Jimmy Nelson update from On Deck

[82brewcrew82]

If your definition of the word "outlier" is simply, "this one thing is different from these other things," then yes you could call the season an outlier if we were just looking at three sets of numbers in a vacuum.

 

it's very possible that 2017 will be Jimmy Nelson's high water mark, but as that story is still unfolding I don't find it appropriate to label that season as an outlier, or an aberration just yet.

This is a message board on the internet, every argument is tired. Still, that is what outlier means so, yeah. I don't know why one third of the sample would carry more weight than two thirds of the sample.

 

The problem I have here is that you are actually the one putting this in a vacuum. The context here is baseball, which we all know is built on the bones of "one hit wonders". Guys who came out of nowhere and had a great season and then disappeared only to be remembered fondly in threads just like this one. In that context, yes, 2017 is certainly the outlier for Jimmy and in no way is that trumped by the notion that the other two years don't count somehow. I've not once said he won't be 2017 Jimmy. I desperately hope he will be but given the actual context (which does include a serious shoulder injury), there is ample reason to question whether we will get 2017 Jimmy. I think a cautiously optimistic approach is far more reasonable than the sentiment that he is fully back to being a front line ace that some are espousing. Even more so, the notion that "he was an ace two years ago so he is an ace now" is far more tired than anything else.

 

Ok then. Jimmy finished ninth in the Cy Young voting in 2017 so yeah i’d say he not only turn the corner but he was an ace. And I don’t think I’m the only one that thinks barring injury that he will be that pitcher again at some point in 2017. Based upon the evidence that I’ve seen I would say that is being “ cautiously optimistic “.

Assuming a near best case scenario isn't being cautiously optimistic, that is just plain optimistic. I'd bet there have been dozens upon dozens of pitchers that have made the top ten in CY Young voting and were never heard of before or after. The real question is how many top ten CY Young finishers have destroyed their shoulder and finished in the top ten of CY Young voting afterward. You may be right (and I think you probably are) but that isn't the argument that would convince me.

[82brewcrew82]

Chase Anderson also put up ace-type numbers in 2017. I would say that was much more of an "outlier" than what Jimmy Nelson did in 2017, simply because he had proven to be an average major league pitcher over several seasons previous to 2017, and he returned to that mean in 2018. I don't think Jimmy Nelson had enough of a track record, though, to even have an "outlier" type season. If Nelson comes back this year to post similar numbers to what he put up in 2015-16, then yes, I would feel more comfortable saying that 2017 was the abnormality. But that history is yet to be written.

If I remember correctly, about a year ago, you were on the front lines of "We don't need to add a pitcher because Chase Anderson has been pitching like an ace for his last 200 innings bandwagon", no?

[topper09er]

He struck out 10.2/9....that is pretty insane. That is about what Greinke did for us in 2011 and that was Greinke's career high. That was higher than Sheets and Gallardo EVER had.

 

I think this is a little misleading, without digging into it very much, it was a different group of hitters who have gradually cared less and less about striking out. The average K/9 in 2017 for the NL was 8.4. In 2011 it was 7.3. In 2004 it was 6.4. I would say Sheets posting a 10 K/9 in 2004 is much better than Nelson posting 10.2 in 2017

[sveumrules]

Chase Anderson also put up ace-type numbers in 2017. I would say that was much more of an "outlier" than what Jimmy Nelson did in 2017, simply because he had proven to be an average major league pitcher over several seasons previous to 2017, and he returned to that mean in 2018. I don't think Jimmy Nelson had enough of a track record, though, to even have an "outlier" type season. If Nelson comes back this year to post similar numbers to what he put up in 2015-16, then yes, I would feel more comfortable saying that 2017 was the abnormality. But that history is yet to be written.

 

Chase pre-2017 | 418 IP (96 ERA+)

Jimmy pre-2017 | 436 IP (93 ERA+)

 

Nelson actually had a slightly longer track record of mediocrity than Chase did prior to 2017.

 

Everyone's free to come up with their own definition of outlier, but when you have 436 IP of 93 ERA+ work & 175 innings of 126 ERA+, that meets the commonly accepted definition. Yes, I believe Jimmy took a step forward in 2017, but I also know he got hurt in & in a very unusual manner.

 

I said earlier in the thread I thought a "healthy" Nelson was capable of 25 starts, 140 innings & a 110 ERA+. I'm expecting the under on all three, but will gladly take the over should that come to pass.

[MrTPlush]

He struck out 10.2/9....that is pretty insane. That is about what Greinke did for us in 2011 and that was Greinke's career high. That was higher than Sheets and Gallardo EVER had.

 

I think this is a little misleading, without digging into it very much, it was a different group of hitters who have gradually cared less and less about striking out. The average K/9 in 2017 for the NL was 8.4. In 2011 it was 7.3. In 2004 it was 6.4. I would say Sheets posting a 10 K/9 in 2004 is much better than Nelson posting 10.2 in 2017

 

A little bigger change than I thought, but the point is Nelson went from very average K/9 numbers to elite numbers. He ranked #10 in K rate and the #8 pitcher overall according to Fangraphs. He went from nothing to something...not just something, but statistically he went from a #4 starter to being mentioned as good as Kershaw/DeGrom/Strasburg/etc. in a lot of ways.

 

That is an outlier. When you have to massive average (or worse) seasons and then decide to be a bonifide ace, how is that not an outlier? His stats backed it up, but regardless it is an outlier. Which will raise a lot of questions before one decides to blow their shoulder.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Chase Anderson also put up ace-type numbers in 2017. I would say that was much more of an "outlier" than what Jimmy Nelson did in 2017, simply because he had proven to be an average major league pitcher over several seasons previous to 2017, and he returned to that mean in 2018. I don't think Jimmy Nelson had enough of a track record, though, to even have an "outlier" type season. If Nelson comes back this year to post similar numbers to what he put up in 2015-16, then yes, I would feel more comfortable saying that 2017 was the abnormality. But that history is yet to be written.

If I remember correctly, about a year ago, you were on the front lines of "We don't need to add a pitcher because Chase Anderson has been pitching like an ace for his last 200 innings bandwagon", no?

 

Actually, I think I was on the "Sign Cobb because he's the ace we need" bandwagon, so take that as you may LOL. But yeah, I had high hopes that the Chase we saw in 2017 was the real Chase. Chase wasn't horrible last year, but he was a far cry from what he did in 2017. He regressed to average. I have no qualms admitting I was wrong.

[coolhandluke121]

Anderson's fly-ball:homer rate was incredibly lucky in 2017. His uptick in velocity was mostly explained by nearly everyone getting an uptick in velocity because the technology for measuring velocity changed.

 

Nelson was always a much more talented pitcher than Anderson. However, 2017 was less than 30% of his career workload and roughly 2/3 of his career WAR. In terms of the amount of data there weighed against the amount of deviation from his norm, I think it's semantically fair to call it an outlier. However, the connotation with outliers is that you often consider throwing them out completely, and I don't think anyone is (or should be) suggesting that. It's the combination of that being a possible career year and him recovering from labral surgery that makes people really reluctant to project future performance based on 2017.

[Brew crew 92]

Actually last year statistically speaking Anderson was slightly above average which is all we really need from him this year. With the healthy Davies and our three young guns with Nelson joining the fray we don’t need Chase of 2017, Chase of 18 be OK.

[Lathund]

Chase Anderson also put up ace-type numbers in 2017. I would say that was much more of an "outlier" than what Jimmy Nelson did in 2017, simply because he had proven to be an average major league pitcher over several seasons previous to 2017, and he returned to that mean in 2018. I don't think Jimmy Nelson had enough of a track record, though, to even have an "outlier" type season. If Nelson comes back this year to post similar numbers to what he put up in 2015-16, then yes, I would feel more comfortable saying that 2017 was the abnormality. But that history is yet to be written.

 

Chase pre-2017 | 418 IP (96 ERA+)

Jimmy pre-2017 | 436 IP (93 ERA+)

 

Nelson actually had a slightly longer track record of mediocrity than Chase did prior to 2017.

 

Everyone's free to come up with their own definition of outlier, but when you have 436 IP of 93 ERA+ work & 175 innings of 126 ERA+, that meets the commonly accepted definition. Yes, I believe Jimmy took a step forward in 2017, but I also know he got hurt in & in a very unusual manner.

 

I said earlier in the thread I thought a "healthy" Nelson was capable of 25 starts, 140 innings & a 110 ERA+. I'm expecting the under on all three, but will gladly take the over should that come to pass.

 

The reason I view them differently is that the underlying difference in performance was much greater than what ERA would suggest. Chase had put up xFIP- of 99, 107, 115 before 2017, and put up an even 100 in 2017, followed by 118 in 2018. Jimmy in his 4 full seasons has put up 106, 104, 119 and then 73 (5th best among qualified starters). Or in other words Chase Anderson got much, much better results by not improving all that much. Jimmy got better results by improving a lot. Those K/BB numbers are truly elite (Very similar to Kershaw's career numbers), and only a .340 BABIP prevented his run prevention numbers from looking equally elite. One can argue about comparing different pitchers via xFIP, but it certainly serves as a useful internal comparison over a pitchers career; more Ks and fewer BBs are generally a sign that one is pitching better.

 

So yeah, I believe(d) a lot more in Jimmy's breakout than I do/did Chase. What remains to be seen of course is what effect the shoulder injury will have, but I believe that before it he had found something real and would almost certainly have outperformed Anderson going foward.

[Lathund]

Anderson's fly-ball:homer rate was incredibly lucky in 2017. His uptick in velocity was mostly explained by nearly everyone getting an uptick in velocity because the technology for measuring velocity changed.

 

I don't disagree with the point about Anderson's ERA in 2017 not reflecting his actual performance, but his velocity did tick up. At some point relatively early on in the season there was an adjustment made that resulted in velocity being comparable to earlier data. So velocity gained/lost in 2017 can be treated the same as in any other year now.

[MrTPlush]

Anderson's fly-ball:homer rate was incredibly lucky in 2017.

 

Okay I don't think anyone expected Anderson to be a 2.75 ERA pitcher...I mean, duh. However, it wasn't really crazy to think he could be vastly improved. His career HR rate even taking out 2017 wasn't that insanely high (1.2ish before coming to Milwaukee). Not great, but certainly not a travesty. He saw an uptick in Ks, downtick in BBs, and a major downtick in hits allowed.

 

Surprisingly the lack of hits given up continued in 2018 which helped him keep solid numbers even with a major spike in HRs given up. What really helped him take a step back in 2018 was his K rate dropping and his walk rate rising back to career norms. Jimmy Nelson could certainly see the same where his K and BB numbers resort back to something more realistic for his career. I think Nelson would fare better even with regression....but point is he isn't any more safe than Anderson was.

[82brewcrew82]

Chase Anderson also put up ace-type numbers in 2017. I would say that was much more of an "outlier" than what Jimmy Nelson did in 2017, simply because he had proven to be an average major league pitcher over several seasons previous to 2017, and he returned to that mean in 2018. I don't think Jimmy Nelson had enough of a track record, though, to even have an "outlier" type season. If Nelson comes back this year to post similar numbers to what he put up in 2015-16, then yes, I would feel more comfortable saying that 2017 was the abnormality. But that history is yet to be written.

If I remember correctly, about a year ago, you were on the front lines of "We don't need to add a pitcher because Chase Anderson has been pitching like an ace for his last 200 innings bandwagon", no?

 

Actually, I think I was on the "Sign Cobb because he's the ace we need" bandwagon, so take that as you may LOL. But yeah, I had high hopes that the Chase we saw in 2017 was the real Chase. Chase wasn't horrible last year, but he was a far cry from what he did in 2017. He regressed to average. I have no qualms admitting I was wrong.

It's not about being right or wrong. Everyone of has been both but in the end it's just guesses. It may not have been you but my point was that there were people who thought Anderson was an Ace because of an uptick in performance and they had all the tangible reasons to point to. In fact, someone in this thread has already pointed out the uptick in velocity that was sighted last year. In the end it was a blip.

 

Nelson is in the same boat. We ALL hope he returns to form but there are legitimate reasons for being cautious. His injury is one and and only having one year at that level of success is another. I find that much more convincing than "He did it one year so that is who he is going forward". You all may be right.......or not.

[Ennder]

What you think of Nelson this season doesn't change the fact that 2017 is an outlier in his career so far. That is a simple fact, by itself it doesn't mean anything. What I personally said is usually when you have that big outlier season the next year you give a little of it back. To use 2017 as the example, out of the top 25 pitchers in ERA that season only 11 had good seasons in 2018. The year to year volatility of SP is just crazy. The good news is xFIP is a bit more stable and he was #5 in xFIP in 2017.

 

Most likely 2017 was sort of the top of his range, everything went well. You can't just expect that to repeat because most of the time it doesn't. Add in the injury and it really isn't fair to just expect it this season, there are going to be some obstacles on the comeback most likely.

 

It doesn't mean I don't believe he broke out, it doesn't mean he is going to turn into a pumpkin. It just isn't safe to assume he is an ace this season until he shows it.

[homer]

I think an outlier is defined by unexpected outcomes surrounded by the norm. If in 2018 he hadn't gotten hurt and then pitched like he did prior to 2017 then yes you can call 2017 an outlier. We don't know what it was because it could be that he figured something out and 2017 was going to be the norm going forward.

 

He certainly had good K numbers in the minors so that wasn't totally out of the blue. He had a high BABIP but his FIP and xFIP were better than his era. Obviously, could all fall apart but I think it's ok for people to be a little optimistic. If he fails then people get a little disappointed and move on with their lives.

[Brew crew 92]

Nelson and Anderson are not comparable. Nelson has/had way way way way better “stuff”.

[MrTPlush]

I think an outlier is defined by unexpected outcomes surrounded by the norm. If in 2018 he hadn't gotten hurt and then pitched like he did prior to 2017 then yes you can call 2017 an outlier. We don't know what it was because it could be that he figured something out and 2017 was going to be the norm going forward.

 

I don't think it needs to be unexpected and the definition of unexpected is open for interpretation too. Who expected Nelson to pitch like he did before 2017? Non one, not a singe person. So isn't that unexpected? Just because the outlier is the last data point doesn't matter. An outlier is an outlier.

 

In the somewhat limited amount of data we have 2017 was an outlier. Though more officially I would rather see a solid 5 seasons before labeling any thing an outlier in super official terms. But loosely, yah, it was kind of an outlier. People are getting to caught up in outlier=shouldn't have happened or can't again. When that isn't true and all they are trying to say is even before the injury repeating 2017 was a lofty expectation or largely unknown how possible that may be.

[homer]

We have two and a half years of meh and one year of awesome. I hope he does awesome again. If he doesn't I'll be ok with it. I also understand people aren't as optimistic as me.

[82brewcrew82]

Chase Anderson also put up ace-type numbers in 2017. I would say that was much more of an "outlier" than what Jimmy Nelson did in 2017, simply because he had proven to be an average major league pitcher over several seasons previous to 2017, and he returned to that mean in 2018. I don't think Jimmy Nelson had enough of a track record, though, to even have an "outlier" type season. If Nelson comes back this year to post similar numbers to what he put up in 2015-16, then yes, I would feel more comfortable saying that 2017 was the abnormality. But that history is yet to be written.

If I remember correctly, about a year ago, you were on the front lines of "We don't need to add a pitcher because Chase Anderson has been pitching like an ace for his last 200 innings bandwagon", no?

 

Actually, I think I was on the "Sign Cobb because he's the ace we need" bandwagon, so take that as you may LOL. But yeah, I had high hopes that the Chase we saw in 2017 was the real Chase. Chase wasn't horrible last year, but he was a far cry from what he did in 2017. He regressed to average. I have no qualms admitting I was wrong.

