Beyond ERA: DIPS, FIP, xFIP & SIERA

Back in the old days all that mattered with a pitcher was wins, ERA and strikeouts. We’ve moved past that at this point, after all a real estate mogul/reality TV star is now the President of the United States, so we are prepared to look deeper, beyond the surface numbers when analyzing player performance. In this entry for the Draft Guide we will look at ERA and the various variations that have sprouted from it. What do these new measures mean? How are they useful when ruminating about pitchers and what they have to offer in fantasy baseball?

ERA: EARNED RUN AVERAGE

FORMULA: (Earned Runs / Innings Pitched) X 9

Here’s a quick rundown of ERA.

It’s not a very good measure of effectiveness.

Earned runs is what ERA is based on (genius I know).

Earned runs result from facts that are often beyond the control of the pitcher. Is it fair to punish a pitcher for these various issues (which will be discussed below)?

DIPS: DEFENSE INDEPENDENT ERA

FORMULA: ((IP*2.4) + (H*.83) + (HR*11.05) + (BB*2.81) - (SO*1.59) / ((IP*0.71) + (H*.244) + (SO*.097) - (HR*.244))
* This is the original formula. It has been revised multiple times since its invention.

Created by Voros McCracken, DIPS began the analytical analysis of ERA and the understanding that the measure has serious shortcomings. McCracken’s Defense Independent Pitching Stat, or DIPS, suggests that a pitcher’s skill level has little to no bearing on whether or not a batted ball becomes a hit. This means that the batting average a pitcher allows on balls put in play is random and the outcome of the batted ball is not in the control of the pitcher no matter how talented he is. Therefore, measures such as ERA and WHIP, which depend on defense dependent events (a single, double or triple, a ball put in play that results in an error or a ball put in play resulting in an out of some type), are fairly useless when it comes to predicting the performance of a pitcher moving forward. The reason for this is that ERA/WHIP are tracking randomly occurring events that have precious little to do with a pitcher’s skill level (some subsequent studies do suggest that pitcher's talent can have some bearing on the outcome of the batted ball, though still much less than one would suspect). The effect of DIPS is basically not to “blame” a pitcher for events that are out of his control by focusing on the events which are in his control. The events that are in a pitcher’s control are labeled Defense Independent events. Those events are strikeouts, walks, hit by pitch and home runs. The resulting DIPS totals therefore are a more precise tool that can be used to gauge a pitcher’s overall effectiveness from year to year than ERA which deals with too much white noise.

Before moving on to the 2016 leaders I need to know that certain portions of DIPS have been disputed, i.e. that maybe the events aren’t completely random, which is why there are further measures listed in subsequent segments that have attempted to take the idea of DIPS to a higher level.

Only two men posted marks under three last season. Sadly, only one will return in 2017.

Hendricks loses a full run from ERA to DIPS. Hendricks was phenomenal last season, but he’s unlikely to match his performance in the new campaign. The same can be said about his teammate, Jon Lester.

Jon Gray posted skills that vastly outperformed the real-world results. Gray posted a DIPS mark more than an entire run below his raw ERA. Same can be said for Robbie Ray and Michael Pineda. All three guys have skills that that suggest better times could be ahead in 2017, though each still has issues to deal with that don’t make improvement a certainty.

FIP: FIELDING INDEPENDENT PITCHING

FORMULA: ((13*HR)+(3*(BB+HBP))-(2*K))/IP + constant
* The constant is generally around 3.20.

FIP is a pitching measure that is more accurate at depicting the performance of a pitcher than ERA. FIP only takes into account the events that are directly in the control of the pitcher (K, BB, HR, HBP). In effect, FIP builds off the work of Voros McCracken with DIPS ERA by attempting to allow the FIP number to be representative of the events that are directly in a pitcher's control versus those that he cannot such as (a) how effective are his fielders? (b) where are those players being positioned by coaches? (c) did the fielders lose the ball in the sun? Issues along those lines. Here are the 2016 leaders in FIP.

The FIP results are very similar to those noted above in DIPS.

xFIP: EXPECTED FIELDING INDEPENDENT PITCHING

FORMULA: ((13*(FB% * League-average HR/FB rate))+(3*(BB+HBP))-(2*K))/IP + constant

A variation of FIP is xFIP or Expected Fielding Independent Pitching. This mark is recorded the same way as FIP with one variation – it normalizes the pitchers homer rate to what it should have been, i.e. the league average. In essence, you take a pitcher’s fly ball rate, multiply that by the league HR/FB ratio (generally in the 9-10 percent range), and arrive at a number that is more reflective of what the HR portion of the equation should look like. Here are the xFIP leaders.

Pineda flies up the board here. Why? The home run. Last year his HR/9 rate was 1.38, an extremely high number. Pineda continues to “score” well in advanced metrics, even if the results continually fall short of those skills.

Marcus Stroman posted an xFIP that was nearly an entire run below his ERA. Always liked this guy’s skill set.

Vets Corey Kluber and David Price settled in right around the 3.50 level. Price seeing the dip, Kluber the rise, according to raw ERA.

Maybe all hope isn’t lost with Dallas Keuchel.

Maybe all hope is lost with Kendricks.

Jake Arrieta really slumped last season based upon previous levels of production, and all the measures are seeming to suggest that his low-ish numbers were earned.

People are in love with Aaron Sanchez. Maybe they shouldn’t be so bullish.

Same can be said about Justin Verlander. I saw what he did last season, but I also saw the previous two years, note his age and mileage, and see a big time rise from his raw ERA in the advanced measures. The man he battled with for the Cy Young award, Rick Porcello, also didn’t flash the skills that were needed to reproduce his 3.15 ERA again this season unless things improve. Keep that in mind before you dive deeply into the Porcello pool.

Zach Davies and Jeff Samardzija were exactly as advertised.

Julio Teheran, one of my favorites, doesn’t have a fan in xFIP.

Tanner Roark plummets down the list as he picked up a massive 1.34 runs according to xFIP. He’s a Bronson Arroyo type or hurler – solid but not close to elite. I would be extremely surprised if Roark finished with an ERA within half a run of his mark from last season.

SIERA: SKILLS INTERACTIVE EARNED RUN AVERAGE

FORMULA: SIERA = 6.145 - 16.986*(SO/PA) + 11.434*(BB/PA) - 1.858*((GB-FB-PU)/PA) + 7.653*((SO/PA)^2) +/- 6.664*(((GB-FB-PU)/PA)^2) + 10.130*(SO/PA)*((GB-FB-PU)/PA) - 5.195*(BB/PA)*((GB-FB-PU)/PA)

SIERA, or Skills Interactive Earned Run Average, builds on the ideas of FIP by looking at what the pitcher can control even more directly. This measure focuses on walks, strikeouts and ground balls while trying to remove aspects of the game like ballpark, defensive efforts and simple luck. SIERA realizes that more grounders and more punchouts often equals fewer runs allowed. It is seen as a slightly more accurate take on FIP and is therefore a bit more predictive of future performance whereas FIP speaks more directly to what has already occurred. The 2016 leaders.

With each passing measure the Johnny Cueto train starts to lose some steam.

Ray continues to come out better than the ERA suggested.

Hendricks does not.

Neither does Porcello.

Gio Gonzalez is moving in the other direction – better than it looked.

Carlos Martinez is another arm that may have outperformed that ERA by a bit.

Drew Smyly... I still have a soft spot, but like Pineda, it never seems to come together for the lefty.

Wade Miley was much better than you think he was last year. That’s not that hard though when you post a 5.37 ERA.

J.A. Happ isn’t going to be on any of my teams in 2017. He shouldn’t be on yours either unless the cost is well below market value.

ERA VERSUS FIP

Easy says, easy does.

Take ERA and FIP. Subtract one from another. Viola, you have your answer. These are the pitchers who performed better than their ERA suggested. These are guys you might consider bumping up your personal rankings a bit. These fellas are low priced stocks that performed better than the bottom line would suggest. You want to keep an eye on the arms on this list because their draft day cost will be lower than the results that they will likely produce – provided they pitch in a similar manner in 2017 of course. Of course, you should just take the Fantasy Alarm rankings as gospel, but if you just so happen to make your own list…

Take FIP and subtract ERA. These are the hurlers who did not deserve the ERA they posted. That means their ERAs from 2016 should be viewed with an eye of skepticism. These fellas are the arms to spend a dollar or two less on than the rest of your league mates are planning to.