Jeremy Hellickson or Zach Britton who was better last year?

[mikegallo]

I think you are likely right, and I certainly agree that my lists of TAM and BAL names w/corresponding ERA/xFIP data is pretty useless. It was an attempt to illustrate the trouble with latching on to a single pairing of players and using that to illustrate a point. I actually believe that a deeper look into Tampa's and Baltimore's respective seasons would largely show your assumptions re: Britton/Hellickson have merit. I just think it's better approached by taking the larger view to show that Tampa was indeed a better defensive team and how that defense affects a staff on the whole. Then, potentially, showing why Britton's and Hellickson's numbers may be skewed as a result.

I know that takes a lot more work, and I certainly don't have time for it so it's unfair for me to suggest you should gone through all of that hassle. But limiting the convo to Britton/Hellickson, I think, makes it tougher to make the leap to talking about defense, because each of them very likely had more going on than just defense when we talk about their peripherals.

Yea I see your point, I am a 22 year old college kid with a 3 year old to boot so time is most certainly an issue and this being my first thread (could have been more thoughtful as to how to get my point across)even tho I have been following the board for bout 7 years.

But basically thats what my first post was trying to do (with very broad strokes).

But I just have always found it odd that this board with all its great posters, really has neglected the importance of defense in general, let alone for this team which has such a bad D and pitching which clearly correlate.

I mean as a scout you see it everyday the difference between a guy being a superstar catcher or shortstop and a 4 A player is D.

Jack cust would be in the HOF if he had good enough tools to play shortstop...Derek Jeter would have never made the majors if he had no glove.

And the same applies to pitchers I believe much more than any public stat at least can show us. The great orioles team knew this only to well.

And as I see the trend almost every team that we know to be genius (Rays,Blue Jays,Yanks,bo sox)

To me its not a coinidence sp?>. that baseball offense has declined the last two years as great teams shift much more towards D realizing how important it is on the invaulable commadity such as pitching?run prevention.

[Stotle]

Yea I see your point, I am a 22 year old college kid with a 3 year old to boot so time is most certainly an issue and this being my first thread (could have been more thoughtful as to how to get my point across)even tho I have been following the board for bout 7 years.

But basically thats what my first post was trying to do (with very broad strokes).

But I just have always found it odd that this board with all its great posters, really has neglected the importance of defense in general, let alone for this team which has such a bad D and pitching which clearly correlate.

I mean as a scout you see it everyday the difference between a guy being a superstar catcher or shortstop and a 4 A player is D.

Jack cust would be in the HOF if he had good enough tools to play shortstop...Derek Jeter would have never made the majors if he had no glove.

And the same applies to pitchers I believe much more than any public stat at least can show us. The great orioles team knew this only to well.

And as I see the trend almost every team that we know to be genius (Rays,Blue Jays,Yanks,bo sox)

To me its not a coinidence sp?>. that baseball offense has declined the last two years as great teams shift much more towards D realizing how important it is on the invaulable commadity such as pitching?run prevention.

I think you make a lot of good points and hope you share more of them. Defense is certainly an important aspect of the game, and one that organizations are working to better evaluate and quantify.

If Baltimore were to pick an area in which to start trying to gain a competitive advantage in evaluation and valuation, I'd think defense would be a great place to start. Nice post.

[allstar1579]

Yea I see your point, I am a 22 year old college kid with a 3 year old to boot so time is most certainly an issue and this being my first thread (could have been more thoughtful as to how to get my point across)even tho I have been following the board for bout 7 years.

But basically thats what my first post was trying to do (with very broad strokes).

But I just have always found it odd that this board with all its great posters, really has neglected the importance of defense in general, let alone for this team which has such a bad D and pitching which clearly correlate.

I mean as a scout you see it everyday the difference between a guy being a superstar catcher or shortstop and a 4 A player is D.

Jack cust would be in the HOF if he had good enough tools to play shortstop...Derek Jeter would have never made the majors if he had no glove.

And the same applies to pitchers I believe much more than any public stat at least can show us. The great orioles team knew this only to well.

And as I see the trend almost every team that we know to be genius (Rays,Blue Jays,Yanks,bo sox)

To me its not a coinidence sp?>. that baseball offense has declined the last two years as great teams shift much more towards D realizing how important it is on the invaulable commadity such as pitching?run prevention.

Don't feel bad, I've been posting here 5 years and I still make long round-about conversation before getting my point out sometimes, drawbacks of a message board.

I think defense is an important trait, one that gets overlooked by a lot of fans and even some MLB teams, but there are some really great ballplayers that are not very good defensively. Sometimes it's a luxury, and sometimes it's a necessity.

The root of your point being that groundball pitchers are MUCH more effective with a good defense behind them shouldn't get lost in the shuffle. Ignoring all statistics and just using common sense, the more ground ball chances you have, the more you want guys with better range and more sure gloves getting to them.

Some teams will sacrifice up the middle defense for offense, and then when they add a ground ball pitcher, they wonder why he wasn't as effective as he had been, but at the same time, some teams will sacrifice offense for up the middle defense, and then not score enough to win a bunch of those 2-1 and 3-2 games.

Pros and cons on both sides of the discussion, but not a bad point.

[Frobby]

I agree with mikegallo's point too. My problem is, it is difficult to quantify defense. I do not trust stats such as UZR and +/- very much. That's not to say they are valueless, but I don't feel they are very accurate. Case in point, Nick Markakis, who won a Gold Glove and was 2nd in the AL in the Fielding Bible voting, despite having a negative UZR and +/-. If you want to upgrade the defense, do you need to replace him?

I think we all know Reynolds is a terrible 3B. I think we all know that Wieters is a deserving GG catcher and that Hardy is a very good SS. On almost everyone else, there is a wide variance of opinion. Some people think Markakis should have won multiple Gold Gloves before this year's, some think UZR has him correctly pegged as a below average defender. Some think Jones is an above average CF, some think he is well below average. Some think Reynolds was good once he moved to 1B, some think he was bad. Some think Davis is a good upgrade from Reynolds at 3B, some think he's just as bad as Reynolds. Need I go on?

In any event, Endy Chavez should be a better defensive LF than Pie or Angle, and decent in CF when needed. Teagarden is probably a defensive upgrade to Tatum, though we need to see about that. Otherwise, we're guessing.

[DrungoHazewood]

I agree with mikegallo's point too. My problem is, it is difficult to quantify defense. I do not trust stats such as UZR and +/- very much. That's not to say they are valueless, but I don't feel they are very accurate. Case in point, Nick Markakis, who won a Gold Glove and was 2nd in the AL in the Fielding Bible voting, despite having a negative UZR and +/-. If you want to upgrade the defense, do you need to replace him?

I think we all know Reynolds is a terrible 3B. I think we all know that Wieters is a deserving GG catcher and that Hardy is a very good SS. On almost everyone else, there is a wide variance of opinion. Some people think Markakis should have won multiple Gold Gloves before this year's, some think UZR has him correctly pegged as a below average defender. Some think Jones is an above average CF, some think he is well below average. Some think Reynolds was good once he moved to 1B, some think he was bad. Some think Davis is a good upgrade from Reynolds at 3B, some think he's just as bad as Reynolds. Need I go on?

In any event, Endy Chavez should be a better defensive LF than Pie or Angle, and decent in CF when needed. Teagarden is probably a defensive upgrade to Tatum, though we need to see about that. Otherwise, we're guessing.

I wouldn't call it guessing. All of the metrics say the Orioles were a bad defensive team. The O's were terrible at run prevention, worst in baseball. It's not hard to say that the O's were terrible at third, at least below average at first, a mess in left, probably below average in center, average or maybe a tick better at second and short, average or average+ in right, and great at catcher. Any kind of plus defender is going to upgrade most positions on the field. Wieters is the only consensus great defensive player they have, and most people would agree they have issues at at least three or four spots.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I agree with mikegallo's point too. My problem is, it is difficult to quantify defense. I do not trust stats such as UZR and +/- very much. That's not to say they are valueless, but I don't feel they are very accurate. Case in point, Nick Markakis, who won a Gold Glove and was 2nd in the AL in the Fielding Bible voting, despite having a negative UZR and +/-. If you want to upgrade the defense, do you need to replace him?

I think we all know Reynolds is a terrible 3B. I think we all know that Wieters is a deserving GG catcher and that Hardy is a very good SS. On almost everyone else, there is a wide variance of opinion. Some people think Markakis should have won multiple Gold Gloves before this year's, some think UZR has him correctly pegged as a below average defender. Some think Jones is an above average CF, some think he is well below average. Some think Reynolds was good once he moved to 1B, some think he was bad. Some think Davis is a good upgrade from Reynolds at 3B, some think he's just as bad as Reynolds. Need I go on?

