- Jesse Crain has been unlucky. His (opponents' batting average on balls in play, BABIP) is .346, which is inflated and will regress to the league norm of .295, resulting in lower WHIP and more effectiveness.
- Speaking of effectiveness... Jesse Crain has been effective (did not allow an earned run) in 12 of his 17 appearances this season. I understand that this might look like a surprise to some. If we look closer at 5 appearances he has been ineffective, 4 of them came with 3 days rest and one with no rest. Here is how opponents hit against Jesse Crain, based on how much rest Crain has before he pitches:
- No rest: .444/.500/.889 (1.389 OPS)
- 1 day rest: .286/.286/.357 (.643 OPS)
- 2 days rest: .176/.176/.235 (.412 OPS)
- 3 days rest: .417/.481/.917 (1.398 OPS)
So, Jesse Crain has been effective other than when he pitched with no rest or 3 days of rest. This could be explained by the fact that his fastball has been his most ineffective pitch. A hard thrower like Crain needs some rest to command his fastball but not enough rest so that his fastball becomes too flat (which has been a general complain about Crain). So it looks like how and when Crain is used affects his stuff and not that "Crain has lost his stuff" per se - So is a manager or a pitching coach supposed to be a seer and guess that when Crain has too much rest he is not himself, so they use him with less rest? Not exactly... Here are Crain's career numbers (opponents hitting) with various days of rest (same as above, but career, not only 2010 and just OPS, not slashlines):
- No rest: .669 OPS
- 1 day rest: .719 OPS
- 2 days rest: .636 OPS
- 3 days rest: .817 OPS
Clearly, Crain has always been less effective when rested 3 days. His manager and pitching coach should have known that and not have allowed it to happen. They should set him up to succeed and not fail. As far as the discrepancy of the no rest numbers between 2010 and career go, it could be an artifact due to that single (the one of the 5) bad outing with no rest this season (5/18 0.1 IP, 2 H, 2 ER, 1 HR) and just the sample might not be enough. The 3 days rest day, based on the career is significant - So how much has Jesse Crain hurt the Twins in 2010: Not that much. His total win probability added (WPA) for 2010 is = -0.02, which is close to zero. Players like Cuddyer (WPA = -0.96, which is losing a game practically) and Drew Butera (WPA = -0.78) have hurt the Twins more. Could this be because Crain was good only when the game was not close? Let's look at the numbers. This is how opponents hit against Jesse Crain in 2010, in high leverage, medium leverage and low leverage situations:
- High Leverage: .231/.286/.385 (.670 OPS)
- Medium Leverage: .313/.353/.438 (.790 OPS)
- Low Leverage: .333/.378/.690 (1.068 OPS)
In other words, Crain has been very good when the game was close and not so good in mop-up role and really has not cost the Twins games this season.
What can one do to make Crain successful? I know that it might appear counter intuitive to many, but the above suggest:
- Use him only with 1 or 2 days rest
- Do not use him in mop up situations
- And Crain, truthfully, has pitched much better than his ERA suggests this season, really... (His FIP is 2 points less than his ERA, btw, for the ones who like that metric.) He just has not been used in the right manner and failed when used in the wrong manner. So it is unfair to him to be the sacrificial lamb for the Twins' struggles...
7 comments:
You are out of your mind. Crain is the worst relief pitcher since Ron Davis and needs to be released. I dislike the way Gardy manages too but Carin has been given every chance imaginable.
Jack,
Crain pitched did not allow a run in 12 out of his 17 outings this season. So in 71% of the games he did his job. To see how that compares to others in the team:
-Mauer did not get a hit in 10 of the 33 games he played. So in 69% of the games he did his job (that's less than Crain.) Back to the pen. Here is the percent of games that all relievers appeared in this season in which did not allow a run (min 5 games) :
Guerrier: 84%
Nesher: 83%
Duensing: 82%
Rauch: 80%
Mahay: 77%
Mijares: 75%
Crain: 71%
Burnett: 62%
So, Crain is close to the bottom of a decent pen, but a. not in the bottom and b. not that far away from the rest of the pack....
As far as the Ron Davis comparison... Only 52% of Ron Davis' games his last season with the Twins were scoreless.
Some other % scoreless games from the past:
Aguillera, first season with the Twins (1990): 77%
Guardado, first season as closer (2001): 76%
Reardon, first season as closer (1987): 70%
LaTroy Hawkins, first season as closer (2000): 67%
Joe Nathan, first season as a closer: (1994): 90%
methinks that Reardon in '87 was regarded as pretty successful, don't you think?
You mentioned Crain and command of fastball in the same paragraph. IALTO
I can't agree with you on this. In the 5 games he gave up a run (of the 17 you mention before 5/21), he gave up at least 2 in all of them, and 3 runs in an inning or less of work 3 times. When he's bad he's REALLY bad which is not what you want out of a relief pitcher. Rauch at least doesn't break when he's 'bending', Crain shatters.
That triple last night was all Span... If Span did not dive for the ball and held to a single, only one run would have scored and there would have been men on 1st and 2nd with 2 outs... At least one of those runs should have been E8
Now you're just not paying attention to my words to try and fit your argument. I said nothing about the Span play or game, everything in my comment was in reference to the 17 appearances Crain made before 5/21 that you mention in the article (hence the "of the 17 you mention before 5/21" blurb I put in said comment), not any others.
In defense of the Span play, if he takes a different (deeper) angle to cut off the ball, it still is a double and probably reaches the wall, do they then both score, I don't know (probably not, I'll concede that), but like I said, I wasn't talking about that game.
Post a Comment