Daniel Cabrera... and BABIP

[Lucky Jim]

Sorry, if I am coming off as overly defensive. I do not mean to. I am trying to restate what I wrote.

First off, I am not depending on pitch f/x at all for my analyses. I merely mentioned his two fastballs look similar on it and we cannot easily use last year's data. I think go into what we should expect from an improved sinker and how the data do not seem to agree with that as an explanation.

Second, BABIP is a weak stat because of the small sample size and how it blends too many types of information together into a generic format. That being said, it can indicate discrepancies. Furthermore, it isn't like all we have is the BABIP data suggesting Cabrera is lucky. Many of his peripherals just do not jive with his success.

Again, I am not taking offense to your comments and appreciate your words. I just think you might be misunderstanding how I came to my own working conclusion. Surely, the answer has not been figured out yet and this is an analysis in progress. We need more data to do anything from a stat end and probably from a visual end as well.

Also . . . if anyone here wants to supplement my fellowship stipend, I will gladly get cable and watch the games. Some of us are not so fortunate and have to choose food over baseball.

I think there's really just a simple misunderstanding. I'm not criticizing your overall conclusions (and largely agree with them, to a point).

I was commenting mostly (at first, at least) on your use of PitchFX to determine that D-Cab isn't throwing a good 2-seam fastball. That was the impetus for my post, really. Nothing more.

[KurtCDavidson]

Throwing more fastballs, seemingly 4 seamers, should not induce more groundballs. They should also not result in more easily caught line drives. Can someone inform me how pitch f/x explains these phenomena?

From my perspective, it seems that the limited pitch f/x data suggests that he is throwing a 'tighter' breaking pitch with less vertical movement.

This would suggest that there would be more contact on breaking balls than swing-and-misses and more strikes than balls. Both factors would drive up GB%.

Does anyone know if this data exists?

[Sports Guy]

The bottom line with all of this is we need to see things like BABIP normalize before we can get a true feel about DCab.

I said the same thing about Guthrie last year and it applies here as well.

That is why I want to see the K rate up, the BB rate down and his HR rate to keep coming down. With his stuff and his ability to pitch late into games, if he command the ball better, DCab is going to be, at worse, a #2 starter in this league.

[Sports Guy]

How accurate can we assume the pitch f/x stuff is?

I mean, if the guy doing it is off just by a fraction, it can distort things.

[Lucky Jim]

How accurate can we assume the pitch f/x stuff is?

I mean, if the guy doing it is off just by a fraction, it can distort things.

Careful, Shack.

[Jericho]

BABIP has got to have something to do with how good the pitcher is, or there wouldn't be any such thing as a successful pitcher who pitches to contact. Keeping guys off balance and having good stuff produces balls hit poorly into play. Hopefully that's what we're seeing in the skewed numbers that D-Cab is putting up.

I think the statistic becomes a measure of luck when you compare the same pitcher over multiple seasons. How does 2008 Daniel compare to past Daniels in BABIP? I think that would tell you how lucky he's been.

There's been lots of studies done on this, and the general conclusion is that no, it's not about skill at all. Even top players like Pedro Martinez will fluctuate wildly from year to year on BABIP. The average BABIP is about .290for AL pitchers and .280 for NL pitchers. Over time, pretty much everyone regresses to the mean. That being said, in a given season a few individual pitchers will be particularly high or low. But over a career, it all pretty much normalizes.

That being said, there are some accepted truths about BABIP. One, it speaks to the quality of the defense behind you. The better the D, the lower the BABIP. Two, groundball pitchers tend to have slightly higher than normal BABIPs. They are a few pitchers who do outpace their expected BABIPs for their career. The difference is slight, but there does seem to be some skill in pitchers exceeding the norm. But like I said, the difference is slight. No one's going to maintain a .220 BABIP. But maybe .010 lower than norm is doable.

But in the end, a good portion of BABIP is luck. If it's really far from the norm, it's mainly luck. Pitching to contact works in part to keep pitch counts down, and allows a guy to save his best stuff for the most important counts. But it only really works if you're also King some guys, minimizing walks, and not allowing a ton of HRs.

