Here’s a Thought: Debunking the Myth of Cole Hamels’ Regression

Cole Hamels went 14-10 with a 3.09 ERA in 2008. He ended the year a World Series hero.

Cole Hamels went 10-11 with a 4.32 ERA in 2009. He ended the year a World Series bust.

Naturally, any fan seeing this would think that Hamels had some sort of huge fall from grace; he must have done more wrong in 2009 than 2008.

The media was all over this line of thinking, particularly in the playoffs (when, admittedly, he did struggle, unlike his excellent 2008 postseason).

Not so fast.

I was entering data into my True ERA spreadsheet today, and I was entering Hamels’ tRA in from Fangraphs when I noticed something.

Hamels’ Fielding Independent Pitching numbers from 2008 and 2009 are exactly equal, at 3.72.

Interesting.

Then again, in an article last night, I showed that Astros lefty Tim Byrdak was wildly underrated by FIP, so just because FIP says Hamels was the same pitcher in 2009 doesn’t mean he was.

But everywhere I looked, the numbers said the same thing.

Hamels’ xFIPs from 2008 (3.63) and 2009 (3.69) are very similar, as are his 2008 (4.18) and 2009 (4.29) tRAs. My own new metric, True ERA, has Hamels at 4.15 for 2008 and 4.20 for 2009.

So what in hell is going on here?

Hamels’ strikeout rate inched upwards this year, from 7.76 K/9 to 7.81. His walk rate decreased slightly as well, from 2.10 BB/9 to 2.00.

This led to an improved K/BB ratio of 3.91, up from 3.70 in 2008. His homer rate (1.11 HR/9 in 2008; 1.12 in 2009) was virtually unchanged as well.

Indeed, the ERA difference can be explained in the most obvious places—BABIP and strand rate. In 2008, Hamels’ BABIP was .270 and he stranded 76.0 percent of runners. In 2009, those figures were .325 and 72.1 percent.

In particular, the BABIP difference is the cause of Hamels’ problems. The only way this could be his fault is if he allowed harder contact in 2009 than 2008.

He didn’t.

In fact, Hamels’ line drive rate—the best indicator of how “hard” a pitcher gets hit, improved from 21.8 percent to 20.8 percent. 

Given his 20.8 percent line drive rate in 2009, the .325 BABIP likely isn’t a fluke, but given his 21.8 percent mark in 2008, the .270 mark in 2008 is wildly out of line. It should be around .330 to .340.

But Hamels, benefiting from the defense of Chase Utley, Jimmy Rollins, Shane Victorino, Pedro Feliz, and Jayson Werth, happened to have his fielders catch almost 20 percent of these balls that should’ve gone for hits. Hence, a .270 BABIP and a Philadelphia hero.

The numbers suggest that Hamels himself was about a 4.00 ERA pitcher all along. There wasn’t anything wrong with the lefty in ’09; he had just gotten lucky in 2008, and expectations were set higher than they should have been.

So what does this mean for Hamels going forward?

Well, we know three things about him.

The first two are good: for one, he can shut down an opponent any given day, and second, his K/BB ratio is excellent.

The one negative thing is that contact against him tends to be hard, as evidenced by the high liner and home run rates (Philadelphia’s park and Hamels’ flyball ways don’t help the latter number).

An excellent defense was able to counteract this in 2008, masking the problem, but it is a very real problem.

Hamels may need to throw a few more chase pitches out of the zone to keep the ball out of the middle of the plate. That may hurt his walk rate a little bit, but it would likely help his strikeout rate while reducing hard contact.

He pitches in the zone around 53 percent of the time, well above the 49 percent MLB average. He may work best at 50-51 percent.

Read more Philadelphia Phillies news on BleacherReport.com

Here’s a Thought: Looking At The Cliff Lee Trade

As you probably know, the Cleveland Indians sent lefty starter Cliff Lee to the Philadelphia Phillies yesterday for prospects Carlos Carrasco, Lou Marson, Jason Donald, and Jason Knapp.

The consensus that I’ve seen everywhere has the Phillies winning this trade easily, as Lee, the 2008 AL Cy Young winner, provides a big upgrade to a rotation that’s been giving starts to guys like Rodrigo Lopez, Antonio Bastardo, and Chan Ho Park this season.

It’s true that the acquisition of Lee does increase the Phillies’ possibility of repeating as World Series champions, and if he pushes them to that goal, Philadephia certainly won’t complain—no matter what the four prospects do.

So I agree that Philadelphia did a good job of getting a guy that legitimately improves the team’s chance of winning a championship. They’re built to win now, as the Rollins/Howard/Utley/Hamels core won’t be together forever, and Raul Ibanez will likely never hit this well again.

But did Philadelphia really “win” the deal?

That implies that the Phillies got what they wanted, and Cleveland didn’t.

It’s obvious that the Phillies got what they wanted, but it seems to be less clear what the Indians received.

Let’s take a look at the four players Cleveland got.

Carrasco has often been called the best prospect in the deal. I disagree, but we’ll get to that in a bit.

He’s a 22-year-old right-hander in Triple-A who throws a decent fastball and an excellent changeup. His curve is a usable third pitch.

Carrasco is prone to mental errors and leaves too many pitches out over the plate. That leads to some home run issues that he needs to work through.

With good control of a nice three-pitch mix, Carrasco profiles as a No. 4 starter, maybe a No. 3, and is close to MLB-ready. His homer issues will be easier to handle in Cleveland than in the Phillies’ bandbox of a stadium.

Jason Donald is a 24-year-old shortstop who hit well in Double-A last year (.307/.391/.497) but has struggled badly in Triple-A this year (.236/.297/.332). He is versatile defensively and a positive addition on the bases.

Donald’s 2009 slump probably ends his chances of being a major league starter, but he could be a decent utility-man with power off the bench and a decent, versatile glove. Then again, it’s not hard to find players like that.

Lou Marson offers more hope than Carrasco or Donald. Also in Triple-A, the catcher is hitting .294/.382/.370. He’s also hit .286/.375/.476 in 24 MLB PA’s.

Marson, unlike Donald, projects to start at his position. He’s an average defensive catcher with excellent OBP skills and doubles power. He could be a .285/.375/.400 player in the majors, which is very valuable at catcher.

Of course, the Indians also have top catching prospect, Carlos Santana, in Double-A. However, Santana is a converted third baseman who can play first, third, catcher, and both left and right field. So there should be roster space for both players to get significant time in Cleveland. It’s like the Indians’ situation; they have Victor Martinez play first base sometimes when Kelly Shoppach catches.

Just 23, Marson could be a Ramon Hernandez-level contributor in a year or two, and could even make an All-Star team or two, depending on the catching depth in the American League.

Then there’s Jason Knapp.

I’ll just copy-paste my report on Knapp from my Top 100 Prospects slideshow:

“Ranked just 10th on the Phillies’ prospect list by Baseball America entering the year, Knapp has really increased his stock this season.

Knapp has struck out 11.71 batters per nine innings while maintaining a decent walk rate and keeping the ball in the park.

On top of the statistical excellence, Knapp has age and stuff on his side. He’s only 18 and already pitching well in a full season league against hitters often 21 or older.

Then there’s his stuff. Knapp’s fastball sits around 95 mph and touches 100, and his slider and changeup both rate as plus pitches.

Knapp may not get much hype, but I can’t understand why. Who doesn’t like an 18-year-old with triple-digit velocity, two good off-speed pitches, and excellent results in a full season league?”

I ranked Knapp sixth on the Top 100 Prospects list.

I know that I’m close to alone in my extremely high regard for him, but there’s no question that if he harnesses his stuff, he’s going to be a front-of-the-rotation starter. He should at least become a dominant reliever.

Everyone seems to be fooled because they think Carrasco is the top prospect in the deal. Yes, if the best prospect in the deal is a No. 3- No. 4 starter, which is terrible. But I think Knapp and Marson rate higher than Carrasco.

The Indians are getting a potential ace in Knapp (although one with a long way to go to the majors), a starting-quality catcher in Marson, another good arm in Carrasco, and a utility guy in Donald.

Knapp and Carrasco are also a refreshing change from the Scott Lewis/ Jeremy Sowers/ Zach Jackson/ David Huff/ Chuck Lofgren/ Aaron Laffey chain of finesse lefties that the Indians keep hyping up and then getting disappointed by.

The Indians aren’t in contention this year, and it’s not likely they will be next year. It’s better to acquire three good future starters and one future backup, especially for a guy that’s only going to be around for two years when the team won’t be contending.

However, it all hinges on Knapp. If he busts, this trade won’t look good. While I’m a huge believer in him, there’s no question that 18-year-old pitchers can have tons of things go wrong between Low-A and the majors.

However, if he meets his potential, the Indians will certainly get what they wanted: a front-of-the-rotation starter to eventually replace Lee.

So yes, the Phillies got what they wanted, but it’s very possible that Cleveland did as well.

Don’t rush judgment based on 2009/2010 results—Jason Knapp could ultimately make this trade a tie, or even swing it in Cleveland’s favor before all is said and done.

I know it’s an unpopular position, but I do think there’s hope for the Indians here.

