It appears that those of us Angels fans who were hoping that Zack Greinke would re-sign with the Halos will be disappointed. The word from ESPN on December 6th, 2012 is that he's leaning towards the Texas Rangers, which will make them stronger. Update: Greinke eventually signed with the Los Angeles Dodgers for six years at a guaranteed $147 million.
But it appears the Angels already accounted for that possibility. On December 5th, they announced the signing of free agent Joe Blanton to a two-year contract worth $15 million, with a club option for a third year. The right-hander split time between the Philadelphia Phillies and the Los Angeles Dodgers in 2012, compiling a 10-13, 4.71 record.
The one advantage Blanton brings to the table is that he can eat up innings -- when he's healthy. Blanton missed much of 2011 with a right elbow injury. In 2012, he worked 191 innings. He also knows where he's throwing; he walked only 34 batters and struck out 167 for an excellent 4.88 strikeouts-to-walks ratio. Unfortunately, he either doesn't put enough mustard on the ball, or else he can't move it around the strike zone deceptively enough, because he also yielded 207 hits and served up 29 homers. Ervin Santana had the same problem in 2012, and the Angels dumped him to Kansas City for a song. Halos Daily points out that the heavier air at Anaheim Stadium could suppress Blanton's gopher balls, and that some of those deep flies could be reeled in by flyhawks such as Peter Bourjos and Mike Trout. Blanton's career ERA is 4.37, and in only two seasons did he post an ERA of less than 4.00. This is offset somewhat by a winning 83-75 lifetime record.
So now an Angels starting rotation of Jered Weaver, C.J. Wilson, Tommy Hanson, and Joe Blanton takes shape, with Jerome Williams and Garrett Richards competing for the number five spot. This is a rotation which can win if backed up by a good bullpen. And the Angels took another step towards strengthening that bullpen by signing left-handed middle reliever Sean Burnett away from the Washington Nationals pending completion of a physical. Despite posting a 1-2, 2.38 record with 31 holds in 2012, Burnett pitched the entire second half with a bone spur in his left elbow, which required relatively minor surgery following the postseason, so the physical is a precaution to determine his recovery progress. The Los Angeles Times reports that Burnett signed for two years at $8 million.
Thus Burnett joins a bullpen already headed up by Ernesto Frieri, Kevin Jepsen, and newcomer Ryan Madson. Despite Frieri's success as a closer in 2012, the Angels have already penciled in Madson as their closer for 2013, thinking that Frieri can be more helpful as a middle reliever where they were plagued with inconsistency in 2012. Madson had 32 saves for the Phillies in 2011; he was injured all of 2012. Scott Downs is also slated to return in 2013.
Maybe it's a good thing that the Angels decided to get two lesser but still useful pitchers for the same price they would have paid for Zack Greinke.
Showing posts with label pitching. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pitching. Show all posts
Thursday, December 6, 2012
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Major League Baseball: If Blown Saves Are Overblown, Then Perhaps Saves Ought To Be Redefined
On April 30th, 2011, ESPN writer Matt Phillip takes issue with the Blown Saves statistic in major league baseball. In a post entitled "Blown saves are overblown", Phillip challenges the notion that blown saves correlate with a team's winning percentage, citing the St. Louis Cardinals as an example. Despite the highly-publicized meltdown of Cardinal's reliever Ryan Franklin, who already has four blown saves this season, the Cards are still 15-11 before action on April 30th.
Phillip cites specific deficiencies with this statistic:
Further minimizing the detrimental value of the blown save is the fact that the top two career leaders in blown saves, Goose Gossage (112 blown saves) and Rollie Fingers (109), are in the Hall of Fame. So Matt Phillip notes that more variables explain a team's loss than a single pitcher’s inability to obtain three outs in a particular game.
But perhaps a look at the definition of a Save is also appropriate. Since blown saves are dependent upon saves, then we need to find out if we should re-define a save, as set forth in Rule 10.19 of the Official Rules of Major League Baseball. The current definition of a save indicates the bar may be set too low:
If the ultimate objective of a successful save is to shut down the opposing team's rally and preserving your own team's lead, you can see that some changes are in order. First, the potential tying run should already be on base; the batters at the plate and on deck should be considered the reliever's responsibility. Second, the pitcher getting the save should not have to be the finishing pitcher, so long as the lead does not change hands. And finally, get rid of the three inning rule, which is strictly a longevity save. A reliever who enters the game in the seventh inning with a six-run lead and pitches three innings does not deserve a save, because the potential tying run was not on base when he came in.
Here's a typical situation to illustrate this point. Athletics playing the Angels in Anaheim. Top of the eighth, Angels lead 2-1, Ervin Santana weakens and allows two hits. Fernando Rodney comes in, retires the next three batters. Then Jordan Walden comes in at the top of the ninth and retires the side.
Under the present system, Walden would get the save, because he faced the potential tying run at the plate in the top of the ninth. Rodney would be credited with a hold. But with my recommended changes, Rodney would get the save, because he inherited the potentially tying run and shut down the Athletics without the lead changing hands. Walden would probably be credited with a hold, if we still want to use that statistic.
