The SIERA Club and the Race for the Fifth Starter Spot
by danmerqury on Feb 16, 2010 7:00 AM PST
144 comments
I've sort of made it my mission here to educate AN about advanced baseball statistics, focusing on their applications to the A's and how we can directly use these advanced statistics to improve our team. In that spirit, I jumped at the chance to write an article on Baseball Prospectus's brand new pitching statistic, SIERA (Skill-Interactive Earned Run Average). In this post, I'll explain how SIERA works, and touch on the little competition we have going for the fifth starting pitcher spot.
Let me start from the beginning. SIERA is an ERA predictor, much like FIP, xFIP, and tRA. It gives an immediately familiar ERA-scaled number that attempts to divorce luck from actual pitching skills. To put it in simpler terms, ERA predictors try to give an ERA-like number that's more representative of how a pitcher actually pitched. SIERA is a member of the defense-independent family of statistics, meaning that like FIP (K, BB, HR) and tRA (K, BB, HR, GB, FB, LD), SIERA only uses events that are directly under the pitcher's control, instead of actual results like singles or lineouts. Specifically, SIERA uses strikeouts, walks, ground balls, fly balls, and pop ups. That's it.
SIERA is actually an improvement and correction over Baseball Prospectus's QERA, but since I haven't seen QERA talked about here, I'll cover some of the things that QERA introduced as well. The main reason behind creating SIERA (and QERA) is that Baseball Prospectus realized that while you can assign a run value to each event, the run values aren't linear. In other words, even in a context-independent point of view, not every strikeout or walk is the same as every other. I'll talk about each point separately.
Strikeouts Have Diminishing Returns
It turns out that if a pitcher has a high strikeout rate, each additional strikeout is worth a little bit less. Or, inversely, for a pitcher that very rarely strikes anybody out, a strikeout is worth a ton. Baseball Prospectus hypothesizes that this is because a low-strikeout pitcher will tend to have a lot of baserunners, so each strikeout has a greater chance of stranding a runner.
Ground Balls Have Increasing Returns
For many of the same reasons as above, the more ground balls a pitcher creates, the more each one is worth. Baseball Prospectus reasoned that because a high-ground ball pitcher will likely allow a fair amount of ground ball singles, every additional ground ball has a higher chance of creating a double play.
Fly Balls Are Less Dangerous With a High-Strikeout Pitcher
A high fly ball rate means a lot of home runs (also why Brad Ziegler almost never allows a homer). If a pitcher is able to get a high number of strikeouts (i.e., less baserunners), each home run will do less damage. Baseball Prospectus uses the example of Johan Santana, whose high strikeout rate means that he tends to consistently outperform his FIP, as his home runs consistently score less baserunners than the average pitcher.
Ground Balls Are Less Dangerous With a Wild Pitcher
Again, for much of the same reasons, if a pitcher tends to allow a lot of baserunners with walks, each ground ball has a higher chance of creating a double play.
So what does it all mean? SIERA tends to be similar to FIP and tRA for the most part, but for a few outliers, it performs noticeably better in predicting next year's ERA. We can use SIERA to gain a more accurate picture of a pitcher's true skills, without much of the influence of luck.
So with all of this in mind, the following table contains the SIERA of all of our pitchers (with at least 30 IP) from last season, and for comparison, FIP, xFIP, and tERA (tERA is just tRA scaled down to match all of the other metrics here).
Because SIERA considers home runs to be an unavoidable byproduct of fly balls, SIERA tends to line up pretty well with xFIP. But SIERA actually likes a lot of our relievers better than xFIP does, which likely has to do with their high strikeout rates. In particular, Craig Breslow seems to benefit most from SIERA. His high strikeout rate coupled with his heavy fly ball tendencies plays directly into SIERA's forte.
But I wanted to focus attention (and hopefully foster a nice debate) on the fifth starting pitcher spot. I think you all know where I stand. Even without looking at SIERA, Gio Gonzalez soundly beat both Trevor Cahill and Vin Mazzaro in FIP, xFIP, and tRA. SIERA loves Gonzalez even more, as a result of his high strikeout rate. It's clear that Gio's 5.75 ERA was fueled mostly by luck. His actual pitching talent should carry him into a great 2010. Who do you guys think should be the frontrunner going into Spring Training?
Odds and Ends
- When I say brand new, I mean it. SIERA came out just a week ago. It's nice to be on the very cutting edge of the field.
- It's very long and extremely technical, but I highly recommend Baseball Prospectus's introductory article on SIERA. It goes into miles and miles of detail about the specifics of the formula, and if you have the mental energy to slog through it, it's well worth the effort. Also, the full formula is on the fifth page. (Part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
- I didn't touch on this earlier, but I've got to wonder why it's taken so long--QERA and SIERA use plate appearances as their measuring sticks. FIP and tRA use innings pitched, which can easily vary from pitcher to pitcher. Case in point--Brett Anderson and Trevor Cahill both pitched essentially the same amount of innings (a difference of three) but Cahill faced almost 40 more batters.
- Did you know Michael Wuertz struck out 34% of the batters he faced? I knew it was high, but wow.
- All of the numbers I used came from Fangraphs. Because different sites have different batted ball numbers, the SIERA values I calculated will likely vary a bit when Baseball Prospectus comes out with their own SIERA values. Also, this explains why the tERA numbers I have are different than Statcorner's tRA numbers.
5 recs |
144 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Gio
Not even close.
Decided that before I looked at your fancy pants numbers. :)
Is this the real life-
Is this just fantasy-
Caught in a landslide-
No escape from reality-
rotation thoughts
Note that going strictly by SIERA, the rotation is Anderson, Sheets, Gio, Duke and (a distant fifth) Braden, with Outman replacing Braden when he returns. Injuries will change all this, but if everyone was to stay healthy, Cahill doesn’t figure. It would be interesting to compare this with other teams, unless Vazquez can repeat last year in Atlanta for the Yankees, not sure anyone has four starters that good.
Braden was our #1 last year and he is going to be replaced by Tommy John
Outman won’t start until september when Duke or Sheets in long gone.
Lance "you sunk my" Blankenship
I can't see why not?
He was only #1 because there were no other options and he was the oldest.
"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - danmerqury
Cahill
I am pretty sure I would be pissed if I was Cahill and not make the team as the 5th starter -The guy pitches an entire year in the majors to be sent to the minors – sucks for him, but I am sure he will be the 1st call up when we have our 100 + DL for the season.
Lance "you sunk my" Blankenship
Aren't flyballs more dangerous with a wild pitcher?
Gio should give up fewer hits than the average pitcher, but he makes up for that by allowing far more walks than the average pitcher. In the end, he’s likely to have more men on base per HR allowed than the average pitcher.
We should also be careful about using a single year of data—or just a partial season for many of these pitchers, as their minor league numbers from last year are ignored.
Yes, they are.
As it would follow from the inverse of the groundball/walk calculation. But I suppose SIERA liked his high strikeout rate more than it hated his high walk rate.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
I was on Team Gio, but I waited to vote until I read the article
Now I’m on board for sure. Not much left for the kid to do but sink or swim in the majors. Cahill seems like he could use some work on lobbing meatballs across the plate.
"Smokey, this be not the foul jungles of the darkest East Orient. This be ninepins. We are bound by laws."
There's one part I'm not following
If SIERA believes K’s have diminishing returns then SIERA should (it seems to me) like high K pitchers less than other metrics do, because where another metric sees 8K’s and counts “8,” SIERA is less enthused about K #8.
Yet SIERA especially likes Gio (a high K pitcher), and especially doesn’t like Braden or Duke (low K pitchers). Why?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I was trying to figure that one out too.
It seems that the strikeout diminishing effect is relatively small compared to the “fly ball/strikeout” effect.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
How do I unvote?
I started off with Cahill, but one look at those numbers and I cringed in embarrassment.
On the other hand, the point has been made (if not established) that Cahill’s numbers last year come in two sets, with the HR-susceptible mid-season spearated from his other starts. Those who support Cahill (I’ve been inclined to be one of ‘em) are supporting him based not on numbers, but on a hope that his youth exposed weaknesses that he can correct for, and put up serious numbers this year. That is, a Cahill supporter can recognize the conclusions of the SIERA/FIP/tERA without blushing, but think these misrepresent his potential for this year. (Of course, to do so, it would help to have some comparable cases to go from. Anybody out there in the past few years who’s a Cahill-like “disaster” their first year age 20, but pitches startlingly anew the next?)
On the downside of Gio: he never seemed to show any “grit.” Once he got hit or missed the plate early, that was it for the day, right? (Ha ha, please take this comment with the humor in which it is intended!)
A Ballade [for the Angels Fan], by Eustache Deschamps: "We are cowardly, ill-formed and weak / Aged, envious and evil-spoken. / I see only fools and sots / Truly the end is nigh / All goes ill."
That "point" is bunkum
Cahill’s GB rate didn’t really change over the course of last season. In fact, the only real thing that changed was his strikeout rate, which got WORSE as the season progressed. Otherwise, it was pretty much fluctuating (but overall very good) luck around a baseline of really poor pitching.
I can give you from memory the complete set of recent pitchers who pitched that badly in their first year and went on to actually be good the next year:
Mark Mulder
… that’s it. The odds are overwhelmingly against it.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Thanks, PT! Consider my unvote complete.
A Ballade [for the Angels Fan], by Eustache Deschamps: "We are cowardly, ill-formed and weak / Aged, envious and evil-spoken. / I see only fools and sots / Truly the end is nigh / All goes ill."
Depends where you look
Cahill’s GB rate didn’t really change over the course of last season.
Cahill’s GB rate per month (percent of BIP):
April: 46.3
May: 48.3
June: 47.8
July: 40.7
Aug: 49.2
Sep: 54.2
Cahill’s GB rate was higher in the last two months of the season than it had been in any other month. This is a small sample and not a huge trend, but it’s there. His average GB rate in the first 4 months was 47.8, and his average GB rate in the final 2 months was 51.7. Those don’t weight for his different number of BIP per month, but I don’t know where that data is.
But how many broke into the league at age 21 while skipping AAA?
