Why the hate for Heredia?

[markp]

You'd think a guy with ERA+ of 124 and 165 the past two seasons would get a little respect, but we have people cheering him going on the DL at NYYFans. Since his ERA+ with us was 365 (!) last year, why do so many people seem to think he's a terrible pitcher? It's insane.

Speaking of pitchers that some people mindlessly hate, how's this:
year ERA+
1999 238
2000 167
2001 109
2002 172
2003 145
2004 1.50 ERA and leads the NL six saves in six chances. Career 203 saves in 238 chances

I'd think a guy with numbers like that would get at least a little respect-say more than Gabe White or Ramiro Mendoza, wouldn't you? But he's universally dissed and has been for several years now. As Butthead would say "people are stupid."

[WiffleWOOD]

the main problem, markp, is his control. that's the main gripe most people have with him, myself included. he has an abysmal K/BB ratio (1.52 for his career, 1.36 last year), high BB totals (33 BB in 87 IP last year), and a high WHIP (1.47 for his career).

This lack of control, which is not just an illusion due to his somewhat wild delivery but is actually seen in his rates, leads many to be less than confident that he can perform. It's unfortunate, you're right, because he does have great stuff and has done a great job converting saves and keeping his ERA down.

But this is one of those times when the people who "use their eyes" and the people who read stats are pretty much on the same page: he looks wild, and he is wild. This doesn't make him an ineffective pitcher, but it makes him one without much of a fanbase.

[markp]

aren't always lousy pitchers. Nolan Ryan walked a lot, and he did OK. I don't really care how a guy gets a good ERA+, just that he does.

[AngelAstro]

I didn't realize his ERA+ was so good.

I think the problem that most people have with Heredia (myself included) is that he is wild. Looking at his walks the last 3 seasons:

2003 0.38 BB/IP or 3.42 BB/9 IP; 0.52 K/IP or 4.68 K/9 IP
2002 0.50 BB/IP or 4.50 BB/9 IP; 0.59 K/IP or 5.31 K/9 IP
2001 0.46 BB/IP or 4.14 BB/9 IP; 0.80 K/IP or 7.20 K/9 IP

The problem, especially for a reliever, is that Heredia walks alot of batters but doesn't strike out that many batters. Comparing him to the mindlessly hated reliever:

2003 0.56 BB/IP or 5.04 BB/9 IP; 1.03 K/IP or 9.27 K/9 IP
2002 0.37 BB/IP or 3.33 BB/9 IP; 1.17 K/IP or 10.53 K/9 IP
2001 0.52 BB/IP or 4.68 BB/9 IP; 1.22 K/IP or 10.98 K/9 IP

He walks even more batters, but he induces double the K's as well. Of course compared to the demigod Mariano:

2003 0.14 BB/IP or 1.26 BB/9 IP; 0.89 K/IP or 8.01 K/9 IP
2002 0.24 BB/IP or 2.16 BB/9 IP; 0.89 K/IP or 8.01 K/9 IP
2001 0.15 BB/IP or 1.35 BB/9 IP; 1.03 K/IP or 9.27 K/9 IP

And you wonder why Yankee fans have such a high standard for relievers? Rivera sets a sky-high standard that won't be matched anytime soon.

[AngelAstro]

Looking more closely at his lefty/righty splits:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlbhist/pl...&type=pitching

Strangely enough, righties and lefties have the same OPS against Heredia. How they get to the same OPS is completely different though. Heredia walks many more righties and lefties seem to hit him harder, but not as often.

So, the problem with Heredia, and probably many relievers, is how they are used. Torre will of course use Heredia as a lefty specialist. However, it would probably be best to use Heredia as a one inning pitcher. I wouldn't want to bring him in with men on base because he'll probably just make the situation worse by walking someone. Perhaps he would fluorish in a situation where he could start an inning with no one on base.

[markp]

as long as he gets them out." Earl Weaver.

I agree with Mr. Weaver about a lot of things baseball. He was one of the smartest and best managers in baseball history. And I especially agree with him on this one. Guys with good ERA+ aren't that easy to find. When you have one, you don't applaud when he gets hurt.

[WiffleWOOD]

mark, i agree, which is why I think that Heredia is a capable pitcher worth keeping. All I am saying is that he has a major control issue, which makes him an easy target for many fans (myself included sometimes).

[Rich]

Heredia seems to have more problems when he comes in with men on base.

[markp]

I wasn't taking issue with your assessment-I was taking issue with the knuckleheads that applauded him getting hurt in the other forum.

Rich, I checked his splits with men on base. A lot of pitchers have worse numbers with men on (especially with the bases loaded). His numbers are worse in some situations than his bases empty numbers, but often not by that much. His numbers with bases empty and no outs (611) are a lot better than bases empty and 1 or two outs (770). I think the huge difference between a runner on 2nd (646) and a runner on third (2.169) show the problem in trying to determine if there's anything to your assessment: far too small of a sample size.
So what you're saying may be true, there's not a large enough sample in a relief pitchers history to draw any solid conclusions.

[MattStewartJHS]

A lot of the time Heredia can't even get through a single inning and does not end up being responsible for keeping the men he put on base, on base.

This means your theory is crap.

[WiffleWOOD]

Originally posted by MattStewartJHS
A lot of the time Heredia can't even get through a single inning and does not end up being responsible for keeping the men he put on base, on base.

This means your theory is crap.

First of all, your last comment is way out of line.

Second of all, your argument makes no sense. In case you didn't notice, this is the Sabermetrics Symposium, which means that conversation here is backed up by legitimate evidence or statistics. Until you provide some, do not start flaming other posters.

[yanquis1957]

mark, i've never understood your obsession with era+. it's merely park and league adjusted era.

you know it is possible, especially with relievers, for a pitcher to get lucky two years in a row. if you go just a bit deeper and look at heredia's peripherals, as has been pointed out, you'll see he's not a good reliever, especially for a team with a terrible defense, where a good k/bb is a must. also, check his splits - his OPS against lefties is worse than any (constant) reliever on the staff. oh, as for the other part of the DIPS equation (which, as i recall, you're a believer in), homeruns - heredia gives up a lot of those too. he got lucky for a couple years, plain and simple. his career 4.37 ERA better reflects his actual ability.

[markp]

I understand the value of them, but I prefer results as opposed to these two. They're good tools, but ERA+ isn't how you do it, but what you did.
I think peripheral stats like those are great, but aren't as valuable as what actually happened.
I never said he was Mariano Rivera. I do think he's a servicable relief pitcher, and has value on this team.

[yanquis1957]

but mark, we're only talking about a handful of innings here. i think it's quite clear, when you look at heredia's past performance and the performance of other relievers with similar peripherals, that luck has played a substantial role over the past couple years. what i see with heredia is a pitcher whose k-rate has declined significantly for four consecutive years. he might be walking a few less batters to try and make up for it, but it's going to catch up to him in the end - even though his era was low over the past couple years, his k/bb in each of them was below his career average, and he wasn't giving up less home runs. his OPS against in 2002 was right at his career average, but due to luck (the small amount of innings, and probably being fished out by other relievers) his era was nearly a full point lower. his OPS against in 2003 was actually HIGHER than his OPS against in 2000 - but his era was over 2 full points lower! luck plays a gigantic role with relievers, which is why so few of them are consistently great - the ones that aren't probably never were - they just got lucky for a little while.