Manny Corpas: Why he’s great, why he’s awful, and why the stats show that either way, you’re right.
Manuel Corpas has been one of the strongest members of our pen this season. He's been absolutely excellent, as he still approaches the plate with a solid control over the strike zone, a low walk rate, and a career-low homerun rate.
Corpas has been one of the weakest members of the pen, however. He's struggled in pressure situations and allowed back-breaking hits and runs where we've come to expect outs.
So would the real Manny Corpas please stand up?
Statistically speaking, we can paint pictures of both versions of Corpas this season.
The first picture is coming from my typical analysis of a pitcher's performance. Right now Corpas is sporting a 6.42 K9, which is right in line with his career totals. His HR9 is at 0.80, which right in line with his career numbers. However, the most impressive part of Corpas' basic rate stats has to be his BB9. Coraps is walking a miniscule 1.87 batters per 9 innings. Only Mariano Rivera, Chad Qualls, Scott Downs, Matt Guerrier, Joe Nathan, and Dan Wheeler have a lower BB9. Summing that whole total out is a 3.49 FIP, which may not be an elite number, but it's hardly a number to sneeze at. His 3.74 tRA supports the notion that his 5.88 ERA isn't really painting the whole picture of Corpas' season.
Join us after the jump to see what the opposition says about Manny.
Corpas' 5.88 ERA bridges us perfectly into the second picture: Shaky, undependable, and absolutely ready to get shelled when he needs to be nails. Corpas is currently sporting a .366 BABIP, which any of the SABR guys around the site will inform you is completely unsustainable, given a .315 career BABIP. Basically, he's getting a bit unlucky - or is he? For the 2009 season, Corpas is allowing a .813 OPS to batters, which may be a bit inflated by the way batters are hitting him since he returned from the DL: 1.355 OPS (.400/.455/.900).
According to Fangraphs' analysis of Corpas' pitches, his fastball has been somewhat hittable, and his slider has been a positive pitch for him this season. He's slowly working in a passable changeup, which if he keeps mixing in properly, could be a solid out-making pitch for him. Batters won't be able to just sit on the slider and wait for the fastball much longer.
But this brings us to a new statistic that we've been seeing in the postgame Fangraphs in the game wraps: WPA.
Win probability added is based, once again, on Tom Tango's work with past data. Fangraphs gives an excellent explanation of how WPA works, and you can read it here. I'll attempt to give an explanation of it as well here.
What Tango's work did was to take every single base-out state (for example, 0-on, 0-out is a base-out state, and 1st and 3rd with 2 out is a base-out state) for every score differential and determined how many games the home team won after that particular base-out state.
So let's show an example here. Rockies vs. Astros, 6/4/09, Jason Hammel v Wandy Rodriguez.
The game starts with both teams having a 50% (.500) probability of winning the game.
To lead the game off, the base-out state was 0 out, no runners on. Ryan Spilborghs grounded out to 3B to create a base-out state of 1 out, no runners on, which gave the home team a win expectancy of .565, or a 56.5% chance of winning. Therefore, Wandy Rodriguez now has a WPA+ of .065, and Spilborghs has a WPA- of .065.
With 1 out and nobody on, Clint Barmes inexplicably drew a walk, leading to a base-out state of 1st base occupied, 1 out, which changed the Astro's win expectancy to .534. Therefore, Rodriguez earned himself a WPA- of .031 (.565-.534), and Barmes a WPA+ of the same, .031.
With 1 out and Barmes at 1B, Helton singled to LF, creating a base-out state of 1st and 2nd, 1 out, with a win expectancy of .500. Helton gets a WPA+ of .034 (.534-.500), and Wandy a WPA- of .034.
With 1 out and 1st and 2nd, Matt Murton struck out, boosting the ‘Stros win expectancy to .559. Murton gets a WPA- of .059 (.559-.500) and Wandy a WPA+ of the same, .059.
With 2 out and 1st and 2nd, Brad Hawpe grounded out to 3B to end the inning, and the Astros now had a 59.1% chance of winning. Hawpe gets a WPA- of .032, and Wandy a WPA+ of .032.