 

Here’s a Thought: Brad Lidge Is Still Unhittable

Much has been made of the decline of Philadelphia Phillies closer Brad Lidge.

Lidge posted a 1.95 ERA and was 41-for-41 in saves last year.

This year, he’s got a 7.20 ERA and is 19-for-25 in saves.

Knowing my work, and the title of this article, you’re probably expecting me to say “But his FIP is the same!”

It’s not.

Lidge had a 2.41 FIP last year, and sports a 6.02 mark this year. Sure, that’s not quite as bad, but you probably figured anyway that the 1.95 ERA was a bit lucky and the 7.20 mark a bit unlucky.

And yet, despite all of that, Brad Lidge of 2009 is far closer to Brad Lidge of 2008 than one would think.

Let me explain.

Last year, Brad Lidge struck out 11.94 batters per nine innings. He walked 4.54, for a 2.63 K/BB ratio.

This year, his strikeout rate has fallen (10.03) and the walks have gone up (5.91), so his K/BB ratio has fallen to 1.70.

That’s quite a bit worse, but that would send Lidge’s 2.41 FIP to the 3.20 range by itself. There are still three missing runs of FIP to account for.

It’s pretty easy to find them.

Last year, Lidge allowed 0.26 homers per nine innings. This year, he’s switched up the digits of that number, allowing 2.06 homers per nine, a truly horrific figure.

It’s not his fault.

Research shows that homer rate is directly correlated to flyball rate, which makes sense: flyball pitchers allow more homers than groundball pitchers.

However, research also shows that the ratio of homers to flyballs regresses to the mean. What that means is that the ratio of homers to flies is essentially luck.

The average ratio is about 10-11 percent. If a pitcher’s HR/FB rate is 5%, they’re getting very lucky; if it’s 15%, they’re getting very unlucky.

Last year, Brad Lidge’s HR/FB was 3.9%.

This year, it’s 18.6%.

Furthermore, Lidge is allowing more outfield flies this year (43%) than last year (32.3%).

What’s essentially happening is that Lidge happened to get lucky in 2008 keeping his fly balls in the park. This season, his HR/FB has overcorrected (the fact that Citizens Bank Park is a homer-happy park contributes to that) and it’s taken his ERA and FIP with it.

There’s a stat called xFIP (Expected FIP) which is FIP with a normalized home run rate.

Lidge’s 2008 xFIP was 3.06; his 2009 mark is 4.68.

Lidge’s xFIP is more indicative of the nature of his decline than his ERA or FIP are. In fact, xFIP is really the best stat to use when evaluating pitchers in general.

So rather than a 5.25 run drop (ERA) or 3.79 run drop (FIP), Lidge’s performance is actually about 1.62 earned runs per nine innings worse than it was last year.

Now, you’re probably thinking “Shouldn’t this article just be titled ‘Brad Lidge Has Declined Slightly Less Than You Might Think’ or something?”

Nope.

He’s still unhittable, at least about as much as he was last year.

I’ll bet some of you are very skeptical of the HR/FB stuff, saying “Nope, Lidge has just gotten lit up. They’re crushing the ball off of him.”

Actually, they aren’t.

There are two very easy ways to tell how “hittable” a pitcher is.

The first one is line-drive rate. 

When a batter squares up a pitch perfectly and hits it as hard as possible, the result is a line drive. That’s why batters hit about .720 on line drives, .260 on ground balls, and .160 on fly balls. The ball is hit harder and there’s less time for fielders to react to it and cover ground.

Last year, Brad Lidge had a LD% (line drive percentage) of 21.5%. That’s actually a bit high. For someone so dominant, Lidge gave up a lot of hard-hit balls last season.

This year, Lidge’s LD% has fallen to 19.0%, which is about average. Hitters are having more trouble squaring up his pitches and hitting them hard.

Lidge’s LD% improvement lends credence to my theory that he’s simply getting unlucky with the HR/FB rate.

The other stat that measures “hittability” is Contact Percentage. Put simply, it is the percentage of swings against a pitcher that the batter makes contact. The higher the Contact Percentage, the more hittable the pitcher is.

This year, the MLB-average contact percentage is 80.7%, and it typically hovers around 80.

Lidge’s is 65.8%, third-best in the majors among pitchers with at least 20 innings (behind Michael Wuertz (56.5%) and Mark DiFelice (65.7%).

So Lidge is the third-most-unhittable pitcher in baseball in 2009, despite the 7.20 ERA.

Lidge is still the Brad Lidge that Phillies fans love and hitters fear. He still generates a similar number of empty swings and does better with limiting hard contact than he did in his huge 2008.

So what’s the reason for Lidge’s 1.62 xFIP decline?

