The ‘all in one’ pitcher efficiency rater

[Pea Hummer]

The Berns Pitching Efficiency Indicator establishes a ‘Pitcher Efficiency Average’ or (PEA) that I believe is the best 'all in one' stat upon which to rate pitchers who give up the least hits and walks and who allow the least earned runs every time they take the mound.

The equation my “Indicator” was birthed from adds the Hits, Earned Runs and Walks pitchers allow (HEW), then divides the total by their ‘Innings Pitched’, then multiplies that figure by 9 to get them ALL EQUAL, then divides that number by their ‘Innings Pitched Per Start’ or IPPS.

It is a truly amazing 'indicator' not only ranking the most efficient pitchers, but along with it gives us another ‘Key Indicator’ as to what Pitchers are 'controlling the zone' and keeping their 'pitch counts' DOWN to gives their ‘Bullpens’ a rest and allows them more IPPS that keeps their PEA down.

I believe the end result is a 'Pitching Efficiency Average' that sits itself head and shoulders above the traditional 'Alphabet Soup' favorites ERA, WHIP and W-L along with the somewhat still 'new kids' on the block, the ERA+ and the FIP/xFIP.

It could become the ‘Benchmark’ for rating Baseballs “Best” Pitchers and selecting Cy Young award winners? A good case in point would be Johnny Cueto who was ranked #5 in the Final 2012 ERA Rankings, yet when put under the scrutiny of the “Pitching Efficiency Indicator” he finished #16 in the more “efficient” PEA final rankings!

During the 162 game season I track pitchers who keep their PEA under 2.40, it usually flushes out about to 35 or 40 by August 1. The graph that I thought I could post had the top 39 who qualified with 162 innings pitched and kept their PEA under 2.40 during the 2012 season.

Hope this “equation” has peeked your interest, Lauren Berns founder of the ‘Berns Pitcher Efficiency Indicator’

[filihok]

The Berns Pitching Efficiency Indicator establishes a ‘Pitcher Efficiency Average’ or (PEA) that I believe is the best 'all in one' stat upon which to rate pitchers who give up the least hits and walks and who allow the least earned runs every time they take the mound.

The equation my “Indicator” was birthed from adds the Hits, Earned Runs and Walks pitchers allow (HEW), then divides the total by their ‘Innings Pitched’, then multiplies that figure by 9 to get them ALL EQUAL, then divides that number by their ‘Innings Pitched Per Start’ or IPPS.

It is a truly amazing 'indicator' not only ranking the most efficient pitchers, but along with it gives us another ‘Key Indicator’ as to what Pitchers are 'controlling the zone' and keeping their 'pitch counts' DOWN to gives their ‘Bullpens’ a rest and allows them more IPPS that keeps their PEA down.

I believe the end result is a 'Pitching Efficiency Average' that sits itself head and shoulders above the traditional 'Alphabet Soup' favorites ERA, WHIP and W-L along with the somewhat still 'new kids' on the block, the ERA+ and the FIP/xFIP.

It could become the ‘Benchmark’ for rating Baseballs “Best” Pitchers and selecting Cy Young award winners? A good case in point would be Johnny Cueto who was ranked #5 in the Final 2012 ERA Rankings, yet when put under the scrutiny of the “Pitching Efficiency Indicator” he finished #16 in the more “efficient” PEA final rankings!

During the 162 game season I track pitchers who keep their PEA under 2.40, it usually flushes out about to 35 or 40 by August 1. The graph that I thought I could post had the top 39 who qualified with 162 innings pitched and kept their PEA under 2.40 during the 2012 season.

Hope this “equation” has peeked your interest, Lauren Berns founder of the ‘Berns Pitcher Efficiency Indicator’

Does it consider defense or park effects? If not, I don't see how it can be better than ERA+, FIP, FIP-, SIERA etc

[Pea Hummer]

filihok asked, "Does it consider defense or park effects? If not, I don't see how it can be better than ERA+, FIP, FIP-, SIERA etc"
No it does not use those ‘xtra added attractions’ however Will Morrison ranked by ERA+ an all time ‘Top 50’ with his ‘top 20’ in the left hand column and what they would be ranked using the Pitching Efficiency Indicator equation in the right hand column.

