User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.5092 seconds
40 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
As useful as I think the DIPS concept is, don't you have to prove that you're a major league quality pitcher before you get the benefit of assuming that your BABIP will fall into the "normal" range?
Doesn't really apply here. Hochevar's career babip is only .289. He don't need no steenkin regression on that. He needs to stop allowing so many of those who reach base on him from scoring at above average rates.
HOCH's 2009 AAA DIPs ERA is 3.08 (actual ERA 1.50)
John Niese's 2009 AAA DIPS ERA i s3.48 (actual 5.18)
I think their DIPs ERA's are closer to the truth than actual, Hoch is nowhere near as good as his 2009 AAA numbers and Niese is nowhere near as bad.
Neither is a good MLB pitcher right now.
I assume this is a type of use of "unlucky" that got people going in the Wright BABIP thread. How much do strand rates vary, even among pitchers established enough to be make it into studies?
It's very useful to have stats like FIP and tRA which give you an idea of how the pitcher is doing at things we're pretty confident are fully under his control. Despite what I consider the unwise use of "unlucky" here, I think made good use of the stats to poke under the hood of ERA and see what else might be going on.
However, for a pitcher at the start at his career, shouldn't we be more careful in assuming he'll regress to league avg on things like BABIP and strand rate?
I'm not ready to write off Alex Gordon just yet, but between 2003 and 2006 the Royals drafted in the top-5 three times (1st, 2nd, and 5th) and came away with Gordon, Hochevar, and Chris Lubanski. Potentially whiffing on all three of those picks really sets an organization back and sheds light on how impressive the Rays scouting has been over the last five years.
Eyeballing the list of recent #1 picks, I'd say it depends. It seems that, for position players, the worst-case scenario is Phil Nevin (Matt Bush excepted) (is Delmon Young heading down this path?). Pitchers, however....
Ah... my fault for not comprehending what was being regressed there. I thought those were two independent statements supporting the overall premise.
Not for pitchers. The best #1 overall picks have been Floyd Bannister, Mike Moore, Andy Benes, and Tim Belcher. Those pitchers have four All-Star appearances combined.
I think the "typical" return is - injury: Matt Anderson, Paul Wilson, Brien Taylor, Ben McDonald, David Clyde.
Longoria seemed like the obvious #1 choice now, but I don't recall anyone saying he was the #1 player in the draft at the time. Andrew Miller was considered by many to be the BPA, but his bonus demands were too high. So it was down to Hochevar and Brad Lincoln with many stat guys and a few scout guys liking Tim Lincecum. I can't really fault the Royals too much. Hooch was considered the "safe choice" - guy who could turn into a mid-rotation starter in the mold of Mike Moore, Floyd Bannister or Tim Belcher. For where the Royals were in 2006, that's what they absolutely needed. Lincecum with his funky delivery and excessive workloads just seemed like too much of a risk.
Oddly enough, the safest choice - Lincoln - has been plagued with injury while Hooch and Lincecum have avoided the DL.
If Hochevar's strand rate is still low when considering the hits and walks he gives up (using the baseruns equation) then here are some possible explanations:
1) bad luck
2) inability to hold runners
3) crappy defense
4) trouble pitching with runners on base, windup vs stretch issues
look at his k/bb and HR rates
he's been bad
sure his strand rate is bad, but his BABIP as has been noted is GOOD
you want someone who, statistically speaking" WAS unlucky, bad ERA despite good peripherals- Brad Penny, back when Sox fans were calling fro his head.
Hoch's peripherals are terrible, his ERA is even worse, so what, with neutral "luck" he may be a little better but he'd still be terrible.
His K/BB is bad. Of the pitchers cited, only Cook's career K/BB is that bad.
His HR rate is "bad". Hochevar only gives up .9 HR/9 which is fine but is worse than any of the guys he's comped to.
Of course Halladay is a ridiculous comp. He K's 6.5/9 which is about average while walking only 2 giving him a sterling 3.2 K/BB while also giving up just .7 HR/9. Wang and Cook both get by on low HR rates -- Cook's .7/9 might be even more impressive than Wang's .5/9 given Cook is pitching in Coors.
Now, at the same ages, Hochevar might comp reasonably to those guys. If he wants their careers, he needs to drop the HR and walk rates (or become a different sort of pitcher by boosting the K rate). And even so, Cook is the upside here with a career 111 ERA+. More likely, if he improves, Hochevar will just be your typical BIP pitcher -- highly variable from year-to-year with a career ERA+ around 100 before things fall completely apart.
Hochevar doesn't get nearly as many double plays as Cook does. (Some of that may be the defense behind him.) Of course, getting more DPs probably goes hand in hand with bringing the HR rate down.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main