The RotoCop

In my 2010 fantasy draft, I chose to select Cole Hamels instead of Josh Johnson for one main reason: the Verducci Effect.  I loved Johnson’s dominating skill set, but I was worried that his big jump in innings the previous season would cause him to break down physically, possibly with a season-ending arm injury.  So I passed on him and, well, things didn’t work out.

Johnson went on to have an incredible season, finishing with a 2.30 ERA, 1.11 WHIP and more than a strikeout per inning.  Although Hamels wasn’t nearly as good as Johnson, he still ended up being very solid when all was said and done.  Unfortunately, I ended up dealing Hamels away before he turned his season around, but that’s a story for another day.  The question is: should fantasy managers be concerned with the Verducci Effect going forward?

I recently put together an article for Bleacher Report looking at how the pitchers who have appeared on Verducci’s red flag list the last four years have ended up performing.  I am re-posting it in its entirety below.  Long story short, about 70% of the pitchers on the Verducci Effect list during the last four years have turned out to be just fine, 20% have seriously regressed and 10% have had serious arm injuries.

It’s hard to fully understand these findings without knowing how young pitchers that aren’t on the list tend to perform from year to year, which is a tall task. The data seems to show that the Verducci Effect isn’t a be-all, end-all, but that there is at least some risk involved with young pitchers who experience an innings jump.

My current thinking is that I will probably still slightly downgrade pitchers like Mat Latos and David Price who appear on the list this year.  It will be more of a tie-breaker than anything, though.  I already had some concerns about Price repeating last year’s performance, so he probably wasn’t going to end up on my team anyway.  Latos, though, is a pitcher I am very high on this year.  But when you combine his likely struggle to get wins with the Verducci Effect, it does make me think twice about taking him before a pitcher without similar concerns.

Anyway, here’s my Bleacher Report piece:

 

MLB Fact or Faction: Verducci Effect for David Price, Mat Latos and Phil Hughes?

On Jan. 11, Sports Illustrated senior writer Tom Verducci published his list of pitchers at risk of the “year after effect”—or “Verducci Effect”—in 2011.  The Verducci Effect, a theory put forth by Verducci and former Oakland A’s pitching coach Rick Peterson more than a decade ago, posits that pitchers under 25 years old whose workloads increase by more than 30 innings are at risk of injury or major regression the following season.

Verducci’s 2011 list of young pitchers at risk includes such notable names as the Rays’ David Price, the Padres’ Mat Latos, the Yankees’ Phil Hughes and Ivan Nova, the Giants’ Madison Bumgarner, the Reds’ Travis Wood, the A’s Gio Gonzalez and the Blue Jays’ Brett Cecil.

Verducci’s theory has become conventional wisdom accepted by many of the most respected minds in baseball.  For instance, when Verducci released his red flag list for 2010, he quoted A’s general manager Billy Beane as saying “We always keep an eye on the Verducci metrics.”

And yet Verducci’s 2010 list of risky pitchers included four players who went on to have not just good, but excellent seasons: the Mariners’ Felix Hernandez, the Marlins’ Josh Johnson, the Tigers’ Max Scherzer and the Padres’ Latos, who has now appeared on the list two consecutive years.

Verducci acknowledged that the performance of these four stars was “as strong a showing against the Verducci Effect since I started tracking it,” but he insisted that the Verducci Effect has not “gone away.”

He pointed to four other pitchers on his 2010 list (the Padres’ Cesar Carrillo, the Astros’ Bud Norris, the Reds’ Homer Bailey and the Tigers’ Rick Porcello) who “were hurt or regressed” the following season, and argued that the remaining two names on his list (the Yankees’ Joba Chamberlain and the Rays’ Wade Davis) “had so-so results.”  He added that the performances of Hernandez, Johnson and Scherzer prove his long-held belief that “the risk is much lower for bigger-bodied pitchers who are at the older end of the age spectrum.”

Maybe so, but the main thing Verducci’s 2010 list clearly demonstrates is that a young pitcher is not guaranteed to get injured or pitch poorly the year after he sees a significant increase in innings.  That doesn’t mean the Verducci Effect should necessarily be dismissed completely, though.

To get a better sense of how to evaluate the Verducci Effect, let’s consider how all of the pitchers that have made Verducci’s list over the last four seasons have gone on to perform the following year.  For the sake of simplicity, we will only consider a player’s major league numbers and won’t count playoff statistics (Verducci does include playoff innings in his analysis).

Below is the complete list for 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010, with the year the player appeared on Verducci’s red flag list in parentheses followed by the pitcher’s performance the season immediately before and the season immediately after appearing on the list:

Cole Hamels (’07)

Before Verducci Effect: 132.1 Innings, 145 Ks, 4.08 ERA, 1.25 WHIP /// After Verducci Effect: 183.1 Innings, 177 Ks, 3.39 ERA, 1.12 WHIP

Justin Verlander (’07)

186 IP, 124 Ks, 3.63 ERA, 1.33 WHIP  ///  201.2 IP, 183 Ks, 3.66 ERA, 1.23 WHIP

Anibal Sanchez (’07)

114.1 IP, 72 Ks, 2.83 ERA, 1.19 WHIP  ///  30 IP, 14 Ks, 4.80 ERA, 2.07 WHIP

Jered Weaver (’07)

123 IP, 105 Ks, 2.56 ERA, 1.03 WHIP  /// 161 IP, 115 Ks, 3.91 ERA, 1.39 WHIP

Sean Marshall (’07)

125.2 IP, 77 Ks, 5.59 ERA, 1.52 WHIP  ///  103.1 IP, 67 Ks, 3.92 ERA, 1.37 WHIP

Scott Olsen (’07)

180.2 IP, 166 Ks, 4.04 ERA, 1.30 WHIP  ///  176.2 IP, 133 Ks, 5.81 ERA, 1.76 WHIP

Jeremy Bonderman (’07)

214 IP, 202 Ks, 4.08 ERA, 1.30 WHIP  ///  174.1 IP, 145 Ks, 5.01 ERA, 1.38 WHIP

Adam Loewen (’07)

112.1 IP, 98 Ks, 5.37 ERA, 1.54 WHIP  ///  30.1 IP, 22 Ks, 3.56 ERA, 1.75 WHIP

Anthony Reyes (’07)

85.1 IP, 72 Ks, 5.06 ERA, 1.38 WHIP  ///  107.1 IP, 74 Ks, 6.04 ERA, 1.41 WHIP

Scott Mathieson (’07)

37.1 IP, 28 Ks, 7.47 ERA, 1.71 WHIP  ///  No Major League innings (only 8 Minor League innings)

Boof Bonser (’07)

100.1 IP, 84 Ks, 4.22 ERA, 1.28 WHIP  ///  173 IP, 136 Ks, 5.10 ERA, 1.53 WHIP

Ian Kennedy (’08)

19 IP, 15 Ks, 1.89 ERA, 1.16 WHIP  ///  39.2 IP, 27 Ks, 8.17 ERA, 1.92 WHIP

Fausto Carmona (’08)

215 IP, 137 Ks, 3.06 ERA, 1.21 WHIP  ///  120.2, 58 Ks, 5.44 ERA, 1.62 WHIP

Ubaldo Jimenez (’08)

82 IP, 68 Ks, 4.28 ERA, 1.30 WHIP  ///  198.2 IP, 172 Ks, 3.99 ERA, 1.43 WHIP

Tom Gorzelanny (’08)

201.2 IP, 135 Ks, 3.88 ERA, 1.40 WHIP  ///  105.1 IP, 67 Ks, 6.66 ERA, 1.80 WHIP

Dustin McGowan (’08)

169.2 IP, 144 Ks, 4.08 ERA, 1.22 WHIP  ///  111.1 IP, 85 Ks, 4.37 ERA, 1.37 WHIP

Chad Gaudin (’08)

199.1 IP, 154 Ks, 4.42 ERA, 1.53 WHIP  ///  90 IP, 71 Ks, 4.40 ERA, 1.32 WHIP

Yovani Gallardo (’08)

110.1 IP, 101 Ks, 3.67 ERA, 1.27 WHIP  ///  24 IP, 20 Ks, 1.88 ERA, 1.25 WHIP

Jon Lester (’09)

210.1 IP, 152 Ks, 3.21 ERA, 1.27 WHIP  ///  203.1 IP, 225 Ks, 3.41 ERA, 1.25 WHIP

Cole Hamels (’09)

227.1 IP, 196 Ks, 3.09 ERA, 1.08 WHIP  ///  193.2 IP, 168 Ks, 4.32 ERA, 1.29 WHIP

Chad Billingsley (’09)

200.2 IP, 201 Ks, 3.14 ERA, 1.34 WHIP  ///  196.1 IP, 179 Ks, 4.03 ERA, 1.32 WHIP

Tim Lincecum (’09)

227 IP, 265 Ks, 2.62 ERA, 1.17 WHIP  ///  225.1 IP, 261 Ks, 2.48 ERA, 1.05 WHIP

Clayton Kershaw (’09)

107.2 IP, 100 Ks, 4.26 ERA, 1.50 WHIP  ///  171 IP, 185 Ks, 2.79 ERA, 1.23 WHIP

Dana Eveland (’09)

168 IP, 118 Ks, 4.34 ERA, 1.48 WHIP  ///  44 IP, 22 Ks, 7.16 ERA, 2.18 WHIP

Mike Pelfrey (’09)

200.2 IP, 110 Ks, 3.72 ERA, 1.36 WHIP  ///  184.1 IP, 107 Ks, 5.03 ERA, 1.51 WHIP

John Danks (’09)

195 IP, 159 Ks, 3.32 ERA, 1.23 WHIP  ///  200.1 IP, 149 Ks, 3.77 ERA, 1.28 WHIP

Jair Jurrjens (’09)

188.1 IP, 139 Ks, 3.68 ERA, 1.37 WHIP  ///  215 IP, 152 Ks, 2.60 ERA, 1.21 WHIP

Jon Niese (’09)

14 IP, 11 Ks, 7.07 ERA, 2.00 WHIP  ///  25.2 IP, 18 Ks, 4.21 ERA, 1.40 WHIP

Cesar Carillo (’10)

10.1 IP, 4 Ks, 13.06 ERA, 2.71 WHIP  ///  No Major League Innings (151 IP in AAA)

Bud Norris (’10)

55.2 IP, 54 Ks, 4.53 ERA, 1.51 WHIP  ///  153.2 IP, 158 Ks, 4.92 ERA, 1.48 WHIP

Mat Latos (’10)

50.2 IP, 39 Ks, 4.62 ERA, 1.30 WHIP  ///  184.2 IP, 189 Ks, 2.92 ERA, 1.08 WHIP

Joba Chamberlain (’10)

157.1 IP, 133 Ks, 4.75 ERA, 1.54 WHIP  ///  71.2 IP, 77 Ks, 4.40 ERA, 1.30 WHIP

Homer Bailey (’10)

113.1 IP, 86 Ks, 4.53 ERA, 1.47 WHIP  ///  109 IP, 100 Ks, 4.46 ERA, 1.37 WHIP

Josh Johnson (’10)

209 IP, 191 Ks, 3.23 ERA, 1.16 WHIP  ///  183.2 IP, 186 Ks, 2.30 ERA, 1.11 WHIP

Rick Porcello (’10)

170.2 IP, 89 Ks, 3.96 ERA, 1.34 WHIP  ///  162.2 IP, 84 Ks, 4.92 ERA, 1.39 WHIP

Max Scherzer (’10)

170.1 IP, 174 Ks, 4.12 ERA, 1.34 WHIP  ///  195.2 IP, 184 Ks, 3.50 ERA, 1.25 WHIP

Felix Hernandez (’10)

238.2 IP, 217 Ks, 2.49 ERA, 1.14 WHIP  ///  249.2 IP, 232 Ks, 2.27 ERA, 1.06 WHIP

Wade Davis (’10)

36.1 IP, 36 Ks, 3.72 ERA, 1.27 WHIP  ///  168 IP, 113 Ks, 4.07 ERA, 1.35 WHIP

There are obviously some things that are not captured in these numbers, the biggest being that they don’t account for minor league statistics.  But these statistics still tell a lot about whether to be concerned with the Verducci Effect or to take it with a grain of salt.

To better understand the data, let’s break these pitchers down into four categories:

1. Pitchers who had serious arm-related injuries the year after appearing on the Verducci Effect list
2. Pitchers who dramatically regressed the year after appearing on the Verducci Effect list
3. Pitchers who either improved, performed about the same or slightly regressed after appearing on the Verducci Effect list
4. Pitchers who—whether due to serious non-arm injuries or being sent to the Minors—did not pitch at least 50 Major League innings in both the season before and after appearing on the Verducci Effect list

“Serious” injuries will be defined as injuries that require major surgery.  “Dramatic regression” will be defined as having an ERA that increased by more than 1.00 AND a WHIP that increased by more than 0.15 from the season before they were included on the list.

Keep in mind that young pitchers often have success when they initially enter the majors but then struggle to make adjustments, an explanation for some regression that has nothing to do with inning totals.  It’s more likely that the regression has to do with physical wear and tear if the pitcher completely falls apart.  Also, pitchers who dramatically improve their performance will be lumped in with pitchers whose performances stay the same because any improvement is unlikely to be caused by increased inning totals.

Here is how the Verducci list pitchers from the last four years break down:

Three Verducci Effect pitchers suffered serious arm-related injuries the following season: Sanchez, Loewen, and McGowan

Six Verducci Effect pitchers dramatically regressed the following season: Weaver, Olsen, Carmona, Gorzelanny, Hamels (’09) and Pelfrey

Twenty-two Verducci Effect pitchers either improved, stayed the same or slightly regressed the following season: Hamels (’07), Verlander, Marshall, Bonderman, Reyes, Bonser, Jimenez, Gaudin, Lester, Billingsley, Lincecum, Kershaw, Danks, Jurrjens, Norris, Latos, Chamberlain, Bailey, Johnson, Porcello, Scherzer and Hernandez

Six Verducci Effect pitchers did not pitch enough major league innings in one or both seasons to make the evaluation meaningful (These pitchers either suffered serious non-arm injuries or were sent to the minors for performance-based reasons): Kennedy, Gallardo, Eveland, Niese, Carillo and Davis

*Scott Mathieson is not included in any category, since he had already had elbow surgery during the 2006 season—before he was included on Verducci’s 2007 list.

These groupings aren’t meant to be perfect, they’re just meant to give a sense of what has typically happened to pitchers who have appeared on the Verducci list.  And the results seem fairly clear.

Of the 31 pitchers who were listed on the Verducci Effect list during the last four years and pitched enough major league innings to be evaluated, 22 pitchers—nearly 71 percent—either improved, stayed the same or slightly regressed from the year before they were put on the list.

Only six pitchers—about 19 percent—dramatically regressed the year after an innings spike put them on Verducci’s list.  And just three pitchers—less than 10 percent—suffered serious arm injuries after being placed on the Verducci Effect list.

Of course, it’s hard to fully understand the implications of these numbers without knowing the frequency of injury and severe regression among pitchers who were not on Verducci’s list, which would be a much more time-intensive exercise.  Four years is also a relatively small sample size.

But even when taking those issues into account, these numbers suggest that the majority of pitchers who appear on Verducci’s list are likely to be just fine following their jump in innings the previous year, and those that run into problems are more likely to have performance issues than severe health issues.

Whether you’re a fantasy manager that is considering whether to draft Mat Latos or a Tampa Bay Rays fan counting on David Price to anchor your rotation this year, you may still want to take the Verducci Effect into account.  The Billy Beanes of the world still do, after all.  But you can also take comfort in the fact that being on the list appears to be a bit less risky than it might seem.

In 2010, Marlins shortstop Hanley Ramirez had what—by his own lofty standards—could be considered a down year.  Hanley “only” batted .300 after hitting .330 or better two of the previous three years.  He “only” hit 21 HRs, the lowest total since his rookie campaign.

He also failed to reach 100 Runs scored for the first time in his career, and his RBI and SB numbers were on the lower end of his career averages.

And yet, Hanley Ramirez remains a no-brainer top three pick in fantasy baseball leagues.

Ramirez’s “down year” line of .300-92-21-76-32 still made him the 15th most valuable player in fantasy baseball in 2010 according to Baseball Monster, a website that quantifies fantasy value for standard rotisserie leagues.

Among shortstops, he was #1 and only the Rockies’ Troy Tulowitzki was close.  In 2009, Ramirez was the 5th most valuable player at any position.

What these statistics should tell you is that even if Ramirez only qualified at 1B or OF, his five-category production would make him worthy of a first round pick.  Add in the fact that you can plug him in at SS, fantasy baseball’s shallowest position, and it’s clear why a legitimate case can be made for him going No. 1 overall in fantasy drafts.

So if Ramirez is an obvious top three pick, how early should you consider Tulowitzki, who nearly matched Ramirez’s output last year? The answer: early, but not as early as you might think.

Again, let’s remember that we’re talking about a below average year for Ramirez.  In 2009, Tulowitzki had an even better year than he had in 2010, but he was still far less valuable than Ramirez.  Ramirez gets a boost from his position eligibility, but the biggest reason he is a top five pick is that he’s proven that he is capable of top five production.

Tulowitzki has proven he is capable of top 15 overall production, which is still extremely valuable at SS.  He’s just not in the same stratosphere as Ramirez, as least not yet.

The other thing to consider before you take the Tulowitzki plunge is the risk factor.  While Ramirez missed several weeks at the end of last season with elbow inflammation, he still easily surpassed 500 at-bats, as he has every year in his career.

Tulowitzki, on the other hand, missed large chunks of the 2008 and 2010 seasons with injuries and has only made it to 500 at-bats twice in four years.

Of course, the fact that Tulowitzki was able to put up such impressive numbers in 122 games in 2010 points to his upside.  But another risk factor with Tulowitzki is his streakiness.

As of September 1st, Tulowitzki had a total of just 12 HRs, 55 RBIs and 9 SBs through 92 games.  He was hitting at a .315 clip, but was still on the verge of being a major bust.  Tulowitzki came alive in September with 15 HRs and 40 RBIs in 28 games, an astounding hot streak that salvaged his 2010 season.

Heading into last season, it was widely believed that a major part of Tulowitzki’s fantasy value was his ability to swipe 20 bags, as he did in ’09.  But he finished with just 11 SBs in 2010.  If Tulowitzki’s SB totals continue to fall, his value will be more and more tied to incredible HR streaks, which makes for a risky proposition.

None of this is to say that Tulowitzki shouldn’t be considered in the mid-to-late first round of fantasy drafts.  He is still young and could continue to improve, and his potential production at SS is very appealing.  Just realize there is a significant drop-off between him and Ramirez.

In fact, Tulowitzki’s value could end up as close to the Mets’ Jose Reyes as it is to Ramirez’s.

Reyes is even riskier than Tulowitzki, considering his recent injury history and inconsistent production, and you can’t expect him to hit more than about 15 HRs.  The big question with Reyes, though, is how much he’ll run.  If he only steals 30 bases, he may not end up being much more valuable than Jimmy Rollins, Derek Jeter, Alexei Ramirez or Elvis Andrus.

But if Reyes can return to nabbing 55-plus SBs, his overall value could come close to Tulowitzki’s.

Overall, Tulowitzki is a good gamble in the late first round, while you should probably hold off on Reyes until the third round in 12 team leagues.  I just wouldn’t feel comfortable coming out of a draft with Reyes as my second best player.

No other shortstop is worth considering until round five or six at the earliest.  Rollins and Jeter are declining, Alexei Ramirez is the definition of inconsistent and Andrus is still somewhat unproven.  The perennially overrated Stephen Drew is just plain boring (where does the Drew hype come from?!?!??), and there will be players available in the 15-20th round of drafts that can give you similar production.

Outside of Drew, I would gladly take any of these guys if they fall a round or two further then they should.  But I wouldn’t reach for them when there are still more elite players out there at other positions.

If I miss out on the mid-round shortstops, I will settle for a more forgotten declining veteran like Rafael Furcal, a solid-but-unspectacular bat coming off a down year like Yunel Escobar, a post-hype speed candidate like Alcides Escobar or a younger guy with 15-15 potential like Asdrubal Cabrera, Mike Aviles, Ian Desmond or Danny Espinosa.

In fact, I might try to take two guys from that list.  I suppose you could also consider taking a poor contact hitter with 20 HR potential like J.J. Hardy or Alex Gonzalez in the later part of the draft.

Are any of those guys particularly exciting?  Certainly not.  But because of the dearth of talent at SS, they probably won’t put you too far behind the other managers in your league, unless they happen to own Hanley, Tulowitzki or perhaps Reyes.