Carlos has had his share of cramps in his forearm, but Will Carroll (who was first to report on Prior's shoulder issues) has Big Z in the red this year (sub. req.)
How did Zambrano survive the workload that doomed Kerry Wood and Mark Prior? We don't know. Maybe it's his body type..."Sudden" Sam McDowell is on his comparables list, and he was out of baseball by age 32. So were Don Drysdale and Ralph Branca.
Will sure knows his stuff, but, as the PECOTA cards aren't up yet, I have this abbreviated list of comps from the PECOTA Weighted Means spreadsheet
Mark Gubicza, Joey Jay, Jim Clancy, Stan Williams
Adding the three pitchers Will lists, here's the group of 8 - IP @ 26 (Z's seasonal age last year), career IP, seasonal age in last season pitched in MLB and ERA+ at each time. Click the headers to sort.
| Pitcher | IP26 | ERA+26 | IPCar | ERA+C | lsAge |
| Sam McDowell | 1590 | 116 | 2492 | 112 | 32 |
| Don Drysdale | 1945 | 124 | 3432 | 121 | 32 |
| Mark Gubicza | 1313 | 118 | 2223 | 109 | 34 |
| Ralph Branca | 1311 | 108 | 1484 | 104 | 30 |
| Carlos Zambrano | 1193 | 130 | ?? | ?? | ?? |
| Stan Williams | 1018 | 105 | 1764 | 108 | 35 |
| Jim Clancy | 976 | 104 | 2517 | 98 | 35 |
| Joey Jay | 934 | 107 | 1546 | 99 | 30 |
The high walk rates Carlos keeps putting up concerns me, and that depresses his innings pitched. Still, he looks OK to me.
19 comments:
Don't quote me on it, but I'm almost positive he was Red last season as well and I think the season before though I'm less sure of that. Too bad I didn't save the files because I don't believe there is a way to look at past ones, is there?
I'll go take a look
and I don't have to quote you, you just said it right here on the intertubes
2007 = Red
http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5864
good memory
2006 = Yellow
http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4886
2005 = Red
http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=3756
2004 = yellow
http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2618
Carroll's measure of injury risk for pitchers seems to be based (at least in part) around Pitcher Abuse Points, and unless I'm sorely mistaken Zambrano has been in the top-5 in PAP the past five seasons.
So the question is, has Zambrano beaten the odds? Or is there something about Zambrano (like, I don't know, his build) that makes him less subject to the rules of PAP? Or was his declining production last season symptomatic of an injury that didn't require a DL trip? I don't pretend to know which is correct.
I suspect his build lets him get away with the workload. This is truly a "we'll see" type of thing, but I'd guess he's going to throw 220 this year.
So he alternates between red and yellow except for the last 2 years in which he's been red both times.
Colin, Carroll does do this largely based on PAP, which I'm far from a strong believer in.
Still, there are some concerning trends with Zambrano, but I tend to believe it has more to do with him falling in love with his cutter the last couple of seasons. I firmly believe he went back to throwing the 2-seamer as frequently as he did in 2002, 2003, and 2004 that we'd see him revert back to that kind of pitcher.
That reminds me to pick up on the Zambrano pitch ID. Too bad we don't have data for previous seasons, but we'll do what we can with '07
It's not that I don't believe in the basics behind PAP, just that I don't know that it buys you much more information than pitch counts do.
That said, I really don't understand the workings of Carroll's system the way I do, say, PECOTA (and I'm not saying that I fully understand PECOTA, but I grasp enough to the principles to feel comfortable with what it does). So, until Carroll shows some evidence that his injury reports have a good deal of predictive value, I don't know that I put a lot of stock into them.
Harry, I'm excited about future seasons and the data that it will have as well. As we know, the more you have the better conclusions you can come to.
I don't think PAP tells us much more than pitch counts do either. Or even innings pitched. It's obvious that pitchers who throw more are more likely to get married.
As for Carroll, I think some of it has to do with his own opinions if i remember correctly. So, yeah, I don't put much stock into.
I just think the number of injuries that you could predict is much smaller than the number of injuries you couldn't have predicted so to me it's really nothing I take too seriously.
I also don't think any discussion about Will Carroll is complete without discussing how the quality of his work has declined significantly over the last couple of years. It's nearly gotten to the the point, in my opinion, that what he says in his daily UTK articles can be taken with a grain of salt. I think Will has gotten more famous than he can professionally handle and it reflects on his quality of work, which was barely readable in 2007. And, more importantly, rarely accurate.
The system does use PAP as one of 12 factors that overlies an actuarial table.
I think what should be changed in the table is not "last season age" but "last effective season age." Williams, Z's top comp, was effectively done as a starter at age-26, lost 3 or 4 years to what looks like injury in the stat line (I don't know - before my time) and came back to have one very effective year as a starter. Clancy is better, making it to 32 while effective with a year "off." Jay has such a weird career pattern that I don't know what to make of it.
It's the Gubicza comp that really worries me. I mean, his stat line is stone cold scary.
And Maddog, I really disagree that my work has gone downhill, let alone "unreadable." I'd love to hear more of your suggestions, so feel free to email me. Always looking to improve.
Will,
Glad to see that you're available for the people who read your work. I want to make it clear, first and foremost, that my opinions are only mine and that no matter what, I still read your work and appreciate what I know is undoubtedly a lot of hard work on your part. I've read your books and have kept up with your UTK for several years and will have no qualms of doing so this year so perhaps my comments were a little off base.
Suggestions? As Colin pointed out, make your system more understandable. We all obviously get the red, yellow, and green labels, but what sometimes goes unexplained is why. I'm glad you explained your marking of Zambrano here and I think everyone would agree he deserves a red. His trends are concerning as I mentioned and anyone who has been worked as hard as he has should be of concern.
I'll take some time if you'd like and look back at this past season in particular, but I don't have the time to do so at this moment.
I'm also available at my site (http://www.anothercubsblog.net) and you can contact me.
Thanks again for replying to the comments here. I think that's one thing that makes Baseball Prospectus the site that it is...most of you can be easily reached and also show up on other sites to discuss topics in response to what you've written. Look forward to the 2008 season.
Will - I'm curious about the effective age concept (first career was gerontology and cognition). What would you (or do you) factor in - injuries? body type? work load? - and to what degree?
I've explained the system in the past (I think the most detailed is 2006.) It's a bit of a "black box" because of the use of actuarial tables that I'm not allowed to disclose. It puts players in categories by position and age -- Z for example is RHS 26-28 -- and is then adjusted by 12 variously weighted factors, such as PECOTA attrition, PAP, height, weight, injury history, team injury rating, and so on. Again, I'm not going to disclose the weightings or even all the factors, but we've measured the results each year (except 2007 and anyone's free to do so) and it's come out relatively well. We're measuring risk of injury, not predicting injury, which is one of the big misunderstandings.
It seems as if most of the criticisms are "make it more understandable" which then becomes "tell us exactly how it works." I think red/yellow/green is eminently understandable for anyone who's not color blind (and we even adjusted the icon for those that are!) I'm *not* going to give away the system.
As for criticisms of the quality of my work, you have my email. As any reader of mine knows, I listen and respond.
Thanks, I'll see if I can dig that piece up in your archives. But that explanation is very helpful.
Post a Comment