78 replies to this topic

[Mackus]

Regarding FIP, the Wall is presumably beneficial for O's pitchers fielding independent type stats.

 

In theory, yes.  FIP is calculated based on actual HR rates, which Orioles pitchers at home should benefit from with fewer homers out to LF.  xFIP actually calculates home runs based on how many you'd expect to allow if you had a normal HR/FB rate.  So if you give up more homers per flyball than average, that'll drive up your ERA and FIP but your xFIP would give you a homerun penalty only for the league average rate of your flyballs allowed and not the exact number that became actual home runs.

 

In Gibson's specific case, his HR/FB rate is only a tiny bit worse than league average, so his FIP and xFIP are nearly identical.  If you break it into home/road, he's had a higher HR/FB at home than on the road which feels unlucky and is reflected in his xFIP being a little lower than his FIP at home, but a little higher on the road.  Both FIP and xFIP, home and away, are still much better than his ERA.  Order of about 1 run.  Part of that is just Gibson, though.  For his career he's always had a worse ERA than his FIP (0.31 runs worse) and xFIP (0.48 runs worse) by what feels like a meaningful amount.

[Mike B]

Ten runs on the board and Gunnar's drawn the collar. Go figure.

Adley and Gunnar 0 for 10 and we score 10.  Not bad.

 

It was helped by Hays and Santander going 7 for 8, 2 bombs, and 7 RBI. 

[BSLChrisStoner]

Do think Gibson has been what's expected... but I apparently feel better about it than most.

He's made 29 starts. He's thrown 168.2 innings.
That has value.

I think he's made 22 competitive starts (5 innings or more, 4 er or less).
Yeah, I know 4 er in 5 is a 7.20 era, but I guess my point is I think those outings from a 4th or 5th starter keep you in a game. Give you a chance. (He's had 17 starts of 5 innings or more, and 3 er or less.)

He's had 4 disaster starts (outings with 6 er or more).

Ideally you'd have a better option than Gibson for a playoff start, but him starting a Game 4 (Bradish, Rodriguez, Kremer) is livable.

He'll have a short hook, you'd just be hoping to get 4-5 usable innings, where you aren't immediately taken out of a game.

Totally get the perspective of wanting better than Gibson in the rotation.
But do think his regular taking the ball - even if the overall results are below average - are part of the reason why the O's have had success.

With his 103 career wins, and 1,700 career innings... I'm okay with giving him a Game 4 opportunity.
Yeah, honest truth is that I wish they had a better option... but is what it is right now.

Wells isn't an option.
Means isn't an option.
So we're talking him or Irvin or Flaherty.

You can keep giving each the ball and see who has the best Sept.
Flaherty has the best stuff, but I don't really trust him any more than Gibson.

All of them are pretty even.
Each would have a chance to keep you in a game.
Each will have a short-hook.
You aren't going to have a lot of trust in any of them.

[Mike B]

Gibby was very likely to throw 6 innings regardless. Good to see him make it a quality start

Yep, it was either pitch well or stay out there and take a beating.  I am glad he went for the first option.  

[Mackus]

Why isn't Means an option for the playoffs?  I trust him, as unknowable as he is, more than I trust Gibson today.  That confidence could plummet if he's really bad in two September starts, but as we're standing now I'd give him the ball over Gibson, Flaherty or Irvin without much hesitation right now.  Those guys are a pretty low bar to clear, IMO.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Why isn't Means an option for the playoffs?  I trust him, as unknowable as he is, more than I trust Gibson today.  That confidence could plummet if he's really bad in two September starts, but as we're standing now I'd give him the ball over Gibson, Flaherty or Irvin without much hesitation right now.  Those guys are a pretty low bar to clear, IMO.

Ahh, I thought you had to be on the 26 man not the 40 man.  I was wrong there. 

I'd give Means a chance I guess if he you feel good about his Sept outings. 
I don't expect him to be any better here in Sept / Oct than Gibson. 
 

If he has control and feel of his change though, yeah... I'd be tempted there.

[You Play to Win the Game]

I trust him and he has value because he throws a lot of mediocre innings every 5 days is such a strange argument IMO. And mentioning Means as someone you don’t trust over this guy is even more so.

[BSLChrisStoner]

I trust him and he has value because he throws a lot of mediocre innings every 5 days is such a strange argument IMO. And mentioning Means as someone you don’t trust over this guy is even more so.

It's Sept. 7th.  Means hasn't thrown a ML pitch since April 13th 22. 
Having more confidence in Means to be ready to jump in now and be any better than Gibson / Irvin / Flaherty is a reach imo.
Could work out if he does have feel for his change, but I don't know you can expect him to be 'better' even if the bar is low. 

Definitely had in my head they had to be on the 26 man vs the 40 man...  so, certainly had that wrong.
If Means can get a couple of good outings under his belt, great. 
I'll still hold out hope for Wells then, though if he can shake off the arm fatigue, him helping the pen vs. making a start seems more realistic to me. 

 

Going back to Gibson's value...   it's just a long-standing belief that I have, that consistent, dependable mediocrity at the back of a rotation has value.  We are at a place in baseball where the average start is 5.1 innings.  That includes all the 'better' starts the front-end guys are providing. If you are getting a 4th / 5th starter that more often than not gives you 5 innings and a chance... that's a win imo... even if you'd obviously like to improve on that with someone who would be a front-end guy somewhere else. 

[Mike B]

Do think Gibson has been what's expected... but I apparently feel better about it than most.

He's made 29 starts. He's thrown 168.2 innings.
That has value.

I think he's made 22 competitive starts (5 innings or more, 4 er or less).
Yeah, I know 4 er in 5 is a 7.20 era, but I guess my point is I think those outings from a 4th or 5th starter keep you in a game. Give you a chance. (He's had 17 starts of 5 innings or more, and 3 er or less.)

He's had 4 disaster starts (outings with 6 er or more).

Ideally you'd have a better option than Gibson for a playoff start, but him starting a Game 4 (Bradish, Rodriguez, Kremer) is livable.

He'll have a short hook, you'd just be hoping to get 4-5 usable innings, where you aren't immediately taken out of a game.

Totally get the perspective of wanting better than Gibson in the rotation.
But do think his regular taking the ball - even if the overall results are below average - are part of the reason why the O's have had success.

With his 103 career wins, and 1,700 career innings... I'm okay with giving him a Game 4 opportunity.
Yeah, honest truth is that I wish they had a better option... but is what it is right now.

Wells isn't an option.
Means isn't an option.
So we're talking him or Irvin or Flaherty.

You can keep giving each the ball and see who has the best Sept.
Flaherty has the best stuff, but I don't really trust him any more than.

All of them are pretty even.
Each would have a chance to keep you in a game.
Each will have a short-hook.
You aren't going to have a lot of trust in any of them.

I think what we might see in G4 is a piggy back start.  Flaherty/Means or Gibson/Means.  

I think Means starts against the Cardinals on Tuesday or Wednesday.  I am anxious to see how that goes.

[Mackus]

Going back to Gibson's value... it's just a long-standing belief that I have, that consistent, dependable mediocrity at the back of a rotation has value. We are at a place in baseball where the average start is 5.1 innings. That includes all the 'better' starts the front-end guys are providing. If you are getting a 4th / 5th starter that more often than not gives you 5 innings and a chance... that's a win imo... even if you'd obviously like to improve on that with someone who would be a front-end guy somewhere else.

Consistently taking the ball and pitching innings absolutely has value over a season. Less so if those innings are below mediocre (like Gibson's this season, he's way below average as evidenced but his 82 ERA+), but still some value.

Where mediocre innings eatings ceases to be of any use is in the playoffs. Quality is way more important than quantity in October.

[DuffMan]

I certainly would go to Means in the playoffs before Gibson.    Really wish we had "ponied up" for Bassitt

[BSLChrisStoner]

Where mediocre innings eatings ceases to be of any use is in the playoffs. Quality is way more important than quantity in October.

I agree on that.  But the hook is going to be quick for anyone.  
Don't think there is going to be a huge difference in any of them Gibson / Irvin / Flaherty / Means. 
Whoever you feel best about down the stretch is fine.
Next Spring I'll feel better about Means vs any of the rest. 
And maybe I'll still prefer him in October vs. the other 3... but after not having a ML pitch since last year...  I'm just not expecting him to look significantly better than the others right now. 

Glad to be wrong about his eligibility though.
Does give you another potential option, and if he has feel with the change, yeah...  sign me up. 

[You Play to Win the Game]

I'll never be on board with embracing mediocrity just because it's the #5 spot and they throw innings. I'd rather try to do better with those innings, even with a patchwork/hot hand approach. This feels like Orioles fandom baggage to me. There's no law that says we have to take what we can get though, and the worst part is we paid him $10M this year. He's our highest paid player.

