Graph of the Day: Knuckleballers

by Dan Turkenkopf on Jun 1, 2009 10:00 AM EDT Comment 7 comments

Like many sabermetricians, I have an unhealthy affection for the knuckleball and the pitchers that throw them.

Maybe it's because of the way the ball dances toward the plate, or maybe it's because they don't throw much harder than your average Little Leaguer.

Whatever the reason, I think it's fair to say there just haven't been enough knuckleballers in the big leagues.

Here's a look at how the most prominent knuckleballers of the Retrosheet era compare. We're only looking at years when the pitcher actually threw a knuckleball (so Joe Niekro is 1971 and beyond, for example). Data is from Sean's Pitching WAR database and the knuckleball identification is from Rob Neyer by way of http://www.oddball-mall.com/knuckleball/list.htm.

Phil Niekro is head and shoulders above the rest of the pack. I'm surprised that Wilhelm doesn't fare better - although I shouldn't be. He spent so much time in relief that it's almost unfair to compare him to the group.

I didn't remember Tom Candiotti as being that good but he put up six All-Star caliber seasons. And Wakefield keeps plugging along, but he's only clearly better than Joe Niekro on this list.

0 recs | Comment 7 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Those Knuckleballs really extend out that years portion of the graph

by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Jun 1, 2009 10:33 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I love the Knuckleball

The part that surprises me, is the lack of negative WAR. All of the pitchers pitched atleast 13 seasons a piece. Why aren’t we teaching the knuckleball to more people, it is clearly a cost benefit to any team.

If you are able to teach someone to pitch it effectively, you are going to get an above average pitcher for atleast 13 years and maybe even 25.

by drabidea on Jun 2, 2009 1:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

My guess is that MLB teams are wary of the knuckleball.

So to give a knuckleballer MLB innings, he has to be really good with a lower chance of failure than usual. Nobody just a bit better than replacement level gets a chance, so those that do are good and knuckleballers as a whole look better. For example, lefty starters look better when you remove all the crappy ones, too.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Jun 2, 2009 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"For example, lefty starters look better when you remove all the crappy ones, too."

That is true for right-handers also

by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Jun 2, 2009 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I want proof. :)

WBULTV - BDale TV Prod

by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jun 2, 2009 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Besides MLB only taking the best, I only took the best of those

So pitchers like Steve Sparks and R.A. Dickey version 2.0 don’t make the list.

by Dan Turkenkopf on Jun 2, 2009 6:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A sorted list by season doesn't necessarily help the argument

Your list ranks seasons from best to worst. but you don’t provide a comparable graph showing performance on a season-by-season basis (everyone’s first season, second season, etc.).

There are a couple of other considerations for Wakefield’s performance relative to the others on the list. Most of the others pitched in the days of a four-man rotation, so they had more chances to pitch. Also, Wakefield has been moved around between the rotation and the bullpen, and sometimes came into pitch out of the bullpen between starts. All of these could impact his numbers significantly relative to the others.

(Perhaps another, more telling graphic might be WAR versus age of pitcher, to show how fluctuations set in during the course of the career.)

by lone1c on Jun 22, 2009 1:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs