Let me preface this little piece by stating that I have nothing against Farid and am not a fanatical believer in Sabremetrics. I do believe though, that the importance of stats should go a little deeper than the conventional numbers you see in the nightly box scores. Thusly, I was surprised…nay bewildered when I read Farid Rushdi’s piece on Matt Chico and his supposed raw deal. He must be doing one of two things: willfully ignoring the facts or he’s heavily invested in Chico’s business ventures (Chico’s Bail Bonds anyone?).
It’s time to release the hounds…
Let’s start off with the premise of the entire article: that the Washington Nationals are treating Matt Chico and Jordan Zimmerman differently despite them essentially being the exact same pitcher. This is clearly the point shown in the beginning of the article where he snipes that the reader was probably assuming he was describing Jordan Zimmerman (as long as you didn’t read the title). Before we look at each player’s past performance, let’s just look at the things that don’t show up on the stat lines. Jordan Zimmerman stands 6’2″ tall. Matt Chico measures in at 5’11”. With a taller frame usually comes a wider wingspan. Simple geometry will tell you that physically, Jordan Zimmerman projects to be more durable and have better stuff. But, history has shown that physical deficiencies can be overcome with great mechanics and strength (see Roy Oswalt). Matt Chico has never been known for his stellar mechanics though. It was just a few years ago where Chico had his entire delivery changed with the re-emergence of a high leg-kick he used in high school. The results of that change? 8 starts, no wins, and a wrecked arm. Coincidence? We report you decide.
The real crux of Rushdi’s argument revolves around the stats. He makes the assertion that their rookie seasons were similar. He makes no mention of Chico’s sophomore explosion but lets just humor him a bit. Below are the stats he calls out.
Record
Chico: 7-9
Zimmermann: 3-5
ERA
Chico: 4.63
Zimmermann 4.63
Percentage of Quality Starts
Chico: 32 percent
Zimmermann: 36 percent
Innings Per Start
Chico: 5.6
Zimmermann: 5.7
Hits/Walks/Strikeouts Per Nine-Innings
Chico: 9.9/4.0/5.1
Zimmermann: 9.4/2.9/9.1
Opponents Average/On-Base Pct./Slugging Pct.
Chico: .281/.354/.471
Zimmermann: .274/.332/.429
Percentage of Pitches Thrown For Strikes
Chico: 67 percent
Zimmermann: 62 percent
This is where I fell out of my chair. We’ll go one by one.
They do have similar records. If you extrapolate J-Zimms start total to equal that of Chico’s you get a 6-10 record for J-Zimm. Looking good so far for Farid.
ERA’s are exactly the same. I’m pretty sure this is the stat that gave him the idea to write this whole thing, because look they’re EXACTLY THE SAME!
% of quality starts. This one favors J-Zimm, but who cares? The quality start is the worst stat in baseball. All you have to do is go six and not give up 3 earned runs. That’s pretty much the bare minimum I expect from any major league starter. If you take 3 runs over 6 innings and extrapolate that to an entire game, that’s 4.5 runs/game. There were 12 teams last year that didn’t average 4.5 runs/game. So essentially to be a “quality” pitcher you just have to hold approximately 1/3 of the league to their average # of runs and shave just a single run off all the others except the Yanks. Don’t come up in here with that weak stuff.
Not much I can say about innings per start. They’re similar. But just for some context, here’s some names of guys last year who had similar innings pitcher per start numbers: Brad Penny, Jorge De La Rosa, Jonathan Sanchez, Scott Kazmir, and Vicente Padilla. There are some great guys and not so great guys that hover around that number. So it’s not a reliable stat to use to gauge one’s skills.
Okay I said I already fell out of my chair at this point. I lied. At the beginning of the stats, I merely slid to the front of the my chair. I fell off at the next line…Opponents Average/On-Base Pct./Slugging Pct. I’m pretty sure these are included out of willful disbelief at what he’s putting in his own article. These numbers couldn’t show the differences between the two men any clearer. Hits numbers are about the same, granted but walks and strikeouts?
GUFFAW! Over 1 less walk per nine innings. One would say that’s not a huge deal right? But viewed through the lens of the strikeout number, it’s a huge deal. The easiest way to get out of walk-induced jams is to strike guys out. J-Zimm nearly doubles the number of K’s that Chico gets. THATS AN ASTRONOMICAL DIFFERENCE!!!. You don’t win by letting people put the ball in play with men on base. It’s just the way it is. And J-Zimm is better at keeping guys off the base paths. Plain and simple. The next stat shows the same effect. J-Zimm allows less hits, less men on base, and those that do get a hit, tend to hit with less power. The fact that these stats were included to strengthen his argument is astounding. Nothing could undermine his argument more.
I’m guessing that the last stat was included for comedic value. A juggs machine throws 100% of balls for strikes. So what?
So after the statistical barrage, Farid eventually admits that Chico does not have the skills of J-Zimm. Why make that statement when you just spent the previous few hundred words trying to demonstrate their similarities? One word…POISE! For all of you that read Deadspin out there, chuckles will commence. It seems Farid has gone the way of mainstream media in supporting the idea that being “wily” and “cerebral” is a fine substitute for athletic ability in a line of work built on showcasing athletic ability.
Alas by the end of the article, Farid seems to have realized he’s written a pretty good piece on why Matt Chico and Jordan Zimmerman shouldn’t be treated the same. And I quote:
“So why did I compare the two? To show that while there is a great deal of difference in their talent, there wasn’t a great deal of difference in their rookie seasons.”
Glad we cleared up the confusion on who’s actually the better pitcher.
“Look, I get it. Matt Chico is not the prettiest girl at the dance. But why does he have to sit along the wall of the gymnasium, waiting for someone to ask him to dance?”
Because maybe the Nationals are finally done with trying to be “not the worst”?
“The Washington Nationals have come a long way since those days when a green rookie coming off a bad spring could earn a spot in the starting rotation. That said, they haven’t come so far that they can turn their back on a 26-year-old with 39 career starts.”
Do you know how many 26 y/o have 39 career starts? Neither do I, but I do know at least 30 players 26 or younger had 30+ just last year (I stopped counting after 30). So I’m guessing there’s 100+. That’s exclusive company!
“Players shouldn’t lose their jobs to an injury.”
Really? Tom Brady, Kurt Warner, screw those guys. Drew Bledsoe and Trent Green should have gotten their jobs back.
It’s only fair.
Kyle Smoot
Richie Oliver
Jon Hoffman
The Nats Report 