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
And when will people accept that past data
doesn’t always accurately predict the future of a unique individual? Cahill is Cahill. We’ll see how it plays out.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Feb 16, 2010 11:19 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Course not.
statistics people are talking about what’s probable. They rarely say that something can’t happen.
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
True. I just think, in general, that we tend to focus on
“it’s 90% unlikely!!!” too much and too little on the fact that a “10% outcome” is not that rare.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Yes
And there are other factors that can make somebody as young as Cahill, with as nasty, natural a bite on his sinker, for example, all of a sudden “get it.”
I’m not saying Cahill will get it, this year or any year. I respect the #s explaining how unlikely it is.
What i’m saying though is that i think there’s a difference between a guy with that kind of nasty natural bite on his pitches and, say, a control specialist without dominant pure stuff like Cahill’s (that to this point he hasn’t controlled enough or blended well enough with his other pitches.)
Add in youthfulness (some guys come to a place in their maturation as a person later or earlier than others, which can make ALL the difference in them finding, among other things, control) and is it possible a guy like Cahill, with that natural bite on his stuff, still has a higher ceiling than many if he only grows as a person and figures out how to control it?
I’m prepared to be shot down in flames here. I suppose many of these metrics allow for what i’m getting into, or what i’m saying has proven to not really matter much.
I just think youth, stuff and psychology can sometimes blend together in unpredictable ways.
Of course much of the same could be said for Gio. I hope they both find themselves, calm that youthful spirit and learn how to pitch, like Brett.
Deswho?
by supersugarCrisp on Feb 16, 2010 12:48 PM PST up reply actions
My guess is that Cahill will be a solid starter
(maybe a #3, if not a #2), but that it will be 2011 before he hits his stride.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
In which case, he should be in AAA
if the A’s feel like contending at all.
Even somewhat of an improvement from his performance last year will absolutely kill this team if they’re coping with it every fifth day.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
That's not true if he's the #5 starter
Number 5 starters generally suck, whether your team is the Nationals or the Yankees. It’s if when Sheets, Duke go down and he’s the #3 or #4 that…
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
the difference between having a 5 ERA pitcher and a 4.5 one is only 1 win over the course of a season.
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
Is that because the A's are only projected
to score 4.7 runs in one game this season?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Yes?
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
This is true, but the difference is more like a full run
according to the above.
A 1.5-2 win difference out of the fifth starter spot is a pretty &*^%ing large difference.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Cahill is ahead
Experience is the missing factor in these numbers. Cahill has basically had a full year to figure it out. You need to figure out how to get major league hitters out. Cahill is ahead of the group because of last years experience.
Thomas Walker
by Thomas Walker on Feb 16, 2010 2:11 PM PST up reply actions
Actually it is rare Nico... by definition it only happens 10% of the time.
I don’t know about you but im sure not betting the house on 10%
"Since other people actually read these threads, though, probably best that your particular brand of wrongness not go completely unchallenged." - PT
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Feb 16, 2010 10:01 PM PST up reply actions
Don't bet the house.
Also don’t be shocked when it happens.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I'm still not seeing your point
If Cahill has a 10% chance of being good, then he’s a pretty lame prospect and shouldn’t be playing baseball for the A’s.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Personally, I think Cahill has a better than 50% chance of being good
even if he profiles, based on his 2009 season, as having a 10% chance because the closest comps to his situation failed. In other words, I think he’s one of those “apparently 10%” odds that is actually more like a 60% odds.
What you’re overlooking is that the sample size for “Cahills” is 1. There has never before, in the history of baseball, been a pitcher who skipped AAA, relied on a power sinker, got Olympic experience, pitched a full season in the bigs at 21 with poor results, worked with Curt Young and Ron Romanick…
I won’t be surprised if Cahill is the exception that proves the rule, regardless of how unready he was for the challenge of big league hitters in 2009.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
LHHs hit .286/.361/.558 against him last year
his power sinker does not work against them. He needs a new pitch or a whole new plan, not marginal improvements, to deal with that problem.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
I thought his changeup improved during the season
But he’s still 2 steps away, IMO: fastball command and a better slider (which I think started to happen in Sept). Which is a lot, and why I agree he’s better suited to AAA right now.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
ODDIBE (ZIPS) has an interesting top comp for Cahill
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/guzmajo01.shtml
Rookie seasons match nearly perfectly. Note the trajectory after.
by AgitationStation on Feb 17, 2010 4:28 PM PST up reply actions
Interesting
They have both Sheets and Anderson allowing more than a hit/inning, which seems unlikely to me. I like the Andrew Bailey comp to Rich Gossage; the Braden/Halama one not so much.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
technically true
Because you used the phrase “that badly”. If you change it to “badly” then it’s a much different story. Most pitchers have relatively poor rookie seasons, even all-stars. And the good ones tend to get better rapidly. But it’s hard to find a sample of players with Cahill’s talent who pitched “that badly” in his debut, presumably because he was rushed so much, so we don’t know exactly what we’re dealing with here. ZIPS likes Cahill a little better than Gio. Chone likes Gio a little better than Cahill. Very few pitchers have success with walk rates like Gio has shown almost his entire minor league career. No pitchers have success with k rates like Cahill had last year. I would posit that Cahill is more likely to improve the K rate than Gio, older and more upper minors time, is to improve the BB%, but that’s really beside the point. Neither one is likely to be good this year. Also, the A’s don’t appear to be going for broke despite the Sheets signing, since I haven’t seen Russell Branyon’s name tied to them even one time. Whatever Barton may be, Branyon would be a big cheap upgrade right now. Therefore, it doesn’t really matter. The A’s should pick whoever they think will develop more by being in the rotation, and who they think will handle demotion better psychologically (and Gio has already said he’s fine in the pen).
