Small Tidbit: Lefties in Late Innings
by Matthew on Jun 13, 2008 11:48 AM PDT
in The More You Know
66 comments
I don't have time to do an exhaustive post on the matter and frankly, I don't think it warrants one in the first place, but because the topic did come up internally and I think the answer is interesting enough I'm going to just post a short blurb on it. Depending on the reception below, you may see more of these when the situation arises or you may never see another one again. So let me know if you like hearing about this stuff.
That being said, late inning lefty pitchers; there are not many of them. It is somewhat common knowledge that there are fewer left-handed closers than you'd expect given the overall demographic of Major League pitchers, but the same is also true (albeit to a lesser extent) of set-up men and while there are more late inning lefties, they tend to occupy more LOOGY roles than the you see righties occupying a ROOGY role, no matter how much (Sean Green) they should be.
With that in mind, I present you with a handy number to serve as a reference in the future if you are ever curious.
Percentage of 2008 MLB pitches tossed by a LHP in innings 1-3: 30.48%
Percentage of 2008 MLB pitches tossed by a LHP in innings 8+: 22.41%
It's not a huge difference but it is a statistically significant one and perhaps an interesting open question as to why. Most lefties get every chance to succeed as a starter, thus inflating the percentage of pitches thrown early in the game (generally by starters) by LHP? LHB are less prevelant than RHB and thus LOOGYs are less useful than ROOGYs? I'm not sure and I'm not sure there is any *one* answer.
1 recs |
66 comments
Email
Print
Comments
RROGY/LOOGY
I recall seeing data that, overall, the splits for batters facing different handed pitchers are generally greater for left-handed hitters than for right-handed hitters. That likely happens because right-handed batters face right-handed pitchers far more frequently than left-handed batters face left-handed pitchers. A RH hitte5r who can’t hit RHP isn’t going to be promoted, whereas a LH hitter who mashes RH pitching will progress farther.
If that is the case, I think it follows that overall LOOGYs will be more valuable than ROOGYs because LOOGYs will be more effective in their role than a ROOGY would be.
by Steve Nelson on Jun 13, 2008 12:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm sure it's been said a billion times...
but what does LOOGY stand for?
Go Nova
by dbroncos31 on Jun 13, 2008 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I always wondered that myself, although I use the term constantly.
I like midgets more than I should.
by Thingray on Jun 13, 2008 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah I vaguely knew what it implied,
but wasn’t sure exactly what it meant
Go Nova
by dbroncos31 on Jun 13, 2008 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOOGY rolls off the tongue easier
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Jun 13, 2008 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
kinda
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Jun 13, 2008 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and it's great for a snack.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Jun 13, 2008 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This sounds interesting, but I live in the valley and the only trees are above me.
Pray tell, are logs able to roll down hills?
by Matthew on Jun 13, 2008 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Indeed they can
My neighbors dog learned that the hard way….
by OlSalty on Jun 13, 2008 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My God, A Ren & Stimpy reference?
I like midgets more than I should.
by Thingray on Jun 13, 2008 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good point
As far as my very limited high school/Babe Ruth career goes, I remember righties not being too hard to hit off of, but lefties were easier for some reason. Maybe because in that low level of baseball, its more like 95% of baseball players are righties, and only a small about of lefties, even a smaller amount that can actually throw.
Jl/Robert '08: Promise for a CoachCage tomorrow!
by Fin on Jun 13, 2008 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because lefties are used to get lefties out. Duh.
by JI on Jun 13, 2008 12:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Strikes me that must have something to do with it
Starters are what they are. Over half a dozen innings you can’t really be too picky because you’re going to get a lot of variety in the batter type faced.
Relievers are usually brought in to face (somewhere between) the next one, two or three guys, occasionally more. They’re brought in more often to combat the type of lineup that they are due to face. If the batter profile i of a certain type (for example, right handed) then it’s more likely that the reliever type will be. Surely?
