Ranking Sale, Bard, and Feliz: A Declaration
When, in the course of formulating the starting pitcher consensus ranks for the 2012 fantasy baseball season, it becomes necessary to rank a relief pitcher as as starting pitcher before he makes start number one in the new season, a decent respect to the opinions of RotoGraphs readership requires that a little more attention be paid to the causes that led to the exclusion of said starter-slash-relief pitchers from the rankings — and how they’d be ranked otherwise.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all pitchers are mostly divided into two groups; that they are thus endowed by the game with different kinds of value and to be judged separately; that inherent to each value is the pursuit of saves or wins but not usually both; that it is much more difficult to gain starting pitcher eligibility and actually start than it is to be a starter-eligible reliever; that the penalties associated from moving from the bullpen to the rotation (17% degradation in strikeout walk and home run rate, as well as a .7-2 mph drop in fastball velocity, on average) often make newly-minted relievers-turned-starters a shaky proposition; that therefore most years it makes most sense to rank reliever-eligible pitchers with the relievers.
But whenever any form or ranking encounters a destructive force — as it has this year in the form of Men like Daniel Bard, Neftali Feliz, and Chris Sale — it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish the old ways and to institute a new form of rankings.
So we’ll do that, sometime.
For right now, though, we’ll have to just tell you where we ranked the guys so you can make an informed decision.
| Eno Sarris | Mike Podhorzer | Zach Sanders | Jeff Zimmerman | Consensus | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matt Moore | 30 | 20 | 40 | 32 | 28 |
| Chris Sale | 51 | 43 | 66 | 26 | 47 |
| Daniel Bard | 57 | 48 | 84 | 36 | 56 |
| Neftali Feliz | 59 | 66 | 56 | 66 | 62 |
| Aaron Crow | 131 | 86 | 103 | 112 | 108 |
It’s no surprise that Matt Moore is the favorite — our consensus has him ranked ranked at 28 — but Sale’s ranking might turn some heads. Obviously, Zach liked the lefty less than the rest of us at least. There bullet points on both sides of his ledger. He was a starter more recently than Bard and Feliz. He had the most excellent numbers last year. He can take a 17% hit and still be great. He has a starter’s repertoire, with three plus pitches. On the other hand, he has a funky delivery that some think will hurt his longevity and durability. His release point makes him more prone to platoon splits than a fastball/slider/change lefty might normally be. He’s only faced 55% right-handers so far in his career and starters usually face about 80% righties. Which way does the scale tilt for you?
Bard sang a beautiful tune last year. Not only did he manage a strikeout per inning — built on the back of an elite swinging strike rate — but he also coaxed more than half his contact on the ground and showed above-average control. The two questions with his move to the rotation surround his velocity and third pitch. How much of his 97 MPH gas will he retain after the switch? And how will that reduced velocity affect his 90+ MPH changeup, in turn? Can that change be a third pitch for him or will his current platoon splits (4.09 FIP v LHB, 2.34 FIP v RHB) only be exacerbated when he has to face batters repeatedly?
Feliz gets the least love from the consensus, and maybe rightly so. He’s been the most injured, for one. And he’s already tried this move before and it didn’t take. On the other hand, we shouldn’t be giving too much weight to his 2011 numbers if we’re trying to project the coming season. It was only 62.1 innings, and despite his poor back-of-baseball-card numbers, he managed to keep his swinging strike rate and velocity at the same level it’s always been. Still, the fact that he’s used his fastball almost 80% of the time in his Major League career so far has to be a little disconcerting. The curveball can be devastating — can he succeed with two pitches? No matter how upbeat you are about Feliz and his chance to be a productive fantasy starter, you have to admit that the fact that they’ve tried this before and it didn’t take means that this brew has an aftertaste laden with doubt.
With a phone full of pictures of pitchers' fingers, strange beers, and his two toddler sons, Eno Sarris can be found at the ballpark or a brewery most days. Read him here, writing about the A's or Giants at The Athletic, or about beer at October. Follow him on Twitter @enosarris if you can handle the sandwiches and inanity.
You may need to do an edit – you mention “Moore” (assuming Matt Moore) without mentioning him previously.
Nice preamble, but I’m disappointed you didn’t carry it out into a list of grievances against the King.
I imagine don cooper will attempt to teach Sale a cutter to help with righties.
You know that the reason Feliz didn’t start last year was because Ron Washington didn’t have a closer replacement, yes?
What is monkey epoxy anyways? Can you get it out with lava soap?
I agree. ‘Didn’t work’ is misleading. ‘Abandoned due to slavish devotion to Proven Closer (TM) notion’ would be more accurate.
Are you serious? I’m fine with Feliz at 3, but the reasons are ridiculous. Feliz, the most injury prone? Sure, he’s had exactly 1 minor injury…hardly anything worth noting. Trying the move and it didn’t work? Um, it wasn’t because of his performance, it was because of the performance of the other ranger starters and the fact that they had no replacement closer. They never really planned on having him start; they decided not to about a week into spring training. It was just a brief consideration.
You also fail to mention how Bard hasn’t started in a very long time, and struggling at that point. You only mention that Sale is the most recent of the 3, but the gap between Feliz and Sale is much smaller than Bard and Feliz. Feliz and Sale are also younger than Bard and have the potential to still get much better.
Bard’s a completely different pitcher than he was the last time he failed starting, and the age gap is extremely minor, with all players entering or firmly in their expected prime. Context is important for your side as well, you can’t complain about misleading talking points and proceed with misleading talking points. All three pitchers are a bit of a crapshoot at the moment, with decent upside and all have significant flaws that make me question whether they’ll be able to stay in the rotation…there is very minimal seperation, and you could rank them in any order without a complaint from me.
yes, i know he’s a different pitcher, but I’m just saying that my main point is how he is less proven as a starter, and instead of saying that, he just says that Sale is more proven, when it should be bard that is singled out in that category, and not sale
Eno, Your main argument for feliz being low is that “They’ve tried this before.” No! They were not committed in 2011, and now with Nathan they are sure to stick with him. It had nothing to do with his performance.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all pitchers are mostly divided into two groups; that they are thus endowed by the game with different kinds of value and to be judged separately; that inherent to each value is the pursuit of saves or wins but not usually both; that it is much more difficult to gain starting pitcher eligibility and actually start than it is to be a starter-eligible reliever; that the penalties associated from moving from the bullpen to the rotation (17% degradation in strikeout walk and home run rate, as well as a .7-2 mph drop in fastball velocity, on average) often make newly-minted relievers-turned-starters a shaky proposition; that therefore most years it makes most sense to rank reliever-eligible pitchers with the relievers.
I enjoyed the flowery language, but I don’t at all follow the logic here. If I understand you correctly, these are your points (followed by my conclusions about each):
1) Relievers and starters have different kinds of value, based on whether they provide saves or wins –> therefore, pitchers who are expected to spend the year as starters should be grouped with other starters, since they’re going to provide value via the wins route, not the saves route.
2) It is more difficult to actually be a starting pitcher than it is to be a reliever with SP eligibility –> this is not relevant here. All three pitchers in your table are expected to start, so they should simply be treated like SPs.
3) The penalties associated with the RP-SP transition make it risky to draft RPs who are converted to SPs –> this, while true, also does not support your conclusion. Rather, it simply makes the job of the forecaster/projector/ranker that much more difficult. The challenge is to try to use previous performance to project future results while accounting for the fact additional factors not accounted for in previous performance. However, you’re still trying to project SP performance, which should be ranked alongside other SPs.
I don’t understand how any of these three points would lead one to conclude that “most years it makes sense to rank reliever-eligible pitchers with the relievers.” Are you assuming that the conversion will not be successful and that these pitchers are more likely to spend more 2012 innings as relievers than as starters?
Should stayed away from having fun with the intro, but my point is this: we don’t know they are starters until they actually start. Teams can tell us they are going to start and change their mind at any moment, and really that’s what I meant by ‘difficult to project’.
But we are left in between two ranking systems. You can rank them with the relievers because they will be RPs to begin with and you’ll have to play them at RP for at least two weeks… but then they are up against pitchers that will get saves, which is, for most, the point of the reliever rankings.
In our specific case, if you were following along, you might know that the FantasyPros tool did not allow us to rank people at positions at which they were not eligible in Yahoo. So, really the point of this was just to show you our consensus ranks, outside of the tool.
The rest was me having fun with the Declaration of Independence.
Thanks for the explanation! I enjoyed the Declaration of Independence part — I just wasn’t clear on the actual argument you were making.
The limitations of the FantasyPros tool are annoying, but it makes sense that you decided to use that tool for your primary rankings.
Does Samardzija now fit in this conversation?
You bet I do. By the way, if you’re a female are you doing anything later?
“Bard sang a beautiful tune last year.”
Great writing.
Moore started and pitched 164 innings at 3 levels in 2011. There was no reason to not qualify him at sp then. I still don’t see any.
Moore is in an entirely different tier than these dudes because of upside and also he’s done successfully at the big league level what bard, feliz, and sale are trying.
left out 17 point increase in BABIP btw.
I enjoyed the article but like some others have pointed out there are certainly others who deserve some attention. I would have included Chapman, Samardzija, Aceves/Doubront and potentially even Medlen who is currently being stretched out during spring training.
Medlen is someone who really intrigues me given his track record of success in the pen with plus control and decent K’s I see real success if he gets his shot. Given the uninspiring performances from the Braves two youngsters battling for the spot, we could potentially see Medlen get his chance this year. He might not start the year in the rotation but I would not be surprised if he ended up finishing there. Considering he is most likely on the waiver wire he is certainly a player who could net some serious profit this year.
P.S.
I enjoyed the intro and hope that you do not regret it. I come here for the hardcore baseball analysis but some character in the articles certainly helps make the analysis a bit more entertaining.
This was just posted on rotowire. I guess I was not that crazy thinking the Braves might let Medlen start. Sometime GM’s and managers sing different tunes and this may be one of those cases.
————-
Even though Medlen will start a minor league game Friday and manager Fredi Gonzalez says he’s not ruling him out as a starter, GM Frank Wren says the plan is still to use Medlen as a reliever, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports. Randall Delgado and Julio Teheran are still seen as the top candidates to start in April with Tim Hudson’s season delayed due to a back injury. Still, it seems like Medlen is more of a possibility than Wren is leading on because it would make some sense for Medlen to have a short-term role in the rotation rather than bring up a prospect for a few weeks. Keep an eye on Medlen’s usage as he could be a nice sleeper if he found a spot in the rotation for the long term.
Crow moving back to the rotation illustrates the risk of ranking relievers with the starters perfectly, imo. And we still don’t know that Feliz will start.