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.
Price/Porcello for Cy Young
|
Post by blizzards39 on Sept 20, 2016 0:03:34 GMT -5
"Wins" for starting pitchers is what "Saves" for relief pitchers and "RBIs" are for hitters. I wish these were never invented or came up with. I'm not saying wins is an important stat. I'm saying look at previous winners. Most have something in common. No different than the MVP award. A lot of the voters still go off of these counting stats. FYI. Also leads in WHIP
|
|
|
Post by scarr0214 on Sept 20, 2016 0:10:21 GMT -5
Stop using wins. Seriously. The voters don't care about it, the players know it's a team stat, so stop it. Baseball would be better off if we'd never started tracking pitchers by wins. Porcello leads the league in innings and K/BB ratio, with a comparable runs allowed rate to the other contenders. That's his case and it is a decent one. I think wins is an entirely underrated stat. It is an indicator of a pitchers ability to step up to the competition. I think about Pedro who had what felt like dozens of 1-run wins when he just manned up in a close game and shut the other team down. If a pitcher goes 7 innings and gives up 5 runs in a game his team wins 14-5 because he changes his gameplan when the lead develops I'm obviously okay with that even though it won't show on many of the "valuable" stats. Winning is stepping up when it counts. No matter what your stats are the most valuable pitcher is the guy who wins.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Sept 20, 2016 0:30:52 GMT -5
Fortunately for everyone that wants to see Porcello win the Cy Young award, we are talking about baseball writers voting for this award.
This means blabbering morons like Tony Mazz (who still has a vote I believe) are voting for this award.
I doubt he even knows what the Fip and XFip stats even mean. They do value wins and ERA because most of these writers have the IQ of a monkey. (Nick Cafardo) It's not really a good argument to make, but it's the simple truth.
I lost all faith in baseball writers after Pedro Martinez lost the MVP in 1999.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Sept 20, 2016 0:34:38 GMT -5
Stop using wins. Seriously. The voters don't care about it, the players know it's a team stat, so stop it. Baseball would be better off if we'd never started tracking pitchers by wins. Porcello leads the league in innings and K/BB ratio, with a comparable runs allowed rate to the other contenders. That's his case and it is a decent one. It seems an exaggeration to say wins mean nothing. To win 20 games means at least 20 times (likely) you pitched through the 5th and kept your team in the game. We can perhaps more fairly say sometimes they are meaningful, sometimes not. Porcello's wins speak to his amazing consistency at least. I don't think voters ignore wins, by the way. It is not common for a starter with 20+ wins not to be at or near the top of CY voting with decent other numbers. Felix beating CC was an aberration. Anyway, no one is so dominant bit luckless to trump Porcello. As I wrote before, I'd call WAR and FIP sillier stats than wins. Take tonight: Porcello was dominant without massive K total. What difference does FIP make? I'd rather have the Jack Morris type who gets wins than the Nolan Ryan who has dominant peripherals but tends to be .500 or often below.
|
|
|
Post by telluricrook on Sept 20, 2016 1:42:37 GMT -5
A few responses re: Porcello: - He's legitimately been one of the five best pitchers in the AL this year. If you want to say that means that "he's in the conversation" for Cy Young, fine, but I don't think he's all that close to number one (that's Sale or Kluber).
- Even if you used ERA-based value statistics like bWAR or Fangraphs' RA9-WAR, Porcello comes behind Sale (and Kluber is only slightly behind in RA9-WAR while being way ahead in bWAR). Porcello has given up more unearned runs than expected, and he's pitched in front of a very good defense. Those things matter.
- WHIP overrates Porcello-- he gives up very few walks, which means he doesn't allow many baserunners, but when he does give up hits, he generally gives up harder contact than his Cy Young competitors.
- Similarly, he ranks well in K/BB because of a low denominator, but by K-BB% (which is a more accurate indicator of pitcher quality), he comes in ninth (behind both Sale and Kluber, among others).
The only real argument for Porcello is based off pitcher wins. As alluded to, that's not in the least convincing to me. Really, really good season. But not the best pitcher in the AL. Kluber is going to get destroyed by the Royals in his next start so he will be out of the race after having a bad start in three of his last four outings.
|
|
|
Post by telluricrook on Sept 20, 2016 2:09:28 GMT -5
With all of his run support Porcello attacks the strikezone to get more contact just so the game end so he has to sacrifice a couple runs in the meantime. He pitches well enough to win the game more than all of the other candidates they dont pitch well enough to win. Kluber Has nine losses are you kidding me? No chance he wins it when there is a guy that has 21 wins and just four or five losses at the most.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,924
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 20, 2016 2:09:37 GMT -5
most of these writers have the IQ of a monkey. (Nick Cafardo) That's an odious comparison. In the future, please refrain from insulting monkeys.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Sept 20, 2016 3:02:25 GMT -5
My issue with FIP is that it's better as a predictive stat than it is as a measure of "what happened." It also favors a specific pitching style (K/fly ball). Furthermore, baseball is not "fielding-independent." There's no sense in over-weighting a stat that favors a specific type of pitcher (an penalizes others) when comparing performances (rather, it is quite useful in predicting how a certain pitcher *might* pitch in the future, particularly when the fielding quality behind them, or venue, changes). ERA might not be the best predictor, but it is much more accurate in terms of what actually occurred. So is WHIP. As for wins, they're not the end-all, nor are they meaningless in terms of assessing how a pitcher actually pitched. The end point of the game is to win, and for reasons discussed, run support can both inflate wins, and probably degrade other stats. WAR, which includes a significant contribution from Ks, isn't an end-all measure either. So each of these many measures of performance should be considered, as well as things such as consistency, innings, performance after losses, etc. Porcello has been a model of consistency, and in particular, he has been consistently very good to excellent. Maybe not transcendent, but he has been the perfect pitcher for HIS team: 7 innings, 3 or fewer runs, time and again. He's stepped it up when he's had to, and even with much weaker run support, he would still have a very good record because he has had very, very few clunkers. He gives up very, very few walks. I'm also not entirely sure that he's had BABIP "luck," so much as he's suited for THIS team. Last year's defense, and the Tigers' defense, were mediocre to terrible. This year, he's the right guy at the right time. Yes, I'm aware of the minimal differences in his year-to-year batted ball type/exit velocity. I don't care. There's no clearly superlative pitcher this year (well, among starters), and when it comes to results, Porcello is as good as any, and probably better. He'd have my vote.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Sept 20, 2016 3:56:05 GMT -5
most of these writers have the IQ of a monkey. (Nick Cafardo) That's an odious comparison. In the future, please refrain from insulting monkeys. Now that's funny. Should of used the refrigerator comparison instead. My bad.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Sept 20, 2016 5:16:40 GMT -5
A few responses re: Porcello: - He's legitimately been one of the five best pitchers in the AL this year. If you want to say that means that "he's in the conversation" for Cy Young, fine, but I don't think he's all that close to number one (that's Sale or Kluber).
- Even if you used ERA-based value statistics like bWAR or Fangraphs' RA9-WAR, Porcello comes behind Sale (and Kluber is only slightly behind in RA9-WAR while being way ahead in bWAR). Porcello has given up more unearned runs than expected, and he's pitched in front of a very good defense. Those things matter.
- WHIP overrates Porcello-- he gives up very few walks, which means he doesn't allow many baserunners, but when he does give up hits, he generally gives up harder contact than his Cy Young competitors.
- Similarly, he ranks well in K/BB because of a low denominator, but by K-BB% (which is a more accurate indicator of pitcher quality), he comes in ninth (behind both Sale and Kluber, among others).
The only real argument for Porcello is based off pitcher wins. As alluded to, that's not in the least convincing to me. Really, really good season. But not the best pitcher in the AL. So what do you focus upon? Is it solely one of the iterations of WAR? Because, especially with pitchers, you really should not focus only on that stat.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 20, 2016 6:11:52 GMT -5
A few responses re: Porcello: - He's legitimately been one of the five best pitchers in the AL this year. If you want to say that means that "he's in the conversation" for Cy Young, fine, but I don't think he's all that close to number one (that's Sale or Kluber).
That's the thing, he is that close. There isn't a big gulf between any of them right now, this isn't Colon winning in 2005. Sale and Kluber have been slightly better and I'd personally vote for Kluber right now, but it's closer than you're implying. IMO he's paradoxically both closer to Cy Young than Mookie to the MVP as in who should actually win it, and further from it as in who will actually win it (Mookie has a bigger chance to steal it considering the Angels are awful and there's pretty much nobody else in the race). It's a fair point, let me clarify. In terms of actual voting, he will be that close, because a large chunk of the electorate still cares about pitcher wins. But in my mind, he's a tier below Sale and Kluber.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Sept 20, 2016 7:07:14 GMT -5
His WHIP is a function of his outstanding walk rate and his low BABIP. It's not really a qualification on its own. In fact, if you think his BABIP is a skill rather than luck, WHIP almost does him a disservice since it's two separate things he's doing well.
