Tuesday, February 6, 2007

Bob Howry

Bob Howry has been a decent middle reliever for a long time. In fact, at one point he was really good. Then, in 2004 and 2005 he was just ok...not great. After a move to the National League, he was excellent...far better than he's been the past few years. I'm a big believer in the impact of pitching in the AL vs. the NL. I think that not only is the AL tougher because of the designated hitter, but that there's been a fairly big skill gap between the two leagues for the past few years.

Year League Team IP BB K
2004 AL CLE 42.2 12 39
2005 AL CLE 73 16 48
2006 NL CHC 76.2 17 71

So this is a case where a pitcher did better because of moving to the NL and we can expect more of the same in 2007, right? Not necessarily. For relief pitchers, I think the impact of the designated hitter is much less than starters. Even in the NL, relievers aren't facing many pitchers, because typically a pinch hitter is sent up to bat when it's the pitcher's turn. So I don't expect Howry to exactly duplicate 2006, although I do think he'll still be an effective reliever. I think he actually was somewhat unlucky ending up with a 3.17 ERA in 2006, so he could certainly repeat that, even if his peripherals aren't as good this year.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Just got here via Roto Authority....
Great idea. Already bookmarked it.

flynn said...

I like your blog but your analysis of Howry is completely inaccurate, i.e. "Then, in 2004 and 2005 he was just ok...not great. After a move to the National League, he was excellent...far better than he's been the past few years."

2005 (CLE): 73 INN, 0.890 WHIP, 2.466 ERA, 7 W, 43 HA
2006 (CHC): 76.2 INN, 1.142 WHIP, 3.189 ERA, 4 W, 70 HA

I agree that a pitcher's stats generally improve going from the AL to the NL but using Howry as your 'proof' is way off base. I don't see how it is at all possible Howry was 'just OK' in 2005 but 'excellent' in 2006. In fact, Howry was dominant in the stronger AL, and good in the weaker NL

Alex said...

flynn - I'm mostly going off K/9 and K/BB since they're better predictors of ERA than ERA itself is. Basically I think he was very, very lucky in 2005.

flynn said...

Alex,
I agree that K/9 and K/BB are very useful for projections, much more useful than ERA. But looking BACK on 2005 and 2006, Howry was better in 05 than 06. Sure, he had 23 more K's in 06, in 3.2 more innings. But I'd expect his K's to increase while pitching against pitchers and inferior lineups in the NL. On the other hand, he gave up 21 more hits in 06 and his BB/9 increased (slightly) as well.
Ask any fantasy owner, or general manager, if they'd rather have the Howry of 05 or 06 and I think they'd all take 05.
Oh, and while ERA may largely be luck, I've never heard of a pitcher being 'very, very lucky' to finish a season with a 0.890 WHIP!!