End of season grades

[endaround]

Except Hardy was among the top defensive SS in the league which would be an A for defense. So on average that's a C. And Cameron's OBP was .344. You act like it's been bad.

[logan82]

An average NL CF put up a line of .268/.339/.423/.762. Cameron's .250/.344/.458/.802 looks above average to me.

[Postseason2006]

I guess I do not see how Braun doesn't get a A + with Fielder when he's the one getting on for a lot of those Fielder RBI's. They work together so w/o one the other doesn't get the results with the other especially when you give the grade Lopez got and his defense isn't much better than Braun's.

 

In fact, offensively speaking he's putting up arguably better numbers Yount did when he won the MVP the last time.

[LouisEly]

Cripes, we're getting hung up on the difference between A's and A+ and B's and B-'s. Close the freakin' thread.

[colbyjack]

Cripes, we're getting hung up on the difference between A's and A+ and B's and B-'s. Close the freakin' thread.

 

With all due respect, as one of the more vocal critics of the Power 50, I'm a little surprised that you're as thin-skinned as you are when you put your own grades out there for everyone to dissect.

[MNBrew]

LouisEly, nice job. The only thing that really surprised me was the C for Catalanotto. Otherwise I think I'm about on the same wavelength.

 

Cat's no great defensive whiz, but played both 2B (some) and the OF respectably. After a slower start, he started hitting and ended up pretty decently 'til family circumstances took him out of the picture for the rest of the year. For what they brought him in to do (and remembering he's not anything resembling a power hitter, I'd say he's probably more in the B or B+ range. And I'd actually like to see him back next year, though I'd see the club not really addressing his situation 'til they've made their decisions about Cameron's & Hart's future roles & "fits" within the plan.

[craigharmann]

I like the grades....but what about coaches? I'd give Macha an F--, Sveum a C, Castro an F, Bosio was thrown into a no-win situation and I hope he catches on somewhere else.

[LouisEly]

We can be critical colby, without being personal.

 

After further review, I will give Cameron a "low B+". I understand his value defensively, however in terms of offense I wouldn't put him in the top 5 in the NL - I think Beltran/Pagan, Kemp, McCutcheon and Victorino had better seasons, and while very similar I'd give a slight edge to McLouth and Fukodome. FWIW, Fangraphs has Nyjer Morgan having more value than Cameron, but I don't necessarily buy that.

 

Edit - I need to change Chris Smith's grade to a C-, as he really tailed off the last week and a half. Also, the "/" between Beltran and Pagan means I thought of them as the same player since one replaced the other; I set the limit at 350 plate appearances, and both actually got 350. I know some think of strikeouts as meaningless, but in order for Cam to go from a B+ to an A for me he needs to get his OBP up to at least .365 with the same SLG.

[TooLiveBrew]

Where was anyone personal?

 

Angel Pagan had a better season than Mike Cameron in terms of offense? I guess if one hot month & one decent month is all you need. Let's just look at Mike's July & August this season, in that case. I don't think you can rank Beltran better when he missed so much time... how does durability not factor in here? Imo it's complete cherry-picking.

 

When you have top-flight defense like Cameron, and the guys better than him offensively can be counted on one hand, it's hard for me to stomach anything below an A.

[colbyjack]

I agree with TLB, I don't see where the thread got personal LouisEly.

[kramnoj]

Russ, while Fangraphs has its place in the baseball world, it is merely opinion (see what their value of Nyjer Morgan is compared to Cameron and Braun).

 

There are different things being discussed here. Fangraphs is a site that has objective data and has columns that use author's opinions. Fangraphs value stats are based on numbers, not on opinions.

[rluzinski]

And if K's don't matter for hitters, then they shouldn't matter for pitchers - you can't have that both ways.

 

As a BF.net vet, you have many times read where this logic is flawed. For a pitcher, it's a matter of comparing the value of a ball-in-play with an unknown outcome vs. an out (a strikeout). But we already know the result of every Cam PA this year. We also know the average value of a K with a BIP out are close to even. As a result, his K totals are almost completely irrelevant when we are concerned with production. If we want to project a pitcher or Cameron, K rate is very important.

 

I stated my argument for Cam - while his SLG and defense is very good, his OBP was below average

 

Someone already mentioned this but I don't think Cam's OBP was every below average. The NL average this year was .331. NL CFers had an average OBP of .338. So:

 

NL CF: .267/.338/.423/.761

Cam: .252/.345/.456/.800

 

Now, the use of BA, OBP and SLG as a measure of performance is also just somone's opinion but so is anything. I am just providing evidence.

Gallardo hasn't gone as many as 7 innings since August 9th; he hasn't gone more than 7 innings since July 25th, and now he's shut down for the year. His performance in August and September have been awful - an ERA over 5.00 both months. Suppan/Parra/Bush/Looper aren't the only ones who have taxed the bullpen. He's 23rd in OBP-A, and 21st in OPS-A. 30th in the league in quality start %.

 

I don't see how what he before or after August 9th has any relevance in this discussion. We are measuring their performance for 2009 as a whole, aren't we. If you are judging late season performance more than early season performance, fine, but you need to let us know.

 

This is how I see it for 2009:

 

Average NL Starter: 4.32 ERA, 5.8 innings/start

Gallardo: 3.73 ERA, 6.2 innings/start

 

All for league min and he get's a B-? We'll have to agree to disagree.

[logan82]

I have Cameron as a B- right now honestly. His offense was a little above average for a CF.

C for his OBP(weighted as 50% of his grade)

B- for his SLG(weighted as 30% of his grade)

C vs expectations(weighted as 20% of his grade) .804 OPS vs .795 expectation

that averages out to a C+

he gets a +1 for defense which moves him to a B-

I used UZR/150 for all defensive judgments. Cameron had a 9.0 and the leading CF had a 19.2. Being the league leader(or close) would have moved him up to a B.

[rluzinski]

If you are going to use an advanced metric like UZR/150, why not just use the run value of all the things you mentioned and then sum them? Seems like the proper way to weight everything.

 

As for his defense, he had the second highest UZR in the league. His defense (according to UZR) was better than all but one qualified CFer. The fact that the one player destroyed his defense should matter little. He should be compared to the average defender, no?

[logan82]

I was looking at both AL and NL for all stats not just NL. The player that had the 19.2 UZR/150 was in the AL and really broke the curve as the next best guy was only at 11.2, which I would consider almost equal to 9. I should probably weight defense more. It still needs a little tweaking. Right now what I have may not be perfect, but it is standardized and can be reused year to year just plugging stats in.

 

To be honest, I am not sure how to convert the rest of the stuff into runs. I know they do over at Fangraphs, but it is vs the league not a player at his position.

[LouisEly]

I'll grant you a B Russ (splitting hairs), but no way does the entire body of work for Gallardo for this season justify an A. His performance was a bit above average, but not a lot.

[TooLiveBrew]

I think the scarcity of pitchers who produced like him over that many IP needs to factor in. Lots of ways to value pitching of course, but just about the only one in which Gallardo isn't very strong is walks.

[rluzinski]

Yo was not even close to average this season, in terms of ERA. If his name was Bob Smith and he came out of nowhere to post a 3.73 ERA in 30 starts and averaged 6-1/3 IP/start while making league min, you'd be giving him an A++++ with a couple smiley faces after it. This comes down to expectations IMO.

[LouisEly]

A "B" grade means "above average", a "C" grade means "average". If you drop the "qualified" status to only 100 IP, there are 67 pitchers in the NL who met that criteria. Thus the median means #33 and a "C". If we say an "A" is the top 25%, that means being in the top 17; so I would need to see him in the top 17 in multiple statistical categories to earn an A. For those with 100IP or more in the NL he ranked: Innings - 28th (B-), ERA - 20th (B+), K's - 5th (A), walks - 2nd most (D), quality starts - 28th (B-), quality start % - 32nd ©, WHIP - 26th (B), K:BB ratio - 28th (B-), OPS-A - 19th (B+).

 

Sorry Russ, but if his name were Bob Smith, you would be grading him as a B/B-. Amongst all of those categories, for NL pitchers with 100 or more innings pitches he is in the top 25% in only one statistical category, and that gets canceled out by having the 2nd most walks. Please show me some statistical categories that he ranks in the top 25% of NL starters to show me that he earned an A.

[kramnoj]

Why would you use a qualifier for innings to rank Gallardo as a SP? By limiting the number of candidates in the pool, you are artificially shrinking the actual pool that Gallardo competes against. If you want to compare him to SP in the NL, the pool should be 80. If you do that, Gallardo ranks in the top 25% for ERA, OPS against and Ks, per your post.

[rluzinski]

If Yo had pitched only 100 innings this year, we'd be correctly discounting the value of his rate stats. Indeed, much of the criticism of Yo has focused on the fact that his high pitch counts have limitied the length of his starts and by extension, his total innings. But now we are going to measure his rate stats against some guys who may have pitches 50+ less innings?

 

If you are going to use rate stats to measure the value of performance, you have to multiply by the rate stat's denominator at some point (games started, IP, whatever). A pitcher with identical rate stats to Yo but with 220 IP would obviously have had more value associated with his performance. Of course, we'd also have to see what he's getting paid, which is my other criticism of your analysis in your last post. How many of those guys in your list are getting paid league min?

 

Like I said before, I don't think your list is bad but it seems like your analysis suffers with less than objective analysis with a couple players. I realize your grading wasn't based on some sophisticated methodology and it doesn't have to do. I'm just struggling to understand the basic concept still. It's value - salary, right? And the value of a guy with twice the PA or IP is double someone else in the same role? (pinch hitter vs. pinch hitter, reliever vs. reliever).

[LouisEly]

It's value - salary, right?

 

No - I said the only place where I took salary into any type of consideration was for Suppan and Looper, and it barely affected their grade. I had suggested that for Cameron, but I amended my grade for him to B+.

