2013 fluke or future - Colby Rasmus

Would you believe me if I told you that Colby Rasmus' slugging percentage was only seven points lower than McCutchen in 2013? Would you believe me if I told you that he had a more valuable season than Adam Jones? How about if I told you that he had a better defensive season than Span, Ellsbury, Blanco and McCutchen? I would not blame you if you would not have believed any of those. Neither did I until I saw them. Was this 2013 season by Colby Rasmus a fluke or what his future will look like?

What do the experts think? I like to look at projections, especially this time of year. The first thing I did was look at last year's ZiPS projection for Rasmus. While ZiPS was dead on for his total doubles and homers, that projection was for a full 588 plate appearances. Due to a couple of bouts with injury, Rasmus only played 118 games and compiled only 458 plate appearances. So Rasmus easily beat his power projections and his batting average and on-base percentage projections too.

But it is hard to blame ZiPS for what it came up with. After a breakout season in 2010, Rasmus ran afoul of Tony LaRussa in one of the most famous doghouse incidents in recent times and then got lost for a couple of years. All Rasmus could muster was a .688 OPS in 2011 and a .689 OPS in 2012. Therefore, ZiPS projection of a .749 OPS for Rasmus in 2013 seemed overly bullish. But Rasmus blew that away and finished with an OPS of .840, 91 points higher.

So the projections would be more optimistic for 2014, right? Wrong. ZiPS has not gotten to the Blue Jays yet (from what I could find). But Steamer and Oliver have put theirs out and they predict Rasmus to fall back to .771 and .770 respectively. Oliver goes further and gives a five year projection. That system never expects him to be as good as he was in 2013.

There must be obvious reasons for the lack of faith in what Rasmus did in 2013. For one thing, Rasmus had a BABIP of .356. That had to be lucky right? His last two seasons before that featured him not being able to achieve a BABIP over .270. But Rasmus once had a season with that high a BABIP--2010.

Obviously, the projections are not buying it. But perhaps you can consider that Rasmus had his best ever line drive percentage in 2013. He had never gone over 20% in that category before and his line drive percentage was 22% in 2013. You hit that many ropes and your BABIP will get a boost. You could say it was a fluke. But what if it wasn't?

Rasmus also had his lowest ground ball rate since (yeah, there is a theme here) 2010. And a higher percentage of those fly balls went over the fence than ever before in his career (17.3%). So more of his fly balls left the yard and his line drive percentage spiked. That will help your BABIP.

There is another thing the projections might be seeing and that is the strikeout and walk rates. Rasmus did compile his highest strikeout rate in 2013 and his lowest walk rate. His swing and miss rate was also the highest of his career. His strikeout rate in 2013 was just a bit higher than (oh my) 2010 and then went down in 2011 and 2012. The interesting thing here is that his percentage of swings at pitches out of the strike zone dipped under 30% for the first time in his career. So he is a bit more selective but is swinging and missing a lot.

Wasn't it the strikeouts that first put him in LaRussa's doghouse?

I can see where the projections might be skeptical of Rasmus. The BABIP, strikeouts and walks would put a analytic damper on things. But the projections also knock down his defense. And, again, it is a bit understandable. His defense was worth 11.5 runs above average in 2009 but then fell into the negative in 2010 and 2011. He bounced back with 2.1 runs in the positive in 2012 and then seemed to explode to 12.9 runs in 2013.

So it is easy to see what the "machine" is looking at. Oliver gives him a projection of 3.8 runs above average and Steamer, six. So Steamer is a bit more optimistic.

I get where the math comes from. The algorithms look at the cold hard data and that is the purpose. But what if there were circumstances involved the algorithms cannot see? Maybe the LaRussa thing really messed him up for a couple of years. Maybe he was immature and did not handle things well. The mental part of the game is something that cannot be measured.

Maybe he is in a better place in his life and in a more supportive atmosphere, the same one that made stars of Bautista and Encarnacion. Colby Rasmus is only 27 years old. I am being bullish here and thinking that 2013 might not have been a fluke. Maybe it is a case of a former #1 draft pick finding himself. Perhaps the future only gets brighter from here. I will feel a little more confident in that pronouncement if he can repeat or better his 2013 season in the year or two to come.

I will leave you with this last bit of mind wandering. Think of the defense up the middle of two guys LaRussa chased out of St. Louis. Think of how crazy good Brendan Ryan is at short and Rasmus is in center. Imagine how scary good the Cardinals could have been in 2013 with those two instead of Kozma and Jay!

Staying on the Colby Rasmus Bandwagon

The St. Louis Cardinals are in many ways the perfect organization. The team has great fans, great baseball writers and a very long tradition. The Cardinals have had great success over the years and it's extremely hard to find fault with a team that just won another World Series title for one of the best cities in America. But in many ways, it's all that tradition and richness of history that ran against Colby Rasmus in his tenure there. Rasmus came down on the wrong side of the bandwagon.

When a city's love affair with a baseball team is that rosy, how can a player who falls into a bad light survive? How can that player do anything right once he goes afoul of all of that? He can't. But as written here, here and originally here, this outsider has long supported Rasmus. Heck, somebody has to. Along with the support of the player comes the acknowledgement that without having first hand access to the inner workings of the Cardinals, there is no way of stating matter-of-factly who was at fault in the fall from grace of Colby Rasmus in St. Louis.

This, of course, runs right in the face of the opinion of the many friends that have been made with those who write in support of the Cardinals. Colby Rasmus was the problem they all believe. And it's not just the writers and bloggers of the team that we're fighting here. There is also the Cardinal fans who populate Twitter who were mostly vicious in any tweets made that included Rasmus in contrast to the tremendous run the Cardinals made to get into the playoffs in 2011 and the serendipitous post season that followed. Colby Rasmus was ridiculed and lambasted with joy during that run. Why exactly?

Okay, it's easy to side with Tony La Russa and the Cardinals in that Colby Rasmus himself was the problem (followed closely by his dad). La Russa is one of the most successful managers in history. He's a sure-fire Hall of Fame kind of manager. And La Russa was an institution in St. Louis. But there are two things that are odd about saying that. First, everyone knows that other players have run afoul of La Russa. There was Ozzie Smith and Scott Rolen. How could anyone think that La Russa could not possibly have any blame in the Rasmus fiasco? Secondly, La Russa was not universally loved by the writers and fans of the Cardinals. So why then do all give Rasmus the villain hat? It is hard to understand.

Those who banged on Rasmus had plenty of fodder when the player went to the Blue Jays and bombed there for the remainder of 2011. See? Rasmus is a bum, right? But what if he wasn't? What if there is some fault in how he was treated in St. Louis? Can we at least entertain the possibility? John Lott of the National Post reported on a long press session Rasmus had yesterday. If you had to go by just the comments by Cardinal fans on Twitter yesterday, Rasmus blasted the Cardinals in his press session. After re-reading Lott's report over a few times, how do you make that conclusion? All this observer can see is a guy who lost his joy while playing for the Cardinals and wants to get it back.

After reading his words and his praise for Jose Bautista, is this observer the only one who could read between the lines and tell he didn't feel the same way about Albert Pujols? Can't anyone else see the angst in that Rasmus never felt comfortable playing for La Russa or was never given the belief that he belonged? From this vantage point, it's impossible to get past the fact that Colby Rasmus was given nothing but praise for his make up as a person before he was a Cardinal. Scouts loved him as a person and felt that his make up was one of his strengths. How did Rasmus go from those opinions to the opinions now openly expressed by people who support the Cardinals?

All this writer wants is for people to at least entertain the possibility that what happened in St. Louis with Colby Rasmus was not entirely the player's fault. That's all. There is the general belief here that there are always two sides of a story. Sure, there is a possibility that Colby Rasmus was the problem. But there is just as much of a possibility that he wasn't entirely. Can't we at least agree on that since none of us really knows?

It is hoped here that Colby Rasmus finds that joy again in playing baseball in Toronto and that he can fulfill his potential. Success is always much more fun to trumpet than failure. At least it is in this house.

Please, Cardinals, Trade Colby Rasmus

Colby Rasmus has had a rough go of it since the first of June. After the first two months of the season, he was batting in the high .270s with an OBP in the .370s as well. Rasmus had a bad June with an OPS of .684 and July has been horrible so far. For his nine games in July, Rasmus has a .384 OPS with no walks and only five hits. Somehow word leaked over the All Star Break that the Cardinals were actively shopping him--a fact confirmed by Buster Olney in his post today over at ESPN.com. Olney wondered why the word had leaked. This writer can tell you why. The Cardinals can't stand him.

Oh, they may say something different. But Tony LaRussa has a long history of having a long memory with players he doesn't get along with. There was Scott Rolen and others that fell in that category. Ever since Rasmus and LaRussa had that public tiff and then Pujols chimed in and said perhaps that Rasmus should just play for a different team, it's sure to have been festering. And now, with Rasmus in a slump, there isn't any support for him. There isn't any positive reinforcement believing he'll work himself out of it. Instead there is a leak that the Cardinals want to trade him. For his sake and perhaps the team's sake, let's hope they do.

There are two obvious problems with Rasmus and his statistics since the beginning of June. One is that he stopped getting on base. He was walking regularly in the early part of the season. He had 33 walks by the end of May but only has seven since. The other obvious problem is that his pop ups to the infield are more than double his career average. Just about every other major statistic is nearly identical to his career norms. He swings at nearly the same amount of pitches in and out of the strike zone. His ground ball and fly ball ratios are right in line with his career. His line drive percentage is just slightly off his norm and his strikeout rate is down from his career numbers.

Other than the infield pop ups, could he just be having some bad luck? It certainly appears possible. His BABIP for June was .221. For July, his BABIP to this point is .160! This author imagines that it would get pretty frustrating when nothing is dropping for you.

It also doesn't help that Colby Rasmus is playing out of position like just about every other Cardinal not named Albert Pujols. Schumaker isn't a second baseman. Lance Berkman isn't a right fielder. Ryan Theriot isn't a shortstop. And Colby Rasmus isn't a center fielder. His fielding numbers bear that out. So we have a guy who is slumping and is playing a position he's not very good at. That sounds like a perfectly acceptable reason to want to trade him.

Except that he is still only 24 years old and he was the Cardinals' first round draft choice in 2005. Plus, he only makes $443,000. Add the fact that he was worth a solid $17 million as a player last year and a was a solid offensive player. Even with his struggles this season, he has still been worth $7 million with his play thus far and for all the Cardinals know, his last month and a half of struggle could simply be a case of bad luck with every reason to think he can turn things around and at least produce to his career norms.

There has been a dark cloud over Colby Rasmus in St. Louis for quite some time now. And from everything this Fan has seen, the fan base there has sided with Tony LaRussa and Rasmus is vilified. He's the black sheep of the family. With all those dynamics, the Cardinals should just go ahead and trade him.

This writer believes very highly in Colby Rasmus. Put him in a positive environment where he is supported and he will blossom into the star that his talent projects him to be. Again, he is only 24 years old. He had a fine growing season last year and is going through a slump now. But that doesn't mean that Rasmus is a no-talent loser. For whatever reason and for whoever is at fault, he's not in a positive environment and a change would be best. This writer hopes it happens soon.

Will Colby Rasmus Survive in St. Louis?

At the tender age of 23, Colby Rasmus put up a slash line of .276/.361/.498 good for an OPS+ of 132. But even so, he and Tony LaRussa, his manager on the St. Louis Cardinals, did not have a rosy year in 2010. And the way Rasmus handled the situation prompted a calling out from Albert Pujols. Such a year from a young slugger would prompt dreams of future glory (or even higher glory than what he already achieved). But there is this nagging feeling that this won't end well. Just what is the problem?

Well, from LaRussa's standpoint, there are all those strikeouts. Rasmus struck out 148 times in 2010. His 31.9 percent strikeout rate was by far the highest in Colby's professional career and much higher than the 20 percent rate with which he struck out in 2009. That is a bit alarming. While nobody should confuse Rasmus with Mark Reynolds, the strikeouts are something for LaRussa to be unhappy about. There is also the matter of the center fielder's defense which dropped alarmingly in 2010. Both baseball-reference.com and Fangraphs show a deep decline in the young outfielder's fielding from 2009 to 2010. Since we only have two years worth of data, we have no idea yet if this is a trend or a one year result from nagging injuries that might have plagued Rasmus. The other thing LaRussa can point to is the high number of times Rasmus was thrown out trying to steal. But then again, if the guy is getting thrown out, stop sending him, no?

But still, the Fan thinks there is more to this than we are being told. Could this be political? Could Rasmus run contrary to the conservative right leanings of the leadership of the Cardinals? You can't discount the possibility. You also can't discount that Tony LaRussa has had plenty of other ball players over the years that became a boil on LaRussa's butt. LaRussa always wins those battles because he can. You can't argue with the manager's success, so his power base is legitimate. So the question is whether Rasmus is a victim or does Rasmus have some growing up to do?

You have to look at some history to get a little clearer picture. Prior to 2010, scouting reports always indicated that Rasmus had above average make-up. What does that mean? It means a lot of things. It means that he has the right attitude for a ball player, he works hard, he's a good citizen. Scouts don't give those kinds of endorsements lightly. So if Rasmus got high marks for his make-up prior to 2010, what happened to him in 2010?

Some times things just don't click between a leader and some of his charges. The Fan has been in those positions. Some times, it becomes a relief for both parties when the employee transfers out to a different department. Perhaps the best thing for Rasmus is to get himself included in some kind of mega-trade. Or the player can dig down and succeed despite the problems he may have with LaRussa.

The Fan finds it interesting that so far, none of the early projections predict Rasmus will have as good a year in 2011 that he had in 2010. Are they too suspicious of the situation? Or are there simply flaws in the game of Colby Rasmus. People say that the game is all about adjustments. It seems obvious that opposing pitchers found some sort of weakness in Rasmus's approach and that caused the strikeouts. Rasmus will need to make an adjustment and get his strikeout rate again down to the 20 percent level or it will be hard to maintain the performance he had in 2010.

The situation in St. Louis is fraught with story lines this coming season. Will LaRussa winning the balance of power fight and his insistence on the Puntos and Theriots of the world work out? Will this be Pujols' last season in St. Louis? Can Lance Berkman play the outfield? And yes, will Colby Rasmus survive in St. Louis? History seems to show that he won't. This fan isn't optimistic. Which is too bad because the kid has a bright future with scads of talent.

Is Politics a Problem With Cardinals?

It seems that Colby Rasmus is the last of a long line of players who do not get along with Tony LaRussa. There was Rolen. There was Adam Kennedy and there were probably others. Now it's Colby Rasmus. This is absolutely a problem because though Rolen was a great player, Rasmus has the talent to be a key piece of this team for a long time. On several occasions, Albert Pujols was quoted with harsh words for Rasmus basically stating that Rasmus is a young kid who doesn't know how good he has it but if he doesn't want to be a Cardinal, he needs to get out of there.

The big question is how did it get this bad in the first place? Rasmus was a kid with "great makeup" and a kid with "his head squarely on his shoulders and his feet on the ground" in one review by scouts published in 2008. So how did we get from a kid with great makeup to a kid who apparently is so young he doesn't appreciate where he is or who he plays for. Sounds simple right? Must be the kids fault. His head got big. He's become a primadonna. But is that accurate? Do any of us really know? There seems to be a disconnect between 2008 and now. So what happened?

And what of the Pujols quotes? At the risk of saying anything bad against the sainted Albert, is he simply the blind defender of all things LaRussa? Yeah, those comments will help heal the wounds, eh? Sounds to this Fan like comments that should have been made in the clubhouse and not in the media. Seems a bit cowardly to this observer. Things are bad though, so bad that Rasmus has twice asked to be traded. Suffice it to say that Mr. Rasmus is not enjoying his experience.

Here we are in a desperate time for the Cardinals who have dug themselves a huge hole, still seven games back of the Reds and five games back of the wild card. And as much as this Fan loves Jon Jay, should Jay have taken any at bats away from Rasmus? Not in this Fan's opinion. But that is what happened. So the question is how much has LaRussa let this internal conflict or this internal politic if you will, affect his decision making? How much has it distracted the team? Colby Rasmus is 23 years old. He has a 124 OPS+. He needs to be playing every day. Period.

Does the recent participation by Tony LaRussa and Albert Pujols at Glenn Beck's recent rally provide any clues into this mess or is that just a different subplot? Who knows. Perhaps Rolen, Kennedy and Rasmus are all left of center in political and moral thought. Who knows. But it was a bit weird that LaRussa and Pujols would go to an event that was sure to be polarizing (whatever you think of Mr. Beck, you can admit he is polarizing, can't you?). And what about Tony LaRussa gushing about Walt Jocketty, his former GM and now the GM in Cincinnati? That seems to be a slap at his own GM, especially since he doesn't mention him.

The Fan guesses that these things are more noticeable when a team is going badly. The Fan also guesses that Scott Rolen would be a lot better playing third for the Cardinals than Pedro Feliz. It would be nice if this thing could get all ironed out for the Cardinals because LaRussa is one of the top three managers in baseball, Albert Pujols is the best player in baseball and Colby Rasmus is a special talent. The Cardinals would be better off making all three of those people happy and working together than any of them working someplace else.