November 28, 2006 at 12:30 AM

2006 Saves Per Inning Pitched

CHAD CORDERO / WASHINGTONPOST.COM
The 2006 relief ace celebrates a save.
I've got a non-Sox related article today (although I do chat quite a bit about how this relates to the Sox). I've got a non-hot stove related article today. I highly recommend reading this article even if you're not interested in statistics or anything non-Red Sox. It came together better than I expected.

In 2004, I invented a new statistic, Saves per Inning Pitched. The two and a half years of data I've covered this (I ran SIP numbers for some players in 2003) have left me unsure how valuable this statistic is. However, I'm going to continue doing it for a number of reasons.

One: Why not? It's not like there's a jillion other topics to write about. We'll get to them this offseason.
Two: This will be the third full year of SIP, which means there should be enough history to really gauge if SIP is good or not. (That is where I will rely on you readers: tell me if this is worthwhile or not, please)
Three: I'm curious to see how 2006 compares to 2005, 2004, and 2003 and if it's worthwhile to me.

Here's the article covering 2003, 2004, and 2005. Here's the rundown of SIP that I wrote last year:

Saves per Inning Pitched (SIP) measures the true worth of a closer. Is he someone who gets cheap saves? Is he someone only used for closing situations? Or is he someone the team depends on, that is used in close games, tie games, or even situations where there is no save opportunity but there is a save-the-team opportunity. SIP is a way to determine who is a closer and who is a relief ace. Which teams use their closer to get the saves, and which use them to keep the game close, to win against the opposition? Saves per Inning Pitched.

There are two limitations.

Limitation One: Said person that is being measured by SIP needs to have at least 50% of all team saves.

Limitation Two: The next person with the most saves on the team cannot have more than 25% of the total saves. Why is this limitation here? Splitting saves means there was no closer. This would reduce SIP to nothing, for it is measuring a closer. To sound like a broken record, SIP is to find out if full-time closers are closers or relief aces.

Additional points I want to make: This could be useful in free agency to figure out which teams are making people act like true closers and finding out why: Not durable enough? Injury history limiting them to one inning? How about similar SIPs for different closers under the same manager? That's a managerial trend. Again, it's the difference between a closer and a relief ace. This doesn't measure the effectiveness of a closer. I would much rather have Trevor Hoffman with 40 saves and a 1.50 ERA in 42 IP than John Doe with 30 saves and a 3.50 ERA in 80 IP. However, a relief ace (like Scot Shields or Keith Foulke in 2004) would always be inherently more valuable than Trevor Hoffman, provided they are as dominant.

For example, in 2004, Trevor Hoffman's SIP was 0.76, which means that 76% of the time, when Trevor Hoffman pitched, he got a save! Contrast that with Foulke's 39% in 2004.

Here are the 2006 SIPs, followed by a look back at some people's SIPs over the last four years and comparisons.

TEAM | PLAYER |PLAYER SV.|<font color="green">% of TEAM SV.</font>|Player IP | <font color="#000080">SIP</font> |  NOTES
	ARI  Valverde      18           <font color="green">52</font>      49.1      <font color="#000080">---</font>    Jorge Julio had 47% of team saves
	ATL  Wickman       18           <font color="green">47</font>      26.0      <font color="#000080">---</font>    7 people had saves for ATL!
	BAL  Ray           33           <font color="green">94</font>      66.0      <font color="#000080">0.50</font>   Walker and Baez should give him more save chances
	BOS  Papelbon      35           <font color="green">76</font>      68.1      <font color="#000080">0.51</font>   Team had 46 total saves
	CHW  Jenks         41           <font color="green">89</font>      69.2      <font color="#000080">0.59</font>   Hermanson 0.60 SIP last year
	CHC  Dempster      24           <font color="green">83</font>      75.0      <font color="#000080">0.32</font>   Howry 5 SV, team 29 total opportunities
	CIN  Weathers      12           <font color="green">33</font>      73.2      <font color="#000080">---</font>    8 people had saves
	CLE  Wickman       15           <font color="green">63</font>      28.0      <font color="#000080">0.53</font>   24 total chances! Thanks for the memories, Carmona
	COL  Fuentes       30           <font color="green">88</font>      65.1      <font color="#000080">0.46</font>   COL is my sleeper team next year
	DET  Jones         37           <font color="green">80</font>      64.0      <font color="#000080">0.58</font>   Jones in FLA 2005: 0.55 SIP
	FLA  Borowski      36           <font color="green">88</font>      69.2      <font color="#000080">0.52</font>    
	HOU  Lidge         32           <font color="green">76</font>      75.0      <font color="#000080">0.43</font>   Wheeler 21% of SV (9)
	KCA  Burgos        18           <font color="green">51</font>      73.1      <font color="#000080">---</font>    Joe "Vulcan" Nelson 26% of SV
	LAA  Rodriguez     47           <font color="green">94</font>      73.0      <font color="#000080">0.64</font>   0.67 SIP in 2005, 3 straight 0.67's (Percival) for LAA
	LAD  Saito         24           <font color="green">60</font>      78.1      <font color="#000080">0.31</font>   Baez 23% of SV (9)
	MIL  Turnbow       24           <font color="green">56</font>      56.1      <font color="#000080">-.--</font>   Cordero 16 SV. Cordero had 0.69 SIPs in 04+05 for TEX
	MIN  Nathan        36           <font color="green">90</font>      68.1      <font color="#000080">0.53</font>   0.61 SIP the past 2 years
	NYY  Rivera        34           <font color="green">79</font>      75.0      <font color="#000080">0.45</font>   0.57, 0.68, 0.55 last 3 years... losing faith in 'pen?
	NYM  Wagner        40           <font color="green">93</font>      72.1      <font color="#000080">0.55</font>   0.51 in 2003, 0.49 in 2005
	OAK  Street        37           <font color="green">69</font>      70.2      <font color="#000080">0.53</font>   54 team save opportunities
	PHI  Gordon        34           <font color="green">81</font>      59.1      <font color="#000080">0.58</font>    
	SDP  Hoffman       46           <font color="green">92</font>      63.0      <font color="#000080">0.73</font>   02: 0.64, 04: 0.76, 05: 0.75
	SFG  Benitez       17           <font color="green">46</font>      38.1      <font color="#000080">-.--</font>    
	SEA  Putz          36           <font color="green">77</font>      78.1      <font color="#000080">0.46</font>   He's just filthy.
	STL  Isringhausen  33           <font color="green">87</font>      58.1      <font color="#000080">0.58</font>   0.63, 0.66 in 04+05
	TBD  Walker        10           <font color="green">30</font>      20.0      <font color="#000080">-.--</font>    
	TEX  Otsuka        32           <font color="green">76</font>      59.2      <font color="#000080">0.54</font>    
	TOR  Ryan          38           <font color="green">90</font>      72.1      <font color="#000080">0.53</font>   0.51 in 2005
	WAS  Cordero       29           <font color="green">90</font>      73.1      <font color="#000080">0.40</font>   0.63 in 2005

The winner of the highest SIP award is unsurprisingly Trevor Hoffman. The lowest qualifier is Takashi Saito, but he gained the job later in the year. The second lowest qualifier was Ryan Dempster, but this is where SIP fails as it did with Saito: Dempster lost his job. He was not a full-year closer. Thus, the award goes to ... Chad Cordero! (Hmmm...)

TREVOR HOFFMAN / PADRESNATION.COM
Celebrating his 400th save, Hoffman is a true closer.
It could be a matter of Chad Cordero breaking out, but in 2003, Rocky Biddle had a 0.47 SIP for the Montreal Expos. Biddle has a career 5.47 ERA and in his 34-save year, had an ERA of 4.65. In 2004, Biddle had 11 saves at a 9.62 ERA and has not been heard since. 2004 was the year Cordero took over as closer and did not qualify for SIP. In 2005, Cordero registered a 0.63 SIP and this year, he's at 0.40. Could this be a matter of Robinson bringing Cordero along slowly in 2005 and now letting it rip in 2006? We need another year of Cordero to tell, but it's encouraging that he was used as a relief ace last year.

Poor Jose Valverde. five saves in his rookie year in 2003, eight in 2004 (Greg Aquino got the majority but did not qualify for SIP) and then the last two years has had the majority of saves but split time with Brandon Lyon (2005) and Jorge Julio (2006)

Here's the progression of Atlanta. John Smoltz with an 0.70 SIP in 2003 and 0.54 in 2004, then Chris Reitsma not qualifying for SIP in 2005, and Bob Wickman clocking in at an unqualified 0.69 (0.53 for a qualified SIP in Cleveland). They have had closer issues since Mark Wohlers. When will it stop? Wickman will get the ball in 2007.

In 2004, Joe Nathan had a SIP of 0.61, which he repeated in 2005. In 2006, the Twins relied on Nathan a lot more to the tune of an 0.53 SIP. Why? In 2006, the reliever ERA was 2.91. In 2005, it was 3.20 and in 2004 it was 3.93. You can thank Joe Nathan's 1.58 ERA for the dip in ERA in 2006, which I'm sure has a direct correlation to his SIP trend.

As mentioned in the notes, is Joe Torre losing faith in his bullpen? Well, he's got a good reason for it. The last four years of Rivera's SIP are: 0.57, 0.68, 0.55, 0.45. He's battled some injury trouble, so it's no surprise his SIP has spiked, but instead of staying steady or rising like Trevor Hoffman, it's going down. Here's the bullpen ERA of the Yankees from 2003 on: 4.02, 4.43, 4.37, 4.18. Let's walk through this. The best year was in 2003, and Rivera had a 0.57 SIP. No doubt trusting his bullpen in addition to Rivera's issues, the SIP spikes, but so does the bullpen ERA. Bringing it back down makes progress, but not significantly. Bringing in Kyle Farnsworth, Mike Myers, and an increased (by far) focus on Rivera (and his low ERA) brings the ERA back down. So my answer to Torre losing faith in his bullpen is: yes, absolutely.

Next look is at Billy Wagner. Wagner had a 0.51 SIP with Houston in 2003. In 2005 with Philadelphia (2004 he didn't meet the 50% qualification due to injury), it was 0.49 and this year with the Mets it was 0.55. Pretty similar and predicable trend: Wagner was right down the middle, as most closers end up being. (Above 0.50 is more of a closer, below 0.50 is more of a relief ace.) As he aged and moved to the Mets with a stronger bullpen, the SIP rises. I would not be surprised to see it keep rising or at the very least, not fall.

Trevor Hoffman is still fantastically only a closer. His 2002 SIP was 0.64, then he was injured. He was still primarily used as a closer in 2002 because of his upward tick in age and injury questions. But when he returned from injury in 2004, he became even more of a closer at a 0.76 SIP. In 2005, a 0.75 came his way and in 2006, a 0.73. Fascinating.

Isringhausen is the last example before I turn to Boston. In 2004, I measured his SIP at 0.63. It went up to 0.66 in 2005, and he was garnering about 81% of all team saves. In 2006, his SIP went down, to 0.58 while nabbing 87% of team saves. Big surprise, as the bullpen had a 4.06 ERA in 2006 and a 3.17 one in 2005. Isringhausen logged more innings because they had a worse bullpen. However, getting hurt near the end and keeping him out for the playoffs makes me easily predict that SIP shoots up next year.

It's obvious that the effectiveness of a closer spreads all over to the effectiveness of the bullpen, and the more the closer is used as a relief ace, the better the bullpen performs.
Okay, the Red Sox now.

Byung-Hyun Kim did not qualify for SIP in 2003. In 2004, Foulke logged an amazing 0.39 (the year before that in Oakland was 0.50). We relied on Foulke a lot, and it probably cost him his career. In 2005, Foulke imploded, and nobody registered a SIP. In 2006, Papelbon nabbed a 0.51 SIP that would probably have been lower if he had pitched all of September.

Here's the bullpen ERA for the Red Sox from 2003 on. In 2003, it was a bullpen-by-committee sort of thing, with Byung-Hyun Kim plugging the hole in the dam for a while. In 2004, it was Keith Foulke. In 2005, it was a mix-and-match with Foulke flailing due to injury. In 2006, Papelbon anchored the bullpen. Anyways, ERAs from 2003 on: 4.83, 3.87, 5.15, 4.51. Wow. Let's look at this. In 2003, the bullpen by committee failed. In 2004, using Foulke as a relief ace, the bullpen pulled together and performed admirably despite any other high-impact players other than Mike Timlin (and maybe Alan Embree, but we did depend on folks such as Curtis Leskanic ... nothing against him, he won Game 4 of the ALCS). In 2005, the bullpen and Foulke imploded, and in 2004, the only bright spot was Papelbon which accounts for the ERA trend downward. It's obvious that the effectiveness of a closer spreads all over to the effectiveness of the bullpen, and the more the closer is used as a relief ace, the better the bullpen performs.

Why? The closer IS THE BEST RELIEVER ON THE STAFF. The more you use him, the better the bullpen performs. This is illustrated perfectly with the Rivera and Red Sox example. (The aberration is Trevor Hoffman, but that's largely because of Kevin Towers' innate gift at compiling a bullpen - but the only reason Hoffman is not a relief ace is because of his injury troubles.)

Well, that closes my look on SIP, and my thoughts? I'm going to keep doing it. It's far from a perfect statistic and only applies to about 10 of all closers every year, but then again, closers always change quickly. It's hard to find that one good, consistent closer, so when you do, you do all you can to hang onto him. Closers change as fast as the career track of Britney Spears. When used right, SIP is quite illuminating.

Discussion

7 Comments on "2006 Saves Per Inning Pitched"

#1

user-pic

Posted by Geo, November 28, 2006 5:36 AM

Very interesting stat I must say Evan. As I was reading through the article I thought about how ridiculous Foulke's SIP would have been in the 2004 Playoffs. With 3 saves in 14 IP meant a SIP of .21! Definition of a relief ace I must say.

In a per year format it's a pretty intuitive stat - a high SIP would either mean a Hoffman type closer where injuries/age is an issue or a lights out closer ala K-Rod or Jenks. Usually these guys would be the last piece of a very reliable bullpen. Low BIPs on the other hand could be good or bad: either a very good closer who needs to help a weak bullpen (Mariano) or just a bad closer who pitches with a save on the line but blows it (Dempster/Lidge).

It'd be interesting to track these kind of numbers 1) split by month and 2) compared to split bullpen ERA's (maybe even excluding the closer). See if there are any trends/correlation. Perhaps there are high SIPs in the early months but Post-ASB as games are more important you see these numbers dip as 2-inning saves become necessary.

Tracking the month of September would also be really interesting...this is usually the time when wins are at a premium and closers are asked to come in the 8th inning. How well do these closers perform in such situations? One that sticks out for me is a guy like Joe Borowski. As an example:

Apr: .38
May: .24
Jun: .87
Jul: .52
Aug: .71
Sep: .39

Just looking at it I'd attribute the low SIPs not to poor save conversion but lack of opportunities (the Marlins were poor early on). He was very reliable June-August (only 3 blown saves in 28 opportunities) but then had a bad August. What the .39 SIP shows me either a) Borowski isn't reliable in playoff race baseball or b) he can't be overworked/tires late in the season. In that month he had as many blown saves as the 3 months prior! It'd also be interesting to see how his fellow relievers perfomed. Looking at those splits could lead to even more questions.

Anyways I'll stop now but hopefully that shows how the number could be utilized a little more than you may have thought to.

Reply

#2

user-pic

Posted by Evan, November 28, 2006 5:48 AM

Wow Geo, that's great stuff. Your suggestions are definitely on the mark, and maybe I'll check out that trend for Papelbon in another article. I'm not sure how to compile a relief ERA minus the closer, but pre-ASB and post-ASB SIPs, month-by-month SIPs, and the like would really shed a lot of light on a bunch of things. Good stuff!

Reply

#3

user-pic

Posted by Paul, November 28, 2006 6:11 AM

Sorry, but I think that the SIP is "junk." Saito pitched more innings over the year than did Hoffman and, well, look at Ks to BBs, Ks per innings pitched, opposing BA, OBP, and SLG, and ERA. And so, if there had been a one game playoff for the National League West crown to end last year's regular season, I'd have taken Saito as my closer over Hoffman in a heartbeat. When Saito's slider was on, which was not an infrequent occurrence, as the numbers suggest, he was very nearly unhittable. I'd call the Cy Young voting "racist", but then some would only accuse me of "playing the race card." Though to be fair, I suspect that Saito's single vote, and Hoffman's coming in second, had less to do with racism and more to with reputation [Hoffman has one, Saito doesn't] and it would appear that the lazy east coast and midwest sports writers can't even be bothered with having to look at the box score the following morning after having retired to bed before Saito came in to strike out the side in the 9th.

You have otherwise made a logical error, since you are including as part of Saito's total IPs, innings that we never intended to earn a save, and so why are you counting such against him when it comes to saves per inning pitched? True, there might be more pressure in closing, and maybe that's why some do just fine as middle relief or the set up guy, but who don't so well closing, but at least for calculating SIPs, you might want to only include those innings that are save innings.

By the way, I am a Dodgers fan and I can safely say that once Saito became our closer, we never brought him in early in what can be called a save the game situation, despite the desire on the part myself and some others that we do so, while there was still a game to save.

Lastly, please do not think that team loyalty prompts my comments, as soch does not. The numbers speak for themselves. Measured strictly by such things as IP, Ks per inning pitched, Ks to BBs, opposing BA, OBP, and SLG, and ERA, Saito was Hoffman's superior in every respect last year. Wasn't his fault that team management didn't see the greatness sooner. Ditto re the lazy sports writers who don't know what the word "honor" means.

Reply

#4

user-pic

Posted by Evan, November 28, 2006 6:42 AM

Paul, just a note that I said in my article that SIP doesn't really measure the effectiveness of a closer. It really just looks at the trend of how a closer is used, and why.

The rest of your comments are definitely interesting, so thanks for that.

Reply

#5

user-pic

Posted by Geo, November 28, 2006 6:54 AM

Thanks! Going a bit further would definitely be a lot of grunt work...it definitely would be a lot easier if you had all these reliever numbers/splits available via database/spreadsheet or whatever. It'd still be interesting to see how such breakdowns would look for certain guys.

Paul, no stat is ever perfect so to dismiss it as junk is bit harsh. Just using save innings would more show a closer's ability of getting a save which you could do simply by dividing saves by save ops. I think if you looked at this more as a closer's value not just strictly as a 9th inning guy but instead late 7th-8th as well. If you look at it along with the rest of the guys in the pen it could be pretty useful tool when it comes to putting a bullpen together.

Going back to the Foulke example imagine you're Theo post 2003 trying to put together your 2004 roster. You notice Foulke's SIP was .49, which shows that besides being a straight up 1-inning closer (like K-Rod) he helps in other roles (8th inning work). From this you could conclude that if you could get Foulke and a solid rotation (Pedro/Schilling) the rest of the bullpen would not be too important i.e. Foulke could come in the 8th if things got dicey. Looking at 2004 you'll notice the SIP dropped to .38 for the regular season and .21 in the playoffs. Just think of the 2004 ALCS...Foulke was a friggin horse and never faltered. It felt like you could throw him out there for 3-4 innings for back to back nights and he'd be "closerlike" in all 3-4 innings. That's one way you could look at the stat. Perfect? Of course not, but it's pretty interesting to look at when you consider it along with other stats/factors.

As far as Saito goes I'd stay away from race being an issue but instead the fact that he started to close 2 months into the season. Kind of the same way missing the last month of the season hurt Papelbon's chances of winning an award. Hoffman's breaking the saves record was also a big deal. I mean if race was an issue than Ichiro wouldn't get any rewards like MVP/ROY/Gold Glove, right?

Reply

#6

user-pic

Posted by Ryne, November 28, 2006 12:51 PM

I'll try to offer a little constructive criticism. If I understand this right, you're trying to look for Jamesian relief aces by finding guys that theoretically get longer (1.1+ innings) saves. Unfortunately, the stat you've created is better at identifying one-inning closers than anything else. To score highly on S/IP, pitchers must pitch almost exclusively in save situations, convert a lot of those opportunities, and do so in one inning or less. SIP really tells you who is Trevor Hoffman and who is not Trevor Hoffman.

Pitchers who score low on this measure can fail on any combination of the three critera. You've attempted to correct for this by setting save and save% requirements. However, you still have to look at low scores on a case by case basis and throw out most of the pitchers. For instance, some teams might only have one or two saves a week, but the closer comes in for non-saves to get work in. A pitcher could blow saves or appear in non-save situations, thus decreasing saves per IP. Pitchers just above the cut-offs you set would also look like relief aces.

If you're really interested in the question I think you are, IP/appearance and SaveOpp/appearance should get you a better look at reliever usage.

Reply

#7

user-pic

Posted by Jared K, November 28, 2006 1:40 PM

A sort of related thought to the last article as well as this. With the Dodgers perhaps being the best fit for Manny, I was thinking a great resolution to the closers role would be to take Brad Penny in the deal (if it happens). With his injury history he may be open to converting to a closer. Anyone who saw the all-star game where he started and knew he was going to only be pitching an inning, maybe two, saw what he might be able to do in that role. He was hitting 98-99 and has a great curveball, he was blowing the AL All-Stars away. If he was willing to convert that would be intriguing, you would be paying him closer's money but it may be their best option if he was willing to consider it. The Dodgers has seemed willing to move him and would certainly prefer to include him over Billingsley, it may make them more willing to include two out of the Kemp/Laroche/Loney list if they were keeping Billingsley. Also apparently Laroche can play short-stop as he was moved from that position to 3rd before Joel Guzman turned into a power forward. I'm assuming he would not be a great short-stop in the field, however he could also spell Mike Lowell next year or we could move Lowell for other help if he can't

Reply

Leave a comment