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.
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.

A few interesting historical and statistical bits of data came to my attention lately, and I thought I would share them:

1) In Steve’s posts on Derek Jeter a few days ago, he compared Jeter to Mickey Mantle, and noted that Mantle’s decline greatly hurt the club in 1965-1968. In an ensuing discussion that took place on GReader, Matt Bouffard of Fack Youk pointed out that Mantle’s decline has become overstated among pundits and Yankees fans. To quote:

Mickey Mantle’s final four seasons:

1965: 2.9 fWAR, 2.0 bWAR, 137 OPS+, .371 wOBA
1966: 3.8 fWAR, 3.7 bWAR, 170 OPS+, .402 wOBA
1967: 4.4 fWAR, 4.1 bWAR, 149 OPS+, .373 wOBA
1968: 3.9 fWAR, 3.6 bWAR, 142 OPS+, .362 wOBA

When I expressed surprise over the high quality of those numbers due to my impression that Mantle had totally fallen off a cliff at the end of his career, Matt had this to say:

I guess the issue of Mantle’s performance depends on your perspective. There’s no doubt it declined, but there’s no way he could continue to put up 6 or 7+ WAR a year, let alone his 10+ WAR seasons, particularly considering the toll that injuries and hard living took on his body. So in that regard he was a shell of his former self.

However, he was still a very much above average to elite ball player. His traditional numbers did take a dive after ’64, but that had far more to do with the second dead ball era than it did with his age, injuries, and decline. Mantle hit a combined .241 over his last two seasons, but the league averages for those two years were just .236 and .230. And he still had so much power and plate discipline that he finished second in the league in walks both years and 5th and 3rd in OBP.

Personally I’m of the opinion that Mantle probably wasn’t quite as great as his OPS+ says he was over those last two years. Plate discipline remains, whether offense is suppressed or not, so I think some metrics overvalue all the walks he took.

It is a testament to Mantle that despite being hobbled by various ailments by the end of his career, he was still able to perform at a high level. If Derek Jeter’s decline looks anything like Mantle’s, his next contract would not be nearly the disaster many are expecting it to be.

2) In a story about Cy Young voting injustices, Cliff Corcoran said the following:

Just ask Mike Mussina, the pitcher most likely to be harmed by that wins-based voting. Mussina should have won the AL award over his teammate Clemens in 2001, but instead ended his career without a Cy Young. For a lesser pitcher that would have been a simple disappointment, but for Mussina, a borderline Hall of Fame candidate, that could prove to be a crucial omission from his resume when he comes up for election in 2014.

My first reaction was to have the 17-year old version of me well up and dispute the claim, remembering the insane 20-1 start to Roger’s season. However, a closer look at the numbers quelled that urge, as Mussina was clearly the better pitcher by almost any available metric, and got a 5th place finish for his efforts.

Clemens: 5.4 WAR, 20-3, 3.51 ERA, 220.1 IP, 213 K, 1.26 WHIP, 0CG, 0SHO
Mussina: 6.5 WAR, 17-11, 3.15 ERA, 228.2 IP, 214 K, 1.07 WHIP, 4CG, 3SHO

That is not even that close. As Corcoran notes, the Yankees scored 5.74 runs per game for Clemens, but just 4.21 runs per game for Mussina. That was the difference between winning the award and first place, and that result will likely hurt Mussina’s Hall of Fame chances. Also, not to horn in on Matt’s grand cause, but go compare the numbers of Mussina and Tom Glavine. Mussina was the better pitcher by most measures, yet Glavine’s willingness to hang around until he reached 300 wins makes him a significantly more likely candidate to be voted in quickly. I think Mussina will get in eventually, but will have to linger on the ballot for a while and get Blyleven-type support before he makes it.

3) CC Sabathia has been really good for quite a long time. You can make the argument that he has been one of the two or three best pitchers in baseball over the last 5 seasons, with quality and durability being the criteria for eligibility for that title. This article by Cliff Corcoran inspired me to go look at the WAR leaderboards for the last 5 seasons. Cliff looked at the AL top 10 in SNLVAR over the last few seasons, while I expanded the look to 5 seasons and top 15 in the two leagues combined.

