Archive for John Danks

Today’s Roto Riteup was written whilst “rocking out,” so random keystrokes caused by a certain forehead touching a certhsthdgdfh keyboard should be ignored.

Read the rest of this entry »

Here is the latest update to Week 24 two-start pitchers. Again this list is subject to change going forward.

Pitchers not listed on last update: Greinke, Lilly, Danks, Willis, Detwiler, Hand

Pitchers no longer scheduled for two starts: Cueto, Peavy, Eveland, Wang.

Let’s take a look at John Danks. On May 29th, Danks allowed 9 ER in 4 IP to send his ERA to 5.25 and his record to 0-8. Since then he’s 6-3 with a 3.09 ERA. Over those last 13 games, Danks has 76 Ks and 17 BB in 81.2 IP.

For the season, Danks has a 3.77 xFIP, which is the lowest mark he’s ever recorded. His ERA is now down to 4.09, higher than what it has been recently, but essentially equal to his lifetime 3.98 mark. It’s been a tremendous in-season turnaround.

Danks pitched okay the first month of the season, with four Quality Starts in six games with 36 Ks in 39 IP. It was May when Danks really hit the skids. In five starts that month, he had a 6.89 ERA with 14 BB, 10 Ks and 6 HR in 31.1 IP. In the first two months of the season, Danks allowed 11 HR in 70.1 IP. He gave up 84 fly balls in that span and had a 13.10 HR/FB rate.

In his last 13 games, Danks has surrendered 6 HR in 81.2 IP. He’s allowed 85 fly balls in that span for a 7.06 HR/FB rate. For the season Danks now has a 10.1 HR/FB rate, almost exactly equal to his career mark of 10.0.

We also see that Danks had trouble with his cutter early in the year. In 2009, Danks’ cutter was 19.1 runs above average while in 2010 it was 10.8 runs above average. In the month of May, Danks’ cutter had a -2.8 run value. Starting in June, Danks has had a positive run value with his cutter each month of the season.

Danks has a home game against Detroit and a road game against Kansas City this week. He has an ERA two runs higher on the road this year, with 76 IP both at home and on the road. But Danks’ road xFIP is 3.40, compared to a 4.13 home xFIP.

The White Sox lefty was knocked around in his last two outings, including a road game in Detroit, which has prompted fantasy owners to own him in just 51.8 percent of ESPN leagues and to start him in just 47 percent of CBS Sports leagues.

This year Danks is 1-2 with a 6.48 ERA against the Tigers in three games and 16.2 IP. Against the Royals he’s 1-0 with a 1.38 ERA in two games and 13 IP. Combined, he has 34 Ks in 29.2 IP against these teams.

Everyone is happy when one of their pitchers is scheduled for two starts in a week. But that is not always a good thing. Here are five pitchers you may be on the fence about (or should be on the fence) putting into your lineup for Week 18

John Danks – After getting beat up in May, Danks was hitting his stride in June until he had to leave his last start of the month with a strained oblique. He came back after the All-Star break and picked up right where he left off. In his last two starts, Danks has allowed just 1 ER in 13 IP and he notched 16 Ks in that span. Because of his horrendous start (0-8, 5.25 ERA), Danks’ overall numbers still look poor. But he is pitching well and should be in your lineup, even with a start against the Yankees.

John Lackey – In his last eight starts, Lackey has alternated between good and bad each start, with four outings with a game score 41 or lower and four with a game score 55 or higher. If this pattern continues, he’s due for a good start his first outing against the Indians and due for a poor one against the Yankees. Regardless of pattern, Lackey has two home starts this week. His ERA in Fenway is 6.54, which should be enough to slide him over to the bench this week.

Jake Peavy – The fact that Peavy is pitching at all is a minor miracle after he suffered a complete tear of the latissimus dorsi muscle from his shoulder. It really should be no surprise that he’s just a shadow of his former self. His fastball velocity is down nearly two mph from his heyday with the Padres and he throws his heater just 51 percent of the time now. In his last five starts, Peavy is 0-3 with a 6.67 ERA. He should not be in your lineup and it’s questionable if he should even be on your roster at this point in time.

Ervin Santana – It’s not unusual for a pitcher to suffer a letdown after pitching a no-hitter but Santana has been pitching great over his last eight starts and he has favorable matchups this week. He has two home starts and up first is the Twins, who have scored the third-fewest away runs in the AL this season. Next up is the Mariners, who have scored the second-fewest road runs in the league. While Santana has not displayed any significant home/road split this year, he has had some trouble with the gopher ball in his home park and he faces two of the bottom three HR teams this week. Keep him active in your lineup.

