I was just about to start compiling statistics about Chien Ming Wang in order to write a post about how bizarre his statistics are. However, I decided to look at espn.com before I did so and look what I found (insider only again). This is a good read, as is consistently the case with Neyer (one of my favorite writers on espn).
I am really divided as to whether I reach the same conclusion. Will Wang fall back to earth and become an average/below average pitcher with one great pitch? A big part of me seems to say yes. On the other hand, a big part of me (you might call it my heart) wants to go the other way and come to the conclusion that Wang is just a statistical anomaly. Basically the decision comes down to a couple of factors.
1) how much weight should I give to history? What Wang is doing, successfully pitching for more than one season with the combination of an incredibly low strike out rate and a very high but by no means extreme groundball rate, is unprecedented. If I rely on history as a guide, Wang will either become more of a strikeout pitcher (relatively speaking) or he will suffer the predicted inflation in his ERA that his raw statistics predict.
2) (This is really more like 1a) Is Wang an entirely new type of pitcher? There are certain characteristics that Wang possesses that separate him from other pitchers with power sinkers and low strikeout rates. These his velocity, which appears to be of a higher order than those that have come before him and the fact that he is right handed. Once again, this really comes down to whether it is plausible to believe that a new type of pitcher could arise after 100+ years of professional baseball.
3) Given the small sample size, what do I make of his statistics? Wang's BABIP, tells us that he has been lucky (BABIP has been shown to be a statistic that is heavily influenced by luck on a year to year basis) both last year and this year since his BABIP in those years is, not including his start today, .270 and .282, respectively, well below the league average. In addition, his home runs per nine innings, both last year and this year, are extremely low, 0.70 and 0.53 (this leads the major leageus), respectively, which would help ameliorate the effect on his ERA that a jump in BABIP would be likely to cause. Now, how do we interpret these statistics? Defense appears to have very little to do with his low BABIP since last year he posted a lower than average BABIP while the Yankees allowed an above average BABIP while this year he has again allowed a below average BABIP while the Yankees have also allowed a below average BABIP. When do we start looking at these two stats as a trend rather than an anomaly? I don't know for sure but if he has similar statistics for all of next year it may make sense to look at this as something other than a fluke or lucky occurrence.
These are the three main factors in deciding whether one thinks that Wang will suffer a decline due his historically low strikeout rate. I have a gut instinct that he won't suffer such a decline (due to another reason that I will discuss in a moment), but, either way, it will be fascinating to watch.
Before I conclude, I want take a moment and discuss a possibility that will render this decision/discussion moot: how much will Wang improve over time? I think that it is highly likely that we will see a rise in Wang's strikeout rate due to an improvement in his secondary stuff and greater utilization of his not-to-shabby four seam fastball. Right now, Wang throws between 70 and 100 percent sinkers from game to game. Hitters know it is coming and still can't hit it because it breaks so late and is thrown so hard (his sinker sits at about 95-97 not infrequently touching 98 or 99). With this in mind, I don't see why a four seamer that looks the same as the sinker for 56-58 feet couldn't be the strikeout pitch he is missing. Combine those two pitches with his B/B+ change and more confidence and experience using his nascent splitter and you have a pretty nasty four pitch arsenal that could lead to dramatic increases in his strikeout rate. Will any of this happen? As I Yankee fan I hope so but I would love to get Theo and others' point of view on this so I have a sense of what a more objective fan thinks of this situation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Me? Objective? HA!
Anyway, It's certainly possible that he can become a very good pitcher over the long term, especially if he develops a new pitch. I am not sure though. I've been waiting for him to go the way of Aaron Small for a full year now.
Keep in mind the original theory was that pitchers can only really control K rate and HR rate. So he does have one under control. That BAPIP on the other hand . . .
The game does change, and maybe Wang is doing something different. Think Ichiro and his infield hits. He may be able to make some sort of impact.
Anyway, all of this is to say that it's not impossible. But it would seem to be improbable.
That Ichiro reference got me thinking, so I looked up other Taiwanese pitchers in the bigs. The only two others are Chin-hui Tsao of the Rockies and Hong-Chih Kuo of the Dodgers. However, it does not seem that there is much statistical similarity (i.e. Wang's stats would not appear to result from a different approach to pitching learned in Taiwan). Kuo gives up few homeruns, but strikes a lot more hitters out. The opposite is the case for Tsao. Both pitchers are young, and certainly have not approached Wang's success. I can't speak for either's pitching style though.
Well, he was great today. I just really want him to go up the ladder every now and then with the four-seamer. I think this would make a huge difference. It doesn't even have to be a lot, he could throw it maybe 5%-10% of the time and it would make his sinker that much more devastating.
Very interesting observations regarding Mr. Wang. It will be fascinating to see how they resonate over time.
Meanwhile, I'm interested in your thoughts on a) the Yankees' new facial hair sproutings; b) the AL MVP; c) ESPN's special program "The Top 5 Reasons You Can't Blame Steroids"; d) is Joe Torre a great manager? e) the worst baseball film ever made.
Thank you. Over and out.
e.) the worst baseball film ever made: any broadcast of the Boston Red Sox from August 2006, or sports talk show dealing with the issue.
Three Ninjas Kick Back has to be the worst baseball movie ever made. It was the sequal to one of my favorite movies, Three Ninjas, which was a cross between Home Alone and Enter The Dragon. It is so terrible that I'm going to take a page from the guys over at FJM and create an imaginary stat for it.
Three Ninjas Kick Back has a 7.62 ISAMU (Insultingly Stupid and Moronic Units), far outpacing the second worst baseball moive, the annoyingly bad remake of Bad News Bears starring Billy Bob Thornton which only has a 5.39 ISAMU.
I would like to argue that Rob Neyer does your job for you because it is actually his job.
He's right Galdstoner, you don't have a job. Stop pretending you do.
Post a Comment