Bitching About Pitching: Imporrtance of Finding Ace SP

I've been complaining about Zaidi's strategy so far for preparing for the NextGen Giants.  Our hitters will be matriculating in the next 1-2 years, and as we all know, developing pitchers (or any prospects) usually take about 4-6 years, unless you hit the jackpot, like we did with Lincecum and Bumgarner, even Cainer took 4 years, we drafted him at 18 YO, he made the majors at 20 YO, he had his first full season at 21 YO, his first good season at 22 YO, and was 24 YO when he had his first ace level season.  

Meanwhile, Zaidi drafted only one pitcher in the 2019 draft, and used three of his best four bullets in the 2020 draft on hitters, but at least picked up Kyle Harrison next, which values him in the 26-33 range. And now in 2021, finally drafted pitchers with his first 9 picks, and 14 of the 20 rounds. But is it too late? Because prospects take 3-6 years to develop, so these 2021 draftees won't be reaching the majors until 2024-2027, on average.

So that got me wondering:  how have teams found an ace level pitcher over the years?  So I compiled from Fangraphs the top 30 pitchers. FG ranked by WAR for qualified pitchers, which is what I wanted to examine, pitchers who were not only good but good enough to pitch what is considered a full season.  So I collected all that data, then supplemented by determining which team acquired the pitcher, as well as when and how (draft, IFA, FA, trade), to get a view of how teams have been acquiring these players. 

Then I combined together the ranked pitchers to get a consolidated view of the universe of starting pitchers who ranked among the Top 30 (I used only the Top 30 showing on the first page of Fangraphs leaderboard, there might be pitchers who have the same WAR as #30, but to simplify my data collection, which probably started weeks ago, I went only with who were on the first page), as that's then roughly the ace pitcher each 30 teams could have theoretically had, if they were allowed to draft by top pitchers each season.

This post shares my analysis and conclusions.

And Merry Christmas to all! I wish you all a safe and healthy holiday period!

ogc thoughts

I want to show how hard it is to find top of rotation starters, period, both in terms of overall scarcity and in terms of acquiring them. if it is that hard to acquire them, then the baseball operations leader needs to have a strategy that maximizes their chances of finding aces for their rotation.  

Finding a Bum

It is obviously hard to find top of rotation starting pitchers. But let's dig into looking at HOW hard exactly is it to find such a beast.  From Fangraphs SP leaderboard, I collected info on the Top 30 starting pitchers from 2009 to 2019, including how they were acquired, both originally and by the team they were with when in the Top 30.  I am defining these pitchers as the aces in the majors each season, one ace per team, though some teams will have multiple and some won't have one.  They have the most WAR, as well as being qualified (162.0 IP minimum) to make this leaderboard list.  

On average, there were 11.9 new pitchers each season (meaning someone who was not on it before; this number will be inflated somewhat from 2010-15, I would estimate, since I did not capture who were on the list from 2000-2008, but I think it's a great ballpark measure).   So there is considerable churn in the leaderboard.

Overall, on average, a little over a third of these leaders were drafted by the team they were with (11.4; standard deviation of 2.69), a third were acquired via trade (10.0; SD=2.05), roughly 15% were signed as free agents (4.5; SD=1.63), and slightly less than 15% were signed by the team they were with as an international free agent (IFA; 4.1; SD=1.04).

Which made my point about needing to focus on pitching in the draft. A bit more than a third of the ace starters in any year are drafted by their team. Just because another third is acquired by trade, that puts your team at the mercy of the market in any year. That ace pitcher to be acquired probably is still wanted by their current team.  Similarly for signing a free agent, those pitchers are ones where his prior team let them go (outliers are the SP looking for top money).  Previous studies have found that teams generally let go of players into free agency those that they do not want to keep (unless Boras is his agent). The best way to have an ace starting pitcher is to draft or sign internationally, which together represented about half of the aces in any season. 

Compare Giants starters Against Qualified Starters' Stats

Having a strong rotation is one way to have an advantage over other teams in the playoffs. Studies have shown that doing this gives teams the best chance of going deep into the playoffs.  The Giants pitching was superlative from 2009-2012, capturing their best seasons, where Lincecum, Cain, Bumgarner, Sanchez, and Vogelsong were among the leaders in the MLB. And where Zito, who never measured up to his contract, nonetheless was still a differentiator on these Giants staffs.

2009 Qualified Starter's Stats

For the top 30 starters, the median ERA was 3.14, with a range from 2.16 to 3.77.  

For the next 30 starters (the #2 starters in the majors), the median was 4.03, ranging from 3.77 to 4.24.

For the next set of starters (the #3 starters in the majors), the median was 5.16, ranging from 4.30 to 5.44. 

1. Lincecum was our clear ace with a 2.48 ERA, which placed him third in the majors. So, most of the time, when he faced another team, even their aces, he had a much better ERA than those SP.
2. Cain was second on our staff with a 2.89 ERA, which placed him 10th in the majors. So, he was better than most of the starters he went up against, even ace starters.
3. Zito was third on our staff with a 4.03 ERA, which placed him 45th in the majors. This means that he was better than most #2 starters, as well as all the #3 starters.
4. Sanchez was fourth on our staff with 4.24 ERA, which placed him 60th. in the majors. His ERA was better than any of the #3 starters. 

Of course, with some good starters not getting enough IP to qualify, they might end up against a pitcher who has a higher ERA, but given most teams order their rotation from best to worse, and that the vast majority of #4 and #5 starters are not very good (worse than the worse #3 starter), our starting rotation had an ERA advantage 1 to 4 in most cases.  

2010 Qualified Starter's Stats

For the top 30 starters, the median ERA was 2.88, with a range from 2.27 to 3.43.  

For the next 30 starters (the #2 starters in the majors), the median was 3.74, ranging from 3.47 to 4.08.

For the next set of starters (the #3 starters in the majors), the median was 4.48, ranging from 4.11 to 5.26. 

1. Sanchez was our ace among qualified starters with a 3.07 ERA, which placed him 18th in the majors. So, most of the time, when he faced another team, even their aces, he had a much better ERA than those SP.
2. Cain was our #2 starter with a 3.14 ERA, which placed him 20th in the majors. Again, most of the time, when he faced another team, even their aces, he had a much better ERA than those SP.
3. Lincecum was #3 starter with 3.43 ERA, which placed him 30th in the majors. He was an ace level starter in the majors, but only third on his staff, and he was competitive against most starters, even ace starters.
4. Zito was the #4 starter with 4.15 ERA, which placed him 62nd in the majors. So he was better than most #3 starters.
5. Bumgarner was the #5 starter but had a 3.00 ERA, which, had he qualified, would have made HIM the ace of the staff that season, and he would have ranked 16th.  He obviously was over qualified to be the 5th starter, but he took over Wellemeyer's position in the staff.

Again, Zito was not even close to being the ace of the staff, but among the #4 starters he was up against, his middling ERA was significantly better than most #3 and worse starters.

2011 Qualified Starter's Stats

For the top 30 starters, the median ERA was 3.14, with a range from 2.16 to 3.77.  

For the next 30 starters (the #2 starters in the majors), the median was 4.03, ranging from 3.77 to 4.24.

For the next set of starters (the #3 starters in the majors), the median was 5.16, ranging from 4.30 to 5.44. 

1. Vogelsong was our ace with a 2.71 ERA, which placed him sixth in the majors. So, most of the time, when he faced another team, even their aces, he had a much better ERA than those SP. But he was mostly our #5 starter.
2. Lincecum was almost as good with a 2.74 ERA, which placed him seventh in the majors. Again, most of the time, when he faced another team, even their aces, he had a better ERA.
3. Cain was our #2 starter but came in third in the Giants rotation with 2.88 ERA, which placed him 12th in the majors. Once again, most of the time, when he faced another team, even their aces, he had a better ERA.
4. Bumgarner was our #3 starter and his 3.21 ERA ranked him 20th in the MLB. Thus again, most of the time, when he faced another team, even their aces, he had a better or competitive ERA.
5. Sanchez was our back of the rotation starter, but he had a 4.26 ERA. He didn't qualify, as he only had a little over 100 IP, but he would have ranked 69th, which is better than most #3 starters, let along #4 or #5 starters.

We had a solid rotation 1 to 5 in 2011, with 4 ace level starters, and a fifth starter who was better than most other starters, when he was able to pitch.  So it was disappointing that our starting rotation had an ERA advantage 1 to 5 in most cases, but still was not able to get into the playoffs, because the offense got crippled by the loss of Posey's potent bat, and even Beltran could not replace enough of it.  

2012 Qualified Starter's Stats

For the top 30 starters, the median ERA was 3.23, with a range from 2.53 to 3.52.  

For the next 30 starters (the #2 starters in the majors), the median was 3.80, ranging from 3.54 to 4.12.

For the next set of starters (the #3 starters in the majors), the median was 4.65, ranging from 4.14 to 5.77. 

1. Matt Cain was our clear ace with a 2.79 ERA, which placed him sixth in the majors. So, most of the time, when he faced another team, even their aces, he had a much better ERA than those SP.
2. Vogelsong was co-#2 with a 3.37 ERA, which placed him 19th in the majors. So, most of the time, when he faced another team, even their aces, he had a much better ERA than those SP. But he was mostly our # starter.
3. Bumgarner was our co-#2 starter and his 3.37 ERA ranked him 20th in the MLB. Thus again, most of the time, when he faced another team, even their aces, he had a better or competitive ERA.
4. Zito was the #4 starter with 4.15 ERA, which placed him 62nd in the majors. So he was better than most #3 starters.
5. Lincecum was the #5 starter with 5.18 ERA, placing him 85th out of 88 qualifying starting pitchers.  He was about as bad as any other team's #5 starter, perhaps worse.

Again, Zito was not even close to being the ace of the staff, but among the #4 starters he was up against, his middling ERA was significantly better than most #3 and worse starters. Still, our starting rotation had an ERA advantage 1 to 4 in most cases.  

Illustrating the advantage of Zito in the 4th slot, from 2009-2012, the Giants went 59-48 in Zito starts (good for .551 winning percentage, which is an 89-win season), although he had a 4.26 ERA over that period and the average starting pitcher had a 4.11 ERA over that period. So he was roughly average but was slightly worse.