Javier Vazquez – Last season was a year to forget for Vazquez and 2011 started off in much the same fashion. But in his last eight starts, Vazquez has recorded 4 W, a 2.40 ERA, a 1.233 WHIP and 39 Ks in 48.2 IP. He may only be a six-inning pitcher at this point in his career, but he’s giving the Marlins a chance to win each time out. And the Marlins lead the NL in runs scored since the All-Star break. Get him in your lineup this week.

Other scheduled two-start pitchers in Week 18 are listed below. Please remember that these are projected pitchers and changes can and will happen between now and next week.

Lincecum, Beckett, Hamels, Kershaw, Sabathia, J. Garcia, Carpenter, Jurrjens, Kennedy, Greinke, Cain, Romero, Lewis, Cahill, Chacin, Tomlin, Norris, Luebke, Zambrano, Correia, Maholm, Hughes, Arroyo, Duensing, Fister, Lannan, Pelfrey, L. Hernandez, Kendrick, Wells, Hand, Huff, Cook, Simon.

Check back Sunday night for an update of two-start pitchers.

Now I want to provide some accountability and check in and see how previous recommendations turned out. There needs to be a two-week lag, since last week’s pitchers have not completed their second start yet. So here are Week 16 pitchers and how they fared.

Baker – Advised to start. W, 5 Ks, 0.00 ERA, 0.800 WHIP. 5 IP, 0 ER
Buehrle – Advised to start. W, 3 Ks, 2.57 ERA, 0.857 WHIP, 7 IP, 2 ER
Capuano – Advised to start. 11 Ks, 5.27 ERA, 1.317 WHIP, 13.2 IP, 8 ER
Hammel – Advised to start. 8 Ks, 10.13 ERA, 2.531 WHIP, 4.1 IP, 7 ER
Marquis – Advised to sit. W, 11 Ks, 3.21 ERA, 1.143 WHIP, 14 IP, 5 ER

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.

Hopefully you were able to pick up Scott Baker and trade Josh Outman last week. But even if you stood pat there are still plenty of acquisition targets and trade bait guys out there for you. So, here are five guys to pick up and five guys to move.

Acquire

Juan Rivera – Playing time has been an issue throughout Rivera’s career, but he seemingly has nailed down the starting job in left field this year. His ISO is nearly identical to last season; the big thing for Rivera this year is a more normal BABIP. After suffering through a .242 mark last year, he has a .313 one this season. Updated ZiPS shows him finishing the year with a .297 AVG and 18 HR and that may be selling him short in homers. Owned in less than 11 percent of ESPN leagues, Rivera is a nice cheap option for AVG and HR.

John Danks – Owners were expecting more than a 4-5 record with a 4.81 ERA in the middle of June. In his last three outings, he is 0-2 with a 5.40 ERA. But Danks is on a career-best strikeout pace, with an 8.15 K/9. Also, he has been a little unlucky with a 14.1 percent HR/FB rate. Danks’ ERA is already 0.36 runs above his FIP and with a little better HR rate going forward, he could turn in an ERA under four for the remainder of the year.

Stephen Drew – It has been a bad start of the year for most of the top shortstops and it seems there is a different SS on the “acquire” part of this list each week. A hot streak the last two weeks has gotten Drew’s overall numbers near respectability. His overall peripherals look okay. However, the one area where he has room for improvement is his numbers in Chase Field, which for most other hitters is a great hitting park. Drew has a home BABIP of .269, which has led to a .247/.318/.433 slash line. In 2008, Drew had a .321/.361/.559 slash line in his home park.

John Smoltz – After five rehab starts in the minors, Smoltz is on the verge of being called up to the Red Sox. He has gone six innings in each of his last two outings, although he was roughed up in his last start, when he allowed four runs. Overall, the minor league numbers look good, not great. But Smoltz is a nice lottery ticket if he is a free agent in your league. He has a history of being very good when healthy and there is really no reason not to add him to your bench if he is out there on the waiver wire and see if he can hold up for the remainder of the season.

Alberto Callaspo – If you need a middle infielder, you could do far worse than picking up Callaspo from the waiver wire. He probably is not going to give much in power, but the .300 AVG looks legitimate. His .330 BABIP looks high, but it matches the .327 he put up last year. In his last two full seasons in the minors he posted marks of .346 and .353 in the category.

Trade

Jason Kubel – At age 27, it should not be surprising that he is on target for a career year. But he is unlikely to maintain his current pace. The 17.5 percent HR/FB rate has led to a career-high .238 ISO, while he has never topped .200 previously. Kubel’s .349 BABIP is easily a career high, topping even his minor league numbers in the category. His SO/BB numbers and batted ball profile are similar to last season, indicating that perhaps some regression is right around the corner.

Max Scherzer – In his last two outings, Scherzer has gone 12.2 innings without allowing a run. He also got to pitch in Petco and against the Giants in those two games. His strikeout potential will always make him attractive to other owners, but it is hard to get excited about a guy who has a 5.73 ERA in his home park. Scherzer’s FIP is slightly higher than his ERA and his strand rate checks in at 79.2 percent. Rest of Season ZiPS sees a couple of more wins, but basically the same pitcher he has been the first part of 2009. If you can find an owner eager due to his strikeouts and recent performances, look to make a deal.

Bobby Abreu – It may be a little late to maximize his value, but Abreu is still on pace for 88 RBIs and 41 SB. But at this point he will be lucky to crack double digits in HR. The AVG is good but not great and he will need to maintain both that and the SB pace to make up for the lack of power. Abreu’s combination of skills will work for some teams but that power from an outfielder will be an albatross for many owners, especially since he was counted on for 15-20 HR at the beginning of the year.

Trevor Hoffman – One of the great stories so far this year has been the performance of Hoffman. But he has yet to give up a HR, has a 92.3 percent strand rate and a .218 BABIP. He has an outstanding 16 saves in 20 games. Shop him hard to teams looking for saves before the bottom falls out.

Adam Jones – There is a lot to like with Jones and hopefully if you deal him now you will get a nice return. But he also has a .372 BABIP and a 21.8 percent HR/FB rate, neither of which are likely to last. One of the hidden keys to Jones’ success this year has been the elimination of infield popups. Last year he had an IFFB% of 14.5 and in two previous partial seasons it was 17.6 and 13.3 percent. This year his mark checks in at 1.8 percent. Since infield flies result in an out nearly 100 percent of the time, this is a significant improvement for Jones. But it is another mark likely to regress going forward.

Very rarely do teams consummate a prospect-for-prospect swap. It seems as though GMs favor the “devil you know” over the “devil you don’t” approach, preferring to keep the young players whom they have invested time, energy and money developing.

However, the Chicago White Sox and the Texas Rangers made just such a deal in December of 2006. In a pitching prospect challenge trade, the Rangers sent former 1st rounder John Danks to the South Side as part of a deal that shipped Brandon McCarthy to Arlington. While the move was viewed as relatively even at the time, Danks has emerged as an ace-quality starter, while McCarthy has battled finger and shoulder maladies. After an inconsistent rookie season, Danks made tremendous strides in 2008:

2007: -1.62 WPA/LI, 5.50 ERA
2008: 2.99 WPA/LI, 3.32 ERA

Danks lowered his ERA by well over 2 runs this past season. Will that dramatic improvement hold? In a word, yes.

Danks upped his K rate slightly, from 7.06 in ’07 to 7.34 in ’08. He also slashed his walk rate significantly, from 3.5 BB/9 to 2.63 BB/9. However, the biggest difference in Danks’ numbers came in the home run department:

2007: 1.81 HR/9, 13.8 HR/FB, 34.8 GB%
2008: 0.69 HR/9, 7.4 HR/FB, 42.8 GB%

An extreme flyball pitcher in ’07, Danks generated grounders at a much higher clip in 2008. Consequently, his home run rate dropped from untenably high to comfortably below average. He may give some of that gain back next season (his HR/FB rate was pretty low; it tends to stick around 11% for pitchers) but he should be able to limit the longball damage and avoid another 2007 fireworks spectacle, given his more even GB/FB distribution. Given the homer-happy tendencies of U.S. Cellular Field, this is no small consideration.

With a few more strikeouts, as well as significantly less walks and homers, Danks cut his FIP ERA from 5.54 in 2007 all the way down to 3.44 in 2008. To what can we attribute this dramatic turnaround? A look at Danks’ pitch data reveals the addition of a new weapon:

(FB=fastball, SL=Slider, CT=Cutter, CB=Curveball, CH=Changeup XX= unidentified. The first number is the % that the pitch was thrown, the number in parentheses is the velocity)

2007: FB 61%(89.5), SL 0.6%(81), CB 17.4%(76.9), CH 21%(81.7), XX 2.7%
2008: FB 52.2%(91.3), SL 4.7%(83.9), CT 16.4%(87.1), CB 6.4%(77) CH 20.3%(82.8), XX 4.7%

In addition to gaining nearly 2 MPH on his fastball, Danks added a cutter to his repertoire. A look at Josh Kalk’s pitch F/X data reveals why this offering is so important to Danks’ development: the cutter gives him a pitch to work away from lefties and in on the hands of right-handers. Essentially, the offering opens up a whole new quadrant of the strike zone previously unavailable to him.

Danks is no flash in the pan. Every statistical and scouting measure available points to his breakout 2008 campaign as legitimate. Don’t hesitate to invest heavily in this southpaw: he’s here to stay among the elite arms in the American League.