Accidental Mariner - P3 W1 L2 (.333)
Sponsor of Jamie Burke's baseball-reference page
by MarkE on Jun 13, 2008 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've noticed that since 2002
The quality of left handed relievers appears to be on the decline. Off the top of my head without any numbers to back it up, there seems to be fewer and fewer LHRs that can shutdown both left and righthanded batters. I don’t know whether the reason for this is a lack of talent, or whether the specialization is playing with the sample size of RHBs, but the pool of shutdown lefties the last few seasons has been basically Billy Wagner, BJ Ryan, and a handful of flukey year to year guys like Buddy Groom, Scott Eyre, or Denny Reyes.
by JI on Jun 13, 2008 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and GS52
Jl/Robert '08: Promise for a CoachCage tomorrow!
by Fin on Jun 13, 2008 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But he's infinitely better than the likes of
Buddy fucking Groom and his career ERA+ of 97. Reyes was average, Eyre’s pretty good but threw 52 innings last year…
There are always some good lefty relievers, though what you don’t see are guys going 90 innings late 80s Paul Assenmacher (my nemesis Loogy) or 80 IP like Mike Stanton in 2001.
Part of this is that teams trade innings/flexibility for success; Groom faced more righties, but really wasn’t good. Limiting Sherrill or Mike Gonzalez to lefties hurts the pen’s flexibility, but makes them much more effective.
It’s like the old debates about why starters don’t throw 280IP per year any more… they come out earlier, but at least theoretically should be more effective in the innings they do pitch.
Another lefty closer to throw in the list is Brian Fuentes.
by marc w on Jun 13, 2008 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
George Sherill isn't that good against right handers though
I’m not convinced he would be effective on a full time basis. Yes, they’re only hitting .174 off him, but the BABIP against for RHBs is also .182. You can get away with letting him face them, but I really would want him facing a good RHB in a high leverage situation if I had better options.
by JI on Jun 13, 2008 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But George Sherill is doing pretty good this year
His K/BB rate is almost 2/1 (small sample size, I know), but has pitched almost 30 innings already. I know its a useless stat, but he has 21 saves already. Funny how the Mariners have traded away not one, but two formidable closers while their current closer is in the DL, leaving our top young starter as a closer.
Jl/Robert '08: Promise for a CoachCage tomorrow!
by Fin on Jun 13, 2008 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sherrill isn't a formidable closer.
He don’t have the best control. Like I said, I wouldn’t strictly platoon him (because Mike Myers type relievers are a complete waste of space), but I don’t see any evidence that he can through tough right handed hitters without having to pitch around them.
by JI on Jun 13, 2008 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't really know what you're arguing here
I mean, what ‘shut-down’ lefties of days gone by was equally good against righties?
Would it be better for, say, Gonzalez to face more righties if it meant RAs in the mid 4s or something (I think Gonzalez/Sherrill would be better than that, but pick your own number)?
Some lefties in the past faced more righties, but the Sherrill/Gonzalez style LOOGY has been a bit more effective.
The percentage of innings thing sort of makes sense in that right-handed relievers will face the odd lefty, and then teams bring in the designated death-to-lefties LOOGY for one or two high-leverage at bats. Less total batters faced, more leverage.
That’d be an interesting way to check this; what sort of situations are lefties used in during late-game situations? LI stays constant or grows even as IP drops? Maybe?
by marc w on Jun 13, 2008 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm aruging that Sherill has always walked a bunch right handed batters
he’s walked more batter than you’d like this year, and much of his dominace has to do with a low BABIP. Good, but not the type of guy you’d want closing ballgames.
by JI on Jun 13, 2008 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
FWIW
Gonzalez has faced 67% RHBs in his career and has been quite good .(210 /.310/.310 against)
Sherrill has faced 50% RHBs in his career and been passable, but not great ( .239 /360/ 343), even if you filter out the IBBS his BB/K ratio v. RHB is 41:51, opposed to 23 : 114 v. LHB.
I think if you check their career numbers, it’s pretty easy to conclude that Gonzalez is a much better pitcher than Sherrill.
by JI on Jun 13, 2008 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Adjust for league and these two are about as equal as it gets
Look, Gonzalez has averaged about .100 ISO-patience vs. righties the past few years too – this is what lefties do: they pitch around tough righties. Take out around .020 of batting average/BABIP and you’ve fundamentally got the same guy here. Gonzalez has a few less HRs, but a lower K%. He also faces pitchers. I’m calling it a toss-up.
