FIP Challenge 2010

Last year at the All-Star break I did a piece that collected all the pitchers who had a difference of at least 0.50 between their FIP and xFIP. At the end of the season I collected the 2nd half ERA for each pitcher in the survey to see if FIP or xFIP did a better job of predicting the results. The raw results favored xFIP, as that metric did a better job predicting 20 of the 34 pitchers. However, FIP did a better job of predicting how the best pitchers in the group would fare.

The results were definitely interesting, but it was hard to make any proclamations off one year of data. So, now is the time to assemble this year’s chart of pitchers with a discrepancy of at least half a run between their FIP and xFIP. Like last year, this list was crafted by hand, so please let me know if you see any omissions. I am looking for pitchers who had 70 or more innings pitched at the All-Star break.

Name HR/FB ERA FIP xFIP
Paulino 1.9 4.40 3.25 4.60
Liriano 2.5 3.86 2.18 2.97
A. Sanchez 3.4 3.66 3.46 4.52
Buchholz 3.6 2.45 3.45 4.26
J. Johnson 3.8 1.70 2.31 3.06
Matsuzaka 4.1 4.56 3.83 4.98
J. Santana 4.5 2.98 3.62 4.69
Vargas 4.7 3.09 3.62 4.84
Verlander 5.3 3.82 3.11 3.89
Zito 5.3 3.76 3.91 4.79
Jimenez 5.4 2.20 3.13 3.71
Gorzelanny 5.4 3.16 3.26 3.92
Danks 5.6 3.29 3.41 4.13
Hanson 5.6 4.13 3.26 4.02
Cain 5.7 3.34 3.82 4.72
Kershaw 5.7 2.96 3.11 3.79
C. Lee 5.8 2.64 2.58 3.34
Wilson 6.1 3.35 4.14 4.71
L. Hernandez 6.2 3.37 4.02 4.71
Fister 6.3 3.09 3.75 4.38
Carmona 6.3 3.64 4.08 4.61
Floyd 6.5 4.20 3.28 3.78
Buehrle 6.6 4.24 4.16 4.85
Morrow 6.7 4.86 3.42 3.93
Cueto 6.9 3.42 3.91 4.45
Lackey 6.9 4.78 4.39 4.98
Correia 15.7 5.26 4.82 4.22
Hamels 15.2 3.78 4.53 3.85
Blackburn 14.8 6.40 5.89 5.14
Millwood 14.8 5.77 5.03 4.32
Karstens 14.5 5.42 4.88 5.50
Duke 14.5 5.49 4.89 4.36
Shields 14.3 4.87 4.11 3.55
Bannister 14.0 5.56 5.26 4.69
Wolf 13.9 4.56 5.81 5.24
Davis 13.7 4.69 5.69 5.10
Nolasco 13.7 4.55 4.39 3.84
Kennedy 13.7 4.12 4.83 4.31

This year there are 38 pitchers in our survey. Five pitchers are repeats from a season ago – Kershaw, Lee, Blackburn, Verlander and Bannister. However both Blackburn and Bannister had HR/FB rates below average last year at the break while they are both above average this year. Kershaw, Lee and Verlander are the only ones who “beat” the average HR/FB rates in both seasons. As far as predicting 2nd half ERA goes, Kershaw and Lee were wins for FIP while xFIP did a better job of predicting Verlander.

To determine which metric is better at forecasting 2nd half ERA, I am going to take the midpoint between their FIP and xFIP and compare it to their real life ERA in the second half of the season.

Using Kennedy as an example, 4.57 is the midpoint between his FIP and xFIP. So, if Kennedy’s ERA in the second half is 4.44, I will count that as a “win” for xFIP. On the flip side, if Kennedy’s second half ERA is 4.66, I will count that as a “win” for FIP.

Like last year, I will check in on this list after the end of the regular season.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.




19 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Jason
16 years ago

Love this analysis. Really allows me to use either or to stick as a trading point in the future.

BlueBleeder
16 years ago

Maybe a stupid questions, but did you include first half ERA as the third ‘predictor’ of second half ERA?

LMack
16 years ago

Typo in the Cain column, I know he gets lucky but I doubt his FIP is really 43.82.

Dave
16 years ago

Typo on Cain’s FIP

Dave
16 years ago
Reply to  Dave

Sorry fixed already 🙂

LawDawgMember since 2016
16 years ago

I don’t see Dan Haren

Jason
16 years ago

Last year at the All-Star break I did a piece that collected all the pitchers who had a difference of at least 0.50 between their FIP and xFIP.

Haren’s only .3.

Klatz
16 years ago

I’m not an expert in statistics but wouldn’t it be better to take all pitchers’ 1st half FIP and xFIP and compare it to the ERA of the 2nd half. Colin Wyers already did a comparison of the root mean square error of ERA, FIP, xFIP, and tRA by comparing even to odd numbered days over a five year period. http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/how-well-can-we-predict-era/

Even then the RMSEs where quite large in that sample. A half season’s innings isn’t going to tell you much anyway regardless of what system you’re using.

Also by limiting it to pitchers with some discrepancy between FIP and xFIP aren’t you likely introducing bias as well artificially limiting sample size?

Ender
16 years ago

BPro did a study when they were working on the SIERA model and they found xFIP to be the best year to year correlation for pitchers.

What I think you’ll find is that xFIP doesn’t work for the very best pitchers or for pitchers in extreme parks or with extremely good or bad defenses behind them. All of those types of situations tend to break the standard model.

I think FIP is a pretty useless stat for a single season personally, why correct for some of the luck in a pitchers stat line and not the rest of it and while yeah pitchers control their HR/FB some they control their own LOB and BABIP some too so correct some and not all of it. Just makes no sense to me.

YG
16 years ago

Nice work Brian, I appreciate the effort. Good stuff to look at, just have to consider underlying factors that could have lead to second half inconsistencies to go along with these #s at the end of the season.

philosofoolMember since 2016
16 years ago

xFIP = (3*BB-2*K + 13 * (FB * HR/FB)/IP, but is HR/FB park adjusted in xFIP or does xFIP just use league average? Because if it doesn’t use park adjustment, I would go with FIP since it’s more likely to give a picture of the pitch in which he throws. But if it’s park adjusted, I would use xFIP.

By the way, you pretty much have to throw Cliff Lee out of the study if he gets traded to/from a hitters park to a pitcher’s park, like both of the last seasons. There’s just no way that you can perform a valid study on Lee going from Safeco to Arlington.

Mark
16 years ago
Reply to  philosofool

Every discussion on xFIP I’ve read either states or implies that the league-average HR/FB rate is inserted into that equation. This is done I guess because xFIP was conceived as a playing-field-leveler, i.e. a tool for deciding how well the pitcher pitched with luck removed. But since most people use xFIP for fantasy purposes, to know how to expect the guy to do going forward, I don’t know why someone doesn’t put out a version that inserts the player’s home park HR/FB rate into that equation (or mix it 50-50 with the league average, since half his games will be on the road).

Why nobody in the sabermetrics world bothers to do this – a stat which would be enormously more popular and useful – is beyond me. Of course, you’d want to use a big enough sample size to get that HR/FB figure, but for most ballparks we have multiple years to aggregate. How about it, guys?

philosofoolMember since 2016
16 years ago
Reply to  Brian Joura

I can see why you would be reluctant to throw it out, but you can’t really consider the data point to be indicative of much either. It’s not data tampering when, while running a medical study, you throw out one subject because they were diagnosed diabetic in the middle of the study.

Xeifrank
16 years ago

You might want to be careful about including pitchers like Cliff Lee who get traded, as the ballpark you pitch in weighs heavily on your HR/FB (xFIP) ratio.
Look forward to the results.
vr, Xeifrank

J
16 years ago

i gotta question…

How do you account for the difference in (CURRENT ERA v. FIP) [VS] (Zips Projected FIP) for projecting future value?