Pitching staff xFIP

[Ennder]

xFIP is a stat that tries to pull luck, park and fielding out of a pitchers stat line and show how good he really was. Personally I'd value it more than ERA for a single season but it is flawed in its own way and ERA is probably a better long term stat when you have 3+ years worth of data. keep in mind RP's tend to beat their xFIP's for whatever reason.

 

 

Shouse - 3.66

Gallardo - 4.00 (that start in colorado really killed his stats, I expect better)

Gagne - 4.19 Tex, 4.21 Bos (yes basically he was lucky in Texas and unlucky in Boston)

Torres - 4.21 (yes he wasn't near as bad as that ERA suggests)

Turnbow - 4.23

McClung - 4.24 (small sample)

Mota - 4.32

Capauno - 4.39 (there was a lot of bad luck in his season)

Bush - 4.43

Sheets - 4.49 (yes his stats were ugly last year which worries me way more than the injury issues)

Riske - 4.56 (he has a long history of beating his xFIP by a lot)

Parra - 4.61

Villanueva - 4.84 (way too many walks last season, this is 2nd year in a row he beat his xFIP by a lot though)

Wise - 4.84

Suppan - 4.85

Vargas - 4.89

 

Note to self, this post scares me. When I started this my idea was to show that we pitched much better than ERA suggests but I'm not so sure that is true. I think a lot of our guys have upsides better than the xFIP. Sheets, Gallardo and Villanueva for sure do. What I do like is that most of our guys are at least in that 'average' range, there are no really ugly guys in that list.

[Ennder]

xFIP is a stat that tries to pull luck, park and fielding out of a pitchers stat line and show how good he really was. Personally I'd value it more than ERA for a single season but it is flawed in its own way and ERA is probably a better long term stat when you have 3+ years worth of data. keep in mind RP's tend to beat their xFIP's for whatever reason.

 

 

Shouse - 3.66

Gallardo - 4.00 (that start in colorado really killed his stats, I expect better)

Gagne - 4.19 Tex, 4.21 Bos (yes basically he was lucky in Texas and unlucky in Boston)

Torres - 4.21 (yes he wasn't near as bad as that ERA suggests)

Turnbow - 4.23

McClung - 4.24 (small sample)

Mota - 4.32

Capauno - 4.39 (there was a lot of bad luck in his season)

Bush - 4.43

Sheets - 4.49 (yes his stats were ugly last year which worries me way more than the injury issues)

Riske - 4.56 (he has a long history of beating his xFIP by a lot)

Parra - 4.61

Villanueva - 4.84 (way too many walks last season, this is 2nd year in a row he beat his xFIP by a lot though)

Wise - 4.84

Suppan - 4.85

Vargas - 4.89

 

Note to self, this post scares me. When I started this my idea was to show that we pitched much better than ERA suggests but I'm not so sure that is true. I think a lot of our guys have upsides better than the xFIP. Sheets, Gallardo and Villanueva for sure do. What I do like is that most of our guys are at least in that 'average' range, there are no really ugly guys in that list.

[Ennder]

xFIP is a stat that tries to pull luck, park and fielding out of a pitchers stat line and show how good he really was. Personally I'd value it more than ERA for a single season but it is flawed in its own way and ERA is probably a better long term stat when you have 3+ years worth of data. keep in mind RP's tend to beat their xFIP's for whatever reason.

 

 

Shouse - 3.66

Gallardo - 4.00 (that start in colorado really killed his stats, I expect better)

Gagne - 4.19 Tex, 4.21 Bos (yes basically he was lucky in Texas and unlucky in Boston)

Torres - 4.21 (yes he wasn't near as bad as that ERA suggests)

Turnbow - 4.23

McClung - 4.24 (small sample)

Mota - 4.32

Capauno - 4.39 (there was a lot of bad luck in his season)

Bush - 4.43

Sheets - 4.49 (yes his stats were ugly last year which worries me way more than the injury issues)

Riske - 4.56 (he has a long history of beating his xFIP by a lot)

Parra - 4.61

Villanueva - 4.84 (way too many walks last season, this is 2nd year in a row he beat his xFIP by a lot though)

Wise - 4.84

Suppan - 4.85

Vargas - 4.89

 

Note to self, this post scares me. When I started this my idea was to show that we pitched much better than ERA suggests but I'm not so sure that is true. I think a lot of our guys have upsides better than the xFIP. Sheets, Gallardo and Villanueva for sure do. What I do like is that most of our guys are at least in that 'average' range, there are no really ugly guys in that list.

[mothershipconnection]

Not pretty. I can't believe we have all of one pitcher under 4.00.

[mothershipconnection]

Not pretty. I can't believe we have all of one pitcher under 4.00.

[mothershipconnection]

Not pretty. I can't believe we have all of one pitcher under 4.00.

[logan82]

So the conclusion could be that our defense didn't effect our pitching as much as we had at first thought?

[logan82]

So the conclusion could be that our defense didn't effect our pitching as much as we had at first thought?

[logan82]

So the conclusion could be that our defense didn't effect our pitching as much as we had at first thought?

[And That]

The flip side to this is that improvement by Gallardo (just by progression) and Villanueva (he walked a lot early in the season... remember when we were nervous about him in April?), as well as a healthy season by Sheets (if it ever happens) would improve 3/5 of the starting innings. I also have to think one or two of Gagne/Torres/Mota will improve, and Riske keeps outperforming the more detailed stats (he has a lot of weird peripherals year after year, but it works).

[And That]

The flip side to this is that improvement by Gallardo (just by progression) and Villanueva (he walked a lot early in the season... remember when we were nervous about him in April?), as well as a healthy season by Sheets (if it ever happens) would improve 3/5 of the starting innings. I also have to think one or two of Gagne/Torres/Mota will improve, and Riske keeps outperforming the more detailed stats (he has a lot of weird peripherals year after year, but it works).

[And That]

The flip side to this is that improvement by Gallardo (just by progression) and Villanueva (he walked a lot early in the season... remember when we were nervous about him in April?), as well as a healthy season by Sheets (if it ever happens) would improve 3/5 of the starting innings. I also have to think one or two of Gagne/Torres/Mota will improve, and Riske keeps outperforming the more detailed stats (he has a lot of weird peripherals year after year, but it works).

[rluzinski]

The defense certainly hurt Cappy and Suppan, two guys who need decent defense to do well. Also, I'm not sure how relevant a year's worth of FIP is for a reliever (although, it's certainly better than ERA).

[rluzinski]

The defense certainly hurt Cappy and Suppan, two guys who need decent defense to do well. Also, I'm not sure how relevant a year's worth of FIP is for a reliever (although, it's certainly better than ERA).

[rluzinski]

The defense certainly hurt Cappy and Suppan, two guys who need decent defense to do well. Also, I'm not sure how relevant a year's worth of FIP is for a reliever (although, it's certainly better than ERA).

[sbrylski]

But xFIP generally regresses everyone's preformance a bit to the mean. So I think its fair to say that at half of those guys will beat their FIP's, and some by more than a half point of ERA (and, of course, the other half the other way). So I think we'll see four or five guys solidly in the 3's, a bunch in the low to mid fours, and then a couple blowbags in the 5's. Because we're so deep, we hopefully can limit the innings of those 5's and use our top guys in the critical situations, we could have a nice low 4's team ERA. 4.10 to 4.40 would be an improvement from last season (4.41), and place us solidly in the 2nd tier.

 

I think that list looks fine, doesn't have me worried. Someone who has more time could compare it to a list of the Cubs pitchers.

[sbrylski]

But xFIP generally regresses everyone's preformance a bit to the mean. So I think its fair to say that at half of those guys will beat their FIP's, and some by more than a half point of ERA (and, of course, the other half the other way). So I think we'll see four or five guys solidly in the 3's, a bunch in the low to mid fours, and then a couple blowbags in the 5's. Because we're so deep, we hopefully can limit the innings of those 5's and use our top guys in the critical situations, we could have a nice low 4's team ERA. 4.10 to 4.40 would be an improvement from last season (4.41), and place us solidly in the 2nd tier.

 

I think that list looks fine, doesn't have me worried. Someone who has more time could compare it to a list of the Cubs pitchers.

[sbrylski]

But xFIP generally regresses everyone's preformance a bit to the mean. So I think its fair to say that at half of those guys will beat their FIP's, and some by more than a half point of ERA (and, of course, the other half the other way). So I think we'll see four or five guys solidly in the 3's, a bunch in the low to mid fours, and then a couple blowbags in the 5's. Because we're so deep, we hopefully can limit the innings of those 5's and use our top guys in the critical situations, we could have a nice low 4's team ERA. 4.10 to 4.40 would be an improvement from last season (4.41), and place us solidly in the 2nd tier.

 

I think that list looks fine, doesn't have me worried. Someone who has more time could compare it to a list of the Cubs pitchers.

[Ennder]

Oh I have time baby!

 

Prior - 3.56 (That was in 2005 when he was last healthy)

Marmol - 3.63

Wuertz - 3.82

Howry - 4.15

Dempster - 4.15

Hill - 4.17

Marshall - 4.56

Zambrano - 4.65

Eyre - 4.92

Marquis - 4.98

 

We had as good of a pitching staff as the Cubs last season, I had that discussion with them on their forum. They had a much much better defense and Wrigley played as a pitchers park last year but our pitching as a whole was as good as theirs. Unfortunately that is hard to prove to the "common fan" since they just look at ERA and decide it is cut and dry based on one of the weakest stats out there.

 

 

Lilly - 4.39

Wood - 4.52

[Ennder]

Oh I have time baby!

 

Prior - 3.56 (That was in 2005 when he was last healthy)

Marmol - 3.63

Wuertz - 3.82

Howry - 4.15

Dempster - 4.15

Hill - 4.17

Marshall - 4.56

Zambrano - 4.65

Eyre - 4.92

Marquis - 4.98

 

We had as good of a pitching staff as the Cubs last season, I had that discussion with them on their forum. They had a much much better defense and Wrigley played as a pitchers park last year but our pitching as a whole was as good as theirs. Unfortunately that is hard to prove to the "common fan" since they just look at ERA and decide it is cut and dry based on one of the weakest stats out there.

 

 

Lilly - 4.39

Wood - 4.52

[Ennder]

Oh I have time baby!

 

Prior - 3.56 (That was in 2005 when he was last healthy)

Marmol - 3.63

Wuertz - 3.82

Howry - 4.15

Dempster - 4.15

Hill - 4.17

Marshall - 4.56

Zambrano - 4.65

Eyre - 4.92

Marquis - 4.98

 

We had as good of a pitching staff as the Cubs last season, I had that discussion with them on their forum. They had a much much better defense and Wrigley played as a pitchers park last year but our pitching as a whole was as good as theirs. Unfortunately that is hard to prove to the "common fan" since they just look at ERA and decide it is cut and dry based on one of the weakest stats out there.

 

 

Lilly - 4.39

Wood - 4.52

[Tbadder]

Is there a stupid person's explanation for this stat somewhere? Thanks in advance.

[Tbadder]

Is there a stupid person's explanation for this stat somewhere? Thanks in advance.

[Tbadder]

Is there a stupid person's explanation for this stat somewhere? Thanks in advance.

[TerraceReserved]

FIP itself is short for Fielding Independent Pitching, and it uses a pitchers walk, strikeout, and HR rates and applies an average hit rate and creates a number on the scale of ERA that shows how well they pitched with no luck involved. xFIP I believe adjusts for the pitchers HR/FB ratio.