Shutdowns and Meltdowns
Over at fangraphs, they recently proposed a fun statistic for keeping track of relief pitcher performances: shutdowns and meltdowns (actually, the idea was first proposed by tangotiger on The Book blog, but I'm going with the fangraphs version of the stat). We saw the full range of reliever performances last night, so I figured it would be a good opportunity to try it out.
The basic idea is to come up with something that serves the same purpose as saves and holds, but isn't so stupid. I don't think it is controversial, even among statistical traditionalists, to point out that a closer who comes in for the ninth inning with a three run lead and manages to convert the save isn't all that impressive. Or that the tensest moment in a game might come in the seventh inning, with a one run lead, the bases loaded, and one out. In that situation, a strikeout or double play ground ball can swing the entire game.
The shutdowns/meltdowns stat uses Win Probability Added (WPA) to quantify each relief pitcher's effect on the game. Win Probability is exactly what it sounds like -- just use the historical record of baseball games to calculate the probability of a team to win the game, given the base/out state. For example, at the start of the 4th inning yesterday, with zero outs and the Rangers up 1-0, the A's Win Probability was 38.3%. Then, Cliff Pennington grounded out to the pitcher and that probability fell to 35.4%, as precious opportunities slipped away. It's important to note that not all plate appearances are treated equally by Win Probability. The out that Pennington made to start the 4th reduced Oakland's chances by 2.9% but Ryan Sweeney's strickout to end the inning was only cost 1.4%. This leads us to Leverage Index (LI). The LI for a plate appearance is a measure of how important that PA is, relative to an average situation. Pennington's out hurt more because the Leverage Index is higher at the start of an inning than later on in the inning (because it is easier to start a rally if there are few outs). Of course, the real fun with Leverage Index comes in the late innings of close games, where the game result hinges on individual at-bats.
More discussion of WPA can be found here or here. In the AN stats primer, danmerqury describes it as:
A statistic that sums up a player's contributions to winning a single game. For example, before a batter's plate appearance, the chances of his team winning the game are calculated, and subtracted from the chances of winning after the batter's plate appearance. This change can be added up for one game or a whole season.
(Actually, I feel like I'm sort of invading danmerqury's territory with this whole fANpost).
Ok, after all that introduction, let's get to the fun part. A shutdown is defined as any relief appearance where the pitcher contributes positive Win Probability of at least 6%. A meltdown is defined as whenever the relief pitcher contributes Win Probability less than -6%. Six percent doesn't sound like a whole lot, but it was chosen so that the total number of shutdowns in the league over the past few years would more or less match the total number of saves plus holds.
Ok, now let's get to last night's game. I'll just go through the relief pitchers one-by-one to identify the best and worst performances.
- Jerry Blevins -- Blevins was brought in with two outs and nobody on in the sixth inning and the score tied 2-2. He got David Murphy to fly out, ending the inning and tallying 1.8% of Win Probability. Blevins remained in the game to start the seventh inning. At this point, the A's had a 3-2 lead thanks to a Patterson triple(!!). With a small lead in the late innings, Blevins Leverage Index was up to 1.91, so the situation is almost twice as important as an average one. Blevins did not help the situation by walking Smoak to lead off the inning. However, the Rangers sacrifice bunted (this play improved the A's Win Probability by 3.7% -- most sac bunts are counter productive!) and then hit into a fielder's choice, with Smoak out at third. At this point, Blevins was lifted so that Ziegler could face Andrus. Jerry's final line was 1.0 IP without allowing a run, but leaving a baserunner on first with two outs. In a close game, that makes for a total Win Probability contribution of 7.8% = SHUTDOWN (but a borderline one)
- Brad Ziegler -- Ziggy came in to face Andrus, but the seventh inning ended abruptly when Borbon was caught stealing. Win Probability doesn't assign contributions to defenders, so Brad gets the credit for that one. Things didn't go so smoothly in the eighth inning, though, as Ziegler hit Michael Young with a pitch and then gave up a home run to Josh Hamilton. Hamilton's HR swung the Win Probability by 51.6%, as Oakland went from a 1 run lead to a 1 run deficit. Ziggy was pulled after giving up a double to Kinsler, leaving the game with a blown save and Win Probability contribution of -47.2% = MELTDOWN
- Darren Oliver -- Meanwhile, on the Rangers side, Darren Oliver pitched a perfect top of the 8th but then ran into trouble in the 9th. With a 1 run Texas lead, Chavez led off the inning by reaching on an error from Andrus (but Win Probability assigns the blame to the pitcher) and then Rosales singled, advancing Chavez to 3rd but was thrown out trying to get to second. Oliver was pulled with 1 out in the ninth, runner on third, and his team hanging on to a 1 run lead (this adds up to an edge of your seat Leverage Index of 4.42). His Win Probability Added was -9.2% = MELTDOWN
- Neftali Feliz -- Feliz came in for Oliver and promptly hit a batter (Fox), then gave up three singles in a row. Over the span of four batters, the Rangers 1 run lead turned into a 1 run deficit. Feliz finished the inning, but his WPA was a ugly -45.5% = MELTDOWN
- Craig Breslow -- Breslow only faced one batter, getting David Murphy to fly out to end the eighth. There was a runner on second at the time, but this still only changed the Win Probability by 2.5%, so Breslow doesn't earn a shutdown.
- Andrew Bailey -- Bailey was brought in for the classic closer situation -- bottom of the ninth with a one run lead. And he blew it, walking Smoak to start the inning and eventually allowing him to score on an Andrus single. It could have been worse -- the Rangers could have gotten a walk-off win -- but Bailey's WPA of -28.1% was clearly a MELTDOWN
- Frank Francisco, Michael Wuertz -- The score remained tied at 5-5, as neither team scored in the 10th inning. Francisco allowed a couple of baserunners, but got out of the jam. These pitching situations with little margin of error are what shutdowns/meltdowns were created for, and both pitchers succeeded to the tune of +14.9% Win Probability = SHUTDOWN
- Chris Ray -- This is what happens in extra inning games: all of your good relief pitchers have already been used, so you throw Chris Ray and his 6.51 xFIP into a high leverage situation and he gives up a HR to Daric "I made 5 outs but still had a WPA of .584" Barton. Ray's WPA was -28.1% = MELTDOWN
- Tyson Ross -- Ross came in for the bottom of the 11th with a one run lead and gave it up on an RBI single from Julio Borbon, resulting in yet another blown save for Oakland. The A's had a 78.1% Win Probability at the start of the inning, but that fell to 50% by the end. This would have been a big old meltdown for Ross, but Geren was running out of relief pitchers, so Tyson stayed in for the 12th and 13th innings. He didn't allow any further runs to score, and Daric Barton came through with the game winning RBI. So the finally WPA tally for Ross was +8.7% = SHUTDOWN
- Darren O'Day -- Scoreless top of the 12th, +14.9% WPA = SHUTDOWN
- Dustin Nippert -- Gave up the winning run in the top of the 13th, -28.1% WPA = MELTDOWN
So there you have it -- one game, five shutdowns and six meltdowns, and the A's are tied for first! Just to wrap this up, let's take a look at the shutdowns and meltdowns for the Oakland bullpen so far this season (all stats available at fangraphs). The WPA column gives the total Win Probability contributed by each pitcher over all of their appearances. The gmLI column is the average Leverage Index for when the pitcher is brought into a game (i.e. the A's are in a sticky situation, so Geren turns to Michael Wuertz).
| Name | Games | WPA | gmLI | Shutdowns | Meltdowns |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tyson Ross | 11 | 0.48 | 1.13 | 4 | 2 |
| Jerry Blevins | 14 | 0.26 | 1.00 | 3 | 1 |
| Michael Wuertz | 3 | 0.17 | 2.08 | 1 | 0 |
| Andrew Bailey | 13 | 0.17 | 1.47 | 6 | 2 |
| Edwar Ramirez | 6 | 0.11 | 0.62 | 1 | 1 |
| Brad Kilby | 5 | 0.00 | 0.06 | 0 | 0 |
| Chad Gaudin | 10 | -0.15 | 0.90 | 2 | 2 |
| Craig Breslow | 14 | -0.45 | 1.03 | 1 | 4 |
52 comments
|
10 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hey colin (or someone else)
Can you explain the difference between gmLI and LI? Is LI for batters and gmLI for pitchers? Qualitatively, is gmLI then the relative “difficulty” of the situation a pitcher is placed in?