It turns out that only two pitchers have been in the top 15 in Fangraphs WAR in every season over the last 5 years: Roy Halladay and CC Sabathia. Using BB-Ref WAR, no one makes that list in all 5 seasons, but CC did qualify in 4 seasons (missed in 2009, was 21st). The only other pitcher to qualify in that many seasons? Again, Roy Halladay. While these criteria obviously exclude some of the best pitchers due to either injury, youth, one poor season, or other factors, they do illustrate the consistent excellence that CC has provided.

This one should be fairly simple, right? As with my Blyleven post , I’m sure I’ll be preaching to the choir, but Mike Mussina should be in the Hall of Fame when his time comes. But, of course, there will be doubters out there. So, I will preemptively make the case for the Mooooooooooose.

If this seems repetitive, it is. I made these two posts comparing Mussina and Glavine back in January. Mike Mussina >>> Tom Glavine.

Anyway, here’s the quick run down:

–24th all time with 74.8 WAR (4.12 WAR per season)
–123 ERA+ while spending his whole career in the hard hitting A.L. East
–1.192 WHIP
–3.58 K/BB
–3.57 FIP
–270 Wins (Yeah, yeah but the voters like it)
–.638 WP (see above)
–Passes Grey Ink, HOF Monitor/Standards tests

Anyway, Mike Mussina was a damn good pitcher for a long time and he did it all in the toughest of the tough environments: the AL (B)East during the “steroid era”. He pitched at a very high level for a very long time. And if Tom Glavine is going to get in–300 wins makes him a lock–Mike Mussina had better get in.

Jan 132010

Yesterday, I examined the Hall of Fame case for Mike Mussina by comparing him to Tom Glavine. Today, I’m going to further that argument using the CHONE WAR system.

Both players rank in the top 30. Mussina ranks 24th and Glavine ranks 29th. What I did to further compare them was order their top WAR seasons to see how they stacked up. First, let’s get to the raw numbers:

Mussina:
High: 7.4
Low: 0.3
Range: 7.1
Average: 4.20

Glavine:
High: 7.4
Low: -0.2
Range: 7.6
Average: 3.05

So, while they had the exact same high of 7.4, Mussina had a higher low and a higher average. To further this point, I charted the data. The Y-Axis is the WAR and the X-Axis is the “nth” best season.

Moose/Glavine WAR

As you can see, Mussina’s line is consistently higher than Glavine’s. If you’re a Hall of Fame voter and you’re looking at your ballot in the winter of 2009, if you’re going to put Tom Glavine in, you’d damn well better elect Mike Mussina. While he may not have pitched as long–and Glavine should get points for longevity–he put up better numbers (see previous post) but he was also, as this post and the graph and the chart on the CHONE site prove, more valuable than Glavine despite pitching fewer innings, games, and years.

Jul 222009

-Yanks are rolling, back in 1st place and life is good. When you can call up Sergio Mitre and get a solid performance in which he gives up 2 earned runs and gets you to the 6th inning, you know you’re hot. And yes, I know he was charged with 3 ER, but Johnny Damon was responsible for 2 of them. We all have heard of CERA, is there such a thing as LFERA?

Because of Winn-Dixie movie The Village rip

-Apparently Jack Nicholson is a Yankee fan and was wearing his colors at a Phillies game, no less. Maybe now I can finally convince Johnny Damon to play this clip from “The Shining” on the big screen when he comes to the plate at home.

-Yankee great Joe Gordon finally gets into the Hall of Fame this Sunday, along with Ricky Henderson and ‘Most feared hitter of the late 70′s’ Jim Rice. Long overdue for ‘Flash’, who was a perennial All Star and MVP candidate on some of the greatest Yankee teams in history, including the 1939 edition which is among the best teams of all time.  He didn’t play long enough (11 seasons) to hit any of the magic numbers (3,000 hits/1500 RBIs) but for 9 straight years he was the best 2B in the game.

The Curse of El Charro release

-Sorry, but Hal Steinbrenner saying the Yanks want to win

Batman: Gotham Knight dvdrip

it all every year doesn’t mean Girardi’s job is in jeopardy. The

The Truman Show movies

manager wears #27 on his back, I think he’s aware of the expectations around here. Must have been a slow news day.

Raging Sharks film

Meet Dave psp

download Barry Lyndon

-First it was John Henry who needs a hobby, and now apparently the Yanks have nothing better to do than this. Is it really so easy to run a MLB franchise that they have time for these things?

-Make sure to catch the Mike Mussina Yankeeography. It’s on again this Sunday @ 9:00 PM, and it’s really terrific. His collection of antique tractors alone is worth the hour of TV time. But seriously, check it out.

Jul 152009

Over at RAB, a few of us were having a spirited conversation about Peter Abraham’s suggestion that the Yankees give up Joba Chamberlain, Jesus Montero, and any two others not named Phil Hughes in a trade for Roy Halladay. One poster compared Halladay to Mike Mussina, who was about Halladay’s age when he joined the Yankees, and is in fact one of Doc’s “through current age” top comparable players. Commenter TSJC came through with the following numbers:

Mussina when acquired by the Yankees (32 years old):

Career: 129 ERA+, 1.175 WHIP, 6.9 K/9, 2.1 BB/9, 200 IP and 4 CG per season

Fragile dvdrip 3 most recent seasons: 129 ERA+, 1.191 WHIP, 7.7 K/9, 1.9 BB/9, 215 IP and 4 CG per season

Merlin and the Book of Beasts trailer

8 Heads in a Duffel Bag movie download

Halladay now (32 years old):

25th Hour ipod Sorry, Wrong Number rip New in Town aka Chilled In Miami the movie

Career: 132 ERA+, 1.201 WHIP, 6.5 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 160 IP and 3 CG per season

Christie’s Revenge move

Shut Up and Sing aka Wedding Weekend dvd

Jarhead move Oliver & Company rip 3 most recent seasons: 138 ERA+, 1.134 WHIP, 6.8 K/9, 1.6 BB/9, 198 IP and 6 CG per season

Those numbers are extremely close, with Halladay possibly having a slight edge. However, Doc does have some injuries in his past, while Moose had been a picture of perfect health to that point. Now, Moose pitched well for the Yankees, especially in those first three years. However, they never won a championship with him despite initially adding him to a stacked, can’t miss rotation. I highly doubt that Yankees fans would give up Joba, Montero, and anyone else not named Hughes if I told them that they were getting the 7 years they got from Moose’s initial contract.

Gojira Vs Biorante divx

The fact is, nobody over the age of 30 is worth that much. Halladay is likely the second best pitcher in baseball over the last 5 years, but he is really no better than Moose was when he joined the Yankees, and has a more suspect injury history. Moose was very good, but you expected more than one season with an ERA plus over 130 over the life of his initial Yankee contract. Per Fangraphs, his WAR from 2002-2008 was 31.1. That is very good but not something that Joba and Montero cannot reach collectively. Halladay’s ace type performance is in no way guaranteed.

Curt Schilling’s retirement announcement yesterday spawned a multitude of articles about his Hall of Fame case. Most of the articles believed that Curt belongs in the Hall, which caused me to start thinking about a similar pitcher who also retired this offseason: Mike Mussina.

Schilling was 216-146 in 20 seasons, with 83 CG, 20 SHO, 3261 IP, 3116 K’s, 711 BB’s, 3.46 ERA, 1.14 WHIP, and a 127 ERA+. He never won a CY Young, but finished second on multiple occasions and made 6 all star teams. Of course, his calling card was his exceptional postseason pitching, going 11-2 in 133.1 IP while amassing a 2.23 ERA. The bloody sock game in Game 6 of the 2004 ALCS provides a classic defining moment for voters to focus upon.

Mussina has similar numbers, although his value lies more in his consistency than pure dominance. He was 270-153 in 18 seasons, with 57 CG, 23 SHO, 3562.7 IP, 2813 K’s, 785 BB’s, 3.68 ERA, 1.19 WHIP, and a 123 ERA+. He only has one second place Cy Young finish, but has 6 top 5′s, compared to 4 by Schilling, as well as 5 all star game appearances and 6 gold gloves. His postseason numbers are not great (7-9, 139.2 IP, 3.42 ERA), but they are far from pedestrian. His most memorable playoff performance was his dominant showing in relief of Roger Clemens in Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS.

