December 6, 2011

Maybe Altobelli Was Right

Phil Birnbaum praises a Bill James’s study that appears in the 1986 Baseball Abstract for giving simple but clear evidence that Joe Altobelli, then manager of the Orioles, was wrong about early season performance of power versus finesse pitchers. Altobelli hypothesized that power pitchers did better than finesse pitchers in April. Bill showed that not to be the case, that in his study, finesse pitchers did better.

When James conducted that study in the mid 1980s, he needed to do a lot of work by hand. Today, with a few queries, we can extend the study. Here’s what I did:

  • Used seasons starting in 1986 so the studies don’t overlap.
  • Used Bill’s criteria of a minimum of 25 decisions. He used two other criteria for selecting pitchers, but it seems that very few from the other two would make it past the 25 decision mark, especially in the era of five man rotations.
  • I considered pitchers with K per 9 IP >= 8.0 to be power pitchers, <= 6.0 to be finesse pitchers.
  • For a particular W-L record, I chose the pitcher with the highest K per 9 to be the power pitcher, and the one with the lowest K per 9 to be the finesse pitcher.

Here are the 44 pairs I found:

Pitcher Season Wins Losses Strikeouts per 9 AprilW AprilL
Curt Schilling 2001 22 6 10.27 3 0
Tom Glavine 1993 22 6 4.51 3 0
Randy Johnson 2001 21 6 13.41 3 3
Jack Morris 1992 21 6 4.94 3 1
Roger Clemens 1997 21 7 9.95 4 0
Jamie Moyer 2003 21 7 5.40 3 2
Esteban Loaiza 2003 21 9 8.23 5 0
Dave Stewart 1989 21 9 5.41 5 0
Fernando Valenzuela 1986 21 11 8.09 3 1
Kevin Brown 1992 21 11 5.86 4 1
Johan Santana 2004 20 6 10.46 1 0
Jamie Moyer 2001 20 6 5.11 4 0
Roger Clemens 1987 20 9 8.18 1 2
Bill Gullickson 1991 20 9 3.62 2 0
Jake Peavy 2007 19 6 9.67 3 1
Chien-Ming Wang 2006 19 6 3.14 1 1
Randy Johnson 2000 19 7 12.56 6 0
Chien-Ming Wang 2007 19 7 4.70 0 2
Randy Johnson 1993 19 8 10.86 3 1
Fausto Carmona 2007 19 8 5.73 2 1
Justin Verlander 2009 19 9 10.09 1 2
Pat Hentgen 1993 19 9 5.08 3 1
Randy Johnson 1998 19 11 12.12 1 1
Rick Reuschel 1988 19 11 3.38 3 1
Jason Schmidt 2004 18 7 10.04 1 2
Jon Garland 2006 18 7 4.77 2 1
Justin Verlander 2010 18 9 8.79 1 2
Joe Magrane 1989 18 9 4.87 2 2
Mike Scott 1986 18 10 10.00 3 2
Jon Garland 2005 18 10 4.68 4 0
Roger Clemens 1988 18 12 9.92 4 0
Jack Morris 1991 18 12 5.95 2 3
Pedro Martinez 1997 17 8 11.37 3 0
Kenny Rogers 2006 17 8 4.37 4 2
Randy Johnson 1999 17 9 12.06 2 1
Tim Hudson 2010 17 9 5.47 1 1
David Cone 1992 17 10 9.41 2 1
Allan Anderson 1989 17 10 3.16 4 1
Curt Schilling 1997 17 11 11.29 3 2
Jaime Navarro 1992 17 11 3.66 1 2
Pedro Martinez 2004 16 9 9.41 3 1
Allan Anderson 1988 16 9 3.69 1 0
Nolan Ryan 1989 16 10 11.32 3 1
Zane Smith 1991 16 10 4.74 2 1
Hideo Nomo 1996 16 11 9.22 4 2
Ed Whitson 1989 16 11 4.64 3 2
Gio Gonzalez 2011 16 12 8.78 2 2
Joe Blanton 2006 16 12 4.96 3 2
Mike Scott 1987 16 13 8.47 3 1
Ramon Ortiz 2003 16 13 4.70 4 2
Randy Johnson 2004 16 14 10.62 2 2
Kevin Appier 1999 16 14 5.64 2 2
Javier Vazquez 2009 15 10 9.77 2 2
Ron Darling 1992 15 10 4.32 1 1
Jeff Fassero 1996 15 11 8.62 1 3
Omar Olivares 1999 15 11 3.72 2 2
Daisuke Matsuzaka 2007 15 12 8.84 3 2
Walt Terrell 1986 15 12 3.85 2 1
Johan Santana 2007 15 13 9.66 3 2
Dennis Martinez 1988 15 13 4.59 3 2
Curt Schilling 1998 15 14 10.05 3 2
Greg Maddux 2006 15 14 5.01 5 0
Kerry Wood 2003 14 11 11.35 4 1
John Doherty 1993 14 11 3.07 3 1
Hideo Nomo 1997 14 12 10.11 3 2
Kirk Rueter 2001 14 12 3.82 2 2
Todd Stottlemyre 1998 14 13 8.28 3 1
Bill Gullickson 1992 14 13 2.60 3 2
David Cone 1991 14 14 9.32 2 1
Tom Browning 1991 14 14 4.49 3 1
Yovani Gallardo 2009 13 12 9.89 3 1
Scott Erickson 1996 13 12 4.05 1 2
Madison Bumgarner 2011 13 13 8.40 0 4
Bill Wegman 1988 13 13 3.80 2 3
Tim Lincecum 2011 13 14 9.12 2 3
Bob Walk 1993 13 14 3.85 2 2
James Shields 2010 13 15 8.28 3 0
Mike Moore 1990 13 15 3.30 1 1
Colby Lewis 2010 12 13 8.78 3 0
Jimmy Haynes 2000 12 13 3.97 3 1
Randy Johnson 1992 12 14 10.31 3 0
Walt Terrell 1991 12 14 3.29 0 3
Javier Vazquez 2008 12 16 8.64 3 2
Bud Black 1991 12 16 4.37 1 3
Jake Peavy 2006 11 14 9.56 1 3
Brad Radke 1995 11 14 3.73 0 0
Chuck Finley 2002 11 15 8.21 2 2
Carlos Silva 2006 11 15 3.49 1 4

This time, however, if you add up the April numbers (including a few regular season games in March), the power pitchers come out ahead:

Pitcher Type April Wins April Losses April ERA April K9
Power 114 61 3.21 9.67
Finesse 103 62 3.98 4.23

Note that the difference in Won-Lost records is not all that great, but the power pitchers own a much lower ERA, something Bill didn’t study at the time.

There is one other thing to consider here. During much of Bill’s study, April was a short month as the season usually started in the second or third week of April. In other words, sample sizes were smaller in April. As double headers disappeared and more playoff games came into existence, the season almost always starts at the beginning of the month now, so sample size is a little less of an issue.

Maybe Joe Altobelli wasn’t as wrong as we thought at the time.

Update: I ran the automatic program for 1963-1985.

Pitcher Type April Wins April Losses April ERA April K9
Power 79 48 2.93 9.19
Finesse 77 57 3.02 3.57

Bill James classified power and finesse pairs by hand, and doesn’t explain in his article what he used to distinguish one from the other. He talks about one throwing hard and the other not. I suppose we could use average speed of pitches to get a reading on that, but in my mind a power pitcher strikes out a lot of batters and a finesse pitcher does not. Using my criteria, there were 37 pairs in the time period, and while some match James’s study, many do not.

3 thoughts on “Maybe Altobelli Was Right

  1. Phil Birnbaum

    Hmmmm … maybe the difference is that Bill just chose pairs arbitrarily, while you chose the extremes from each group?

    Still, it’s shocking that your results are so much different from Bill’s. You got 79-48 for the power pitchers, he got 49-51. It’s like your “extra” pitchers went 30 and minus 2.

    Your results are more expected than Bill’s — no real difference between power and finesse. I’m just shocked at how different the results are with basically the same methodology.

    Strange …

    ReplyReply
  2. David Pinto Post author

    Phil Birnbaum » Right. I was somewhat shocked by that. I almost want to program in the pitchers Bill used to see what their ERAs are like. I wonder if there was a dumb luck factor involved.

    ReplyReply
  3. MSE

    Makes sense, really. James, IIRC, also pointed out that most finesse pitchers–also against conventional wisdom–are more vulnerable to age-related loss of velocity issues hurting their performance than power pitchers, since a power pitcher whose fastball drops from 95 to 90 MPH still has major league velocity, while a finesse pitcher whose fastball drops from 85 to 80 really no longer has a fastball at all (with rare exceptions, such as a knuckleballer). If fatigue causes loss of velocity late in the season, one would expect to see a similar effect for finesse pitchers when comparing early and late season performance.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *