If there is one thing that fantasy owners like, it is consistency. One of the most consistent players in recent seasons is Adam LaRoche, who just signed a free agent deal with the Diamondbacks. Now that we know where LaRoche will play this season, let’s look at what he is likely to produce. Here are his fantasy stats for the past three seasons:

2007: .272-21-88-71-1
2008: .270-25-85-66-1
2009: .277-25-83-78-2

Of course, fantasy owners know LaRoche for something else, too. He is one of the players who has consistently performed better in the second half of the season compared to the first half. LaRoche has been in the league for six seasons and in five of those he has posted a higher OPS after the All-Star break, including four years where the difference was over 200 points. Here are his lifetime splits by halves:

First Half: .252/.326/.447 in 1785 PA
Second H: .300/.363/.546 in 1445 PA

Over at The Book Blog, MGL and TangoTiger have done a bunch of work on splits, specifically on halves. MGL said, “Using the ‘same weight’ method, I got an ‘r’ of -.004 (again, 6427 player seasons).

Using the second method, weighting by PA, I got an ‘r’ of .001.

Sorry guys, I see no evidence of these splits having any meaning whatsoever. None.”

MGL went on to offer a $100 donation to charity if anyone could find a predictive value to splits (aside from a few with previously documented small predictive values). Nearly 15 months later, nobody has posted any research looking for a reward.

But, what works for the aggregate does not necessarily work for the individual, as we see here in the extreme case of LaRoche. The question becomes, should we weight LaRoche differently given his track record?

Perhaps more importantly, are fantasy owners valuing LaRoche correctly, given his overall performance the past three years? Currently, he has an ADP of 255, making him on average a pick early in the 22nd round.

If LaRoche can duplicate what he has done recently, he will be a steal at that pick. And now he gets to call Chase Field home. After spending most of his career in Atlanta, where Turner Field has a multi-year park factor of 98, LaRoche will play half of his games in a good hitter’s park. Baseball-Reference.com gives Chase Field a multi-year park factor of 109. In his brief playing time so far in Arizona, LaRoche has a .661 OPS in 43 PA.

Perhaps those at-bats came early in the season.

Santa is not the only one with an overflowing mailbag this time of year. Let’s answer two questions in this version.

Question #1: JMB asks:

Do you see Pablo Sandoval gaining catcher eligibility if the Giants go with Buster Posey behind the plate? I’m in a keeper league where I traded away Sandoval last season, but I’d love to have him back if I can exploit that angle. Posey obviously can’t catch 162 games. Will the Giants go to another backup trying to protect Sandoval’s elbow, or do you see him calling some games? Thanks for your help!

Unfortunately, I think the ship has sailed for Sandoval as a catcher. I think he did decent work behind the plate in his brief time as a catcher in the majors. But Sandoval caught only three games in 2009, with his last game behind the plate coming on May 8.

As you alluded to, in the third week of May, Sandoval suffered an arm injury when he strained his right elbow making a throw from third base during an Interleague game against the Mariners. He missed four games and the injury lingered a little after that, too. Perhaps the Giants had already made their decision to move Sandoval permanently off catcher prior to the injury, but it is noticeable that he did not do it again afterwards.

You did not mention the eligibility requirements for your league but it is very difficult to imagine him playing 20 games behind the plate. Even 10 games at catcher for Sandoval seems unattainable. Perhaps if your league requires only one game during the regular season to become eligible it becomes a possibility but I would not want to even wager on that chance.

Finally, do not expect Posey to open the year in San Francisco. In an article dated December 5, John Shea of the San Francisco Chronicle wrote, “General manager Brian Sabean said the front office had a ‘raging debate’ over whether Posey would be the No. 1 catcher, adding, ‘We came to the overall conclusion it would be a tall order to ask him to do that. He just hasn’t played a lot.’”

Question #2: KE asks:

I have a keeper deadline on 12/31, and I’m struggling with who to keep for my last position. I’m in a 12 team auction league where the longer you keep a player the more you pay. My budget for next year is $285. The hitting categories are: R, 2B, 3B, HR, RBI, net SB, K, BB, Avg. I’m looking for a 1-year deal and trying to decide between:

– Todd Helton ($2)
– Bobby Abreu ($20)
– Miguel Cabrera ($39)

My other keepers are: Pedroia ($19 for 5 years), S. Drew ($4 for 2 years), Choo ($13 for 3 years), Adam Jones ($13 for 3 years), Victorino ($14 for 1 year), Carpenter ($8 for 1 year) and Tommy Hanson ($8 for 3 years). We start 2C, 1B, 2B, SS, 3B, 5 OF, 1B/3B, 2B/SS, Util.

The numbers tell me to keep Helton as a good value, but I’m concerned about walking into the draft without a 1st round talent (well, Pedroia rates out as a 1st rounder in our scoring system).

Any help you can provide would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.

I would not worry at all about having keepers with first-round talent. Instead, focus on how much value is on your roster and how much of a budget you and your fellow owners will bring to the auction.

Because of the net steals category, Abreu probably creates the most raw dollar value of the three, followed by Cabrera then Helton. But they are likely all within a few dollars of each other, making Helton the choice due to the large dollar discrepancy among their contracts.

Helton bounced back nicely from the back problems that plagued him during the 2008 season and turned in a fantasy season that fit in well with what he produced from 2005-2007. It may be that 2009 is the top end of what Helton can produce next season (his .355 BABIP was his highest since 2004) but even if he misses substantial time with injury a-la 2008, he is likely to exceed $2 in value. And if he plays in 150 games again, you will easily wind up with double-digit dollar value, an excellent return and a great building block for a money finish for you.

Have a question for the RotoGraphs authors? Send it in to our mailbag (rotographs+mailbag@fangraphs.com) for consideration.

Which of these two pitchers is going to go for more in your auction this year? Here are their 2009 stats and their 2010 ages:

Player A: 15 W, 2.87 ERA, 238 Ks, 1.026 WHIP, RHP, age 33
Player B: 2 W, 3.61 ERA, 30 Ks, 1.465 ERA, RHP, age 34

Now, that comparison is not really fair, as Player B was obviously hurt at some point while Player A had arguably the best season of his career last year. So, let’s use some career numbers instead.

Player A: 4.19 ERA, 8.14 K/9, 1.24 WHIP
Player B: 3.64 ERA, 6.13 K/9, 1.26 WHIP

That closes the gap considerably and you could reasonably opt for Player B, preferring his likely ERA to Player B’s definite K advantage. A lot would depend on the health of Player B and the respective teams of the two pitchers. Let’s throw another piece of information into the mix, the Bill James 2010 projections for both players.

Player A: 15 W, 3.60 ERA, 204 Ks, 1.20 WHIP
Player B: 10 W, 3.64 ERA, 89 Ks, 1.29 WHIP

That projection sees the ERA and WHIP as tossups, but a huge advantage in W and Ks for Player A, in part due to a 68-IP advantage for Player A. The Mock Draft crowd has already spoken, giving an ADP of 57 to Player A , with a high draft position of 41 and a low draft position of 71 in the last 199 drafts. Meanwhile, Player B had an ADP of 192, with a high draft position of 144 and a low draft position of 230.

As you might have guessed, Player A is Javier Vazquez while Player B is Tim Hudson. The Braves essentially had this choice and opted to go with Hudson. They have the best information on his health and they determined he was worth a 3 Year/$28 million contract, which includes a $1 million buyout of a fourth year, also at $9 million. Meanwhile, Vazquez at $11.5 million on the final year of his contract was dealt away in what was at least partially a salary dump.

The Braves would have preferred to have traded Derek Lowe, who is older, less effective and costs more money than Vazquez. But no one was willing to step up and take Lowe off their hands, at least they did not offer a haul greater than that offered for Vazquez, a haul criticized on most Atlanta message boards.

The Braves are generally regarded as a well-run team. They knew that signing Hudson gave them six SP and that they would have to shed the salary of one of them prior to the season. They decided that three/four years of Hudson at $9 million per year was better than one year of Vazquez at $11.5 million plus additional salary the following two seasons or two compensation picks. And they did this knowing that this is the final year for manager Bobby Cox and knowing that the window for another championship for Chipper Jones is closing, too.

From the Braves position, we cannot evaluate this trade until we see what they do with the money freed up in the differences between the salaries of Vazquez and Melky Cabrera, roughly $9 million. Do they trade for Dan Uggla and make him their first baseman? Do they sign Mark DeRosa and make him a starting outfielder? Those are just two of countless options now available.

But what we do know is that we need to reevaluate the 2010 rankings of both Hudson and Vazquez. If the Braves think Hudson is healthy enough to lock up for three or four years, than he is a decent bet to provide better results than his ADP as the 49th SP off the board would indicate. And with Vazquez in the AL, pitching half his games in 2009’s best HR park in baseball, we probably need to adjust him downward from being the 10th SP selected, his current ADP.

Last year Bengie Molina was the ninth-best fantasy catcher, according to final dollar numbers from the RotoTimes Player Rater. He finished with a $2.62 value, just behind Miguel Olivo ($2.65) and ahead of A.J. Pierzynksi ($2.50). But what should fantasy owners expect from Molina in 2010?

First, let’s start by breaking down Molina by category. Here are his ranks by position in each category, along with his raw numbers in parentheses:

HR – T6th (20)
R – 12th (52)
RBIs – 6th (80)
AVG – 14th (.265)
SB – T 30th (0)

It is pretty clear that Molina derives most of his fantasy value from HR and RBIs, so to continue to be a worthwhile fantasy player, he needs to come close to matching those numbers next season.

Last year, Molina was the cleanup hitter for most of the season for the Giants, as 487 of his 520 PA came in the fourth spot in the order. Now a free agent, Molina is unlikely to return to San Francisco, as the Giants want to open the position for top prospect Buster Posey sooner rather than later, while Molina is looking for a long-term deal.

Molina is not likely to hit cleanup for any other team in the majors, so his RBI totals are going to fall off wherever he ends up, as he bats lower in the order, comes to the plate fewer times and sees fewer runners on base.

But we also have to consider that Molina will be hitting in a new park. Last year he had the following home/road splits:

H: .309/.324/.532
R: .225/.250/.360

The previous two seasons in San Francisco, Molina had been fairly neutral in his home/road splits. Last year’s numbers were in part caused by a big BABIP split. He had a .300 BABIP in home games compared to a .234 mark in road games. For the year he had a .273 BABIP, compared to a lifetime mark of .281 in the category.

Another factor to consider when projecting Molina’s 2010 HR output is that last season he had a 52.5 FB%, by far the highest mark of his career. After five seasons of FB% in the mid to upper 30s, Molina has seen increases the last three seasons, culminating in last year’s mark, which was the third-highest in the majors.

Meanwhile, his HR/FB rate was 8.8 percent, which matched his career average.

Another important thing to consider is that Molina will be 35-years old in 2010. Catchers take more abuse than any other position player and normal aging patterns do not necessarily apply to those who don the tools of ignorance. Among 34-year-old backstops, Molina’s 2009 HR output ranked tied for sixth while his RBI totals ranked eighth. Here’s how the top 10 in both categories fared in their age 34 and age 35 seasons, starting with HR:

Read the rest of this entry »

Two outfielders with similar names put up eerily similar fantasy numbers last year. Here are the respective numbers for Jason Bay and Jayson Werth:

JB:.267-36-119-103-13
JW: .268-36-99-98-20

The largest difference in any category is the 20 RBIs that separate them. As you might imagine, the two winded up with very similar dollar values. The RotoTimes Player Rater gave Bay’s season a $24.40 total while Werth’s received a $24.12 value.

