3+ Seasons Of 60+ IP & An ERA+ Of 200+
Posted by Steve Lombardi on August 2, 2011
How many pitchers have at least 3 seasons where they had 60+ IP with an ERA+ >= 200?
The list -
| Rk | Yrs | From | To | Age | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mariano Rivera | 11 | 1996 | 2010 | 26-40 | Ind. Seasons |
| 2 | Joe Nathan | 5 | 2004 | 2009 | 29-34 | Ind. Seasons |
| 3 | Pedro Martinez | 5 | 1997 | 2003 | 25-31 | Ind. Seasons |
| 4 | Billy Wagner | 4 | 1999 | 2010 | 27-38 | Ind. Seasons |
| 5 | Walter Johnson | 4 | 1912 | 1919 | 24-31 | Ind. Seasons |
| 6 | Keith Foulke | 3 | 1999 | 2004 | 26-31 | Ind. Seasons |
| 7 | Robb Nen | 3 | 1996 | 2000 | 26-30 | Ind. Seasons |
| 8 | John Wetteland | 3 | 1993 | 1998 | 26-31 | Ind. Seasons |
| 9 | Roger Clemens | 3 | 1990 | 2005 | 27-42 | Ind. Seasons |
| 10 | Mark Eichhorn | 3 | 1986 | 1994 | 25-33 | Ind. Seasons |
.
It's an interesting grouping, no?
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:09 am
I'm sure people are going to comment on Andy's pal Eichhorn, but I have to say I never saw Robb Nen coming.
Wetteland/Rivera is an interesting duo to see there, too.
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:14 am
The three starters: Walter, Pedro, Rocket are pretty elite as well...
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:22 am
In that span, Pedro sandwiched in years of 163 (over 233 IP) and 190 (over 116 IP). Damn.
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:25 am
I know I can check the leaderboards to satisfy my curiosity but Pedro with 291 ERA+, holy cow...that has to be close to the best ever. Do any of us grasp how great he was?
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:33 am
I thought I'd see Maddux up there for sure. 2 seasons he went way over the 200.
271, 262, then 189, 187, 172...
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:36 am
Dave, personally, I don't think we do, especially given the context in which he pitched.
Pedro's peak (age 25 to 31) featured the following numbers:
118-36 record (.766 W%), 2.20 ERA, 11K/9, .94 WHIP.
He struck out 32% of the batters he faced.
Batters reached base at a .239 clip.
His ERA+ was 213.
He put up a WAR of 51.0, 7.3 per season.
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:44 am
I followed Pedro very closely during those years, and I still can't grasp it, either.
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:56 am
Totally off topic, but the Mets yeterday tied up the game with a homerun when down to their final out--the second straight game they did this! In both games, they promptly lost the next inning. Has this ever happened before?
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:18 pm
Compare Pedro to the other pitchers in the AL in 2000. The next best ERA+ is Clemens at 131. Pedro's ERA was almost 2 runs less than Clemens, who had the next best ERA of pitchers that qualified. That is crazy! I wish I had watched more of him that season.
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:20 pm
Also Rivera leading this list is not surprising, but did you know his lowest ERA+ since he became a full-time reliever is 144?
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:25 pm
@4 Dave
Pedro actually had the best ever single season WHIP that year, 0.737. It has to be in the running for the most dominant season by a pitcher in history.
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:30 pm
Pedro....
April 30 - June 8, 2000: 7GS, 3CG, 5-2, 57IP, 4R, 4ER, 11BB, 74K, 1HR, 0.63ERA, .392OPS, average game score of 81. How he lost 2 games... jeez
July 1st - August 10, 2002: 8GS, 0CG, 7-0, 57.1IP, 5R, 3ER, 10BB, 77K, 0HR, .47ERA, .410OPS, average game score of 77.
Yes, I'm playing the "arbitrary endpoints" game. But those are some absurd streaks of dominance. And I'm sure he might have a few others out there but those are the first two that sprung to mind.
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:42 pm
No starter will ever win the MVP. He was second in 99 and fifth in 00 even though he was actually better in 00. They scored fewer runs therefore he didn't have as good a W-L record proving he wasn't as valuable or something. One statistical thing I used to do was this: I would take the difference between the pitcher's ERA and the league ERA and apply it to the number of innings he pitched; producing theoretically the number of runs he was better than an average pitcher. I think i got 65 or so runs for Pedro a couple of times. As I say no starter will ever win the MVP.
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:50 pm
There's another right handed pitcher that if you just adjust the year windows looks very similar to pedro. I guess it's rather obvious but the lines are so close that I'll post it:
1997-2003
1400IP, 2.20 ERA .94 WHIP 213 ERA+
1995-2011
1191IP, 2.21 ERA 1.002 WHIP 206 ERA+
Pedro was Rivera for 6-8 innings a game instead of 1-2. That, or Rivera is Pedro in his prime for that fleeting moment.
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:50 pm
@8 - The only other team to hit a down to their last out game-tying HR in consecutive games was the 2004 Rays, who lost both games, but one was not immediate:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/OAK/OAK200408290.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/TBA/TBA200408310.shtml
Johnny Bench almost did it by himself in 1968 (the Reds lost both games, but one not immediately), but there was a 1-0 10 inning loss in between.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PHI/PHI196809010.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CIN/CIN196809030.shtml
I should note that 2 teams have hit multiple down to their last out game-tying HRs in a single game, The '83 Mets and the '85 Braves. The Braves lost their game, the famous July 4, marathon vs. the Mets.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYN/NYN198305060.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ATL/ATL198507040.shtml
For clarity purposes, I should mention that only game tying home runs were included in my search. Teams which were behind and took the lead on the home run were not considered.
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:06 pm
@ #13 Stan - Vida Blue and Roger Clemens would like a word with you...
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:06 pm
Straying off topic with #8: the Mets yeterday tied up the game with a homerun when down to their final out--the second straight game they did this! In both games, they promptly lost the next inning. Has this ever happened before?
Just tying up the game with a two-out, ninth-inning homer is a pretty rare feat — it happens, on average, much less than once per team per season. I found only five times since 1950 where the same team hit two GT2O9I HRs within a span of three calendar days. Only the 2004 Devil Rays did it in consecutive games. The 1968 Reds probably came the closest to "duplicating" the Mets' achievement, although they played one game in between. Here's the full list.
1954 Dodgers
Game #67: Tied game in 9th on HR by Duke Snider; won game in 11th
Game #69: Tied game in 9th on HR by Roy Campanella; lost game in 13th
1968 Reds
Game #134: Tied game in 9th on HR by Johnny Bench; lost game in 9th
Game #136: Tied game in 9th on HR by Johnny Bench; lost game in 11th
1971 Orioles
Game #69: Tied game in 9th on HR by Boog Powell; lost game in 10th
Game #72: Tied game in 9th on HR by Brooks Robinson; lost game in 15th
2004 Devil Rays
Game #130: Tied game in 9th on HR by José Cruz Jr.; lost game in 9th
Game #131: Tied game in 9th on HR by Aubrey Huff; lost game in 14th
2011 Mets
Game #108: Tied game in 9th on HR by Scott Hairston; lost game in 9th
Game #109: Tied game in 9th on HR by Lucas Duda; lost game in 10th
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:06 pm
@1: Nen was absolutely lights out in those late 90s years -- really not that surprising. I'm most surprised by Foulke.
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:09 pm
Sorry about that, all. I should have known Raphy would post a better (and shorter) answer. Oh well, at least I got the gray background — makes my avatar look better.
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:11 pm
#16 . I should have said no starter will ever win it in the future.
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:31 pm
@ 19. Kahuna, nice.
I didn't know if anyone else was going to do the leg work on that one.
Oh, and for the record, your answer is more complete than mine.
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:33 pm
@ 8, 15, & 17 - Thought it was necessary to mention that while it is rare, John Mayberry Jr. did this for the Phils last night (game-tying homerun while down to the last out). Let's see if they do it again tonight.
August 2nd, 2011 at 2:17 pm
I believe the Mayberry home run was the 10th Street has given up in 46 innings. Many, many fly balls to the warning track as well. At least it seems so.
