With such small sample sizes to work with early in the season, it’s difficult to determine if a pitcher’s hot start is a fluke or the beginning of a breakout year. And vice versa, what to make of a pitcher off to a crappy start?

I use a 2-step process to come to a conclusion when evaluating pitchers this early. It consists of several questions I ask myself, which are as follows:

1. Is Pitcher A’s current ERA a true reflection of how he has pitched so far? What I mean is, looking underneath the surface, do his peripherals match his ERA? What should his ERA actually be given the skills he has posted so far? If Pitcher A has a 2.50 ERA, is that supported by a 9.0 K/9, 2.5 BB/9 and 50% GB rate, or does he have a 5.5 K/9, 3.5 BB/9 and 42% GB rate, which doesn’t quite jive with a 2.50 ERA? This step allows you to filter through the good/bad luck to get a more accurate picture of the pitcher’s true performance. A quick and dirty way to find out what a pitcher’s ERA should be is by looking at the xFIP statistic provided by The Hardball Times. The xFIP metric strictly looks at strikeouts, walks, and HRs allowed, but regresses this last number to a league average rate, based on the pitcher’s fly ball percentage. Once you determine what his current ERA should be based on his current skill profile, it’s time for step 2.
2. Does Pitcher A’s current peripherals fit in with his career skill set? Basically, could Pitcher A maintain his peripheral and continue posting what he has so far this season? Since we’re looking at a very small sample size of innings, it’s reasonable to believe that some pitchers will post much stronger or weaker strikeout rates/walk rates/ground ball rates than his career profile suggests he’s capable of. This could simply be the result of a good or bad stretch, which shouldn’t be expected to continue. Obviously, taking into account the pitcher’s age and various other factors to determine if improvement or decline in the peripherals is possible should be included in this analysis. So in a nutshell, while step 1 looks at how real the ERA is given the peripherals, step 2 looks at how real the peripherals are given the pitcher’s history.

Let’s put these 2 steps in action by looking at 2 examples to make the process as clear as possible.

Wandy Rodriguez

1. A 19/2 K/BB ratio in 19 1/3 innings, with a 42% GB rate and an xFIP of 2.85. The excellent xFIP compares to an actual ERA of 2.33, so the peripherals basically match the ERA, and Wandy passes Step 1 with a check mark.
2. With a career K/9 of 6.85, including 7.78 last year and 3 straight years of improvement counting 2008 so far, it seems possible the strikeout rate could remain this high given the growth trajectory, but I wouldn’t bet on it. Some regression towards last year’s rate is the better percentage play. With a career BB/9 of 3.47, including 3.05 last year, Wandy’s current walk rate is clearly unsustainable. And last, the GB rate is around where it’s always been, with a little upside potential given the 45%+ rates he posted in ‘05 and ‘06. So all in all, obviously the peripherals as a whole won’t remain this good, but could be better than last year. Some regression should still be expected, taking the ERA with it, and leading to a neutral rating for Step 2.

Final Verdict: Could be a pleasant surprise with a mini-breakout year (if you don’t include last season as his true breakout) and an ERA in the high 3’s.

A.J. Burnett

1. A 9/6 K/BB ratio in 17 1/3 innings, with a 48% GB rate and an xFIP of 4.38. The xFIP is much better than his actual 7.27 ERA, but still above what we’re used to expecting from Burnett. The 4.67 K/9 is way below A.J.’s career 8.11 K/9. Although the peripherals don’t exactly match the ERA, as his xFIP says he’s been unlucky, the skills are still worse than expected, matching the disappointing season his ERA implies, and therefore Burnett departs Step 1 with an X.
2. With a career K/9 of 8.11, including 9.56 last year, and no reports of any injury issues (yet), it’s reasonable to expect the strikeout rate to rebound close to its historical average. With a career BB/9 of 3.75, which is inflated due to poor control earlier in his career, the 3.12 BB/9 he is currently sporting is right as expected. Last, the GB rate of 48% is close enough to his career 51% that we could expect this to be maintained as well, with some upside potential as he hasn’t posted a GB rate below 50% since 2002. So all in all, the peripherals should be expected to improve based on Burnett’s history, bringing the ERA back down to below 4, and leading to a positive result as we finish Step 2.

Final Verdict: The injury worry is always there for Burnett, but he still makes for an excellent buy low candidate. Combine the poor start with the injury concerns, and you might be able to acquire him cheaper than you’d think.

Questions, comments, criticisms, praise, expert league invitations? Email me at FBGeneralsMike@gmail.com.