SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
2016 Red Sox Rotation Discussion
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Aug 17, 2016 15:25:15 GMT -5
Why not plan to biggyback Pom with Erod? 3-4 innings for each, then BP.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 17, 2016 15:42:42 GMT -5
My point is that such ROS projections have been consistently wrong all year. And they are projections based on a standard weighting of this year's results to previous ones. Clearly, in reality, each season in a career has its own weight. Once Hanley got hurt last year, he fell short of his ROS projection the rest of the way. Any genuine breakout hitter will exceed his ROS. Mid-August seems to me to be about the right point in the season where you can say that if there has been no observable regression towards the ROS projection so far, we're seeing something anomalous and our ROS projections should be accordingly tempered. Porcello (includes his first 2/3 of last year) and E-Rod (includes his injured first half, and his pitch-tipping games and other possible outliers from last year) are also unreliable. As is Pomeranz, since the system doesn't know he added a cutter this year, which means that he's being lumped with all of the guys whose apparent breakouts were random. Hey, that's everybody! Actual non-cherry-picked empirical analysis of this question suggests that you're dead wrong. Here's MGL: More at the link (and here's the equivalent analysis for hitters). Yes, there are sometimes real breakouts (and the opposite of breakouts-- death spirals?) that the projections can't take into account. But the vast majority of the time? Trust the projections. I was going to add that I thought that Price would definitely regress towards his projection, but that I wouldn't count on his doing so to the degree they're predicting. But see below. By definition the projections are going to be nicely accurate for all projected pitchers (or hitters). That's what they were engineered to do. I don't disagree with that at all. What I'm pointing out is that we know more than the projection systems and we shouldn't toss out that knowledge. When you have a well-justified a priori expectation that someone will differ from their projection, and they do so, you have a strong reason to believe they will continue to diverge from their projection. That sixth-month group includes, in addition to pitchers who pitched to their projection: A) Players who beat their projection for real reasons B) Players who beat it by luck C) Players who fell short because of luck D) Players who fell short for real reasons And the projections, as I said, are designed to make A/B counterbalance C/D. But if you believe you have identified an A case or a D case, there is no good reason not to use that knowledge. If a guy has lost 3 mph off his fastball and his arm slot is noticeably lower, you're going to be pretty sure he's a type D. I think the rules of thumb are a) trust the projections absolutely (or risk making the mistakes MGL talks about) whenever a pitcher has been inexplicably good or bad, and b) do not try too hard to cook up an explanation. You may just be constructing an explanation for random data. In Price's case, ZiPS projects his ERA at 3.18 and Steamer at 3.60, hence the 3.40 Depth Chart. (BP has him at 3.20, but their whole set of projections seems fishy -- start of season, they had his DRA, their high-tech custom stat which they use for their WARP, projected at 3.65, even though he was coming off of 3.03, 2.04, and 2.50; and they have his ERA projections at DRA - 0.30 even though in his career his ERA is DRA + 0.33). Upon reflection, my pessimism about him has little justification, since his elevated BABIP is the only thing that's borderline statistically significant, and it's only one of a whole bunch of numbers we could look at. I think I'm instead largely reacting to what may be worst possible performance pattern, for a fan psychologically: awful results in April, really bad May, bad June, himself finally in July, and then really bad again the first half of August. It's not obviously other than random, and the best explanation you can come up with is a generic "first season in a new contract." So we should expect 3.20 to 3.60. Not that I'm actually going to do so, of course, because no one wants to be burned again! But if it happens, I'll be pleasantly ... other than surprised. (We need a set of words for our reactions to events where our rational and emotional expectations diverge.)
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Aug 17, 2016 16:57:02 GMT -5
But if you believe you have identified an A case or a D case, there is no good reason not to use that knowledge. See, there's the problem.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Aug 18, 2016 8:28:54 GMT -5
So far in the 2nd half Red Sox rotation has pitched 32 games.
They have gone for 200 IP (t-1st), 3.47 ERA, 3.71 FIP, 4.20 xFIP, 3.9 fWAR. They have the 7th best K/BB rate. 5th best BB%. 9th best LOB%. 5th best HR/9.
Not great...but certainly passable if the offense is playing up to par.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 18, 2016 9:04:10 GMT -5
So far in the 2nd half Red Sox rotation has pitched 32 games. They have gone for 200 IP (t-1st), 3.47 ERA, 3.71 FIP, 4.20 xFIP, 3.9 fWAR. They have the 7th best K/BB rate. 5th best BB%. 9th best LOB%. 5th best HR/9. Not great...but certainly passable if the offense is playing up to par. Wait, that's not great?
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Aug 18, 2016 10:48:36 GMT -5
If this is for MLB & not just the AL, this is great. If it's AL only, it's very good.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 18, 2016 11:16:16 GMT -5
It's for all of baseball. Once you adjust for league and park effects, it's at least very good, though it looks like there's some BABIP or sequencing luck mixed in there. Fangraphs' depth charts projects the Red Sox starting pitching as the 12th best in the league going forward. I actually think that's a bit low (they're still a little bearish on Steven Wright), but it's in the right neighborhood. With the acquisition of Pomeranz and the re-emergence of Rodriguez, tarting pitching is not really a weakness for this team anymore.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 1, 2016 9:04:54 GMT -5
One of the biggest mistakes of the season was bringing Wright back before he was ready at the expense of Buchholz pitching great as a starter again while they had Joe Kelly who easily could have provided what Buchholz could in the bullpen.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 30, 2016 5:06:15 GMT -5
I'm sure other have noticed it, but we have Price under control for 6 years (unless he opts out), Rodriguez for 5, Wright for 4, Porcello for 3, Pomeranz for 2, and Buchholz for 1.
While we're on that topic, if my math is correct, Joe Kelly fell 3 days short of adding a year of service time and is still under control for 3 years. Vazquez, however, now is at 2 years and 2 days. They lost a year of control because they rehabbed Hanigan for 13 days instead of 10.
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Sept 30, 2016 6:29:33 GMT -5
I'm sure other have noticed it, but we have Price under control for 6 years (unless he opts out), Rodriguez for 5, Wright for 4, Porcello for 3, Pomeranz for 2, and Buchholz for 1. While we're on that topic, if my math is correct, Joe Kelly fell 3 days short of adding a year of service time and is still under control for 3 years. Vazquez, however, now is at 2 years and 2 days. They lost a year of control because they rehabbed Hanigan for 13 days instead of 10. Builds a nice bridge to kopech and groome. Assuming they develop. Gives owens and Johnson time to mature and see if they can effectively pitch in the bigs. It also gives them time to look at and not rush the 3 college pitchers they got in this year's draft. I also think it creates a definite window to look at the pitching coaches in the system. The pitching staff as a whole next year has a BIG opportunity to help make up for the loss of papi's offense by giving up fewer runs.
|
|
|