IMPORTANT BLOG ANNOUNCEMENT

PLEASE CHANGE YOUR BOOKMARKS AND FEEDS TO THE NEW URL, YANKEEANALYSTS.COM. TYU IS IN NO WAY AFFILIATED WITH THE NEW YORK YANKEES OR YANKEES UNIVERSE.

John Manuel of Baseball America recently did an interview
with NoMaas, and made a number of interesting statements over the course of his remarks. The one I found most compelling was his opinion on Jesus Montero’s defense:

The consensus is (and frankly has been for the last two years) that Montero has improved, but will never be an average defender.
He’s got plus raw arm strength, but a slow, inconsistent release. He’s become more flexible and agile behind the plate, but is who he is — a behemoth for a catcher. He’s just big, in a better way now, but still big. I believe he can catch in the majors, but it would always be “adequate,” and he would be an asset for his offense, not his defense.
Comparing him to Mike Piazza, he has a better arm but is a lesser receiver. He’s never been held up as a guy who is great at handling pitchers, either.

Check out the remainder of the interview, as Manuel is very candid in his assessments and NoMaas asks some strong questions. As for Jesus, I recently suggested that the Yankees might be better off just sticking Montero at DH and forgetting about him for the next 10 seasons, but that contention was based upon the premise that Montero will be an awful defender. If he can be adequate or even moderately below average behind the plate, it is almost certain that he would provide more value to the club in both the short-term and long-term as a catcher. It seems like the Yankees believe that he can meet that standard, and I expect them to give him a chance to be the starting catcher on Opening Day 2012, and possibly sooner if Russell Martin does not work out.

(The following is being syndicated from The Captain’s Blog).

Perhaps anxious to get right to the game, Christina Aguilera’s rendition of the Star Spangled Banner before the Super Bowl not only improvised a few words, but removed one line altogether. Considering that the NFL has turned the game into a reality TV show (Janet Jackson has become a more notorious figure in Super Bowl history than Scott Norwood), rather than just a sporting event, the publicity following the botched Anthem probably has league suits beaming.  Not only does the NFL seem to relish every last crumb of media attention, but for at least one more day, postseason focus was diverted from the impending lockout that could shut the sport down for some time to come.

Questionable performances of the National Anthem are not unique to the NFL. Baseball, with its thousands of games each season, has had more than its fair share of debacles ever since the tradition first started during the turn of the 20th century (the custom of singing the Anthem before every game began during World War II). Undoubtedly, the worst rendition of the national song took place before a San Diego Padres game on July 25, 1990, when the team inexplicably decided to invite comedian Roseanne Barr to do the honors. In what could only be described as a desecration, Barr not only completely mangled the lyrics with a shrill vocal delivery, but then she proceeded to make lewd gestures while walking off the field to a serenade of boos.

Before Barr’s disgraceful peformance, one of the most controversial renditions of the Anthem took place before game 5 of the 1968 World Series. Amid the backdrop of a very tense time in Detroit, which had been ravaged by social unrest and racially motivated riots, Tigers’ announcer Ernie Harwell booked a young, blind Puerto Rican singer named Jose Feliciano to perform the National Anthem. In that past, very little liberty was taken with the song’s delivery, but on this evening, Feliciano chose a soulful rendition inspired by his Latin jazz roots.

Only moments after the unorthodox version was completed, hundreds of outraged viewers flooded television station switchboards. In the ensuing days, Harwell was widely criticized, with some even suggesting he was a Communist. Things were even worse for Feliciano, whose music was blackballed for sometime to come. Despite the controversy, both Harwell and Feliciano persevered and went on to enjoy very successful careers, and in the process, their involvement in what was once a moment of scorn was turned into a source of pride. Feliciano’s rendition is still remembered to this day, but the recollections are now mostly positive. In fact, the singer was invited back to Tiger Stadium on May 10, 2010 to once again sing the Star Spangled Banner during a tribute to Harwell just days after his death.

