Pathetic Stat

[jakesdaddio]

An incredible stat from an article on SI.com. the Brewers are 5-24...let me repeat....5-24...when the Brewers don't score 8 runs! They need 8 runs to have a chance to win. Otherwise, they are 5-24! Does anyone else find that stat horrific? that is historically awful, isn't it?

[jakesdaddio]

Sorry, the story was on Fox Sports.com. My bad.

[sheethead]

There are a plethora of pathetic stats available to describe the 2010 Milwaukee Sewers.

[rluzinski]

I find it kind of contrived and purposely misleading, myself. There were many times that they could have scored less runs and still have won, so had the offense performed worse overall, this stat would actually improve. Don't get me wrong, it's a morbidly interesting stat but it's not very informative.

 

If you want to objectively capture how bad the pitching and defense has been, just look at runs against. Yuck!

[And That]

Jeff Suppan has one of the best walk ratios on the team. That's how well we're doing.

[sheethead]

Brewer pitchers have issued 164 walks, which is better than four teams: CLE (165), LAA (166), KC (173), NYM (184)

 

The combined record of these five teams is 84-118.

 

The top five teams in walks issued: MIN (91), PHI (105), StL (114), SEA (121), TB (122) are a combined 114-86, with the Mariners dragging that down a bit with a putrid offense.

 

Maybe the Brewers can find an organizational goal somewhere in this data.

[Fatter than Joey]

Brewer pitchers have issued 164 walks, which is better than four teams: CLE (165), LAA (166), KC (173), NYM (184)

 

You should probably use a rate stat here -- as all the teams have played different amount of games...

 

We have the highest WHIP in MLB.

 

The Diamondbacks have a worse BP than us though -- they are really bad.

[sheethead]

You should probably use a rate stat here -- as all the teams have played different amount of games...

 

Yeah, that takes too long on my phone. There would be some movement, as the Red Sox would likely replace the Angels in the bottom 5. I believe the top five would remain the same.

[Ennder]

3 teams have a worse BB/9 than we do, 8 have a worse K/BB than we do. 10 have a worse xFIP than we do but only 2 have a worse FIP. We have the highest BABIP against and 2nd highest HR/9 in the league. Some of it is likely bad luck given just how high the BABIP is but most of it is just bad pitching and really bad defense so far.

[Funketown]

3 teams have a worse BB/9 than we do, 8 have a worse K/BB than we do. 10 have a worse xFIP than we do but only 2 have a worse FIP. We have the highest BABIP against and 2nd highest HR/9 in the league. Some of it is likely bad luck given just how high the BABIP is but most of it is just bad pitching and really bad defense so far.

It's funny, I knew just from watching that the BB/9 numbers were brutal, and figured the K/BB numbers were only salvaged by their high strike-out ratios. Without looking though, I actually had no clue the Brewers have given up 1.30 HR/9 this year, I guess the walks have drawn away my attention (or maybe it just feels like a marked improvement over last year's (1.5?) HR/9 rate).

[Fear The Chorizo]

3 teams have a worse BB/9 than we do, 8 have a worse K/BB than we do. 10 have a worse xFIP than we do but only 2 have a worse FIP. We have the highest BABIP against and 2nd highest HR/9 in the league. Some of it is likely bad luck given just how high the BABIP is but most of it is just bad pitching and really bad defense so far.

Wouldn't having an extremely high HR/9 also significantly increase BABIP without any sort of luck factored in? I mean, how unlucky can a pitcher be if he's giving up 450' blasts? I totally agree the defense has been woeful and is playing a big role, too - I think the issue I have is how luck continues to be an excuse or explanation for this mess. I think the combination of bad defense (balls finding more holes that shouldn't be hits) and bad pitching (walks, homeruns allowed and no positive pitching stat showing the Brewers in the top 1/2 of MLB) completely overshadow any "bad luck" the Brewers may have had thus far this season. You can say a pitcher's unlucky due to seeing eye singles, but if defensive metrics are actually good at measuring defensive ability, it should be expected that Brewer BABIP should be high compared to league averages. Add the fact that Brewer pitching as a whole is bad (HR/9, poor walk rates, etc) and there's the explanation for a high staff BABIP.

Other stats show the Brewers have the worst WHIP in all of baseball, the 3rd worst SLG% against in all of baseball, and the worst OPS% against in all of baseball. It's obvious that most everything's related, and none of it's any good. At all.

[logan82]

Wouldn't having an extremely high HR/9 also significantly increase BABIP without any sort of luck factored in?

 

No, HR are not counted in BABIP and flyballs are turned into out at a pretty high rate. If we were giving up a lot of linedrives I would see our BABIP being pretty high. It really is just some bad luck to go along with a bad defense. Link

 

 

NUMBER OUTS OUT%

Groundballs 9952 7208 72%

Flyballs 7845 6179 79%

Line Drives 4082 1050 26%

Total 21879 14437 66%

[TheCrew07]

As logan pointed out HRs aren't part of BABIP as they aren't technically a ball in play because a position player doesn't have to field the ball because it left the field of play. We argued this a couple of years on the statistical forum and I was the only one who thought it was dumb that HRs which are essentially the ultimate line drive were not taken into consideration when trying to determine "luck".

