metrics are really just figured by compiling and using different configurations of the traditional stats.  You can twist it any way you want. It still comes down to the basics.

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    There are so many stats and variations of them out there that it is not too hard to find one to suit your purpose. We forget to take into account the human factor.  This is not like the probabilities of rolling the dice. I think we are trying to over analyze things. In baseball , things change. They do not necessarily follow a predictable pattern. Often , recent performance is more telling than past history. The various new metrics are really just figured by compiling and using different configurations of the traditional stats.  You can twist it any way you want. It still comes down to the basics.

    Stabbed by Foulke.


    .
    True. No stat or metric is close to a 100% predictor of what will follow.

    I do think most recent numbers count largely towards guessing future performance, but for pitchers, I rarely value just the last 1-2 starts as being that significant. I like to look at a number of recent sample sizes: past 10 starts or so, past season, past 2 years combined, past 3 years combined, and career numbers, unless the pitcher is old or young. My guess is that combining all of these sample size numbers is a better indicator of what is likely to follow than any one sample size might do alone.

    There are certainly exceptions to the rule, especially if injuries were involved. For example, should Lackey's last 3-4 year sample size be counted as highly as a normal situation? I'd think this year's numbers should be weighted higher than normal to offset his bad numbers from 2011 that were probably injury-related.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    How about Stephen Fife with the Dodgers?

    13 starts since the Bedard trade:

    3-5  2.74 ERA and 1.313 WHIP

     

    Sox4ever

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    16 of our next 19 on the road starting tonight in Houston (I'll be there).

    After this stretch we play 15 of 27 at home. Total from now? H 18  A 28

    3 v Bal

    3 v CWS

    3 v Det

    4 @ NYY

    3 @ TBR

    3 v Bal

    3 v Tor

    2 @ Col

    3 @ Bal

    Sox4ever

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    The stretch from Sept 2 to 15th could tell all:

    3 vs Det, 4 @ NYY, 3 @ TBR, and 3 v NYY

    then, we play Baltimore in 6 of our last 14 games.

    Sox4ever

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    The stretch from Sept 2 to 15th could tell all:

    3 vs Det, 4 @ NYY, 3 @ TBR, and 3 v NYY

    then, we play Baltimore in 6 of our last 14 games.

    Sox4ever

     



    I think the team is set up well to finish an amazing season moon.  I like the fact Farrell has mixing up our BP so much this season and given a few youngsters like Workman, Webster and Wright a look as starters.  We have alll talked about Webster, Barnes, Rubby and Renaudo but the unsuspected upcoming prospect for 2013 for me has been Workman, I hope he finds a permanent spot soon.

     

    I also covered the Paw Sox last night.  Bogy got two more hits and looks like a good option sooner than expected but Middy?  Will made another throwing error after making a nice diving play but he still looks like the kid we sent to mature a bit.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    The stretch from Sept 2 to 15th could tell all:

    3 vs Det, 4 @ NYY, 3 @ TBR, and 3 v NYY

    then, we play Baltimore in 6 of our last 14 games.

    Sox4ever

     



    I think the team is set up well to finish an amazing season moon.  I like the fact Farrell has mixing up our BP so much this season and given a few youngsters like Workman, Webster and Wright a look as starters.  We have alll talked about Webster, Barnes, Rubby and Renaudo but the unsuspected upcoming prospect for 2013 for me has been Workman, I hope he finds a permanent spot soon.

    How about Britton too?

     

    I also covered the Paw Sox last night.  Bogy got two more hits and looks like a good option sooner than expected but Middy?  Will made another throwing error after making a nice diving play but he still looks like the kid we sent to mature a bit.

    Middy is a puzzle. Bogaerts is awfully young, but looks like he may be ready now.

     

     




     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    The stretch from Sept 2 to 15th could tell all:

    3 vs Det, 4 @ NYY, 3 @ TBR, and 3 v NYY

    then, we play Baltimore in 6 of our last 14 games.

    Sox4ever

     



    I think the team is set up well to finish an amazing season moon.  I like the fact Farrell has mixing up our BP so much this season and given a few youngsters like Workman, Webster and Wright a look as starters.  We have alll talked about Webster, Barnes, Rubby and Renaudo but the unsuspected upcoming prospect for 2013 for me has been Workman, I hope he finds a permanent spot soon.

    How about Britton too?

     

    I also covered the Paw Sox last night.  Bogy got two more hits and looks like a good option sooner than expected but Middy?  Will made another throwing error after making a nice diving play but he still looks like the kid we sent to mature a bit.

    Middy is a puzzle. Bogaerts is awfully young, but looks like he may be ready now.

     



    Britton looks good too moon, but Workman really impresses me. His physical makeup reminds me of Wake and he has a great SO to BB ratio.

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    The stretch from Sept 2 to 15th could tell all:

    3 vs Det, 4 @ NYY, 3 @ TBR, and 3 v NYY

    then, we play Baltimore in 6 of our last 14 games.

    Sox4ever

     



    I think the team is set up well to finish an amazing season moon.  I like the fact Farrell has mixing up our BP so much this season and given a few youngsters like Workman, Webster and Wright a look as starters.  We have alll talked about Webster, Barnes, Rubby and Renaudo but the unsuspected upcoming prospect for 2013 for me has been Workman, I hope he finds a permanent spot soon.

    How about Britton too?

     

    I also covered the Paw Sox last night.  Bogy got two more hits and looks like a good option sooner than expected but Middy?  Will made another throwing error after making a nice diving play but he still looks like the kid we sent to mature a bit.

    Middy is a puzzle. Bogaerts is awfully young, but looks like he may be ready now.

     



    Britton looks good too moon, but Workman really impresses me. His physical makeup reminds me of Wake and he has a great SO to BB ratio.

     



    Workman has looked great in the small sample size (22K 4 BB), but so has Britton (7K 1BB).

     

    Career K/BB in minors:

    Workman 4.01

    Britton      2.13

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part III

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    The stretch from Sept 2 to 15th could tell all:

    3 vs Det, 4 @ NYY, 3 @ TBR, and 3 v NYY

    then, we play Baltimore in 6 of our last 14 games.

    Sox4ever

     



    I think the team is set up well to finish an amazing season moon.  I like the fact Farrell has mixing up our BP so much this season and given a few youngsters like Workman, Webster and Wright a look as starters.  We have alll talked about Webster, Barnes, Rubby and Renaudo but the unsuspected upcoming prospect for 2013 for me has been Workman, I hope he finds a permanent spot soon.

    How about Britton too?

     

    I also covered the Paw Sox last night.  Bogy got two more hits and looks like a good option sooner than expected but Middy?  Will made another throwing error after making a nice diving play but he still looks like the kid we sent to mature a bit.

    Middy is a puzzle. Bogaerts is awfully young, but looks like he may be ready now.

     



    Britton looks good too moon, but Workman really impresses me. His physical makeup reminds me of Wake and he has a great SO to BB ratio.

     

     



    Workman has looked great in the small sample size (22K 4 BB), but so has Britton (7K 1BB).

     

     

    Career K/BB in minors:

    Workman 4.01

    Britton      2.13



    Not sure why and I could be dead wrong moon but Britton seems like a guy who will end helping the pen more than having success as a SP.  Regardless I can't remember the last time we had so many young hopefuls on the farm.  I also love the way Farrell has been utilizing so many of them this season. 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share