Lidge’s command has slipped a bit, as his walk rate has increased and he’s finding the strike zone at the lowest clip of his career. That’s a source of concern, but a bit of a lapse in control is certainly less of an issue than some of the doomsday theories being thrown around about Lidge.

So don’t worry, Phillies fans. Brad Lidge is still unhittable. A few more strikes and some average luck, and he’ll be the shutdown guy you know him to be.

Here’s a Thought: Explaining Levels Of Pitching Statistics

The pitcher pictured in this article, J.A. Happ, is 6-0 with a 2.91 ERA.

Great, right?

Wrong.

If you know about BABIP, strand rate, FIP, and where I’m about to go with this, you don’t need to read this. If you don’t know about them, please, let me inform you.

When I wrote this article, showing that Matt Cain hasn’t progressed in his career, and is simply a No. 3 starter, I seemed to create a divide. Some people understood what I was saying (and agreed), and some people didn’t (and disagreed).

And that’s fine. I write columns here because I know a lot about the game of baseball and how to evaluate talent, and I like to use my extensive knowledge base to educate everyone.

If that last paragraph comes off as arrogant, I’m sorry: I just have put a lot of time and effort into baseball analysis, and I like to think it pays off. I freely admit when I’m wrong, and I am by no means clairvoyant when it comes to baseball.

Anyway, back to the point. I was talking about Cain’s low BABIP, high strand rate, and good-but-not-great FIP to back up my argument.

If you don’t know what that means, allow me to explain. Just listen to what it means, understand it, and then do what you want with that information. If you don’t think FIP is a good stat, fine, but at least you know exactly what it means.

So, here we go. This is what I (and stats people) believe about pitching.

Most of you who don’t know much about stats look at win-loss record and ERA.

Win-loss record is a bad stat. Obviously, a pitcher who allows one run in a game where his team scored zero runs did a better job than a pitcher who allowed seven runs in a game where his team scored eight.

Now, you may be thinking “Well, those games don’t happen often.”

But they add up, and pitchers who deserve to be 13-10 quickly become 10-13. Pitchers who should be 15-8 become 10-11. It happens. Continuing with the Matt Cain theme, he was certainly better than 15-30 over 2007-2008. He also isn’t 10-2 this year. He’s really maybe a 15-11 or so quality pitcher each of those years.

Now, several years back, many people realized this, and paid more attention to ERA.

Now, ERA is a better stat than wins, because it removes some luck from pitching.

Removing luck from pitching is so important. You have to isolate what the pitcher is doing, not what the offense behind them or the defense behind them is doing. Wins still have that big component of how much run support a pitcher gets.

ERA removes that run support component, but it leaves much more luck than many of you might think.

Consider this rather extreme example:

Pitcher A throws ten straight pitches that are swung at, hit, and roll softly between the pitcher, catcher, and third baseman on the infield. All ten batters are safe, and the batting team has a huge inning.

Pitcher B throws ten straight pitches that are crushed deep to center, but die on the warning track and are outs. He throws 3 1/3 perfect innings.

Which pitcher did a better job?

Obviously, the first one: he induced weak contact and kept the ball on the ground.

Which one has the better ERA?

The second one: he didn’t allow anyone to reach base.

Again, things that extreme don’t happen often, but consider this more plausible example.

Team A has a shortstop who can move five feet to each side in the time a line drive gets from a batter’s bat to the edge of the infield.

Team B has a shortstop who can move eight feet to each side in that time.

A pitcher on Team A gives up 15 liners between five and eight feet of the shortstop over a season. A pitcher on Team B does the same. Team A’s shortstop misses all of them and they go for hits. Team B’s catches all of them and they go for outs.

Did Team B’s pitcher do anything better than Team A’s? No. But his ERA (and WHIP) will certainly look better, because 15 fewer guys got on base during the course of a year.

Add in subtle variances in batted-ball placement, fielder positioning, and fielder quality, and you can get 20 or 30 hits becoming outs over the course of a year, or vice versa.

So there’s obviously some luck that goes into balls in play, from a pitcher’s perspective. A pitcher can’t control where the ball is hit, where his defenders are positioned, and how good his defenders are.

So we know that.

Now, let’s step away from batted balls for a second and look at what defense doesn’t play a role in.

Three things can happen in baseball that defense isn’t involved in: walks, strikeouts, and home runs. Because there’s no batted-ball luck involved, these three things are sometimes referred to as the “Three True Outcomes.”

They are also referred to as the “peripheral statistics” of a pitcher.

If you ever hear me say “…’s peripherals are:” I’m discussing the pitcher’s walk rate (how many batters he walks per nine innings), strikeout rate (how many strikeouts he gets per nine innings), and homer rate (how many homers he allows in nine innings).

