Now reading my post it looks like bragging and awkward - sorry about that - you know what I mean Bodio - did not mean to advertise cause there is no need - just that I am furious about stupidity. Capping folk like ourselves have a hard time tailing anyone - does not matter how talented - let alone paying for it so it is unbelievable that someone actually supports stealing and selling by buying it.
Thats it Buddy - I am dom=ne with this subject
0
Now reading my post it looks like bragging and awkward - sorry about that - you know what I mean Bodio - did not mean to advertise cause there is no need - just that I am furious about stupidity. Capping folk like ourselves have a hard time tailing anyone - does not matter how talented - let alone paying for it so it is unbelievable that someone actually supports stealing and selling by buying it.
Bodio, I have a question and I apologize if you've answered it before but do you depreciate a pitchers arm during the season? If so, is it weighted heavily in you model? Personally, I look at abuse points but I guess I was just wondering if that was something you take into account and whether you thought it was a big deal or not. I understand everyone handicaps a little differently but I was just curious on your take on the issue. I saw an article about it here on covers which made me think of it though I had thought about the issue pretty in-depth before.
I know each pitcher is different so to compare apple to apples you would have to compare a pitcher season over season (i.e. do they historically show fatigue in the middle or late in the season) and then as a pitcher ages you would have to weigh it more heavily (amplify the effect of wear and tear on an arm).
The model focuses on providing in season comparisons/calculations between 2 pitchers. It does NOT take into account 'abuse' points. That's something that I take into account when handicapping the games AFTER the model shows me where the 'value' is. I look at it even closer after the all-star break.
You bring up an excellent point that each pitcher is different and it's important for everyone to understand that. There really is no guideline. Obviously 90-110 is a typical range, and anything higher could potentially cause some fatigue in a following start, but not for everyone. I think it's important to compare each pitcher to themselves and their typical in-season decline, etc. I like to look at the # of pitchers thrown recently and compare to the YTD season P/GS averages. If a pitcher averages 100 P/GS for the season, but has thrown 112 P/GS in his last 5, he 'might' be getting over-used a bit (Dempster today actually is in this boat). Obviously, if a pitcher threw a couple of clunkers his P/GS could be skewed down, especially early in the season with a small # of starts.
Great point by the way and excellent 'factor' to keep in mind as this baseball season progresses.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SteveWellmer:
Bodio, I have a question and I apologize if you've answered it before but do you depreciate a pitchers arm during the season? If so, is it weighted heavily in you model? Personally, I look at abuse points but I guess I was just wondering if that was something you take into account and whether you thought it was a big deal or not. I understand everyone handicaps a little differently but I was just curious on your take on the issue. I saw an article about it here on covers which made me think of it though I had thought about the issue pretty in-depth before.
I know each pitcher is different so to compare apple to apples you would have to compare a pitcher season over season (i.e. do they historically show fatigue in the middle or late in the season) and then as a pitcher ages you would have to weigh it more heavily (amplify the effect of wear and tear on an arm).
The model focuses on providing in season comparisons/calculations between 2 pitchers. It does NOT take into account 'abuse' points. That's something that I take into account when handicapping the games AFTER the model shows me where the 'value' is. I look at it even closer after the all-star break.
You bring up an excellent point that each pitcher is different and it's important for everyone to understand that. There really is no guideline. Obviously 90-110 is a typical range, and anything higher could potentially cause some fatigue in a following start, but not for everyone. I think it's important to compare each pitcher to themselves and their typical in-season decline, etc. I like to look at the # of pitchers thrown recently and compare to the YTD season P/GS averages. If a pitcher averages 100 P/GS for the season, but has thrown 112 P/GS in his last 5, he 'might' be getting over-used a bit (Dempster today actually is in this boat). Obviously, if a pitcher threw a couple of clunkers his P/GS could be skewed down, especially early in the season with a small # of starts.
Great point by the way and excellent 'factor' to keep in mind as this baseball season progresses.
Now reading my post it looks like bragging and awkward - sorry about that - you know what I mean Bodio - did not mean to advertise cause there is no need - just that I am furious about stupidity. Capping folk like ourselves have a hard time tailing anyone - does not matter how talented - let alone paying for it so it is unbelievable that someone actually supports stealing and selling by buying it.
Thats it Buddy - I am dom=ne with this subject
Advertise away brutha!
0
Quote Originally Posted by mkbini:
Now reading my post it looks like bragging and awkward - sorry about that - you know what I mean Bodio - did not mean to advertise cause there is no need - just that I am furious about stupidity. Capping folk like ourselves have a hard time tailing anyone - does not matter how talented - let alone paying for it so it is unbelievable that someone actually supports stealing and selling by buying it.
Typically a pitcher that can induce a higher number of Ground Balls than average, tends to be a better pitcher with all other things being equal of course. Average GB% is around 44%. Of course there are excellent 'FB' pitchers, but you'll notice that those tend to have high K/9 ratios and K/BB ratios. Think Greinke and Morrow. Toronto plays in a 'hitter's' and that's part of the reason why Morrow's numbers there are so horrible. I backed Greinke in NY against the Yankees yesterday, which was another mistake, since it's also a 'hitter's park and Greinke is a FB pitcher. (Same thing for Marcum actually who is going tonight).
I guess to answer your question directly, you should use the GB/FB ratio in conjunction with other key stats when evaluating 2 pitchers. If you have 2 pitchers and their K/BB ratios, xFIP, tERA, etc. are fairly even and pitcher A has a GB/FB of 1.5 while the other has it at 0.8, and the game is in a 'hitter-friendly' park, well, then pitcher A has an advantage. (By the way, don't forget to analyze the LD rate since that's not account in this ratio. That's a critical factor to look at as well. Average LD% is 18%. Anything over 20% is pretty bad. Example: Morrow has a 0.7 GB/FB ratio and a 25% LD%. If he's not striking guys out, he's most likely getting 'crushed' and that's what has been happening to him in Rogers Centre (3rd most hittable park this year), especially against good hitting teams.
Hope this helps.
Thanks for taking the time to reply Bodio.
I have been keeping a close eye on pitchers who have had a drop off on their career gb/ao ratios for the season but the early indications from a small sample size are that the angle isnt particularly profitable. I assume this is because if a ground ball pitchers ground ball rate is down then his era is probably already inflated and the information is very much public. The most obvious example of this would be Aaron Cook but every scouting report you read on him atm eludes to the fact that his sinker is not doing its job. He was around +240 taking on CC at Yankee stadium last week, incidentally I am quite surprised that he has opened at pick with Jake Peavy tomorrow given how Peavy has pitched whilst he has been healthy this season, although Peavy does fit into your Morrow/Greinke mould so not sure Coors is the best place for him to pitch!
LD% (i assume Line drive?) is something i have never come across before but i am very intrigued now you bring it up. I guess it directly relates to BABIP but is maybe even a more deep indicator of pitcher 'luck'? Would you mind sharing which website you use for this stat?
0
Quote Originally Posted by bodio:
Typically a pitcher that can induce a higher number of Ground Balls than average, tends to be a better pitcher with all other things being equal of course. Average GB% is around 44%. Of course there are excellent 'FB' pitchers, but you'll notice that those tend to have high K/9 ratios and K/BB ratios. Think Greinke and Morrow. Toronto plays in a 'hitter's' and that's part of the reason why Morrow's numbers there are so horrible. I backed Greinke in NY against the Yankees yesterday, which was another mistake, since it's also a 'hitter's park and Greinke is a FB pitcher. (Same thing for Marcum actually who is going tonight).