It's not about being right or wrong. Everyone of has been both but in the end it's just guesses. It may not have been you but my point was that there were people who thought Anderson was an Ace because of an uptick in performance and they had all the tangible reasons to point to. In fact, someone in this thread has already pointed out the uptick in velocity that was sighted last year. In the end it was a blip.

 

Nelson is in the same boat. We ALL hope he returns to form but there are legitimate reasons for being cautious. His injury is one and and only having one year at that level of success is another. I find that much more convincing than "He did it one year so that is who he is going forward". You all may be right.......or not.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Nelson and Anderson are not comparable. Nelson has/had way way way way better “stuff”.

 

If only "stuff" and results were always 100% compatible ...

 

This is what makes baseball great. We can all sit here in mid-March and try to predict outcomes, but no one really knows that's going to happen until the games are played. Yes, statistics and analysis can lead to some pretty educated guesses, but the games will tell the story. I think that we can all agree, though, that having an effective Jimmy Nelson, and even having an effective Chase Anderson, gives this team a much greater chance of success.

[82brewcrew82]

Nelson and Anderson are not comparable. Nelson has/had way way way way better “stuff”.

 

If only "stuff" and results were always 100% compatible ...

 

This is what makes baseball great. We can all sit here in mid-March and try to predict outcomes, but no one really knows that's going to happen until the games are played. Yes, statistics and analysis can lead to some pretty educated guesses, but the games will tell the story. I think that we can all agree, though, that having an effective Jimmy Nelson, and even having an effective Chase Anderson, gives this team a much greater chance of success.

Well said.

[MrTPlush]

Nelson and Anderson are not comparable. Nelson has/had way way way way better “stuff”.

 

Yes they are. Why can one expect Anderson to regress...but not Nelson? Nelson can easily see his numbers regress a bunch just like Anderson saw his regress. Yes, there was some predictable regression for Anderson because of his HR/FB rate, but things like his K and BB were not predictable regressions. Better stuff doesn't make you less likely to regress, it just changes where you start/end. Anderson went from Very Good to Average. Nelson could go from Elite to Above Average. Same concept just a different scale.

 

Some guys just don't have the bite or control they had year to year. Sometimes one year just blatantly sticks out. It is no different than being a pumpkin one month and then Cy Young the next (which Nelson experienced in 2017).

 

You could pick just about any player you want that had a nice career and find a year that just sticks out from the rest (either notably worse or notably better).

[FVBrewerFan]

How soon we forget Wily Peralta. As with every comparison, it's not exact, but same concept. Bad season, one really good season, then back to bad. Spare me the reasons, it doesn't matter. (He's out of shape....yea he was out of shape during his good season too.) There are all sorts of things that come into play that causes a player to have one really good year above the norm.

[Brew crew 92]

How soon we forget Wily Peralta. As with every comparison, it's not exact, but same concept. Bad season, one really good season, then back to bad. Spare me the reasons, it doesn't matter. (He's out of shape....yea he was out of shape during his good season too.) There are all sorts of things that come into play that causes a player to have one really good year above the norm.

 

Wily Peralta? Wow

[FVBrewerFan]

How soon we forget Wily Peralta. As with every comparison, it's not exact, but same concept. Bad season, one really good season, then back to bad. Spare me the reasons, it doesn't matter. (He's out of shape....yea he was out of shape during his good season too.) There are all sorts of things that come into play that causes a player to have one really good year above the norm.

 

Wily Peralta? Wow

 

Exactly!

[Brew crew 92]

How soon we forget Wily Peralta. As with every comparison, it's not exact, but same concept. Bad season, one really good season, then back to bad. Spare me the reasons, it doesn't matter. (He's out of shape....yea he was out of shape during his good season too.) There are all sorts of things that come into play that causes a player to have one really good year above the norm.

 

Wily Peralta? Wow

 

Sorry, speechless for a bit. Now that I’ve had a chance to recover let me just say Nelson in 15 and 16 young pitcher with good stuff and no command. His mechanical adjustment made in early 17 improved his curveball and command of all his pitches, hence ace like pitcher all of 17 til injury. He figured it out, like ALL good pitchers eventually do. If Jimmy not injured I’d say 90+% 2018 season similar to 2017 season.