Cite small samples all you want if it makes you feel better. The incontrovertible fact is that over large samples, the correlation between FIP and RA9 wins is 0.96, meaning that for a simple metric that uses only 3 variables, FIP is able to explain 96% of pitcher results over the long haul. If you want to be a good pitcher in the major leagues over a long period, then you generally must have a good FIP. There are some notable exceptions, but they are notable precisely b/c they are so rare. (And of course, Matt Harrison isn't one of the exceptions. He didn't outperform his FIP last year, and he's doing so this year only b/c of a low BABIP with men on base (luck over a small sample)).

Unless you can explain why Matt Harrison will continue to have a much lower BABIP with men on base than without, this is all subterfuge. Smoke and mirrors. You aren't fooling anyone with this nonsense.

We know the following with no hesitation.

1. FanGraph's gurus and other reasonable Sabermetricians concede FIP utterly FLOPS with some pitchers.

2. Since there are epic FIPFLOPs, logic dictates that there are FIPFARTS, instances where FIP isn't an epic failure but merely an oopsy disappointment.

2. In 2012 FIP made a nose-dive in expressing the performance of 3 Ranger pitchers-- that's a 25% failure rate. 25% of the time FIP earned a failing grade.

3. Jon Daniels sure knows the difference between Harrison and the dual failures (Feldman and Oswalt). Ron Washington sure knows the difference. The fans sure know the difference. Future contracts will certainly express the difference (if Scott or Roy can even find one). But FIP? FIP was a metric shitting its shorts telling us Ozzy and Feldy were just fine and that Harry was average! How clueless.

As I have said before, FIP and its derivatives are generally in the vicinity...maybe 90% of the time. But when a performer like Harrison crushes the FIP formula two years in a row...it's time to hit the stop button, and kill the circus music.

FIP was great for 8-10 years. An interesting oddity. It helped in a clumsy sort of way. By comparison NEXTGEN is going to make these FIPCentric metrics look like a creation of Lloyd Christmas.

It's time to learn new software, RFAN...or die with dinos.

For those of you that seek precision in your analysis...consider Hit/FX...

One example? Two years of league wide statistics reveal the following:
Batters hit .158 on any ball with a speed less than 80 mph in the 12-degree plane.
But they hit .497 on balls hit harder than 80 mph.

Measure the speed and trajectory of the batted ball...and you will discern true stars from wannabes...whether we are talking hitters or pitchers.

When real illumination arrives...insipid little flashlights like FIP... won't matter at all.

"In 2012 FIP made a nose-dive in expressing the performance of 3 Ranger pitchers-- that's a 25% failure rate."

FIP and ERA don't match up over small samples. If they did, they would be the same stat. That's the whole point of having FIP as a stat. It factors out a lot of luck and defense, which can affect ERA over small samples, but which have less of an effect on long run ERA.

"But when a performer like Harrison crushes the FIP formula two years in a row"

Harrison didn't outperform his FIP last year. He's done it this year only and that's b/c he has a BABIP that is 20 points lower with men on base than without. Unless you can explain why you think he'll continue to supress his BABIP with men on base, you're just avoiding the issue.

Why do you people think HitF/x will ever be released to the public?

Taylor asks, "Why do you people think HitF/x will ever be released to the public?"

The company that created Hit/FX is called SportsVision. As their name implies they create design graphics and animation for broadcast and the web. Their partner is MLBAM, the group that handles web design for all the Major League teams and produces MLB TV.

Given that SportsVision takes statistical imagery and turns it into visual design for public consumption...and they already released Pitch F/X to the public...it's a good bet that this is the plan for Hit/FX, Fielding FX and Command FX.

It's certainly possible they've completely changed their business model and corporate objectives. I haven't seen anything to suggest that.

Whatever you do, if you do anything.......Keep doing it. Your sportswriting career stops here.

Hi, my name is S, and I don't understand what these people are talking about, so I'm just gonna troll.

Hey, just here to pay homage to the most epic thread of the 2012 baseball season.

Carry on.

"and may it live forever, while we all rot in hell"

Wow. Just...wow.

Yu Darvish is the answer. I don't care about the question.

I wonder what Harrison's extension offer will look like.

4-years, $36 million seem fair for both sides?

I defer to thesex incarnate known as "Mike G" . I dont even care what he said. He could say Face is Jesus and I would nod in agreement for he would not lead us astray...

Wait, what?

The inception of Face occurred many, many years ago, on a stormy and hellish planet called LV-426. The Rangers front office was doing some intergalactic scouting when news arose that the Blue Jays had serious interest in Esteban Loiza. So while discussing a trade with Toronto, Texas received notice from the Blue Jays that a minor league player by the name of Michael Young would more than likely be their best offer. So the Rangers' scouting department made the arduous odyssey to the darkest reaches of space, leading them to LV-426, where Michael Young was rumored to be playing.

Upon landing, the Rangers learned that this was no ordinary planet. Devoid of sunlight and life, the Ranger scouts were certain that they had landed on the wrong planet, when suddenly a scout screamed, "Hey, look over there!" Standing ominously in the distance was a massive ship with the Blue Jays logo painted on the side, along with a skull. One scout thought out loud, that "this must be their indoor facility. Young has to be in there". So the scouts made their way upon the rocky terrain towards the giant Blue Jays ship. Upon entry, the ship was dark and dead, so the scouts decided to split up in search of Young. One scout found a strange hole through the floor of the ship, it looked very much like the kind of hole that a flopping third baseman leaves behind when attempting to dive for a groundball. The scout then fastened a rope around his waist in order to parallel to the bottom to investigate what was beneath the hole. While descending, the scout lost his balance and tumbled aimlessly, violently landing on the floor with a crashing thud. After regaining his senses, the scout lifted his head from the ground and looked around the room. A mere 10 feet from the scout was a strange, leathery object, covered in moisture. The object looked like a giant baseball glove, but it was no ordinary glove: It glittered like gold and was covered in dust, but more importantly than anything else, the glove palpated much like a heart; it was alive. The scout neared the object slowly. Suddenly, the glove-like object hissed open, as its top spread apart much like a squid before devouring its prey. The scout continued forward cautiously as without warning, a fetal Michael Young flew forward like a striking snake, landing on the scout's face and grasping his arms and legs around the scout's head. Hearing the commotion, the other scouts went to investigate. They were shocked at this discovery. Michael Young was literally attached to the scout's face, much like the teeth of a bear trap around an ankle. Alarmed, the scouts attempted to pull Young away, but with every tug, Young's grasp simply grew tighter. Concerned for the safety of their fellow scout, the scouts sent the "OK" to the front office, and the trade was completed.

Years later, it was learned that the scout was actually the physical embodiment of the Texas Rangers franchise, and that Young was clinging on, thusly earning the nickname, Face. It wasn't until the height of his stay in Texas that a cure was found. All the front office ever had to do was threaten Young's playing time, and in response, Young's grip upon the franchise would ease ever so slightly, and he would demand a new franchise to cling to. To this day, a trade has yet to be completed, and Young continues to cling to the franchise like a proverbial xenomorph hatchling, but his days are numbered, as the Rangers plan to sever Young's sustenance after the 2013 season. Michael Young's days are finally outnumbered.

8 dollar d dollar.

Some of the posts on this page...reflect why I won't be posting much until proper forum software comes to bbtia.

It's sad that a single lunatic finds pleasure in being an ass.

Praise brotha Mike G! Amen!

Profar old friend, what/who has offended you?

Txball writes, "Profar old friend, what/who has offended you?"

I like to know that when I see Txball as the signature of a post...that it's for real. I want to know---before I ready a massive post by a guy calling himself "Mike G"...that it is indeed the work of Mike G.

Real forum software removes uncertainty... It kills fraud posts. And it doesn't require the water-boarding intrinsic to Craptcha.

Joey is making plenty of money on this site. He can afford to add true forum software.

I will no longer donate much of my writing and time to this site until it's fixed. Nor, I'd suggest, should anyone else.

Perhaps you weren't listening when Joey talked about the limitations of adding an actual forum to this site. If I remember correctly, adding a forum would probably entail moving to a new blog software package. Obviously I'd be happier if we had a more full-featured forum, but switching posts from one blog software package to another usually isn't easy, nor is it always feasible if you want to maintain permance of the URLs to your current articles, and you certainly don't want to just throw out years of quality content, much of which is still useful for reference.

I expect that Joey has given more thought to this than you realize, but it may just not be worth the effort, if it's possible at all. If you're dead-set on a new forum, perhaps you might propose one off-site and see if some cooperative effort can be made. Knowing the limitations of the current site, this is probably more constructive than bitching.

In the course of this thread I argued that as Harrison has crushed his critics...so NextGen Saber is going to turn much of recent sabermetric thinking into irrelevant dust.

I'm a little late to notice, but on Oct 30, Steve Staude introduced a new way to better explain a pitcher's BABIP. As I suggested this new one is based on hit/FX and is called xBABIP.

http://www.fangraphs.com/community/index.php/proejcting-babip-using-batted-ball-data/

At it's heart the formula states:
"about 40% or more of the difference in pitchers’ BABIPs can be explained by two factors that are independent of their team’s defense: how often batters hit infield fly balls and line drives off of them."

The baseball season won't be here for awhile . You've got the time. Check it out!

This is an excellent article. Thanks for posting it.

That said, it has very little to do with the debate about Matt Harrison. As you know, Harrison's ERA (bWAR) outperformed his FIP (fWAR) in 2012. As I've explained numerous times in this thread, the reason for this was not due simply to generalized success on batted balls. Harrison had a BABIP of .284 in 2012, which was only slightly better than the MLB avg. among starters (.294). The reason Harrison outperformed his FIP in 2012 was his success in stranding runners. He had a 79% strand rate, which according to Fangraphs, translated into 2 additional bWAR and explains most of the difference between Harrison's fWAR and bWAR.

Why was Harrison so successful in stranding runners in 2012 when he has never had similar success in any other season? As I've also explained many times, Harrison had a BABIP of .260 with men in scoring position. Some may believe that in 2012, Harrison discovered some magical way to shave 25 points off his BABIP but only when there are men in scoring position. I myself conclude that Harrison experienced BABIP luck over a small sample. Time will tell.

No one has yet to explain why I should conclude that Harrison will continue to post a .260 BABIP with men in scoring position. Unless you can do that, you aren't advancing the ball on this debate. In other words, until we have more data, this debate is at a stand still.

A standstill? Two years of premium Harrison performance is moving this debate forward inexorably. Of course he can't pitch in January...so in that sense we are on hold.

RFan, I appreciate what you are saying about the strand rate and the challenges of repeating in '13. Perhaps he won't repeat that particular metric! What's interesting is that in 2011 Harrison put up scintillating results *without* that foxy (lucky?) strand rate.

This guy keeps finding ways to amaze his fans and confound his critics.

Let's not forget to congratulate Matt for winning the Ranger's 2012 Organizational Best Pitcher (yeah, I know its hollow to win something handed out by local sportswriters, but there it is).

I agree RFan and I like Harrison.

The only explanation that makes any sense is focus. When he gets in trouble maybe Matt Harrison pays more attention to what he is doing. This would actually make him something of an underachiever.

I remember him talking about his wife/girlfriend buying him a book on pitching which he read in the off season. He claimed it was the only book he'd ever read cover to cover. There were jokes about that at the time but it could illuminate his personality. But, wouldn't you expect someone who is in the Major Leagues to have already read that book? Maybe Matt Harrison is simply lazy when the bases are clear. Maybe he starts thinking about what he is doing, or listens to the catcher more with men on base.

If that is the case, and I am not saying it is, then maybe there is room for Harrison to not regress away from his BABIP but to move towards it.

We can hope that is the case.

He certainly seems to have the velocity and mix of pitches to be successful

Cosmo I think you are missing a couple of things.

RFan is clearly implying that Harrison's strand rate is unsustainable, a product of luck. (RFan is one of those skeptics that Harrison keeps grinding on)

But look... in 2012 these were the pitchers with the highest LOB%: Hellickson, Price, Sale, Dickey, Zimmerman, Weaver, Cain, Harrison, Vargas and Lee.

From my perspective that's a pretty talented list of pitchers, not a list of lucky ones. If it was just a lucky stat...you'd have lots of strays in the list. There aren't.

Harrison was only 22nd on that list in 2011, but still had a fabulous overall year.