Fan Perception of Starting Pitcher Talent

[rluzinski]

This is long and kind of silly, so you've been warned. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

It seems to me that fans aren't always very good at judging starting pitcher talent while the season is ongoing and I'll use the Brewers rotation this year to illustrate:

 

* When Suppan was playing way over his head to start the season, fans seemed very confident about the Brewers' chances in games he started. Now that he's played below his ability for about the last month and inflated his ERA to near 5, it appears that fans now expect that level of performance to continue.

 

* Sheets is a former all star and has had a very good ERA for several years now but a couple bad starts and a blister later, some were acting like he might be a true 4.5 ERA pitcher. Now he's pitched very well (and gotten great run support) and fans feel he can't be beat.

 

* After a terrible start for Bush (6.13 ERA over his first 10 starts), he had a pretty nice, month-long run (3.03 ERA over 5 starts and a relief appearance). Despite this recent success, the moment he gave up a couple of early runs in his last start, the "same old Bush" comments started right back up. He ends up giving up 4 ER in 6 IP, which really isn't bad for your #4 pitcher but I don't think anyone even noticed.

 

* Capuano started out on fire; 5-0 record, with a 2.31 ERA. Since then, he has a 6.89 ERA over his last 6 starts. He still has a decent 4.35 ERA though, so not much has been made of that bad run.

 

* Vargas had a great start (2.65 ERA over first 6 starts). Since then, he's cooled off considerably (5.56 ERA over next 8 starts). Again, his overall ERA is still good, so no one seems to notice, especially since the Brewers keep winning most of the games that he starts.

 

 

Here are some of the rules I think I've figured out:

 

1. What the pitcher has done in past seasons is only relevant if his current production matches it. A good pitcher doing bad in the current season is expected to continue doing bad. A bad pitcher doing good should continue to do well.

 

2. Starting off good leaves a much stronger impression on a fan than ending good. Take two pitchers with identical 4.5 ERAs and the pitcher who had the better start will probably win out. Of course, the opposite is true as well. A bad start has the potential of scaring the reputation of a starting pitcher for the rest of the season.

 

3. The exception to rule 2: The moment that the pitcher's overall numbers (ERA or wins-loss record) shifts past some threshold (good or bad), first impressions are seemingly completely wiped away. A pitcher might have 5 great starts to start off the season and than have one horrible start that inflates his ERA to over 5.0. Bad season so far.

 

4. The final and most important rule: The outcome of the game you start in is more important than anything else. 4 ER in 5 IP but your team won? Good start for the pitcher. 3 ER over 6 IP but your team loses? Didn't get the job done.

 

Did I botch any? Miss any altogether?

[Thurston Fluff]

Starting off good leaves a much stronger impression on a fan than ending good.

 

Cappy and Eveland are two examples of that. I think it's differant for teams in a pennant race though. If for example Sheets started out poorly but he came around in September and boosted the Brewers to the playoffs I think he would be viewed more positively than if he was doing the exact same thing with a non contender.

[rluzinski]

Starting off good leaves a much stronger impression on a fan than ending good.I think it's differant for teams in a pennant race though.

 

Good point. You'll have to excuse me for not thinking about that. My team hasn't been in that situation since I was about 7. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[Nearsighted Views]

The only factor that I see missing in fan perception is contract size. This is obviously affecting Suppan. He is as advertised up to this point. He is performing, IMO, exactly how he should be. But when there's a big contract involved, you're suddenly never supposed to lose again.

[mark brouhard is number on]

looks pretty much right on the money. Just shows how little many fans know about the game. case in point a guy i work with came up to me when Bush came ib relief last week just up in arms about it. I quote " Bush has sucked this year, his ERA is over 5, they just lost this game!"

 

I told him that is not true at all. That he had been pitching very well of late, and even though his ERA wasn't that great. a few bad innings ib many of his early games led to this. He walked away with a strange, confused look on his face.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

Could you elaborate on your definition of the word "fan"? Are you talking more about casual fans, fans on this site, or both?

[Kpanz20]

I'm guessing this spawned from your other comment about how vargas appeared to have a good start in some eyes and bush a bad one with the same innings and era pitched but vargas won. Its a very interesting topic I must say.

 

I think the worst the pitchers career numbers are that it then falls into a what have you done for me lately scenario. I think you were pointing this out but if bush has a bad outing it seems like the perception is worse than if sheets has a bad outing.

 

also I think what contributes to these perceptions sometimes is actually the pitchers "stuff". I think starters who have more flash are givin more leeway than someone who is "boring".

 

good topic.

[obobo55]

I think your point about early season success goes for position players as well.

 

It is really hard for most fans to capture splits easily. They make up their minds most often when they follow the games the most--early in the season. So Jenks is awful and JJ Hardy is an allstar. When you look deeper into the numbers, all players go through their ups and downs over the course of the year. Whether that is due to wear-and-tear, making adjustments, being "in the zone", or whatever I don't know but it happens with just about every player on every team.

 

It probably just seems more pronounced with starters since they have a much smaller sample to work with. ERA can jump a lot with a bad outing, it is much harder for a batter to see that kind of effect this late in the season.

 

To me, I think fans overreact to many things. Ned (and most managers) do well to weed out the limitations of short-term statistics and stick with guys that have proven themselves in the past.

[TerraceReserved]

-----"4. The final and most important rule: The outcome of the game you start in is more important than anything else. 4 ER in 5 IP but your team won? Good start for the pitcher. 3 ER over 6 IP but your team loses? Didn't get the job done."-----

 

I especially like this one. It's amazing how the more casual fans abide by this rule.

 

Although this sort of ties in with #4, you may want to consider this rule. 4 ER in 5 IP with a win, and the pitcher "knows how to win." But of course, if the pitcher goes 6 innnings with 3 ER with a loss, well then he just doesn't know how to win.

[brettac1]

Although this sort of ties in with #4, you may want to consider this rule. 4 ER in 5 IP with a win, and the pitcher "knows how to win." But of course, if the pitcher goes 6 innnings with 3 ER with a loss, well then he just doesn't know how to win.

 

Also, some will say that the guy who won with the 4 ER/5 IP peformance "kept the team in the game and gave them a chance to win" (since the offense was good that day), while on the day the guy who had the quality start and lost, he didn't give the offense a chance.

[mark brouhard is number on]

i would say both fans on this site, but casual fans are much worse usually. my guess is some people just look at the basic stats in the newspaper and make assumptions based on these. whereas a fan that really watches every game, has played the game in the past, can really look at the season as a whole better than the casual fan and determine who is having a decent year and who isn't.

[JoeHova]

This seems kind of like a strawman argument to me.

 

Fans get upset/giddy at the performance of their team. It's natural, it's what makes us fans. No one actually believes that Jeff Suppan is a 2 ERA pitcher. Some of us do hope that through some miracle that will happen, and that is what is reflected in the kinds of posts/comments you are referring to. Conversely, it's easy (and fun) to complain about players when they are doing poorly. We don't have to keep a level head because we don't actually make the decisions about who to keep or get rid of.

 

What fun would talking sports be if everybody agreed that guys who were doing well are going to do worse in the future and that guys who were doing poorly are going to do better in the future?

[hauser42]

I feel the pitching is fine.

 

Starting pitchers more than anything are hard to get a handle on. There are so many factors that go into their success each time out.

 

1. Are they pitching strikes on that day.

2. Is the defense making plays behind them.

3. Is the offense giving them run support.

 

 

There are other factors that I can't think of right now.

[rluzinski]

The only factor that I see missing in fan perception is contract size.

 

That's another very good one.

 

As for my definition of fan, I am referring to anyone who takes a more casual approach to judging a starting pitcher's in-season performance. If everyone just watched the games and only saw the pitcher's current ERA and record, the rules would be followed almost universally. It's how we are all hardwired to process information.

 

I would certainly fall under that category for football. I love watching the sport, so I wouldn't necessarily call myself a casual fan. I just don't get into the game-by-game performance analysis side of it, like many others do. We all enjoy our sports in different ways.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

I must not fall into this category then because I have always been on the Sheets bandwagon, but never have been on the Capuano bandwagon.

 

Even when Cappy was 5-0 early in the year, he was playing with fire. He got out of a lot of trouble and hasn't been able to maintain. I love having Capuano on days where he has his best stuff, but he if he doesn't, he gets shelled. Let's hope the long rest gave Cappy's arm some time to rest up and become the solid #2 pitcher that we need.

 

I am wondering if I fall into this "category" of fan, but it appears not entirely. Just my take on this. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

[mark brouhard is number on]

That's a good comment that we all like our sports in different ways. Some may like to question or complain about every decision or player, while others love watching the games and want their team to win, while not questioning every move or complaining about every player.

 

Neither one makes you a better or worse fan, just makes the two groups difficult to watch a game with for each other.

[rluzinski]

I must not fall into this category then because I have always been on the Sheets bandwagon, but never have been on the Capuano bandwagon.

 

Again, all fans do this to some degree but it's hard to be completely objective when judging a player's actual ability and actual game-by-game performance. It's human nature to make a sometimes quick assessment of a player's ability and it's also human nature then to want to see that judgment be the correct one. So, sometimes, we fudge a bit, since there's always some wiggle room with regard to performance analysis.

 

I find myself constantly questioning my own subjectiveness and I'd be an blind fool if I said I always succeed. If I'm making a one sentence comment in the chat room or an IGT, I don't worry as much about making a completely objective comment. We've all used the "it seems that" disclaimer from time to time, after all.

 

I do try to dig deep into the objectively pool and check my facts before arguing a point in a dedicated thread, however. If I am going to make a response disputing someone else's claim, I feel I should make sure I've given it a reasonable amount of unbiased thought.

 

I would want to make sure it's just not me wanting Bush to friggin' pitch the way I know he should be friggin' pitching! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif But if Bush had started off with those 5 nice starts and a 3.03 ERA, I would have known that he was most likely playing over his head and not automatically adjusted my expectations. As a wanna-be analyst at least. As a fan...

[1992casey]

---

Could you elaborate on your definition of the word "fan"? Are you talking more about casual fans, fans on this site, or both?

---

I think everyone?from the fan who picks up a sports section once a week to the hard core message-boarder who should absolutely understand small sample sizes?is capable of missing out on the big picture at times.

[BrewCityUnit]

Do you take into account the situation of the game?

 

I would think pitchers pitch differently and managers manage differently depending on the score of the game. For example if a pitcher was spotted a 5 run lead early in the game, isn't he pitching differently compared to if the game was tight. I know most pitchers just try to throw strikes in that situation which might inflate a pitchers number in that situation.

[Lil Dummy]

Fans are so stupid. Thank God I'm not one. Uh, wait...

[rluzinski]

Studies have been done looking for correlation between runs scored and given up. There is a small amount of correlation but much of that probably has to do with personnel changes (putting your weaker pitchers into a game you already have a huge lead in).

 

I wouldn't be surprised if starting pitchers are a bit more aggressive with an early lead but I suspect the result is pretty slight. Generally speaking, pitchers are going to do what they think gives them the best chance to get a batter out, no matter what the score is.

[Fatter than Joey]

Nice post Russ -- I will try to have some fun with it -- http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

 

1. The first thing that jumped into my mind was contracts -- let me expand on this. I know that contracts are determined primarily by 2 things past performances and the FA market. However I think a lot of fans think that they are buying future performances from their pitchers. E.g., we paid this guy $15M that means we should get 15 wins from that guy.

 

2. Bush v. Vargas -- One thing that occured to me when you made your comparison to Bush v. Vargas and how they pitched about the same # of innings and gave up the same amount of ERs and how Bush was perceived to be bad and Vargas was good.

 

I have to admit -- I thought Bush was "bad" compared to Vargas -- and then when I thought about it a little more, I think Bush getting hit harder (warning track outs) probably had a negative impact on me I found myself thinking "Bush was lucky that didnt go out of the park" -- so I think fans do not see all outs as being equal. If you give up more FB outs -- you are probably going to be viewed as worse than a guy who gives up equal GB outs.

 

3. Doug Melvin Nugget Syndrome -- If you are a throw-in pitcher in a Doug Melvin trade -- you will have off the chart expectations relative to your actual talent. (This is specific to Brewer fans)

 

4. Parks -- I think fans rarely take into account pitchers coming from places like OAK may see a regression because they got a lot of foul outs that they won't get in the new park.

 

5. Fantasy Baseball -- I think more than anything in recent years fantasy baseball has skewed fans' grasps of baseball realities. A lot of stats are overvalued in reality because they have great fantasy value. I think a lot of fans who are good at fantasy baseball think they have a better grasp on the game, when in fact I think that they are jaded.

[whynotthebrewers]

I think the game yesterday is a perfect example. I happened to catch part of the postgame show on 1250 and people were asking how bush could possible stay in the rotation. Well saving Yo for later in the year is one reason and his performance has been pretty good lately, so that may be another.

 

But they were saying this because he was supposedly so "awful", "again", yesterday. Well actually he could have given up only 2 runs, if the guy is out at home and we catch a popup. Giving 5 outs in an inning will usually come back to get you. So he has actually been pretty good in just over a month.

 

So I think people are quick to jump on a guy when there is another option. But we want to save Yo a bit this year and bring him along slowly. Which I agree with and hope it turns into him starting later in the year or at least being able to pitch a little more later in the year. But that is something we can worry about once we get there. Our team is tops in the NL and I think the expectation have gotten the best of most.

In past years, these starters would all be awesome seeing we were only winning 75 games. But winning will do that to the fans. We are impatient and have a new taste in our mouth. So nobody is safe from being killed by message boards and talk radio everywhere.

[rluzinski]

Quote:

---

I think Bush getting hit harder (warning track outs) probably had a negative impact on me I found myself thinking "Bush was lucky that didnt go out of the park" -- so I think fans do not see all outs as being equal. If you give up more FB outs -- you are probably going to be viewed as worse than a guy who gives up equal GB outs.

---

 

I drove myself crazy trying to judge every ball in play from Sheets earlier in the year. "That was hit hard but right at someone! That was a blooper that should have been caught!" I just gave up and focused on strikes and walks (and still drove myself crazy small sampling myself to death).

 

Judging balls in play is just a tough deal any way you look at it. When the difference between a good and bad BABIP is 2-3%, it takes a heck of a lot of balls to see what is what. How many times would you need to roll a dice to know if you had the 27% one or the 30% one?

[dadofandrew]

Bush's ERA is basically the same as last year if you remove the 6 run 1st inning versus the Cubs in his first start. He's not pitching badly by any means, but he sure does not get the breaks.