#1 pick in doubt

[thewupk]

How would you explain the three plus year pattern of outperforming his FIP? I agree that he doesn't really give up enough ground balls to fit that profile, but three plus years in a row is hard to attribute to good luck.

My best guess is that the HR component overstates the FIP for guys who don't give up a lot of base runners.

Julio is a guy who has outperformed his FIP. That is expected but not by a near full run that it is right now. So some regression is expected but not to a 3.7 ERA. I mean his BABIP against is in the 240's. That's unlikely to be sustained the entire year. The same is especially true for Wisler who's BABIP against is 232. That is very unlikely to continue as well. Just some things to keep in mind.

[chop2chip]

Julio is a guy who has outperformed his FIP. That is expected but not by a near full run that it is right now. So some regression is expected but not to a 3.7 ERA. I mean his BABIP against is in the 240's. That's unlikely to be sustained the entire year. The same is especially true for Wisler who's BABIP against is 232. That is very unlikely to continue as well. Just some things to keep in mind.

That's very reasonable. I would counter though that young pitchers tend to improve upon their peripherals over time (Wisler/Teheran are definitely trending positively since the beginning of May), so while we will likely see a regression in BABIP, we should also be hopeful in their FIPS improving.

[conalthomas]

I have to believe the Twins will play better at some point, but at the same time, the Reds will likely play worse (and likely move a few guys at the deadline as well). I'm envisioning a massive sell-off by the Padres by the non-waiver trade deadline, which could put them in the hunt as well. And I still think the Phillies will collapse like an Italian coalition government.

That said, we should still be the favorites.

I like the metaphor.

[4maddux_cy's]

I haven't studied advanced statistics enough as I should and accept them to be very good and mostly better measurements than in the past. I cannot get over this thought that strikeouts and FIP are the only way a pitcher can be elite. You're telling me Tom Glavine was not an elite pitcher? His FIP numbers and k/9 rates were never overly impressive as far as I can tell.

If I am wrong point out where because I see lots of years in the 4's for Glavine's FIP. I was under the impression that was not good.

[cajunrevenge]

Last time I checked games are won and lost based on the actual runs scored not what some formula thinks the score could have been.

[nsacpi]

I haven't studied advanced statistics enough as I should and accept them to be very good and mostly better measurements than in the past. I cannot get over this thought that strikeouts and FIP are the only way a pitcher can be elite. You're telling me Tom Glavine was not an elite pitcher? His FIP numbers and k/9 rates were never overly impressive as far as I can tell.

If I am wrong point out where because I see lots of years in the 4's for Glavine's FIP. I was under the impression that was not good.

Glavine had a career ERA that out-performed his career xFIP by 100 points. I think that's an alternative way to be an elite pitcher.

Would I be able to identify the next Glavine if I was watching him pitch? I suspect not. So my presumption in watching pretty much any pitcher with non-elite strikeout rates is that he is not going to be the next Glavine.

[mqt]

Last time I checked games are won and lost based on the actual runs scored not what some formula thinks the score could have been.

Nobody is going to argue with you about this. The main reason to look at the advanced metrics of a game where we might have given up only a run or two is to see how likely it is to happen again. Whether a pitcher loads the bases and gets out of it each time or they throw a no-hitter is irrelevant to the game that has already taken place, but I'm going to bet on the pitcher that did the latter to continue seeing success.

[nsacpi]

The other thing to keep in mind is if thousands of people play a game of chance with equal skill, there will be a handful who will do incredibly well. Not that I'm arguing Glavine is one of those. I think he was a very effective pitcher using skills that are much more subtle than the ones we are used to seeing with very successful pitchers.

[bravos4evr]

[thewupk]

I haven't studied advanced statistics enough as I should and accept them to be very good and mostly better measurements than in the past. I cannot get over this thought that strikeouts and FIP are the only way a pitcher can be elite. You're telling me Tom Glavine was not an elite pitcher? His FIP numbers and k/9 rates were never overly impressive as far as I can tell.

If I am wrong point out where because I see lots of years in the 4's for Glavine's FIP. I was under the impression that was not good.

Glavine was a one in a million in that regard. For the vast majority of players FIP is an excellent predictor of future success. It's also important to look at that players baseline. Julio for example has out performed his FIP by half a run regularly. I would expect that to continue for the most part. This year he's out performed it by almost a full run. I don't expect that to continue.

[thewupk]

That's very reasonable. I would counter though that young pitchers tend to improve upon their peripherals over time (Wisler/Teheran are definitely trending positively since the beginning of May), so while we will likely see a regression in BABIP, we should also be hopeful in their FIPS improving.

Yeah that is what we would want to see. I'm definatley encouraged to see his K/9 jump to over 8 again. His HR/9 and BB/9 to drop below 1 an 3. His GB% to jump to 44%. All good signs.

[bravos4evr]

Glavine's skill set included getting the umpire to expand the zone. This helped him get a lot of soft contact. IDK if he would have been as successful in this era where the umps rarely expand the zone laterally anymore.

[mfree80]

Last time I checked games are won and lost based on the actual runs scored not what some formula thinks the score could have been.

Why can't we just add up projected WAR at the beginning of the season and go straight to the playoffs. I think some on here might prefer that. The STAT's would never be wrong. (TIC of course). ;-)

[thewupk]

Glavine's skill set included getting the umpire to expand the zone. This helped him get a lot of soft contact. IDK if he would have been as successful in this era where the umps rarely expand the zone laterally anymore.

He did play in the perfect era for his skill set. Maddux certainly benefited from this as well. That being said I feel his stubbornness was one of his biggest attributes. If Player A won't roll over on your outside junk then who cares if he walks because Player B likely will.

[bravos4evr]

indeed, Glavine never gave in to anyone. IMO, he might have been even better had he thrown inside a little more often, but I reckon he felt he had little reason to do so.

[nsacpi]

Why can't we just add up projected WAR at the beginning of the season and go straight to the playoffs. I think some on here might prefer that. The STAT's would never be wrong. (TIC of course). ;-)

I happen to be one of those who takes pleasure trying to predict how teams and players will perform. But I don't think anyone around here doesn't enjoy the game itself. Those of you who don't enjoy the analytical side of things are free not to indulge. A chacun son gout.

[nsacpi]

indeed, Glavine never gave in to anyone. IMO, he might have been even better had he thrown inside a little more often, but I reckon he felt he had little reason to do so.

I think he threw inside more often than a lot of people realized. Even for a strike now and then.

[thewupk]

I think he threw inside more often than a lot of people realized. Even for a strike now and then.

He did more at the end of his career whenever the umps took the 2 inches off the plate away.

[mfree80]

I happen to be one of those who takes pleasure trying to predict how teams and players will perform. But I don't think anyone around here doesn't enjoy the game itself. Those of you who don't enjoy the analytical side of things are free not to indulge. A chacun son gout.

I don't have a problem with using Stat's until they assume that nobody ever improves, or performs better than they suggest. That happens way to often for my comfort.

[thewupk]

I don't have a problem with using Stat's until they assume that nobody ever improves, or performs better than they suggest. That happens way to often for my comfort.

Nobody assumes any of those things. Players improve, decline, have extended slumps and career years.