Lohse is Cardinals’ most-pleasant surprise
Tomorrow ESPN will feature the most-pleasant surprises for each team during April. For the Cardinals, we picked Kyle Lohse.
When the Cardinals lost ace Adam Wainwright for the season, the pressure suddenly shifted to their starting rotation. In particular, the spotlight turned to Lohse, the righty who made only 40 starts in the two seasons since signing a hefty 4-year, $41 million contract extension. Given that from 2009-10 his ERA was indistinguishable from his strikeout rate (though, to be fair, his expected FIP was much lower), expectations were tempered. So his 2011 campaign thus far — five Wainwright-like starts with an ERA of 1.64 — has been the most pleasant surprise for the Cardinals. He is inducing groundballs like never before (48.6%) and limiting self-inflicted damage with a walk rate (1.17 BB/9) that Cliff Lee would be proud of. And he’s currently tied for fourth in the NL in WAR among pitchers.
Will he continue? The odds say no. His adjusted ZiPS ERA projection for the rest of the year is 4.46. His success is somewhat illusory, based as it is largely on a .202 BABIP — 100 points lower than his career average — despite a line-drive rate (21.5%) that is inline with his career rate (20.9%). And his career-high groundball rate notwithstanding, his HR/FB rate (3.1%) is bound to climb. But through the first month of the season, he is a big reason — the fourth-biggest by WAR — that the Cardinals are in first place. And for him to have taken, even if temporarily, Wainwright’s spot among the league’s best pitchers — Halladay, Johnson, Hamels, Lincecum — is the biggest and most-pleasant surprise of all.
[Note: Agree, disagree? Please vote in the accompanying poll.]
April 28th, 2011 at 10:38 am
“And he’s currently tied for fourth in the NL in WAR.”
Count me a little dubious of a statistic that currently shows Matt Garza, he of an 0-3 record and 4+ ERA, in the number 1 slot.
Sabermetrics has brought so many positive and intriguing ways of looking at the game of baseball, but with all those neat new tools have been some speedbumps that defy common sense.
April 28th, 2011 at 12:18 pm
Why do you consider win-loss record more reliable than something like WAR, or ERA more reliable than FIP? In my and other sabermetricians’ view, putting stock in a pitcher’s win-loss record seems to defy common sense, since so much of it is dependent on things outside of the pitcher’s control (not the least of which is his team’s offensive performance).
April 28th, 2011 at 1:11 pm
So you stand by the belief that Matt Garza has been the best pitcher in the Natinoal League this year accounting for factors outside of his control?
Seriously, some of saber-nerds get so stuck on the numbers that you refuse to listen to what your heart/gut is telling you and only pay attention to what’s in your head. Take a step back and think about what you’re saying. Just think.
I realize that win-loss record isn’t the best tool to measure a pitcher’s success or lack thereof but it shouldn’t be completely discounted either. Same with ERA. The problem with you guys is that you forget that these advanced (sabermetric) stats help tell the story but they don’t tell the whole story.
For example, some pitchers always seem to get by with a lower K/9 and higher BABIP than others and keep their ERA respectable, and as a result, the FIP metric always tends to underestimate the value of guys who are able to pitch to weak contact – i.e. get a high rate of outs without a high K/9 percentage.
Bottom line, you guys need to think outside of the numbers and apply some common sense on occasion.
April 28th, 2011 at 4:04 pm
I don’t know if Lohse is the biggest surprise. He’s pitched well for this team before. He finally got healthy again. Only thing is I can’t think of anyone who has really surprised me because we have always known how many of these players should be performing and now they are living up to that (berkman, Rasmus, etc.).
April 28th, 2011 at 5:23 pm
MuleRider, it sounds as though you reduce the argument to “pitcher A is better than pitcher B because I say so.” I’ll admit that numbers don’t tell the whole story, but the reason we try to quantify things with numbers is to provide some objectivity.
April 28th, 2011 at 5:25 pm
Bodie, you’re right, in that he has done it before. It’s just that it has been so long since he has pitched consistently well, and since he’s not getting any younger (or healthier), it’s a surprise.
Rasmus is a different story, because he’s coming into his own and it would’ve been surprising for him *not* to start breaking out.
April 28th, 2011 at 9:30 pm
‘MuleRider, it sounds as though you reduce the argument to “pitcher A is better than pitcher B because I say so.”’
Hardly. I’m just pointing out that there are times the sacred sabermetrics get it wrong…
“but the reason we try to quantify things with numbers is to provide some objectivity.”
And I’m telling you objectively that there is a problem when Matt Garza has a WAR of 1.6 and Josh Johnson is at 1.2. I’ll give you that Garza has pitched much better than his winless record and 4+ ERA and shouldn’t be judged so harshly thus, but there isn’t a person in his right mind who would say he’s pitching better than Johnson right now, even controlling for things outside of each pitcher’s domain.
April 28th, 2011 at 9:41 pm
Not sure why you need to bring straw-man arguing like “sacred sabermetrics” to the conversation.
First, the claim that Garza had a better April than Johnson is not the same as saying that he’s a better pitcher. But I’m curious: In what way is Johnson pitching better than Garza?
April 28th, 2011 at 10:26 pm
“Not sure why you need to bring straw-man arguing like “sacred sabermetrics” to the conversation.”
This tells me that while you might be good at numbers, not so much with the English language. Methinks you have “straw-man” confused with “sarcasm.”
“First, the claim that Garza had a better April than Johnson is not the same as saying that he’s a better pitcher.”
Po-tay-to, po-tah-to….what’s your point? You read too much into my statement. Let’s revisit it – “there isn’t a person in his right mind who would say he’s pitching better than Johnson right now” – I don’t accuse you of saying Garza is the better pitcher; I simply address who’s pitching better right now – i.e. who’s had the “better April.”
“But I’m curious: In what way is Johnson pitching better than Garza?”
Um, he’s giving up ~3 fewer runs per 9 innings pitched, for starters? Do I really need to go any farther?
April 28th, 2011 at 10:49 pm
Oh, and the reason I interjected what you interpreted as a straw-man (but was really just snark/sarcasm) and referred to it as “sacred” sabermetrics is because you’re doing just that with things like FIP, WAR, etc. – you’re treating them as sacred ways of determining players’ strengths and weaknesses and ignoring many of the other common, basic, and common sensical ways. I don’t dispute that those are very good tools for analysis, but as I’ve said before and I’ll say again a million times, those advanced metrics only HELP tell the story, but they aren’t the WHOLE story. However, you’re too hung up on the religion of sabermetrics and putting all your faith in those numbers and you’re completely disregarding other sound and objective ways of measuring players’ strengths and weaknesses. Do those traditional metrics have flaws? Certainly, and I don’t mean to imply they’re perfect. Do the advanced metrics have flaws as well? Damn straight and you sabermetric fundamentalists need to get it through your thick skulls that using only them can sometimes result in flawed analysis. That’s what’s going on here and you’re letting common sense slap you in the face while you try to ignore it and tell an entirely different story. And that’s just bogus, man….
Anyway, I’d bet $50 you’re a left-winger….you exhibit all the typical characteristics – namely this innate need to grab some obscure and esoteric way of looking at something, quantify it on your own terms and twist it to fit your (contrarian) argument, and then claim you’ve got the facts on your side and that anybody who sees it differently is just ‘wrong, wrong, wrong!’ Whatever gets your rocks off, I guess, but I get tired of you and your ilk infesting the baseball world with your sophistry and condescension and wish you’d keep that crap in the ongoing flame wars at political blogs and gaming sites and leave our national pastime alone.
April 29th, 2011 at 8:58 am
MuleRider – Pip is not the one who has engaged in “condescension” in this exchange: he has said nothing personal, whereas you have called him a “saber-nerd” and a user of “sophistry”, accused him of not understanding the English language, and attempted to insult his political views (I say “attempted,” because your only apparent basis for speculating about what his views actually are is that you don’t like it that he disagrees with you over the significance of certain pitching statistics…and that’s not a very good basis). Stay classy.
Pip – nice article and keep up the good work. I love the site and consistently your find your statistical analyses informative!
April 29th, 2011 at 9:25 am
“in this exchange: he has said nothing personal,”
This is true. My only response to this would be that in previous encounters with some of these sabermetric fundamentalists, they indeed are the ones to pre-emptively make it very personal and speak condescendingly to anyone who doesn’t latch onto their “science” 100%, so I carry around a little chip on my shoulder when I’m around people in that “club” who I know eschew or outright dismiss more traditional metrics.
“whereas you have called him a “saber-nerd” and a user of “sophistry”,”
The “saber-nerd” was a regrettable insult but I stand by my sophistry remark, especially once he interjected the question of Garza v. Johnson of whether we were talking about who was the better pitcher or who had pitched better in April, a technicality that was not germane to the original premise of our debate which was me raising an ojbection of the WAR statistic for having a potential flaw when it rated Garza so highly when he’s arguably struggled this spring, even when accounting for things outside of his control.
“accused him of not understanding the English language,”
I stand by this as well as he did not use ’straw-man’ in the proper context and seemed to be confusing it with sarcasm, which it clearly was.
“and attempted to insult his political views”
I didn’t mean to insult, just point out that he argues like a left-winger, so that’s where my money says his political leanings lie.
“(I say “attempted,” because your only apparent basis for speculating about what his views actually are is that you don’t like it that he disagrees with you over the significance of certain pitching statistics…and that’s not a very good basis).”
Maybe so, but when he ignores that one guy is giving up 3 more earned runs per 9 innings than one of his peers but still wants to make a case that that guy has pitched better so far thsi year and, rather than acknowledge that traditional metrics show Garza may have a lot more flaws than the FIP/WAR/etc. metrics show, he insists the facts are on HIS side and that I’m WRONG, well, I can’t help but feel like I’m reading Paul Krugman.
April 29th, 2011 at 11:57 pm
Oh, the Paul Krugman comment was the unkindest cut of all, MuleRider! By the way, do you need my Paypal account to send me that $50?
And thanks, hopandgator!
April 30th, 2011 at 10:49 am
Hey Pip, how’s it going? I’ll verify you win the bet, so post your PP account and I’m sure $50 will apear
. Oh yeah, almost forgot about the point of the blog. Its gotta be Berkman PIP. Lohse is second. I expected good pitching from a fully healthy Lohse, but had no idea Berkman would be as good offensively as he’s been so far. And he’s even played pretty good right field for an old man! Puma!!
April 30th, 2011 at 10:57 am
Hey, Danny! Great to hear from you. Yeah, Berkman is certainly a pleasant surprise, if for no other reason than that he has stayed healthy (for a month, at least!) and is raking like in his prime. You’re not alone — according to the poll, lots of people agree!
May 1st, 2011 at 7:03 am
[...] (Cardinals) – Matt names Kyle Lohse the Cardinals most pleasant surprise. That’s quite a turnaround considering he suggested the Cardinals go with a four man rotation [...]