Undervalued Pitcher #1
A few days ago, I talked about why I don’t like long term contracts for pitchers, and why I expect the big name free agents this winter to get contracts that are not in their signing club’s best interests. There’s no way I’d get involved in the Barry Zito negotiations, and from the sounds of what he’s going to receive, I’d bow out on Jason Schmidt very quickly as well.
Of course, since I’m eliminating all the popular names from the discussion of who to acquire, the natural question that follows is “well then, who do you want?”, since we have to actually field a starting rotation next year. I’m of the opinion that pitchers, due to the significant effects that random variation can have on their performance, can often be valued incorrectly. Since the price of pitching has gotten so out of control on the free market, the best way to build a team is to spend on position players, develop your own elite starters, and find bargains to fill out your rotation.
I’ve identified three pitchers who will almost certainly be made available this winter that will require only a moderate cost in terms of talent to acquire and 2007 salary, and will come with no long term commitment, but could be expected to give the team quality innings at the back of the rotation. All three are undervalued, in my opinion, and would be terrific candidates for the Mariners to acquire, allowing them to spend most of their assets elsewhere.
Undervalued Pitcher #1 is probably going to be non-tendered by his current team this offseason because of his poor season. Among qualified American League starters, only Joel Pineiro and Carlos Silva have posted higher ERAs. His ERA is 25 percent worse than league average this season, and it was 15 percent worse than league average last year. He made $3.75 million this year and is arbitration eligible, and it’s unlikely that any team is going to want to take him to arbitration again after posting a 5.88 ERA.
Ladies and Gentleman, Rodrigo Lopez. You might remember him from the May 25th game, where he shutout the Mariners for 7 1/3 innings, or the August 1st game, where he shutout the Mariners for 7 2/3 innings, by far his two best starts of the year.
So yes, I really am suggesting that the Mariners acquire a pitcher who posted an ERA near 6.00 and who got beat around by everyone in baseball not wearing Seattle on their chest. This isn’t exactly the kind of acquisition that is going to get fans excited about coming back to Safeco Field, but it is the kind of acquisition that good teams make. Rodrigo Lopez is the classic buy-low candidate.
Over the past three years, he’s thrown 171, 209, and 182 innings. He’s 30 years old and has proven to be a durable innings eater who is remarkably consistent. But he’s not just a Ryan Franklin type rubber arm who takes the hill every 5 days and eliminates your chance to win the game. Rodrigo Lopez actually has some ability. Look at this five year history:
Season K/9 BB/9 HR/9 FB% HR/FB BABIP LOB% FIP ERA 2002 6.22 2.84 1.05 38.2% 10.1% 0.263 75.4% 4.36 3.57 2003 6.31 2.63 1.47 35.0% 13.7% 0.345 67.5% 5.00 5.82 2004 6.38 2.85 1.11 36.2% 11.0% 0.284 78.2% 4.37 3.59 2005 5.07 2.71 1.20 35.8% 10.9% 0.302 67.0% 4.81 4.50 2006 6.38 2.82 1.48 35.1% 13.9% 0.339 66.7% 4.93 5.88
That’s a pretty interesting chart. Several of those numbers have been amazingly consistent, while several others have been all over the board. He’s posted remarkably similar walk, strikeout, and flyball rates the past five years, showing almost no year to year variation in those core skills. His HR/FB and LOB% have been less consistent, however, ranging from very good to very poor, which has completely driven the wild swings in his ERA.
If you judge Lopez on run prevention, he was excellent in 2002 and 2004, mediocre in 2005, and terrible in 2003 and 2006.
If you judge Lopez on his skillset, however, he’s been practically the same pitcher every year for the last five years. You know exactly what you’re going to get from Rodrigo Lopez. There’s no chance he’ll be an ace, because his stuff just isn’t good enough, but when he’s stranding runners, he’s a valuable middle of the rotation starter. He hasn’t stranded enough runners in 2006, but if you’ve been reading the blog at all the past year, you know that isn’t predictive in nature.
One more chart, just for fun:
Pitcher K/9 BB/9 HR/9 FB% HR/FB BABIP LOB% FIP ERA J. Verlander 6.07 2.81 0.92 34.5% 9.5% 0.293 78.6% 4.20 3.42 Barry Zito 6.15 3.95 1.12 38.1% 9.2% 0.278 78.1% 4.97 3.86 Jose Contreras 6.16 2.44 0.86 38.9% 7.8% 0.286 69.8% 4.04 3.97 Rodrigo Lopez 6.38 2.82 1.48 35.1% 13.9% 0.339 66.7% 4.93 5.88 Kevin Millwood 6.48 2.10 0.91 33.2% 9.6% 0.315 67.2% 3.82 4.47 Ervin Santana 6.60 3.08 1.03 44.4% 8.5% 0.278 66.3% 4.41 4.50 Josh Beckett 6.90 3.33 1.61 38.8% 15.1% 0.270 68.7% 5.25 5.09 Vicente Padilla 6.96 2.96 0.94 35.7% 9.5% 0.307 69.5% 4.27 4.44
Based on his peripherals, that’s the class of pitcher that Rodrigo Lopez has pitched like. His 5.88 ERA is an extreme outlier based on his actual performance, just like Jarrod Washburn’s 3.20 ERA was an extreme outlier the other way last year. Lopez isn’t as good as all those pitchers, but the difference is far less drastic than you’d imagine. With a likely regression in his BABIP, LOB%, and HR/FB rates, combined with his durability and consistency in his core skills, Rodrigo Lopez looks like a prime candidate for a bounce back 2007 season.
Lopez would make a fine #4 starter for the Mariners next year, and he’ll probably cost no more than $2 million for the season, thanks to his atrocious 2006 ERA.
The power of ERA is still strong, and it’s going to cause Rodrigo Lopez to be significantly undervalued this offseason. The Mariners would do well to take advantage of this particular market inefficiency.
Comments
USSM uses and recommends
Nice find. We should totally be going after guys like this to fill holes. I do think that overpaying for top-of-the-market guys now and then is necessary, but if you can’t upgrade your supporting cast from Franklin/Piniero/Meche types, there’s no point in even trying. Same with the offense: enough with the Bloomquist/Dobbs/Everett type of player.
I had the opportunity to watch him pitch a few times this year. He has decent mechanics and stuff. I think his problem is much like Meche. It’s all upstairs. When he started struggling it became obvious on the mound. He lost his composure and that was pretty much the game.
For 2 million or less I think he is definitely worth taking a flyer on. He is definitely an upgrade over Joel, Baek, and Woods et al.
Nice analysis. I think the M’s ballpark effect and their defense will make him look real good.
Which probably means he’ll wind up in Oakland.
I agree with what you said about how the Mariner’s should develop and aquire pitchers.
In addition, I would say the M’s should look for bargains in position players by looking for left handed hitters in general, and if a right handed hitter, someone who walks or hits bombs or fans (is that what is meant by the 3 true outcomes?), which guards against the parks’ effect on righties (if I’m understanding it correctly that Safeco is death on right handed hitters.)
This protects against double plays, as well (an important, and oftentimes overlooked statistic). The additional talent said position players should have is good defensive skills (a plus in Safeco, if I understand correctly that it doesn’t yeild HR’s as much as other parks), especially if the bargain basement pitchers aren’t striking everyone out.
I’m really interested in what factors have an effect on LOB%. How much of it is the defense behind you versus just pure luck? Are there any other significant factors at work? What are the differences between pitchers who post wildly inconsistent LOB rates and consequently drastically different ERAs, a la Washburn and Lopez here, as opposed to guys who seem to post consistent ERAs year after year? I seem to recall you mentioning stranding runners isn’t a repeatable skill, but there are certain pitchers with “reputations” to help them out in that regard. Is that right? I apologize if the questions are a little vague and confusing, I don’t know a whole lot about LOB%, but I’m really interested.
Dave,
How does he compare to Gil Meche? Is he a little better, much better? Or is he simply going to be a cheaper version?
…but it is the kind of acquisition that good teams make.
I stopped reading at this point. While I generally enjoy my experience with USSM, the downside is I have an increased insight into the player valuation and signings over the past couple of years. And looking at that history, it’s just hard to believe that the Mariners (management) are a good team.
That said this is great analysis and the kind of thing I WISH the Mariners would do AND follow through with. It’s amazing that Lopez is in the same range of pitchers as Ztio and Millwood and will come at less than 1/4 the cost. I look forward to seeing who #2 and #3 are and dreaming and praying that the Mariners sign one of them.
It’s worth $2 million just to not have to watch the Ms hitters flail against him again.
I had the opportunity to watch him pitch a few times this year. He has decent mechanics and stuff. I think his problem is much like Meche. It’s all upstairs. When he started struggling it became obvious on the mound. He lost his composure and that was pretty much the game.
My current hypothesis is that almost every pitcher who struggles with runners on base is going to get labeled with this “mental midget” tag. People get frustrated by seeing a pitcher repeatedly allow run scoring hits, and in our desire to blame someone, we take it out on the pitcher’s intelligence, since we can’t deny the times he’s pitched well with the bases empty.
If Rodrigo Lopez doesn’t have the mental capacity to pitch well with runners on base, how do you explain 2002 and 2004, when he was among the league leaders in LOB%?
Rather than claiming that every pitcher who fails to strand runners has some character flaw, I think I’m leaning more towards just believing that LOB% is highly random, and we should try our best to not make inferences about a pitcher’s mental capacity based on his results with runners on base.
I’m really interested in what factors have an effect on LOB%. How much of it is the defense behind you versus just pure luck?
Defense and luck are certainly factors. Luck is probably the biggest factor, with defense being a more minor factor.
Are there any other significant factors at work?
Absolutely. Pitcher quality is certainly a factor. Good pitchers will strand more runners than bad pitchers for several reasons. They’re more likely to get an out in any scenario, including runners on base, than bad pitchers, because they have more talent. So good pitchers (as evaluated by skillsets) will most always have better LOB% than bad pitchers. Dave Studeman found that pitcher ability can explain 20% of LOB%. That’s significant. But that also means there’s 80% that we can’t explain through the pitcher’s abilities.
What are the differences between pitchers who post wildly inconsistent LOB rates and consequently drastically different ERAs, a la Washburn and Lopez here, as opposed to guys who seem to post consistent ERAs year after year?
In any given sample of a large enough population, you’re going to have outliers. The existance of outliers doesn’t mean that they’re inherently different than those who fall within expected ranges. It’s just part of life. 2005 Washburn and 2006 Lopez are outliers.
I seem to recall you mentioning stranding runners isn’t a repeatable skill, but there are certain pitchers with “reputations” to help them out in that regard. Is that right? I apologize if the questions are a little vague and confusing, I don’t know a whole lot about LOB%, but I’m really interested.
I wouldn’t say reputations help them out, no. I think there are pitchers with skillsets that are more apt to stranding runners than others.
Strikeout pitchers will likely be more consistent in their ability to strand runners, since their skills produce more consistent results than contact pitchers. Pitchers who can control the running game should post lower LOB%, since they’ll be able to keep runners at first base more often than those who are easy to steal off of. And, as mentioned earlier, good pitchers will strand more runners than bad pitchers because of the inherent fact that they’re good pitchers.
But I’d say something like 60-80% of LOB% is still random and unpredictable, and that randomness has a huge impact on run prevention. Since that part of stranding runners isn’t predictive, for evaluating talent going forward, we’re best served ignoring it.
How does he compare to Gil Meche? Is he a little better, much better? Or is he simply going to be a cheaper version?
He has better command of worse stuff. That said, if he’d have spent the season in Safeco Field and Meche would have spent it in Camden Yards, I’d be willing to bet that Lopez would be cashing in on a multiyear deal and Meche would be looking for any kind of invitation to spring training he could get.
I’d rather have Lopez than Meche, even without considering salary. When you factor salary in, it’s a home run for Lopez.
#3
I think you’re putting too much stock in how he would fare at Safeco alone. While that may certainly help at Home games, they spend an equal (or close to it) amount of time on the road. If it were me, and it’s a good thing it’s not, that wouldn’t enter into my decision.
I also agree with the grow your own/aquire under-rated or under-valuated players, although the former is easily the more difficult to successfully do.
What really gets my goat cheese is how inconsistant our pitchers are. Granted, every one in a while during the course of a season you should probably except a pitcher to get roughed up. It just seems to me our pitchers are more inconsistant that most of the other clubs and it drives me bonkers. Dr Jekyll and Mr. Putrid.
Randy Johnson is dead last in LOB% among qualified AL pitchers. I don’t think he’s a “mental midget” and if he is I wonder what happened since last year when he was very good at LOB. Johnson also has an above average DER (is that just the “opposite” of BABIP) so it isn’t that the players behind him can’t field.
He’s a sample size of 1, but he seems to kill any theories that LOB% is a real skill.
Dave,
Not saying he is a mental midget or lacks the capacity to hold runners on base. Just saying he seemed to get extremely flustered when calls wouldn’t go his way or when he started missing the strike zone. Moreso than other pitchers. When the catcher/pitching coach/manager would go out to slow him down and make him take a little breather he would be fine. It might just be a maturity thing and it also might go away with a change in scenery. He has been touted as the 2nd coming of Cy Young in Baltimore and when that didn’t pan out the fans and press really got on him. Of course you should hear what they say about Tejada here.
I think he would be a good acquisition for the M’s and quite possibly a good fit in Safeco. If he doesn’t work out it’s probably only a 1 year contract with maybe an option year. Not going to kill the M’s like a Washburnish type of contract.
Even any kind of cursory look at LOB% will tell you how crazy it can be. Derek Lowe posted a 58.5% LOB% in 2004. 58.5%! That’s crazy. Predictably, his LOB% went way up the last two years, and he’s been a pretty good pitcher for the Dodgers.
It is a skill to some degree, but the extremes are almost always random variation, and they correct pretty quickly.
Several weeks ago i came accross Lopez’s name as a possible cheap fill in for next year, but was affraid to even consider it because he is basically the Baltimore version of Pineiro.
The question i have is how valuable of a stat is FIP-ERA? Looking at who leads in the negative you find players like Bonderman (-1.18), Felix (-.59), and Lopez (-1.01). These players (or atleast the first two listed) have great ’stuff’ but for whatever reason their stuff wasn’t reflected in their ERA. Is FIP-ERA a good measure of who is lucky or unlucky (ie: Washburn 2005 and 3.20 with a FIP-ERA of +1.18).
I mean its obvious you have to pay attention to how high the FIP and ERA’s are. Case in point Pineiro is -1.11 but his FIP is 4.91 (very close to the bottom of the heap).
Just as a quick aside: guess who leads in the positive in FIP-ERA this year with +1.03…..yup, your 2007 New York Yankee/Met opening day starter, Barry Zito
Here is a blog transcript on Lopez. If you take out the Baltimore banner, substitute Ryan Franklin for Lopez and Howard Lincoln for Angelos it could be a Mariners blog circa 2005.
Oriole Chat
This in no way implies I think he is like Franklin. I just found it amusing how similar baseball fans are and it lets you know a little what they think about Lopez.
The question i have is how valuable of a stat is FIP-ERA?
It’s a good starting spot for finding undervalued pitchers. You can certainly use it as a tool to help look for guys who have pitched better than their ERAs, but like you mentioned, in and of itself, it’s not enough. A lot of bad pitchers are going to underperform their FIP because FIP doesn’t adjust for stranding runners, which is one of its big flaws.
Since it gives everyone a league average strand rate, it’s going to overrate bad pitchers and underrate good pitchers. So, if you find a good pitcher who has a significantly lower FIP than ERA (like Felix, Washburn, or Lopez), then yes, it can be useful. But I’m not using FIP-ERA to say that Joel Pineiro or Carlos Silva are candidates for a good 2007.
So we know one of your possible targets for 2007 Dave. Is this someone the Mariners would go for? Do they already have a long list of off-season pitching targets they are going to shorten down in a few months? Curious as to how far out they are thinking and what they intend to do.
Undervalued pitcher #2: Claudio Vargas.
Undervalued pitcher #3: BK Kim.
I think the big knock against Bavasi is that he isn’t influenced by this kind of analysis. If he were, we wouldn’t have Washburn, about whom Bavasi was convinced was a marquee pitcher. Bavasi will always go for the obvious choice – which speaks to his functional intelligence (not overly creative – like investing huge money in RH power hitters in Safeco)
Maybe it is completely random, but I notice pitchers throughout the course of a single season getting consistantly lucky or unlucky. I understand that luck is very powerful in terms of performance but for a pitcher like lopez, who’s ability should translate to something like a 4.50 ERA, doesn’t it take consistent luck in one direction or the other to push it down to 3.50 or up to six? Does this consistency of luck show that more value should be placed on a pitcher’s mental ability not to get distracted or unfocused/stressed when runners are on base?
Dave,
If the pitcher has no influence on BABIP (it’s just luck, or defense) and HR/FB (it’s just luck), how do you explain the correlation between Rodrigo Lopez’s BABIP and HR/FB (R=.96)? Just luck? Is that what a smart general manager should conclude?
Dave,
I’ve often wondered if a pitchers ability to hold runners on would effect his LOB%. Just thinking about it logically, if a pitcher had a great move to first runners are going to get shorter leads and not be able to advance as far on hits. They also will have a harder time moving in to scoring position by stealing. If the move is good enough to pick off a certain amount of guys a year as well, he’s erasing some of the base runners himself. Has anyone studied this?
Not BK Kim — either BK, or BH Kim. The man’s name’s Byung-Hyun.
Anyway, Lopez does indeed sound like a guy worth taking a flier on; I’m not optimistic, but I’d love to see the M’s grab a few guys like that and let them sort themselves out. If nothing else, that strategy ought to enable us to be mediocre enough at the back of the rotation that Felix el Rey, Matsuzaka (please!) and another bat could carry us into contention, with a little luck — and without breaking the bank.
#23: see next-to-last paragraph of post #9, where Dave already mentioned that.
#21: a single season really isn’t that big a sample size; in so large a population, that some players should have consistently good or bad luck over the course isn’t really something requiring explanation. As McAndrew would say, “The laws of probability do not merely permit coincidences — they require them.”
And I have to wonder if J. J. could teach Rodrigo that splitter . . .
Ancient Mariner,
I feel stupid now. That’s what I get for going to lunch and not refreshing before posting.
If settling for Lopez means that we have a little extra money to acquire someone like a Frank Thomas, Daisuke Matsuzaka, and a quality backup catcher like a Greg Zaun, then I’d be all for it.
The only risk to signing this guy is of course is you’d be only hoping he can bounce back while pitching at SAFECO Field with all the ballpark factors and stuff, he’s not a sure thing.
Of course, with all the free agents we’ve signed over the years, who is a sure thing anymore in free agent waters, right?
The only real sure thing the Mariners have had in free agency it seems like is Carl Everett, and we basically knew that it was a sure thing he was going to suck. Which every Mariner fan with half a brain was correct on.
On the other hand, Gil Meche struggled for about $3.7 million this year, and Joel Pineiro struggled for about $6.8 million this year, and Jarrod Washburn was hurt for 3 months of the season with a hip bursitus (yet, still continued to pitch), and during that time we had to see him struggle for $9 million.
If someone struggles in this rotation, I’d rather see them do it for $2 million rather than $9 million.
It’s Common Sense 101 really.
#27-But then again, Bill Bavasi is an idiot, so what makes you think he’ll sign undervalued talent.
You guys should post about OVERVALUED talent one of these days.
If the pitcher has no influence on BABIP (it’s just luck, or defense) and HR/FB (it’s just luck), how do you explain the correlation between Rodrigo Lopez’s BABIP and HR/FB (R=.96)? Just luck? Is that what a smart general manager should conclude?
Replace the word luck with “a nonrepeatable skill”, and you have a better idea of what my position is. Lopez probably threw more hittable pitches in ‘03 and ‘06 than he did in ‘02 and ‘04. We don’t really have any way of quantifying that, but it’s the logical conslusion based on the data.
It’s just that we know that information has very little influence going forward, so we shouldn’t really care.
You guys should post about OVERVALUED talent one of these days.
Did you read the piece on long term contracts for free agent pitchers that is linked in the post above and that I wrote five days ago?
Isn’t “nonrepeatable skill” a contradiction in terms?
Yeah, and it was a very good post, but that’s about pitchers from the past.
I want to talk about what’s out there THIS YEAR in the winter that may be overvalued.
Dave’s statistical anaylsis is eye-opening and concise. he makes a good arguemnt.
The only reason I could think of a negative of the Mariners’ owning Rodrido is that his stats won’t be helped by pitching against Seattle.
I think a major factor of deciding which free agents to sign is how they perform against AL West clubs, as it was our intra-division record that buried us deep & early (and handed the division to the A’s). So let’s take a look at Rodrigo, using basic stats:
vs. LAA: 5-2, 2.01 ERA in 62.2 IP, 7 HRs allowed
vs. Oak: 4-4, 3.38 ERA in 61.1 IP, 4 HRs allowed
vs. Tex: 3-2, 4.88 ERA in 48, 9 HRs allowed
So, ladies & gentlemen, that totals 12-8, 3.30 ERA in 172 IP, 20 HRs allowed. If we had that season in our rotation this yar, he’d be the ace, not #3 or #4 or whatever…
Sign him up!
Isn’t “nonrepeatable skill” a contradiction in terms?
No, I don’t think so.
For instance, if I hit a halfcourt shot in a basketball game, it took a combination of me applying the correct trajectory and velocity to the ball for it to go in the hoop. I hit the shot using skills that I do have.
That doesn’t mean I can do it again with any kind of consistency. The degree of difficulty on hitting a halfcourt shot is very high. I can do it sometimes, because I do have the necessary skills, but I struggle to repeat them.
Same goes for pitching. Pitchers have the skills necessary to prevent hits on balls in play. They can throw a pitch in the perfect location and induce an easy out. They just can’t do it every time.
I think a major factor of deciding which free agents to sign is how they perform against AL West clubs…
I couldn’t disagree more. It’s taking small sample size theatre to a whole other level. Using performance vs teams is a great way to completely misevaluate a player. It’s just a bad idea.
I think you’re putting too much stock in how he would fare at Safeco alone. While that may certainly help at Home games, they spend an equal (or close to it) amount of time on the road. If it were me, and it’s a good thing it’s not, that wouldn’t enter into my decision.
50% of their games are in Safeco, an extreme pitcher’s park for right handed hitters. Of the other 50%, they are in a wide range of parks, some of which are also pitcher’s parks. In particular, a very substantial number of their road games are in Oakland and Anaheim, which are also pitcher’s parks.
So it’s definitely not 50-50.
Pitchers have the skills necessary to prevent hits on balls in play.
But what about Mariner pitchers?
Pitchers have the skilles necessary to prevent hits on balls in play.
But what about Mariner pitchers?
Like Dave said, nonrepeatable skill….
“Nonrepeatable” would imply that it can’t be repeated at all. And if it can’t be reproduced, it’s not a skill. I agree that as you say, skills (emphasis on the plural) are involved. A struggle to repeat, difficult to repeat, yes. Nonrepeatable, no.
Besides, the analysis still focuses on the outcomes that result rather than the skills that produce them. Hard to avoid, and you can’t separate them completely, but I think nonpredictive outcome is really what you’re talking about.
Pardon me for quibbling, I understand your point, I just find the phrase oxymoronic.
I’d rather have Lopez than Meche, even without considering salary.
Familiarity breeds contempt. I think Meche is actually coming into his own, and has a decent chance at being around his 2006 level for a while- and Lopez and Meche are pretty comparable on a gross level.
That being said, you add in the incidental factors (park, defense, non-repeatable skills, and so on), and Meche is likely going to come at a premium to Lopez… so yeah, I get the logic.
I still offer arbitration to Meche, though, because even in the worst case scenario (Meche accepts arbitration and you sign Lopez), you could bundle Meche into a decent package with surplus talent and get something nice back- or you could even cut him in spring training before the 25 man roster deadline and only be on the hook for 60 days salary
Re #26: Oooh, yeah, I know that one . . .
Re #32: That’s been done at length, to the extent that it can be done (i.e., while we can conjecture that Jason Schmidt will be overvalued, he won’t actually be overvalued unless and until he signs a contract that’s out of whack with his likely future production). Bottom line: every major US pitching free agent is likely to be overvalued.
what type of FA would meche be? A, B?
Familiarity breeds contempt. I think Meche is actually coming into his own, and has a decent chance at being around his 2006 level for a while- and Lopez and Meche are pretty comparable on a gross level.
If by “2006 level”, you mean he’s going to post park-adjusted ERAs in the 4.70-5.30 range, sure. Which is, of course, pretty darn close to replacement level.
Meche has been just as terrible away from Safeco this year as he’s always been. He’s pitched well in a good park for pitchers to pitch well in.
If he goes to LA or Detroit, he might be able to sustain this kind of success. Stick him in, say, Cleveland, he’s screwed.
Dave,
Given the analysis provided and the likelihood of finding an undervalued pitcher, would it then benefit the team to lock these types of undervalued players to a longer-term contract in order to benefit more into the future?
If we simply sign this guy to a 1 year 2 mill deal, we strike gold, then his market value would correct and other teams would be bidding him up to the 6+ mill a year range…
But if we sign him to a 3 year 2 mill/year range, then we could watch him turn things around and gain so much value in the league that you could consider trying to upgrade using him if someone overvalues him and undervalues someone else.
Is this a strategy that some GMs already do employ and is a a sensible strategy, or still a bad idea based on attrition of pitchers?
Looks like the O’s could use a 1B next year. Think Bavasi could pull off sending Richie Sexson to Baltimore for Lopez & Brandon Erbe? Or, am I just dreaming?
Given the analysis provided and the likelihood of finding an undervalued pitcher, would it then benefit the team to lock these types of undervalued players to a longer-term contract in order to benefit more into the future?
No. Pitcher’s are so inconsistent that its rarely a good idea to give one a multiyear contract. The cost savings just isn’t worth the increased risk.
If we simply sign this guy to a 1 year 2 mill deal, we strike gold, then his market value would correct and other teams would be bidding him up to the 6+ mill a year range…
Then you let him go, and do it all over again. The point of this analysis isn’t that Rodrigo Lopez is a great pitcher – it’s that pitchers like Rodrigo Lopez are easy to find.
But if we sign him to a 3 year 2 mill/year range, then we could watch him turn things around and gain so much value in the league that you could consider trying to upgrade using him if someone overvalues him and undervalues someone else.
He wouldn’t be interested in a 3 year, $6 million deal. He’d be better off going year to year.
Looks like the O’s could use a 1B next year. Think Bavasi could pull off sending Richie Sexson to Baltimore for Lopez & Brandon Erbe? Or, am I just dreaming?
They’re not trading Erbe, but Baltimore is certainly a potential destination for Broussard or Sexson.
Thanks for the responses, I was wondering if it that would be the case that he wouldn’t even agree to a long-term low deal anyway.
Obviously with these finds being available every year until GMs learn, that’d be the way to go if not just finding guys in the minors that can fill the role.
CCW, I’d love to see us get BK Kim. For some reason I like him a lot.
I know nothing of the Orioles other than that I wouldn’t put anything past an owner stupid enough to turn down Roy Oswalt and Morgan Ensberg for Tejada and his contract.
If you were Rodrigo Lopez’ agent, wouldn’t you print out Dave’s analysis, put a glossy cover on it and show it to every team who might need a pitcher? Then try to get $5 million/yr instead of $2 million?
50: not every GM, I wouldn’t waste the postage cost of sending it to Bavasi
Both Meche and Lopez are arbitration-eligible. Meche is shiny, because of his “success” this year. Lopez is non-shiny, but has the potential to be okay.
Could the M’s go for a one-for-one swap with the O’s? The Orioles get a “good” pitcher, who they can try and arbitrate with (or sign to an extended deal), and the M’s go year-to-year with Lopez. Or do I have my valuation off? Would this be the kind of minimal-talent trade that the M’s could get away with? Or are they better off sending a B- prospect to Baltimore for Lopez and letting Meche go for the draft pick?
Both Meche and Lopez are arbitration-eligible. Meche is shiny, because of his “success” this year. Lopez is non-shiny, but has the potential to be okay.
Meche is a free agent. You can’t trade free agents.
D’oh! I missed the part where he’s making $3.75M, and that means the M’s would be due to pay him $4M in arbitration. That makes it a bad deal, talent-wise.
And I missed the part where Meche is a free agent, too. I thought he had one more year of arbitration eligibility. It looks like I really goofed.
CCW, I’d love to see us get BK Kim. For some reason I like him a lot.
Yeah. I can see it now. Instead of the customary posts round here like:
[Pineiro]
We’d get a lot of
[B-H Kim]
To be fair, BK is his nickname and he’s called BK Kim a lot, though the misspellings of Byung-Hyun Kim would probably be hillarious.
I agree, we need to find some good undervalued players to counterbalance the inevitable veteran(s) with “World Series experience” that Bavasi is bound to overpay for again.
It’s Piñeiro that has one extra year of arbitration eligibility- and, to be blunt, he’s even more likely to get hosed than Lopez.
When was the last time a player got hosed in arbitration?
Could the (behind the scences) reason for placing Pineiro back in the rotation be showcasing him for Cleveland (as the PTBNL in the Broussard deal).
#61 – The PTBNL was already named. It was Livingston, I presume.
For the sake of argument, here are 4 players the Ms could probably sign next year, each for a somewhat reasonable price (c’mon chart, be legible…):
Player INN K ERA K/BB K/9Inn GB/FB
Kim, Byung-Hyun 139 117 5.374 2.167 7.58 1.1
Lopez, Rodrigo 182 129 5.885 2.263 6.38 1.1
Meche, Gil 170.3 142 4.28 1.919 7.5 0.9
Vargas, Claudio 149.3 112 4.942 2.333 6.75 0.9
I would presume wrong. I mean Nottingham.
So, Dave, the $64,000 Question is this:
Are the M’s capable of seeing how things are, rather than how they LOOK … and make decisions accordingly?
Hahaha, Jim, you already know the answer to that, dude!
64- I think the Sheriff of Nottingham is his name.
I thought that was the Sheriff of Rottingham? Or was that the wrong Robin Hood movie?
#61 – The PTBNL was already named.
Totally slipped my mind. Sorry. (I was just excited about trying to remove Pineiro)
68- I thought it was Nottingham, although Rottingham sounds correct as well.
It is a mystery.
Sheriff of Rottingham was from the Mel Brooks movie “Men in Tights”, a Robin Hood spoof. Nottingham is from the original tale.
#69 Understand excitement about getting rid of Joel.
Bavasi has to have his offseason plan at least in the embryonic stage. I would love to see what it contains. Check that. I don’t want to be miserable the entire off-season.
It occurs to me…
This entire peice was based on the assertion that Lopez’s ERA will drive down his price, thus making him a bargain.
Except this front office has demonstrated an affinity for ERA. That’s why we blew $37 million on Washburn. So isn’t this sort of advice guaranteed to fall on deaf ears?
Johjima is in the 3 hole tonight. Snelling in 8 spot, RF.
#72 That is a good point.
Now how, exactly, do we know that’s why we blew $37 million on Washburn? It’s entirely possible that Bavasi knew that Washburn’s ERA was unsustainable and still thought he was worth the money, after all. (I don’t know that that’s an encouraging thought, but that’s life in a tomato can.) Similarly, it’s entirely possible that the M’s scouting department might come to Bavasi and say, “Rodrigo Lopez is better than his ERA, playing in Safeco in front of our fielders will help him, we see some problems we think Chaves could fix,” etc., and convince Bill it’s worth signing the guy. I don’t know that any of this is likely, but one thing I’m pretty sure about — all these decisions are a lot more complicated than they look in the papers.
74-
I couldn’t agree more with your first statement. Did Bavasi honestly give Washburn 37 mil because had a 3.20 ERA in 2005? I personally doubt it. There was obviously something else Bavasi saw in Washburn.
I also agree with what you said on Lopez. The M’s have guys on their staff that do breakdowns like Dave did for this thread. It is just a question how much stock Bavasi puts into these stats.
I agree that it is possible to find diamonds in the rough where you can find a pitcher who will give you ~Washburn-performance at about 2mil/yr for a 1-2 yr contract and this is a good idea to allow the team to avoid considerable risk. I also am a big fan of homegrown starting pitching. I think it is much easier to make a great team by developing pitching from within and acquiring big names in offense in FA since hitters are much more stable than pitchers.
With that said, I feel uncomfortable about going dumpster diving. The reasons that a pitcher posts an ERA > 5.50 usually aren’t because of bad luck. If you look at a game log of Lopez this year, it is really ugly. He has given up as many runs as innings pitched in about 1/3 of his outings. ER are a flawed way to look at pitching but good pitchers don’t suck that much.
Although our AAA pitching isn’t very good, I’m not sure if Lopez is much better than the Woods/Baek/… replacement players that we could throw out there and hope one stick. Woods and Baek have pitched about 50 innings and have posted a FIP of about 4.80. I agree that it isn’t that hard to find league-average pitching. I realize this is a small sample and I will be very happy if we could get these guys to pitch at around the same level for a significant time.
I’m not really happy with the idea of Lopez in the rotation next year. I’d rather see Meche back (but it depends on how much $$ he gets so I won’t be disappointed) or even Pineiro maybe. Someone earlier referred to Lopez as the Orioles version of Pineiro and I think this may be very accurate. Lopez’s peripherals have been more stable than Joel’s but their end results look bad. They both have done horrible this year and racked up ugly ERA that will make them pretty much worthless this offseason (driving down their cost). I really think that Pineiro is struggling to figure out how he can be successful after the injury he suffered a couple years ago. He lost some velocity and that has really forced him to change his approach. If he can make the adjustments, which they are currently trying, he could become a useful pitcher once again. One advantage Joel has is age; he’s only 28 years old. If he is able to get his K/9 up he should be a useful pitcher once again. They will both be dirt cheap but I think Joel has better upside than Lopez although Lopez is more likely to give you a pitcher who could fill the #5 spot in the rotation.
Sidenote:
When evaluating Lopez’s career you must take into consideration that 2003, he struggled with injuries. Also, during the 2004 season he worked a fair amount of the year in relief where he did quite well which may skew some of the numbers very slightly. This doesn’t make a huge difference. Just thought I’d point it out.
-2004 as a Starter-
IP 139
FIP 4.45
K/9 6.02
BB/9 2.59
HR/9 1.17
ERA 3.95
Dave, re: #8, why do some pitchers struggle with men on base, I’m inclined to think that there are significant pitching pattern issues with this. Without having a pitch-by-pitch chart, though, it’s hard to say. Consider Meche: a few weeks back, there was an extensive discussion of his patterns en blog, and in particular that when he fell behind in the count he _consistently_ went to mostly fastballs. I opined that he didn’t want to dish out the walk, and was more inclined to use his defense since, as we knew, he didn’t have a high propensity to get the K that way (breaking pitches are his strikeout ones). This, to me, speaks of a consistent, purpose-driven, but not necessarily smart approach. In the same way, when pitchers get guys on base, some stay with their basic game, but others clearly shift their pattern; get a GB, stay away from the long ball, or whatever. This isn’t a question of being a mental midget or flibbertygibbet per se, but does indicate someone who lacks confidence in being able to execute some pitches in their repertoire on demand, and so an over-dependence on a smaller set of outcomes, which leaves hitters zeroing in on what’s coming.
It doesn’t have to be something as clear cut as Meche going to the fastball when behind to still have a significant impact. As a hypothetical, if a guy decides to focus on getting the GB with men on base because his defense is good, his present pitching coach is big on it, or whatever, maybe he throws more sliders—but it’s his second or third best pitch, and moreover he does it so much that other teams isolate it in scouting and have their hitters looking for it. For a year, that guy looks _terrible_ with men on base. Next year, he gets a new pitching coach, or changes his approach; results see a big swing until and unless the hitters adjust. The pitcher has the same basic tools, and over a large sample has the same basic outcomes, but in a small subset of instances he has a swing in result which impacts his LOF% and ERA in big, big ways.
If LOB% was truly random, it should STAY random, we wouldn’t see consistent month-to-month numbers over the course of a year. Ergo, LOB% has significant _non-random_ components, to me. Year to year fluctuation may have some stochastic inputs, sure, but they don’t explain the majority of the variation, I suspect.
And I entirely endorse an offer to Rodrigo Lopez. He would do well with this defense in this park, or at least better than in Camden; he’s cheap; he’s better than what we have; the thinking is right. . . . There’s no possiblity that the present FO regime goes this way, though. Thinking things through isn’t their forte. When behind in the roster count, they focus on the ‘most famous name’ approach, and pray hard.
Re: #20, I _don’t_ think Bavasi was convinced that Washburn was a marquee pitcher, and that was before and since Bill B.’s comments in the pre-season gabfest that he ‘wasn’t comfortable at all with signing free agent pitchers,’ a reasonable reality test that comment. Bavasi was told that he was to sign a top-of-the-rotation starter, the only guys with decent talent soared into a ridiculous price/talent stratosphere, and he took the next-best available ‘name’ pitcher. And he paid for him the $$$-and-years figure the market set, obviously not liking it any too much. I wouldln’t even be all that sure that Washburn’s gaudy but implausible ERA in ‘05 weighed that much into it. A LHP who had a good history throwing at Safeco, that figured into it big time.
With that said, I feel uncomfortable about going dumpster diving. The reasons that a pitcher posts an ERA > 5.50 usually aren’t because of bad luck.
Okay, fine, don’t call it bad luck. Call it unlikely to be repeated poor performance.
ER are a flawed way to look at pitching but good pitchers don’t suck that much.
Really?
Jeff Francis: 2005 ERA – 5.68, 2006 ERA – 4.01
Jason Jennings: 2004 ERA – 5.51, 2006 ERA – 3.61
Cliff Lee: 2004 ERA – 5.43, 2005 ERA – 3.79
Brett Myers: 2004 ERA – 5.52, 2005 ERA – 3.72
Derek Lowe: 2004 ERA – 5.42, 2005 ERA – 3.61
Jamie Moyer: 2004 ERA – 5.21, 2005 ERA – 4.28
Rodrigo Lopez: 2003 ERA – 5.82, 2004 ERA – 3.59
If you write off every pitcher who has a bad ERA not supported by peripheral statistics, you’re going to make a lot of mistakes.
Although our AAA pitching isn’t very good, I’m not sure if Lopez is much better than the Woods/Baek/… replacement players that we could throw out there and hope one stick. Woods and Baek have pitched about 50 innings and have posted a FIP of about 4.80
Seriously? You can’t tell the difference between Jake Woods (4.9 BB/G, 5.5 K/G out of the bullpen), Cha Baek (4.1 BB/G, 6.1 K/G in 28 innings) and Rodrigo Lopez, who’s been running 2.75 BB, 6.0 K performances for five straight years?
The only way to believe that Lopez is replacement level is to believe that he has some flaw that doesn’t allow him to pitch well with runners on base. To believe that, you have to ignore 2002 and 2004, when he was among the league leaders in the category.
Someone earlier referred to Lopez as the Orioles version of Pineiro and I think this may be very accurate.
Again, seriously? Pineiro’s strikeout rate is 4.4 K/G. That’s horrible, and his walk rate is still higher than Lopez’s. If you really think that Pineiro = Lopez, I don’t know what to tell you.
Honestly, I’d rather have Lopez than Washburn. To argue that he’s less valuable than Pineiro, Woods, or Baek… you have to ignore every piece of information out there besides ERA to believe that’s true.
If LOB% was truly random, it should STAY random, we wouldn’t see consistent month-to-month numbers over the course of a year. Ergo, LOB% has significant _non-random_ components, to me. Year to year fluctuation may have some stochastic inputs, sure, but they don’t explain the majority of the variation, I suspect.
You don’t. Try reading either of Studes’ columns on the issue, then get back to me.
LOB% is something like 20% skill, 80% random.
How much of that 80% is actually random and how much is the opposing hitter (and baserunners)?
How much of that 80% is actually random and how much is the opposing hitter (and baserunners)?
I’d say almost all of it is the opposing batter.
I basically don’t like Lopez very much. I don’t think that he has a lot of future. Maybe a 1 yr deal where he fills a gap in our rotation could work out fine but I don’t think we can expect much from him. I basically think that his chance of doing above replacement is low.
I don’t think that Woods or Baek are as good as Lopez. I was trying to show that we might be able to plug in a AAA player instead of getting Lopez.
With respect to Pineiro, I don’t think that Lopez is better than Pineiro right now. I referred to them as equals mostly because they both were abused by opponents hitters. I do think that Pineiro has a chance to improve his K/9 and BB/9 by becoming a better pitcher. I don’t think that Lopez will change his K/9 or BB/9 very much. I guess what I was trying to get at and never said was that if you are looking for inexpensive pitchers then you might also want to look past statistics and talk to a scout to find pitchers who struggled but have a chance of improving their game. These pitchers are more of a gamble but have much more upside than a steady performer like Lopez.
I agree that Washburn looks like he could implode at any moment since a lot of his stats are discomforting. Good thing he kept those unrepeatable skills looking good otherwise our rotation would have really been ugly this year. Make sure to send him a rabbit’s foot for next yr.
I basically don’t like Lopez very much.
But you don’t have a good reason why you don’t like Lopez?
I don’t think that he has a lot of future.
You would have said the same thing back in 2003, the year before he posted a 3.59 ERA, right?
I don’t think that Woods or Baek are as good as Lopez. I was trying to show that we might be able to plug in a AAA player instead of getting Lopez.
Well, we might be able to plug in a AAA player instead of getting Matsuzaka too. It doesn’t mean we should.
I referred to them as equals mostly because they both were abused by opponents hitters. I do think that Pineiro has a chance to improve his K/9 and BB/9 by becoming a better pitcher. I don’t think that Lopez will change his K/9 or BB/9 very much.
For the 185th time, why? Why hold an opinion that you can’t support?
I guess what I was trying to get at and never said was that if you are looking for inexpensive pitchers then you might also want to look past statistics and talk to a scout to find pitchers who struggled but have a chance of improving their game. These pitchers are more of a gamble but have much more upside than a steady performer like Lopez.
So, basically, you don’t like Rodrigo Lopez because he doesn’t throw hard enough for you? Got it.
I agree that Washburn looks like he could implode at any moment since a lot of his stats are discomforting. Good thing he kept those unrepeatable skills looking good otherwise our rotation would have really been ugly this year. Make sure to send him a rabbit’s foot for next yr.
At the risk of being rude, are you dillusional?
Jarrod Washburn’s 2005 LOB%: 81.8%
Jarrod Washburn’s 2006 LOB: 69.4%
Yea, he’s really kept those “unrepeatable skills looking good”. Did you realize he’s posted an ERA six percent below average for a pitcher who gets to throw half his innings in Safeco Field this year. The Mariners are paying $9 million for a below average pitcher, whom you apparently think is having a good year.
I’m sorry, but your opinions just don’t seem to be founded on anything other than personal preference.
Since, as you pointed out, he’s had some amazingly consistent numbers, how can we be sure he won’t be just as ineffective (against EVERYONE but the M’s) next year? I mean by your logic, couldn’t good things have been predicted for him after last year, even after his ERA rose quite a bit from 2004?
Thanks for writing this Dave, it was a great post to read. It’s following this type of critical review that, even if the situation were to end up on the nasty end, would be hardly much of a loss at all. If it ended up right around what [i]should[/i] be expected it would be a slight bargain, not to mention an aid to a team that needs it. At best, it would be a steal.
When you consider the potential outcome and the odds that it would overall be beneficial, as opposed to harmful, it seems like a good ‘gamble’ (somewhat) so to speak. On top of that, the saved salary allows for something better in another rotation slot or in the lineup.
Even if this doesn’t specifically happen/work out, I hope this general direction is something that is considered.
Oddly enough, there’s another Oriole SP who’s putting together a pretty crappy performance, someone who I feel is a good bet to rebound next year, for a number of reasons (stats and otherwise). He’s not a great pitcher, but were he in the market this winter he’d be a better bargain for the dollar than those “just above” him. Seriously, not every 2-5 spot in the rotation has to be filled with someone who is available for the most money, just so we can squeeze every last drop of potential (or, well… sometimes it backfires anyway).
He’s making way too much this year. It would surely go down if he were to hit the market, but unfortunately, it looks like he has one year left on the contract, so that ain’t gonna happen.
Since, as you pointed out, he’s had some amazingly consistent numbers, how can we be sure he won’t be just as ineffective (against EVERYONE but the M’s) next year?
When it comes to pitching, there’s no sure things. Every pitcher is a risk. The Red Sox didn’t expect a 5.09 ERA when they gave up two of their best prospects for Josh Beckett. The Yankees certainly didn’t expect a 4.84 ERA from Randy Johnson, and I’m sure the Braves thought Tim Hudson would do better than a 4.95 ERA.
I mean by your logic, couldn’t good things have been predicted for him after last year, even after his ERA rose quite a bit from 2004?
Yep. That’s the nature of the beast.
What you guys need to come to grips with is the massive effects that things out of the pitcher’s control have on run prevention. Until you stop looking at ERA as a predictor of pitcher effectiveness, you’re going to continue to attribute skills to a pitcher from results that he did not influence.
A huge part of ERA is out of the pitcher’s hands, regardless of whether that pitcher is Johan Santana or Rodrigo Lopez. The best a team can do is acquire pitchers who excel at the things they can control and hope that the ball bounces their direction more often than not.
Acquiring a pitcher because he’s been a recipient of good fortune in the past, or avoiding one who has not, is just a bad way to run a ballclub.
So Dave, are the M’s gonna move brousarrd (which I hadn’t really heard before) so that they can make room to sign bonds?
To #84.
I was saying that Washburn could have done much worse than he did. I’m not happy with how much we are paying him but I thought he actually might do worse than he did this year.
Dave,
Since we are on the subject of undervalued pitchers how about Greg Maddux?
I’m not sure if he is a free agent or not, but if he is I would love Maddux in our rotation, he would not be as cheap as the Rodrigo Lopez types, but he certainly wont be as expensive as the Jason Schmidt types and his age would probably lower the price.
Maddux has a 3.92 xFIP, he doesn’t strike out many guys (4.9 K/G), but he hardly walks anyone (2.0 BB/G).
This could all be moot if he isn’t a free agent, but if he is I would love to have him in the rotation, as long as he is not too expensive.
#90: Maddux’ contract is up in 2006, but will never leave the JV league. He is smart enough to realize that it’s not possible to throw 7 innings of 1-hit ball in 68 pitches (or anything close to it) in the AL. He’s remarked in the past how he enjoys the “strategy” there is in that pure brand of baseball they play over there.
And speaking of Schmidt, I see he was scratched from his Friday start due to a strain in his upper back, ostensibly from taking BP. I wonder if his golf swing will aggravate it in the off season?
#87: Acquiring a pitcher because he’s been a recipient of good fortune in the past, or avoiding one who has not, is just a bad way to run a ballclub.
“Give me lucky generals.”
– Napoleon
But I guess his fastball was a little short by the time he faced Wellington at Waterloo.
Interesting. I don’t disagree with your analysis. But I think it’s incomplete. I’m a Red Sox fan and I’ve seen too much of Lopez. He used to kill the Sox. I think he went 4-0 against them in 2002. But doesn’t seem like quite the same pitcher as he used to be. Maybe it’s been exacerbated by bad luck, but I think he’s been worn down by 5 seasons of starting in MLB after his time starting in Mexico. His pitches seem a mile an hour or two slower. They seem just a little bit less sharp. He seems to command them juuuuuuust a little bit less well, missing in the heart of the strike zone more than he used to. I know this is a very general, qualitative argument, but Rodrigo Lopez just looks like a guy on his way down the curve of his career trajectory.
Would I invite him to camp and challenge him to show something? Absolutely. Would I sign him to a small money contract? Sure, if it was small enough. But I wouldn’t expect much from him.
I tend to have an impression that really strong teams manage to get at least two and often three really good starters. We’ve already got one back-of-the-rotation starter in Washburn, and we’re banking on Felix become an ace. You say Lopez would be a great #4.
But if the M’s have to fill three spots in the rotation next year, and go shopping for undervalued pitchers like Lopez, they’ll be rolling the dice with a cheap rotation of mostly #4-caliber starters. Isn’t that just punting on pitching because it’s too expensive and too unpredictable? Can we really offset weakness in the rotation with enough offense? Didn’t Texas try that for a few years and fail?
Lopez is a great suggestion; you make a great case. I’m wondering if acquiring three Rodrigo Lopezes are going to supply enough pitching prowess.
94- Who’s arguing we want to sign 3 Lopezes? Dave’s argument is we should skip massively overvalued free agents- he’s NOT said “Don’t bother with Matsuzaka; let’s try and get by with slightly above replacement value guys to go with Washburn and King Felix”.
And…
The best a team can do is acquire pitchers who excel at the things they can control and hope that the ball bounces their direction more often than not.
And, of course, acquire defensive players who also feed into fielding those balls…