Harang or Bonderman: A Poll
Dave · June 20, 2013 at 10:24 am · Filed Under Mariners
Here are the stats for the two Mariners starters who are in the running to get tossed out of the rotation whenever the Mariners decide to bring Erasmo Ramirez back from Tacoma.
| Name | IP | BB% | K% | GB% | HR/FB | BABIP | LOB% | ERA | FIP | xFIP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jeremy Bonderman | 24.2 | 7% | 8% | 46% | 13% | 0.215 | 86% | 3.28 | 5.48 | 5.14 |
| Aaron Harang | 59.2 | 4% | 22% | 36% | 12% | 0.319 | 64% | 5.73 | 4.18 | 3.87 |
I’m not offering any analysis besides putting those numbers up for you to see.
Which one do you think is going to pitch better going forward?
Comments
67 Responses to “Harang or Bonderman: A Poll”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
A poll to see how many of your readers haven’t read the reference material?
http://ussmariner.com/2006/08/29/evaluating-pitcher-talent/
Sorry, but you do have to be kind of allergic to basic math to prefer a pitcher with K and BB rates of 8/7 to a 22/4 pitcher. I suppose it’s theoretically possible there’s a circumstance where you’d prefer the former, but I have a difficult time imagining it.
So far, 45.24% of you have flunked this test.
I lean towards Bonderman. I think there’s more upside there, given that he hadn
t pitched for 2 years. I’m not really a stats guy (except for the obvious) and I wish he’d last more than 6 plus innings, but Bonderman’s ERA has been dropping like a rock, while Harang’s has been consistant. I just can’t see Aaron getting any better.
Another point in Bonderman’s favor is that he’s 30, to Harang’s 35, and in the long run could be more valuable to the M’s as a “seasoned” pitcher than Harang.
An ERA argument on an advanced stat discussion site?
Sabermetrics, bro … It’s a lot like math.
You’ll like it if you look into it and you will eventually think back to the comment you just made.
Dave’s removed the names and ERA in the past and it’d be clear who you keep, even if you put age in there. A guy who strikes out 8% of batters won’t last.
djw: I ended up voting for Harang after your breakdown, so i was simply entertaining the thought that maybe there could be more to the story here than the enormous differential in their k/bb rates and xfip data – like maybe the great infield defense and tragic outfield defense effecting the flyballer vs. the groundballer- without accepting that thought. You demonstrated, using basic math, how the numbers aren’t lying in this case, which I appreciated. In conclusion, after gathering all the data, my takeaway here is that you are an incredibly brilliant mathematician, a true baseball mind, and also just kind of a snarky douche.
my takeaway here is that you are an incredibly brilliant mathematician, a true baseball mind, and also just kind of a snarky douche.
One of these things is probably true.
I’m shocked that this is close.
I would like to vote for “None of the Above”
Admit it – some of you are voting for Bonderman just because you hate Harang’s cheesy beard.
How is this so close? :s
As others have mentioned Bonderman has the age advantage. He’s still 30 and Harang turned 35 last month. No question Harang’s peripheral stats are better. Is there a way we can pick the June 11th, two hit shutout Harang over the typical Harang?
I’ve got to admit I can’t stand Harang primarily because he’s so fat. Yeah, I know these “horses” tend to have good longevity for whatever reason, but it still bugs me. Not that Bonderman is exactly lithe…
Why does Bonderman need to be lithe? Brandon McCarthy is lithe. Jake Peavy is lithe. Alexi Ogando is lithe. Look where lithe has gotten them. These guys aren’t cross country runners. I saw Bonderman a couple of weeks before he took off for Peoria and that dude is weight-room strong from head to toe, very little fat.
As others have mentioned Bonderman has the age advantage. He’s still 30 and Harang turned 35 last month.
This would matter if we were (shudder) signing one of these people to a long term contract. But as we’re talking about performances over the next 3 months it’s not relevant.
I’m amazed at how hard people will evidently work to convince themselves that 8/7 is better than 22/4. Why?
The question posed was “Which one do you think is going to pitch better going forward?” There was no timeline specified. I’m sure many took this to mean “for the remainder of this season” or “for the remainder of their Mariners career.” I took it to mean “for the remainder of their career.”
1. With Bonderman’s injury history, the odds of advancing age being the thing that ends his career are very long indeed.
2. Since there’s very little reason to think Bonderman’s current skill set elevates him above replacement level, the future value of his career may have very little to do with how long he’s able to pitch.