More generally, I’m still unclear as to what you’re comparing Sherrill too – which 1990s players were better LHRPs? Billy Wagner? Yeah, I’ll give ya that one. But I’m still trying to get my head around why someone would think Dennys Reyes or Buddy Groom were, you know, good.
by marc w on Jun 13, 2008 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
uhh
But I’m still trying to get my head around why someone would think Dennys Reyes or Buddy Groom were, you know, good.
well
and a handful of flukey year to year guys like Buddy Groom, Scott Eyre, or Denny Reyes.
by JI on Jun 13, 2008 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, then who?
Who were the great lefties of yore?
In looking at guys from Charlton to Assenmacher to Mike Stanton (or even ex-M’s ‘star’ Ed Vande Berg), it’s clear that the guys who pitched 80IP had smaller splits. That is, they sacrificed a measure of effectiveness against lefties to be better against others. Maybe that’s a pitch mix thing (fewer sliders, more…change-ups?), maybe it’s just a usage pattern.
But by any measure, guys like Sherrill and Gonzalez seem to be better at getting lefties than others. I can see an argument that this minimizes their potential effectiveness, but I just can’t see it as an argument that the overall quality of lefties has gone down. In Stanton’s best year, lefties hit better off him than righties. He was a hell of a reliever, but if you need someone to come in and get [lefty all-star X], I think anyone would rather have Gonzalez/Sherrill than Norm Charlton/Paul Assenmacher (though he certainly made Griffey look bad in 1995).
by marc w on Jun 13, 2008 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And that's why I'm wondering wheter it's a satistical anomaly
and whether that anomaly is the result of further specialization, or whether the quality has actually declined, because it’s hard to deny that the results are worse from 2003-06 than they were in 2001-02. I’m genuinely curious.
by JI on Jun 13, 2008 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd take Charlton in his prime
over GS52… against lefties or righties. Although that’s based on an emotional reaction rather than statistical analysis.
by johnbai on Jun 13, 2008 5:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but Sherill's got a much lower BABIP
I would wager that if he faced right handed batters 67% of the time that his numbers wouldn’t look nearly as good.
by JI on Jun 13, 2008 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What?
His .605 OPS vs. RH batters isn’t terrible – and he’s actually faced a LOT more RH hitters than lefties. I’m so biased, of course, that I can’t really think of too many LHRPs that might compare. B.J. Ryan’s OPS vs. righties this year is over .700. Billy Wagner’s showing some weird reverse platoon splits (.535 OPS vs. RHers and ..663 vs. lefties). But I wouldn’t say GS52’s numbers vs. RH batters “aren’t that good.” His dominance clearly is vs. lefties, but he handles righties just fine…
Ill Ligitamus Non Carberendum
by PositivePaul on Jun 13, 2008 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A .178 BABIP is a complete fluke.
and in 2006 RHBs tallied a .400 OBP against him.
by JI on Jun 13, 2008 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sample size for ALL RPs is always tough...
2006 wasn’t exactly a typical GS52 year, either. Why are you ignoring 2007? Yeah, he faced more LHBs, but it’s not like he didn’t face any RHBs last year. A .587 OPS (vs. RHBs) in 76 PAs for a RP isn’t terrible…
Ill Ligitamus Non Carberendum
by PositivePaul on Jun 13, 2008 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
JI is giving you reasons to support
The Jeff/Matthew/Graham ticket with his anti GS52 rhetoric.
by Sec 108 on Jun 13, 2008 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm tired of the media in this country
Anyone who has been paying attention knows I am one of GS52’s biggest supporters.
by JI on Jun 13, 2008 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
C.J. Wilson
Has the Rangers’ closer duty. May not have as many innings as other closers since the Rangers don’t tend to have that many 1-3 run leads to protect at the end, even so he’s been used in the 9th and beyond in non-closing situations too.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912)
by Ed Coffin on Jun 13, 2008 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not just that lefties are used to get lefties out ...
because RHPs are used to get right-handed hitters out. That doesn’t explain the data anomaly that Matthew describes.
I’m hypothesizing that if we pulled the data, we would find that LH pitchers shut down LH batters more effectively than RH pitchers shut down RH batters. That means that given a RH reliever and a LH reliever of equal abilities, it will be more effective to use the LH as a LOOGY and the RH as a setup or closer than it would be to reverse the roles.
by Steve Nelson on Jun 13, 2008 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m hypothesizing that if we pulled the data, we would find that LH pitchers shut down LH batters more effectively than RH pitchers shut down RH batters.
Left handers do have wider splits than right handed batters.
by JI on Jun 13, 2008 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
WE DO LIKE HEARING ABOUT THIS STUFF
Excellent work! Thanks!
by chinn on Jun 13, 2008 1:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Maybe managers just don't like lefties in their bullpens
because of racism
by Last Fan Of Jose Lopez on Jun 13, 2008 2:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Also, this stuff is funtastic
Thanks.
Side question: Has there ever been a ML pitcher who was a switch hitter?
by Last Fan Of Jose Lopez on Jun 13, 2008 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A switch-pitcher would be more interesting than a switch-hitting pitcher.
Alas, it would be extraordinarily improbable.
by planB on Jun 13, 2008 4:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow.
I should have looked up Greg Harris before making that comment.
by planB on Jun 13, 2008 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Holy shit, I forgot about Eddie Taubensee.
I reject your reality and substitute my own!
Also, I'm always down for some online Grand Theft Auto IV or Rock Band. Gamertag: Phildopip
by Phildopip on Jun 13, 2008 5:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Handism.
Yes, I'm a girl. Yes, I know baseball. Yes, I even drink beer.
by NOLAmarinergirl on Jun 13, 2008 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If we're going to be "correct" about this, I'd go with Dextrism
and by “correct” I mean making up words that sound cool
by Last Fan Of Jose Lopez on Jun 13, 2008 2:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a pretty cool word.
Yeah, they’re dextrist.
Yes, I'm a girl. Yes, I know baseball. Yes, I even drink beer.
by NOLAmarinergirl on Jun 13, 2008 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really want to make a Mike Cameron joke.
The premise is there, but the specifics elude me.
by planB on Jun 13, 2008 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This nomenclature lends extra credibility to my case
of dextrual harassment.
by planB on Jun 13, 2008 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In Moneyball
Michael Lewis does talk about discrimination against pitchers like Chad Bradford who appear “tricky” or “flukey” rather than classically dominant. Old baseball scouts and managers tend to overvalue good-looking 6’4” right handers with 95 mph fastballs. There’s something about a Jamie Moyer type that they just don’t like. And many lefties seem to have a “crafty” label that implies that they aren’t really very good and shouldn’t be trusted. If you can’t quite cut it as a starter, but the organization likes you… you might have a career as a bullpen arm. If the organization doesn’t really like you and had been expecting you to fail all along… you might just get your left-handed ass ridden out of baseball.
I have absolutely zero data to back up any of these wild speculations.
by johnbai on Jun 13, 2008 5:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not always
Starting about ten years ago the Mariners had quite a few soft-tossers, especially leftties, in the organization, and a corresponding dearth of pitchers with strong arms. They were looking for the next Jamie Moyer.
The reality is that pitchers like Jamie Moyer are rare. Guys with that skill set have a very low probability of succeeding at the MLB level. That’s why Moyer is so unique.
I don’t think it’s because they don’t like Jamie Moyer types – in fact I think most old line baseball guys love guys like Moyer. But they know that their chances of success with guys such as Moyer are slim.
The pitchers that do get undervalued are fireballers who don’t have big frames.
by Steve Nelson on Jun 13, 2008 5:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and by the way
“prevalent”
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
by pdb on Jun 13, 2008 2:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
semicolon -> colon
“That being said, late inning lefty pitchers; there are not many of them.” should be “That being said, late inning lefty pitchers: there are not many of them.”
by planB on Jun 13, 2008 4:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
