Devil's Advocate 2.0

by Rob Castellano on May 26, 2009 1:25 PM EDT

For anyone who missed it, I decided to run a season long comparison of the guys Omar actually chose versus the guys he could/should have chosen. You can check out the original post here to see where the matchups stood about a month ago. And without any further ado...

*statistics as of Monday, May 25

	IP	ERA	Pitches/IP	HR	BB/9	BABIP
Oliver Perez	21.2	9.97	20.8	3	7.20	.378
Derek Lowe	62.2	3.45	16.1	2	3.16	.266

Didn't think it could get worse, then it did...Believe it or not Ollie is only the 3rd worst in pitches thrown per inning among qualified NL starters while Lowe is way way down on the list at #71...the BABIP's actually do suggest that Lowe's getting a bit lucky while Ollie was quite unlucky; but does that mean anything? no

	AVG	OBP	SLG	RBI	SB	UZR
Luis Castillo	0.282	0.364	0.339	11	6	-2.9
Orlando Hudson	0.344	0.412	0.497	29	4	-2.6

Though still quite valuable, Castillo has come back to the pack a bit while Hudson is still surging as one of the top second baseman not named Utley/Kinsler...just to really tip the scales, Hudson has appeared in 46 games compared to Castillo's 37...though Castillo still sports the better BB/K (Castillo: 1.31 Hudson: .77) and neither has been great defensively...and apparently Hudson's middle name is Thill, strangely enough...

	IP	ERA	WHIP	HR/9	BB/9	Saves/Opp
Francisco Rodriguez	21.2	0.83	1.02	0.42	4.15	13/13
Kerry Wood	15.0	7.20	1.80	2.40	6.00	7/9
Brian Fuentes	16.2	4.32	1.44	0.54	3.24	12/14

This guy is quickly becoming my favorite Met...Although, K-Rod's peripherals, especially that walk rate, will probably not allow that perfect season we're all hoping for...but you can't argue with results and this guy has been far and away the best of the bunch and really the best closer in baseball so far...surprising how bad Wood has been, hes already allowed 4 HRs but his BABIP is high at .368 and his Avg. FB velocity hasn't been this high since 2003...Fuentes has been quietly OK but nothing special

This FanPost was contributed by a member of the community and was not subject to any vetting or approval process. It does not necessarily reflect the opinions, reasoning skills, or attention to grammar and usage rules held by the editors of this site.

Tweet Comment 32 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Just thought I would throw some more numbers at the wall

DL – 3.49 FIP
OP – 6.17 xFIP

LC – .323 wOBA
O-Dawg – .403 wOBA…and 18 more RsBI!

Franks – 3.22 FIP
Wood – 5.97 FIP
BF – 3.11 FIP

by Sokojoe on May 26, 2009 1:43 PM EDT reply actions

Interesting choice of stats

I’d recommend GB%, K/9 for the pitchers next time.

King of the bling come to lay down the evidence//Not George Bush, L-Millz be da president

by Sam Page on May 26, 2009 2:44 PM EDT reply actions

yeah

i used K/9 last time. i’m basically just mixing and matching stats each time to keep it fresh.

by Rob Castellano on May 26, 2009 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions

The Castillo/Hudson comparison is a red herring

Castillo was already under contract, was unlikely to be traded for anything remotely useful after the season he had in 2008, and was almost certainly going to be our starting 2B all along. Sportswriters may have said “hey, the Mets should get rid of that bum Luis Castillo and go sign Orlando Hudson” but I can’t genuinely bring myself to believe that was ever actually under consideration.

by JoshNY on May 26, 2009 3:00 PM EDT reply actions

Well there were multiple published reports citing team sources

that if the Mets could get rid of Castillo they would sign Hudson.

King of the bling come to lay down the evidence//Not George Bush, L-Millz be da president

by Sam Page on May 26, 2009 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah, but I don't know how feasible it was to honestly hope

that we’d be able to get rid of Castillo

by njmetfan12 on May 26, 2009 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions

Also

Hudson isn’t going to hit .344. His career on-base percentage is .350, which includes the last three seasons playing in a hitter’s park in Arizona.

by Eric Simon on May 26, 2009 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions

Fuentes

His velocity is down, but he’s having a pretty good season. He had a blowup against the Yankees in April and that killed his ERA for awhile to the point where people assume he’s been garbage. Lowe/Fuentes > Ollie/Frankie, and they cost about the same. Although I must say that I love Frankie as well.

by James Kannengieser on May 26, 2009 3:32 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

I'll throw in a few more

Adam Dunn: .277 .414 .579 .993
Manny Ramirez: 348 .492 .641 1.133 STEROIDS SUSPENSION
Gary Sheffield: .277 .417 .494 .911

by PSUdevon on May 26, 2009 4:12 PM EDT reply actions

Also Randy Wolf

4.23 TRA, 7.19 K/9 2.73 BB/9

by Gina on May 26, 2009 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions

Then again, you could add in pretty much every other pitcher who was on the market.

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on May 26, 2009 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions

exactly

by Rob Castellano on May 26, 2009 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions

Wow

I didn’t know that Sheff was hitting so well

St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008

by vivaelpujols on May 28, 2009 2:17 AM EDT up reply actions

Fuentes' WHIP

is dreadful for an “elite” reliever. As soon as people start hitting more home runs off him, his (bad) ERA will inflate even further.

by deadspy3 on May 29, 2009 5:05 AM EDT reply actions

Or it could be that the angels defense is awful

which, it usually is.

by Gina on May 29, 2009 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions

Fuentes's BABIP is .369

and his line-drive % is 19.6%. This screams bad luck. His DIPS are just fine, so I think his ERA will improve.

by James Kannengieser on May 29, 2009 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions

While the BABIP is high

That’s still not a very good LD% for a high level reliever. Just doing a quick check of GB and FB rates, his BABIP should still be somewhere around .330. His HR/FB is also just 4.5%, though this isn’t as unreasonable as it looks, considering he’s generally been sub-10% for his career and that was pitching in Coors. Still, it means while his FIP and tRA are nice, his xFIP and tRA* are not nearly as pretty looking.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on May 29, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions

How did you figure that .330 BABIP?

I’m genuinely curious. An xBABIP of .330 seems high.

Re: the LD % – it’s not great, but it’s not as if all dominating relievers have outstanding LD ‘s. Hoffman’s is 20.7 for his career. Broxton’s is 22.6%. Wagner’s is 18.5%. Frankie’s has been in the 20% range the last 2 seasons.

by James Kannengieser on May 29, 2009 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions

I didn't do anything too thorough

But I didn’t just do the LD + .12 either. I just estimated about 75% of LD rate, 25% of GB, 20% of FB, and I didn’t even really go through the math, I rounded for the rates, and obviously for the factors too.

75% of 20% LD = 15
25% of 36% GB = 9
20% of 45% FB = 9

15 + 9 + 9 = 33.

xBABIP = .330

So its not exactly thorough. I rounded the LD% from 19.6 to 20, the 37.3 GB% to 36 and the 43.1 FB% to 45. And the factors are closer to .750 on LD, .240 on GB, .220 on FB than .750, .250, .200. But I wanted the math to be nice and easy to do in my head lol, so I figured this was close enough, and its not like I rounded everything up, I feel like I balanced it well enough. I turned a few extra flyballs into outs and a few extra grounders into hits, while reducing the GB rate slightly and increasing the FB rate slightly.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on May 29, 2009 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions

So then Frankie's xBABIP using this method

is:

75% of 20% LD = 15
25% of 22% GB = 5.5
20% of 58% FB = 11.6

15 + 5.5 + 11.6 = 32.1

xBABIP = .321
Actual BABIP (per your comment below) = .223

Frankie is due for a serious change in luck, it seems.

by James Kannengieser on May 29, 2009 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions

Yup

Indeed it does. That’s what I said in my comment below. I had no idea his BABIP was that low, forget the method I just used, I’ll go Jerry on this one and just say my “gut” tells me that .223 BABIP is an indication of favorable luck for Frankie thus far.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on May 29, 2009 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions

Then again

For all we know about Jerry, he might think BABIP might stand for something like “Bunt Again Because Its Productive”.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on May 29, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

The other thing you have to consider

Is how the luck relates to the results. How much would 10 hits for every 100 balls in play effect Frankie’s results? I can’t imagine it would be more than 2.00+ (probably a lot less) to his ERA, which would still give him a very pretty looking 2.79 ERA.

For Fuentes, if he has an extra .050 BABIP, that’s 4 extra hits every 100 balls in play. So that might drop his ERA a run or so at most. Frankie’s still got better results.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on May 29, 2009 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions

Any link to this method of calculating xBABIP for a pitcher?

I mean the concept behind it makes sense, similar to the theory behind tRA. I’m just curious to read more, cause it seems like most pitcher’s xBABIP’s would be pretty high.

by James Kannengieser on May 29, 2009 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah its possible

I’ll look for a link when I get a chance, but I just remember reading that approximations for BABIP were .220 for FB, .240 for GB, and .750 for LD, which when I read it seemed to gel with the eBABIP method of .12+LD, just a bit more precise.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on May 29, 2009 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions

For what it's worth

You could say the same thing about K-rod. His ld% is higher, and his hr/fb is much lower, and lower than his career numbers, although playing in citi probably has a lot to do that with that.

by Gina on May 29, 2009 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah Frankie's definitely gotten more than a little lucky too

.223 BABIP with a 20.3 LD%? The 57.6% FB? 2.9% HR/FB? Citi Field should be helping the HR and outs of FBs and such. But I’m still amazed to find Citi has a 1.161 HR Park Factor, and the Mets have played 23 games at home and 23 on the road, and have 17 and 15 HR, respectively. I know what my eyes tell me, and as the sample size grows this is likely to change, but the numbers suggest the counter-intuitive here, that Citi has actually yielded slightly more than an average HR rate, and its not entirely because of the Mets flyball pitching staff, the Mets lineup has been effected the same way thus far.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on May 29, 2009 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions

Well its possible we just really lack power

and considering the line up we’re toting out there thats not exactly surprising, our power guys, Beltran and Wright aren’t even really power guys their line drive hitters, one of whom’s slugging has been declining, Sheffield is old and just starting to heat up and Delgado is obviously MIA. Citi having that park factor is really weird though, the only explanation I can think of is that there are a lot of left handed sluggers and dead pull lefties seem to have an advantage in citi.

by Gina on May 29, 2009 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions