Baseball Musings
Baseball Musings
February 21, 2006
Strikeouts and Pitch Counts

I'd like to return to this article by Rich Lederer which I attempted to criticize last night. This is the line that caused me to criticize the article:

Just as striking out the side in order is preferred over getting all three outs via the K regardless of the number of batters faced, a pitcher who strikes out hitters on three pitches is more effective than those who take five or six to get the job done.

I got the feeling from this statement that Rick felt that strikeouts per 100 pitches was greatly influenced by the number of pitches per strikeout. That the pitchers at the top of the K per 100 pitches list would on average throw many fewer pitches on strikeouts than people at the bottom of the list. I didn't make that clear last night, and I'd like to make it clear with some research tonight.

For the 2005 season, I looked at all pitchers with at least 50 strikeouts and calculated their Pitches per K. Here are the results, ranked fewest to most Pitches per K.

PitcherPitches Per KStrikeoutsPitches
Brad Lidge 4.194103432
Jamey Wright 4.347101439
Joe Kennedy 4.35197422
Mark Mulder 4.387111487
Brandon Backe 4.40297427
Bobby Jenks 4.42050221
Miguel Batista 4.42654239
Randy Wolf 4.44361271
Nate Robertson 4.451122543
Tyler Walker 4.46354241
Todd Jones 4.48462278
Mike Timlin 4.49259265
Jason Jennings 4.49375337
Chad Qualls 4.50060270
Huston Street 4.50072324
Dan Wheeler 4.50769311
Kerry Wood 4.51977348
Jon Lieber 4.530149675
Jeremy Bonderman 4.531145657
Scott Elarton 4.534103467
Chris Carpenter 4.535213966
Doug Waechter 4.54087395
Derrick Turnbow 4.54764291
Kelvim Escobar 4.55663287
Paul Byrd 4.569102466
Brian Bruney 4.56951233
Jose Valverde 4.57375343
Scott Downs 4.57375343
Trevor Hoffman 4.57454247
Horacio Ramirez 4.57580366
Kiko Calero 4.57752238
Jose Contreras 4.578154705
Carl Pavano 4.58956257
Rafael Betancourt 4.60373336
Duaner Sanchez 4.60671327
Sunny Kim 4.60756258
Kris Benson 4.62195439
Matt Morris 4.624117541
Ben Sheets 4.624141652
Ted Lilly 4.62596444
Giovanni Carrara 4.62556259
Matt Belisle 4.62759273
Brad Halsey 4.63482380
Salomon Torres 4.63655255
Freddy Garcia 4.637146677
Roy Oswalt 4.641184854
A.J. Burnett 4.641198919
Rudy Seanez 4.64384390
David Weathers 4.64562288
Odalis Perez 4.64974344
Lance Cormier 4.65163293
Byung-Hyun Kim 4.661115536
Brett Tomko 4.667114532
Andy Pettitte 4.667171798
Brandon Webb 4.669172803
Jon Garland 4.670115537
Francisco Rodriguez 4.67091425
Ryan Dempster 4.67489416
Carlos Silva 4.67671332
Brian Lawrence 4.697109512
John Patterson 4.697185869
Jake Westbrook 4.697119559
Shawn Estes 4.69863296
Matt Clement 4.699146686
Jeff Fassero 4.70060282
Scott Linebrink 4.70070329
Aaron Harang 4.706163767
Sidney Ponson 4.70668320
Jason Isringhausen 4.70651240
Randy Johnson 4.706211993
Jason Johnson 4.71093438
Kip Wells 4.712132622
John Smoltz 4.716169797
Matt Thornton 4.71957269
C.C. Sabathia 4.720161760
Doug Brocail 4.72161288
Jorge Julio 4.72458274
Jeff Francis 4.727128605
Sean Douglass 4.72755260
Jason Marquis 4.730100473
Danny Haren 4.730163771
Julio Mateo 4.73152246
Victor Zambrano 4.732112530
Derek Lowe 4.733146691
Joe Nathan 4.73494445
Greg Maddux 4.735136644
Mariano Rivera 4.73780379
Dave Williams 4.73988417
John Lackey 4.739199943
Jake Peavy 4.7412161024
Jerome Williams 4.74370332
Javier Vazquez 4.745192911
Billy Wagner 4.74787413
Mike Wood 4.75060285
Runelvys Hernandez 4.75088418
Doug Davis 4.755208989
Claudio Vargas 4.75895452
Dontrelle Willis 4.759170809
Pedro Martinez 4.760208990
Mike Wuertz 4.76489424
Cory Lidle 4.769121577
Johan Santana 4.7692381135
Tim Wakefield 4.775151721
Neal Cotts 4.77658277
Jeff Weaver 4.777157750
Roy Halladay 4.778108516
Matt Wise 4.77863301
Brian Fuentes 4.78091435
Bartolo Colon 4.785158756
Juan Rincon 4.78684402
Josh Towers 4.786112536
Vicente Padilla 4.786103493
Mark Prior 4.787188900
D.J. Houlton 4.78990431
Hideo Nomo 4.79759283
Kevin Brown 4.80050240
Ramon Ortiz 4.80296461
Mark Buehrle 4.805149716
Mike DeJean 4.80852250
Cliff Lee 4.811143688
Brendan Donnelly 4.81153255
David Wells 4.813107515
J.P. Howell 4.81554260
Jarrod Washburn 4.81994453
Wandy Rodriguez 4.82580386
Tom Gordon 4.82669333
Brandon Claussen 4.826121584
Rich Harden 4.826121584
Joe Mays 4.83159285
Kevin Millwood 4.836146706
Brad Penny 4.836122590
Bruce Chen 4.842133644
Cliff Politte 4.84257276
Casey Fossum 4.844128620
Esteban Loaiza 4.844173838
Eric Milton 4.846123596
Josh Fogg 4.84785412
Chad Cordero 4.85261296
Josh Beckett 4.855166806
Tom Glavine 4.857105510
Felix Hernandez 4.85777374
Oliver Perez 4.86697472
Zack Greinke 4.868114555
Robinson Tejeda 4.87572351
Chris Capuano 4.875176858
Jeff Suppan 4.877114556
Mike Maroth 4.878115561
Ezequiel Astacio 4.87966322
Zach Duke 4.87958283
Brett Myers 4.8802081015
Jorge Sosa 4.88285415
Joaquin Benoit 4.88578381
Scott Kazmir 4.885174850
Barry Zito 4.895171837
Kyle Farnsworth 4.89787426
Rodrigo Lopez 4.898118578
Bronson Arroyo 4.900100490
Gary Majewski 4.90050245
Ryan Franklin 4.90393456
Joe Blanton 4.905116569
Luke Hudson 4.90653260
Kazuhisa Ishii 4.90653260
Brian Moehler 4.91695467
Noah Lowry 4.919172846
Kenny Rogers 4.92087428
Tim Hudson 4.922115566
Brad Radke 4.923117576
Ryan Vogelsong 4.92352256
Ambiorix Burgos 4.93865321
Adam Eaton 4.940100494
Mark Redman 4.941101499
Gustavo Chacin 4.942121598
Ryan Madson 4.94979391
Yhency Brazoban 4.95161302
Kyle Davies 4.95262307
Jason Schmidt 4.952166822
Justin Duchscherer 4.95385421
Glendon Rusch 4.955111550
B.J. Ryan 4.960100496
Danys Baez 4.96151253
Pedro Astacio 4.96278387
Kyle Lohse 4.96586427
Roger Clemens 4.968185919
Jason Frasor 4.96862308
Tomo Ohka 4.96998487
Ervin Santana 4.97099492
Joel Pineiro 4.972107532
Dave Bush 4.97375373
Jose Lima 4.97580398
Russ Springer 4.98154269
Victor Santos 4.98989444
Scot Shields 4.99098489
Daniel Cabrera 4.994158789
Carlos Zambrano 4.9952021009
Tony Armas Jr. 5.00059295
John Thomson 5.00062310
Seth McClung 5.01192461
Jay Witasick 5.01473366
Roberto Hernandez 5.01661306
Aaron Heilman 5.019106532
Chris Young 5.022137688
Ron Villone 5.02970352
Chan Ho Park 5.035113569
Orlando Hernandez 5.05591460
Aaron Fultz 5.05654273
Jim Brower 5.05753268
Curt Schilling 5.05787440
Jamie Moyer 5.059102516
Woody Williams 5.066106537
Mike Gonzalez 5.06958294
Gary Glover 5.06958294
Akinori Otsuka 5.08360305
Al Reyes 5.08868346
Livan Hernandez 5.088147748
Francisco Cordero 5.10179403
Gil Meche 5.10883424
Aaron Sele 5.11353271
Hector Carrasco 5.12075384
Ugueth Urbina 5.12497497
Kevin Gregg 5.13552267
Mike Mussina 5.141142730
Erik Bedard 5.144125643
Damaso Marte 5.14854278
Shawn Chacon 5.15279407
Jason Vargas 5.16959305
Jae Seo 5.16959305
Kirk Saarloos 5.17053274
Mark Hendrickson 5.18089461
Justin Speier 5.19656291
Scott Eyre 5.21565339
Brad Hennessey 5.21964334
Mike MacDougal 5.26472379
Andy Sisco 5.30376403
Guillermo Mota 5.31760319
Wade Miller 5.40664346
Al Leiter 5.44397528

The mean for this set of data is 4.815 Pitches per K and the standard deviation is 0.206. That should make the 95% confidence interval about 4.4 to 5.2. There are 236 pitchers in the set.

If Rich's conjecture is true, then we should expect his top pitchers to be near the top of the list. This is not true. The highest ranked pitcher in his top 6 is Carpenter at 21, 4.535 pitches per K. Santana ranks 102, Peavy 90, Pedro 99, Prior 113, and Randy Johnson 70. These five are all between 4.70 and 4.79.

The bottom six do on average throw more pitches per strikeout. Four of them, Lima, Rogers, Lohse and Arroyo were between 4.9 and 4.98 pitches per strikeout. In other words per 100 strikeouts, the bad goup throws about 20 more pitches than the good group! On top of that, Horacio Ramirez, the lowest ranked pitcher in Rich's list, ranks 30th in Pitches per K, right near Chris Carpenter. Marquis ranks 80, better than most of the top six.

This was the point I was trying to make last night. It takes a few pitches to set a batter up for the strikeout. Efficiency comes from other things; not walking batters, or getting players to chase bad pitches early. It's not just from striking out batters on fewer pitches. Strikeouts per 100 pitches does help separate good from bad pitchers, but it's not just because of fewer pitches per strikeout.


Posted by David Pinto at 08:48 PM | Pitchers | TrackBack (0)
Comments

Gosh, I don't know where to even start. First of all, I apologize if I misled you or anyone else. I never meant to suggest that pitchers with high K/100P rates strike out batters using fewer pitchers than pitchers with low K/100P rates.

It's too bad that one sentence (taken out of context, I might add) led you to criticize my idea and findings. I still stand by the point I made in that sentence: "a pitcher who strikes out hitters on three pitches is more effective than those who take five or six to get the job done." The operative words are "more effective." Quite literally, a pitcher is "more effective" if he strikes out a batter on fewer pitches. But striking out individual batters on fewer pitches wasn't the point of the article.

Your list above compares apples to oranges. As I explained, my universe of pitchers consists of those who tossed 162 or more innings. It did not include relievers like Brad Lidge, Bobby Jenks, etc. nor did it include starters with less than 162 IP. Moreover, unlike K/100P, your list doesn't identify anything other than the average number of pitches per strikout.

It's too bad you didn't focus on my conclusion:

"We have known for some time that strikeouts are the out of choice. The more Ks, the better. We also know that the fewer pitches, the better. Combining high strikeout and low pitch totals is a recipe for success. The best way to measure such effectiveness is via K/100 pitches...I believe this stat just might be the best way to measure pitcher dominance, if not overall performance."

The bottom line is that if you believe in the power of strikeouts, you should believe in the power of K/100P as an indicator of pitching success. K/100P does a better job of identifying run prevention than K/9 or K/BF.

Posted by: Rich Lederer at February 21, 2006 10:49 PM

That is honestly one of the most interesting lists I've seen in a while.

There's an interesting trend I notice, but need to look up on before I make any conjecture.

Posted by: Mike lafser at February 21, 2006 11:48 PM

I have to agree with David Pinto on this one. It is well known that most strikeout pitchers throw more pitches than guys who rely on hitters putting the ball in play. Strikeouts per 100 pitches rewards the guys with pitches like a sinker which will cause more outs early in counts. Most of the starters on this list are guys who don't have dominant stuff and therefore hittters put the ball into play more often. Guys like Peavy, Santana, Martinez, etc... will cause more hitters to swing and miss which means they will have to go deep into the count more often.

Posted by: Kevin Kett at February 21, 2006 11:49 PM

I posted this on Rich's site, but I thought why not annoy more people. If K/BB is so good, then does that mean Carlos Silva with 7.89K/BB is much better than Johan Santana at 5.28K/BB?

But on the other hand, why not just look at #P/Out? Or to get it more linear, by subtracting the ratio by 3? Do people actually use this?

Posted by: wilson at February 22, 2006 12:02 AM

For the record, pitches per strikeout are not the issue here. I'm measuring strikeouts per pitch, not the other way around.

Posted by: Rich Lederer at February 22, 2006 12:42 AM

A similar idea to Rich's is The Hardball Times' K/G (strikeouts per "game") which adjusts for efficiency:

"Strikeouts per games pitched. This stat is based on the number of strikeouts divided by total number of batters faced, times the average number of batters per game in that specific league (generally around 38 batters a game)."

Posted by: Chris at February 22, 2006 01:05 AM

Mr. Pinto –
What is the problem here? Do you dispute Rich’s finding that K/P has a higher correlation to the various measures of effectiveness (ERA/ R/G, ERC, FIP, DIPS)? If so, I didn’t read that anywhere.

If you don’t dispute his finding, acknowledge it and then forge your own path to prove the point – which has no relevance to Rich’s conclusion – that looking at the average number of pitches within each strikeout event does not produce a list of impressive pitchers, it just produces a non-impressive list.

Posted by: Tom at February 22, 2006 01:31 AM

I would like to inject that there is one thing I find to be of the utmost value in this list. Closers that are strikeout pitchers like Lidge producing results with lower pitch counts. Otherwise... no effect at all.

As a guy who pitched and caught (with limited success but I was told I played smart) sometimes an extra pitch or two to set up a batter is valuable in that at bat and perhaps even the next few following at bats.

While I enjoy stats there is a certain amount of gamesmanship that I do not believe can be quantified with numbers. Anyways, based on this post and the discussion it is obvious that it is Feburary.

Posted by: Ed Zipper at February 22, 2006 02:13 AM

I'm not sure I quite understand your point Dave.

What you're measuring seems to be quite different from what Lederer was measuring, and he pretty explicitly indicated as much in his original article. It shouldn't surprise us that the lists don't match. You seem to be going at things from a top down perspective(strikeouts to pitches), while he's going from bottom up one(pitches to strikeouts), while explains the difference pretty well.

Personally, I'm much more interested in the Lederer list, as it seems to indicate something pretty significant about pitching ability. Pitches per strikeout, I'm not sure what that's measuring. It might be significant as well, but I can't quite get my head around what that would be just yet...

Posted by: Kostya at February 22, 2006 03:27 AM

Dave; it seems that a pitcher who uses a lot of pitches but gets the K is rewarded under Rich's system, because the K outweighs the extra pitch or two he uses to set up the batter?

It's not the pitches per K that hurt, it's all the pitches thrown that result in batted balls and walks, right? I think Rich's idea makes perfect sense.

Posted by: bj at February 22, 2006 05:41 AM

Gee. What a shock. A fresh reliever throwing heat for one inning, two max, is more likely to strike out a relatively tired batter than a starter. I'm gonna party like it's 1959.

In all seriousness, there is an assumption here that strikeouts are the best measure of a pitcher's effectiveness. While Bill James has pointed out that guys that strike out inordinately few batters tend to wash out (e.g. Mark Fidrych), as others have pointed out, groundball pitchers with good control aren't likely to get many strikeouts, either.

Bottom line: HOW a pitcher gets outs isn't as important THAT a pitcher gets outs.

Posted by: Wooden U. Lyktneau at February 22, 2006 07:58 AM

I've now read Rich's piece four or five times. His thesis is that pitchers who strikeout lots of batters and are efficient in their use of pitches are very effective pitchers. I don't dispute this. What I dispute is that efficiency comes from striking out batters on fewer pitches. From my read of the article, this appears to be what Rich is implying. The point of the above chart is to demonstrate that the efficiency doesn't come from fewer pitches per strikeout, but from other places.

Posted by: David Pinto at February 22, 2006 08:06 AM

Note David's conclusion:
"Strikeouts per 100 pitches does help separate good from bad pitchers, but it's not just because of fewer pitches per strikeout."

It's worth clarifying that Rich's article had several hypotheses in it. (I think David was clear that his commentary was not focussed on the main hypotheses, one way or the other.)

1) One main hypothesis is that K/100 pitch is the best measure of a pitcher's strikeout proficiency.
2) In a closely related claim, K/100 pitch is "a recipe for success" or "the single greatest Defense Independent Pitching stat", since both high strikeouts and low pitch counts are good.

Then there is the subordinate hypothesis which Rich advanced as an reason of why hypotheses 1 and 2 might be believed:
3) strikeouts achieved on fewer pitches are better, because a)the pitcher getting low pitch strikeouts is better at missing bats, b)more likely to pitch deeper into game, c)more likely to record a greater number of outs.
[It's not clear if 3a is good because it means that such a pitcher gives up fewer balls in play, period, or because the balls in play are less likely to be hard hit.]

David has objected to the last (explanatory) hypothesis, and presented rather compelling evidence against it.

Posted by: joe arthur at February 22, 2006 08:29 AM

I think you guys are both arguing different things, and I think you're both right. I'm not sure Rich was implying that pitches/strikeout was important at all; he echoes that here in a comment above. And you're right David, a correlation between ERA and your table in your post here definitely disproves that idea I think. I think the bottom line of his article is that K/100 is better than K/9 or even K/BB, which is pretty striking to me. And if we trust his numbers, he's right.

Posted by: Mike at February 22, 2006 08:30 AM

David's findings DO shed important light on Rich's thesis. By showing that a high K/P ratio does not primarily reflect "efficient" strikeouts, it tends to confirm that a lower K/P (when comparing pitchers with similar K/BF rates) is telling us that a pitcher is making more pitches on other PAs. That is another indication that what Rich is really picking up is a higher walk rate and/or a higher hits on BIP rate. K/P is a combination of K/BF, BB/BF, and H/BIP, so it's not surprising that it correlates a little better with RA than K/BF alone. But as a hybrid stat that contains far less info than something like FIP or DIPS ERA, it's not clear what value it has.

Posted by: Guy at February 22, 2006 10:45 AM

What's the correlation on pitches per K to ERA or K/BFP rates?

Posted by: Trev at February 22, 2006 04:11 PM

To answer "Wilson"'s question: While K/BB is a descriptive and valued statistic, it does not tell the entire (defense independent) story, as does dERA or FIP. And also, I think Mr. Lederer was trying to analyze defense independent situations only, so pitches/out would not be defense independent. If you want to look up defense independent pitching (DIP) more, look up Voros McCracken, the "father" of DIPS, and mastermind of dERA.

Posted by: stat man at February 22, 2006 09:05 PM

Looking at both Rich's and David's analysis, I'm stuck by what appears to be a glaring problem. And that is that all the pitchers are being lumped together, rather than being separated by league. If you look at Rich's top 10 K/100P list, only two (Santana, Johnson) pitched in the AL last year. The difference between facing a DH or a pitcher is going to skew the statistics.

Posted by: BosoxBob at February 22, 2006 09:47 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?