Crystal Ball: Chien-Ming Wang
by John Sickels on Sep 5, 2006 12:11 PM EDT
in News
Email
Print
I'm not enamored of Wang's low strikeout rate, but groundball pitchers can get away with it much more easily than fly ball guys. Wang needs strong defensive infield support to truly thrive, and fortunately he will usually have this with the Yankees. I think he will have a good career as an inning-eating ground ball machine, but when he starts to fade I think it will happen quickly.
52 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The wins I can see...
However, I don't see him getting an ERA below 3 in a full season. He'd have to have amazing luck.
Probably not
by natsfan2005 @ Minor League Ball on Sep 5, 2006 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Lowe's strikeout rate
Hmmm
Disclaimer to Yankee fans: this was a joke. I was being sarcastic. End Disclaimer
I think
left side D
by DavidWrightismyGod on Sep 7, 2006 9:13 AM EDT up reply actions
I would be such a Wang fan...
I could see his career going pretty much like this. That 2010 Cy Wang season probably won't happen, but I suppose there's a chance he'll have just one of those years. I think it's a lot less likely than someone who Ks a lot of guys, though. I think he's pretty much at the limit of excellence that you can get to without K-ing anyone.
As to his chance at the Cy this season, I think he lost his chance yesterday when he failed to keep pace win-wise with Santana and Halladay. If he had ended the season with two or three more wins than those guys, he'd have stood a good chance.
well...
by yanksfan6129 on Sep 5, 2006 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions
because...
Honestly, he doesn't deserve 1 vote for the Cy Young this year.
by SmokeyJoeWood on Sep 5, 2006 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions
well
by yanksfan6129 on Sep 5, 2006 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions
what i meant to say was
by SmokeyJoeWood on Sep 5, 2006 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Okay
He's been the Yankees most consistent quality pitcher. It's fair to say that he's saved the team on numerous occasions with his ability to work deep, allowing the bp to have breaks to protect itself (IMO, he's been the Yankees MVP this year).
I'd rate it
- Santana
- Halladay
- Wang
- Verlander
Top 5 Cy Young
- Santana
- -------
- Halladay
- Kazmir
- Bonderman
As for Wang and Verlander, they're not even the Cy Young's of their own teams. Bonderman's numbers are equal or better to Verlander's across the board; Verlander is getting over 6 runs a game in support while Bonderman is only receiving just over 4 runs per start. And by your own admission, a Cy Young shouldn't be 'protected'. Bonderman is the #1 on the staff, has been, and should be for years. HE'S the Tigers ace.
And Wang takes a back seat to Mussina on the Yankees. Mussina is superior in almost every stat, save wins.
By my account, Wang and Verlander shouldn't be in the top 5. Top 10 they'd probably still be behind Zito, Schilling, Rogers, Haren . . .
They've have very good years, but to me they're more a product of high run support than many others and are being judged too much by their win totals and ERA.
Agree
Disagree on Mussina being a better candidate. To me, a Cy Young candidate has to be consistent throughout the year, and while the numbers for Mussina have somewhat maintained, they are deceiving in the fact that he's worn down and hasn't gone as deep as he was early in the year. Add in the injuries, and no, I can't place him as a Cy Young worthy candidate ahead of Wang.
Schilling? No way, IMO. I don't see him in the top 10, in regards to productivity, although on name, he may get in there. He started off hot, but has really come down hard. I'd have Wang ahead of Rogers, although I could see it the other way. But the numbers are fairly similar across the board. Haven't looked at Haren's numbers recently, so I can't say. Last I checked Zito's numbers, they just weren't good overall. I believe the ERC was close to 4.4 or 4.5 last I checked. While ERC isn't everything, it's hard for me to justify giving the Cy Young to anyone that poor. He's a solid pitcher, who is the best FA pitcher, who will get a great contract, but the reality is, he's a number 2/3 type pitcher at this stage of his career.
Bonderman has pitched well, but the reality is that the Cy Young is part hype, and he just doesn't have it. There was that article today that hinted that Bonderman may get dealt, FYI.
And, are you sure about Wang's run support? I know it's not low, but I also doubt it's high. There's been numerous times this year when the Yankees failed to score more than 1 or 2 runs while he was in there. I have a hard time believing that he has high run support.
Deal?
Wang
Because
by abbreviatedman on Sep 5, 2006 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Time for Scott's Critique...
by yanksfan6129 on Sep 5, 2006 2:43 PM EDT reply actions
Here's the thing to remember
I'm not sure what his career is going to look like. I think it can look better than what John has there, and I'm not a Yankees fan. I'd look for the strikeouts to increase the next few years, to the point where he is perhaps averaging around 5 or so.
I guess the main purpose of the post is to remind people that Wang's sinker, while it is his bread and butter, isn't the only thing in his arsenal, provided he continues to develop consistency on his other pitches.
hhaahaha....pessimistic?
He is at best another Jake Westbrook, with a great line-up behind him.
by GSIZEMORE on Sep 5, 2006 3:01 PM EDT reply actions
just an intresting thought,
Wang
Wang's had a very nice year, and I could certainly see him hanging around, but his peripherals are unsustainable, in my opinion. At 26, I don't see him making the adjustments necessary to have the kind of career John's Crystal Ball suggests.
i agree
anybody remember nate cornejo?
re: cornejo
I think Wang is on par with Jake Westbrook IMO. But if you ask me is he closer to Derek Lowe or Cornejo, I'd easily say Lowe. CM Wang is much better than Cornejo.
by im not new on Sep 5, 2006 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions
re: lowe
by amos on Sep 5, 2006 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions
cornejo
on to cornejo. we remember him as the guy who got beaten like a red-headed stepchild for 3 of his four major league seasons, and for his tightrope act in 2003 that resulted in a 4.67 ERA despite a historically low 46 K's in 195 innings. but he used to be regarded as a top prospect, ranking #38 on the BP top 40 and #55 on the BA top 100 in 2002. he had a 94 mph sinking fastball that was regarded as his bread-and-butter pitch and he tore through AA and AAA at the age of 21 in 2001 (a better year than any minor league season of chien-ming wang). that year he K'ed 127 and walked 48 in 154 innings, decent but not great. it was only in the major leagues that his K rate fell through the floor.
anyway, my point is that everything about his profile is extremely similar to wang. the only reason he's not higher on wang's comparable list is that he was 3-4 years younger than wang at every level, since they are the same age and cornejo hit the majors in 2001. i just think there's a lesson to be learned here. you need to strike some guys out to succeed.
as has been observed by several others, jake westbrook strikes out about 50% more batters than wang, and derek lowe is also much better with the K. those aren't the closest comps. if wang can hike his K rate into the 4.5 to 5 per 9 range, then he can absolutely be a successful innings-eater. (note that neither westbrook nor lowe is really any better than that. westbrook had a very good 2004 and lowe was brilliant in 2002, but other than that they have been practically the definition of league average.) but i'm not sure he can. pitchers just don't significantly improve their K rates at the age of 26.
over the past two season wang's BIP have consisted of 64% ground balls, 21% fly balls, and 15% line drives. based on the aggregate BABIP for all of MLB of .276 on GB, .212 on FB, and .743 on LD, we would expect wang to have a BABIP of .333, which is a very high number (the league average is around .300, because fly balls are easier to turn into outs). but wang's actual BABIP was .265 last year and .284 this year. this is really the part that is unsustainable.
i actually think the closest comp to wang among recent pitchers is one of my favorite hurlers, carlos silva. unfortunately, he's also one of the worst starting pitchers in the american league, despite a better K rate and much much better walk rate than wang (admittedly a worse GB%, but still quite a GB pitcher). last year silva had a very good season, extremely similar to wang's 2006, with a normal-looking .292 BABIP. unfortunately it was normal only for pitchers with normal GB/FB rates--silva is giving up hits on 33% of balls in play this year, much more in line with his batted ball types. and as you all know, he's getting torched. (the home runs haven't helped either, but even with a low HR rate he'd still have a component ERA near 6.)
Excellent Post.
The second thing is to see whether any pitchers DO dramatically increase their K rate at a "late" age, like 26. I'm thinking of Doug Davis, in particular, and am checking his stats right now...
...
... and I'm back. He did increase his K rate, which had never been above 6 K/9 IP before '04, when it jumped to 7.21. It then went up to 8.41 in '05, when he finished third in total Ks. It has decreased to 6.78 so far this year, lower certainly but also still higher than any of his old highs in K/9.
Perhaps someone can tell me what happened to Doug Davis? Did he add a pitch? Improve his command later in his career? Did he recover from an earlier injury (59.2 IP in '02, 109.1 IP in '03, full years since then)? Did he come back from a surgery stronger than before? Was he all roided up for two years, with biceps the size of tree trunks and balls the size of marbles?
Also, despite my example of Doug Davis and my question of whether there are any examples of sustainable low BABIPs with extreme GB tendencies, I'm in the "it's only downhill from here for my Wang" camp.
by abbreviatedman on Sep 6, 2006 1:21 AM EDT up reply actions
Response
As I said, Cornejo had two good months in 2003 then was already regressing towards the mean in a major way by June. He finished with 40 more Hits allowed than IP. Let's also remember that his success was in the AL Central back before that division's recent renaissance. Wang on the other hand has been improving statistically as the season has progressed. He also plays in a very tough AL East - albiet he doesn't have to face the Yankee lineup =)
Re: Silva
Ditto Silva on the AL Central point. Also, even in his good seasons, Silva has never been able to limit home runs to the extent that Wang has. He's also never been better than middle of the pack in LD% among qualifiers. Silva is a one trick pony like Wang. Sinker, Sinker, Sinker. But I've watched 5 of his starts this year. The guy is a mess. He can't get his ball to sink. He leaves it up consistently. That's why his BABIP stinks this year. It's not a simple matter of law of averages catching upto him on BABIP. It's a matter of him being a mess this year. I will concede that if Wang ever just loses his command of his sinker like Silva has he will stink. But you could say that about alot of pitchers in the league if they lost their fastball command. (Side note: being a 'sinker baller' for an astro turf team hasn't done Silva any favors over the years either).
Re: Comps to Lowe's K-rate
Let's remember Lowe is in the National League. The only website I've found that displays Pitchers vs Batter matchup data is ESPN.com. And I can't look up Lowe vs all batters at once. It forces me to look at him vs one team at a time. That's too tedious for me to put together a comprehensive report. But scanning the data he's fanned pitchers like Smoltz, Capuano, Carpenter and Petitte numerous times this year. Generally at a 30-50% clip. So he gets a nice boost there. The gap b/w Lowe and Wang is a little overstated.
Re: improve at age 26
"pitchers just don't significantly improve their K rates at the age of 26."
I do respect your opinion. You seem to put alot of thought and research into it. But it is a pet peeve of mine when people try to put every player neatly into a certain box and stereotype them. Wang came from Tapei at age 20. Also, according to baseballcube, he did not pitch his age 21 season (IIRC due to injury). He's got to assimilate to American culture/language, adapt to a much higher level of competition (Tapei colleges can't be baseball hotbeds), recover from arm injury... this isn't a Dominican or American H.S. draftee thats been in pro ball from ages 18-26. I think it's reasonable that he not be held to the same rigid expectations timelines.
I think people really take Age-relative-to-league too seriously. It's a tool for putting things into context. But it isn't an absolute. Look at the Hafner crystal ball - Pronk repeated the Sally and was still in A-ball at age 23. I have a similar problem with the whole "he's a short RHP, so he is an injury waiting to happen" stereotype going on in the Lincecum diary but thats a rant for another time.
If Brett Myers can increase his K-rate substantially at age 25 by adding a pitch (cut fastball) to his repertoire why can't a player like Wang can't modestly improve at age 27?
by im not new on Sep 6, 2006 5:24 AM EDT up reply actions
reply
derek lowe pitches in the NL, but if you adjust for league then his translated K/9 the last four years have been 4.8, 5.0, 5.3 and 4.6 this year. wang's two seasons have been 3.0 and 3.7. i don't think it's a small difference, but as you say, it may be overstated due to the difference between leagues.
you definitely caught me on "pitchers don't improve their K rate at 26." i was being sloppy. what i meant was, most pitchers don't improve their K rate at 26. so if wang is going to do it, then he'll have to continue to fall outside of normal pitcher classifications. nobody is saying he can't do it. i just feel like the odds are stacked against him.
then again, he's obviously pretty unique, as evidence by this community's inability to come up with any particularly comparable pitchers. like i said, it's going to be really interesting to see what happens.
Re: Silva
As I've mentioned, I watched him five times this year. The amount of pitchers that ended up belt high or higher was awful. He's got zero consistency and everything comes in around the same velo. Sometimes you really need to see players play and not just interpret data.
by im not new on Sep 6, 2006 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Reponse - part 2
"over the past two season wang's BIP have consisted of 64% ground balls, 21% fly balls, and 15% line drives. based on the aggregate BABIP for all of MLB of .276 on GB, .212 on FB, and .743 on LD, we would expect wang to have a BABIP of .333, which is a very high number (the league average is around .300, because fly balls are easier to turn into outs). but wang's actual BABIP was .265 last year and .284 this year. this is really the part that is unsustainable."
I can't justify this with data at the moment. But my intuition would suggest that the top echelon of truly skilled sinker ballers can achieve a little better GB BABIP than that average of .276 without it being pure luck. I doubt that all ground balls are created equal. Some guys are just better at sawing you off or getting batters to roll over on outside pitches.
I guess thats one of my problems with BABIP. Trying to suggest that every pitcher is average and all divergence is luck. If some pitchers can be better at getting swing and misses than the average pitcher I'm not sure why it's so hard to believe that some might be better at inducing weak contact than the average...
by im not new on Sep 6, 2006 5:47 AM EDT up reply actions
BABIP
i would very much like to see somebody study this. i honestly don't think all ground balls are created equal either. i only broke down batted balls into their 3 types because the data is there, and surely all ground balls are created "more equal" (animal farm, anybody?) than all batted balls, so this must be an improvement.
I guess thats one of my problems with BABIP. Trying to suggest that every pitcher is average and all divergence is luck. If some pitchers can be better at getting swing and misses than the average pitcher I'm not sure why it's so hard to believe that some might be better at inducing weak contact than the average...
it's not hard to believe at all! in fact for decades everybody believed it. then voros mccracken did a study and showed that if "inducing weak contact" is a skill, then it shows up very very weakly in year-to-year correlations. that's the only reason people talk about BABIP today, because of voros's study and his DIPS theory. DIPS has gone through some revision in the past few years (knuckleballers and some lefties seem to have a limited but definite ability to induce weak contact, but for most pitchers the noise is much much stronger than the signal), but it seems to still be consistent with the available data, so people are willing to trust it.
re: DIPS
I believe there are small #s of pitchers that induce weak contact more often. So small it doesn't disprove the theory on aggregate but the ability could exist. Like I said in the previous paragraph, I don't really believe all ground balls are created equal. Intuitively it seems to me that if a guy's sinker can be so good that it severely limits Line Drives it's likely making some grounders into weaker grounders as well. If this happens, which i suspect it does, i think that pitcher can sustain a GB BABIP a little better than league average w/o it just being luck.
by im not new on Sep 6, 2006 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Stuff wise
The question is
because
As a Ranger fan, this reminds me a little of Ryan Drese. Another sinkerball pitcher with poor peripherals who enjoyed brief success in his mid-late 20's.
umm
I think this is a little to optimistic in the "numbers" colum, but dead on in the wins, look at that lineup, and its the yankees. I see him getting hit hard next season, then rebounding in 2008.. DK about 2009 i believe even though he is a ground ball pitcher that the new park will have an effect.
I think...
Infield D
Take a look again
by SirCaptain on Sep 6, 2006 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions
Wang
by MPK on Sep 5, 2006 11:27 PM EDT reply actions
stuff -> strikeouts
Impressions left by Wang
(This was entirely too much fun.)
Less than a week ago...
Initial post:
I broke out the historical database, and found a lot of reasonable comps to Wang, but none since 1994, when a 25-year-old Ricky Bones went 10-9 for Milwaukee in 170.2 IP. His K9 and W9 were 3.0 and 2.4, respectively. Wang's are 3.0 and 2.3 now. He had a 3.43 ERA, while Wang has a 3.69 ERA. [A caveat is that a 3.43 ERA in 1994 isn't as good as a 3.69 ERA in 2006, due to different eras.] Bones never had a season over .500 after that. His career ERA was 4.85 in 1278.3 IP.
Is this Wang's fate?
=> Then, after someone noted that Bones wasn't the same sort of groundballer, ...
No, but after you made this reply, I added a screen for HR% to get rid of some of the Ricky Bones types. That left me with 34 post-war seasons matching these criteria:
K9 < 3.3
W9 between 2.0 and 3.0
HR9 < 0.6
100+ IP
27 of those 34 seasons involved allowing 8.5 H9 or higher, as might be expected.
Interestingly, if you consider W/L, Bob Stanley's 15-win (vs 2 losses) relief pitching season at age 23 (141.2 IP) makes for an intriguing comparison. Stanley struck out only 2.4/9 ip, but was remarkably effective, logging a 2.60 ERA in what was then possibly the best hitter's park in the game. Stanley had a reasonable career, apparently getting MVP votes in 3 seasons, making 2 All-star games, and getting CY votes in 2 seasons (how he finished 15th in MVP voting without getting any CY votes in 1983 is beyond me). That said, Wang's not a reliever.
The thing about most of the comparable seasons are that they are by older pitchers whose "stuff" has degraded, but still "know how to pitch". Are there "young pitcher skills" and "old pitcher skills", too? :)
FWIW, I wasn't really trying to rip Wang... he intrigues me, and despite hating the Yankees, I root for him just because I think there's something to be learned from studying players who buck the usually assumed "success formula" (I used to like Sid Fernandez, too, and I don't like the Mets either... he was an extreme flyballer who didn't throw all that hard, and he was virtually unhittable some years). Someone responded with this tidbit when I posted the same Wang data in a SOM forum...
"(Funny that you mention Bones '94: in a league where we drafted 8 teams from a pool of 9, he was the all-time single-season win champ, with 10 wins in 60 games!)"
wang's photo
by yuhsuan0124 on Sep 8, 2006 8:09 AM EDT reply actions
If there's anything the Internets are good for
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