 

Should the Ravens have embraced Duvernay over OBJ this off-season, given his likelihood to "stay on the field" (AKA log innings)?

[BSLSteveBirrer]

The problem is a quick hook in the playoffs is correct but we aren't really built for that. Regardless of who you start, Gibson/Irvin/Flahetry, if you yank them early we are in trouble because the guys we have to then bring in are no better. I don't see Wells being an option at all. If he has arm fatigue he either is still arm dead come October or at best rested but rusty as heck.

 

So it comes down to Means. If Means looks good in the last half of the month then he is starting over those guys anyway. And if he doesn't look good then he's hardly a long relief guy either.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

I'll never be on board with embracing mediocrity just because it's the #5 spot and they throw innings. I'd rather try to do better with those innings, even with a patchwork/hot hand approach. This feels like Orioles fandom baggage to me. There's no law that says we have to take what we can get though, and the worst part is we paid him $10M this year. He's our highest paid player.

 

Should the Ravens have embraced Duvernay over OBJ this off-season, given his likelihood to "stay on the field" (AKA log innings)?

Agree. The worst part is that Gibson was brought in as the BEST new starter not any kind of rotation upgrade. So here we are.

[Mike B]

I certainly would go to Means in the playoffs before Gibson.    Really wish we had "ponied up" for Bassitt

Ponying up is not in the Angelos play book.  We were supposed to go to see Springsteen at Oriole Park on Saturday.  He had to cancel Saturday and all his September shows.  Angelos owes me about 500 dollars.  If he promises to sell the team, I will let him keep it.

[mweb08]

In theory, yes. FIP is calculated based on actual HR rates, which Orioles pitchers at home should benefit from with fewer homers out to LF. xFIP actually calculates home runs based on how many you'd expect to allow if you had a normal HR/FB rate. So if you give up more homers per flyball than average, that'll drive up your ERA and FIP but your xFIP would give you a homerun penalty only for the league average rate of your flyballs allowed and not the exact number that became actual home runs.

In Gibson's specific case, his HR/FB rate is only a tiny bit worse than league average, so his FIP and xFIP are nearly identical. If you break it into home/road, he's had a higher HR/FB at home than on the road which feels unlucky and is reflected in his xFIP being a little lower than his FIP at home, but a little higher on the road. Both FIP and xFIP, home and away, are still much better than his ERA. Order of about 1 run. Part of that is just Gibson, though. For his career he's always had a worse ERA than his FIP (0.31 runs worse) and xFIP (0.48 runs worse) by what feels like a meaningful amount.

I haven't been paying as much attention to developments in advanced stats the last few years, is there a FIP like stat that actually uses batted ball data to determine how many homers would be given up in a homer neutral environment?

[You Play to Win the Game]

I haven't been paying as much attention to developments in advanced stats the last few years, is there a FIP like stat that actually uses batted ball data to determine how many homers would be given up in a homer neutral environment?

Not that I'm aware of - but there is the contact data, which suggests his expected ERA should be 4.68 (7.7% barrel rate - highest in his career, but not god awful, 44.6% hard hit rate, highest in his career by a substantial margin). But xERA isn't expected to be predictive like FIP/xFIP try to be. Worth noting that his xERA is about a half run higher than the FIP/xFIP. Eye test doesn't show a pitcher who has been unlucky IMO. 

[mweb08]

I'll never be on board with embracing mediocrity just because it's the #5 spot and they throw innings. I'd rather try to do better with those innings, even with a patchwork/hot hand approach. This feels like Orioles fandom baggage to me. There's no law that says we have to take what we can get though, and the worst part is we paid him $10M this year. He's our highest paid player.

Should the Ravens have embraced Duvernay over OBJ this off-season, given his likelihood to "stay on the field" (AKA log innings)?

I agree about not embracing meh at best performance out of the #5 spot.

Here's the thing though, Gibson wasn't brought to Baltimore to be the #5 starter. He took the mound to start the year for the Orioles.

[NewMarketSean]

I agree about not embracing meh at best performance out of the #5 spot.

Here's the thing though, Gibson wasn't brought to Baltimore to be the #5 starter. He took the mound to start the year for the Orioles.

On a team with a lot of promising young starters. That he is the 5th or even 6th best SP on this team is a good problem to have.