by AgitationStation on Feb 16, 2010 3:41 PM PST up reply actions
Both of them are 100% worthless to the Oakland Athletics as bullpen pitchers
so their respective comfort levels, or lack thereof, in the bullpen should not play any factor in this consideration.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
hyperbole
Silly. Either pitcher could handle Jerry Blevins’ duties just fine, and it’s debatable whether starting at Sacto or relieving in the bigs is the better spot to develop these guys. Gio for example wasn’t growing at Sacto, and he and the team both believe his problems are largely concentration issues. Focused innings out of the pen might be the way to sharpen his mind. Not like it’s a revolutionary idea, even if it’s out of practice these days.
Cahill…the A’s have stuck themselves in the corner by rushing him. Teams generally don’t jerk young players around. You may think psychological implications don’t matter, but 30 teams don’t operate that way, and I assume it’s for a reason. The discussion is basically moot anyway, because if Cahill isn’t disastrous in Spring, we all know he’s getting the 5th spot anyway. Components aside, he held his own for an entire season. I’m sure the A’s value that. Would I like to see him in AAA? Yes, ruthlessly, for service time. Is he likely to develop any more in AAA than in the bigs? Not significantly, the crossover of hitting talent between AAA and MLB is huge. The hitters at AAA are really quite good. It’s not a developmental league (as James pointed out 30 years ago). If he can’t throw his secondary stuff at the MLB level, he can’t throw it at AAA either. Maybe he should go to Midland.
At least one of Duke, Braden, or Sheets will be hurt by June anyway, and Gio and Cahill will both be in the rotation.
by AgitationStation on Feb 16, 2010 10:04 PM PST up reply actions
Jerry Blevins is better at his "duties" than they are
So are Craig Breslow and Brad Kilby, one of which group is in all likelihood not even going to make the roster.
As for “jerking young players around,” plenty of teams “operate that way.” Homer Bailey was sent to the minors for sucking. Cliff Lee was sent to the minors for sucking. Roy motherfucking Halladay was sent to the minors for sucking. Newsflash: when you suck, it’s not jerking you around to send you to the minors.
I agree that the A’s are likely to keep Cahill in their rotation, but I was under the impression that the point of this thread was to discuss what they ought to do, not try to divine the future.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Not the same
Those guys didn’t get sent down until they get tuned up. If Cahill has a 10.64 ERA (or a 7.93 or 6.60) come June, obviously he’ll be sent down also. It’d be quite a different situation than sending down a kid who held his own for 32 starts after skipping the high minors almost entirely.
The last reliever in the bullpen has little value to the team. You know this better than anybody. And the difference between Jerry Blevins and Gio Gonzalez or Trevor Cahill, for one thing, probably wouldn’t be great if anything at all, and for another, the impact would likely be negligible to the season. The experience for either of those two would likely be the real value.
by AgitationStation on Feb 16, 2010 11:37 PM PST up reply actions
absent the luck Cahill had
at the end of the year, he will have a bad ERA.
"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - danmerqury
He didn't hold his own
He was completely horrible. One of the two or three worst pitchers to pitch a full season last year in all of baseball.
The last reliever in the bullpen has little value to the team.
Gosh, this sounds a lot like this:
Both of them are 100% worthless to the Oakland Athletics as bullpen pitchers
As for “experience,” there’s no real reason to believe that pitching in MLB garbage time is either more or less useful than regular starts in AAA. There IS good reason to believe that pitching in MLB garbage time burns more service time than regular starts in AAA.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Small population
When looking for starting pitchers who pitched poorly in their rookie year and well in their sophomore year, if you limit yourselves to those who played something close to a full year in the rookie season, then you rule out most pitchers, because typically a rookie isn’t kept in the rotation for the full year, and especially not if he isn’t pitching well. Mark Mulder being the only one is largely a function of this small population. When considering his uniqueness as evidence that “the odds are overwhelmingly against it”, you can’t count him against the universe of all pitchers, but only against other pitchers who pitched poorly for a full rookie year and then pitched poorly again in their second year. There aren’t a huge number of those either.
If you expand your universe a bit and allow for pitchers who were only in a major-league rotation for part of their rookie year, you find several more who went from bad to good. Jair Jurrjens had 5.26 FIP in 7 starts in his first year (2007), then followed up with 3.59 FIP the next. Joel Pineiro had 6.13 FIP in 8 starts in his first year (2000), then followed up with 2.86 FIP the next. (By comparison, Mulder went from 5.27 to 3.35, and Cahill will go from 5.33 to ?.??.)
(Numbers from FanGraphs. I use FIP because xFIP doesn’t go back far enough for Mulder or Pineiro.)
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
The sample size is large enough for there to be an extremely strong trend in favor of the pitcher being bad
There was a post about this at minorleagueball a few months ago. I don’t remember the exact number of comps, but it was, eh, 25 or so?
7 or 8 starts is such a tiny sample that any pitcher could have a poor FIP in that stretch. The guys you’re picking out are (probably) pitchers who just picked an awkward time to have a run of poor pitching; that is to say, they were never “that bad”, such that they had to improve on it, at all. Their “improvement” was simply a matter of regression to the mean.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
I'm going to have to correct both of you here re: Pineiro
iglew: He pitched 8 games in 2000, but only one of those was a start (total innings pitched for the Mariners for 2000: a mere 19.1). And in 2001, the sample was still not a full season, as his IP for that year numbered 75 1/3. So I definitely wouldn’t cite him as a Mulder-esque example.
PT: This statement of yours is what prompted me to look up Pineiro’s stats in the first place:
The guys you’re picking out are (probably) pitchers who just picked an awkward time to have a run of poor pitching; that is to say, they were never "that bad", such that they had to improve on it, at all. Their "improvement" was simply a matter of regression to the mean.
The Joel Pineiro of my memory was, until last year, almost always “that bad”, so I had to hit baseball-reference for confirmation. While he had a couple good seasons early on for the Mariners, he also posted ERAs of 4.67, 5.62, and 6.36 in his last 3 seasons with the M’s, throwing at least 140 innings in all of these. So his bad 19 innings in 2000, although largely meaningless, can’t really be simply dismissed as an “awkward time to have a run of poor pitching”.
So there is/was no winner in this debate.
by Cutthemullet on Feb 20, 2010 1:49 AM PST up reply actions
and should either of you my response, 3+ days after the fact
any retort you might make should center around my excessive usage of the word “so” in this here post
by Cutthemullet on Feb 20, 2010 2:00 AM PST up reply actions
Pineiro was excellent his first 2 seasons, then got injured.
He had a pretty devastating slider his first 2 seasons, then pitched hurt and was eminently hittable.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
answer is somewhere in the middle
I believe in looking at numbers and appreciate new ways to evaluate the numbers. At the same time you have to take into consideration what you see with your eyes when you watch these guys too. I was able to attend two of Cahill’s games against the Angels and saw the pitcher that he could be in those starts.
Numbers can not be ignored, but you still have to evaluate with what you see on the baseball field as well. I also think numbers should be considered less for younger players who are still at an early stage of their development. Based on what I have seen, I am routing for Cahill to win the job.
I can’t wait till spring training when the competition for the 5th spot will be played out and hope to see development from all of our young pitchers. I just hope we will have the run support to give our young arms a chance at some Ws… the most important stat of them all.
SIERA
the new Prius (hybrid) of pitching stats….
"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."
"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff
At least it is...
“braking” the status quo….
"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."
"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff
by ST on Feb 16, 2010 9:45 AM PST up reply actions
PETCOA has been recalled several times this offseason
"Since other people actually read these threads, though, probably best that your particular brand of wrongness not go completely unchallenged." - PT
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Feb 16, 2010 10:00 PM PST up reply actions
I assume you mean PECOTA
and are not making some reference to a projection system involving smug-looking-cat pictures.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Gio.
Just to save some service time on Cahill.
"Carter's 25-game hitting streak isn't any normal streak. He's 46 for 97 (.474 average) during the run, adding 16 walks and compiling 81 total bases in the process. I'm out of superlatives for what he's doing." - Kevin Goldstein
Also he's likely to be way better in 2010 than Cahill
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
this reason
is so much less arcane and nerdy than service-time manipulation, though. Since when do we put together a roster based on who is “good at baseball”?
by el generico on Feb 16, 2010 10:24 AM PST up reply actions
I'm not a big Gio booster, by any means.
However, he at least had flashes of brilliance in 2009 instead of being sub-average and lucky like Cahill, or sub-average with occasional competence and then injured like Mazzaro. If he can keep the ball in the strike zone and keep his head together he should make a fine #5.
by Rancho Canseco on Feb 16, 2010 10:07 AM PST reply actions
"If he can keep the ball in the strike zone and keep his head together he should make a fine #5."
Now there’s a ringing endorsement.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Feb 16, 2010 10:08 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
lol
(I still prefer typing that to making the rec)
by Cutthemullet on Feb 20, 2010 2:02 AM PST up reply actions
Gio's his own worst enemy
If he can settle down, he could be amazing. Time to bring in Harvey Dorfman.
Thanks for the education, danmerqury!
Wish they had chosen a more baseball friendly name
since the Sierra Club is on record as hating baseball.
it just makes me think of Ruben Sierra
I thought that was part of the joke, naming a pitching stat after him.
The only interaction
that I can find between the Sierra Club and MLB is an objection to the Rays wanting to sell naming rights of their county-owned spring training facility to a company which engages in strip-mining, which seems more like an example of hating strip-mining than baseball.
