When do we start worrying about Johan?
Hey all you wonderful AA'ers. I wrote this sample blog post to apply for a Mets blogging position at a small, local radio station. This is my first long, in-depth article using advanced stats, so please criticize and critique! Let me know what's good, what sucks, etc, so I clean it up before sending it in, or if the article even makes a valid argument (it's very possible that it doesnt).
Also, obviously feel free to discuss the subject at hand. Thanks!
In this tormenting (if not typical) season of ups and downs for the Mets, there has remained one constant: Johan Santana, our ace, our stopper, our prized Cy Young winner. On the surface, this might look like any other season in Johan's superb career. He's one off the league lead in Wins. His ERA is a rock-solid if not unexceptional 3.10. That he once again finds himself in the thick of the Cy Young race is nothing short of a miracle, considering the spare parts that now surround him on the diamond.
But this year has been anything but typical for Johan. In fact, he may be on the decline already at the tender age of 30. Every year since 2005 his walks have increased; he has issued 2.59 free passes per 9 this season, compared to just 1.75 in 2005. Perhaps most alarming is Johan's 1.07 homers allowed per 9 innings, higher than every year except 2007. For comparison, Santana's home run rate is equal to that of the nauseating Livan Hernandez. That 11 of those jacks were hit at the spacious confines of Citi Field is a little bit disconcerting. These stats, combined with his decreased strikeout rate, explain his increased FIP (Fielding Independent Pitching, a measure of the three factors a pitcher himself can control: home runs, walks, and strikeouts), which has jumped to 3.76, up from his career low 2.80 in 2004. It may be time to put to rest all the theories about bad defense causing Santana's struggles. His inflated BABIP can at least be partially explained by a whopping 12% increase in his fly ball rate.
Santana lives and dies by his change-up. Unfortunately, his change-up lives and dies by his fastball. A drop in velocity on his heater has led to a higher contact rate (78.1% compared to his career line of 73.5%). One of the most frustrating things about Johan this year has been his inability to put batters away. His first pitch strike percentage is right in line with his career average, but his money pitch, the change, has been sub-par by his standards. Usually 20 or more runs above average, the offering is only 4.7 runs above average in 2009. Oddly enough, more batters are swinging at pitches out of the zone against Santana, and making contact at a 61.9% clip when they do (career average: 50.5% contact rate out of the strike zone). Clearly, though still an above-average pitch, the change has lost its bite. Instead of swinging and missing for strike three, batters are taking it for a ball, knocking it foul, or simply smacking it for a hit. This has increased his pitch counts and shortened his outings. Johan has lasted approximately 6.2 innings per start this year, and is still without a single complete game.
There is no question that Johan Santana is still an ace and one of the best pitchers in baseball. However, he is clearly not the stud he was in Minnesota. Should the Wilpons decide the Mets won't be competitive in 2010 (re: they sell the team), they owe it to the franchise and it's loyal (re: masochistic) fans to listen to trade offers, and build towards a 2011 or 2012 World Series (re: use the free money to give Delgado a 3-year extension).
0 recs |
28 comments
Comments
I'm not sure what you mean by saying that Johan's change is X number of runs above average
But that might just be me
by JoshNY on Aug 19, 2009 3:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
check out the pitch type linear weights on FanGraphs
Cool stuff.
by jasondg on Aug 19, 2009 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just to make sure I'm understanding
Are you saying that the way the Mets win the World Series in 2011 or 2012 is to have the Wilpons sell the team, possibly trade Johan, and resign an aging Delgado to a THREE year deal?
…is this serious?
by ljshorty89 on Aug 19, 2009 3:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Of course not!
I’m saying the only way they’ll decide they dont have a shot next year is if the Wilpons sell the team, but since that will never happen, they’d probably use the money to re-sign Delgado instead of using it to buy good players. I can see how that might be confusing, though.
by Steeeve on Aug 19, 2009 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, because the way I read it, I thought you were advising them to resign Delgado.
I’m quite glad that wasn’t your recommendation.
by ljshorty89 on Aug 20, 2009 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice Article
I would second JoshNY’s comment, that I am not sure what X number of runs above average means either. Also, you explain the other stats you use pretty well (ie, FIP etc.) which makes me believe the audience you are targeting is SABR friendly but not necessarily SABR knowledgable. Explaining the runs above average stat I think would be approrpriate in such an article.
I really liked the comparison to Livan Hernandez, as that puts the HR/9 number in perspective. I think some other comparisons to other pitchers would be helpful as well for some of the numbers. It doesnt even have to be other players, you could just say for instance, that league average contact percentage on a fastball is X etc.
Finally, though this is more a matter of taste, is that the title and approach, and especially the conclusion are a tad alarmist. I think this undermines your otherwise good analysis of the numbers. Maybe a better title would be “What should the Mets expect from Johan?” or some other such thing. The idea of being open to trades is decent perhaps a little empty, as a team should always be open to trading away a player if they get a lot back. Signing Delgado comes a bit out from left field. Instead of making a suggestion about him, maybe making a few suggestions about how the Mets should take into account the possibility of a Johan decline when thinking about their rotation for next year. If indeed Johan is declining, getting Holliday might be less a priority then getting another starting pitcher or two, for instance.
Also, Johan is a very good pitcher, and I am pretty sure even with his declining numbers he is still a very good pitcher. This is a matter of taste, but I would probably end an article with a little bit of praise of Johan, something like, well he may be declining but damn he can pitch.
Hope these suggestions are helpful and good luck.
by Whack8888 on Aug 19, 2009 3:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
haha oops
I read the last paragraph a little more carefully, and you do say Johan is a very good pitcher. Maybe move this sentence to the end, though, so it comes as the final idea, instead of throwing it in the middle of criticism and then continuing with criticism.
by Whack8888 on Aug 19, 2009 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
I was going to explain the runs above average thing, but I couldnt really think of a good way to word it, and I was trying to keep it somewhat short, as this is just a sample and not the real thing. And I agree with the title thing, I just figured it would be a nice attention grabber.
by Steeeve on Aug 19, 2009 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you mean "i.e." rather than "re"
i.e. = id est = that is. Or, you may be thinking of “read, …” which also would work.
re means regarding.
by SupT on Aug 19, 2009 4:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
D'oh! You're right
I meant “read” not “re:”. I dont know what I was thinking. Good catch.
by Steeeve on Aug 19, 2009 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pitch Type Values
I popped over the Fangraphs to check your pitch type values and noticed you’re not using the rate values. While it’s true that 4.7 runs above average is much less than 20, the season isn’t over yet, so it’s not quite a fair comparison since Santana still has a few games left to accumulate value on his change up.
I think the per 100 pitches rate stat would better for a year to year comparison. That shows a decline too, but not as dramatic.
by mnbv on Aug 19, 2009 5:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
very confusing
but i guess you’re posting it for proofreading and advice. i’m not sure if there’s a clear thesis statement that you’re trying to get across, and the last paragraph is very confusing.
by cntrlalt on Aug 19, 2009 5:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Not to worry
Don’t be concerned about Johan. He’s not losing anything, he’s just a Met, 99% of Met players under perform. When the Mets get rid of him, He’ll be back to his old dominating self.
by montlebon on Aug 20, 2009 12:09 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
"he’s just a Met, 99% of Met players under perform."
I know it’s old hat at this point, but:
718-937-6666
“Montlebon from Rego Park, you’re next on the FAN.”
"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Aug 20, 2009 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One thing you probably should edit
“His inflated BABIP can at least be partially explained by a whopping 12% increase in his fly ball rate.”
That actually doesn’t make sense, because a fly ball is more likely to be an out than any other kind of ball in play (IIRC, it’s 84% of fly balls are caught for outs, in comparison to 76% of ground balls and only 30-some% of line drives). The reason fly balls are less desirable than ground balls is that if they don’t go for an out, they tend to be home runs, but that doesn’t affect BABIP; by definition, a home run is not a ball in play.
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
by Lefti on Aug 20, 2009 7:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well when you combine the increase in flyballs
With the larger outfield, less likely to end up homers but more areas for them to land in stadium, and a pretty crappy defensive outfield that may have something to do with it.
by Gina on Aug 20, 2009 8:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be interesting
To see if fewer fly balls go for outs in Citi Field than in other stadiums…it would certainly make sense if that’s the case.
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
by Lefti on Aug 20, 2009 11:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What's the logic
Behind not including home runs in BABIP? Doesn’t count since there’s no defensive play involved?
by dbmets on Aug 21, 2009 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep. It's not affected by luck or defensive skill.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 21, 2009 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
doesn't the pitchers ability to not serve up a HR count as defensive skill?
and wouldn’t giving up a hR count as deficient defensive skill? Just curious
"I reject your reality and substitute my own"
-Adam Savage
by blueandorange4life on Aug 21, 2009 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The whole point of BABIP
is to separate pitching from defense; i.e., if a pitcher strikes out a batter, he’s entirely responsibly for that out, but if the guy hits a groundout to short, the shortstop and first baseman are also responsible for that out. Similarly, if a pitcher gives up a home run, there’s nothing the defense can do; that was entirely on the pitcher (That said, there is a certain amount of luck involved, as most research shows that the only way pitchers can prevent HRs is by getting ground balls; there is definitely such thing as a lucky HR/FB ratio).
In other words, the idea here is to separate pitching skills and “defensive skills”, and strictly speaking, giving up a home run is a deficient pitching skill, rather than a deficient defensive skill.
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
by Lefti on Aug 21, 2009 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also that is why there is tRA and FIP
While BAPIB doesn’t account for HR’s or batted ball type, those stats are aimed at tackling those aspects of pitching as well.
by Balagast on Aug 22, 2009 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ah ok, thanks, that makes sense
"I reject your reality and substitute my own"
-Adam Savage
by blueandorange4life on Aug 24, 2009 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Worry timeline...
Now. Now’s when we start worrying about Johan.
by Howard Megdal on Aug 24, 2009 6:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This is why
I wanted the team to forfeit the rest of the season a month ago.
But would Mets management and MLB listen to me? Noooooooooo.
by LeiterMilnerFasterStronger on Aug 24, 2009 6:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I guess NOW is a good time to start worrying about Johan…
by ljshorty89 on Aug 25, 2009 9:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
this is completely inexcusable
He’s been hurting since the break? He got to the point where he couldn’t throw side sessions in between games? In a season that was over weeks ago, why in the hell did anyone think it was a good idea to keep running him out if he was in that much pain? I will give him grission points for playing through it, but still. This is incompetence of the highest order. In a season where I thought I was numb to the idiocy that is the Mets management and front office, this had me almost seeing red.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own"
-Adam Savage
by blueandorange4life on Aug 26, 2009 1:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 


















