Yesterday, I discussed four starting pitchers due for an improved walk rate moving forward, according to my expected walk rate equation. Today, I’ll highlight another four pitchers, this time a group who is at risk of suffering from an increased walk rate over the rest of the season. These pitchers all sport xBB% marks well above their actual marks.
I don’t discuss it as often as my xK% equation, because the R-squared is significantly lower, but my xBB% formula is still useful to calculate and analyze the results. Even for hitters, strikeout rates have always been easier to predict from an equation than walk rates. Odd. Anyway, let’s take a look at the four starting pitchers whose xBB% marks are most below their actual walk rates. This could signify improvement on the way, which would bring both ERA and WHIP down.
Every spring training, we make a big to do about fastball velocity. We may even remember to monitor it for the first start of the season. Whose velocity is up, hinting at a breakout? Whose velocity is down, suggesting either a hidden injury or a disappointing year is on the way? Then we totally forget about it and rarely discuss it again. Velocity does rise throughout the year, but some pitchers gain more than others, obviously. Sometimes better health or a slight tweak in mechanics mid-season could increase velocity, aside from just the warmer weather that generally lifts all boats. So here are seven pitchers whose fastball velocity has jumped in May, compared to April.
Do you need starting pitching in your deep league? Of course you do! The tough decisions come when debating between a middle reliever who is going to give you solid ratios but reduce your win and strikeout potential or a bottom of the barrel starter who could potentially torpedo your ratios. This is where your place in those specific categories in key. Performing well in the ratios? Don’t blow it. Play it safe with a middle reliever. Already sitting at the bottom of the ratio categories? Might as well take the plunge, you can’t fall much further!
Yesterday, I put my xK% equation to good use by identifying five starting pitchers the formula suggests has strikeout rate upside. As usual, today I take a look at those with strikeout rate downside. These are the pitchers whose xK% are well below their actual K%.
Warning: these are very good pitchers!
It’s been a little while since I last used my xK% equation to identify pitchers with strikeout rate upside. So now that we’re about a third of the way into the season, it’s time to take another look. The five pitchers discussed below all have xK% marks well above their actual K% marks. My equation isn’t perfect, of course, just like all formulas that act as skill estimators, but it should work pretty well at the extremes at predicting the direction of future stat changes.
It’s rankings update time! As you may have consistently noticed as the updated RotoGraphs consensus rankings for hitters have gradually been released, two months of performance is hardly a large enough sample size to move the needle all that much for me. Unless there is a clear explanation for a change in performance and/or underlying skills, then more often than not, the player is going to revert to what you had him projected for in the preseason.
For pitchers, it’s essential to remember that ERA is not a skill. It’s just a result. So I don’t really care what a pitcher’s ERA is at the moment. What I’m really interested in is their peripherals and any changes in pitch mix and/or velocity. And even if their peripherals have changed, you then have to ask yourself if its sustainable. Again, more likely is that what we initially forecasted is what is going to be posted the rest of the way, though obviously this is not always the case.
As a reminder, the tiers are named after the best characters from the FXX show, Man Seeking Woman.
It’s not often I have a streak of deep league waiver wire recommendations that have been so ridiculously poor. Let’s recap, shall we?
Last week, I recommended Marc Krauss. The very next day, he was DFA’d.
Two weeks ago, I recommended Drew Stubbs. He was option to Triple-A that night. But that wasn’t all. In that post, I also recommended Tommy Field. He was DFA’d last Saturday. Though I did end my blurb on him by saying, “This is not a long-term recommendation and his opportunity might be shorter than Stubbs’.”
Three weeks ago, I recommended Jackie Bradley Jr. He was sent back to Triple-A nine days later.
Oof, that’s pathetic. It either goes to show you how difficult it is to recommend these types of players or I have just done a terrible job sorting through the trash to uncover a gem. Probably a little of both. Here’s to hoping my streak has ended and better recommendations are in my future!
Yesterday, I discussed the players fantasy owners in CBS have been scurrying to pick up over the last week. Today I’ll look at the opposite side of the coin, those players you’re dropping like a hot potato. In general, fantasy owners seem to be far too quick with their mouse clicking, willing to drop players after a week-long slump. Even if they are near replacement level to begin with, there’s no benefit to such churning and playing the “hot hand”. It will just increase your stress level, without actually improving your team. So let’s see if that’s the case with the top dropped players this time, or if the moves are justified. I have excluded players on the disabled list.
Fantasy owners are heavily influenced by the forces of recency bias. A hitter is in the midst of a hot streak, having hit .400 over the last week with a pair of long balls? Pick him up! Unfortunately, we know that such streaks have limited, if any, predictive value, resulting in this strategy usually being a losing one. But that’s not always the case, as a hot streak could lead to increased playing time and we’re always chasing at-bats (and innings pitched). So let’s take a gander at which players have been added the most in CBS leagues over the last week and determine whether picking them up is a good move. Obviously, context plays a huge role in decisions like these, but since we have no such information, we’ll do our best.