I’m sure somewhere they’ve opposed building a field somewhere, but again I’d argue that’s the Sierra Club opposing development of wild areas rather than any particular dislike for baseball itself.
In Albany, they opposed little league fields period.
Also tried to get the existing fields removed in order to widen a creek by 10 ft.
I think that this supports Nate's point
I think their position is more accurately described as “pro-wliderness” as opposed to “anti-baseball”. I bet they would have felt the same way about a soccer field, or a bunch of tennis courts, or anything that was not the natural setting.
This reminds me to request something with the stat glossary
Thanks, dm, it’s really helpful to see a range of numbers with a newer stat. I wish that all the stat posts allowed us to see what’s a great number and what’s a bad number. Telling us how WAR is calculated is helpful, but showing examples of Pujols’ and Randy Winn’s WAR is even better.
I didn't give examples of individual players
but I was sure to give a range of what’s considered very poor, average, and All-Star level.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
Looking at the formula
I see (GB-FB-PU)/PA) throughout it….what’s PU?
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
Pop ups. They're lumped in with fly balls here.
(GB-FB-PU)/PA gives a number that shows the batted ball tendencies of a pitcher. Zero is perfectly neutral, positive is ground ball heavy, and negative is fly ball heavy. Ziegler, for example, got a huge 0.30, whereas Russ Springer was the opposite with a -0.32.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
Cool thanks!
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
I'd favor Gio at this point
but I wouldn’t call his 5.35 ERA “unlucky.” it’s what happens when you have a few spectacularly poor outings, and since I watched those games, wouldn’t call them “unlucky” in the slightest.
Gio’s shown a tendency his entire big league career to suddenly and fantastically fall apart in specific outings. Until and unless he fixes that deficiency, his ERA is never going to be as good as his peripherals.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
I agree.
Gio looks “unlucky” because his bad things always come in threes, and fours, and fives sixes sevens, etc. But in reality, I don’t think thats bad luck – you can even see on his face that he’s mentally defeated. On the other side, when Gio is going well, you know there is a pretty good chance it will continue.
These stats always do underestimate guys with great grit and ability to pitch through tough spots, and overestimate guys who are total flakes (Manny Parra probably looks great here, too). I still think advanced pitching stats are better than going by ERA, but I will never trust anything more than my own eyes…at least with guys that my eyes have time to see.
by SeanR on Feb 16, 2010 2:34 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd for awesome pointness
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Yeah, but we WON that game!
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
That's cuz Gio is a WINNER.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
July 20.
Gio’s regular ERA in that game was 37.13!
Also Matt Holliday was 4/5 with two doubles and two homers. I had forgotten that part.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
But did Holliday smile?
game set match. he sucked as an A.
"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - danmerqury
This is exactly what people said about Dallas Braden a year ago
Remarkably enough, he then stopped being unlucky and having 36% of his baserunners score, and suddenly he’s like AN’s favorite dude.
It’s really funny how people never learn.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Notice Braden's SIERA? 4.88.
xFIP tells the same story. He had a sub-5 HR/FB. That’s not gonna hold.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
All true. He wasn't as bad as he seemed in 08
and he’s not as good as he seemed in 09. That doesn’t preclude that he improved from 08 to 09 — just not as much as the extreme stats (in each direction) suggested. And given that he developed an additional pitch, the cutter, it’s not even shocking that he improved. Which he did. Just not as dramatically as the crude stats would suggest.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Oh, definitely. I'm not saying he didn't improve at all.
But I’ve heard things like “he’s our #2” and stuff. Braden’s more like a #4. Still useful, and still a lock for a SP spot.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
I'd agree with that.
I’d probably bump him (assuming good health) to #3 just because he reliably pitches 6+ innings, and because #3s are usually pretty inconsistent or flawed. If he’s your #2 you have problems; and if he’s your #4 you’re doing just fine.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I still don't get Paul's comment.
Nobody’s ever said anything about Braden being defeated and mentally weak. Plenty’s been said about him having mediocre stuff.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
I'd call a .369 BABIP unlucky
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
I'd call constantly pitching behind in the count unskillful
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
So would I
But I’m talking about things pitchers have little control over.
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
Are there stats on BABIP following certain counts?
I know there are for BA and BAA.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Hmm there's some limited stuff on Fangraphs with their new splits(about time), But it's rather interesting
His walk rate is much higher along with his BABIP in low leverage situations. With none on he has a K/9 of 9.19 to go along with his BB/9 of 5.63(4.53 xFIP). Men on his K/9 is 10.66 with a BB/9 of 4.62(3.53 xFIP). His BABIP is a little lower with men on, but both are sky high. He’s actually a better pitcher with men on base.
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
What stands out to me is the .479 vs. lefties
Partly SSS I’m sure, but also suggests that he simply hasn’t learned how to pitch inside to lefties and keeps centering pitches to them if he doesn’t strike them out — which is totally consistent with what my eyes saw (Morneau, Kubel, Morneau again!).
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
That's probably a good sign, since it should be something that would easily be improved.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
That's my hope
His curve is already perfectly devastating; lots of K’s. He just needs to locate his fastball better.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Compare a bad pitcher's career numbers to a good one. Heck, do it with multiple pitchers.