But while those were very close, there were many, many more players who winded up with closer gaps in their dollar value. Many of these players played different positions and posted very different stats, but came out with similar values. For instance, check out these two lines:

A: .281-13-90-73-7
B: .243-31-90-84-2

Which one would you rather have?

Player A is James Loney, with an $8.53 value, while Player B is Dan Uggla, who checked in with an $8.52 total. Obviously, you would rather have Player B, once you know it was Uggla, a second baseman. The Player Rater does not take into account position scarcity. So, when making comparisons you either need to build in your own adjustments or focus on players at similar positions.

Let’s look at two players who have been compared recently by agent Scott Boras, in Mark Teixeira and Matt Holliday. Boras, the agent for both, is trying to get a contract for Holliday similar to the one he arranged for Teixeira last year. The argument has been met with a lukewarm response from the baseball community, but is one that was fairly apt for fantasy purposes last year. Here are their fantasy numbers:

MT:.292-32-122-103-2
MH:.313-24-109-94-14

The Player Rater gave Teixeira a $25.70 value and Holliday a $25.52 one.

Another interesting comparison between two players with very different skills but similar overall values last season is Ian Kinsler and Michael Bourn. Kinsler’s power and Bourn’s speed produced virtually identical fantasy seasons.

IK:.253-31-86-101-31
MB: .285-3-35-97-61

The Player Rater had the two separated by just one penny, with Kinsler posting the higher value at $22.81 last season.

Dollar values are not a precise measurement and different sites will have different values for players. These are best used as a rough estimate of value and as a reminder that owners (and players) can acquire value in a multitude of ways.

In 2008, Mark Reynolds put up a .239-28-97-87-11 fantasy line as a 24-year old. The RotoTimes Player Rater valued that season at $12.14, making Reynolds the 76th most valuable hitter in fantasy. Only 31 pitchers recorded a higher dollar value that year.

Coming into the 2009 season, fantasy players were not impressed with Reynolds. Not only did they forecast no improvement from the Arizona third baseman, they predicted him to be significantly worse than he was the previous year.

If you forecasted Reynolds to duplicate what he did in 2008, you might pick him around 107th (76 + 31). If you used a 60-40 hitter-pitcher split, you might figure the 76th best hitter to go around pick 127. Instead, fantasy players drafted him around 100 spots lower than those methods. Reynolds’ ESPN page gave him an ADP of 218.9 for 2009.

Clearly, fantasy players did not believe in Reynolds. What did the preseason projections predict for him?

Bill James – .269-32-105-101-10
CHONE – .252-22-81-77-5
Marcel – .260-23-82-78-7
ZiPS – .257-28-89-88-7

Only the James model, frequently the most optimistic projection system, saw him bettering his 2008 numbers. ZiPS had him with a better AVG, but basically the same in HR, RBI and R, while suffering a drop in SB. Both Marcel and CHONE predicted a better AVG but drops in the other categories due to playing time issues.

But even the most pessimistic of the projection systems saw Reynolds putting up roughly an $8-10 season. For a comparison, see 2008 Adrian Beltre, who posted a .266-25-77-74-8 line, which RotoTimes gave a $10.23 dollar value. Beltre had an ESPN ADP of 103.9 for 2009.

Why did fantasy players think so poorly of Reynolds heading into the 2009 season?

Obviously the strikeouts were a major red flag for a lot of people. Reynolds set the all-time single-season strikeout record in 2008 with 204 Ks and he had a 37.8 percent K%. Additionally, he had a .329 BABIP, which seemed elevated with his 19.1 percent LD%. Even the Dutton and Bendix xBABIP model thought he was lucky in 2008, as it gave him a .304 BABIP.