For a pitcher, a walk rate of three to four BB per nine innings pitched is about average, a strikeout rate of six to seven per nine innings is about average, and a homer rate of one HR per nine innings is about average.

Going back to Matt Cain, he has a walk rate of 3.54 BB/9, a strikeout rate of 7.31 K/9, and a homer rate of .85 HR/9. That means he’s got average control and slightly above-average strikeout and homer ability. That’s not bad. That’s a good #3 starter. It’s not an ace, which is what I said before.

But without reigniting a war about that (and if you have something to say about Cain, at just add to the 54 comments (and counting) on that article rather than messing with the discussion on this one), let’s move on.

So we know what the pitcher controls. Let’s go back to what he doesn’t control.

If you read my articles, or those of other sabermetrics (advanced baseball stats) guys, you probably see the term BABIP used a lot.

BABIP stands for batting average on balls in play. It’s largely luck (I’ll clarify the “largely” in a bit). We know it’s largely luck because statistical studies have shown that a pitcher’s BABIP in one year has almost no correlation to his BABIP of the next year.

So, why is J.A. Happ’s 6-0 record and 2.91 ERA not a good indicator of his pitching ability?

Because he has a .242 BABIP.

Nobody (except Chris Young, Mariano Rivera, and maybe one or two others) can keep a BABIP in that range. Last year, J.A. Happ’s BABIP was .283. In 2007, it was .389.

BABIPs tend to centralize around the .300-.310 mark. If a pitcher is in that range, it’s fairly likely that their ERA will fall pretty close to their true level of performance. If it’s way below that, their ERA will likely overrate them, and if it’s way above that, their ERA will underrate them.

You also see the stat “FIP” thrown around a lot in my articles. What is FIP?

FIP (or Fielding Independent ERA) is essentially ERA without the BABIP luck issues. FIP looks at a pitcher’s peripheral numbers, assumes average luck on everything else, and then tells you what that pitcher’s ERA should be. J.A. Happ’s is 4.51. Matt Cain’s is 3.87.

So FIP is essentially just a better version of ERA.

Now, there’s plenty of stat guys who will tell you FIP is perfect.

It’s not.

Pitchers can control some things on balls in play. They can influence whether the ball is a ground ball, line drive, popup, or outfield fly.

What they can’t influence is what those do.

Batters hit in the .720 range on line drives. They hit about .260 on ground balls.

So if there was a pitcher who gave up only line drives, we would actually expect him to have a BABIP around .720.

A pitcher who only gives up ground balls would be expected to have a BABIP around .260.

For flies, the BABIP is in the .160-.170 range, and batters hit about .015 on popups.

Consider these two examples:

Pitcher A: 16.7% LD, 35.8% GB, 47.6% FB, 9.4% PO.

Pitcher B: 16.7% LD, 48% GB, 35.3% FB, 10.2% PO.

If we multiply out the expected BABIP figures, we get that Pitcher A’s BABIP should be about .293 and Pitcher B’s BABIP should be about .301.

Pitcher A is Happ, who has a .242 BABIP. Pitcher B is Jon Lester, who has a .348 BABIP.

It’s no surprise that Lester’s 3.22 FIP thus exceeds his 3.87 ERA.

Note that Happ, because he allows more flies, which have a lower BABIP than grounders, does have a slightly lower Expected BABIP (or xBABIP). But note that it’s  a .008 difference, not .106.

Almost entirely because of that balls-in-play luck, Happ’s ERA is .94 better than Lester’s, even though Lester’s FIP is 1.29 runs lower.

I brought up Chris Young and Mariano Rivera as low BABIP-ers earlier. Why? Young allows a ton of flyballs in huge Petco Park, and Rivera’s cutter induces a ton of popups.

If you don’t feel like multiplying a bunch of numbers out to find xBABIP, just use (LD percentage + .12). Because BABIP on liners is so much higher than BABIP on anything else, limiting line drives is key to getting good results on balls in play.

In scouting terms, this is the old “pitch to contact, away from the barrel of the bat.”

So don’t assume that just because a pitcher’s BABIP is .340, it’s going to come down. Check the line-drive rate, and if it’s up in the 21-plus percent range, the BABIP is legit. It’s been shown that LD percentage + .12 is a good “quick and easy” formula to assess BABIP.

That’s really it as far as balls in play stats.

Glad it’s over?

We’re not done yet. There’s a few other things I’d like to call attention to.

You may be wondering why groundball pitchers are held in high esteem by stat guys if flies have a much lower BABIP.

It’s simple: flies can go out of the yard.