August 2nd, 2011 at 2:37 pm
@23: The broadcasters kept saying he had to avoid the slider up over and over...and then he went to the well one last time...
August 2nd, 2011 at 2:42 pm
Dennis Eckersley makes an honorary appearance on the list if you take his scorching ERA+ score of 610 in 1990 and cut it in half and count it twice.
August 2nd, 2011 at 2:58 pm
23. Street can't throw a fast ball past a good hitter, ever. I don't recall seeing him get a swing and miss on a fast ball. I seem to recall him throwing harder earlier in his career before the 400 or so innings took their toll
August 2nd, 2011 at 3:06 pm
Besides the Mets on 5/6/83 and the Braves on 7/4/85 (noted by Raphy in #15), here are the PI-era teams that have hit two final-at-bat, game-tying homers in the same game.
• Giants, 7/3/51 vs. Phillies (Bill Rigney, b10, and Willie Mays, b13)
• Giants, 7/7/51 vs. Braves (Willie Mays, b10, and Sal Yvars, b11)
• Reds, 7/23/57 vs. Pirates (George Crowe, b9, and Jerry Lynch, b12)
• Giants, 9/1/58 (2nd game) vs. Dodgers (Bob Schmidt, b9, and Whitey Lockman, b16)
• Reds, 8/12/66 vs. Pirates (Art Shamsky both times, b10 and b11)
• Pirates, 7/15/71 vs. Padres (Willie Stargell, b13, and Richie Hebner, b16)
• Braves, 6/29/73 vs. Dodgers (Darrell Evans, b9, and Dave Johnson, b10)
• Blue Jays, 5/10/91 vs. White Sox (Roberto Alomar both times, b9 and b11)
• Phillies, 7/24/98 (2nd game) vs. Marlins (Mark Lewis, b9, and Rubén Amaro, b12)
• Cardinals, 8/8/98 vs. Cubs (Ray Lankford, b11, and Eli Marrero, b12)
Just seems like those 1951 Giants kept on coming, doesn't it?
August 2nd, 2011 at 3:19 pm
Mariano of course is the last player to officially be issued #42 since it was retired by MLB in 1997. It got me wondering how long has he owned that number exclusively (as other players who were grandfathered in began to retire).
Well I found this interesting website:
http://www.flipflopflyin.com/flipflopflyball/info-42.html
It shows a nice bar graph illustrating each team's last player to be issued #42
Of note here is that Mo Vaughn was the last player to wear #42 for three teams (Mets, Angels, Red Sox). The double dippers are:
Armando Reynoso (Braves, Rockies)
Jose Lima (Astros, Tigers)
Michael Jackson??? (Indians, Twins) I guess there was another one famous for wearing one glove.
Lima was released by the Tigers in early September of 2002. When he was picked up by the Royals during the 2003 season he was denied the number (I guess) because he had been out of the league.
So Mariano Rivera has been the exclusive owner of the issued #42 for eight years now. Of course, if the question becomes, "The last player to WEAR #42?" then the answer gets trickier. The answer could be, "All of them." - due to MLB celebrating Jackie Robinson by having every player wear his number on April 15th. I also learned that, "The idea of 'un-retiring' Robinson's number for a day belongs to Ken Griffey Jr... Griffey personally petitioned the Commissioner for the opportunity to wear it. He didn't know what he was starting." (source MLB.com)
Note - My apologies if this topic has been covered before on these blogs (which I would totally expect it would be given how little slips by (most of) you people.
August 2nd, 2011 at 3:44 pm
Wow, I didn't know Nen was that good in those years. I guess it's because he would alternate bad years (by his standards, anyway) with good years. Every other year he'd have to recover from being overused the previous season, and finally he didn't want to anymore. What a great final season for him, though. Man, that's the way to go out!
And let's hear it for Mariano Rivera, please. He's 41 years old now. Remember when he blew a couple of saves early in the year, and it was a big deal? Some people thought he might finally be losing it. Well, take a look at his statistics for the 2011 season! I think I'd like to "lose it" the way Rivera has.
August 2nd, 2011 at 5:59 pm
surprised lefty grove didn't make the list, given he holds the record for ERA titles. so i took a peek...
he only topped 200 once, his 31-game winning MVP campaign of 1931.
but he also has 253innings of 190 ERA+, 291IP and 185 ERA+, 191IP and 185 ERA+, and 273IP of 175 ERA+.
interesting he never led the league in WHIP, IP, or BF
August 2nd, 2011 at 6:51 pm
Re: Grove and others from earlier time frames: Somebody suggested to me once that ERA+ is a little distorted in favor of present day pitchers because there are now five man rotations and 12 man staffs so that you are being compared to a poorer collection of pitchers. I am not sure that is true or that I have explained myself clearly.
August 2nd, 2011 at 7:03 pm
@31 stan,
yeah i'm aware of that particular phenomenon, that it's easier for the best pitchers to post better ERA+ numbers in an era with higher league ERAs
August 2nd, 2011 at 9:02 pm
I don't know, the general quality of the league was lower then as well, so I'm not so sure I buy this argument. I think it makes more sense looking at the 60s (no 5man rotations, more complete games, lots of 2-300IP guys, pre-expansion, post integration).
And you do notice that none of the 60s greats show up on this list.
Mostly, I was expecting this to be a great relievers list, and was a bit surprised to see so many starters on it, but that's why they are some of the greatest pitchers ever.
I don't think there has ever been a pitching season as dominant as Pedro's 2000. not just arguably or in the conversation. Find me another that even has a case to be better.
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:47 pm
@28
"Fake" Pedro Martinez!
August 3rd, 2011 at 2:58 am
The question is do we define dominance as per IP, or per IP related to era (which arguably gives a fair break to modern guys who were not able to throw as much), or total accomplishment? Martinez could never create as much value as guys not many years before who had Epic seasons, just due to IP.
What I would like to throw open to comments: what do you think are factors that should be considered when loioking for a more precise definition of degree of pitching greatness? Adjusting for IP, or rIP related to era is one factor. Another big one: ERA + is a less accurate measure than OPS +. Since pitchers are much more affected by what their defenses do. In some cases it seems that guys should have "effective" ERAs of a 1/2 run or more different.
So these greats-which of them do y'all think had their best years inflated or denigrated by factors no accounted for in ERA +? Official scoring or errors is one factor, but range factor shold be a bigger one, esp. for ground ball pitchers.
Another way to triangulate how good someone is involves looking at all the peripherals & the advanced metrics. But just examining defense & scoring, we should see some guys who would deserve a 200 ERA +, others who would slip under it, if ERA + could adjust for factors hurlers cannot control.
August 3rd, 2011 at 12:49 pm
Martinez's 1999 and 2000 seasons have to be two of the best seasons ever by a pitcher. I just can't decide which one is better. If you go by ERA+ and WHIP, then 2000 is mind blowing. If you go by things like FIP, then it's 1999 that sticks out. Either way, he was dominant in general for that whole 1999-2003 stretch.
August 3rd, 2011 at 3:18 pm
I think we can draw several conclusions from the list, although determine why these conclusions are so will prove more tricky. First, there's something about the last several decades that favors the ERA+ stat, given that the Big Train is the only pitcher on this list with a 200 or higher ERA+ prior to 1986. Second, ERA+ favors relief pitchers. Or put another way, it may favor those who pitch fewer innings. What may be a better measure is to compare starters against starters and relievers against relievers. This may give a better relative value of any given pitcher's ERA performance when apples are compared to apples.
August 3rd, 2011 at 4:27 pm
Pedro's "peak" was better than any other pitcher's peak...EVER! PERIOD! End of discussion.
Look at the league ERA back then and his era, it's insane! I still remember the 99' all star game in which he K'd 5 of 6 batters ala Bob Feller.
FYI, I'm no Red Sox fan...I'm a Pedro Fan. Pure dominance out of a tiny body, amazing!
August 3rd, 2011 at 5:15 pm
HR with two outs in the 9th to tie the game in back-to-back games...didn't the Yankees do it in the 2001 World series?