Personally, I think Schilling deservedly gets in, with his very good but unspectacular stats getting a boost from his playoff dominance and role in ending the curse. Mussina, on the other hand, is right on the fence. His numbers are slightly less impressive than Schilling’s, although his greater win total may sway some less educated voters. I think Moose gets in eventually, towards the end of his time on the ballot, in a very close vote.

What do you think? Which one, if either, gets in? Do they deserve to get in?

Feb 022009

From Bob Klapisch (Bergen Record):

It’s not just that Torre crushes easy targets like Johnson and Pavano, it’s that he violated the sanctity of the clubhouse to plunge the knife deeper. By doing so, Torre is telling his present-day Dodgers that no anecdote or conversation will be off the record once he leaves the organization. None of his players could be blamed for keeping their distance; how could any of them trust Torre ever again?

Mussina said, “it’s not just what goes on in the clubhouse, it’s sitting on the bus, or if you’re out having lunch. As a ballplayer you need to know who you have to watch out for and who you can trust. First and foremost, you should be able to trust your manager.

“I mean, people knew that Brown was out there, and that Randy was ornery all the time. And Pavano is whoever he is. But if you’re their manager, you can’t go out and write about them like that.”

Mussina’s point can be boiled into a single indictment: you can’t just be the manager of the good soldiers, Derek Jeter and Jorge Posada and Mariano Rivera. You have to lead them all — including the disturbed and unreliable ones. Actually, it was Torre’s mandate to especially act as a higher authority to players like Brown, Pavano, A-Rod and Gary Sheffield.

Klapisch and Mussina are dead on with their comments. This was the reason the Steinbrenner family stuck with Joe Torre. Everyone assumed that he was able to unify the clubhouse and manage the assorted personalities that come with all the superstars. However, in the end, it doesn’t seem like that was the case, really. He shunned A-Rod and he loved Jeter—it’s the perfect example. Maybe this is why Joe lost his luster in his final years with the team.

Joe Torre’s book seems to be getting a lot of people embroiled in controversy. The latest to be ripped by media personalities (if you consider Michael Kay a personality) is Mike Mussina, for the comments that he made about Mariano RIvera in Joe Torre’s book. From Mike “Tiny” Lupica:

“We were up 3-0 and Mo (Rivera) came in again with the lead and lost it. He lost it again. As great as he is, and it’s amazing what he does, if you start the evaluation again since I got here, he has accomplished nothing in comparison to what he accomplished in the four years before. He blew the World Series in ’01. He lost the Boston series. He didn’t lose it himself but we had a chance to win in the ninth and sweep them, and he doesn’t do it there.”
The tone here isn’t angry, the way the tone of this book isn’t angry, despite the coverage it has gotten. These are tough opinions, but honest ones.
“I know you look at everything (Rivera’s) done and it’s been awesome,” Mussina continues. “I’ll admit that. But it hadn’t been the same in those couple of years. That’s what I remember about the ’04 series.”

Moose has always been a blunt speaker, and he certainly does not pull any punches here. The statement that he makes is true. If Rivera pitches in the postseasons of 2001 and 2004 like he did in the dynasty years (ie. perfectly), players like Giambi, Mussina, and A-Rod would have a title. Those teams reached the ninth inning with a chance to hand the ball to Mo and win or go to the World Series, and Mo did not come through. Nobody is perfect, and imperfections from a closer are usually amplified due to their dramatically flipping the outcome of the game. Mariano still remains the greatest closer and possibly postseason pitcher of all time, and Moose never questions that. In regard to the veracity of the comments, Moose is entirely safe from criticism.

The real question is, regardless of whether the comments were true, should they have been made? Not everything that is true needs to be said in public, particularly when we consider the supposed sanctity of the teammate relationship. Ultimately, Moose probably should have kept his mouth shut, but Mariano is going to be the one to determine whether the comments were inappropriate. Knowing Mo, he will likely defuse the situation by agreeing with Mussina’s assessment, and another Torre book/Radio blowhard created controversy will dissipate.

What do you think? Was Moose right? Should he have made those comments?

© 2011 TYU Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha