Is Zambrano Back?

[CubsWin]

His last for starts have gone:

 

7.1 IP, 5 H, 1 ER, 1 BB, 8 K.

5.1 IP, 4 H, 0 ER, 4 BB, 7 K.

7.0 IP, 4 H, 2 ER, 2 BB, 8 K.

8.2 IP, 3 H, 0 ER, 3 BB, 9 K.

 

He's 4-0 with a 0.95 ERA with 32 strikeouts against 10 walks. Now the teams he did that against weren't very good offensively (WAS, PIT, NYM & MIL) so those numbers need to be taken with a large grain of salt. But, that's what the old Z should be doing against such teams. Since returning July 31st after taking 5 weeks off presumably to deal with his emotional issues, his line is...

 

48.2 IP, 37 H, 10 ER, 29 BB, 43 K (5-0, 1.85).

 

I don't know if he got diagnosed for a chemical imbalance and is on medication or what. I couldn't get any news what he did on his 5-week hiatus. Does anyone know?

 

I still think he will be very hard to trade due to his contract, but his performance has got to be making it a little easier. GMs are sure to notice his last four starts. The question is, if he keeps up this level of performance the rest of the season, what is your confidence level in him? What would need in return to give him up? Or do you think the team should keep him?

[Guest]

The biggest difference between 1st half and 2nd half Z?

 

BABIP.

 

Luck.

 

He's still the same pitcher he's been the past several years. He has been throughout the year.

[rocket]

we should probably sign him to an extension

[Old Style]

we should probably sign him to an extension

As long as there are a few no trade clauses in there.

[CubsWin]

The biggest difference between 1st half and 2nd half Z?

 

BABIP.

 

Luck.

 

He's still the same pitcher he's been the past several years. He has been throughout the year.

I didn't even look it up. Good point. Was his luck that bad early on? Does that explain everything? Is the improved strikeout to walk rate just the poor offenses he has faced the last four games? Truly wondering...

[Little Slide Rooter]

He may make some team very happy next year after we trade him for some borderline prospects and partial salary relief.

[UMFan83]

He may make some team very happy next year after we trade him for some borderline prospects and partial salary relief.

 

You mean the "Jim Hendry Special"?

[TruffleShuffle]

plus he still adds way more than the average pitcher with his bat. if he pitches like a #3 guy and hits really well, you're not getting too bad a return for your $18M. certainly not bad enough to just give him away while eating half his salary.

[chuckywang]

The biggest difference between 1st half and 2nd half Z?

 

BABIP.

 

Luck.

 

He's still the same pitcher he's been the past several years. He has been throughout the year.

 

I still refuse to believe BABIP is all luck. You're telling me a pitcher has no control of the ball once it hits the bat? I don't get that.

[TruffleShuffle]

green font?

[XZero771679666304]

I'd be curious as to what Z's LD% allowed was in the first half. Zambrano has always been at his best when he pitches to contact, and not all balls in play are equal. I haven't watched much of the second half, but in the first half he was getting hit pretty hard, but his second half babip is more in line with his career numbers.

 

His first half babip was sky high, and I don't think that was just bad luck, and I don't think his recent success is just better luck. That's gross oversimplification.

[Cubs Fan Dan]

I am still thoroughly disgusted with out Z has been handled this year, if he was left in the rotation all season he would have his usual 12-14 wins with a mid to upper 3 ERA. Yea not worth the salary but definitely still our ace. The Cubs should not trade Z unless a team takes 80-100% of his salary, no reason to take scrap for a productive pitcher.

[Little Slide Rooter]

He may make some team very happy next year after we trade him for some borderline prospects and partial salary relief.

 

You mean the "Jim Hendry Special"?

 

The same. There has to be another player out there whose on a similarly bad contract, but an all around inferior player that we can trade him for.

[KaiserCesar]

He may make some team very happy next year after we trade him for some borderline prospects and partial salary relief.

 

You mean the "Jim Hendry Special"?

 

The same. There has to be another player out there whose on a similarly bad contract, but an all around inferior player that we can trade him for.

 

Oliver Perez?

[Northside Blues]

He may make some team very happy next year after we trade him for some borderline prospects and partial salary relief.

 

You mean the "Jim Hendry Special"?

 

The same. There has to be another player out there whose on a similarly bad contract, but an all around inferior player that we can trade him for.

 

Yeah but the Milton Bradley for Carlos Silva swap has certainly been a good move.

[Magnetic Curses]

just put him at the front of the rotation and hope he can get you 200+ innings because he is still good.

 

name some other pitchers with a 9-year run of at least 100 innings with a sub 4 era, you'll get a decent idea of what kind of company he's in. he's 29, you could still get a cy young or two out of him.

[Bull]

just put him at the front of the rotation and hope he can get you 200+ innings because he is still good.

 

name some other pitchers with a 9-year run of at least 100 innings with a sub 4 era, you'll get a decent idea of what kind of company he's in. he's 29, you could still get a cy young or two out of him.

 

This could be another example of accidental excellence by Cubs management. In a lost cause year, Z got used less than he has in years. We were all questioning the wear and tear on that arm. This could be good in the long run. Cubs in 2011!!

[Backtobanks]

just put him at the front of the rotation and hope he can get you 200+ innings because he is still good.

 

name some other pitchers with a 9-year run of at least 100 innings with a sub 4 era, you'll get a decent idea of what kind of company he's in. he's 29, you could still get a cy young or two out of him.

 

With his latest run of good starts, it makes no sense in trading him. With the bad publicity from this year, we would be trading him for pennies on the dollar, a terrible player with a terrible contract (Oliver Perez), or paying him $10 million per year to pitch for another team. As eccentric as he is, he still is a very good pitcher (though not worth his contract).

[Moises a loo]

Z for Peavy. Book it.

[BigSlick]

The biggest difference between 1st half and 2nd half Z?

 

BABIP.

 

Luck.

 

He's still the same pitcher he's been the past several years. He has been throughout the year.

 

I still refuse to believe BABIP is all luck. You're telling me a pitcher has no control of the ball once it hits the bat? I don't get that.

the best way to explain it is how Bill James (I think it was him) explained it when people started saying this: (paraphrased) ' Obviously pitchers have some degree of control over whether a batted ball drops for a hit, but its much much less than what we thought it was '

 

pitchers have a lot of control over whether a ball is hit in the air, hit on the ground or popped up. each of those outcomes have their own degree of chance in whether or not the ball is a hit or not.

 

the reason why i tend to believe pitchers have a low amount of control over their BABIP is because it tends to fluctuate wildly season to season with the same pitchers, while other metrics (strike outs, walks, home runs given up) tend to stay more constant. even amazing pitchers have bad BABIP years.

[TruffleShuffle]

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=878

[CubsWin]

I love the discussion on BABIP. Something I definitely need to learn more about. To me, I just can't get past that some pitchers are going to be more hittable than others and wouldn't that affect BABIP?

 

Okay, so as interesting as all of that is, what does it say about whether the Cubs should keep him and hope for the best or get whatever they can for him, and if so, what should they be shooting for in return? Essentially, what's his worth? Can he be an 18 game winner with a mid 3 ERA? Should we expect at 9-8 season with an ERA in the 4s? Or somewhere in between?

 

(Sorry, I know those aren't the most telling stats, but I grew up before sabermetrics hit the world and its still how I think...)

[XZero771679666304]

.

 

the reason why i tend to believe pitchers have a low amount of control over their BABIP is because it tends to fluctuate wildly season to season with the same pitchers, while other metrics (strike outs, walks, home runs given up) tend to stay more constant. even amazing pitchers have bad BABIP years.

 

Z has been relatively consistent when it comes to babip, and consistently below the league average. This season sticks out like a sore thumb. A lot of babip is luck, but you have to factor in some observational stuff, like how often a pitcher is being squared up by hitters. You can expect a guy who gives up a lot of ropes to have a higher babip than one who gets hitters to beat the ball into the ground a lot.

 

In August, when Z really turned it on, his LD% dropped precipitously, and his gb rate almost doubled. That's not all luck.

 

This year Z has a career high babip, his highest LD% since 2002 and has by far had his most fb heavy gb/fb ratio. If I had to hazard a guess as to why most of this year has been sub-par for Z, I would say it is because he has missed up in the zone more than usual, combined with decreased velocity and a bit of bad luck.

[TruffleShuffle]

.

 

the reason why i tend to believe pitchers have a low amount of control over their BABIP is because it tends to fluctuate wildly season to season with the same pitchers, while other metrics (strike outs, walks, home runs given up) tend to stay more constant. even amazing pitchers have bad BABIP years.

 

Z has been relatively consistent when it comes to babip, and consistently below the league average. This season sticks out like a sore thumb. A lot of babip is luck, but you have to factor in some observational stuff, like how often a pitcher is being squared up by hitters. You can expect a guy who gives up a lot of ropes to have a higher babip than one who gets hitters to beat the ball into the ground a lot.

 

In August, when Z really turned it on, his LD% dropped precipitously, and his gb rate almost doubled. That's not all luck.

 

This year Z has a career high babip, his highest LD% since 2002 and has by far had his most fb heavy gb/fb ratio. If I had to hazard a guess as to why most of this year has been sub-par for Z, I would say it is because he has missed up in the zone more than usual, combined with decreased velocity and a bit of bad luck.

 

the higher LD% would explain the increase in BABIP but not the GB/FB ratio. fly balls are turned into outs more frequently than ground balls.

 

but here's something interesting. this fangraphs article says that in 2007, line drives were hits 73% of the time, ground balls 24% and fly balls 15%. when you look at an extreme ground ball pitcher - say, brandon webb - his expected BABIPs from 2004-08 were .310, .317, .310, .311, .297. his actual BABIPs were .295, .305, .293, .294, .297. i think there's enough information to say that webb has not simply been lucky his entire career. one factor could be infield defense, but i note the same trend with guys like derek lowe, aaron cook, chien-ming wang when he was healthy - the extreme GB guys post BABIP's better than their xBABIP. the explanation i can come up with is that all ground balls are not created equal, and their style of pitching is such that balls are grounded more weakly than against GB-FB neutral pitchers and fly ball pitchers.

 

interestingly enough, in derek lowe's two worst years from 2002-09 (2004 and 2009), his LD% did not change greatly but his FB% went up (and hence his GB% went down). using the xBABIP formula, one would expect his BABIP to be lower in those years where he gave up more fly balls, but he actually had very poor BABIPs in those years. so perhaps this suggests that in 2004 and 2009, lowe was either missing his spots more or not getting as much sink on the ball, so the ground balls being put into play were, on average, harder ground balls than the ones hit in other years.

 

one last semi-related note. i also came across this article on fangraphs that compared a fly ball-heavy pitcher (barry zito) to a ground ball-heavy pitcher (webb). what the author found was that while webb pitched down in the zone a bit more frequently than zito, webb's expected ground ball rate was just 48% versus 44% for zito. yet webb's actual rate was 66% versus 39% for zito. so the main reason that pitchers have a strong tendency in one type of batted ball is not because they consistently pound a certain part of the zone, but because of the way that they pitch. i always assumed that ground ball pitchers just pitched around the knees most of the time, but that does not appear to be the case.

[XZero771679666304]

It's not scientific, but I think it's fairly obvious that guys who have a certain M.O. have poorer results when they deviate from it. It may be accepted that ground balls yield more hits than fly balls, but certain pitchers (like Webb, Zito, etc.) have built their success around inducing them. If these guys aren't inducing them, it probably means they aren't on their game. If they aren't on their game, their results are probably going to suffer, even if it means they give up more fly balls, which should ordinarily mean a lower babip. In Z's case his shifting gb/fb rate may well have had an effect on his babip, because it was an indication he was suffering from a loss of command. It may also mean that his breaking balls weren't breaking as well as in the past, and what may have been ground balls were becoming line drives. Or a combination of both.

 

Z has not been a true ground ball pitcher for some time, but his gb rate dropped about .15 this year, and if some or all of that .15 translated into the higher LD%, it probably would have had an effect on the overall babip.

 

These statistical rules of thumb may apply generally, but clearly they break down in certain scenarios. I think you sometimes have to look at these things in context.

 

As far as location as it applies to inducing ground balls, I think just as often downward movement is the key. If you throw a pitch with good downward break, you're probably going to induce grounders, even if you throw it thigh high. A good low ball hitter will destroy balls down if they don't have movement. But like a slider pitcher working the outer half, a good sinkerballer is that much more effective if he pounds the lower half of the zone.