The New Brandon McCarthy
The career transformation of Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher Brandon McCarthy has already been well documented. Concerned about his future in the majors, McCarthy opted to alter his pitch selection, which led to two fantastic seasons in Oakland. Just a few years removed from that, it’s starting to look like McCarthy has reinvented himself again.
Two things stand out about McCarthy’s new approach. His strikeout rate has exploded. After averaging a 16% strikeout rate over his career, McCarthy is up to 21.3% in 2014. While that figure is boosted by a 12 strikeout performance against the Phillies, McCarthy’s whiff rates on all of his pitches have shot up this season. Aside from strikeout rate, the second thing that jumps out is McCarthy’s increased ground ball rate. McCarthy turned himself into a ground ball pitcher in Oakland, but he’s taken things to the extreme now. On the season, McCarthy’s ground ball rates sits at a career-high 54.7%.
The added strikeouts are more appealing for fantasy leagues, and there’s some reason to believe the gains can stay. McCarthy’s velocity has taken a major step forward to begin the year. Last April, McCarthy’s sinker averaged 92.64 mph. This year, it’s jumped to 94.03 mph. That’s a significant jump, and it’s likely a result of McCarthy’s new offseason workout regimen. The purpose of the regimen was to keep McCarthy stronger throughout the season. While it remains to be seen whether that will be successful, the short-term gains have certainly been beneficial to his game.
Though not as appealing to fantasy owners, the increased ground ball rate has played a big role in McCarthy’s new approach. McCarthy has been a sinker-heavy pitcher in the past, but he’s gone even further this year. The sinker is being used 57.56% of the time in 2014. He used the pitch 44.26% of the time last year. He’s also made some changes to his repertoire. McCarthy hasn’t thrown a single changeup this season, according to BrooksBaseball.net. It was his worst pitch last season according to pitch values. McCarthy told Eno Sarris that he still believes he can figure out “a way to unlock” the pitch, but it doesn’t appear to be a focus this year.
The results of the new approach haven’t manifested in his numbers just yet. While McCarthy’s 4.67 ERA, and 4.04 FIP, maybe aren’t what fantasy owners are looking for, his 2.92 xFIP could hint at a nice improvement. It’s tough to really utilize xFIP after just 44 1/3 innings, but it does give reason to believe McCarthy’s number will come down. McCarthy’s already given up seven home runs, three of which came during a rough start in Colorado. Those struggles with the long ball have caused his HR/FB rate to skyrocket to 21.9% this year. That’s not sustainable.
The fact that his numbers are less than stellar at the moment makes McCarthy a tremendous buy low candidate. McCarthy has typically been stingy with walks, so any increase in strikeout rate gives him a huge bump in value. He’s had some problems staying healthy in the past, but he’s worked to address those issues during the offseason. While it’s unclear whether he’ll make it through an entire year unscathed, it looks like he can provide plenty of value as long as he can stay on the field.
Chris is a blogger for CBSSports.com. He has also contributed to Sports on Earth, the 2013 Hard Ball Times Baseball Annual, ESPN, FanGraphs and RotoGraphs. He tries to be funny on twitter @Chris_Cwik.
The time to buy low was unfortunately probably 2 weeks ago
I’ve quietly had my eye on him waiting to see how he fairs against the white sox on Friday but now he’s been put in the spotlight!
I added him in a deep league 3 starts ago and he has been mostly good. I have a deep league. 16 teams.
I think the velocities are off. He was averaging more like 90 last year and 92 this year. His max is 95.
Would you deal Tanner Roark for him?
His four good starts were against some of the worst hitting/most free swinging teams in baseball (rank in parentheses):
wOBA wRC+ K%
PHL 306(19) 90(21) 21.2(14)
CHC 287(29) 75(29) 24.2(29)
SDP 265(30) 67(30) 23.0(25)
NYM 288(28) 83(28) 23.1(26)
His 3 bad starts were against some of the better hitting teams (with at least league average K%):
LAD 325(9) 108(8) 21.9(20)
COL 372(1) 122(1) 16.6(3)
SFG 314(15) 101(11)21.6(19)
I’m not saying he can’t be streamed against bad teams, but I wouldn’t trust him yet. He may be pitching differently – I’m not sold on the results.
…and the three teams that light him up are all in his division so its not like he’ll have to see them much more often going forward.
Well, that was a great outing by Brandon last night. 3 shutout innings followed by an utter implosion of 7ER in 0.1 IP. Told you he kept getting done in by one bad inning. This is why sometimes statistics lie and you need to t.
…to trust your instincts.
My instincts say “keep him,” but I am having trouble reconciling that with the poor 5X5 stats…
Also, how did Gibson let McCarthy throw away the game like that? Gibson has some responsibility to the fans to try to manage the team to a victory sometimes.
I think xFIP should be adjusted. Instead of inputting the league average HR/FB% rate (10.5%), the input should be that individual pitcher’s HR/FB% over the past two seasons. This way, you can account for change in that individual pitcher’s ability to suppress the long ball (see Tim Lincecum, who was quite good at it years ago but not so good the past couple seasons). While we’re on Lincecum, his 3.22 xFIP is based on the 10.5% HR/FB rate. His HR/FB rate over the past two seasons is 13.2%. Would that adjustment not give us a clearer sense of how well Lincecum has pitched and will continue to pitch? Why would we want to rely on an indicator that gives a pitcher credit for something they’ve proven they can’t do, or take credit away from a pitcher for something they’ve proven they can do exceptionally well? I guess what it comes down to is the whole luck thing. If you believe consistently posting a high HR/FB rate over a two-year stretch is merely bad luck, then you believe in xFIP as it is currently calculated today. If you believe that pitcher’s skills (or erosion of said skills) have more to do with giving up long balls, then you believe the current xFIP metric is a load of crap. Vote for change!
Is this really relevant to this article?
Or just get rid of xFIP altogether and use the two-year HR/FB% input for FIP. Keep it simple.