Is Scott Baker One of the Best Pitchers In the American League?

by Jesse on Jun 30, 2011 9:01 AM EDT in Opinion

Scott Baker

#30 / Pitcher / Minnesota Twins

Height: 6-4

Weight: 215

Bats: R

Throws: R

Born: Sep 19, 1981

	W-L	G	GS	CG	SHO	SV	BS	IP	H	R	ER	HR	BB	K	ERA	WHIP
2011 - Scott Baker	6-5	16	16	1	0	0	0	105.2	97	38	37	12	29	101	3.15	1.19

Yesterday afternoon, as Scott Baker put down Dodger batter after Dodger batter, it was evident that we were watching a pitcher at the top of his game. After having lost six straight, including the first games of the series against Los Angeles, if Baker were able to keep the Dodgers off the board then he'd help the Twins halt their series losing skid at two. And that's exactly what he did.

In six June starts, Baker is 4-2 with a 2.45 ERA in 44 innings. He's struck out 40, walked just nine and allowed 39 hits. Most impressively, and this would be impressive for any pitcher who has made six starts in a month but it's even more impressive for Baker, is that he's given up just one home run this month. Yesterday's gem was his fourth consecutive start without serving one up.

Right now he's pitching as well as anyone. But is he turning into one of the American League's best starters? Not to ruin the suspense, but the answer is: not yet.

Still, he's actually not too far off. His strikeout and walk rates are both strong, and could match up with any of the six pitchers who I would dub the AL's best of 2011 (Jered Weaver, Josh Beckett, Justin Verlander, Gio Gonzalez, James Shields, Michael Pineda). There's nothing about his profile as a fly ball pitcher that means he can't be one of the league's best.

Mostly, Baker is just allowing a few more base runners and getting hit just that little bit harder. The six guys above have been extraordinarily stingy with hits this season, averaging less than a base runner per inning between them. Batting average against, between them, is under .200. Baker's mark of .244 is nothing to be ashamed of, but it falls a little shy of the elite levels set by the six pitchers listed above.

Baker is undoubtedly deserving of a place on this year's All-Star team. He's been a very good pitcher all season, he's been the Twins Ace over the last month (at least), and apart from Michael Cuddyer is probably the most deserving player from Minnesota to represent us at the mid-summer classic. But right now he's sitting firmly in that next tier of pitchers; guys who have been very good this season and probably deserve more recognition than they get, while not quite being the cream of the crop. Ricky Romero, Erik Bedard, and David Price all fall into that group, too, so it's not like Baker is in bad company.

Regardless of where he ranks in our more or less arbitrary ranking of starting pitchers, Baker has been a lot of fun to watch this season. It's the best we've seen from him, and it's exciting to watch him pitch to the level that many of us thought he could pitch to. It's been a great year for him. And with a few more starts under his belt like he's had in June, there may be a bigger case for Baker's consideration as one of the American League's best pitchers by the end of the year.

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

The sabermetric stuff has always liked Baker.

He projected very well in the projections I did and similarly well in others. Interestingly, he has sort of a rare combination of good Ks, good BBs, and bad results on batted balls (HRs esp.). Typically, if a pitcher is going to be good at 2 out of 3 of those categories, it will be Ks and batted balls—guys will throw nasty stuff that’s about as hard to control as it is to hit. Rare to have nasty strikeout stuff, control it well enough not to walk guys…but still get shelled a fair amount. Moonshot Scott in a nutshell.

by Luke in MN on Jun 30, 2011 9:52 AM EDT reply actions

I would like to see more starting pitchers selected to the All-Star team

Starting pitchers have it tough in awards voting. CYA voting only had ballot slots for 3 pitchers versus 10 for the MVP. Starting pitchers are routinely bumped off All-Star rosters because they pitched recently or because the manager wants a situational reliever for his All-Star bullpen. MLB rosters are 50% pitchers but All-Star rosters are never 50% pitchers.

These things alter the perspective on the value of good pitching. Bert Blyleven’s HOF case was much harder to build because “he didn’t make many All Star teams” and “he didn’t get many CYA votes”.

by DJL44 on Jun 30, 2011 10:20 AM EDT reply actions

Depends on what All-Star roster slots are intended for

If their intent is to provide a team of players to play the All-Star game, then I would disagree with you that there are not enough pitchers on the roster – you can easily work 20 position players into a 9-inning game, while you realistically can’t/shouldn’t play more than nine pitchers (I don’t want to watch an All-Star game bloated by mid-inning pitching changes).

If the intent is for it to serve as an honor for the players selected, regardless of whether they play in the game (a sort of midseason “all-league” team), then your position makes a lot of sense.

For what it’s worth, I am in the first camp – while it’s certainly an honor for the players, I think it’s primarily about fielding teams of great players to play a hopefully entertaining game.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Jun 30, 2011 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions

Home runs

Home runs are a more volatile stat, so it’s hard to tell whether he’s improved, or just hit a streak.

