Archive for Cliff Lee

Continuing this series of comparing FanGraphs Points league scoring to traditional scoring, we’ll begin looking today at pitching.  To start, I decided to look at a traditional points scoring system compared to the ottoneu points scoring system.  There is no apparent “standard” fantasy points system, but I chose the points scoring used at CBSSportsline as my comparison, as it seems fairly typical of systems you see out “in the wild.”  Let’s start with a list of the top-10 pitchers by their system in the 2010 season:

For reference, I also included their rank according to total FanGraphs Points.  Overall, it doesn’t look that different, right?  The top three are identical, and most of the top-10 are ranked similarly in both systems.  There are two pitchers who had a ranking disparty of at least 10 spots, however: David Price and Tim Hudson.

Read the rest of this entry »

Here are the results from this week’s ADP Crowdsourcing, and I’m bothered by what you all had to say about Lee.

Robinson Cano
My vote: 7
Average: 7.7
Median: 7.5
Std Dev: 3.3

There isn’t much to talk about after these votes. We were all in agreement when it came to Cano, with all of us being pretty confident that he’ll go in the second half of the first round. The seventh pick is right where he deserves to go, but owners shouldn’t be blamed for getting a little bit excited and selecting him as early as fourth or fifth, because he could very well be worth it.

Cliff Lee
My vote: 40
Average: 24.8
Median: 24
Std Dev: 8.74

I’m ashamed of all of you for making me look so foolish, so I guess I need to say something about the disparity in our votes. First, in what world would owners pick Lee at the 2-3 turn? Because I’m pretty confident it’s not this one. In the small sample of mock drafts that I’ve been involved in, Lee has gone during the middle of the fourth round. Granted, these were before he chose to play in Philly, but has his value really gone up that dramatically? I seriously doubt it. He may go at the 3-4 turn, but I think you all are a good 10-12 picks off here, and even a fairly generous standard deviation doesn’t reach that mark. Like a great author once said, “I may be wrong, but I doubt it.”

This is the first time I’ve looked at the results and though y’all were just flat out wrong. What am I missing here? I desperately need voters to defend themselves in the comments, so please do so.

In today’s edition of ADP Crowdsourcing, we stay with the topical trend. We are using pick number instead of round again, so please vote accordingly.

We all knew that Cliff Lee was going to make a big splash in free agency, and that he would have a large and lasting effect on the teams involved. But, we all assumed those teams were the Yankees and Rangers, not the Phillies.

One of the good things about Cliff Lee returning to Philadelphia is that we already have a sample, albeit a relatively small one, in place. During his 80 innings (okay, you caught me, 79.2 innings) in the NL, Lee struck out over a batter an inning, and posted his best swinging-strike rate since his 52 inning year in 2003. His FIP was a tremendous 2.83, and we can all remember how dominant he was in the playoffs.

Lee is already 32-years old, and will turn 33 before the 2011 season ends. However, he does not rely on velocity, and his control appears to be the sharpest it’s ever been. The defense behind him will be more than adequate, especially in the infield, and getting to face pitchers once again will benefit his numbers. With all the free agency hype, will Lee’s value be overblown? Or could Lee actually be undervalued because of his lack of strikeouts? It’s your job to decide.

Below is a link to the voting form, and please read the wording carefully. This is not where you would draft him, but where you think he’ll be drafted in most leagues. This time around, we’re using pick number instead of round, as it works a little better for top players. For the voting, we’re assuming a 12-team standard league, using 5×5 scoring.

To submit your vote, click here. And while you’re at it, why not submit a fan projection for Lee by clicking here?

Earlier today, in Part I of the series, I published a chart of 38 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.

Felipe Paulino – pitched in just 5.2 innings after the break. Officially a win for xFIP, but one we should probably dismiss due to a lack of playing time.

Francisco Liriano – His second half ERA was better than his first half mark, but both metrics thought he was outstanding before the All-Star break. This is a clear win for xFIP.

Anibal Sanchez – His 2nd half ERA (3.44) was a near-perfect match for his first half FIP (3.46).

Clay Buchholz – Both systems thought Buchholz was not nearly as good as he was in the first half. FIP had his as a keep while xFIP said he was an active sell. Since Buchholz did even better in the second half of the season than the first, this was a clear victory for FIP.

Josh Johnson – Both systems had Johnson as a keeper, but xFIP did a better job predicting his 3.50 post All-Star break mark.