In any event, Endy Chavez should be a better defensive LF than Pie or Angle, and decent in CF when needed. Teagarden is probably a defensive upgrade to Tatum, though we need to see about that. Otherwise, we're guessing.

I think your problem (like some others) is you can't (or won't) separate the exception(s) from the rule (i.e. Nick) or utilize the data within in it's constructs (your Reynolds/Davis argument).

[CA-ORIOLE]

Yea I see your point, I am a 22 year old college kid with a 3 year old to boot so time is most certainly an issue and this being my first thread (could have been more thoughtful as to how to get my point across)even tho I have been following the board for bout 7 years.

But basically thats what my first post was trying to do (with very broad strokes).

But I just have always found it odd that this board with all its great posters, really has neglected the importance of defense in general, let alone for this team which has such a bad D and pitching which clearly correlate.

I mean as a scout you see it everyday the difference between a guy being a superstar catcher or shortstop and a 4 A player is D.

Jack cust would be in the HOF if he had good enough tools to play shortstop...Derek Jeter would have never made the majors if he had no glove.

And the same applies to pitchers I believe much more than any public stat at least can show us. The great orioles team knew this only to well.

And as I see the trend almost every team that we know to be genius (Rays,Blue Jays,Yanks,bo sox)

To me its not a coinidence sp?>. that baseball offense has declined the last two years as great teams shift much more towards D realizing how important it is on the invaulable commadity such as pitching?run prevention.

Using DER (assuming the worst case) we're probably talking about 12 hits and 7 runs between Hellickson and Britton last year on defense. That's significant but probably not the game changer you're making it out to be.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I wouldn't call it guessing. All of the metrics say the Orioles were a bad defensive team. The O's were terrible at run prevention, worst in baseball. It's not hard to say that the O's were terrible at third, at least below average at first, a mess in left, probably below average in center, average or maybe a tick better at second and short, average or average+ in right, and great at catcher. Any kind of plus defender is going to upgrade most positions on the field. Wieters is the only consensus great defensive player they have, and most people would agree they have issues at at least three or four spots.

Well, that recent babip study showed that our DER may not have been as bad as it seems (in fact I think it showed us close to average) and may have been due to balls being hit harder than other teams. But that doesn't really explain our overall poor UZR/DRS (Nick's excepted) which should have provided batted ball speed in some reasonable scope. It would be interesting to see how UZR and DER correlate.

[mikegallo]

I wouldn't call it guessing. All of the metrics say the Orioles were a bad defensive team. The O's were terrible at run prevention, worst in baseball. It's not hard to say that the O's were terrible at third, at least below average at first, a mess in left, probably below average in center, average or maybe a tick better at second and short, average or average+ in right, and great at catcher. Any kind of plus defender is going to upgrade most positions on the field. Wieters is the only consensus great defensive player they have, and most people would agree they have issues at at least three or four spots.

Yeah there really is no doubt at all on the fact we were one of the worst teams in baseball when it comes to D....which made our pitching seem much worse then it actually was....Even tho either way it wasn't good

But this leads me back to my orginal comp on Jeremy versus Zach and how huge D is in the success of a pitcher

To guys with similar perhiphals had amazingly different results....two teams with amazingly different results

Now I am not saying D will completely close the differance in the two teams seasons but I bet it is much more signficant than people seem to want to admit.

Improving our D will be the only way were gonna get any better....it doesnt matter how many grade a pitching prospects we bring through our system until we improve our D there going nowhere fast

Not to mention D is still very underrated in Free agents just look at David Dejeus contract and Michael Cuddyers...Offense is still grossly overpaid for while D is grossly cheap.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Yeah there really is no doubt at all on the fact we were one of the worst teams in baseball when it comes to D....which made our pitching seem much worse then it actually was....Even tho either way it wasn't good

But this leads me back to my orginal comp on Jeremy versus Zach and how huge D is in the success of a pitcher

To guys with similar perhiphals had amazingly different results....two teams with amazingly different results

Now I am not saying D will completely close the differance in the two teams seasons but I bet it is much more signficant than people seem to want to admit.

Improving our D will be the only way were gonna get any better....it doesnt matter how many grade a pitching prospects we bring through our system until we improve our D there going nowhere fast

Not to mention D is still very underrated in Free agents just look at David Dejeus contract and Michael Cuddyers...Offense is still grossly overpaid for while D is grossly cheap.

The peripherals aren't similar. You're comparing one extreme FB pitcher to one extreme GB pitcher. Additionally, Hellickson had some amazing luck no matter how you look at it. At most, we're probably talking a 7 run differential (0.40 in ERA) between the two isolating defense...and that's a stretch. There is far more going on here than defense and while isolating this singular example is interesting (I'll disagree with Stotle here) it lacks any real context or significance on a macro scale.

[mikegallo]

The peripherals aren't similar. You're comparing one extreme FB pitcher to one extreme GB pitcher. Additionally, Hellickson had some amazing luck no matter how you look at it. At most, we're probably talking a 7 run differential (0.40 in ERA) between the two isolating defense...and that's a stretch. There is far more going on here than defense and while isolating this singular example is interesting (I'll disagree with Stotle here) it lacks any real context or significance on a macro scale.

Theres so much wrong with this post....Maybe you should read the thread again

Yea Zach is a GB guy Jeremy is a FB guy that was stated by me several times even listed them when I listed there strikingly simailar peripherals esp for guys with ERA over two runs apart

And of course luck played a huge roll in Jeremys great era something else I stated more then once....READ the THREAD

These to guys are a great example on a MACRO scale of two teams whose D greatly changed the results of there pitching

Orioles xFIP of 4.26 and ERA of 4.9

Rays xFIP of 4 and ERA 3.5

Huge differance mostly because one had a great D one was a horrible D

Jeremy had a era that beat his FIP BY TWO RUNS!!!!!

Zach had an era over .5 runs higher than his FIP.

No D= no pitching (or wasting good pitching)

GREAT D= GREAT PITCHING even for average or in Jeremys case a below average pitcher

So thank you come again

[allstar1579]

Theres so much wrong with this post....Maybe you should read the thread again

Yea Zach is a GB guy Jeremy is a FB guy that was stated by me several times even listed them when I listed there strikingly simailar peripherals esp for guys with ERA over two runs apart

And of course luck played a huge roll in Jeremys great era something else I stated more then once....READ the THREAD

These to guys are a great example on a MACRO scale of two teams whose D greatly changed the results of there pitching

Orioles xFIP of 4.26 and ERA of 4.9

Rays xFIP of 4 and ERA 3.5

Huge differance mostly because one had a great D one was a horrible D

Jeremy had a era that beat his FIP BY TWO RUNS!!!!!

Zach had an era over .5 runs higher than his FIP.

No D= no pitching (or wasting good pitching)

GREAT D= GREAT PITCHING even for average or in Jeremys case a below average pitcher

So thank you come again

Before you go getting all snarky with guys that understand advanced stats much better than you do, learn how to use a period.

You are obsessed with this whole D and FIP thing. As people have touched on before Defense isn't the easiest thing to turn into numbers, there is a lot more that goes into it, and it's probably better left to scouts to evaluate than statisticians. So no matter how many times you want to say people don't understand you, or that these numbers scream a story, in the end it's not going to matter, scouting will win on this one.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Theres so much wrong with this post....Maybe you should read the thread again

Yea Zach is a GB guy Jeremy is a FB guy that was stated by me several times even listed them when I listed there strikingly simailar peripherals esp for guys with ERA over two runs apart

And of course luck played a huge roll in Jeremys great era something else I stated more then once....READ the THREAD

These to guys are a great example on a MACRO scale of two teams whose D greatly changed the results of there pitching

Orioles xFIP of 4.26 and ERA of 4.9

Rays xFIP of 4 and ERA 3.5

Huge differance mostly because one had a great D one was a horrible D

Jeremy had a era that beat his FIP BY TWO RUNS!!!!!

Zach had an era over .5 runs higher than his FIP.

No D= no pitching (or wasting good pitching)

GREAT D= GREAT PITCHING even for average or in Jeremys case a below average pitcher

So thank you come again

I read the thread and there is no confusion other than your myopic fixation on one year and two pitchers with different peripheral stats that you have selectively chosen to mitigate.

You consistently harp on defense being so significant but provided little context up to this point and none as it specifically relates to Britton versus Helickson, I did the work for you. Using DER and placing all the factors in your favor it's a difference of 7 runs or 0.40 in ERA. That may put Britton up to an ERA+ close to 100 but still leaves a 26-27 point gap in ERA+. So while the difference is significant, it's not what you're making it out to be.

