Oh Pedro: Why Feliciano Is So Important To The Mets
Jorge Cantu is a pretty good hitter. In 2009, he hit .289/.345/.443 for a .788 OPS. However, baseball does not require a pitcher to face Jorge Cantu every at-bat. They'll have to face some better players, and more often some worse players, for an overall average opposing batter much worse than Jorge Cantu. Why is this relevant? Because in 2009 Pedro Feliciano did face Jorge Cantu every time he pitched.
Of course not literally, but for pitchers with a minimum of fifty innings pitched, Pedro Feliciano faced hitters with an average OPS higher than any other pitcher in baseball (.796, actually higher than Cantu's). And what did Feliciano do to these hitters? He held them to a .231/.288/.394 average. He basically turned Jorge Cantu into a worse version of Omir Santos. While DIPS theory is important, it would only credit Feliciano, as he was not at all benefiting from anything resembling a quality defense.
Feliciano's other numbers reflect his dominance in 2009. He had a 3.55 FIP, a 3.05 xFIP, and 3.44 tRA (the lowest of his career), all while facing some of the most stealth competition in baseball. Sure, the batters Feliciano saw were most likely at a disadvantage in terms of handedness, but this is irrelevant. In fact, this is what we should be commending Feliciano for: being able to turn good hitters into bad ones by exploiting weaknesses.
What's also important is when Feliciano pitched. He was usually in close games facing the superstar players on the opposing teams (i.e. Ryan Howard, Adam Dunn, Brian McCann, etc.), giving him a WPA of 1.91, the highest of his career by .7. Here are Feliciano's 2009 splits:
Righties: 4.49 xFIP, 5.19 FIP, 1.59 K/BB, 21.8 LD%, 43.6 GB%
Lefties: 2.40 xFIP, 2.80 FIP, 6.83 K/BB, 12.3 LD%, 63.2 GB%
I also think a fundamental problem with LOOGY analysis is that their value is not properly assessed via WAR thanks to the relatively small amount of innings they pitch. Feliciano was only worth .6 WAR last year (.4 less than Santos), but was clearly more "valuable" than that. While fWAR does take into account leverage index, it's still difficult to buy the final numbers. For a more detailed conversation on that issue, look here.
Feliciano's 2009 was great. He got batters to swing at pitches outside the strike zone (28.9% of the time), turning above average hitters into career minor leaguers at the most important stages of the game. If the Mets are playing more competitive baseball in 2010, maybe his late game excellence will be realized even more.
Pat Andriola is a writer for The Hardball Times. You can contact him at Patrick.Andriola@tufts.edu or on Twitter @tuftspat.
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.
18 comments
|
12 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Nice work, Pat.
If I could, I’d rec this harder.
by LeiterMilnerFasterStronger on Feb 11, 2010 9:35 PM EST reply actions
We might win more games, then.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 11, 2010 10:22 PM EST up reply actions
Buy stock in Duct tape
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Stephen Schmidt on Feb 11, 2010 10:27 PM EST up reply actions
Is there any established quantifiable effect on getting up and throwing and then sitting down?
I know announcers often mention things like that, but I was wondering if that actually has some substance to it. Looking at his recent career, he’s appeared in a lot more games in the past two years then 2006 and 2007, but he’s pitched less innings.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Feb 11, 2010 10:33 PM EST up reply actions
rec'd
As long as Jerry doesn’t decide Pedro doesn’t really need in arm to play we should be good for 2010
"I reject your reality and substitute my own"
-Adam Savage
by blueandorange4life on Feb 11, 2010 10:46 PM EST reply actions
He's probably the best reliever
on the team.
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
I have a question:
If batters don’t get credit for the situations they are put in (such as bases loaded), why should pitchers? They have no control over the leverage situation they are put in, so I don’t see why they should get credit (WAR) for it. I understand the pitchers that pitch well in high leverage situations are actually helping their team win more than pitchers that pitch well in low leverage situations. I guess it depends on what you want WAR to be.
I imagine because
teams have more control of when a pitcher comes in than a batter, you can pinch hit for a batter, but teams don’t usually specifically keep insane pinch hitters on the bench for high leverage situations, unless your Matt Stairs and your sole purpose in life is to pinch hit homers, especially in the AL. where as, teams do routinely value and use their bullpen pitchers based on the situation, whether they use a bullpen ace or pay top dollar for closers/8th inning guys.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
So teams know that their best reliever will be in high leverage situations, and therefore pay and value them knowing that.
That makes sense, but I still don’t know if WAR should take that into account.
WAR is not designed to take leverage into account.
You could mix some WPA, LI or else to asses how a player performed including leverage.
In lobby campaign for Chris Carter.
Fangraphs WAR does
that’s what the poster was referencing when he talked about fWAR.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
I was searching for some other opinions on it and found an article by Tango that explained it more
here.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
More on "WAR and Relievers" @ Fangraphs
The average Leverage Index of a closer is about 1.8, meaning that each plate appearance is about 80 percent more important than an average PA. We give the closer credit for half of that, based on the principle of chaining.
Link
From that link you posted, only relievers get Leverage adjustment.
In lobby campaign for Chris Carter.

by 


























