Can Gee keep this up?
First things first. As you may or may not know, I’m new to TRDM. My name is Kirk and I’ve been added to the TRDM team to contribute to the Sabermetric side of the blog. I’m a huge Mets fan who was born and raised in NYC. I’ve really taken to Sabermetrics the past few years and my goal is to provide analysis that will both satisfy the Sabermetric crowd and also help convert some traditionalists. My opinion is that EVERYTHING has evolved in the past 100 years so why shouldn’t the way we quantify what we see on a baseball field? Sabermetrics themselves are not a perfect science and they continue to evolve as well. However I still feel they are far and away more accurate than old school statistics. Anyway I hope you like what I bring to the table and I’m thrilled to be a part of this.
I don’t think anyone would have guessed that at this point in the season Dillon Gee would lead the Mets in wins. I’ll also go out on a limb and say I don’t think anyone thought he would be 7-0 and have the lowest ERA amongst Mets starters. While that’s all well and good, one has to wonder if Gee can sustain this success. Before I begin throwing stats at you I’m going to preface this by saying that I don’t think Gee can sustain his current numbers. I don’t think thats too controversial of a stance either. However, I do think Gee can be a solid back-end of the rotation starter provided he continues to work on the things he needs to improve. Because while there’s a few things you have to like about what Gee has done there’s certainly some things that he hasn’t done well.
The Good:
The first thing I notice when looking at Gee’s stats is that he has scrapped his slider almost entirely. After throwing it 15.4% of the time in 2010, he’s throwing it just 3.8% of the time thus far in 2011. Gee has instead heavily favored his changeup, throwing it an incredible 29% of the time. According to FanGraphs Pitch Type Value his changeup rates 4.7 runs above average, making it his best pitch for the second year running (4.2 in 2010). Obviously it’s a good idea to use your best pitch more often.
Gee has also done a good job of inducing ground balls, which are statistically the best way to get an out. He’s gotten hitters to hit the ball on the grass 48.6% of the time. That’s a nice rate when you consider that the MLB average is 43.2%.
He’s getting hitters to swing at bad pitches. Although we’re talking small sample sizes, in 33 IP in 2010 batters swung at 29% of pitches outside the zone. In 2011 that number has risen to 34.2% (MLB average is 31.1%). Perhaps his increased use of his changeup has been the reason for this improvement.
The Bad:
He’s been lucky. Whether its his BABIP (.244 for Gee, .297 MLB avg) or his fielding independent adjusted ERA’s (3.59 FIP, 3.91 xFIP, 3.62 tERA), all signs point to defense, ballpark and just pure luck helping Gee’s traditional numbers. The BABIP is slightly troubling so a regression is ERA should be expected.
(Note: For those of you who are new to Sabermetrics- FIP,xFIP and tERA are ways of measuring a pitchers performance similar to ERA. These numbers try to equate ERA in a way that removes any good/bad luck provided by defense and ballpark factors. All three stats are slightly different and incorporate different variables. xFIP is a good way to predict a pitchers future performance while tERA is best for determining how a pitcher has actually pitched so far.)
Gee doesn’t throw enough strikes. While earlier I told you that Gee has been successful at getting hitters to chase pitches outside the zone, that isn’t likely to carry forward. Hitters will take notice and make adjustments. Which means Gee will have to adjust by hitting his spots in the zone more consistently. So far Gee has thrown 39.3% of his pitches inside the strikezone. That’s slightly below the league average of 41.5%. More troubling is that he’s managed to throw just 39.5% of first pitch strikes. That’s well below the league average of 44.6%. Getting behind hitters leads to fatter pitches later in at-bats and more walks, obviously.
In summation, I think my inital forecast for Gee holds true. While he is certainly pitching above his head, there’s no reason to think he can’t be a solid 4 or 5 starter in an MLB rotation. Most of his other metrics and rates have stayed pretty consistent and don’t raise any red flags. whether or not he sustains success at the major league level will depend on how he adjusts to hitters, who will certainly adjust to the things Gee has done to get them out so far. Things like throwing more strikes (good strikes) and walking less batters will go a long way to making himself a mainstay in an MLB rotation.
12 comments
stickguy
6/15/2011-12:19pm at 12:19 pm (UTC -4)
you are what your numbers say you are. Just gotta decide which numbers you want to look at.
But, he is getting up to a pretty large sample size which says that he is an effective ML pitcher. And while he might not keep his ERA quite so low forever, it certainly seems reasonable that he can continue to be a viable, relaible ML pitcher.
also, some of the % stats can be looked at both ways. Pitchers make adjustemnts too. So, if guys keep swinging at balls out of the zone, keep throwing them there.
If he can end up being the rick reed clone that many people predict, that would be a huge return from a 20 something round draft pick. Hell, they have already gotten more than their moneys worth out of him!
metsfan4decades
6/15/2011-12:53pm at 12:53 pm (UTC -4)
You won’t have to convert me, Kirk but I definitely need the sabermertrics education. Math is not exactly my strong suit. I get the basics but when I start seeing formulas to calculate things such as BABIP my eyes kind of glaze over. LOL.
As a Met fan who started following the team as a kid in ’68 and who understandably grew up with nothing more than BA, ERA and Wins/Losses, I find these new stats fascinating, even if I don’t always understand them all. For instance, I get the concept of looking at a pitcher’s W/L record is probably the worst way to evaluate his talent. So I’m glad to see you started out here with Gee’s success so far this season.
I liked what I saw from Gee last Sep and in ST. I couldn’t help but wonder though if he could sustain his recent success. All early scouting reports indicated he was really nothing special and I don’t think anyone thinks he’s a top of the rotation type of pitcher.
If I’m reading this correctly though, his willingness or intelligence to constantly work on his craft to get better (for instance changeup vs. his slider) and his high ground ball rate is part of what accounts for his early success this season. And dang it, since you’ve concluded a part of that success so far has been luck and getting hitters to chase bad pitches (especially since he doesn’t throw a lot of first pitch strikes), I can only hope Gee is crafty enough to make the necessary adjustments as hitters catch on. I noticed the tendency to give up the long ball but so far, they’ve been of the solo variety since he doesn’t often have men on base when that happens.
Given his age, his demeanor and the fact that he doesn’t take anything for granted (heck, he and his wife are still living in a hotel so I have to assume even he’s surprised at his success so far), it would great if Gee could be a back end of the rotation on this staff for a few years to come.
One thing that both impresses and bothers me though is he’s apparently pitching with a partially torn labrum. Wonder how long that will hold up?
stickguy
6/15/2011-1:00pm at 1:00 pm (UTC -4)
the labrum does not seem to really be an issue. It was apparantly a minor rip, and has been fine for a while after rehab. So don’t think it is something that is always 1 pitch away from blowing apart!
for the saber stuff, best not to “look behind the curtain”. If you understand the concept and the purpose, and believe the basis is sound, then you can look at the result and apply it as you see fit (same as with any “old fashioned” stat).
Unless of course you are from bayonne, in which case anything saber is the devil’s spawn, and the ruination of baseball. Use your eyes, damnit, not some new fangled mumbo-jumbo math nonsense.
metsfan4decades
6/15/2011-3:21pm at 3:21 pm (UTC -4)
hahaha – you’ve got him down pat.
Although in my case, it was ‘you chicks just like Wright b/c of how he looks shirtless. Try getting your face out of a saber book sometime’.
Kirk_C
6/15/2011-4:14pm at 4:14 pm (UTC -4)
Surely it isn’t all luck, and that was part of my point. Part of it can be Gee adjusting to hitters. I love the fact that he’s started working on a cutter. Not only because it shows he’s willing to work on his craft, but also because it’s a pitch I think EVERY pitcher should use.
metsfan4decades
6/15/2011-7:09pm at 7:09 pm (UTC -4)
That story of him working on his cutter and almost immediately incorporating it in his bag of tricks is why I’m thinking he’ll stick around quite awhile. –If not here with the Mets, probably would be a nice additional to many SP staffs.
Kirk_C
6/15/2011-9:30pm at 9:30 pm (UTC -4)
I think Gee can certainly have a long successful career. The Rick Reed comparisons seem on par. Never going to blow you away, but gives you innings and keeps you in games.
gategem
6/15/2011-3:43pm at 3:43 pm (UTC -4)
Welcome Kirk glad to have you aboard. The mathematics behind the curtain so to speak has been around for over 80 years. What was lacking beyond an understanding was mostly the tools to take advantage of these concepts.
As mf4d has pointed out Gee’s apparent intelligence and willingness to learn and adjust could portend well for the future. However he reminds me quite a bit of Brian Bannister so it’s possible he has a similar career.
stickguy
6/15/2011-4:50pm at 4:50 pm (UTC -4)
you don’t have to have “filthy” stuff. average is plenty, if you have control, and know how to pitch.
Glavine won a lot of games for a lot of years with decidedly average stuff, and not that big of a variety of it.
Kirk_C
6/15/2011-4:59pm at 4:59 pm (UTC -4)
Tom Glavine was a Hall of Fame pitcher with great control.
My point isn’t to knock Gee or say that he can’t improve. He can improve yet still see his numbers slip a bit just based on some luck factors. You can’t explain a .244 BABIP in any other way then to say he’s been somewhat lucky. Here’s a look at the top 5 pitchers (by WAR) and how they fared in BABIP.
1. Cliff Lee .287
2. Roy Halladay .290
3. Justin Verlander .286
4. Josh Johnson .297
5. Ubaldo Jimenez .271
stickguy
6/15/2011-5:07pm at 5:07 pm (UTC -4)
one key difference: those are all higher K guys. BABIP should be higher for them.
so sure, Gee could be all luck, or a combination of throwing stuff that guys aren’t getting good swings on. That is where scouting comes in.
if he is getting smoked with balls drilled right at people, luck.
If he consistantly generates pop ups or weak ground balls, good pitching.
The average is probably somewhere in the middle.
Kirk_C
6/15/2011-6:14pm at 6:14 pm (UTC -4)
I never said he was all luck. I just think some of his stats are due for a correction, and not necessarily a large one. His LD% has been on the rise over his last 3-4 starts.
Also almost half his starts have been against bad offensive teams like Washington, Pittsburgh (2x) and Houston.
My point here isn’t to knock Gee. I think he’s a really solid pitcher as I wrote in my post. I just know how some fans expectations can go through the roof with a fast start. Brian Bannister was a good example. Or offensively Jeff Duncan comes to mind. When he came up and got off to a hot start people were talking like it was gonna be him and Reyes atop the order for 5-7 years.