August 3rd, 2011 at 6:05 pm
Jonathan Papelbon missed this list by 1.2 ip in 07.
that said, someone look up relievers with multiple seasons with an era under 2.00 and whip under 0.800.
my ad hoc research only came up with 2 names, both of whom had the fortune of doing it in consecutive years.
August 4th, 2011 at 2:14 am
Nope, not end of discussion Jeff.
Just presenting ERA absent context, even relative to the league, does not answer many questions such as I raised in post #35. One big question is how much ERA + is effected by factors outside a pitcher's control, & looking at things like FIP & peripherals, + isolating defensive support, etc: might give a distinct result.
Difficulty in dominating the whole league by era is another factor much discussed above. I will add a wrinkle to that: almost all acknowledge how hitters, esp. the best ones, feast when expansion waters down the competition of the league. Maris & Cash in '61, Big Mac & Sosa in '98...There must be a similar effect for pitchers, there being many hitters who were added in '98, the best picthers could pad their stats at least a bit.
Lastly, a big part of dominance is arguably how MUCH you dominated. IP vary hugely between era: Pedro never had the IP to add the same value as pitchers a few years back, & did not pitch quite as much as some contemporaries.
Please do not write back an emotional diatribe listing how great Pedro was. Of course he was, & I like & admire his talent. The specific questions are how good was someone, how much value they create per season, do certain stats like ERA +, very useful overall, need a more granular look & adjustments to see exactly how much a pitcher added.
August 4th, 2011 at 11:37 am
@Mike--
While I agree that ERA+ is not as good of a wholistic measure as OPS+ is, at some point, you have to apply the sniff test. This is not the case of someone marginal like Juan Gonzalez, whose slugging and BA masked his low OBP and thus, he wasn't as good as mainstream media would portray him.
even if things like fielding were to detract from his numbers (i mean what - he induced too many balls *right* at the defenders?), it would not turn him into a league-average 4.50 pitcher.
That said, usually things like FIP, SN-W/L take into account what the rest of the team takes away from the pitcher, not things that the pitcher does inspite of his defense. and how many years did he have manny ramirez "patroling" left field for him!
unfortuantely, xFIP is not available for his 99-00 seasons, but his ERA/FIP went:
99: 2.07/1.39
00: 1.74/2.17
according to bb-ref (which has different WAR numbers than fangraphs), pedro's 00 WAR (which i believe is not adjusted) is the 18th best since 1900, and his 99 is 102nd best.
the 2000 war is the highest war since gooden's 1985 season, and clearly the first since the strike (and steroid era).
adjusted pitching wins: 00: 1st, 99: 14th since 1900. Only clemens (97: 4th), and maddux (95: 11th) show up inbetween, since the strike.
adjusted pitching runs: 00: 1st, 99: 11th. this time, just clemens (97: 5th) shows up.
but i like this one the best: WHIP (un-adjusted): 00: 0.7373 - first, all time, including the 1800s pitchers.
i wish there was a WHIP+, adjusted for era. Especially for relievers, it's one of my favorite stats.
As for your argument regarding IP, Pedro averaged 204 ip over 11 years. This includes his 2001 season where he only pitched 116 innings. if you take that out, it's 213 ip/year. while this may be a far cry from nolan ryan, it is well within his contemporaries not named curt, roy, and randy. he even led the majors with 13 cg in 1997.
And peripherals, he led the league 17 times in k/9, bb/9, k/bb h/9, hr/9 over 9 seasons (45 total chances). of those 17 times, he led the majors 9 times.
While you may be right about expansion eras diluting talent, I would add a counterpoint: this expansion era was coupled with more hitter-friendly parks, and the steroid era - the most offense-friendly era in history. on top of that, he spent 7 years in one of the most hitter-friendly parks, and 4 more in another hitter's park. It's not like he was doing this in safeco or turner field (btw, that only adds to randy johnson and curt schilling's brilliance in arizona).
August 4th, 2011 at 4:18 pm
Peter, I appreciate the detail in comparison's & things such as WHIP & other stats provide a more complete picture. But you misunderstood what i was saying, thus argued against a Straw Man. I explicitly said he was great & I admired him.
I never said or implied that Pedro would be a league average pitcher potentially when other stats were considered, that would be absurd. I talked about ERA + sometimes being more or less a 1/2 runs "off". what someone really did. I did NOT even say that Pedro is likely to be worse when considering the other factors: for all we know he could be better! I suggested factors that could mitigate or ameliorate the ERA + of ANY pitcher.
Though ERA + accounts for era & park, & it does not account fully for great athletes taking advantage of expansion conditions. He did average a good # of IP though 1 years compared top contemporaries, just not as many as some others such as you names.
There are many ways to look at how good a hurler is. I wonder if ERA + adjusted for factors like defense is better than measure like FIP. WHIP is important, but if we really want to get granular & see how good a guy was, we should see how efficient he was at not giving up runs, via what he can control. 'Cause if you give up the bases in bunches & have more XBH, esp. HRs, even with a lower WHIP than someone else you could easily be worse, since you do surrender more runs.
August 4th, 2011 at 5:24 pm
I see, i kind of mis-read your original comments.
As for what goes into evaluating pitchers, you start with the basics: what do the pitchers give up? that's whip, k/9, fb/gb and then things like baa/obpa/slga. slga should then correlate to era minus runs bullpen irs (inherited runner scored).
then you start taking into account things that the pitchers can't control: defense, parks, era. to some extent, you may even need to evaluate strength of schedule. an orioles/blue jays pitcher currently has a much tougher task than a rangers pitcher. similarily, even within a division, a cardinals pitcher has an easier time than an astros pitcher since they don't have to face pujols, holliday and berkman.
relievers need an additional componant for ir/irs.
you may even want to toss in some additional metrics that look at pitch f/x and measure pitcher's velocity and break for breaking balls. this could help quantify "stuff"
August 4th, 2011 at 9:07 pm
Thanks, though i do not know the last slash stats in the 1st paragraph.
I do not see an adjustment for difficulty in excelling due to era-debatable whether you should add this if ERA + accounts for it. i am saying you could use a genrally fairly comprehensive measure of runs allowed like ERA +, & add strength of defense & schedule.
Either way: care to say which 200 or near pitchers were significantly over or under rated by ERA +? Anyone clearly better than even a huge ERA + would indicate?
August 5th, 2011 at 10:23 am
baa/obpa/slga - batting averge, obp, slugging allowed (or against). i don't know if i've ever seend obpa & slga listed with the a, but the a is implied in a pitcher's expanded stats.
that's true - since era+ adjusts for era, takes into account league-wide stats, it would take into account both the expansion dilusion as well as roid/live-ball inflation.
as for people who over/under-perform their ERA+, i'm looking at the current active leaders, and the first dozen or so are pretty spot on.
i'm kind of surprised that more elite relievers aren't at the top - guys like joe nathan, scot shields, etc
as for overperformers, candidates include carlos zambrano, derek lowe, barry zito (probably inflated due to his early success), scott kazmir
potential underperforms: cliff lee (but maybe his earlier years brought him down), cc sabathia (ditto).
it's hard to judge guys that have had 1 or 2 elite years in their mix: dan haren, or guys with polarizing career numbers like chris carpenter and jake peavy
as for overall historical leaders, it seem questionable that roy oswalt (134) is ahead of greg maddux (132), or tim hudson (127) ahead of john smoltz (125).
tom glavine is only a 118. what's with the braves trio?! jose rijo (121), jimmy key (122) is ahead of glavine! oh wow, i forgot how good jose rijo was...
so that said, overall, era+ is doing a good job overall. there are a couple anomolies, but it's not like 20-30% error rates.
August 5th, 2011 at 9:27 pm
Thanks Peter. But NONE of the top SEASONS are significantly different in quality than ERA + would imply? Careers tend to even out. Defenses, schedules & other factors should vary much more over a single year.
Concerning the comparisons you make Peter, understand that those with a much longer career have years that are from mediocre to merely good that bring them down. So ERA + may not be at all off there, esp. considering Atlanta's defenses. But when looking at peak value, the #s seem about right.