[crawdad]

How accurate can we assume the pitch f/x stuff is?

I mean, if the guy doing it is off just by a fraction, it can distort things.

Right, I think the data has be dealt with a blobs with the truth lying somewhere within the blob as accuracy and precision are still somewhat open for question. Relating things to the four-seamer may help a bit. I'm sure if we all knew more about the derivation of the output, we'd be more confidant in this approach.

[Sports Guy]

This is definitely one of those things that you need to use your eyes as the #1 thing. My eyes tell me that DCab's 2 seamer is sick and really unhittable when it is on.

[Mackus]

This is definitely one of those things that you need to use your eyes as the #1 thing. My eyes tell me that DCab's 2 seamer is sick and really unhittable when it is on.

I remember even his first couple starts when he was getting hit hard that his fastball was looking considerably better than it had, with a lot more movement, in a couple years. His curve was still pretty bad, and I still don't think he's had a good one all year, but his heater has been so good that he can throw it a ton and get away with it.

I don't think he'll be able to do that all season, so he'll have to start throwing either the curve or change with some effectiveness, but the 2-seamer has certainly looked much better than the last couple years.

[tywright]

This is definitely one of those things that you need to use your eyes as the #1 thing. My eyes tell me that DCab's 2 seamer is sick and really unhittable when it is on.

Funny you say that...how is this any different from Guts last year?

[Mackus]

Funny you say that...how is this any different from Guts last year?

Because Cabrera's stuff is far better than Guthrie's.

Guthrie certainly looked and pitched better than his periferals would suggest, but that doesn't mean he's a similar comparison to Cabrera in terms of stuff.

[Sports Guy]

Funny you say that...how is this any different from Guts last year?

Because my eyes don't tell me the same thing...If Guthrie's stuff was consistently like it was last night, I would be right there with you....But it isn't consistent at all.

[Lucky Jim]

Funny you say that...how is this any different from Guts last year?

The overall argument - that Cabrera is likely to regress - is exactly the same. There's no inconsistency at all. Now, how good the pitchers will be when that regression occurs may vary. And that's based on "stuff."

Cabrera pretty much indisputably has better stuff than Guthrie.

[tywright]

Because Cabrera's stuff is far better than Guthrie's.

Guthrie certainly looked and pitched better than his periferals would suggest, but that doesn't mean he's a similar comparison to Cabrera in terms of stuff.

Of course DCab's stuff is better.

I'm referring to the fact that we dismissed Gut's stuff last year and put more emphasis on his MILB numbers. Guts does have good stuff (#3 starter) and he consistently showed that for over 3 months last year. Yet SG didn't have faith in him because his MILB numbers and BABIP suggested his performance was fluky...despite the fact he was drafted in the 1st rd and was scouted as a #2/3 as a prospect and college pitcher. We did find out his early numbers were fluky, but he still posted a very good season after having an inconsistent 2nd half.

So I was surprised to see SG actually using his "eyes" at the "#1 thing to look" at DCab. Now we should agree that historic stats and pitch f/x shouldn't be weighted so heavily...especially when you have a pitcher adapting to new methods and is realizing a epiphany of sorts... basically he's maturing before our eyes as a pitcher...not a thrower.

That's why I brought up Guts since his stuff and performance was downplayed by SG. I'm glad you've come around, SG...and I do agree that Guts' consistency is the key factor.

[Mackus]

Guts does have good stuff (#3 starter) and he consistently showed that for over 3 months last year. Yet SG didn't have faith in him because his MILB numbers and BABIP suggested his performance was fluky...despite the fact he was drafted in the 1st rd and was scouted as a #2/3 as a prospect and college pitcher. We did find out his early numbers were fluky, but he still posted a very good season after having an inconsistent 2nd half.

I think your argument proves SG right. Guthrie's ERA was that of a #1/2 starter, and many people were quick to anoint him as such (myself included). His peripherals and other stats suggested that he was more of a #3/4 starter. It appears that this is the case. He's still a very solid MLB caliber starter, just not a great front-of-the-rotation guy.