Does your head hurt yet? Mine does.
Fast forward to the top of the 3rd inning. With Ryan Spilborghs on 1B with no outs, Barmes triples to drive Spilborghs in. Barmes receives a WPA+ of .166 (.487-.321), and Wandy receives a WPA- of the same level. Run scoring plays clearly give good WPA+ to the batters.
As the game continues, players score runs and create outs, leading to varying levels of WPA+ and WPA-. At the end of the game, you take each player and find the difference in their WPA+ and WPA- (WPA+ - WPA-) to determine their overall Win Probability Added for the game.
At the end of this particular game, Clint Barmes was the big hero, providing a .150 WPA, or in other words, he added 15% to his team's chances of winning. Wandy was the big loser, with a WPA of -.334, or he cost his team 33.4% of a chance of winning.
Now there is one quick nuance to look at when reading over the WPA charts at the end of the game. The winning team's WPA will always add up to .500, and the losing team's to -.500. My intial thought was "But wait shouldn't the winning team have 1.000 and the losing team 0.000??" but then I remembered how arithmetic works: Both teams start with .500, and if the winner gains .500 and the loser loses .500, that means the the winner ends up with 1.000 and the loser with 0.000.
Hurray, the stats guy knows how to do math!
So what does this have to do with Manny Corpas, many of you may be asking?
Well, this season Manny Corpas has a WPA+ of 1.94, and a WPA- of -2.78, giving him an overall WPA of -0.84 for the season. What does this tell us?
Corpas hasn't really done well for himself this season. While he's posted good peripherals, he's saved his moments of weakness for the most untimely of situations. Granted, he's nursing bone chips in his elbow, but if Jim Tracy plans to continue sending him out, Corpas has to figure out how to turn some of these ugly hits into outs.
So to sum up our Corpas discussion, the Pros include: Good FIP, decent tRA, good K9, BB9, HR9. Cons: bad ERA, bad BABIP, bad WPA. Is he still a good tool for our bullpen? Absolutely. Is his elbow still hurting him? Most definitely.
Do we need him?
You bet we do.
0 recs |
16 comments
|
Comments
Corpas is the argument
I see that tells me we need a proven arm. He has been invaluable to the pen…and I don’t think he will make it through the season, and if he does, it won’t be at a level of performance the fans have come to expect out of him.
In fact I think it would be best for him and team to just get the chips removed now. He might be able to be back by playoff time….and Tracy won’t keep running him out in high pressure situations, when he’s not that same guy anymore. (not to mention the every other year for a reliever, with less innings this year a bounce back next year should be expected)
Start Seth Smith! Free Eric Young Jr.!
by Redhawk on Jul 22, 2009 11:22 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
WPA
is kind of a stat that old skool baseball people and statheads can compromise on. Old-timers like it because it takes ultimate results into account, and statheads like it because it breaks down the effectiveness of individual actions.
Statheads also like it because it proves that the sacrifice bunt is almost universally an idiotic move.
"In the future, I want to be a fossil. Or, at least have my feces be fossilized"
-Pygalgia
by DbacksSkins on Jul 22, 2009 11:22 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
i like wpa to a degree
But for hitters, its more of a measure of clutchiness than skill. In one game this year, spilborghs had a higher wpa with a ph 8th inning walk than hawpe, who doubled and hit a home run, since he gidp in a crucial spot. And clutchiness can be very fluky. The pitcher could have just been wild to spilly, and hawpe could have smoked the ball, with one jus right at someone
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
by Andrew T. Fisher on Jul 22, 2009 11:48 AM MDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't that
part of the nature of hitting?