Evidently, fantasy players must have been worried about the strikeouts and the low average ultimately preventing Reynolds from keeping a starting job in 2009. The pessimistic projection systems had Reynolds as a solid player even with 75 fewer ABs. Fantasy players must have figured he would not even reach the 468 ABs that CHONE projected.

The Diamondbacks did have a reasonable alternative at third base on the roster in Chad Tracy. A knee injury was the main culprit causing Tracy to log just 552 ABs in 2007-08 but all of the preseason reports were bullish on Tracy, who had a 132 OPS+ in 2005 and who carried a lifetime .285 AVG heading into the 2009 season.

But even when Reynolds struggled in 2008, he hit .226/.303/.409 after the All-Star break, Arizona kept him in the lineup along with Tracy, who saw most of his action at first base. That should have been an indication that Reynolds was going to have a long leash in 2009.

Clearly, no one saw the 44-HR, 24-SB season that Reynolds enjoyed in 2009. But since the team stuck with him through a record strikeout season in 2008, gave no indication that they thought Tracy deserved playing time ahead of him at third base and that the team did not have a top prospect at the position waiting in the minors, thinking that he was a likely candidate to lose his job in 2009 was a poor prediction.

Reynolds may have broke his own strikeout record in 2009, but the biggest whiff came from fantasy owners who relegated him to the 18th round or lower in drafts this year. RotoTimes gave his 2009 season a $27.58 value, making Reynolds the 12th-best fantasy hitter this year and one of the biggest bargains in the game.

Recently, reader Pat left a comment on an article, asking:

“Can’t alot of pitchers HR/FB rates be expected to increase in the second half just due to the weather? … [T]herefore it would seem like a good strategy in a points league to stack pitching in the first half (and then look to make moves around the allstar break to acquire hitters).”

The reasoning here is that since bats tend to heat up as the weather gets warmer, hoard pitching early and then pick up hitters when the season is in full swing and 80 and 90 degree days are the norm.

Seems like a reasonable strategy, but would it work?

Since we would hoard pitchers early, let’s look at the top 20 starting pitchers, as determined by the final dollar values from the RotoTimes Player Rater, and check out their monthly HR and HR/FB data.

If HR prevention is the goal of this strategy, 16 of our 20 top pitchers had a HR/FB rate less than 11 percent in the final month of the season. Even August, the month last year where more HR by far were hit than any other, saw eight of our 20 pitchers have a HR/FB rate beneath 11 percent.

And this does not even take into account that the pitchers who were ranked top 20 at the beginning of the year often are nowhere to be found near the top of the leaderboard at the conclusion of the year. Using my friend Troy Patterson’s 2009 Starting Pitcher Rankings, here are the ones that did not make the top 20 at the end of the year:

Johan Santana (1), Brandon Webb (4), Jake Peavy (5), Cole Hamels (8), James Shields (10), Roy Oswalt (11), Ervin Santana (13), John Lackey (14), AJ Burnett (15), Edinson Volquez (16), Scott Kazmir (17), Carlos Zambrano (18), Chad Billingsley (19) and Daisuke Matsuzaka (20).

If you went into your draft convinced to load up on pitching, you could have wound up with a staff of Santana, Webb, Peavy, Hamels, Oswalt, Lackey and Burnett and at the All-Star break found other owners willing to offer you very little hitting in return.

Now, let us look at how pitchers as a whole fared in 2009. Here are the first and second half splits for all of the pitchers in MLB in 2009:

1st half – 4.32 ERA, 1.389 WHIP
2nd half – 4.33 ERA, 1.391 WHIP

It does not always work out this close, but this is yet another example of how easy this strategy could go awry.

Finally, you also have to consider how your league will handle trading with you when you have such an obvious need for hitters. Will your league-mates be willing to help you out and offer fair or even somewhat reasonable trades given how needy you are for offense? In friendly leagues that might not be a problem but it would likely be a bigger issue the more competitive your league is.

The best pitchers can dominate (or like Rodriguez in June – get lit up) at any point in the season. Stacking up on pitching only to turn around and deal it for hitting at the All-Star break seems like the fantasy baseball equivalent of market timing and not the best way to ensure long-term success.

Earlier today, in Part I of the series, I published a chart of 34 pitchers who had a difference of 0.50 or greater between their FIP and xFIP at the All-Star break and their 2nd half ERAs. Here I want to go into more detail rather than just giving a raw score for the two metrics

In rating the two systems, I considered the metrics to recommend keeping a pitcher if at the All-Star break they were at 3.50 or lower, to listen to a trade if they were between 3.51 and 4.00, to actively look to sell the player if they were between 4.01 and 4.50 and to either sell or cut a pitcher if they were above 4.51.

Of course, we also have to consider what the pitcher’s actual ERA was at the break, too. A pitcher could still be a sell candidate if one of the metrics was significantly higher than his ERA. For these extreme cases, I considered a difference between 50-75 points to be a “listen” candidate, while above 75 to be a “sell high” guy.

Zack Greinke – His xFIP was 101 points higher than his ERA, making Greinke a sell high guy. This was a big win for FIP.

Joel Pineiro – After allowing just three home runs in 17 first half games, Pineiro served up eight home runs in 15 games after the break. This was a big win for xFIP.

Tim Lincecum – It was a very good second half of the season for Lincecum, just not as good as the first half. He did have a slightly higher HR/FB rate in the second half, and xFIP did a better job predicting his post-break ERA. Still, those fantasy owners who kept him based on his FIP did not end up disappointed.

Dallas Braden – Made just four starts after the break due to a foot infection. Officially a win for xFIP, but one we should probably dismiss due to lack of playing time.

Paul Maholm – His second half ERA was lower than his first half one, despite more HR allowed. Still, this was a pitcher that FIP would have identified as a potential buy candidate at the break, so a win for xFIP.

Tim Wakefield – Made just four starts in the second half due to leg and back injuries. Officially a win for xFIP, but one we should probably dismiss due to the lack of playing time.

Clayton Kershaw – He had a 5.0 HR/FB rate at the break and was even better in the second half, as he finished the year with a 4.1 mark. His ERA finished two full runs below what xFIP predicted. This was a big win for FIP.

Derek Lowe – Opponents posted an .888 OPS versus Lowe in the second half of the season, including 10 HR in 331 ABs. This was a big win for xFIP.

Cliff Lee – Everyone thinks the move to the NL turned things around for Lee but he was 3-0 with a 1.44 ERA in his first three games with Cleveland after the break. His HR/FB rate has been below 11 percent the past five seasons. This was a big win for FIP.

Carlos Zambrano – This was the closest one, as Zambrano’s second half ERA of 4.14 was just barely closer to his first-half FIP than his xFIP. Zambrano pitched worse in the second half than in the first, but it had nothing to do with his HR rate, which declined slightly from the 5.8 he posted in the first half. This was a slight win for FIP.

Jair Jurrjens – Both FIP and xFIP predicted Jurrjens’ ERA to rise in the second half and instead he pitched even better after the break. If you went strictly by FIP at the break, you would have listened to offers for Jurrjens. If you went by xFIP you were in the sell/cut area. This was a win for FIP.

Jeff Niemann – As with Jurrjens, both of our metrics predicted an ERA rise from Niemann in the second half. FIP had him as a sell while xFIP had him as a sell or cut guy. This was a slight win for FIP.

Nick Blackburn – Yet another pitcher that both metrics forecasted a rise in ERA. Except this time, the actual rise was more drastic than even the more pessimistic xFIP predicted. Since you might have kept him if you used FIP, this was a big win for xFIP.

Edwin Jackson – Pretty much the same thing as with Blackburn above, except you were even more likely to keep Jackson if you used FIP. This was a big win for xFIP.

Mike Pelfrey – The spread with our two metrics was not nearly as great with Pelfrey as it was for Blackburn and Jackson, but the end results were the same. This was a big win for xFIP.

Jon Garland – FIP projected Garland to be virtually the same in the second half as he was in the first half while xFIP had him being noticeably worse. The trade to Los Angeles invigorated Garland, or perhaps it was simply leaving a bad home park, as he finished the year with a 5.29 ERA at Chase Field and a 1.67 ERA at Dodger Stadium. This was a win for FIP, but probably not a pitcher anyone was targeting at the break.

Felix Hernandez – Again, both metrics predicted an ERA rise in the second half, although xFIP was more pessimistic, making him a sell high guy with a difference of 94 points. Hernandez pitched even better after the break, making this a big win for FIP.

Justin Verlander – Both metrics predicted an ERA drop in the second half for Verlander, with FIP being the most optimistic. Verlander pitched well, but saw his ERA go up, making this a win for xFIP.

Brian Bannister – A 3.66 ERA in the first half made Bannister look like a useful pitcher. Both metrics saw an ERA increase, but xFIP was the most pessimistic. This was a big win for xFIP.

C.C. Sabathia – Our two metrics were split on how Sabathia would fare in the second half. With a predicted decrease from his first half ERA, this was a big win for FIP.

Brad Penny – Our two metrics were split again. But Penny’s ERA went up in the second half. This was a win for xFIP, but not many people who used FIP were angling to acquire Penny.

Vicente Padilla – His HR/FB rate went up significantly in the second half, yet Padilla produced a lower ERA after the break, thanks to a move to the NL. Neither metric identified Padilla as a pitcher to target, although FIP came very close to hitting his actual mark.

Jarrod Washburn – Both metrics identified Washburn as a sell candidate as his ERA was 92 points lower than his FIP and 150 points lower than his xFIP. Officially a win for xFIP, although you likely would have made the same decision regardless of which metric you used.

Jered Weaver – A win for xFIP, which had him as a sell, while FIP had him as a listen. There are also extra points for xFIP for exactly predicting his second half ERA.

Joe Blanton – The metrics were split on how Blanton would fare in the second half. This was a big win for xFIP, which forecasted him to be a useful pitcher and he ended up better than that.

Bronson Arroyo – Technically a win for xFIP but not many fantasy players were running out to acquire Arroyo based on his 4.99 first half xFIP.

Jamie Moyer – Repeat the comment from Arroyo, except sub in 5.06 xFIP.

Trevor Cahill – Same as the above two, except with a 5.18 FIP.

Chris Volstad – Our two metrics were split on Volstad. FIP saw him continuing to be a sell/cut guy while xFIP saw him being a useful pitcher with a sub-4.00 ERA. This was a win for FIP.

Rick Porcello – Both systems predicted a rise in ERA but FIP elevated him to cut status. This was a win for xFIP.

Braden Looper – The two metrics were split on Looper, with xFIP predicting a drop in ERA. Looper actually pitched worse in the second half but neither system would have advocated acquiring him at the break.

Josh Geer – Made just three starts after the break due to lousy pitching. Not one that either system would have suggested to add.

Rich Harden – While most of the players with above average HR/FB rates have been of little or no value in regards to fantasy, Harden is the exception. Both systems saw him improving on his first half ERA but xFIP was much more bullish. And Harden exceeded those expectations. This was a big win for xFIP.

Randy Johnson – Appeared in just four games after the break due to a rotator cuff strain. Officially a win for FIP, but one we should probably dismiss due to lack of playing time.

*****

If you made your fantasy decisions this year based on xFIP, you would be feeling very good about your choices with Pineiro, Lowe, Blackburn, Jackson, Pelfrey, Bannister, Blanton, Harden and to a lesser extent Maholm, Verlander, Weaver and Porcello.

If you made your fantasy decisions based this year based on FIP, you would be feeling very good about your choices with Greinke, Kershaw, Lee, Hernandez, Sabathia and to a lesser extent Jurrjens and Volstad.

From a pure bulk standpoint, you were better off in 2009 using xFIP at the break. But those who relied on FIP were more likely to make the right call on four of the five pitchers with the lowest ERA in the second half among the 34 pitchers in our sample.

We really cannot make any inferences for the future based on this one small sample. What we can say is that judging strictly from results in 2009 it would be a mistake to ignore FIP completely and absolutely while making fantasy decisions at the All-Star break. This year if you used xFIP you would have made the wrong decisions on some of the best pitchers in the game.

Back at the All-Star break, I wrote a piece here asking Should Fantasy Owners Use FIP? I included a chart of all of the starting pitchers who had a difference of 0.50 or greater between their FIP and xFIP.

The article ended with a promise to follow up and see which metric did better in predicting pitchers ERA in the second half of the season. Here is the table from the original article, with one additional column, this one the pitcher ERA in the second half of the season.

There are 34 pitchers in the above chart. On a raw scale, the xFIP metric did a better job of predicting 2nd half ERA, coming closer than FIP on 20 of our pitchers. Furthermore, xFIP did a better job of forecasting 14 of the 24 players with low HR/FB rates and did a better job forecasting six of the 10 players with high HR/FB rates.

In the original article, I projected the two systems would be fairly close to 50-50, so xFIP slightly exceeded my expectations (59-41). But what really surprised me was how few players’ 2nd half ERA fell in between the range of their first half FIP and xFIP. For example, Pineiro had a 2.99 FIP and a 3.77 xFIP and his second half ERA was 3.83, outside the range of the two systems. Only six of the 34 pitchers had 2nd half ERAs inside the range. Both FIP and xFIP correctly forecasted three of those pitchers.

Later today I will post a breakdown of all 34 pitchers in this survey.

Here is a team that I picked during mock draft season on March 2nd over at Mock Draft Central. I had the third pick overall in a 12-team mixed league 5×5 draft.

David Wright
Carl Crawford
CC Sabathia
Joe Mauer
Dan Haren
Josh Beckett
James Shields
Mariano Rivrea
Torii Hunter
Andre Ethier
Jose Valverde
Derek Lowe
Conor Jackson
David DeJesus
Adrian Beltre
Ted Lilly
Placido Polanco
Fred Lewis
Gil Meche
Edgar Renteria
Carlos Guillen
Brandon Inge
Jason Bartlett

At the time, the projected standings at MDC loved this team. It was judged the first-place team with 94 points, a healthy 21 points above the second-place squad. The category breakdowns were:

AVG – 12
HR – 1
RBI – 3
SB – 11
R – 11
W – 12
SV – 9
K – 12
WHIP – 11
ERA – 12

This would have been a pretty decent team in reality, too. Two top 10 hitters (Crawford and Mauer) supported by three top 20 pitchers (Haren, Rivera, Sabathia) and three great late picks (Lilly, Polanco, Bartlett).

It was far from a perfect draft, with fantasy killers Renteria, Lewis, Guillen and Meche. But I believe with proper oversight during the year, this team would likely be a money finisher and a first-place finish would not have been out of the question.

While I went into this mock draft trying to build a stronger pitching squad than I usually do, I did not consciously punt power. And what looked like a poor HR team on paper was no doubt worse in reality, with the down year in homers by Wright and injuries to Hunter, Beltre and even Jackson sapping what little power this team possessed.

To me, this squad begs the question: Can a successful fantasy team punt HR, and by extension RBIs?

On paper this team had 56 pitching points, which is pretty close to what this “strategy” would need to be successful. And even if you ace the pitching categories, it could still fall flat if the non-power categories did not also average double-digits in points.

It is certainly not a tack I would recommend, especially with the third overall pick. All of the top pitchers need to come through, and one has to draft at least one closer, and probably two, in the top half of the draft.

But, as a fantasy player who always favors power, this team was an eye-opener.