By raising the bar on saves, we make blown saves more meaningful as well. Of course, raising the bar on saves would mean it would be a cold day in hell before a relief pitcher would get 62 saves in a season again. Thirty saves would be the normal max. And this would make the save more directly comparable to a win for a starting pitcher; twenty wins is considered the benchmark of dominance for a starter.
And finally, one other meaningful measure of merit for relievers should not be neglected. Inherited Run Scoring Percentage (IRSP) measures the relationship between the number of baserunners a reliever inherits from his predecessor vs, the number who score. So if a reliever inherited 100 runners during a season, and allowed 20 of them to score, his IRSP would be .200. Some examples are listed HERE to provide a frame of reference. IRSP is also a way to directly compare all relief pitchers, not just the ones used in save situations.
Phillip cites specific deficiencies with this statistic:
Like its ugly brother, the save, the blown save is a blunt object wielded to bash relievers into easily identified goats.
Consider these weird facts:
* A pitcher who enters a tie game and gives up the lead can’t get a blown save.
* A pitcher who enters with a four-run lead and gives up the lead can’t get a blown save.
* A pitcher can get a blown save if the go-ahead run scores on fielding errors.
* A pitcher who blows a save can also get the win.
* A pitcher can be charged with a blown save even though a run may not even be charged to him.
A blown save is merely a half-inning sample of a ballgame. That means that a team has at least 17 other half-innings in which to win any particular game. What do you call it when the starting pitcher allows a run in the fourth inning with a 7-4 lead? Or a sixth-inning reliever who comes into the game down 3-2 but allows a run to increase his team’s deficit? We don’t call it anything, of course.
Further minimizing the detrimental value of the blown save is the fact that the top two career leaders in blown saves, Goose Gossage (112 blown saves) and Rollie Fingers (109), are in the Hall of Fame. So Matt Phillip notes that more variables explain a team's loss than a single pitcher’s inability to obtain three outs in a particular game.
But perhaps a look at the definition of a Save is also appropriate. Since blown saves are dependent upon saves, then we need to find out if we should re-define a save, as set forth in Rule 10.19 of the Official Rules of Major League Baseball. The current definition of a save indicates the bar may be set too low:
The official scorer shall credit a pitcher with a save when such pitcher meets all four of the following conditions:
1. He is the finishing pitcher in a game won by his team;
2. He is not the winning pitcher;
3. He is credited with at least ⅓ of an inning pitched; and
4. He satisfies one of the following conditions:
----- He enters the game with a lead of no more than three runs and pitches for at least one inning
----- He enters the game, regardless of the count, with the potential tying run either on base, at bat or on deck
----- He pitches for at least three innings
If the pitcher surrenders the lead at any point, he cannot get a save, but he may be credited as the winning pitcher if his team comes back to win. No more than one save may be credited in each game. If a relief pitcher satisfies all of the criteria for a save, except he does not finish the game, he will often be credited with a hold (which is not an officially recognized statistic by Major League Baseball).
If the ultimate objective of a successful save is to shut down the opposing team's rally and preserving your own team's lead, you can see that some changes are in order. First, the potential tying run should already be on base; the batters at the plate and on deck should be considered the reliever's responsibility. Second, the pitcher getting the save should not have to be the finishing pitcher, so long as the lead does not change hands. And finally, get rid of the three inning rule, which is strictly a longevity save. A reliever who enters the game in the seventh inning with a six-run lead and pitches three innings does not deserve a save, because the potential tying run was not on base when he came in.
Here's a typical situation to illustrate this point. Athletics playing the Angels in Anaheim. Top of the eighth, Angels lead 2-1, Ervin Santana weakens and allows two hits. Fernando Rodney comes in, retires the next three batters. Then Jordan Walden comes in at the top of the ninth and retires the side.
Under the present system, Walden would get the save, because he faced the potential tying run at the plate in the top of the ninth. Rodney would be credited with a hold. But with my recommended changes, Rodney would get the save, because he inherited the potentially tying run and shut down the Athletics without the lead changing hands. Walden would probably be credited with a hold, if we still want to use that statistic.
By raising the bar on saves, we make blown saves more meaningful as well. Of course, raising the bar on saves would mean it would be a cold day in hell before a relief pitcher would get 62 saves in a season again. Thirty saves would be the normal max. And this would make the save more directly comparable to a win for a starting pitcher; twenty wins is considered the benchmark of dominance for a starter.
And finally, one other meaningful measure of merit for relievers should not be neglected. Inherited Run Scoring Percentage (IRSP) measures the relationship between the number of baserunners a reliever inherits from his predecessor vs, the number who score. So if a reliever inherited 100 runners during a season, and allowed 20 of them to score, his IRSP would be .200. Some examples are listed HERE to provide a frame of reference. IRSP is also a way to directly compare all relief pitchers, not just the ones used in save situations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)