There is something more going on there between Hellickson and Britton other than defense and it's not just luck.

-FIP/XFIP tends to reward GB pitchers and hurt FB pitchers.

-Not uncommon for FB pitchers to outpitch their FIP.

-Hellickson pitched extremely well in high leverage situations. Britton did not.

-TB is a lower run environment favoring FB pitchers like Hellickson. He may be better suited to is park than Britton is to his.

-OPACY should reward Britton as the IF is slower and the park yields Higher HR rates.

The bottom line is Hellickson did things better than Britton did last year. He simply performed better in his environment (that's already neutralizing defense and park) and in leverage situations.

If your argument is that Britton was better than Hellickson last year because he had a higher FIP/XFIP, I don't buy it. Didn't buy it with Guthrie and don't buy it now. That said the peripherals show something and do indicate the gap is closer and there are many that believe FIP is a better a predictor a future performance than ERA/ERA+.

If you want to look at TB's overall numbers versus ours and relate them to defense, then that's a different story. That's more of a macro approach I'd be looking for.

[mikegallo]

I read the thread and there is no confusion other than your myopic fixation on one year and two pitchers with different peripheral stats that you have selectively chosen to mitigate.

You consistently harp on defense being so significant but provided little context up to this point and none as it specifically relates to Britton versus Helickson, I did the work for you. Using DER and placing all the factors in your favor it's a difference of 7 runs or 0.40 in ERA. That may put Britton up to an ERA+ close to 100 but still leaves a 26-27 point gap in ERA+. So while the difference is significant, it's not what you're making it out to be.

There is something more going on there between Hellickson and Britton other than defense and it's not just luck.

-FIP/XFIP tends to reward GB pitchers and hurt FB pitchers.

-Not uncommon for FB pitchers to outpitch their FIP.

-Hellickson pitched extremely well in high leverage situations. Britton did not.

-TB is a lower run environment favoring FB pitchers like Hellickson. He may be better suited to is park than Britton is to his.

-OPACY should reward Britton as the IF is slower and the park yields Higher HR rates.

The bottom line is Hellickson did things better than Britton did last year. He simply performed better in his environment (that's already neutralizing defense and park) and in leverage situations.

If your argument is that Britton was better than Hellickson last year because he had a higher FIP/XFIP, I don't buy it. Didn't buy it with Guthrie and don't buy it now. That said the peripherals show something and do indicate the gap is closer and there are many that believe FIP is a better a predictor a future performance than ERA/ERA+.

If you want to look at TB's overall numbers versus ours and relate them to defense, then that's a different story. That's more of a macro approach I'd be looking for.

Look I was trying to tell a story of the two teams drastic different seasons and how D is such a huge and underrated part of that and thoses pitchers were just a good example of just that.

Clearly, this being my first thread, I was unable to point the discussion for whatever reason (wording clearly) toward where my direct point was.

Bottom line D greatly changes the performance of pitchers and by extension a team...The orioles greatly neglected this impact on there roster last year and the results show that....The Rays didn't and there pitching also showed that.

Jeremy and Zachs rookie seasons clearly show the weight these two teams put on D and no one can deny it is a huge reason the Rays are now a contender and the Os aren't.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Look I was trying to tell a story of the two teams drastic different seasons and how D is such a huge and underrated part of that and thoses pitchers were just a good example of just that.

Clearly, this being my first thread, I was unable to point the discussion for whatever reason (wording clearly) toward where my direct point was.

Bottom line D greatly changes the performance of pitchers and by extension a team...The orioles greatly neglected this impact on there roster last year and the results show that....The Rays didn't and there pitching also showed that.

Jeremy and Zachs rookie seasons clearly show the weight these two teams put on D and no one can deny it is a huge reason the Rays are now a contender and the Os aren't.

If you made a post "Rays pitching and defense versus O's Pitching and defense" and used more direct analytics, you'd have generated much better discussion and pointed the post towards a pretty significant point imo. You really made no substantive points about this up until your second to last post and essentially did all you could to distract and minimize your supposed central point here. Relating your point directly to these two pitchers in one year was fatally flawed from the start. I know you thought it was creative. We're not dummies that need to be told a story and we get agitated when the story doesn't really make a lot of sense. Why not start over with something more macroscopic, coherent and less tangential.