BP360 is Back! One low price for a: BP subscription, 2022 Annual, 2022 Futures Guide, choice of shirt

Phillies vs. Reds
Roy Oswalt: 2.76 ERA, 3.33 SIERA
Oswalt joined the Phillies in late July and posted a 1.74 ERA in 12 starts and an inning of relief. The Phillies won 10 of his 12 starts, but his SIERA of 3.33 was a dead ringer for his 3.31 SIERA in his 20 starts with the Astros. Oswalt’s .227 BABIP with the Phillies was due to very few ground balls finding holes and outfield flies staying catchable more often than can be expected in the future. However, both his 2010 SIERA in Philadelphia and in Houston were far better than his recent years’ SIERAs of 3.89, 3.63, and 3.86 from 2007-09. The reason is that Oswalt struck out more hitters than he had since his 2001 rookie year, raising his strikeout rate from 18.2 percent in 2009 to 23.1 percent in 2010. Oswalt began using his changeup more in 2010 with the Astros early on, and began using it even more after working with Phillies pitching coach Rich Dubee. Thus, Oswalt has the sixth-best SIERA among all starters in the playoffs and 13th overall, after finishing only 33rd in the majors in 2009.

Bronson Arroyo: 3.88 ERA, 4.66 SIERA
Arroyo has managed to put up ERAs of 3.84 and 3.88 the past two years, but a good deal of luck has factored into both, as he has been declining for several years now. His strikeout rate has only been 13.8 percent in each of the last two years, decidedly below the major league average of about 17.6 percent for starting pitchers. He has a solid 6.7 percent walk rate, though his batted-ball rates are pretty average all around. Arroyo is nowhere near the second-best starter on the Reds but was been given the nod for Game Two anyway. In his career, he has struggled against lefties, with a 3.0 K/BB vs. RHB and only a 1.5 K/BB vs. LHB and an 816/684 OPS split as well. This year, his .192 BABIP vs. RHB has exacerbated his OPS split to 786/576 for 2010. Lefties like those in the heart of the Phillies’ lineup are going to have a good chance against Arroyo.

Giants vs. Braves
Tommy Hanson: 3.33 ERA, 3.74 SIERA
Hanson lowered his walk rate from 8.8 last season to 6.6 percent in 2010, but also lowered his strikeout rate from 22.2 to 20.5 percent and was left an almost identical SIERA. Hanson is neither an extreme ground-ball pitcher nor an extreme fly-ball pitcher, so his command of the strike zone is the key to his success. He has had ERAs below his SIERAs in his first two major league seasons primarily due to low home runs per fly ball rates. His 9.5 percent was below the league average of about 13.1 percent as a rookie but this year it dropped to 7.2 percent, which was well below the league average of 12.3 percent. Thus, Hanson has beaten his SIERA two years in a row. His .279 BABIP in 2009 helped as well, though his .290 BABIP in 2010 seems in line with his skill level as a power pitcher who is not much of a ground-ball generator. If Hanson is going to repeatedly beat his SIERA, it will be because he can keep his HR/OFB low, but pitchers who maintain lower than usual rates in that area also tend to generate a lot of infield pop-ups. That is something Hanson is pretty good at doing, but not amazing. In 2010, the league average was about 7.5 percent and Hanson was at 8.8 percent. I think that Hanson’s skill level is probably closer to his SIERA, but a couple more years could change my mind.

Matt Cain: 3.14 ERA, 3.90 SIERA
It’s finally time to admit that DIPS metrics like SIERA do not work well for Cain. They are bound to work for the vast majority of pitchers, but some will be the exception to the rule. However, one must be careful not to stick a feather in the cap of every rookie who beats his SIERA, and then not fall victim to confirmation bias for those who have a second year of beating their peripherals. There will be a handful of pitchers that are lucky two years in a row and appear to have SIERA-beating skills but really do not. However, it is now four years in a row with Cain. After posting a 4.15 ERA in 2006, just above his 4.03 SIERA, Cain has transformed into a pitcher that pitches ahead of his peripherals by quite a large margin. In 2007, he had a 3.65 ERA and a 4.20 SIERA; in 2008, he had a 3.76 ERA and a 4.23 SIERA; in 2009, he had a 2.89 ERA and a 4.09 SIERA; and in 2010, he had a 3.14 ERA and a 3.90 SIERA. None of these are bad SIERAs. Cain strikes out 20 percent of hitters and walks only 6.8 percent. He is by no means a ground-ball wizard, but he induces pop-ups pretty regularly (11.4 percent of balls in play in 2010) suppressing his BABIP. His BABIP in his career is .270, and his HR/OFB is just 9.6 percent. Chances are that Cain has been a little bit lucky in this string of SIERA-beating ERAs, if for no other reason than it seems almost impossible that he was unlucky. However, Cain is one of the better pitchers in the postseas and gives the Giants a solid one-two punch with Tim Lincecum with which to compete against the NL’s best. 

Thank you for reading

This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.

Subscribe now
You need to be logged in to comment. Login or Subscribe
Just did a Google search on "hard luck" "Matt Cain" and it returned 974 valid results. It is well-known that Cain received woeful run support in years past, but this year that seems to have normalized a bit.

For this year, among pitchers with at least 100 innings pitched, poor Tony Pena "leads" with only 1.25 runs of support, but Felix Hernandez shows why wins don't matter in 2nd place at 3.25.

Barry Zito was the least-supported on the Giants, at 5.28, but Cain was close behind at 5.36. That makes him the 29th least supported pitcher with more than 100 innings, the 119th best. Still bad, but better.

Not sure how (if at all) that factors into his pitching better than his SIERA four years' running, but it's interesting.

has the following, agreeing that he pitches better than his peripherals, though it doesn't appear that the last start of 2010 is included.

2005 2.33 4.08 4.15 46.1 0.6
2006 4.15 3.96 3.69 190.2 4.1
2007 3.65 3.78 3.68 200.0 5.4
2008 3.76 3.91 4.50 217.2 3.5
2009 2.89 3.89 3.98 217.2 4.3
2010 2.95 3.51 3.38 219.1 5.6

It also makes the point that he was "ranked 7th, 5th, 13th and 15th to last in run support" the last few years (presumably 2006-2009).

Is Lincecum + Cain + Sanchez (+ Bumgarner) the best rotation in the playoffs? Philly and Atlanta both have really good top threes, and Sabathia, Pettitte, Lee, and Wilson have all come up big.

Halladay + Oswalt + Hamels (+ Blanton/Kendrick)

Lowe + Hanson + Hudson

Sabathia + Pettitte + Hughes

Lee + Wilson + Lewis

Liriano + Pavano + Duensing

Looking forward to Hanson vs. Cain tonight! Go Giants!
SIERA does not factor in run support at all. It focuses on what a pitcher's ERA should be if he had neutral luck and played in a neutral park with average defense.

To your question about best rotations in the playoffs, the Phillies rotation is better than the Giants in terms of SIERA, with three of the top six SIERAs in the playoffs (among starters). Even if you adjust for Cain constantly being able to beat his SIERA, it would still be in the Phillies favor as Sanchez is a good deal behind Oswalt and Hamels. Keep in mind Blanton as a 4th starter is much better than Kendrick-- his SIERA this year was actually just 4.01. Still, I think it's probably safe to say that the Giants have the second best rotation in the playoffs, though the Braves and Rangers both have pretty solid ones too.
Thanks. I knew SIERA didn't take into account run support, it was more like Cain thinking "I know I'm not going to get run support, so I have to bear down" and being better, though I doubt players can turn it on and off like that.

But could "mental makeup" (ugh) be part of what lets a pitcher best his SIERA?
In the sense that it affects sequencing, sure. Tom Glavine notoriously bested estimators like SIERA in his career because of how he sequenced-- specifically, attacking hitters with bases empty and pitching around them more with men on. The result was more of his opponents' OBP came when men were on (and SLG was relatively more important), and more of his opponents' SLG came when bases were empty (and OBP was relatively more important). His UBB rate went up from 6.2 to 8.9 percent with men on, while his HR rate went down from 2.3 to 1.5 percent. As a result, you get things like:

2005: ERA 3.53, SIERA 4.72
2006: ERA 3.82, SIERA 4.37
2007: ERA 4.45, SIERA 5.20

That's not quite what most people mean by mental makeup, but it's mental in the sense that he was an excellent strategist with good control.

In terms of "bearing down" which is what most people mean by mental makeup, I think that it could work the other way-- certain pitchers with anxiety issues may perform worse with men on and have ERAs worse than their SIERAs, though I suspect people with that tendency might not have buckled down when they needed to pitch in front of scouts the first time anyway.

I also think that people who don't focus with bases empty probably would have trouble making the big leagues too-- so they might have a tendency to have ERAs lower than their SIERAs but both would be too high in the first place.

I think people imagine pitchers and hitters out there with intense concentration at crucial moments in the game, but I tend to think that's just when fans concentrate really hard and notice the concentration a pitcher or hitter that was concentrating hard the whole time.
Matt, this is very interesting. Do you know of any current pitchers that have had a consistent record along the lines of Glavine on OBP and SLG?
Matt Cain is one who lowers his slugging pct with runners on. (Most pitchers have both OBP and SLG increase with baserunners.)

Glavine SLG bases empty - .384
runners on - .369
RISP - .356

Cain SLG bases empty - .373
runners on - .368
RISP - .346
Fascinating. Thank you, Matt.