I guess to answer your question directly, you should use the GB/FB ratio in conjunction with other key stats when evaluating 2 pitchers. If you have 2 pitchers and their K/BB ratios, xFIP, tERA, etc. are fairly even and pitcher A has a GB/FB of 1.5 while the other has it at 0.8, and the game is in a 'hitter-friendly' park, well, then pitcher A has an advantage. (By the way, don't forget to analyze the LD rate since that's not account in this ratio. That's a critical factor to look at as well. Average LD% is 18%. Anything over 20% is pretty bad. Example: Morrow has a 0.7 GB/FB ratio and a 25% LD%. If he's not striking guys out, he's most likely getting 'crushed' and that's what has been happening to him in Rogers Centre (3rd most hittable park this year), especially against good hitting teams.
Hope this helps.
Thanks for taking the time to reply Bodio.
I have been keeping a close eye on pitchers who have had a drop off on their career gb/ao ratios for the season but the early indications from a small sample size are that the angle isnt particularly profitable. I assume this is because if a ground ball pitchers ground ball rate is down then his era is probably already inflated and the information is very much public. The most obvious example of this would be Aaron Cook but every scouting report you read on him atm eludes to the fact that his sinker is not doing its job. He was around +240 taking on CC at Yankee stadium last week, incidentally I am quite surprised that he has opened at pick with Jake Peavy tomorrow given how Peavy has pitched whilst he has been healthy this season, although Peavy does fit into your Morrow/Greinke mould so not sure Coors is the best place for him to pitch!
LD% (i assume Line drive?) is something i have never come across before but i am very intrigued now you bring it up. I guess it directly relates to BABIP but is maybe even a more deep indicator of pitcher 'luck'? Would you mind sharing which website you use for this stat?
I have been keeping a close eye on pitchers who have had a drop off on their career gb/ao ratios for the season but the early indications from a small sample size are that the angle isnt particularly profitable. I assume this is because if a ground ball pitchers ground ball rate is down then his era is probably already inflated and the information is very much public. The most obvious example of this would be Aaron Cook but every scouting report you read on him atm eludes to the fact that his sinker is not doing its job. He was around +240 taking on CC at Yankee stadium last week, incidentally I am quite surprised that he has opened at pick with Jake Peavy tomorrow given how Peavy has pitched whilst he has been healthy this season, although Peavy does fit into your Morrow/Greinke mould so not sure Coors is the best place for him to pitch!
LD% (i assume Line drive?) is something i have never come across before but i am very intrigued now you bring it up. I guess it directly relates to BABIP but is maybe even a more deep indicator of pitcher 'luck'? Would you mind sharing which website you use for this stat?
fangraphs.
High LD% and low BABIP, definitely helps explain 'pitcher' luck. That's for sure
I agree on Peavy. I'm actually very shocked that he's not the favorite tomorrow. I watched him pitch in relief on Saturday, and he looked awesome in those 4 innings. He's coming off a 55 pitch outing and I expect him to perform at the same level.
White Sox seems to be an AUTOMATIC play tomorrow.
0
Quote Originally Posted by UKCrazyDave:
Thanks for taking the time to reply Bodio.
I have been keeping a close eye on pitchers who have had a drop off on their career gb/ao ratios for the season but the early indications from a small sample size are that the angle isnt particularly profitable. I assume this is because if a ground ball pitchers ground ball rate is down then his era is probably already inflated and the information is very much public. The most obvious example of this would be Aaron Cook but every scouting report you read on him atm eludes to the fact that his sinker is not doing its job. He was around +240 taking on CC at Yankee stadium last week, incidentally I am quite surprised that he has opened at pick with Jake Peavy tomorrow given how Peavy has pitched whilst he has been healthy this season, although Peavy does fit into your Morrow/Greinke mould so not sure Coors is the best place for him to pitch!
LD% (i assume Line drive?) is something i have never come across before but i am very intrigued now you bring it up. I guess it directly relates to BABIP but is maybe even a more deep indicator of pitcher 'luck'? Would you mind sharing which website you use for this stat?
fangraphs.
High LD% and low BABIP, definitely helps explain 'pitcher' luck. That's for sure
I agree on Peavy. I'm actually very shocked that he's not the favorite tomorrow. I watched him pitch in relief on Saturday, and he looked awesome in those 4 innings. He's coming off a 55 pitch outing and I expect him to perform at the same level.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.