 

But now we are going to measure his rate stats against some guys who may have pitches 50+ less innings?

 

I did that because if we only looked at qualified pitchers it made Yo's stats actually look worse - his rankings in terms of those stats would have been even lower (more C's, less B's). Someone would have griped that I wasn't comparing him to enough pitchers, or that he deserved a better grade because a number of other starters didn't get enough innings to be qualified. Bottom line is whether you look at 100 innings or "qualified" pitchers only, the only stat where Yo ranks in the top 25% of NL starters is strikeouts.

[rluzinski]

I did that because if we only looked at qualified pitchers it made Yo's stats actually look worse - his rankings in terms of those stats would have been even lower (more C's, less B's). Someone would have griped that I wasn't comparing him to enough pitcher

 

I'm just saying that you should compare him to all starting pitchers and then adjust for playing time. And if you aren't considering that Yo is making league minimum, his amended B grade is reasonable enough. I just don't get how can you only consider salary for a couple of players. It seems so... arbitrary. Using different criteria for each player turns this more into a "who I like the most" list. And if that's all you meant it to be, I can't disagree with any of the rankings, then.

[LouisEly]

As far as adjusting for playing time that was part of it - durability was a factor that I took into consideration. The fact that he got shut down early, regardless of whether it was expected, was a detriment. 95% of it was the fact that I could only find one stat that had him amongst the top 25% of NL starters. And again, as mentioned, the salary component for Suppan and Looper was very minimal, in reality only gave me consideration of giving them a D+ instead of a D, but I went with my initial reaction of a D. 95% of it was numbers. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

[monty57]

I'm just saying that you should compare him to all starting pitchers and then adjust for playing time.

 

Here again falls my dislike for aggregate stats. What good does it do to compare Yo with Mike Burns? If he is an "A" player, he should be compared to other pitchers who's teams felt they were actually good enough to pitch all season. Sure you may miss some injured pitchers, or late call-ups, but if I'm trying to determine if someone is good or bad, I don't want to compare them with someone who really shouldn't even be in the league.

 

There appear to be 80 starting pitchers who compiled 160 or more innings. Therefore, only 2-3 pitchers should get an A+ (97% or above), 3-4 pitchers should get an A (93-97%), 2-3 an A- (90-93%), etc. The question, then, would be if Yo (this year only) was one of the 10 best starting pitchers in all of MLB. The top 10 by ERA are:

 

Zach Grienke 229.1 IP, 2.16 ERA, 242 K, 51 BB, 16-8 W/L,

Chris Carpenter 192.2 ERA, 2.24 ERA, 144 K, 38 BB, 17-4 W/L

Tim Lincecum 225.1 ERA, 2.48 ERA, 261 K, 68 BB, 15-7 W/L

Felix Hernandez 215 IP, 2.49 ERA, 217 K, 71 BB, 19-5 W/L

Jair Jurrjens 215 IP, 2.60 ERA, 152 K, 75 BB, 14-10 W/L

Adam Wainwright 233 IP, 2.63 ERA, 212 K, 66 BB, 19-8 W/L

Roy Halladay 239 IP, 2.79 ERA, 208 K, 35 BB, 17-10 W/L

Clayton Kershaw 171.0 IP, 2.79 ERA, 185 K, 91 BB, 8-8 W/L

Javier Vazquez 219.1 IP, 2.87 ERA, 238 K, 44 BB, 15-10 W/L

Matt Cain 217.2 IP, 2.89 ERA, 171 K, 73, BB 14-8 W/L

 

#'s 11 through 20 include: J.A. Happ, Wandy Rodruguez, Randy Wells, Ted Lilly, Johan Santana, Dan Haren, Cliff Lee, Josh Johnson, Randy Wolf, CC Sabathia

 

#'s 21-30 include: Jon Lester, Justin Verlander, Ubaldo Jimenez, Joel Pinerio, Edwin Jackson, Ryan Dempster, Kevin Millwood, Yo Gallardo, Jared Weaver, Carlos Zambrano

 

Now, I just used "basic" stats, and ranking by ERA probably isn't the best way to rate pitchers, but when compared to other pitchers in the league who started all year, a "B/B-" grade is probably fair.

 

There were 484 pitchers who threw at least 20 innings. If you want to judge Yo by comparing him to Lenny DiNardo's 10.13 ERA in 5 starts for Kansas City, I guess that's okay. Yo looks really good in that comparison. If the only D's and F's handed out are to Lenny and Carlos Carrasco (8.87 ERA in 5 starts for Cleveland). "C's" would go to guys like Ricky Romero for Toronto (4.30 ERA in 29 starts for Toronto).

 

In other words, if you give "A's" to elite pitchers who had elite years, I think Yo probably falls a little short this season. If you broaden the pool to contain every scrub who started a game, Yo could deserve an "A." To me, that's sort of like saying everyone in AP Math gets an A because they're smarter than the kids in the remedial class, but I don't know exactly how to quantify that, so some subjective judgement may have to be applied to any list created. On that, I think Louis did a good job.