Notice the drastic inconsistency or what you might call ‘over rating’ the ERA+ formula gives in the differential column compared to the efficiency oriented PEA.

If so inclined, go to Mr. Morrison’s site and punch in the numbers, thanks for your reply, Pea Hummer


ERA+ Pitcher Year PEA DIFF
1 Pedro Martinez 2000 2 -1
2 Greg Maddux 1994 4 -2
3 Greg Maddux 1995 5 -2
4 Bob Gibson 1968 1 3
5 Pedro Martinez 1999 18 -13
6 Dwight Gooden 1985 8 -2
7 Roger Clemens 2005 38 -31
8 Roger Clemens 1997 20 -12
9 Pedro Martinez 1997 11 -2
10 Kevin Brown 1996 26 -16
11 Roger Clemens 1990 32 -21
12 Pedro Martinez 2003 46 -34
13 Ron Guidry 1978 10 3
14 Zack Greinke 2009 41 -27
15 Pedro Martinez 2002 33 -18
16 Billy Pierce 1955 29 -13
17 Dean Chance 1964 13 4
18 Randy Johnson 2002 28 -10
19 Randy Johnson 1997 34 -15
20 Tom Seaver 1971 6 14

[Pea Hummer]

Grapics

Sorry for the 'sloppy' graph, it did not hold its columns after posting. Pea Hummer

[Pea Hummer]

Felt so bad about that last graph, this will help. Sorry about that, PH

Morrison's ERA+ Rankings are in order in the left column the recalculated and what I believe where they should be correctly ranked according to the PEA formula are in the PEA column. The differential column shows how the ERA+ formula has over rated all but FOUR who gained in their ranks with the PEA and are (bracketed)

ERA+---- Pitcher-------Year---PEA---DIFF
--1---Pedro Martinez--2000----2----- -1
--2---Greg Maddux-----1994---4----- -2
--3---Greg Maddux-----1995---5----- -2
--4----Bob Gibson------1968----1---- (3)
--5---Pedro Martinez—1999---18--- -13
--6---Dwight Gooden--1985----8---- -2
--7---Roger Clemens—2005---38--- -31
--8---Roger Clemens—1997---20--- -12
--9---Pedro Martinez--1997---11----- -2
--10---Kevin Brown----1996---26--- -16
--11---Roger Clemens-1990---32--- -21
--12---Pedro Martinez-2003---46--- -34
--13-- Ron Guidry------1978---10-----(3)
--14-- Zack Greinke----2009---41--- -27
--15-- Pedro Martinez-2002---33--- -18
--16-- Billy Pierce-------1955—29--- -13
--17-- Dean Chance----1964—13-----(4)
--18-- Randy Johnson—2002-28--- -10
--19-- Randy Johnson—1997-34--- -15
--20----Tom Seaver-----1971—6--- (14)

[Bothrops Atrox]

It should be noted, fwiw that both ERA+ and "PEA" omit defense behind the pitcher and BABIP luck/random fluctuation around true talent level (for those who hate the "L" word).

[filihok]

It is a truly amazing 'indicator' not only ranking the most efficient pitchers, but along with it gives us another ‘Key Indicator’ as to what Pitchers are 'controlling the zone' and keeping their 'pitch counts' DOWN to gives their ‘Bullpens’ a rest and allows them more IPPS that keeps their PEA down.

How "does" it DO this, give us insight into Which pitchers keep their pitch counts down? I didn't see that number of pitches is an input anywhere in the "formula"

[Pea Hummer]

The higher Innings Pitched Per Start or IPPS tells us 'outside' the formula that the +6.50 IPPS Pitchers have kept there 'pitch counts' down and eluded 'Captain Hook' longer than, for example the pitcher who holds a 5.50 - 5.00 IPPS average.

You are correct, Pitch count IS NOT in the formula but it DOES CORRELATE to a higher IPPS average that keeps their Pitching Efficiency Average, the PEA down. Thanks for your reply, Pea Hummer