Worst ERA, minimum 60 games
Posted by Andy on September 24, 2009
Brad Lidge's nightmare season just keeps getting worse.
Cnt Player **ERA** G Year Age Tm Lg GS CG SHO GF W L W-L% SV IP H R ER BB SO ERA+ HR BF AB 2B 3B IBB HBP SH SF GDP SB CS Pk BK WP BA OBP SLG OPS OPS+ Pit Str +----+-----------------+----------+---+----+---+---+--+---+--+---+--+--+--+-----+--+-----+---+---+---+---+---+----+--+----+----+--+--+---+---+---+---+---+---+--+--+--+--+-----+-----+-----+-----+----+----+----+ 1 Jesse Orosco 7.75 65 2003 46 TOT ML 0 0 0 13 2 2 .500 2 33.2 41 31 29 21 29 53 4 166 137 8 1 3 3 1 4 0 7 0 0 0 7 .299 .394 .460 .854 134 647 376 2 Alan Embree 7.62 67 2005 35 TOT AL 0 0 0 15 2 5 .286 1 52 62 47 44 14 38 58 10 231 209 21 1 3 2 3 3 4 6 1 0 2 1 .297 .342 .550 .892 130 833 550 3 Javier Lopez 7.52 64 2004 26 COL NL 0 0 0 10 1 2 .333 0 40.2 45 34 34 26 20 65 1 187 157 7 2 4 3 1 0 6 2 2 2 0 3 .287 .398 .376 .774 97 680 404 4 Brad Lidge 7.48 63 2009 32 PHI NL 0 0 0 52 0 8 .000 31 55.1 69 50 46 34 59 57 11 269 226 12 3 3 4 4 1 4 10 1 0 0 4 .305 .404 .531 .935 0 1095 658 5 Mike Munoz 7.42 64 1995 29 COL NL 0 0 0 19 2 4 .333 2 43.2 54 38 36 27 37 73 9 208 176 8 2 0 1 2 2 2 3 0 0 0 5 .307 .398 .528 .926 124 6 Alan Embree 7.33 61 2001 31 TOT ML 0 0 0 17 1 4 .200 0 54 65 47 44 17 59 60 14 245 219 12 2 2 3 0 6 1 4 2 1 0 3 .297 .347 .562 .909 137 945 605 7 Bobby Ayala 7.29 62 1998 28 SEA AL 0 0 0 36 1 10 .091 8 75.1 100 66 61 26 68 63 9 351 310 19 2 4 1 8 6 4 6 1 0 0 4 .323 .370 .484 .854 120 8 Norm Charlton 7.27 71 1997 34 SEA AL 0 0 0 38 3 8 .273 14 69.1 89 59 56 47 55 62 7 343 285 15 2 2 4 7 0 4 5 5 1 1 7 .312 .417 .453 .870 128 9 Shawn Chacon 7.11 66 2004 26 COL NL 0 0 0 60 1 9 .100 35 63.1 71 52 50 52 52 69 12 316 252 13 3 7 5 7 0 3 5 0 1 0 9 .282 .414 .500 .914 128 1265 737 10 Jim Poole 7.11 63 1997 31 SFG NL 0 0 0 11 3 1 .750 0 49.1 73 44 39 25 26 58 6 242 207 17 0 4 4 4 2 5 3 4 1 0 5 .353 .429 .522 .951 156 11 Andrew Sisco 7.10 65 2006 23 KCR AL 0 0 0 16 1 3 .250 1 58.1 66 47 46 40 52 66 8 278 228 10 0 6 1 4 5 4 5 1 0 0 4 .289 .391 .439 .830 113 1104 636
By the way, the search criteria for the above list is 1901-present. Just so happens the guys are all recent.
Going by ERA+ Lidge is even worse:
Cnt Player **ERA+** G Year Age Tm Lg GS CG SHO GF W L W-L% SV IP H R ER BB SO ERA HR BF AB 2B 3B IBB HBP SH SF GDP SB CS Pk BK WP BA OBP SLG OPS OPS+ Pit Str +----+-----------------+--------+---+----+---+---+--+---+--+---+--+--+--+-----+--+-----+---+---+---+---+---+------+--+----+----+--+--+---+---+---+---+---+---+--+--+--+--+-----+-----+-----+-----+----+----+----+ 1 Jesse Orosco 53 65 2003 46 TOT ML 0 0 0 13 2 2 .500 2 33.2 41 31 29 21 29 7.75 4 166 137 8 1 3 3 1 4 0 7 0 0 0 7 .299 .394 .460 .854 134 647 376 2 Brad Lidge 57 63 2009 32 PHI NL 0 0 0 52 0 8 .000 31 55.1 69 50 46 34 59 7.48 11 269 226 12 3 3 4 4 1 4 10 1 0 0 4 .305 .404 .531 .935 0 1095 658 3 Jim Poole 58 63 1997 31 SFG NL 0 0 0 11 3 1 .750 0 49.1 73 44 39 25 26 7.11 6 242 207 17 0 4 4 4 2 5 3 4 1 0 5 .353 .429 .522 .951 156 4 Ben Hayes 58 60 1983 25 CIN NL 0 0 0 34 4 6 .400 7 69.1 82 53 50 37 44 6.49 8 318 272 12 3 6 1 3 5 5 6 2 0 1 1 .301 .381 .456 .837 136 5 Alan Embree 58 67 2005 35 TOT AL 0 0 0 15 2 5 .286 1 52 62 47 44 14 38 7.62 10 231 209 21 1 3 2 3 3 4 6 1 0 2 1 .297 .342 .550 .892 130 833 550
I can't think of a season when so many playoff teams were considering leaving prominent pitchers off the post-season rosters. Lidge may not be there, as well as Joba Chamberlain for the Yankees and Tim Wakefield for the Red Sox.
September 24th, 2009 at 8:34 am
Tim Wakefield's probable omission is more likely due to the fact that he has bone chips floating around in his back as opposed to performance-related matters.
September 24th, 2009 at 11:37 am
[...] here’s the thing about those 63 games… it’s a threshold number. In fact, according to the always interesting Baseball-Reference blog, of all the pitchers who have appeared in at least 60 games, Lidge has the fourth-worst ERA in [...]
September 24th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
A lot of LOOGY's on this list. Makes Lidge's appearance as a RHP that much more impressive.
September 24th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Ayala is the only one with 70 IP, and he's got the most losses, too. At some point, a guy with a record and ERA like that should be either demoted, released, limited to minimal innings or used strictly in mop-up situations. But with 11 decisions and 8 saves, if they ever did that, it was too late.
September 24th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
The guys are all recent because not too many people pitched 60 games in a season until recently. From 1901 to 1938, only 2 guys ever pitched 60 games in a season. It happened several times during WWII and then became a regular occurrence in the '50s, but those would just be the couple best relievers in the league. Now every team has a few guys who pitch 60 games a season, so some of them will stink.
September 24th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
What a weird career for Embree, who appears above twice. After his 7.33 in 2001 when he was 31 years old, with a career ERA of nearly 5 to that point, who'd think he would have much left in the tank? Except of course, he's lefty. He bounced back with a tremendous performance for San Diego in 2002, including this game http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SDN/SDN200206220.shtml against the Yankees, which I believe spurred Boston to trade for him. Then he starts to fade again, and makes the list again with a horrible 2005. Bounces back to be a solid reliever in '06 and '07 and somewhat competent last season, but has not been good this year in Colorado. Is it finally the end for him? Well, he's "only" 39...
September 24th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
What's a LOOGY? I'm guessing that the "L" stands for Lefthander/Lefthanded.
September 24th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
Lefthanded one out guy.
September 24th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
LOOGY= Lefty One-Out Guy.
One thing to remember with these high ERAs is that these pitchers (especially Loogies and Roogies) enter games with inherited runners, often as many as two or three. In order for them to give up an earned run charged to themselves, they have to really Monica, give up enough hits and walks to allow one or more of their oiwn batters to score. Of course, with a one- or two-run lead blown, the game might well be over /or they'd be replaced by another pitcher who could get the one or two outs needed) before one of their batters scored.
Having one of these pitchers give up one or more earned runs coming into a game with runners already on and a couple of outs is hard to do - a real accomplishment.
Back in the 50s-60s, very few relievers had ERAs above 3; having a 2.80 was not considered especially noteworthy for a reliever.
September 24th, 2009 at 9:52 pm
Radio, I'm not sure about your last statement. By the '50s there were definitely established relievers, but it still wasn't a modern bullpen. A lot of (most?) pitchers both started and relieved. There were not yet that many guys who were strictly relievers, and those that were were probably those most successful in the role. So I'm guessing that if a 2.80 ERA was not considered noteworthy for a reliever, it was because only a few top pitchers were really well known as relievers.
Anyway, I ran a search to try to test your statement. I defined a reliever as pitching at least 90% of games in relief with at least 50 IP. From 1950 to 1969, there were 332 such pitcher-seasons. 293 of those had an ERA of at least 3 (88%). From 2000 to 2009, there were 505 such pitcher-seasons. 462 of those had an ERA of at least 3 (91%). Considering on the one hand that there is more offense these days, and that there are more full-time relievers (i.e. more bad pitchers in full-time relief), and on the other hand that relievers pitch shorter stints these days, which makes them more effective ...... well, I don't know what conclusions to draw, but it definitely doesn't look like "very few" relievers had ERA above 3 back then. You forget about the guys who didn't pitch as effectively, because they didn't keep their jobs that long.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:43 am
Here's another way to study the statement, "Back in the 50s-60s, very few relievers had ERAs above 3; having a 2.80 was not considered especially noteworthy for a reliever." Let's look at the 1953 National League, in standings order.
The Dodgers had 5 main relievers, and 4 of them had ERA over 3.30
4 of the 5 main relievers for the Braves had ERA over 3
All the Phillies relievers were over 3.70
All the Card relievers were over 2.90, and 5 of their top 6 were over 4.20
The Giants relievers were all over 3
The Reds relievers were all over 3.70
The Cubs relievers were all over 3.10, and the 5 with 20 or more relief appearances were all over 4.60
And every reliever on the last-place Pirates had an ERA over 3.90