You will find that there is relatively no difference in BABIP. Good pitchers don’t necessarily have good BABIP, and bad pitchers don’t necessarily have good BABIP. This should lead one to believe that pitchers have very little control over their BABIP. Now if you sort through a list of the leagues pitchers, and sort it by BB/9 and K/9, you’re pretty much going to find a list of the elite pitchers down to the shit ones. a .479 BABIP to me just means awful fucking terrible luck.
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
What I'd be interested in seeing is
whether a “post 2-1 count” BABIP differs from a post “1-2 count” and so on, where you might be able to correlate a terrible stretch with an inability to pitch from an advantageous position.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I'm not aware of any correlation between low walk rates and low BABIP
Barry Zito, one of the few pitchers about whom we can reliably say that he actually has some kind of BABIP-limiting skill, is a walk machine.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
It shouldn't
Any handedness split on BABIP, of all things, is so bizarrely under-sample-sized that it tells you less than nothing.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
"He’s actually a better pitcher with men on base"?...
He’s certainly had plenty of practice!
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
It's not all that big of a difference
.286 on 0-2 vs. .319 on 3-0 for the AL as a whole last year. There’s a big difference in terms of power, especially HRs. Iso slg is much higher in hitters counts than pitcher’s counts.
In any event, I would say that “getting behind in the count too much” explains the bad results much more than “unlucky babip” although there is an element of that. He had slightly more 2-1 counts than 1-2 counts, whereas the league as a whole has significantly more 1-2 counts.
Gio’s 09 ratio 2-1/1-2: 1.05
League ratio: .795
The slg% difference for those counts has probably been as much of a problem if not more than all the BBs. I think he improved on that as the season went on though, but that might be wrong.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
That makes sense; thanks.
I have to say that watching him, I was not prone to say, “Man, bleeder through the left side…aw, bloop to LF” so much as, “Aw crap, another titanic HR on a 3-ball pitch.”
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
This is GREAT stuff...
I love that it just came out, and I think you explained it beautifully. I have always leaned towards Gio as winning the fifth spot, but like jeepers said above me:
…I wouldn’t call his 5.35 ERA "unlucky." it’s what happens when you have a few spectacularly poor outings, and since I watched those games, wouldn’t call them "unlucky" in the slightest.
Gio’s shown a tendency his entire big league career to suddenly and fantastically fall apart in specific outings. Until and unless he fixes that deficiency, his ERA is never going to be as good as his peripherals.
That’s worth repeating and remembering.
"Bobby Crosby at third is a bit of an adventure. And not like, here’s some hidden treasure, what fun. More like, gah! poison ants!" --alea iacta est
QEra SiERA SiERA...whatever will be will be...
While I like the nastiness of Gio’s curve and slider it remains to be seen if he will revert to trying to paint strikes and walk a ton of batters or sling away, which is when we saw his improvement.
Both pitcher’s strength is their enemy in that they have sometimes too much movement. I have to agree with thomas walker that Cahill is ahead based upon Major League Experience but I have no doubt that by year’s end they will both be in the rotation if injuries prevail.
"I've been accused of using too many words...I suppose that's like accusing Mozart of using too many notes." Bill King
Nevada?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Their brewery is like a mile away from me
I can smell the hops brewing when I’m out running in the morning. Mmmmm.
@worldblee on Twitter.
Giving the 5th spot to G. Gonzalez for the first part of the season really is a win-win for the A's.
By almost all projections, he figures to be better than Cahill next season, so that’s great. Assuming health for the other four starters, it also allows the A’s to fix part of the glaring mistake that was allowing Cahill and Anderson to start last year instead of calling them up in the middle of the season and saving a year of service time.
Even if Gonzalez fails to pitch well in ST and “win” the fifth spot, I’d give it to Mazzaro before I would Cahill. Cahill needs time in the minors, plain and simple.
If you think Billy Beane is a bad GM, I hate you and find you stupid.
I'm sure someone already said this
but Gio would be a great lefty to come out of the Pen and we could have Mizzaro or Cahill be the 5th starter. I don’t think Cahill needs time in the minors, the A’s aren’t hard pressed to win anything this season. If they do win it would be a surprise, and a welcomed one. No use stunting the growth and maturity of any of our starters. Unless Cahill regresses a ton there is no reason to put him in AAA. With Gio’s experience in the pen, and the A’s lack of lefties, he is a great fit to come in the later innings, and could double as a long reliever or a spot starter in case the Duke or Sheets gets hurt. (which they will)
Paul Konerko - 1B Perhaps the Dodgers best draft pick since the 70's, they had to go and fuck it up by trading Konerko for Jeff Shaw
The A's lack of lefties?
You mean after Breslow, Blevins, and Kilby? (One of whom probably won’t even make the team due to roster crunch)
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Putting good young SP in the bullpen is a good way to ruin a franchise
Rotation or AAA is the way to go. Maximizes value all the way around.
Gio?
Are you kidding me! Have any of you people actually watched him pitch? I was at a game last year when almost EVERY pitch was hit hard. Foul balls, outs, nearly EVERY pitch. The guy cannot pitch in the majors. How long must the team suffer?
by fansince1980 on Feb 16, 2010 4:10 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
I was at a game where Cahill got rocked too
So he can’t pitch in the majors. How long should we suffer?
"Chicks dig the long ball, although fat chicks will settle for warning track power" - Nick Diamond
And yet he pitched better than Mazzaro and Cahill by all advanced statistical measurements.
Maybe they all suck and we are doomed!
He didn't, though.
He pitched better, and worse.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
True... when he sucked, he really sucked
And when he was on, he was fantastic. Which is what I want out of my 5th starter. He is either going to win you the game or likely lose you the game. Most 5th starters muddle along and lose more than they win and often times they run into the other team’s #1.
Gio can compete with that #1 sometimes and the rest of the time we will lose which we would likely have done anyways.
I think, for this reason, Gio’s W-L record will always be better than his stats would predict… that is unless he puts it all together and just pitches good all the time.
Good discussion
I think looking at last year’s SIERA numbers is interesting, but I’m far more interested in how our pitchers look in ST: velocity, how they react to bad situations, how they’re attacking the strikezone, etc. Don’t care if the 5th starter is left- or right-handed, if starting him saves service time or not, or if he talks to the spirit of Don Knotts while on the mound. As long as he keeps the score down without throwing a ton of pitches, I’m down. Heck, with our bullpen, I’ll even give him a pass if he throws a lot of pitches and never makes it past the fifth inning.
@worldblee on Twitter.
YOU LEAVE POOR MR. FURLEY OUT OF THIS!!!
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Fife > Furley
But baseball! Fuck yeah! -- lynnzgal
by WaddellCanseco on Feb 16, 2010 4:44 PM PST up reply actions
Mr. Furley could kick Barney Fife's ass!
but Don Knotts would f**k both of them up at the same time with Judo and Witchcraft and stuff…
"The rich people want what the poor peoples got, and the poor people want what the rich peoples got. You can never please anybody in this world"- The Shaggs, "Philosophy Of The World," 1968
by Gaijin_Suketto on Feb 16, 2010 4:51 PM PST up reply actions
Sierra 117
Takes time away from smashing Covenant fools to approve this new stat category.
As a physicist I'm very skeptical
Can you apply your approach to some historical data and use it to show how SIERA is better or worse than ERA or anything else in predicting the outcome of future games? Without predictive power there is nothing to say that one system is any better or worse than the next.
You can use past data to predict the following year.
For example calculate the SIERA of someone in 2005, check how well his numbers look compared to the SIERA in 2006. We have so much data to test it, and it has been tested, that’s why it’s released.
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
BProspectus did that already.
It’s on one of the pages of their introductory article.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
Somehow I posted this wrongly
But in any case, what is the result?
Found the article
But the standard error of the mean for each metric isn’t listed and I don’t see a post-hoc analysis on the metrics. And the comparison metric could use a little more explanation.
What was the result?
Was SIERA significantly better than ERA based upon simple ANOVA?
wow. it's this week's proof of how balls-deep awesome Michael Wuertz was last year
he struck out 34% of his hitters? That is astoundingly astonishing and about as effective as a reliever who often enters the game with guys on base can be, whoa.
Dan these are so great, you make it so even I can comprehend the stat stuff, which is like perfecting a way to teach algebra to the cat, believe me. As for 5th starter, we are at least blessed with a rotation’s worth of options there, especially when Josh “Stirrups” Outman returns from having his arm reassembled in the secret lab the A’s have for that sort of thing.
If he’s there I vote for him, although I guess you’ll all go “But he must build back arm strength before starting again!” and I guess you’re right there, although others might say starters are starters and they should start, even if they just go 3 at first, etc., so it’s a wash.
When the season starts he won’t be there, so I’d have to go with whoever looks best out of camp (hint: I hope it’s Mazzaro cuz Cahill & Gio look like they need the most work to me, but heck Vin is kinda meh too and he’s probably still recovering a bit from injury so I just dunno…. it’s whoever’s stylin’ outta spring training IMO, go with the hot hand but be prepared to shuffle the deck if the 1st choice comes north and promptly stiffs.
Hey, I just bought the team from Lew Wolff... who wants to play third?
by emperor nobody on Feb 16, 2010 11:15 PM PST reply actions
Geo + 1 more
With Duke, Sheets and Dallas all on the mend, surely one will not make it through Spring Training so it will be 2 additional starters needed: Geo + Cahill by the looks of your poll.
I dunno about that, I mean they're injury prone, but they're not exactly Rich Harden or Eric Chavez lol
And don’t call me Shirley.
"The A's get some action but they do not score..." -Glen Kuiper
"Anyone who calls themselves the Angels Angels should have to start over and ride the short bus." -timmeh from McCovey Chronicles
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Athletics Nation
Related FanShots on Athletics Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Swisher ends Orioles sweep dreams with timely homer
- Create-a-Caption: Dusty Baker wants YOU to buy playoff tickets
- Padres' Heath Bell wistful about Trevor Hoffman's 600th save
- Want your first career home run? Face a pitcher from Chicago
- Slumpbot .200: Phil Hughes runs into New York's Joba Rules
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
