Thoughts on Mat Latos

by John Sickels on May 27, 2025 8:00 PM EDT Comment 13 comments

More photos » Pablo Martinez Monsivais - AP

San Diego Padres starting pitcher Mat Latos (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

Thoughts on Mat Latos

I was set to do a big thing on Mat Latos today, but then I remembered thatI already did one back in February and frankly don't have much to add to it.

So far this year, Latos is 4-3, 3.09 in nine starts with a 42/12 K/BB in 55.1 innings, 43 hits allowed, ETA+ 119. The biggest difference between this year and last year has been improved control. His K/IP and H/IP marks are almost the same, but he's cut his walk rate in half compared to 2009. His FIP has dropped from 4.72 to 3.88.

My assessment from February still stands. If Latos stays healthy, he can be a number one or two starter. I just don't know that he'll stay healthy long-term, but we will see.

1 recs | Comment 13 comments | Add comment

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Is is the general assumption that the Padres won the deal if Latos becomes a #1

Personally, I think so…

by lakersdodgersyankees4life on May 27, 2025 8:03 PM EDT reply actions

What deal?

They did not trade for him, the drafted him. If you’re talking about the $1.25 million investment, according to fangraphs, he has already been worth $2.5 mil just this year.

by lions1 on May 27, 2025 10:10 PM EDT up reply actions

oh wow, my bad

I was thinking of Clayton Richard… haha oops…

by lakersdodgersyankees4life on May 27, 2025 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions

they won that deal too

by matthewmafa on May 28, 2025 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions

On a side note John...

Although FIP is fairly predictive of a player’s performance, it should not really be used and, instead, should be replaced by xFIP. A pitcher has no real control over his HR/FB and a pitcher’s FIP can be wildly misleading in one direction or another (whether he has gotten lucky or unlucky). xFIP adjusts for this variable (I believe it assumes the league average) and seems to be a more accurate predictor of future performance.

In this case, his HR/FB has actually been about league average (which is somewhat surprising to me seeing as he plays at Petco which is known to suppress homeruns), so it doesnt make too much of a difference.

by lions1 on May 27, 2025 10:20 PM EDT reply actions

home runs

I want to see evidence that a pitcher has no control over his HR/FB rate. I have not read the most recent research on that, but intuitively it sounds like utter bunk. Please show me the research.

by John Sickels on May 27, 2025 10:40 PM EDT up reply actions

I don’t think it’s utter bunk. We know that hitters have a lot of control over their HR/FB rates, and that is intuitive. The stronger the hitter is, the farther he can hit the ball. Classic examples are Adam Dunn, Albert Pujols, etc. These are batters that routinely hit homeruns on 20% of their fly balls. Now we also have players on the other end of the spectrum. Chone Figgins (3%), Jason Kendall (1.6%), etc. These players are usually ones that hit lots of groundballs, but, when they do hit fly balls, they very rarely go out of the park. From information like this, it’s fairly obvious that batters have control over how many home runs they hit.

On the flip side, looking at all types of pitchers, most have a HR/FB career rate between 8.5% and 10.5%. Unlike HR/FB rates for batters, which are extremely statistically significant (as evidenced by the difference between the 3% HR/FB rate of the Chone Figgins types and the 20% HR/FB rate of Adam Dunn types), the 2% difference here does not seem to be so significant. Even if we assume that it does have some significance, park factors play a huge role. Up until recently, someone might have said that Jake Peavy was fairly good at keeping balls in the park (about 9.4%), but moving to Chicago and their home run inflating stadium shows just how much a park can factor into a pitcher’s HR/FB ratio (of course, SSS).

Here are some links. Although I doubt it will thoroughly convince you, I hope it makes you rethink your initial reaction… at least for a little bit. This is just a little bit of research on a topic that obviously needs to be delved into quite a bit further but I also do not think that there is much research that shows all pitchers do in fact have control over their HR/FB rate.

http://saberlibrary.com/pitching/hrs/

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/fantasy/article/using-fip-to-evaluate-pitchers-i-wouldnt/

http://fantasybaseballadvantage.blogspot.com/2010/02/predicting-hrfb-rates.html

by lions1 on May 28, 2025 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions

There are certainly some guys that have a measure of control over HR/FB

And the difference in correlation between FIP and xFIP is only borderline statistically significant. Yeah xFIP is probably a better measure for the entire population of pitchers, but it does so at the expense of relevant data for a number of guys. This really isn’t an either/or scenario. Just look at both and then draw your own conclusions.

by nixa37 on May 28, 2025 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions

xFIP is best used in a major league setting only

The talent disparity is less in the MLB than it is the minor leagues making it easier to apply batted ball based metrics. Certain things such as LD % being around 20-22% and the HR/FB % being between 8-11 are based off of this.

In the minors, there is a greater variety of player talent among the teams. You would need to calculate a HR/FB ratio for each league level. However, a great deal of year to year variance would still exist due to a number of variable. For example, slap hitting MILB defensive specialists who do not hit many line drives or have any HR/FB rate of note will go up and down each year(ex Oswaldo Navarro and Argenis Diaz). Also, slugging heavy/poor contact types who can’t cut it in the MLB along the lines of Mitch Jones and Mike Hessman will also vary. This does not include organisational moves where you might have a A-ball talent organisational player taking AAA ABs due to injury crises.

The same talent variation exists with pitchers. This is why you can never take MILB batted ball profiles or BABIP too seriously. You can argue that there are signs that regression for BABIP or HR/FB will occurr, but it is much less of a solid argument than with MLB data.

by tdot mariner fan on May 28, 2025 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions

I agree with John that a pitcher has some control over HRs

If he has good stuff(Im thinking Kershaw last year), he will get weak contact and his FBs will usually not go out. Hell, many of them didnt leave the infield.

Now, you could say he cant control what park he plays in, but if you are getting weak contact because your stuff is good, you can control your HRs to some extent, IMO

by lakersdodgersyankees4life on May 27, 2025 10:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Some places include infield fly balls when they calculate HR/FB rates. Pitchers can definitely influence their infield fly rates, like your example in Kershaw (his infield hit numbers are insane), so in places where they use infield flys in the HR/FB calculation the pitcher will have some influence.

I think the research on outfield flies, though, shows pitchers don’t have much control over it.

by oplaid on May 28, 2025 2:04 AM EDT up reply actions

Latos

is really, really good. He reminds me of AJ Burnett, except he seems to get how to pitch more than Burnett did at a young age. His breaking ball is just nasty…

by SenorGato on May 28, 2025 1:01 AM EDT reply actions

Latos

has great stuff. I love how well he’s limited walks this year.

His K/9 is a tad low right now, and his delivery sort of worries me. Being a Padres fan, I am excited to see him for years to come. Maybe he and Castro could make a nice 1/2 in the near future.

by walnut falcons on May 28, 2025 2:29 PM EDT reply actions