Although Feliciano’s singing of the National Anthem paved the way for the more creative renditions often song today, resistance to some interpretations still remains. Of course, with the exception of debacles like Barr’s, just about any performance would probably be preferable to forgetting the words. That’s a lesson Aguilera found out the hard way…ramparts and all.

watch?v=jrY9RVfVkws

Late last week I played around with a WAR spread sheet and projected the 2011 rotation while comparing it to the 2010 rotation. I was pleased by the results since they weren’t as ugly as we may’ve expected. Consider it riding that relatively high feeling, but I’m going to get a bit more bold. I’m going to take all those random fifth starter candidates–Sergio Mitre, Ivan Nova, Freddy Garcia, Bartolo Colon, Hector Noesi, Andrew Brackman, and David Phelps and project their performance in a different way.

I’m going to keep their CAIRO projected FIPs the same, but I’m going to tinker with the innings. Instead of changing the projected performance, I’m going to change the duration of that performance. I’ll take whatever FIP that CAIRO gives me and “extrapolate” it out to the same number of innings the Yankees got out of their “fifth” starter last year. I designate fifth starter as the guy with the fifth highest innings pitched total. In 2010, that was Andy Pettitte and his 129 innings. Performance wise, Pettitte obviously wasn’t the fifth best starter, but we’re just talking innings here. I call this post the “best case scenario” because if the Yankees get 129 innings out of any of these guy’s, it’d be damn near miraculous.

Sergio Mitre:
Actual Projection: 4.69 FIP in 72 IP = 0.7 WAR
Extrapolated Projection: 4.69 FIP in 129 IP = 1.3 WAR

Ivan Nova:
Actual: 5.04 FIP/116 IP/0.8 WAR
Extrapolated: 5.04 FIP/129 IP/0.8 WAR

Freddy Garcia:
Actual: 4.90 FIP/31 IP/0.2 WAR
Extrapolated: 4.90 FIP/129 IP/1.0 WAR

Bartolo Colon (No CAIRO projection for Colon, using Marcel instead):
Actual: 4.60 FIP/66 IP/0.7 WAR
Extrapolated: 4.60 FIP/129 IP/1.4 WAR

Hector Noesi:
Actual: 4.91 FIP/81 IP/0.6 WAR
Extrapolated: 4.91 FIP/129 IP/1.0 WAR

Andrew Brackman:
Actual: 5.26 FIP/63 IP/0.3 WAR
Extrapolated: 5.26 FIP/129 IP/0.6 WAR

David Phelps:
Actual: 5.05 FIP/94 IP/0.6 WAR
Extrapolated: 5.05 FIP/129 IP/0.8 WAR

Based on these ridiculously rough calculations, the best we’re probably looking at from the Yankee (nominal) fifth starter is anywhere from 0.6 WAR (Brackman) to 1.4 WAR (Colon, which is probably the most out there of these projections). Considering what the Yankees got out of their fifth starter(s) last year in terms of performance, I would sign up for that. Javier Vazquez was under replacement level by fWAR (-0.2) in 2010 so anything would be an improvement. I’m not confident in saying that any one of these guys will necessarily reach the arbitrary 129 IP mark, but if it happens, I’ll be dancing.

Feb 072011

Nary a day goes by in the baseball world does a day pass without two people discussing which of their favorite players was better than the other. Our daily baseball ritual includes this process, especially now during the Hot Stove season. We start with a gut reaction, a quick thought that we post on a forum or we Tweet it. Then we have that moment of panic…”What if that statement was way off base?” So, to make sure we’re not wrong, we whip open new tabs to accommodate Baseball Reference, Fan Graphs, or various pitch f/x sites. We come to our conclusion and either back off the statement, try to pretend no one saw it, or, hopefully, rub the fact that we were so right in the faces of other commenters or our followers. We do this same song and dance when it comes time to debate the Hall of Fame credentials of one player over another or when two similar players retire at or around the same time. For this article, as you can tell from the title, we’re going to be doing the latter, featuring Mike Mussina and Andy Pettitte.

Mussina started his career (1991) four years earlier than Pettitte (1995), but their careers overlap greatly. What helps is that they faced essentially similar competition since both of them were in the A.L. East for the duration of their careers (minus Pettitte’s three year stint in Houston). This is something that makes comparing them much easier. But why now? Well, the easy answer is that Pettitte just retired and Mussina retired after 2008. They’re both fan favorite pitchers who happened to be very good at throwing a baseball and getting batters to make outs because of it. The other reason? Someone from East Coast Sports Fans forwarded Moshe the debate as it was unfolding and asked our opinion on the matter. Moshe asked me to write it up, so here it goes…

Both pitchers were paragons of durability. Mussina pitched a remarkable 18 years in Major League Baseball while Pettitte racked up a similarly long career, pitching in 16 big league seasons. Both pitchers had just one year in which they threw under 100 innings–Mussina’s debut in 1991 in which he threw 87.2 innings and Pettitte’s 2004 in which he threw 83 innings. Per 162 games, each pitcher averaged over 200 innings: 215 for Pettitte and 226 for Mussina. We’re dealing with two pitchers who were healthy and effective for many years.

Sticking with our per 162 games average, let’s take a look at two of my favorite pitchers side by side:

Mussina: 34 G, 226 IP, 219 H, 99 R, 92 ER, 24 HR, 50 BB, 178 SO, 1.192 WHIP, 8.7 H/9, 0.9 HR/9, 2.0 BB/9, 7.1 K/9, 3.58 K/BB, 3.68 ERA, 123 ERA+, 3.57 FIP.

Pettitte: 34 G, 215 IP, 224 H, 103 R, 93 ER, 18 HR, 68 BB, 158 SO, 1.357 WHIP, 9.4 H/9, 0.8 HR/9, 2.8 BB/9, 6.6 K/9, 2.34 K/BB, 3.88 ERA, 117 ERA+, 3.75 FIP.

Oh my word. Are there two pitchers more evenly matched than Pettitte and Mussina? Their ERA and FIP differences are minuscule and Mussina’s edge in ERA+ is just six points. He has a slight edge everywhere else, except Pettitte did a better job of keeping the ball in the park…but just barely. The biggest advantages we see are Moose’s respective edges in WHIP, strikeouts, and K/BB. Let’s see if we can dig a little deeper and get anything out of this.

Here’s their batting lines against:

Mussina: .255/.297/.399/.696
Pettitte: .270/.326/.398/.724

We see the gap grow in Moose’s favor a bit here, but that stems from his slightly lower BB/9. Pettitte does have the lower SLGA, which is a result of his slightly lower HR/9. For the sake of context, the 2010 AL average OPS was .734.

We’re coming up with advantage Mussina over and over again here, but let’s see if there’s something else we can do. This is something that we discuss a lot when we talk about MVP voting: peak vs. longevity. We’ve essentially already covered longevity. Both had very long careers and Mussina’s got a slight edge in just about everything. But, consider this a final not on longevity and effectiveness.

The one thing every fan, writer, and analyst alike said when reminiscing about Andy Pettitte over the last few days was his incredible consistency. Only once did Andy end a season with an ERA+ under 100: 2008 when he finished with an ERA+ of 98. Mussina had three such seasons towards the end of his career: 98 in 2004; 96 in 2005; and 88 in 2007. This is definitely something that could start to tip the balance back towards Andy; he had fewer seasons of below average pitching. But, of course, that’s only one side of the coin. Let’s look at peak/career bests and see what we come up with.

Pettitte’s high in ERA+ was 177 in 2005. Mussina never beat that; his career high was 164 in 1994. Pettitte’s peak, though, is hard to nail down because of his consistency. He never had any wild dips and climbs in his ERA+ numbers. Moose’s peak is a little easier to nail down. 1994-2001 were the best years of his career and in that stretch he had a 132 ERA+. Because of how level Pettitte’s career was, it’s almost as if the whole career was a long, extended, even plateau. When we set a different bar, perhaps seasons of 120 ERA+ or higher, we could see something different. Pettitte cleared this rather arbitrary bar four times. Mussina cleared it 12 times. In terms of staying above league average, we saw Pettitte beating Mussina there. However, in terms of exceeding a higher level of performance, Mussina gets the easy win.

Andy Pettitte’s career was so consistent (yes this word has been used a lot but there’s no getting around it) that there wasn’t a period of extended dominance and it didn’t feature a lot of great years. Mussina had more of a decline at the end than Pettitte did, but Mussina made up for that with many more better-than-just-good years than Pettitte. What’s another way we can flesh this out? Let’s look at everyone’s favorite vaguely controversial stat: WAR.

In terms of fWAR, based in FIP, Andy Pettitte racked up 66.9 WAR. Mussina tallied 85.6 WAR. That’s an 18.7 fWAR advantage in Mussina’s favor. Shifting to bWAR, based on RA, Pettitte managed 50.2 bWAR, or 3.9 per 162 games. Mussina was worth 74.8 bWAR, or 5.2 per 162 games. These advantages for Mussina aren’t huge, but they’re not insignificant. If we hearken back to our ERA+ examination from before, we see similar results. Mussina never reached Pettitte’s career high in bWAR (7.6), but Pettitte cleared 5.0 bWAR just three times, while Mussina racked up 5.0 bWAR or more seven times. fWAR gives a repeat: Mussina never reached Pettitte’s best (7.4), but he cleared the 5.0+ fWAR more times (11) than Pettitte (4). We’re seeing the pendulum swing toward Mr. Moose here.

Part of the query Moshe received was a look at the big-game performances, the playoffs. Long ago, I looked at Andy in the Playoffs, so I’ll just rehash it here: despite some great playoff performances with some stinkers in there, Andy’s playoff numbers look exactly like a normal regular Andy Pettitte season.

Mike Mussina had “only” 139.2 innings pitched in the playoffs, compared to Andy’s 263. And, surprise, they look a lot like one of his regular seasons. He had a 3.42 ERA, a 1.103 WHIP, and a 2.1 BB/9. He gave up a few more homers than normal (1.2 HR/9) but also struck out more guys (9.3 K/9) and had a better K/BB (4.39) in the postseason. On raw numbers in the playoffs, like in the regular season, Mike Mussina’s got an edge over Andy Pettitte. Pettitte gets more credit for being a playoff performer because he played for five World Series winning teams, whereas Mussina never got that elusive ring. That doesn’t mean, though, that Mussina was a worse playoff performer because of it.

Running through this exercise was more than enjoyable. If I had to pick today, Andy Pettitte and Mike Mussina would be my two favorite pitchers ever, and easily my favorite pitchers I’ve seen in pinstripes. Looking back on their wonderful careers and letting my memory jog was a treat. Now that I’ve come to the end, I have to decide on which pitcher was better. I’m tempted to stay sitting on the fence, refusing to choose between a favorite righty and a favorite lefty, but as Mr. Colbert would say “Choose a side; we’re at war!” My side? Mike Mussina. His regular season numbers were better, even if just slightly, and the same goes for his playoff numbers. Over the course of each player’s wonderful and wonderfully long career, Mussina was worth more by both WAR systems, and had more impressive individual seasons than Pettitte did (even if Pettitte didn’t have as big a decline and was the definition of consistency for 16 years). You’re all smart enough to know this, but I’m saying it anyway: this decision, in no way, means I think Andy Pettitte wasn’t a great pitcher for a long time. He certainly was and there’s little debate about this. The only thing I’m saying is that Mike Mussina was a better pitcher than Andy Pettitte. The list of pitchers who weren’t as good as Mike Mussina is definitely a long list and there is no shame in being on it, especially if you’ve had a career like Andy Pettitte had.

© 2011 TYU Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha