This article is part of our Rounding Third series.
Let's establish a quick point — I love Corbin Burnes. I had him on a number of teams last season, and I have him in my keeper leagues. I profusely thank RotoWire colleague James Anderson for recommending him last season. I do want him on my teams, generally speaking. But I also think that in most cases he's going to carry a draft cost higher than I'm willing to pay. In 65 NFBC drafts as of Sunday, Burnes's ADP was 55th overall, 19th among starting pitchers.
Burnes had a wonderful breakout season in 2020, posting a 2.02 ERA and 37.6 K% (88 strikeouts in only 59.2 IP), while allowing only two homers. This after beginning the season in a hybrid long-reliever/starter role, and on the heels of a disastrous 2019 season when he gave up 17 homers in 49 innings. He finished one out short of qualifying for the ERA title, and would have finished fifth with that one more out. He would have gotten it too, but for a back injury that was later diagnosed as an oblique strain in his final start. Using RotoWire's Earned Auction Value tool, Burnes was the 12th-rated pitcher in 2020.
Where did the improvement come from for Burnes? Let's start with the pitch mix. In 2019, Burnes threw a four-seamer 52.5 percent of the time, with horrific results. Hitters hammered him to the tune of a .425 BA and .823 SLG — 13 of his 17 homers allowed came on that pitch.
Let's establish a quick point — I love Corbin Burnes. I had him on a number of teams last season, and I have him in my keeper leagues. I profusely thank RotoWire colleague James Anderson for recommending him last season. I do want him on my teams, generally speaking. But I also think that in most cases he's going to carry a draft cost higher than I'm willing to pay. In 65 NFBC drafts as of Sunday, Burnes's ADP was 55th overall, 19th among starting pitchers.
Burnes had a wonderful breakout season in 2020, posting a 2.02 ERA and 37.6 K% (88 strikeouts in only 59.2 IP), while allowing only two homers. This after beginning the season in a hybrid long-reliever/starter role, and on the heels of a disastrous 2019 season when he gave up 17 homers in 49 innings. He finished one out short of qualifying for the ERA title, and would have finished fifth with that one more out. He would have gotten it too, but for a back injury that was later diagnosed as an oblique strain in his final start. Using RotoWire's Earned Auction Value tool, Burnes was the 12th-rated pitcher in 2020.
Where did the improvement come from for Burnes? Let's start with the pitch mix. In 2019, Burnes threw a four-seamer 52.5 percent of the time, with horrific results. Hitters hammered him to the tune of a .425 BA and .823 SLG — 13 of his 17 homers allowed came on that pitch. Last season, Burnes only threw 25 four-seamers, according to Baseball Savant, which accounted for 2.5 percent of his pitches. He also cut back on his slider usage, dropping from 31.0 to 12.7 percent. In place of those pitches, Burnes introduced a cutter (31.5 percent) and more heavily used his sinker (33.1 percent — up from 3.7 percent) and changeup (11.2 percent, up from 4.1 percent).
The end results were fantastic. His K% spiked from 29.8 to 37.6, supported by a 14.9 percent swinging strike rate — while that's lower than his previous rates, it still would have put him eighth among qualified starting pitchers had he retired one more batter. He allowed just two homers, and allowed a .268 batting average against on balls in play, with very few balls in play to begin with. Other Statcast data supports the breakout too — hitters averaged an exit velocity of 86.9 mph, which put him in the 74th percentile among major league pitchers last season. The spin rate on his fastball and curveball were in the 99th and 95th percentile respectively.
So why am I concerned about Corbin Burnes? First, there should be a natural inclination to regress a player coming off of a breakout year, as his best year yet. 2019 was an event that happened — even though Burnes made material changes, that range of outcomes still remains. Even if those material changes wipe out every negative event from his worst year (unlikely), the degree of improvement is also scary. Most notably, those two homers — amounting to a tiny HR/FB rate (2.6 percent according to our stat provider, 4.7 percent according to Fangraphs) is an aberrant rate. That alone should give you pause.
But regression, or projected regression, is only the start of the conversation. I have a bigger concern with Burnes — his durability, or to be more specific, his ability to throw the volume of innings needed to justify being your SP1 or SP2, depending on how soon you take a starting pitcher. Burnes pitched 59.2 innings in 2020, 71.1 innings between the majors and Triple-A in 2019, and 116.2 innings between the majors and Triple-A in 2018. You have to go back to 2017 to where he even approached 150 innings (145.2), at two levels of the minors. I have him projected for 159 innings, which is pretty generous considering his recent usage patterns. Of course, his role with the Brewers isn't the same as it was in previous seasons no longer do we have to worry about whether he'll start or come in relief. It also follows that manager Craig Counsell has Burnes in his circle of trust, and will be more inclined to stretch him out than in 2020. And even accounting for that, I still think he'll have a quicker hook on Burnes than other managers will have on their respective top starters.
How big of a concern is that for us? I think it's significant. It's readily apparent that more innings equates to more strikeouts and more chances to qualify for a win. Like it or not, chasing the win remains important in our game. Even with his elite ratios last year, Burnes won only four games. But unless his ratios remain at an elite level in 2021, they'll provide less of an impact than some of his draft contemporaries. Perhaps the game is changing enough to lessen starting pitcher innings league-wide, but I want to get 180+ innings from my ace. I don't think that Burnes gets there.
Moreover, I don't think his ratios will remain elite, and not just due to natural regression. His walk rate jumped from 8.5 percent to 10.0 last year. Only five pitchers with 50-plus IP had higher walk percentages — Robbie Ray, Dylan Cease, Spencer Turnbull, Sonny Gray and Martin Perez. One of these is not like the other, which one could it be?
The other reason I think that Burnes's ratios will suffer is the level of competition. Here is the list of his opponents in 2020, along with their respective wRC+ (number and rank):
Chicago Cubs - two appearances, 7.0 innings; 91, 21/30.
Chicago White Sox - one appearance, 3.2 innings; 114, 6/30.
Cincinnati Reds - one appearance, 5.1 innings; 91, 23/30.
Minnesota Twins - one appearance, 5.0 innings; 101, 16/30.
Pittsburgh Pirates - two appearances, 11.1 innings; 73, 29/30.
Cleveland Indians - one appearance, 6.0 innings; 86, 27/30.
Detroit Tigers - one appearance, 7.0 innings; 89, 24/30.
St. Louis Cardinals - two appearances, 8.1 innings; 93, 19/30.
Kansas City Royals - one appearance, 6.0 innings; 92, 20/30.
Burnes pitched in 12 games, and only once faced a top-half lineup in the White Sox, in only 3.2 innings. If you want to lump the Twins with the White Sox, that's fine — it's still only 8.2 of his 59.2 innings against an offense that was average or better. He threw more innings against the Pirates than any other opponent. The strength of schedule argument doesn't solely apply to Burnes — it applies to virtually all of the Central Division pitchers. We'll delve more into that issue at a later date, but suffice to say I think caution is necessary when evaluating the Central starters, especially those with big improvements in their ratios. I easily could have written this article about Kenta Maeda instead of Burnes — he has similar durability issues, and an outrageous improvement in his WHIP.
We don't yet know how baseball's schedule will look like in 2021. There's some suggestion that the season could be delayed by the owners, as they wait for the COVID-19 vaccine to become widely distributed and allow fans back in the ballparks. If that comes to pass and the season is significantly delayed and shortened once again, we could have a geographic-based schedule once again, ameliorating my concerns about Central Division pitchers having such a huge advantage again. But for now, I'm projecting as if there will be at least some modicum of balance in the schedule, at least more so than in 2020.
Accounting for all of the above, I projected Burnes for a 3.62 ERA, 1.21 WHIP, 10 wins and 199 strikeouts in 159 innings. Using our Custom MLB Rankings tool, he is our 104th-rated player, and 41st pitcher. You shouldn't necessarily rank just by projection, I can appreciate that — if you want to incorporate some upside into that projection, I could see ranking him toward the bottom edge of his range. Currently that range is fairly compact — between 40th and 78th overall. If you're getting him there, chances are he's your second or maybe even your third starting pitcher, which is more appropriate for the stated risks involved.
But I also think that, health willing, his ADP is more likely to climb than fall, for two reasons. One, the fantasy analytic community is generally predisposed in Burnes's favor, especially as his FIP (2.03), xFIP (2.99) and K% (36.7) were all among the top 10. Two, at least in the NFBC, high-strikeout pitchers tend to rise in ADP the closer we get to the start of the season. It will become awfully difficult to lay off a pitcher with his high strikeout potential as spring training attrition sets in and we lose an ace or three (three last year with Luis Severino, Noah Syndergaard and Chris Sale). We're unlikely to be able to draft Burnes at the low end of his range, or even his ADP by the time March rolls around, unless he's the one with health issues in spring training.
For what it's worth, my colleague Clay Link does his own rankings on RotoWire's MLB Cheatsheet, and his opinion is more in line with Burnes's ADP — he has Burnes ranked 52nd overall. The custom rankings are generated more in line with my projection. As always, with either set of rankings, you should use them as a starting point in your research — you might end up higher than Clay, or lower than me! And I'll be picking Clay's brain on this one too — perhaps my stance might soften with a little more discussion. I'll be sure to report back if there are any significant changes.