Also, I don't really see recent evidence of voters using wins to push a less-qualified candidates over more. Possibly Arrieta over Kershaw/Greinke last year, but I really think Arrieta's amazing second-half being so fresh in voters' minds is what made the difference (and it's not like Arrieta was some bum with a high win-total). Maybe Price over Verlander in 2012, too. Kershaw in 2013, Greinke in 2009, and Felix Hernandez in 2010 are good examples of the voters looking past the win total.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Sept 20, 2016 7:21:10 GMT -5
A few responses re: Porcello: - He's legitimately been one of the five best pitchers in the AL this year. If you want to say that means that "he's in the conversation" for Cy Young, fine, but I don't think he's all that close to number one (that's Sale or Kluber).
- Even if you used ERA-based value statistics like bWAR or Fangraphs' RA9-WAR, Porcello comes behind Sale (and Kluber is only slightly behind in RA9-WAR while being way ahead in bWAR). Porcello has given up more unearned runs than expected, and he's pitched in front of a very good defense. Those things matter.
- WHIP overrates Porcello-- he gives up very few walks, which means he doesn't allow many baserunners, but when he does give up hits, he generally gives up harder contact than his Cy Young competitors.
- Similarly, he ranks well in K/BB because of a low denominator, but by K-BB% (which is a more accurate indicator of pitcher quality), he comes in ninth (behind both Sale and Kluber, among others).
The only real argument for Porcello is based off pitcher wins. As alluded to, that's not in the least convincing to me. Really, really good season. But not the best pitcher in the AL. You are giving opinion as stats some here, of course. Which is fine, don't get me wrong, they're decent opinions and solid stats, but it *is* opinion to take K-BB% over K/BB as "more accurate of pitcher quality," especially as the determinant for Cy Young. Digging down into the modern value-based metrics based on component stats is, in my mind, the way to go when considering moves in building a team for the future. But I don't have any problem at all in people deciding this year's Cy Young on more top-line results. In the end, the other stats are generally explicitly designed to be more predictive of future performance. Which I agree with ... but, in the end, when measuring past performance, I'm perfectly fine with things like WHIP (since limiting baserunners is the end goal) and runs allowed (since that is, after all, the whole point of the defense) and K/BB (since keeping the denominator low on that stat is, after all, a pitcher skill) and even, to a limited extent, wins (since pitchers absolutely pitch differently with a 7 run lead than with a 2 run lead), even if those things are quite obviously influenced by the defense around him or just pure luck. I think trying to isolate the pitcher completely from the context of the events is an imperfect science, so I'm not going to disagree with someone for just going with results when deciding something as meaningless and amorphous as "Cy Young Award." I'm sure JBJ would feel good if Porcello won the Cy Young award, so it's fine that his contribution on defense helps him win it. If a hitter had a high BABIP over the course of the year, I'm going to discount his future prospects, but I'm not going to say he produced any less this year just because he almost surely got lucky.
|
|
jimed14
Veteran
Posts: 25,816
Member is Online
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 20, 2016 7:28:05 GMT -5
For the record, K-BB% is much better than K/BB. Porcello is 9th in the AL for that stat.
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Sept 20, 2016 7:33:19 GMT -5
A few responses re: Porcello: - He's legitimately been one of the five best pitchers in the AL this year. If you want to say that means that "he's in the conversation" for Cy Young, fine, but I don't think he's all that close to number one (that's Sale or Kluber).
- Even if you used ERA-based value statistics like bWAR or Fangraphs' RA9-WAR, Porcello comes behind Sale (and Kluber is only slightly behind in RA9-WAR while being way ahead in bWAR). Porcello has given up more unearned runs than expected, and he's pitched in front of a very good defense. Those things matter.
- WHIP overrates Porcello-- he gives up very few walks, which means he doesn't allow many baserunners, but when he does give up hits, he generally gives up harder contact than his Cy Young competitors.
- Similarly, he ranks well in K/BB because of a low denominator, but by K-BB% (which is a more accurate indicator of pitcher quality), he comes in ninth (behind both Sale and Kluber, among others).
The only real argument for Porcello is based off pitcher wins. As alluded to, that's not in the least convincing to me. Really, really good season. But not the best pitcher in the AL. As I have said before I am not very good at finding all the data that's gets thrown around on these threads, and many times do not understand how some of the data fits the argument. But I truly believe that there is ALOT of value to the data. So, I would humbly ask for some assistance here. I think there is some key facts that are buried in the data. How many times has each started after a team loss and had a quality start to give their team a chance to win? Pickup the team after a tough loss. How well have they pitched against the potential playoff teams and verlander type pitchers? Tough teams/pitchers in higher leverage situations. How well have they pitched on the road? You can be lights out at home and poor on the road. Some teams play better for certain pitchers and not others. Sox seemed to perkup when rick pitches. Do not get that impression with the white sox with sales. Emotion says rick for cy this year. Sales has a higher ceiling he could be in the discussion for the next 5 years. Tough comparison with power pitcher vs groundball pitcher. How do ballparks fit into the equations? Fenway seems to be a harder park to pitch in than Chicago.
|
|
jimed14
Veteran
Posts: 25,816
Member is Online
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 20, 2016 7:34:02 GMT -5
If you want an extreme example of why K-BB% is better than K/BB, consider this. Pitcher A strikes out 27 per 9 innings and gives up 3 walks per 9. His K/BB rate is 9. Let's say his K-BB% is 90%. Pitcher B strikes out 3 per 9 and walks 0.2 per 9. His K/BB rate is 15 and say his K-BB% is 10%. Which pitcher is better?
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Sept 20, 2016 7:51:24 GMT -5
Porcello has a shot to get his ERA under 3 with a start against the Rays coming up.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 20, 2016 7:57:48 GMT -5
A few responses re: Porcello: - He's legitimately been one of the five best pitchers in the AL this year. If you want to say that means that "he's in the conversation" for Cy Young, fine, but I don't think he's all that close to number one (that's Sale or Kluber).
- Even if you used ERA-based value statistics like bWAR or Fangraphs' RA9-WAR, Porcello comes behind Sale (and Kluber is only slightly behind in RA9-WAR while being way ahead in bWAR). Porcello has given up more unearned runs than expected, and he's pitched in front of a very good defense. Those things matter.
- WHIP overrates Porcello-- he gives up very few walks, which means he doesn't allow many baserunners, but when he does give up hits, he generally gives up harder contact than his Cy Young competitors.
- Similarly, he ranks well in K/BB because of a low denominator, but by K-BB% (which is a more accurate indicator of pitcher quality), he comes in ninth (behind both Sale and Kluber, among others).
The only real argument for Porcello is based off pitcher wins. As alluded to, that's not in the least convincing to me. Really, really good season. But not the best pitcher in the AL. You are giving opinion as stats some here, of course. Which is fine, don't get me wrong, they're decent opinions and solid stats, but it *is* opinion to take K-BB% over K/BB as "more accurate of pitcher quality," especially as the determinant for Cy Young. Digging down into the modern value-based metrics based on component stats is, in my mind, the way to go when considering moves in building a team for the future. But I don't have any problem at all in people deciding this year's Cy Young on more top-line results. In the end, the other stats are generally explicitly designed to be more predictive of future performance. Which I agree with ... but, in the end, when measuring past performance, I'm perfectly fine with things like WHIP (since limiting baserunners is the end goal) and runs allowed (since that is, after all, the whole point of the defense) and K/BB (since keeping the denominator low on that stat is, after all, a pitcher skill) and even, to a limited extent, wins (since pitchers absolutely pitch differently with a 7 run lead than with a 2 run lead), even if those things are quite obviously influenced by the defense around him or just pure luck. I think trying to isolate the pitcher completely from the context of the events is an imperfect science, so I'm not going to disagree with someone for just going with results when deciding something as meaningless and amorphous as "Cy Young Award." I'm sure JBJ would feel good if Porcello won the Cy Young award, so it's fine that his contribution on defense helps him win it. If a hitter had a high BABIP over the course of the year, I'm going to discount his future prospects, but I'm not going to say he produced any less this year just because he almost surely got lucky. Given that Ks are roughly as good as BBs are bad, it is a mathematical axiom that K-BB% is more reflective of pitcher quality than K/BB. You won't find a single contemporary sabermetrician who thinks otherwise. Even if you dismiss FIP-based WAR for these discussions, Porcello trails Sale and Kluber by runs-allowed-based value measures.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Sept 20, 2016 8:12:37 GMT -5
