We decided to look at recent first-time starters. Last year 74 pitchers started games who had never before started in the majors. Through May 18 this year, 23 more had debuted. Those pitchers run the gamut from 15 guys whose 2002 was a single start, to Josh Fogg (33 starts) and Vincent Padilla (32) last year. The group, necessarily, includes fewer pitchers from the good teams - they did not need to try as many new pitchers. If the eight 2002 playoff teams were representative, they would furnish about 26% of the new pitchers in ‘02, but they only furnished 15% of them. So it is expected that the pitchers in the study lost more games than they won.
The questions posed were: 1) how well did the pitchers do in their first starts? 2) how did they do in their first 5 starts? 3) how did they do after pitching a "confidence-building start" - which we defined as a quality start (6 IP or more, 3 ER or less) won by their team?
First a few benchmarks: all 2002 starters were .500, of course, an equal number of wins and losses; their combined ERA was 4.60, and average innings pitched were 5.9 per start, and the average Game Rating was 2.76 last year.
In first starts, the new pitchers went 36-61 a .371 mark, with an ERA of 4.46, avg innings of 5.0, and avg GR of 1.99. Not that bad, especially in the ERA department, a little better than average. They were 20-24 at home, 16-37 away. Those who went off as home favorites were 11-7 +$1.30 at $1 per game. Home dogs were 9-17 -$4, away favs were 2-4 -$2.31, and away ‘dogs were 14-33 -$13.05
In the second start, they were 38-39, better than expected, with the same 4.46 ERA, improved innings and Game Ratings. Home favorites went 13-3 for +$6.43, home underdogs were 13-16 +$0.65, away favs were 3-4 and away ‘dogs were 9-16 -$1.75.
They tapered off a bit in start #3, 26-39, ERA 5.01, GR down to 2.40 average. But home favs were still ahead, 9-3 for +$3.40 while home ‘dogs and away starters combined for a poor 17-36 and a lot of $ lost.
The fourth game continued the home favorite advantage, 6-3 +$1.88, and the pitchers combined to an overall 33-24 in their 4th start. They were 6-9 as home ‘dogs, 3-2 as away favs, and an unexpected 18-10 for +$20.75 when away underdogs! ERA (4.22), average innings and avg GR were the best for the 5 games studied. In game #5 they were back to earth with an ERA over 5.00, an 18-30 record, and even home favs were only 8-8, although road ‘dogs at 6-8 showed a tiny profit.
All rookie starts, including the singletons up to all of Fogg’s & Padilla’s, were 101-66 as home favs, +$6.18, 64-112 as home ‘dogs -$23.70 ... 32-42 as away favs -$17.13, and a nice 113-158 +$11.85 as away underdogs. This study includes only one-and-a-quarter seasons, but 688 total rookie games, and 97 debut starts. It seems apparent that rookies with good teams (favorites) pitching at home can be good bets.
We have heard that rookies with a good strikeout-walk ratio (2:1) in the minors are worth a play, but checking that out was going to be impossible or exhausting. It seems reasonable, however. The "confidence-builder" used to be a complete game victory - but those are so few that we have chosen a quality start won by the team as a marker. That turns out to be an error, however. In the next game after the supposed confidence-builder, the rookies went 19-30 with a 4.83 ERA. They were 4-3 as home favs, -$0.23, 5-13 as home ‘dogs, -$5.15, 1-4 as away favs, -$3.05, and 9-10 +$3.75 as away underdogs.
So it might build the young guy’s confidence, but our confidence in him is a little shaken!