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
Athletics Nation - WE'RE ALL GONNA MRIIIIIIIIIIIII!!!!! - danmerqury
gmLI
Only counts whatever the Leverage Index is when the pitcher is brought into a game. So if you bring in Gaudin for a low leverage situation (A’s up by 4) but then he gives up a bunch of runs and it becomes a close game, then the gmLI for that appearance would still be low, while the average LI for all batters faced might be a lot higher.
For pitchers, fangraphs keeps track of their LI averaged over all batters faced (pLI), the average LI when they enter the game (gmLI), the average LI at the start of each inning that the pitcher starts (inLI), and the average LI when the pitcher leaves the game (exLI).
I used gmLI for the table because I think it gives the best idea of Geren’s bullpen management. Wuertz has only made three appearances, but you can already see that he gets put in for the tough situations (as it should be). Meanwhile, Kilby’s 5 appearances all came in extremely low leverage situations.
......and all along I was thinking that gmLI was a dwarf
by Lafayette Scotsman on May 12, 2010 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions
This made me laugh way more than it should have.
The selfish, they're all standing in line, faithing and hoping to buy themselves time.
Me, I figure as each breath goes by, I only own my mind.
I was scoffing at you effing geeks.
….til I got it.
sock puppets have never successfully defended castles, except when working with squirrels, which would never happen because squirrels know better than to trust sock puppets. -nm
by Leopold Bloom on May 12, 2010 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions
This is a good idea in general, but the one weakness WRT relievers
is that, as far as I know, leverage is based entirely on generic, situational considerations, and not on actual matchups.
That is, a pitcher’s WPA will be the same whether he K’s Albert Pujols with a 3-run lead and the bases loaded with 2 outs in the 8th, or he K’s Rajai Davis in that situation. And that’s significant because whatever the average likelihood of a win is for the pitcher’s team in that situation, based on runners on and score and outs, in reality your likelihood of winning that game facing Raj is way, way higher than your likelihood of winning facing Pujols. So the “contribution to win” of K’ing Pujols is immensely greater than the contribution of K’ing Raj.
Now, obviously, saves don’t measure this difference, either. But one virtue of saves is that they don’t pretend to measure it. It’s an openly stupid stat. WPA claims to measure a player’s contribution to the win, but leaves out a significant consideration in calculating the contribution.
Of course, you could say the same thing from the hitter’s perspective: tieing the game off Bailey is a much greater accomplishment than tieing it off Gaudin.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
good point
I meant to mention this in the fANpost, but it was already stretching on pretty long. Maybe some “third order saves/holds” stat that take into account the average run expectancy for each opposing hitter (park effects too?).
So far this season, Pujols has a wRAA of 9.6 runs in 146 PA, which averages out to 0.066 runs above average per plate appearance. Then you need to leverage it somehow. Maybe the right thing to do is to consider all of his batted ball outcomes and figure out their run expectancies given the specific base/out state?
not sure you want to do this
Think about it this way. What a pitcher gains in WPA, the batter loses. So if some guy comes in and strikes out Pujols to end the game, and we give him extra WPA because it’s Pujols, then Pujols has to lose the same amount.
Do we really want to penalize Pujols more for every out he makes because he’s Pujols? Likewise, he’d get less credit for every hit, again because he’s Pujols. Doesn’t make much sense…
This is discussed in detail in several threads over at The Book Blog (insidethebook.com).
http://www.ballyourbase.com
by thelincolndude on May 12, 2010 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions
definitely don't want to penalize Pujols
I guess this would be something asymmetrical, used only for evaluating relief appearances. But I’ll go check those threads out. I’m sure there is a lot of good discussion.
Okay, I'm going to try here a bit...
So when you say that Blevins was SHUTDOWN and had a Win Probability contribution of 7.8%, what you’re saying is that based on Blevins’s performance, the A’s had a 7.8% greater chance to win the game. Right?
I love your post, btw.
sock puppets have never successfully defended castles, except when working with squirrels, which would never happen because squirrels know better than to trust sock puppets. -nm
breaking Blevins appearance down
- He came in to a tie game with two outs and no one on in the bottom of the sixth. At that point, the A’s had a 48.2% Win Probability. He got the out to end the sixth, increasing the A’s WP to 50%. So that’s a gain of 1.8% right there.
- In the top of the 7th, the A’s scored, so when Blevins came back out for the bottom of the 7th, Oakland’s WP was 62.1% (Jerry does not get credit for that 12.1% gain, because that was provided by the A’s offense). He got two outs (sac bunt, fielders choice) and left with a runner on first. At that point, Oakland’s WP was up to 68%.
So he picked up 1.8% WPA in the sixth inning and 5.9% in the seventh. That only adds up to 7.7%, so there must be some rounding going on in there.
anyone see Harden's first inning today?
Harden at almost 50 pitches….5 walks….
He had one shutdown in Oakland and all meltdowns before or since.
Velocity way under 90, no control whatsoever.
Makes you wonder how/why he got it together for the start in Oakland,
when he’s been so crappy before and after. Adrenaline?
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
Probably more Ego/intestinal fortitude
than adrenaline. When I watched him at the Coliseum that day, he seemed to have more swagger then the previous games I had watched on TV. All those years I watched him in Oakland it was always nagging physical problems, never mental ones, that held back his career. I guess at the end of the day there is something wrong physically with him that causes the bad control and lost velocity. Perhaps in Oakland his mental focus overcame that. Either way, he has been fascinating to watch this year.
GET ON YOUR THESIS. NOW.
sock puppets have never successfully defended castles, except when working with squirrels, which would never happen because squirrels know better than to trust sock puppets. -nm
by Leopold Bloom on May 12, 2010 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions
Sure, it sounds like that now...
sock puppets have never successfully defended castles, except when working with squirrels, which would never happen because squirrels know better than to trust sock puppets. -nm
by Leopold Bloom on May 13, 2010 4:32 AM PDT up reply actions
I am so glad there were no blogs when I wrote my thesis
Otherwise, I’d probably still be writing it.
BEER IS GOOD. BEER IS GOOD. BEER IS GOOD, AND STUFF.
and if Win Probability
assigns blame for errors to the pitcher, doesn’t that make it an unreliable (or at least equally unfair) statistic? Also what’s the acronym for Win Probability?
sock puppets have never successfully defended castles, except when working with squirrels, which would never happen because squirrels know better than to trust sock puppets. -nm
I know. I'm crossing the threshold, huh?
sock puppets have never successfully defended castles, except when working with squirrels, which would never happen because squirrels know better than to trust sock puppets. -nm
by Leopold Bloom on May 12, 2010 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm just worried you'll end up knowing more than me.
Oh wait, too late.
I'm here to talk about the past.
How do we get out of here?
sock puppets have never successfully defended castles, except when working with squirrels, which would never happen because squirrels know better than to trust sock puppets. -nm
by Leopold Bloom on May 12, 2010 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Just follow the squirrels.
"We support your economy. We make your food and tend your fields. All we want are the same rights and responsiblities as you. Please... Vote YES on Proposition 801- Equal rights for sock puppets!"
by Gaijin_Suketto on May 12, 2010 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions
thank god for them.
sock puppets have never successfully defended castles, except when working with squirrels, which would never happen because squirrels know better than to trust sock puppets. -nm
by Leopold Bloom on May 12, 2010 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions
I know, right?
I mean I appreciate the statistical analysis, and understand a good deal of it…..but it takes away from my enjoyment of the game a little.
Good fanpost though, colin. That’s an interesting little experiment they’re trying.
He steps to the left, he steps to the riiiiiiight. That Amos Roberts, he'll make you look shite!
Yes, but in theory a large enough sample size might even that out
and in any case it’s less arbitrary than saves, which also penalize pitchers for errors.
At least I think that would be the defense of the metric.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
There are basically two kinds of good pitching statistics
The ones that assume the pitcher controls everything, and the ones that assume he controls only a very small number of things. The first one captures whatever elements of skill the pitcher has, but also large amounts of noise. The second one captures little noise but risks ignoring some skill-based elements.
Errors really don’t fit into that calculus at all. They’re in a nebulous in-between zone.
Arthur Dent: You know, it's at times like this, when I'm trapped in a Vogon airlock with a man from Betelgeuse and about to die of asphyxiation in deep space, that I really wish I'd listened to what my mother told me when I was young.
Ford Prefect: Why, what did she tell you?
Arthur Dent: I don't know, I didn't listen!
Unfair to Oliver!
He dominated in high leverage duty, then was victim of an error, then was victim of Ron Washington “forgetting to get Neftali Feliz up.”
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
Awesome stuff, Colin.
I still can’t believe how quick this stat came together. It was proposed on The Book Blog and, like, a day later, Appelman had implemented it into Fangraphs.
The selfish, they're all standing in line, faithing and hoping to buy themselves time.
Me, I figure as each breath goes by, I only own my mind.
that suggests the collective (of statheads) is
using the internet for all the good you can. Collective intelligence.
sock puppets have never successfully defended castles, except when working with squirrels, which would never happen because squirrels know better than to trust sock puppets. -nm
by Leopold Bloom on May 12, 2010 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Wow
Awesome analysis.
I’ve lurked here for a while and I gotta say, this is one of the best places to talk baseball, period. It’s a cool combination of rabid and erudite, like a wasted professor in the RF bleachers heckling the enemy with all sorts of sabermetrics-based insults.
{bites StrangeDaze}
Unfortunately, I’m not erudite.
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
did Ross' AB count in the WPA calculations?
"We support your economy. We make your food and tend your fields. All we want are the same rights and responsiblities as you. Please... Vote YES on Proposition 801- Equal rights for sock puppets!"
by Gaijin_Suketto on May 12, 2010 12:59 PM PDT reply actions
bummer. Poor little happy tree.
sock puppets have never successfully defended castles, except when working with squirrels, which would never happen because squirrels know better than to trust sock puppets. -nm
by Leopold Bloom on May 12, 2010 2:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Thanks for the update.
"We support your economy. We make your food and tend your fields. All we want are the same rights and responsiblities as you. Please... Vote YES on Proposition 801- Equal rights for sock puppets!"
by Gaijin_Suketto on May 12, 2010 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions
A "fun" stat?????????? Ooh.
The funny thing about baseball is that people will believe what they want to believe. -Joe Posnanski 8/29/09
Seriously - I like reading this stuff a lot when it's laid out and explained clearly.
Thanks!
The funny thing about baseball is that people will believe what they want to believe. -Joe Posnanski 8/29/09
How does Bailey have 2 meltdowns?
He hadn’t given up a run until yesterday. Did he leave some runners on or something earlier in the season and get bailed out? Or were there some unearned runs? I’m too lazy to look.
Then "meltdown" is not a well-chosen term for this
“ZOMG he allowed an inherited runner to score — TOTAL MELTDOWN!!!!!”
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, I'm stat ignorant, so I don't know if that's the one counted,
but the Opening Day game is the only one I can remember in which runs scored while he was pitching.
It was Opening Day
He entered a tie game in the 9th with 2 runners on base, and they both ended up scoring, making it 5-3 Seattle. Both runs were charged to Ziegler.
Thanks, colin
Now I have another fun stat to use the next time I do a GOG.
BEER IS GOOD. BEER IS GOOD. BEER IS GOOD, AND STUFF.
This is a great post, but I do wonder one thing
Do we need these numbers to tell us that Ziegler and Bailey sucked last night? I’m wondering what the practical applications of this are. Is it just to get the shutdown/meltdown stat?
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on May 12, 2010 2:08 PM PDT reply actions
I think the value it provides
is to put the closer’s contribution on the same scale as other relief pitchers. If the save statistic never existed, but something like this did, then I bet managers would probably use much more intelligent bullpen strategies.
But you definitely would never want to sign some free agent reliever for big bucks just because he lead the league in shutdowns or something like that.

by 

