 

That's one of the major reasons Escobar will have a higher BABIP than Fielder for example, because the HRs (which would push the BABIP number higher) are not counted by the metric. Just about every hit for Escobar counts, while Fielder has 30+ positive results removed from his line every year. Generally I think BABIP analysis is pretty worthless but I'm in the minority there as well.

[rluzinski]

Take the highest and lowest stats for any metric in the league and luck is probably playing a factor. That's not an excuse, it's stats 101. I wish more baseball fans appreciated this.

[Fear The Chorizo]

As logan pointed out HRs aren't part of BABIP as they aren't technically a ball in play because a position player doesn't have to field the ball because it left the field of play.

 

Wow, so a pitcher can have a low BABIP while getting absolutely shelled, as long as the best hit balls against him are home runs? Doesn't BABIP become a less effective stat to evaluate pitchers who give up alot of HR's then? Can't we just use BAA (batting average against)? That at least includes the worst and best outcomes a pitcher can allow (HR or K) and can still help illustrate crappy defense. By the way, Brewers are dead last in MLB for BAA, too.

 

I would also argue that a good percentage of home runs should not be categorized as flyballs, but I'm not going to continue beating my head against a wall.

 

I guess the "in play, runs" phrase from MLB Gameday shouldn't apply to a HR.

[Polish Falcons]

Does anybody know where to find a detailed statistical breakout showing starting pitching vs relief pitching by team? Specifically I’m interested to see where the Brewers rank in terms of innings per start (IPS), starting pitcher ERA, and etc. But my search has come up empty. I am curious to see how much water Macha’s complaint holds in terms of IPS vs other teams. Not that I think the starters have been good, but I think the relief pitching is skewering these numbers.

 

[cwolf2012]

"Wow, so a pitcher can have a low BABIP while getting absolutely shelled, as long as the best hit balls against him are home runs?"

 

Yes, but BABIP isn't used as a value stat, it's a regression stat. HRs are treated in completely different stats, and BABIP is simply a tool to help regress certain things to the mean. HR/FB is typically a high-variance stat like BABIP, but some pitchers are worse at giving up more hard-hit balls.

 

BABIP is only for balls in play. It doesn't count for or against anything if a homerun is recorded. And if a pitcher has a lower BABIP because of it, then they would appear to be overperforming, since BABIP is a stat that is typically a function of luck. Trust me, more home runs does not reflect well on a pitcher in any stat.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Take the highest and lowest stats for any metric in the league and luck is probably playing a factor. That's not an excuse, it's stats 101. I wish more baseball fans appreciated this.

I wish more people obsessed with stats would spend more time emphasizing that if you're at either end of that spectrum in any metric, there's alot more than good/bad luck that put them there. The Brewers are essentially near the bottom 1/4th of every single pitching-defensive metric in all of baseball - they might be unlucky to currently have the worst statistical numbers compared to some of the other bottom feeders, but it's not like they're 1-2 funny hops away from being good, or even average.

 

The upside of the Brewers' pitching staff with great luck is slightly below average with this current defense. When that's all they can optimistically be, it's pointless to argue semantics.

 

 

 

[trwi7]

Does anybody know where to find a detailed statistical breakout showing starting pitching vs relief pitching by team? Specifically I’m interested to see where the Brewers rank in terms of innings per start (IPS), starting pitcher ERA, and etc. But my search has come up empty. I am curious to see how much water Macha’s complaint holds in terms of IPS vs other teams. Not that I think the starters have been good, but I think the relief pitching is skewering these numbers.

 

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/teams.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&type=1&season=2010&month=0

 

Make no mistake, the starters have been bad.

[Polish Falcons]

Thanks for posting, and yes you're right. Both SP and RP have pretty much been equally bad. Both seem to be bottom five in basically every pitching category imaginable. Not sure why I thought I'd be able to pull some positive news from this breakout.... Sorry for the downer.

[Ennder]

Wow, so a pitcher can have a low BABIP while getting absolutely shelled, as long as the best hit balls against him are home runs? Doesn't BABIP become a less effective stat to evaluate pitchers who give up alot of HR's then? Can't we just use BAA (batting average against)? That at least includes the worst and best outcomes a pitcher can allow (HR or K) and can still help illustrate crappy defense. By the way, Brewers are dead last in MLB for BAA, too.

 

It doesn't really work like that, BABIP isn't a stat you are good or bad at. You can have a low BABIP and still be a bad pitcher, you can have a high BABIP and still be a good pitcher. It is just a way to isolate some of the variance out of pitching stats.

 

To keep it as simple as you can, if a pitcher has completely normal for him levels in all other peripherals and just has a higher than normal BABIP it is almost always just variance or 'luck'. If a bunch of peripherals all change at the same time there is usually something more to it.

[rluzinski]

they might be unlucky to currently have the worst statistical numbers compared to some of the other bottom feeders, but it's not like they're 1-2 funny hops away from being good, or even average.

 

Of course not. They've been terrible. But it's important to realize that these guys aren't all rookies. To weight this season's stats 100% and all previous stats 0% isn't logical.