Broken Bat - Discussion Forum: Pitcher Rating

Forum >> Discussions >> Pitcher Rating

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date	Function

#35277	06/11/2016 7:54:00 am
Crazy Li Joined: 01/25/2015 Posts: 879 Inactive	Since my pitchers magically all had strokes this season (the leading cause of my team going from what should have been the best in their division to next to last), I've decided to work on a new way to evaluate pitchers. Looking at W/L, ERA... even FIP I felt didn't give a clear enough picture to how good a pitcher's performance was and could skew a lot of things. I've been trying to work on a formula that would analyze their stats in a meaningful way to give me an idea of who was performing better so I can at least optimize my rotation. I wouldn't give the details yet since it's still being heavily tweaked, but I will say that it accounts for runs, hits, and walks allowed as well as general outs and strike outs. It also partially uses a linear weights formula. Right now, I just wanted to show the current scores of some of the pitchers who started for me this season and see if the more knowledgeable feel they're being ranked correctly. Ideally a score of 40 means a completely run-of-the-mill, average pitcher. Below is garbage and above is good. 1. Martin Mata - 44.7 2. Lorenzo Santos - 41.7 3. Christian Falcon - 41.1 4. Leroy Osbourne - 41.0 5. Omar Quintana - 38.8 (really surprised how this guy has pitched) and for bonus points, one I cut: Martin Noble - 35.7

#35281	06/11/2016 8:17:43 am
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9599 Haverhill Halflings III.1	I'm assuming you are looking at just this last year's stats? In my mind, the most important statistic for a pitcher in H/IP. From that perspective I would rate all of these guys below average. The next thing to consider would be HR or GB/FB. These are not always perfectly correlated, so I mostly consider HR slightly tweaked by GB/FB to try and eliminate some of the (good/bad) luck of small sample sizes. From this perspective Mata is pretty good, while Falcon and Santos are bad. The next thing I look at is K/BB ratio. Lastly I look at WHIP/FIP/ERA because those thing incorporate a few additional factors that can help tweak my opinion of a guy. So for instance, despite having a horrible year from a WHIP/ERA perspective, I still consider Parodi to be a decent relief pitcher. For starters one last thing to look at would be QS, since this has value for a starter. I mostly consider W/L to be a completely useless statistic. Updated Saturday, June 11 2016 @ 8:20:17 am PDT

#35285	06/11/2016 8:42:36 am
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9599 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Going completely gestalt (which is how I do my evaluation of players), I'd say it should look more like: Mata - 39 (this year only) Osbourne - 38.8 Falcon - 37.3 Santos - 37.1 Quintana - 36 Noble - 35 So the biggest switch would be that Osbourne is probably a little better then you give him credit for. Also, Mata has done well with this year's stats, but looking at his history, I don't think he will maintain that low HR rate. Osbouren may be feeling the affects of age a bit, but looking at his history, he is a solid pitcher. Definitely a 40+ (not really sure on your scale). Same with Quintana, he might be starting to feel the affects of age (remember they can decrease a bit on the sub-level without it showing), but from a historical perspective he looks like a very solid 40+ pitcher. Mata is still probably your number #3 from the multi-year perspective but I would still consider him below average. Overall the biggest issue with your pitchers (other than Quintana and Osbourne) is that they give up a LOT of long balls. You might consider pushing the walls a bit higher or a bit further to compensate.

#35293	06/11/2016 2:05:37 pm
Crazy Li Joined: 01/25/2015 Posts: 879 Inactive	Was just looking at this season so far, not last season. Last season, most of the pitchers performed way better than this season, at a cursory glance. I don't expect too much out of Mata based on his attributes... just average performance, but he seems to be outdoing people this season. Maybe a fluke? All the pitchers I was actually counting on have failed spectacularly so that's why I tried this experiment to see if maybe I was valuing pitchers incorrectly. My scale is probably incorrect as it still needs some tweaking to get the numbers sounding right. If all these guys should actually be below 40, I'll need to play with the formula more to reflect that, I think. I just gotta think about what should have the most weight.

#35298	06/11/2016 2:30:09 pm
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9599 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Well scales are kind of subjective. Mata and Osbourne both look ok. Maybe they should be 40. But I do think Mata is performing awfully well this year. He has not given up so few HRs in previous years. IMHO, I would have more confidence in your measurement if Osbourne was rated higher. But really that is just my opinion. Others might not like him as much. Updated Saturday, June 11 2016 @ 2:31:22 pm PDT