You are giving opinion as stats some here, of course. Which is fine, don't get me wrong, they're decent opinions and solid stats, but it *is* opinion to take K-BB% over K/BB as "more accurate of pitcher quality," especially as the determinant for Cy Young. Digging down into the modern value-based metrics based on component stats is, in my mind, the way to go when considering moves in building a team for the future. But I don't have any problem at all in people deciding this year's Cy Young on more top-line results. In the end, the other stats are generally explicitly designed to be more predictive of future performance. Which I agree with ... but, in the end, when measuring past performance, I'm perfectly fine with things like WHIP (since limiting baserunners is the end goal) and runs allowed (since that is, after all, the whole point of the defense) and K/BB (since keeping the denominator low on that stat is, after all, a pitcher skill) and even, to a limited extent, wins (since pitchers absolutely pitch differently with a 7 run lead than with a 2 run lead), even if those things are quite obviously influenced by the defense around him or just pure luck. I think trying to isolate the pitcher completely from the context of the events is an imperfect science, so I'm not going to disagree with someone for just going with results when deciding something as meaningless and amorphous as "Cy Young Award." I'm sure JBJ would feel good if Porcello won the Cy Young award, so it's fine that his contribution on defense helps him win it. If a hitter had a high BABIP over the course of the year, I'm going to discount his future prospects, but I'm not going to say he produced any less this year just because he almost surely got lucky. Given that Ks are roughly as good as BBs are bad, it is a mathematical axiom that K-BB% is more reflective of pitcher quality than K/BB. You won't find a single contemporary sabermetrician who thinks otherwise. Even if you dismiss FIP-based WAR for these discussions, Porcello trails Sale and Kluber by runs-allowed-based value measures. What "runs-allowed-based value measures" are you referring to?
|
|
jimed14
Veteran
Posts: 25,816
Member is Online
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 20, 2016 8:15:59 GMT -5
By pretty much every advanced stat, Porcello is not close to being the best in the AL.
K-BB% 9th FIP- 6th xFIP- 13th SIERA 12th
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 20, 2016 8:18:15 GMT -5
Given that Ks are roughly as good as BBs are bad, it is a mathematical axiom that K-BB% is more reflective of pitcher quality than K/BB. You won't find a single contemporary sabermetrician who thinks otherwise. Even if you dismiss FIP-based WAR for these discussions, Porcello trails Sale and Kluber by runs-allowed-based value measures. What "runs-allowed-based value measures" are you referring to? As mentioned earlier, Baseball-Reference's WAR (based on runs allowed, with a defensive adjustment) and Fangraphs' RA9-WAR (based on runs allowed, no defensive adjustment).
|
|
atzar
Veteran
Posts: 1,817
|
Post by atzar on Sept 20, 2016 8:58:48 GMT -5
I don't contest some of the arguments being made against Porcello as CY, but it's worth noting that his BABIP falls in line with his competition - roughly even with Kluber and .010 lower than Tanaka and Sale, IIRC. So I'm not sure why being a low BABIP pitcher is a bad thing as relates to being a CY candidate.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Sept 20, 2016 9:06:04 GMT -5
I'm not sure I buy that voters completely overlook wins even though I think it's pretty much a useless stat.
Sure, they'll overlook them if there is something else to blow them away, but I don't think there are still a decent chunk of voters that still base their vote at least partly on it.
There are far better stats to use when looking for the top pitcher, but we are still a good ways from cycling out all the writers/voters who are still in the 80's/90's.
Pure numbers, it should probably be Tanaka or Sale. If they want to factor in a playoff team, it should probably be Kluber or Porcello. The only way Porcello wins is if they put an emphasis on wins and performance over the final 4-6 weeks
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Sept 20, 2016 9:15:09 GMT -5
By pretty much every advanced stat, Porcello is not close to being the best in the AL. K-BB% 9th FIP- 6th xFIP- 13th SIERA 12th ERA- 1st
|
|
jimed14
Veteran
Posts: 25,816
Member is Online
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 20, 2016 9:21:03 GMT -5
By pretty much every advanced stat, Porcello is not close to being the best in the AL. K-BB% 9th FIP- 6th xFIP- 13th SIERA 12th ERA- 1st If you consider that advanced, ok.
|
|
|