But should we even be looking at innings? It seems pretty ridiculous that teams count innings instead of counting pitches. So let's use three-year averages of the average number of pitches that starters threw per inning and do a simple recalculation. The result: pitchers this year who are below the three-year average of 16.1 pitches per inning really aren't on pace for the number of innings suggested by their stated totals. And we can calculate exactly how much less. Conversely, pitchers who throw more than 16.1 pitches per inning are on pace for a greater workload than their actual innings pace suggests. Our formula is the number of pitches thrown divided by that 16.1 P/IP three-year average to get a new innings number. Not sure what to call this new number. But for the purposes of the chart, there's "actual" innings pace and P/IP innings pace. The difference is what the net result would be at the end of the year, everything else being equal. We're only charting pitchers who have an ERA+ (ERA adjusted for league and park factors) of more than 120 (league average is always 100). This is the time of year where the contending teams start looking at their pitching staffs and worrying about whether certain pitchers who are racking up higher than expected innings paces will be shut down early or simply lose steam down the fantasy stretch.
|Player||ERA+||Actual IP pace||P/IP Pace||P/IP Diff|