The "Unsustainable" Ubaldo: The Strand Rate

this is why I keep coming back to the Row day after day – good in depth look at what is happening with the Rockies!

is whether to compare “unsustainable” numbers to a league average or to a career average. Like you said in the article, about a 72% strand rate is normal, and Ubaldo sports a career 73.3%. So for LOB%, it’s kind of moot, but when we want to talk about things like BABIP, etc, I’m always wary about just assuming league average.

The league has never hit Ubaldo that well, the free pass is what got him in trouble. But sitting at a nice 3.03 (how appropriate) BB/9, he’s making them work for it now. And they’re hitting him even worse now.

The point I’m slowly and clumsily building toward is that statistical metrics have never been able to capture breakout seasons well. Stats are all about tempering expectations. They regress things to league average (or career average or whatever) so that when a ridiculously hot player starts to perform like normal again, the pundits aren’t screaming for his head or whatever.

That all said, I do think it’s conceivable for Ubaldo to keep up some absurd run, to some extent. Maybe not Gibson or Gooden level, how about Kevin Brown’s 1996 or 1998? (See what I mean about tempering expectations?)

Great article RG. I hate having to tapdance around stuff like LOB%, etc.

… I’m going to be surprised if Ubaldo finishes with a sub 1.50 ERA. You need to dance around a lot of bad luck to keep your ERA that low.

The rest allow themselves to be caught stealing out of fear.

Oh wait, wrong thread.

Clearly a 92% strand rate is unsustainable, and we should expect some regression – anyone who thinks Ubaldo is going to finish 27 – 3 is kind of out there. I think it’ll eventually settle on 81, 82% strand rate and he’ll end up with a sub-2.75 ERA, which is kind of ridiculous.

[buddy] called me yesterday morning. He was biking in Wash Park and saw Ubaldo finish his running. Said he wondered if it was him – that it looked like him – then he got in to a white H2 Hummer…so [buddy] went over and talked to him. Said he was really nice and talked to him for a minute or two…

For something to be unsustainable, there must be some inherently limiting action involved. For example “spending more than you make every month is unsustainable because eventually your credit will be trashed and no one will lend you more money” or “the way this guy is pitching is unsustainable because the torque he puts on his wrist will cause injury” (apparently Ubaldo had some motion like that early in his career and it’s been corrected by coaches over the years).

I think what people are trying to say by “unsustainable” is that it’s statistically improbable for Ubaldo’s LOB% to stay where it is. But then, a run like Ubaldo is on this year is statistically improbable in the first place, yet it’s happening. Saying essentially that things eventually average out is true, but it’s the deviations from average and the long streaks of statistically unlikely events that make this game so much fun to watch.

So why do these nameless someones talk about Ubaldo’s strand rate? I think it’s either opposing fans trying to give themselves hope by saying he’s “lucky” or (as RMN has alluded) it’s his own fans trying to temper their expectations so as to avoid disappointment.

I think such analysis is very useful after the fact to go back and look for what accounted for an awesome season, and to see if any lessons can be learned so it can be replicated. It’s also probably good as fans to remember that this is an incredible event we’re witnessing and not expect it to go on forever. But in the meantime, just enjoy the ride! Coors Field should be absolutely packed when #38’s on the hill. After all, a season like Ubaldo is having is statistically unlikely to happen again. :-)

The more you strike out and the fewer you walk or let hit HRs, the fewer will score. Think of it this way: the first runner in an inning is usually harmless, but the second could score the first, or at least pretty much guarantees that if a third reaches base, the first will score. On-base events (hits or walks) have two valuable components (other than not making an out): they advance other runners and they advance you. The first guy on-base in an inning is wasting his value of advancing other runners. For subsequent baserunners, the value of the “advancing others” piece continues to grow.

But while there’s a skill, you’ve sort of set up a false dichotomy here: all skill or not skill. You imply that because the latter was disproved, the first must be true. It’s not. it’s a mix of skill and luck.

Another problem created by looking at the leader boards is that we tend to think some pitchers are better than they really are BECAUSE of their luckily-high strand rates. Take Daisuke’s 2008. He was a 4.00+ FIP guy, but people still think he’s a stud because the low strand rate kept his ERA in the 2.00s.

Because strand rate is part skill and part luck, you don’t see very much awful pitchers on the leader board. That will be made up of good and great starters who are getting lucky. A lucky bad pitcher will merely creep up into an above-average strand rate.

Would it be the top single season pro-sports accomplishment ever in this town?