However, the percentage of fly balls that leave the yard is another statistic, like BABIP, that’s been shown to be largely random. Homer-to-flyball ratio (or HR/FB) typically sits in the 7-13 percent range. If a pitcher has a HR/FB of 2 percent, he’s lucky. If he has a HR/FB of 20 percent, he’s unlucky.

You’re probably thinking “But I thought you said pitchers could control homers!”

Well, they usually can, because flyball percentage can stay fairly consistent, and homers correlate to that. 

“But, isn’t FIP flawed then?”

Yes, yes it is.

Hence xFIP (or Expected FIP). This takes a pitcher’s flyball rate, assigns average HR/FB luck, and generates an expected home run rate. It then uses the expected home run rate to go with walks and strikeouts to produce FIP.

J.A. Happ has a 9.4 percent HR/FB rate, just slightly below average. His FIP is 4.51. His xFIP is 4.77.

The extra .26 is a correction in HR/FB luck.

There’s one other stat, like BABIP and HR/FB, that has no predictive value and is thus luck. I promise I’m done after this one.

It’s strand rate, or percentage of runners stranded. The average is about 72 percent. It’s true that better pitchers may have slightly higher strand rates and worse ones might have slightly lower ones, but if a pitcher’s strand rate isn’t between 69 percent and 75 percent, they are getting lucky (if it’s higher) or unlucky (if it’s lower).

J.A. Happ’s strand rate is 85.9 percent.

With a BABIP of .242 and a strand rate of 85.9 percent, it’s obvious why Happ has succeeded.

While Happ isn’t a bad pitcher, his peripherals are 6.31 K/9, 3.31 BB/9, and 1.14 HR/9. All three are about average, which lead to an average 4.51 FIP. 

J.A. Happ’s 2.91 ERA stems from an average pitching performance coupled with exceptional luck on balls in play and with stranding runners. His 6-0 won-loss record, on top of that, stems from good run support from an excellent Phillies offense. 

The stats tell us that Happ and Cain are overrated, and Lester is underrated.

So there you have it. That’s what “us stats guys” look at when evaluating a pitcher. I hope that those of you who didn’t know about this stuff have learned something, and that I presented this information in a clear, understandable fashion.

Here’s A Thought: The Phillies Should Get Hector Ambriz, Not Pedro Martinez

Much has been made of the Philadelphia Phillies’ recent pursuit of Pedro Martinez.

I was pondering that potential acquisition today, and it does make sense on a certain level.

Pedro Martinez has a ton of big-league experience, he’s only 37, and signing him gives the Phillies a fifth starter to complement the Cole Hamels/J.A. Happ/Joe Blanton/Jamie Moyer quartet.

Aside from Moyer’s bad luck with the home run ball this year, the four have pitched well enough to get by in their roles. But Antonio Bastardo clearly isn’t a big-league pitcher yet, and Rodrigo Lopez is years behind his days of being effective.

The Phillies need a fifth starter, and they need one badly.

Could Pedro fill that role? Sure.

There’s a problem, however.

Pedro Martinez is no longer a known commodity. Yes, he was unbelievable in five 2007 starts, he was a good fourth starter in 2006, and he was excellent before that. But last year, he was barely serviceable at the back of the Mets’ rotation.

In particular, Martinez suffered from the home run ball in 2008 (1.57 HR/9). Pitching in old Shea Stadium, a pitcher’s park, Martinez couldn’t keep the ball in the yard.

What makes you think he’ll keep it inside Citizens Bank Bandbox?

Of course, there’s nothing to lose, other than a couple million dollars and some innings.

But should the Phillies take that risk?

Perhaps they should, but only if there are no alternatives.

Roy Halladay, Erik Bedard and other big names are often thrown around, but I think the Phillies should take a different approach.

I decided to look around Triple-A and try to find someone who would fit the Phillies’ needs.

To be successful in a Phillies uniform, a pitcher must be able to prevent homers. To be successful in the major leagues at all, a pitcher must have a good strikeout-to-walk ratio.

To be a more worthwhile acquisition than Pedro Martinez, a pitcher must possess both those traits and not be a hot prospect.

I looked around Triple-A. There are a bunch of guys who meet two out of the three criteria very nicely, but there’s one name that sticks out as a perfect fit.

Hector Ambriz.

You’ve probably never heard of Ambriz unless you’re a Diamondbacks fan or a minor league nutcase like me. Ambriz is a chunky 25-year-old righty with a 5.74 ERA in Triple-A. He wasn’t ranked in the Diamondbacks’ top 30 prospects by Baseball America entering the season (although he was ranked No. 27 coming into 2008).

So why on earth am I saying the Phillies should turn to an out-of-shape non-prospect to fix their rotation?

Well, let’s run through the three qualifications.

Hector Ambriz has thrown 62 2/3 innings pitching in a hitter’s league with a hitter’s home park. He has allowed just three home runs, for a sparkling .43 HR/9. This isn’t a fluke: Ambriz consistently has kept the ball in the park in his minor league career. He’s certainly capable of a homer rate of less than one HR/9 if pitching in Philadelphia.

In those 62 2/3 innings, Ambriz has struck out 56 batters and walked just 23, for an above-average 2.43 ratio. Again, this would likely go down a bit in the majors, but Ambriz should be able to keep the K/BB ratio around 2.00.

Ambriz’s 5.74 ERA is a mirage created by a .380 BABIP and 58.9% strand rate, two numbers that are purely luck and way out of line with anything he’s ever done in his career. His FIP is just 3.18, an outstanding figure.

In the majors, pitching in a similarly difficult park, Ambriz profiles as a 4.00 ERA pitcher. If you want a statistical comparison, think Paul Maholm in 2008. Maholm posted a 2.21 K/BB ratio and a .92 HR/9, while keeping 53.6 percent of balls on the ground. That added up to a 4.15 FIP.

Stuff-wise, there’s not much to worry about: Ambriz isn’t a trick pitcher. He throws his heater in the 89-96 range, sitting at 90-93. He’s got a plus splitter, an average curveball, and a usable changeup. Imagine if Joe Blanton threw a plus splitter instead of an average slider, and you’d have a rough comparison for Ambriz.

There’s also the matter of Ambriz’s availability: in order to be a better fit than Pedro, Ambriz needs to be easy to acquire.

Given that he’s 25 and just getting to Triple-A, Ambriz isn’t exactly a well-regarded guy. Scouts think he’s overweight, which hurts him. The 5.74 ERA also makes Ambriz look worse than he is. I mentioned Baseball America‘s disregard for the righthander this year, which reflects the general consensus.

All the Phillies need to do to get Ambriz is give up someone like Mike Cervenak, who has no use in Philly but could be the infield utility guy Arizona wants. Failing that, some low-minors C-or-D-level prospect like Jason De Fratus would be enough to get Ambriz.

The point is, the Phillies can acquire Ambriz quite easily without giving up anyone they’ll miss.

The Phillies also get Ambriz for six years of team control, whereas Pedro would only be around for one.

With a good four-pitch arsenal and solid numbers in every area, especially homers, Hector Ambriz is a perfect fit for the Phillies.

While signing Pedro Martinez isn’t the worst of ideas, it’s quite clear that in trading for Hector Ambriz, the Phillies have a much more worthwhile alternative, for both 2009 and future seasons.

“What?! He’s Still Playing?!” Part One of Five

Have you ever looked at a box score or turned on the TV to a baseball game and seen a name you never expected to see?

A name you hadn’t seen in several years?

I had a moment like that just last week. I looked at a Royals box score and was flabbergasted at their starting pitcher.

“What?! Bruce Chen’s still pitching?!”

Obviously, players who come back to the majors after several years away get some mainstream exposure.

I thought it would be a fun idea to look through the minor leagues and see what former major leaguers are still kicking around.

I’ll do this in five parts. I feel that often, when I’m doing a big list like this, I wind up writing a 10-page article nobody wants to read all the way through, and  I’m losing viewers by cramming four or five articles’ worth of information into one. So I’m trying out a new split-up approach—we’ll see how it goes.

This article will look at the International League (Triple-A) pitchers. The next one will look at IL hitters. Part 3 will be Pacific Coast League (Triple-A) pitchers, and Part 4 will be PCL hitters. Part 5 will be everyone in Double-A or below.

Basically, my criteria for picking these guys is as such:

1. They had a significant big league career.

2. They haven’t had significant big league action in a few years.

3. They don’t really have the “Quad-A” tag, so you wouldn’t expect them to just stay in the minors putting up great numbers forever.

So, here are the International League pitchers that you never would’ve guessed are still playing:

 

John Halama

Take a second to think about that. John Halama is still pitching.

A major leaguer from 1998-2006, the lefty managed to be a useful back-of-the-rotation guy despite throwing just 83-84 mph with his fastball.

He took 2007 off, pitched for the Indians’ Triple-A team last year, and moved on to the Braves Triple-A team this year, where he’s actually made three decent starts.

Halama is 37 and gets very few strikeouts, but he still has good control and keeps the ball on the ground.

Will he ever get another big league look? Not unless the Braves have a ton of injuries.

 

Gustavo Chacin

The one with the weird glasses?

Yep.

The one with the odd stepback hesitation thing in his delivery?

Yep, that’s the one.

Chacin was last seen in the Blue Jays rotation in 2007. His struggles (6.28 FIP), sent him to Triple-A, where he continued to struggle.

Last year, Chacin was sent all the way down to High-A at age 27. He responded by posting a 7.88 ERA and getting released after the year.

Just when his career looked over, Chacin was given one last shot by the Phillies, and now all of a sudden, he looks like he’s back to his excellent 2005 form. Chacin’s got a 3.48 FIP in six Triple-A starts. 

Will he ever get another big league look? Chacin’s just 28 and pitching well. Given how bad the Phillies’ rotation’s been, who knows?

 

Rodrigo Lopez

Lopez was a pretty bad major league pitcher, primarily with the Orioles, for nearly a decade, but after basically vanishing last year, he’s resurfaced with the Phillies. A 3.10 FIP has him back on track to be the below-average major league pitcher he once was.

Will he ever get another big league look? Supposedly, he’s starting tomorrow. If Lopez struggles, look for Chacin to take his spot.

Consider yourselves warned for the inevitable “What?! Rodrigo Lopez is still pitching?!” moment that you’ll have watching ESPN highlights.

 

Carlos Hernandez

How’s Hernandez for a throwback?

Once thought to be an excellent lefty starting prospect, the diminutive lefty turned in a nice year in 2002 as the Astros’ No. 3 starter before arm problems ended his career.

Or did they?

Hernandez made nine big league starts in 2004 and was awful. He threw 14 Double-A innings in 2006 and was awful. Then, last year, six years removed from his last decent effort of any kind, Hernandez dominated High-A in six starts.

Moved back to Triple-A, Hernandez has put up a 4.05 FIP in 15 starts for the Rays’ Triple-A affiliate.

Will he ever get another big league look? Believe it or not, Hernandez is just 29. If he stays healthy and pitching decently, his chances are about 50/50.

 

Jason Davis

This one might not be quite as surprising.

Davis actually threw 34 terrible innings for a terrible Pirates team last year. Given that the 2008 Pirates weren’t exactly drawing huge TV ratings, I doubt many people even realized Davis was still around. But he is.

With the Pirates’ Triple-A team, Davis has struggled to a 6.02 ERA. He hasn’t been that bad (4.80 FIP), but it certainly doesn’t look like a 2009 callup is in the cards.

Will he ever get another big league look? He’s 29, and he’s been there recently, so his name still has the “big leaguer” tag on it.

Then again, he’s not pitching well, and the Pirates are getting younger and better. He’ll have to look elsewhere and get some luck, whether it’s in the form of injuries to others or a big spring training performance from Davis.

 

Josh Towers

Towers is one of my least favorite players of all time.

I’m not sure why. I think it has something to do with the fact that he’s a pitcher and wore No. 7. It also probably has to do with the fact that he’s not a very good pitcher.

Last seen killing the Blue Jays from within in 2007, Towers was bad for the Rockies’ Triple-A affiliate in 2008 (to be fair, it’s impossible to pich there), was released by the Nationals after one Triple-A game this year (that’s when you know you’re bad), and was picked up by the Yankees.

Towers has superficially good numbers, but he’s still a bad pitcher. His miniscule strikeout rate and high homer rate put his FIP at 5.30.

He’s still Josh Towers.

Will he ever get another big league look? I hope not—too many teams have thrown away innings on this guy. He hasn’t pitched well in Triple-A, and he’s 32.

 

Sergio Mitre

Mitre has a good excuse for dropping out of our minds—he missed all of 2008 after Tommy John surgery. Let’s not forget the 3.98 FIP the sinkerballer put up for Florida in 2007. 

Mitre, now with the Yankees, has a 2.60 Triple-A FIP. He’s just 28 and certainly seems ready to pick up where he left off.

Will he ever get another big league look? It’s fairly likely. Mitre has talent and fairly recent big league success. He’d fit well on a team like Cleveland.

 

Jorge Sosa

The journeyman is still journeying. After his horrific performance for the Mets last year (5.95 FIP), you’d think Sosa, who’s pitched seven years in the majors, would be gone at age 32.

Nope.

The Nationals picked him up (Jim Bowden picked up a has-been guy with talent and no clue how to use it? Who saw that coming?). 

To be fair to Sosa, he’s actually pitching very well in Triple-A, with a 3.26 FIP. However, Sosa’s only real big league value is as a starter, and he hasn’t started a game in two years.

Will he ever get another big league look? He shouldn’t get one from the Nationals, who really need to go young, but given the way they’re run, I wouldn’t rule it out. I’d say Sosa has a 55 percent chance of throwing in another major league game.