His success could disappear in a heartbeat, if the HR numbers increase in July. This is the Sabermetric question – he looked good in metrics, but bad innings, driven by HRs, killed him.

by snolls on Jun 30, 2011 12:02 PM EDT reply actions

True

But you have to look at the bigger picture. Scott Baker could give up two home runs per start and still get the victory because the Twins won. This means that Sabermetrics sometimes don’t tell the truth.

I'm a proud fan of the Minnesota Twins and Dallas Cowboys!
"Life is precious and time is a key element. Let’s make every moment count and help those who have a greater need than our own." – Harmon Killebrew

by Jessy S on Jun 30, 2011 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions

Let me fix that for you...

This means that ~~Sabermetrics~~ Wins sometimes don’t tell the truth.

"...and we'll see ya tomorrow night!" - Jack Buck, Game 6, 1991 World Series

by WindyCityTwinsFan on Jun 30, 2011 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 6 recs

This.

by Jesse on Jun 30, 2011 6:16 PM EDT up reply actions

Partially true

You just can’t go by the score on the scoreboard or announced on TV. You have to view the game within the context of the boxscore or television highlights. Sabermetrics are fine, but they don’t tell the truth. Those stats are ofter taken out of context and often used for fantasy play. That doesn’t mean that home runs aren’t a good deal for the Twins, but it produces a myth that says that when Scott Baker gives up a home run, the Twins lose.

by Jessy S on Jun 30, 2011 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions

Which stat says that again?

by archie2227 on Jun 30, 2011 9:30 PM EDT up reply actions

Out of context pitching stats.

All I am saying here is that pitching stats don’t always tell the truth. Sure Scott Baker could give up home runs, but it doesn’t mean that he will get the loss. He could give up a home run in his next start and still win the game.

by Jessy S on Jul 1, 2011 2:36 AM EDT up reply actions

Wins and losses aren't sabermetrics.

Sabermetrics tell you that wins and losses don’t tell the truth.

I think you understand the concept, but you’re not applying the concepts correctly.

by Jesse on Jul 1, 2011 6:14 AM EDT up reply actions

To be clear: that a pitcher's W-L totals don't tell the truth.

by Jesse on Jul 1, 2011 6:15 AM EDT up reply actions

To be fair

Nothing tells the truth except the box score. I’m not saying that Bert Blyleven doesn’t deserve to be in the Hall of Fame, but sabermetrics can be twisted to put anyone in the hall, and they have been twisted in Bert’s case. Not to say it is a bad thing because voters tend to use the win-loss record to decide if a pitcher is worthy.

by Jessy S on Jul 1, 2011 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions

Those stats exist

Among the multitude of stats available on FanGraphs is the percentage of fly balls that resulted in home runs (HR/FB). Research has shown that pitchers have lots of control over their ground ball and fly ball rates, but very little control over the percentage that go over the fence (luck and stadium effects seem to be much more prominent) – the difference between xFIP and FIP is that xFIP uses fly ball rate instead of home run rate in an attempt to account for this.

Looking at the splits, Baker has probably been at least a bit lucky. His HR/FB in June was 5.6%, against a career rate of 9.3% and a 13.5% rate in May. I doubt he can keep up a rate like he did in June, but assuming it stabilizes around league average (around 9%), he’ll still be a very effective pitcher.

"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

by BeefMaster on Jun 30, 2011 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions

Agreed.

I didn’t mean to imply that he’d improved something or found a way to figure out how to avoid home runs. Only that he hadn’t given them up. Sometimes I do try to subtly point things out but this wasn’t one of those times…I was being very superficial.

by Jesse on Jun 30, 2011 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions

On the season his HR/FB is right about at league average and a tick above the Twins' overall rate.

So if it’s luck in June, it’s just canceling out earlier bad luck from April/May. Overall he’s outperforming FIP and xFIP by a touch, but not a lot. They’d put him at around a 3.40 ERA instead of 3.15.

I have to imagine his HR/9 rate has improved a bit this season not so much because he’s getting lucky on fly balls, but because there are simply more guys striking out and fewer putting balls in play. But the other thing is, his homer rate isn’t really the big story at all this year. It’s below his career average, but not especially far below it. If it reverted to his career rate he’d still be pitching quite well due to the high strikeouts and

by Luke in MN on Jun 30, 2011 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions

HR/9 are part of most sabermetric metrics

Especially the projective kind, like FIP.

by DavidRF on Jun 30, 2011 6:35 PM EDT up reply actions

At his best? Of course.

Baker has always had the potential to be one of the top pitchers in baseball. He’s got great deception because his release point is exactly the same for all his pitches. The late-breaking action on his fastball gets lots of whiffs and bad contact. His curve and slider both break hard. He’s even got a good changeup.

The problem with Baker has always been refining his mechanics, making sure he follows through bent over, then finding that perfect rhythm. When he gets out of sync the whole thing falls apart. When he doesn’t finish his follow through, he sails everything high. This year it looks like he’s putting it all together early, plus he’s relatively injury free. No reason Baker can’t keep pitching just like this for the rest of the year. At this point, Scott Baker is indeed one of the best pitchers in baseball. Not as flashy as Verlander, but just as effective.

by jimbo55403 on Jun 30, 2011 12:09 PM EDT reply actions