Projections vs. the Fans: Starting Pitcher Edition

A month ago, I compared Depth Chart projections — a composite of the reputed Steamer and ZiPS projection systems — to fan projections, compiled on each player’s page as “FANS.” I proceeded to look at the largest differences between the two systems — loosely considering the aggregation of independent fan projections a “system” — and identify which system better projected that particular player.

For hitters, the Depth Charts won by a landslide, 7-2. Turns out that fans frequently projected better production from prospects than what said prospects actually produced. It’s the cognitive bias I expected to see; I anticipated that fan(tasy owner)s associate hype with swift, robust production. I call it the Mike Trout Syndrome, named after the generational talent who has conditioned fans to expect immediate and immense production from all top prospects.

So how did the fans fare versus the Depth Charts regarding pitchers? Funny you ask. Here are the five starting pitchers whose Depth Charts FIPs varied most dramatically from their FANS FIPs:

5. Chris Tillman, BAL
Depth Charts: 4.48 FIP
FANS: 4.00 FIP
Actual: 4.45 FIP
Verdict: Depth Charts, by 42 points

The fans were enamored by Tillman’s solid 2014 season. It’s not as if he can’t pitch to a 4.00 FIP — he accomplished the feat in 2011, and everyone was giddy when he did it again in 2014. The projection systems didn’t buy the hype, though, noticing a suppressed home run rate (HR/9) which could have been attributed to his career-best ground ball rate (GB%) but was probably more luck than skill.

Ironically, Tillman’s ground ball rate further improved in 2015 — it’s just that his strikeout and walk rates trended very far in the wrong directions. After massively outperforming his FIP in terms of ERA in 2014, Tillman then proceeded to regresst to the mean in 2015. Given he’s only 27, I can see the projection systems expecting a bounceback from Tillman, whereas the fans will probably express some pessimism — the same way they exuded optimism this past March.

4. Jacob deGrom, NYM
Depth Charts: 3.54 FIP
FANS: 3.04 FIP
Actual: 2.70 FIP
Verdict: FANS, by 50 points

DeGrom was electric in 2015. I’m not surprised the Depth Charts expected some regression for deGrom; as an unproven commodity on an incomplete sample, it would be only sensible to hedge your bets. But projection systems don’t think. They just do. And based on years upon years of historical data, the Depth Charts did, and they lost.

I don’t know if anyone could have expected deGrom to shave down one-third of his walk rate. That’s where deGrom saw his greatest gain: he induced more swings on pitches outside the zone. Hitters’ contact rates didn’t budge, so deGrom ultimately saw the gains in his walk rate (BB%) rather than his strikeout rate K%). It’ll be interesting to see how hitters adjust — now would be time to expect some regression toward the mean. But part of me thinks fans will continue to expect even more from the young stud.

3. Carlos Martinez, STL
Depth Charts: 3.83 FIP
FANS: 3.31 FIP
Actual: 3.21 FIP
Verdict: FANS, by 52 points

Martinez is more enigmatic than deGrom. He posted a 2015 FIP almost identical to his 2014 mark but got there in an entirely different fashion by ramping up strikeouts, limiting walks, inducing more ground balls and allowing twice as many home runs on fly balls.

Unfortunately, it’s kind of hard to tell what’s real here. Swinging strike rate (SwStr%) strongly correlates with strikeout rate, and Martinez’s actually dropped by a sizable margin. Martinez peppered the zone a bit more in 2015, and he threw more first-pitch strikes, but his pitches per plate appearance increased over 2014 and hitters made more contact on pitches outside the zone.

So the fact that Martinez saw such large gains in 2015 says one of two things: (1) 2014’s outcomes don’t reflect its periperals, or (2) ditto for 2015. It’s likely a combination of the two, and the Depth Charts will reflect that. But when it comes down to it: FIPs of 3.18 and 3.21 in consecutive years will likely yield a similar projection in 2016.

2. Alfredo Simon, DET
Depth Charts: 4.88 FIP
FANS: 4.27 FIP
Actual: 4.77 FIP
Verdict: Depth Charts, by 39 points

After a couple of solid years out of the Cincinnati Reds’ bullpen, Simon entered the rotation and excelled despite what was, at best, a dismal strikeout rate. His ERA crushed his FIP, and fans expected more of the same. But the Depth Charts didn’t buy into a walk rate that somehow improved upon moving to the rotation — something that doesn’t typically happen. Or, if it happens, it’s not a lock to continue.

Continue, it did not. The walk rate jumped back up to its usual level. A higher-than-usual batting average on balls in play (BABIP) and a brutally low left-on-base percentage (LOB%) led to an ERA north of 5. Simon allegedly pitched the entire years with a condition called patellar tendinosis, or “jumper’s knee;” he could be a cheap bounceback candidate in deeper leagues in light of an extenuating circumstance the computers control for.

1. Mike Pelfrey, MIN
Depth Charts: 4.57 FIP
FANS: 5.76 FIP
Actual: 4.00 FIP
Verdict: Depth Charts, by 119 points

The fans were, uh, not stoked about Pelfrey’s 2014 season. It was only five starts, but they were five wildly mediocre starts, to say the least. It was enough to sour everyone’s opinions on him.

Pelfrey is a perfect, tangible example of the cognitive biases we experience when confronted with unreliably small samples. The starts were horribly, unforgivably bad. But anything can happen in five starts — relative to that particular player’s skill level, of course. Clayton kershaw would never walk twice as many hitters as he struck out for something like 24 innings. But Pelfrey? And his career 12.9 K% and 8.0 K%? It could definitely happen, and it did.

Pelfrey was far from sensational, but 2.0 WAR will get the job done when you’re basically pitching for free. The Tigers just signed Pelfrey for cheaper than his previous contract — sounds like an acquisition that, at that price, can not lose. For fantasy purposes, however, he’s barely a deep-league consideration for his la