"In the future, I want to be a fossil. Or, at least have my feces be fossilized"
-Pygalgia
by DbacksSkins on Jul 22, 2009 11:57 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes
But I’m just saying, like most stats, it has areas where it fails to communicate who had a better game. And one player can have far worse wpa and better stats than another player over the couse of the season just based on timing. Clutch performances are skill and luck
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
by Andrew T. Fisher on Jul 22, 2009 12:07 PM MDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
I'm going to have another article explaining the difference
between skill related stats and performance related stat
Chris Iannetta status: DOOM
Seth Smith status: FREE SETH SMITH
Matt Murton status: Prisoner Exchanged for CarGon
Mike McCoy status: FREE MIKE MCCOY
by Andrew Martin on Jul 22, 2009 12:09 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
The thing is
All these aspects will average out. For every game Hawpe hits a liner down the throat of CF and Spilly lucks out on a poor pitch, there will be a game where the opposite happens, so it can be disregarded.
The difference between Spilly and Hawpe, ultimately, is that Brad has a stronger arm and possibly a better ability to hit in certain situations, and it’s these quantitative differences which make him the better player when the vagaries of chance are ironed out.
by biondino on Jul 22, 2009 4:59 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
like i said, we'll have an article about it
because I’m not simply distinguishing between a bloop single and a double to the gap.
Chris Iannetta status: DOOM
Seth Smith status: FREE SETH SMITH
Matt Murton status: Prisoner Exchanged for CarGon
Mike McCoy status: FREE MIKE MCCOY
by Andrew Martin on Jul 22, 2009 9:49 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's the problem though...
luck doesn’t average out exactly—but I’m sure that RMN will explain this further.
Eschew Obfuscation!
by Jeff Aberle on Jul 23, 2009 1:15 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
On the bone chips front
Did anyone catch Tracy on the postgame interview (or did you turn off the tv in disgust). He said Corpas was unavailable last night because of stiffness (ostensibly in the elbow, rather than in the er, back or knees or something). That concerned me as much as his spotty performance the other night.
(Sorry if you read this before, it’s the 3rd time I posted it.)
Leave Dexter alone! You're lucky he even performs for you!
by FooMan on Jul 22, 2009 11:28 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
not after last nights game no
but I did hear the announcers say that Corpas probably couldn’t go back to back days too often (I think this was Saturday or Sunday’s game during the game)
Start Seth Smith! Free Eric Young Jr.!
by Redhawk on Jul 22, 2009 11:31 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Now confirmed
Corpas is going to have surgery on his elbow.
by ShadowPenguin on Jul 22, 2009 4:49 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm a number guy too...
…but at some point, don’t you have to toss the numbers out, and say “dude chokes under pressure?”
by noelman31 on Jul 22, 2009 1:08 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
the wpa numbers actually show that pretty well
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
by Andrew T. Fisher on Jul 22, 2009 4:10 PM MDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
There's a stat for that too!
Leverage Index!
It takes the amount that WE can change from one base-out state to another and compares that to the historical average. For instance let’s say there is a situation where the a single results in a WPA+ of .069 wins and an out results in a WPA- of .140. Now let’s say that a single happens 33% of the time and the out happens 67% we can calculate the average change in WE from this situation as .140*0.67+.069*.33=.117. Now historically the average change in WE in a PA is .0346. We calcualte .117/.0346 to get a leverage index of 3.38, this is a very high leverage situation. If we look at a player’s performance in situations that are deemed “high leverage” (usually a LI >1.5) we can say that yes a player struggles in pressure situations.
(there are of course more complicated ways to calculate LI because of course baseball is not as simple as single or out. How does a double change the WE? What about a HR? We can use root mean squared methods to get the average change in WE for every possible outcome of the PA. Thankfully Tom Tango is a wonderful man and has already done this work and a fairly extensive LI chart is available here: http://www.insidethebook.com/li.shtml and fangraphs also tracks LI in real time during the game (it’s the bargraph below the WE graph))
by ch3cooh1 on Jul 23, 2009 8:43 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think many stat guys would agree with you
When people assert that a guy chokes, they’re claming an (in-)ability, not just that a guy failed in a key situation in the past. WE and LI speak more to the latter than the former.
Leave Dexter alone! You're lucky he even performs for you!
by FooMan on Jul 23, 2009 10:13 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 



