Daisuke Matsuzaka – After allowing 4 HR in 71 IP in the first half, Matsuzaka served up 9 HR in 82.2 IP after the break. Big win for xFIP.

Johan Santana – His 3.00 ERA in the second half almost identical to his first half mark of 2.98. xFIP had Santana as a cut, so an easy win for FIP.

Jason Vargas – Eight of his 14 starts after the break came on the road and he allowed eight of his 10 second half HR away from Safeco. Big win for xFIP.

Justin Verlander – In the last three years, Verlander has posted an ERA over 5.50 in the month of April. He was terrific from May 1st through the end of the season again in 2010. Easy win for FIP.

Barry Zito – A lousy second half of the season made Zito a spectator for the Giants in the post-season. xFIP did an outstanding job predicting Zito’s collapse.

Ubaldo Jimenez – Just like with Zito, xFIP was just about perfect predicting Jimenez in the second half.

Tom Gorzelanny – Both systems saw Gorzelanny as a pretty good pitcher, but xFIP came closer to his second-half collapse.

John Danks – Again, the crystal ball for xFIP was right on target for Danks.

Tommy Hanson – In both seasons in the majors, Hanson has outperformed his xFIP. He turned it up a notch in the second half of 2010, thanks as much to his .233 BABIP as his 7 HR in 100.1 IP.

Matt Cain – Another pitcher with a history of outperforming his peripherals, Cain beat his FIP by nearly a run and his xFIP by nearly two runs in the second half of 2010.

Clayton Kershaw – Just as good in the second half of the season as he was in the first.

Cliff Lee – Many people wanted to eliminate Lee from this study last year, as he went from a pitcher’s park to a hitter’s park. But Lee outpitched his xFIP after the break in 2009. No such luck for Lee this year while following a similar story line of moving to a tougher park for pitchers.

C.J. Wilson – Like Kershaw, he was remarkable consistent between halves and ended up as a win for FIP.

Livan Hernandez – Those of us who kept predicting the bottom to fall out for Hernandez in 2010 are still waiting. Meanwhile, his second half ERA of 4.02 was a perfect match for his first half FIP.

Doug Fister – I imagine even the staunchest FIP supporters were shopping Fister every chance they could.

Fausto Carmona – After back-to-back seasons with a BB/9 over 5.00, Carmona allowed just 29 BB in 94.0 IP after the break last year. That had more to do with it than HR rate (10 HR in 94 IP) for why FIP was a clear winner.

Gavin Floyd – Fantasy owners did not know start from start what to expect from Floyd, but xFIP did a nice job of predicting his second half ERA.

Mark Buehrle – Like Wilson and Kershaw, Buehrle was a model of consistency with his ERA between halves this year. However, I worry about his K/9 rate and would be shocked if he was on any of my teams next year.

Brandon Morrow – With the Blue Jays out of the race, they decided to shut down a healthy Morrow after his first September start, which limited him to 46.1 IP after the break. A polar opposite to Buehrle, Morrow posted a 10.95 K/9, up from 8.14 a season ago.

Johnny Cueto – Cueto’s second half ERA was in the range predicted by his first half FIP and xFIP. But it was just 0.05 away from his FIP.

John Lackey – His second half ERA of 3.97 was a nice match for his 3.89 career mark but I doubt that makes too many Red Sox fans happy about his season and the team’s remaining obligation to him.

Kevin Correia – The first player on our list to have a big discrepancy between his FIP and xFIP due to a high HR rate, Correia did not show much regression in the second half of the year. Those who thought he would rebound, especially considering his home park, were disappointed. Correia allowed 13 HR in 82.1 IP in Petco this year.

Cole Hamels – Just like in 2009, one pitcher from the high HR rate side completely turned things around to become one of the best pitchers in the second half. Hopefully, Hamels has more luck in 2011 than 2009’s entry did. Rich Harden had a 5.58 ERA in 20 games with the Rangers this year after having a tremendous post-break performance (2.55 ERA) in 2009.

Nick Blackburn – Both systems would have advised cutting Blackburn, who responded with a 3.94 ERA in the second half, as he showed a big across-the-board improvement, including a microscopic 1.83 BB/9.

Kevin Millwood – Most of the players with a high HR/FB rate come back as not worth the risk by both systems. But xFIP said Millwood was significantly better than he showed in the first half and did an excellent job projecting his post-break ERA.

Jeff Karstens – An sore shoulder led to just one appearance in September. I regret the pain suffered by Mr. Karstens but it’s probably just as well that it played out that way.

Zach Duke – Hard to believe he made the All-Star team in 2009. Since then he is 11-23 with a 5.52 ERA.

James Shields – Both systems predicted a big bounce-back performance in the second half by Shields but that never materialized. He continued to give up HR by the basket, saw his K/BB ratio drop by over a full point and saw his BABIP increase to .362 after the break.

Brian Bannister – Limited to 25.2 IP in the second half due to rotator cuff tendinitis.

Randy Wolf – Both systems saw Wolf as waiver wire fodder but he had a 2.67 ERA in his final 13 starts, which was right after I placed him on waivers in a dynasty league.

Doug Davis – Elbow tendinitis kept Davis from pitching after the All-Star break.

Ricky Nolasco – FIP was nearly perfect with its Nolasco forecast, a marked departure in recent history, as he has generally underperformed his peripherals the past two seasons. Of course, Nolasco pitched just 47 innings after the break due to knee surgery.

Ian Kennedy – Neither system thought much of Kennedy going into the break but xFIP had a brighter outlook. Meanwhile, Kennedy put it altogether after the All-Star game, with Quality Starts in seven of his last nine outings. He finally started pitching well in his home park. In his last three games in Chase Field, Kennedy allowed 4 ER (0 HR) in 19 IP.

*****

When I started this comparison in 2009, my belief was that you would be just as well off using either system. After last year, there was a definite raw advantage for xFIP but now with two years worth of data, the two systems are basically even. Overall, there have been 72 pitchers who’ve had a 0.50 or greater difference between their FIP and xFIP at the All-Star break. Here’s how they did if you used their first half FIP or xFIP to project their second half ERA:

xFIP – 37
FIP – 34
Push – 1

Both systems have strengths and weaknesses. Generally speaking, xFIP does a better job with non-elite pitchers with low HR rates while FIP does a better job with elite hurlers. So, if a Tom Gorzelanny is cruising along with a sub-7.0 HR/FB rate, it appears you should look to sell high. But if it’s Justin Verlander, perhaps you should hold onto him.

We know that over the long haul that xFIP is the better metric to use for most pitchers. The issue here is that for one season (or one partial season) there may not be enough time for regression to fully kick in. Let’s look at Tim Lincecum. In the first half of 2009, he had a 3.9 HR/FB rate. In the second half of the season he had a 7.5 HR/9. This year he had a 9.9 HR/FB ratio. He has been regressing towards a normal HR/FB rate since the first half of 2009. But it did not all come in the same season.

Readers have suggested using first half ERA, or a mid-point between first half FIP and xFIP or an average of all three to see which one best predicted second half ERA. I think these are worthwhile suggestions and perhaps ones that we can use in the future (going back retroactively, too) as our sample size increases. We can also eliminate pitchers who did not pitch substantial innings and look for other trends and anomalies as our population gets bigger.

This started with a claim by my friend and colleague Derek Carty that FIP was basically useless for fantasy purposes with other metrics like xFIP available. Right now it appears FIP is making a case not to be tossed into the trash can by fantasy players.

In 2009, I did a column at the All-Star break to see if FIP or xFIP would be more helpful for fantasy players in making trades. This year I did the same thing. You can see the results below

Should Fantasy Owners Use FIP?
FIP Challenge Results Part I
FIP Challenge Results Part II
FIP Challenge 2010

Here is the table from the 2010 article, along with an additional column, the pitcher’s ERA in the second half of the season.

There are 38 pitchers in the above chart. On a raw scale, the two systems were almost identical, with the FIP metric did a better job of predicting 2nd half ERA in 20 cases while xFIP did better 17 times. Furthermore, FIP did a better job of forecasting 14 of the 26 players with low HR/FB rates and both systems got five of the 11 pitchers (Davis being a wash) with high HR/FB rates.

In 2009, xFIP did better on a raw scale, as it did a better job predicting 20 of the 34 pitchers in the sample.

Similar to 2009, most of the pitchers fell outside the range predicted by FIP and xFIP. For example, Liriano’s FIP was 2.18 while his xFIP was 2.97. But he had a 3.31 second half ERA. Only seven of the 37 players listed above had a second half ERA between their first half FIP and xFIP. The two systems were close on this, too, with FIP being better on four of these seven pitchers. In 2009, 28 of the 34 pitchers had second half ERAs outside the range of their first half FIP and xFIP numbers.

Later today I will post a breakdown of all 38 pitchers in this survey.

We’ve dissected the Cliff Lee deal like it’s already done, and from both sides of the deal, so let’s continue on in that vein and look at the pitcher that the Mariners are most likely to call up to replace Lee as early as tonight in Seattle. Even if it’s not the Yankees, the Mariners look like they want to trade Lee before the All-Star break to get the most possible value, so Pineda should be up soon.

The green and gray certainly hope that Michael Pineda day doesn’t end up pinata-like, but by all accounts it should be more of a commencement than a trial by fire. The 21-year-old came into the season as the fifth-best Mariner’s prospect by resident maven Marc Hulet’s standards. Here’s what he said at the time:

A beast on the mound at 6’5” 250 lbs, Pineda was let down by his elbow in ’09 as his season was interrupted in mid-May and he did not return until August. The elbow soreness that he experienced is cause for concern going forward, but the right-hander has a bright future ahead of him if he can put the issue behind him. Just 20 in ’09, Pineda posted a 2.73 FIP in 10 appearances (eight starts) in high-A despite playing in a good hitter’s league. He allowed just 29 hits in 44.1 innings of work and showed outstanding control for his age with a walk rate of 1.22 BB/9. His low-90s fastball and good (but inconsistent) slider helped him post a strikeout rate of 9.74 K/9. It will be interesting to see if the organization returns Pineda to high-A in 2010 or pushes him to double-A.

What happened this year is exactly what Mariners fans hoped for and Hulet pointed to as his most important chore this year: Pineda proved he was healthy by not only dominating Double-A on his second attempt (9.1 K/9, 2.0 BB/9), but by also mowing down Triple-A hitters after a promotion (12.3 K/9, 2.3 BB/9). He looks ready to go.

In fact, looking at his career numbers (8.6 K/9, 2.0 BB/9), it might be tempting to label him a control artist with okay stuff, but it has been his work at the higher levels, and this year, which has pushed him into elite territory as a prospect. If the rankings were to come out today, he might just be first, if only because his lowest strikeout rate above Double-A was this year’s 9.1 at Double-A.

As for how he might fare in the bigs, there are two minor pink flags to consider. First, Pineda did have the elbow injury last year, so he didn’t accrue many innings, and only put up 138.1 innings combined in 2008. He’s already at 96 innings this year, and 120% of 138.1 is 165. Even if this is no hard cap on his innings, it’s reasonable to assume that he won’t put in another 100 innings in the second half and will have his innings limited at some point.

The other minor flaw in his repertoire has been the slight tendency towards fly balls as he’s risen in the minor leagues. His overall groundball percentage is decent (46%), but this year, the numbers haven’t looked as good. This year, 42.3% of his balls have guzzled grass, and at each stop from high-A to Triple-A, his groundball percentage has dropped. A number like his Triple-A groundball percentage (36.6%) would be a problem in the major leagues. Even this pink flag has its own caveat, however, as SafeCo is a safe haven for flyballers. According to StatCorner, the park has a 93 park factor for home runs by right-handers, and that number drops to 87 for lefties.

Given the lack of offense behind him, and the chance that the Mariners limit his pitches as well as his innings, Pineda does not make for a good choice for wins. On the other hand, the park should help him continue to develop, and nothing terrible leaps out from his pristine numbers. He’s a strong pickup in deeper leagues, and if he performs well in his first start against a good offense from New York, he’ll even be relevant in mixed leagues for his strikeouts and ratios alone.

I’m going to be perfectly honest: I typically stay away from Johan Santana. I’ve only drafted Johan once in my life, and then I flipped him for Brandon Webb and Michael Young, and dominated my league. Another disclaimer – I’m a Mariners fan, so I’m in love with Cliff Lee at this point, as I’m sure many Phillies fans were last season.

This year, Johan and Lee have some extra intrigue surrounding each of them, and are being drafted relatively close to each other. Johan is coming off September elbow surgery, and Lee is in a new (old) league again with a new squad. Johan is currently the seventh pitcher off the board (41), with Lee being the ninth pitcher being drafted (51). But should Lee be going before Santana?

Johan has posted two nice seasons since going to New York. In 2008 he pitched a career high 234.1 innings, won 16 games and had an ERA of 2.53. I would call that a more than superb fantasy season, but a 1.15 WHIP and 7.91 K/9 dropped him down a bit. Last season, before his injury woes, Santana pitched 166.2 innings, won 13 games and had an ERA of 3.13. Once again, however, a 7.88 K/9 and 1.21 WHIP made that season less valuable. I find it strange that no one is talking about Johan’s drop in strikeout rate since he entered the NL. From 2002-2007, he never struck out less than a batter an inning, and now he is doing so consistently. CHONE projects his strikeout rate to be at 8.11, with fan and Marcel projects hovering around the same mark. But what proof do we have that his strikeout rate should rise back towards his career average (even if it is only a slight bump)?

Lee has been fabulous since his return to the bigs late in 2007. In ’08 he posted a 2.54 ERA (3.57 xFIP) and struck out 170 batters in 223 innings. Splitting time with the Indians and Phillies in ’09, Lee struck out 181 batters in 231.2 innings, earning himself a 3.22 ERA (3.69 xFIP). Looking at his 2009 as a whole, his strikeout rate was an improvement from 2008, but in reality it may not have been. His strikeout rate in the AL was worse than 2008, coming in at 6.34 per nine. The defense behind him and the spacious Safeco field will only help his ERA and WHIP next year, and Fans may have it right by projecting a 1.06 WHIP and 3.16 ERA.

Doing a quick comparison, which starter would you rather have? The pitcher that’s coming off surgery and has Jason Bay as their left fielder, or the pitcher with an outstanding defense and ballpark around him? I’d rather have Lee, but that’s not to say he’s being drafted too low. I think switching him and Santana in the draft order would be best, but in the end Santana just needs to move down below Lee on draft day.

Over the offseason we’ll take a look at each position on the diamond and see how the past season affected the positional rankings and where there might be some potential bounceback value picks going into next year’s drafts. (See shortstops, catchers, second basemen, first basemen, third basemen, right fielders, left fielders and center fielders.)

Of course, when it comes to pitchers, the format suffers. We’re certainly not about to do tiered rankings for the top 75+ pitchers that get drafted every year in mixed leagues – that would be one long post. Instead, I’m going to cover the pitchers by their location on your team. The first group consists of pitchers that could or should be selected to be fantasy aces in 2010. Let’s take a look.

This is where I drop some caveats. Everyone has their preferences, so order this tier as you will. The first tier is meant to be the no-doubt-about-it group. All of these guys won’t give you the strikeouts of Tim Lincecum and Zack Greinke, but they’ll come within a strikeout or two per nine innings. They won’t all have the miniscule WHIPs of Dan Haren or Roy Halladay, but none of them should break 1.2 in that category. They won’t all be the horse that CC Sabathia is, but they’ve all (so far) shown the ability to put close to 200 innings together. There are no guarantees when it comes to elbows and shoulders, but these guys look like bonafide studs.

The next group ain’t too shabby themselves. The first three only have question marks because they’re young and haven’t been doing this for ages. Despite my worries about Jon Lester’s walk rate in the minors, he hasn’t shown any problems since he made his cancer recovery. Felix Hernandez broke out last year, and just needs to show it again. Justin Verlander seems to have fixed his delivery, but will what broke before break again? The next two guys have question marks are about age and health. Chris Carpenter is a walking question mark, and his ongoing health issues make him overvalued after strong years and undervalued after injured years. In other words, I owned him often last year and may not own him once next year. Instead, I may own Johan Santana often this year, who should be next year’s Carpenter, despite his worrisome declining velocity and strikeout rates. Cliff Lee never had great strikeout rates to begin with and is going to the tougher league, but he may get some support for a higher ranking.

Originally, there was a tier between Lee and Adam Wainwright, but that tier was born more of intuition than anything in the numbers. Wainwright made just as big of a leap forward as King Felix in some ways, why should he be in another tier? Perhaps this imaginary tier has a combination of questions. Wainwright broke out – and has durability questions. Josh Johnson can probably repeat his performance, given his history, but he has definite durability questions. He’s put together just 364 innings total from 2007-2009. Josh Beckett is a favorite of mine, but for some reason he keeps putting up ERAs that are much higher than his FIPs, and maybe that’s just how he rolls. Ubaldo Jimenez induces mad ground balls and strikes out plenty, but his stats are still borderline. Aw, heck, put that tier back in.

The “just off” tier gives you a preview of some nice SP2 values that you could pair with a late SP1 for your best strategic approach. Consider that the number one pitcher on this list is projected by Bill James to put up an 2.80 ERA and 1.12 WHIP with 261 strikeouts, while the tenth guy may “only” contribute 3.08 ERA, 1.09 WHIP and 224 strikeouts. That, my friends, is why you wait to draft your starting pitchers.

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.