Starting Pitcher Classification Guidelines

[sveumrules]

Seems like there is always a lot of discussion this time of year if a pitcher is a number one, a number two, et cetera, but there is really no consenus what any of that really means.

 

I looked back at 2019 & there were 105 starters who threw at least 110 innings. Since I don't think anyone believes there are truly 30 "number one" starters, this seemed like a good cutoff since I could put the top 15 as "number ones", the next 30 as "number twos", the next 30 as "number threes", the last 30 as "number fours" & then anything worse that that is essentially a "number five".

 

The approximate ranges for each spot in 2019 were...

 

#1: 4.7-7.4 fWAR | 54-74 FIP-

#2: 2.8-4.5 fWAR | 75-93 FIP-

#3: 1.6-2.7 fWAR | 93-105 FIP-

#4: 0.5-1.6 fWAR | 106-115 FIP-

#5: < 0.5 fWAR | > 115 FIP-

 

(I used fWAR/FIP-, but the ranges were pretty much the same for rWAR/ERA-.)

 

Please feel free to use or ignore these hastily put together back of the napkin figures as you do or do not see fit.

[MVP2110]

Where would Woodruff, Lauer, Anderson, & Houser fall on this list?

[sveumrules]

Woodruff | 82 ERA-/67 FIP- | 3.0 rWAR/3.3 fWAR (#2)

Davies | 80 ERA-/102 FIP- | 3.0 rWAR/1.6 fWAR (#2/3)

Chase | 94 ERA-/107 FIP- | 2.2 rWAR/1.3 fWAR (#3/4)

Lyles | 55 ERA-/99 FIP- | 2.0 rWAR/0.8 fWAR (#3/4)

Gio | 85 ERA-/95 FIP- | 1.7 rWAR/1.2 fWAR (#3)

Adrian | 103 ERA-/94 FIP- | 0.9 rWAR/1.1 fWAR (#4)

Jhoulys | 130 ERA-/127 FIP- | -0.3 rWAR/0.1 fWAR (#6)

 

Lauer | 105 ERA-/97 FIP- | 1.3 rWAR/2.2 fWAR (#3)

Brett | 87 ERA-/102 FIP- | 3.6 rWAR/2.0 fWAR (#2/3)

 

The most impressive thing about the 2019 rotation to me is how much they were able to limit truly awful outings besides the 34 games started by Jhoulys, Burnes, Peralta & Nelson.

[RollieTime]

Thank you for putting this information together for us!

 

Essentially, we have a number 2, 2 number 3’s, a 4, and Lindblom as it sits. I do think that Lauer has the makings of being a number 2 starter. Hopefully he can take that step forward for us as early as this season.

[clancyphile]

Thank you for putting this information together for us!

 

Essentially, we have a number 2, 2 number 3’s, a 4, and Lindblom as it sits. I do think that Lauer has the makings of being a number 2 starter. Hopefully he can take that step forward for us as early as this season.

 

Depending on the stats, we have a high-end #2 (Arguably a #1) in Woodruff on the basis of FIP-.

Houser is a borderline #2/#3 on FIP-.

Brett Anderson and Lauer are #3 starters

 

Lindblom... can't really tell, given KBO, but I'd probably slot him in as a #3.

 

There is, of course, the minors, as well. Roegner and Supak, for starters. Brown and Burnes as potential comebacks from rough 2019s...

[TJseven7]

We are deep then. Might as well trade Woodruff, we can just replace him with Roegner.

 

The most impressive thing about the 2019 rotation to me is how much they were able to limit truly awful outings besides the 34 games started by Jhoulys, Burnes, Peralta & Nelson.

 

That's the entire point of the model. You don't need rotation aces if you avoid trash. Add 10 options who you believe are solid. Shuffle until the dependable ones are in the top 5. Collect a sub 4 era from your starters inexpensively. Wash rinse repeat.

[CheezWizHed]

I think it's silly to say there are fifteen #1 pitchers. Aces, sure, but the #1 should align with the number of teams.

[Ennder]

I think it's silly to say there are fifteen #1 pitchers. Aces, sure, but the #1 should align with the number of teams.

 

 

That would be way too generous. A lot of teams don't have what would qualify as a #1 and you have innings limits that stop some of the better pitchers in the game from counting. There are fewer than 10 ace pitchers in the game. Now if you want to go with say 20 #1's it wouldn't bother me, but 30 is too many. It is going to skew things to where a lot of really mediocre guys look like #2's.

[TJseven7]

I think it's silly to say there are fifteen #1 pitchers. Aces, sure, but the #1 should align with the number of teams.

 

 

That would be way too generous. A lot of teams don't have what would qualify as a #1 and you have innings limits that stop some of the better pitchers in the game from counting. There are fewer than 10 ace pitchers in the game. Now if you want to go with say 20 #1's it wouldn't bother me, but 30 is too many. It is going to skew things to where a lot of really mediocre guys look like #2's.

 

But people shouldn't talk out of both sides of their mouth on it. Not referring to anyone directly. Sure there are only 20 true aces. But then the perception of what a 2 is doesn't fit the numbers at all.

 

Soon you are saying all we have is 4s and 5s. But you are looking at pitchers in the top 100. That's not a 4 and certainly not a 5.

 

I agree that there aren't 30 1s. But you can't bemoan 4s and 5s when they are actually 2s and 3s by league comparison. Our perceptions of what pitchers qualify as, doesn't fit the reality of it.

 

We also know from watching this team that the only time this team struggles is when they have actual 5s and 6s like Burnes Peralta and Chacin in heavy rotation.

[brewerfan82]

It would be interesting to see if you narrowed the pool to just playoff teams how things look.

[Oxy]

I think it's silly to say there are fifteen #1 pitchers. Aces, sure, but the #1 should align with the number of teams.

 

 

That would be way too generous. A lot of teams don't have what would qualify as a #1 and you have innings limits that stop some of the better pitchers in the game from counting. There are fewer than 10 ace pitchers in the game. Now if you want to go with say 20 #1's it wouldn't bother me, but 30 is too many. It is going to skew things to where a lot of really mediocre guys look like #2's.

 

 

These labeling argument are always silly (unless you're lawyer), but I'll partake anyway. By definition there are 30 #1 pitchers. As Ennder said, not all #1 pitchers are aces. Also, they are obviously not evenly distributed, as last year just between the Astros, Nationals, and Mets they had at least 9 #1s, and probably 9 "Aces" even--which I would classify as a guy capable of winning the Cy Young.

[sveumrules]

It would be interesting to see if you narrowed the pool to just playoff teams how things look.

 

Here's the 2019 playoff teams (plus the Cubs!!) rotations...

 

Brewers (10.5 rWAR, 8.7 fWAR)

 

Woodruff | 82 ERA-/67 FIP- | 3.0 rWAR/3.3 fWAR (#2) 0.6 million

Davies | 80 ERA-/102 FIP- | 3.0 rWAR/1.6 fWAR (#2/3) 2.6 million

Chase | 94 ERA-/107 FIP- | 2.2 rWAR/1.3 fWAR (#3/4) 6.5 million

Lyles | 55 ERA-/99 FIP- | 2.0 rWAR/0.8 fWAR (#3/4) 0.7 million

Gio | 85 ERA-/95 FIP- | 1.7 rWAR/1.2 fWAR (#3) 1.7 million

Adrian | 103 ERA-/94 FIP- | 0.9 rWAR/1.1 fWAR (#4) 0.5 million

Jhoulys | 130 ERA-/127 FIP- | -0.3 rWAR/0.1 fWAR (#6) 6.8 million

 

Yankees (11.3 rWAR, 10.6 fWAR)

 

Paxton | 83 ERA-/83 FIP- | 3.0 rWAR/3.5 fWAR (#2) 8.6 million

Tanaka | 97 ERA-/92 FIP- | 2.8 rWAR/3.2 fWAR (#2) 22 million

German | 93 ERA-/105 FIP- | 2.2 rWAR/1.5 fWAR (#3) 0.6 million

Happ | 109 ERA-/114 FIP- | 1.9 rWAR/1.1 fWAR (#4) 17 million

Sabathia | 108 ERA-/122 FIP- | 0.8 rWAR/0.4 fWAR (#5) 8 million

 

Braves (13.8 rWAR, 11.3 fWAR)

 

Soroka | 60 ERA-/79 FIP- | 6.1 rWAR/4.0 fWAR (#1/2) 0.5 million

Teheran | 86 ERA-/106 FIP- | 3.3 rWAR/1.6 fWAR (#2/3) 11.2 million

Fried | 94 ERA-/85 FIP- | 2.5 rWAR/2.9 fWAR (#2/3) 0.6 million

Dallas | 85 ERA-/108 FIP- | 2.3 rWAR/0.8 fWAR (#3) 13 million

Folty | 102 ERA-/114 FIP- | 1.2 rWAR/0.8 fWAR (#4) 5.5 million

Gausman | 139 ERA-/96 FIP- | -0.6 rWAR/1.2 fWAR (#4/5) 6.5 million

 

Cubs (13.8 rWAR, 15.7 fWAR)

 

Hendricks | 79 ERA-/81 FIP- | 4.0 rWAR/4.1 fWAR (#2) 7.4 million

Darvish | 91 ERA-/94 FIP- | 3.6 rWAR/2.6 fWAR (#2/3) 20 million

Hamels | 87 ERA-/92 FIP- | 3.0 rWAR/2.5 fWAR (#2/3) 20 million

Lester | 102 ERA-/96 FIP- | 1.4 rWAR/2.8 fWAR (#3) 27.5 million

Quintana | 110 ERA-/87 FIP- | 1.3 rWAR/3.3 fWAR (#3) 10.5 million

 

Twins (14.7 rWAR, 16.6 fWAR)

 

Odorizzi | 75 ERA-/73 FIP- | 4.2 rWAR/4.3 fWAR (#2) 9.5 million

Berrios | 79 ERA-/84 FIP- | 4.1 rWAR/4.4 fWAR (#2) 0.6 million

Pineda | 86 ERA-/87 FIP- | 3.0 rWAR/2.7 fWAR (#2/3) 8.0 million

Gibson | 105 ERA-/93 FIP- | 0.9 rWAR/2.5 fWAR (#3/4) 8.1 million

Perez | 107 ERA-/102 FIP- | 1.1 rWAR/1.8 fWAR (#3/4) 3.5 million

 

Rays (16.0 rWAR, 17.6 fWAR)

 

Morton | 69 ERA-/64 FIP- | 5.8 rWAR/6.1 fWAR (#1) 15 million

Glasnow | 40 ERA-/52 FIP- | 2.9 rWAR/2.3 fWAR (#2) 0.6 million

Snell | 96 ERA-/75 FIP- | 1.7 rWAR/2.7 fWAR (#3) 1.6 million

Yonny | 79 ERA-/94 FIP- | 2.5 rWAR/1.6 fWAR (#3) 0.6 million

Yarbro | 97 ERA-/81 FIP- | 1.3 rWAR/1.9 fWAR (#3) 0.5 million

Stanek | 47 ERA-/64 FIP- | 1.6 rWAR/1.3 fWAR (OPNR) 0.4 million

 

A's (17.3 rWAR, 11.8 fWAR)

 

Montas | 59 ERA-/67 FIP- | 2.9 rWAR/3.0 fWAR (#2) 0.4 million

Brett | 87 ERA-/102 FIP- | 3.6 rWAR/2.0 fWAR (#2/3) 1.5 million

Fiers | 87 ERA-/111 FIP- | 4.0 rWAR/1.7 fWAR (#2/3) 6.0 million

Bassitt | 89 ERA-/101 FIP- | 2.6 rWAR/2.0 fWAR (#3) 0.6 million

Bailey | 96 ERA-/82 FIP- | 1.3 rWAR/1.7 fWAR (#3) 0.3 million

Mengden | 95 ERA-/99 FIP- | 0.9 rWAR/0.7 fWAR (#3/4) 0.3 million

Roark | 103 ERA-/126 FIP- | 0.7 rWAR/0.1 fWAR (#4/5) 1.2 million

 

Cardinals (17.4 rWAR, 10.9 fWAR)

 

Flaherty | 65 ERA-/80 FIP- | 6.9 rWAR/4.7 fWAR (#1) 0.6 million

Hudson | 79 ERA-/113 FIP- | 3.3 rWAR/1.1 fWAR (#2/3) 0.6 million

Mikolas | 98 ERA-/99 FIP- | 2.9 rWAR/2.5 fWAR (#3) 8.8 million

Waino | 99 ERA-/100 FIP- | 2.8 rWAR/2.2 fWAR (#3) 10 million

Wacha | 110 ERA-/128 FIP- | 1.1 rWAR/0.0 fWAR (#4/5) 6.4 million

 

Astros (21.8 rWAR, 19.4 fWAR)

 

Cole | 56 ERA-/59 FIP- | 7.8 rWAR/7.4 fWAR (#1) 13.5 million

Verlander | 58 ERA-/73 FIP- | 8.8 rWAR/6.6 fWAR (#1) 20 million

Miley | 89 ERA-/100 FIP- | 2.6 rWAR/2.0 fWAR (#3) 5 million

Greinke | 68 ERA-/73 FIP- | 1.7 rWAR/1.7 fWAR (#2) 4.5 million

Peacock | 95 ERA-/96 FIP- | 1.5 rWAR/1.1 fWAR (#3/4) 3.1 million

McHugh | 143 ERA-/116 FIP- | -0.3 rWAR/0.2 fWAR (#5) 5.8 million

 

Dodgers (22.8 rWAR, 19.8 fWAR)

 

Ryu | 55 ERA-/71 FIP- | 6.7 rWAR/4.8 fWAR (#1) 17.9 million

Buehler | 78 ERA-/69 FIP- | 3.9 rWAR/5.0 fWAR (#1/2) 0.6 million

Kershaw | 73 ERA-/89 FIP- | 5.1 rWAR/3.4 fWAR (#1/2) 31 million

Maeda | 99 ERA-/91 FIP- | 2.2 rWAR/2.3 fWAR (#3) 3.1 million

Hill | 58 ERA-/94 FIP- | 1.8 rWAR/0.9 fWAR (#3) 18.7 million

Stripling | 86 ERA-/84 FIP- | 1.4 rWAR/1.5 fWAR (#3) 0.6 million

 

Nationals (24.9 rWAR, 21.4 fWAR)

 

Scherzer | 65 ERA-/54 FIP- | 6.0 rWAR/6.5 fWAR (#1) 37.5 million

Strasburg | 74 ERA-/72 FIP- | 6.4 rWAR/5.7 fWAR (#1) 35 million

Corbin | 72 ERA-/77 FIP- | 5.5 rWAR/4.8 fWAR (#1) 12.9 million

Anibal | 86 ERA-/98 FIP- | 3.5 rWAR/2.5 fWAR (#2/3) 6 million

 

My personal takeaways (if you made it this far) are that A) the only "number one" we could have realistically acquired in the last couple two tree years is probably Charlie Morton & 2) the general composition our staff most resembles the Rays & A's; two other smart, poor (by MLB standards), yet still successful teams.

 

Make of all of it what you will or won't.

[tigerbrew]

The lefty Ryu is available, hope Stearns boldly get him to be our next CC Sabathia.

[pacopete4]

Other than being a lefty, what’s the comparison?

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Other than being a lefty, what’s the comparison?

 

Ryu is a soft tosser with pinpoint control. Sabathia threw gas when he was a Brewer. Pretty much opposite ends of the spectrum.

[tigerbrew]

Other than being a lefty, what’s the comparison?

 

Both are plump, lefty Ace. I think the Brewers need another Ace to contend.

[LouisEly]

Woodruff | 82 ERA-/67 FIP- | 3.0 rWAR/3.3 fWAR (#2)

Davies | 80 ERA-/102 FIP- | 3.0 rWAR/1.6 fWAR (#2/3)

Chase | 94 ERA-/107 FIP- | 2.2 rWAR/1.3 fWAR (#3/4)

Lyles | 55 ERA-/99 FIP- | 2.0 rWAR/0.8 fWAR (#3/4)

Gio | 85 ERA-/95 FIP- | 1.7 rWAR/1.2 fWAR (#3)

Adrian | 103 ERA-/94 FIP- | 0.9 rWAR/1.1 fWAR (#4)

Jhoulys | 130 ERA-/127 FIP- | -0.3 rWAR/0.1 fWAR (#6)

 

Lauer | 105 ERA-/97 FIP- | 1.3 rWAR/2.2 fWAR (#3)

Brett | 87 ERA-/102 FIP- | 3.6 rWAR/2.0 fWAR (#2/3)

 

The most impressive thing about the 2019 rotation to me is how much they were able to limit truly awful outings besides the 34 games started by Jhoulys, Burnes, Peralta & Nelson.

Are you classifying Woodruff as a #2 based on WAR? His FIP- was in the range of a #1. WAR is a counting stat, and Woodruff missed almost two months due to the oblique injury, hindering his ability to accumulate WAR. One could argue that based on ability (FIP-), Woodruff is a #1.

[sveumrules]

Interestingly, to me anyway, there are exactly 150 starters with at least 500 IP since Ryu's first MLB season in 2013.

 

For his career as a whole has pitched like a #1 (ERA-: 79, 13th | FIP-: 83, 17th) when on the mound, but he hasn't always been on the mound (736 IP, 83rd) so his actual production (rWAR: 17.3, 34th | fWAR: 15.0, 40th) is more in line with a solid #2.

 

His yearly results look like this...

 

2013: 192 IP | 84 ERA-/87 FIP- | 4.2 rWAR/3.8 fWAR (#2)

2014: 152 IP | 97 ERA-/72 FIP- | 2.4 rWAR/4.0 fWAR (#2/3)

2015: (hurt)

2016: (hurt)

2017: 126 IP | 91 ERA-/112 FIP- | 1.7 rWAR/0.6 fWAR (#3/4)

2018: 82 IP | 51 ERA-/75 FIP- | 2.7 rWAR/1.9 fWAR (#2/3)

2019: 182 IP | 55 ERA-/71 FIP- | 6.7 rWAR/4.8 fWAR (#1)

[sveumrules]

Woodruff | 82 ERA-/67 FIP- | 3.0 rWAR/3.3 fWAR (#2)

 

Are you classifying Woodruff as a #2 based on WAR? His FIP- was in the range of a #1. WAR is a counting stat, and Woodruff missed almost two months due to the oblique injury, hindering his ability to accumulate WAR. One could argue that based on ability (FIP-), Woodruff is a #1.

 

Yeah, the FIP is in the #1 range, but with the injury/limited innings the actual production comes out in the #2 range. Guess you could say #1/2 since he's borderline. If he tops 180 IP this year I think he has a good shot at being a top 15ish pitcher in all of MLB.

 

Montas, Glasnow & Greinke w/Astros were a few other guys like Woodruff where they had the #1 peripherals, but not enough IP to meet the WAR threshold, so I put him down as a #2. Ultimately, for me anyway, to be a "true" #1 you need the peripherals & innings.

[sveumrules]

These labeling argument are always silly (unless you're lawyer), but I'll partake anyway. By definition there are 30 #1 pitchers. As Ennder said, not all #1 pitchers are aces. Also, they are obviously not evenly distributed, as last year just between the Astros, Nationals, and Mets they had at least 9 #1s, and probably 9 "Aces" even--which I would classify as a guy capable of winning the Cy Young.

 

In general, I agree, but if we acquired Marco Gonzalez or Eduardo Rodriguez (who were both top 30 by fWAR) you'd have a hard time convincing many they were #2 pitchers much less a #1.

 

Looking at it somewhat outside the "30 teams" grouping system, since talent/results are not evenly distributed, there were 146 starters with at least 70 IP in 2019.

 

Of that sample I would say there were 6 aces (6.0+ WAR), 10 number ones (4.5-5.9 WAR), 25 number twos (3.0-4.4 WAR), 51 number threes (1.5-2.9 WAR), 34 number fours (0.5-1.4 WAR) & everyone else is a five or didn't throw 70 IP.

[Eye Black]

Not completely related, but since he was mentioned in this thread...

 

Tyler Glasnow was in studio with MLB Network this afternoon and (politely) said some candid things about the difference between Pittsburgh and going to the Rays. He said they changed his pitching approach because they were able to use advanced data to tell him, “this what your stuff does, and this is why you are good. Let’s do more of this.” He said it helped him shift his mentality from previous (in Pittsburgh) where he was taught to go downhill, keep the ball down, and touch corners. He said the Rays were able to show him that he would be better off erring on the side of being aggressive versus trying to touch corners. He said once that resonated he was able to just focus on working up and down through the middle of the plate which created an attack first mentality. He finished by saying the Rays staff and coaches were really able to show him how good his stuff actually was.

[Eye Black]

Not completely related, but since he was mentioned in this thread...

 

Tyler Glasnow was in studio with MLB Network this afternoon and (politely) said some candid things about the difference between Pittsburgh and going to the Rays. He said they changed his pitching approach because they were able to use advanced data to tell him, “this what your stuff does, and this is why you are good. Let’s do more of this.” He said it helped him shift his mentality from previous (in Pittsburgh) where he was taught to go downhill, keep the ball down, and touch corners. He said the Rays were able to show him that he would be better off erring on the side of being aggressive versus trying to touch corners. He said once that resonated he was able to just focus on working up and down through the middle of the plate which created an attack first mentality. He finished by saying the Rays staff and coaches were really able to show him how good his stuff actually was.