We are a funny people, we Americans. For example, despite the fact that we fought two wars with England and badly wanted our independence from that country, whenever we are faced with an Englishman or woman, we are overly charmed by the accent. Once, while on a training trip, the trainer was Irish and spoke with that area's lilt. We were charmed and mesmerized. We tend to credit people of foreign countries with a nobility that might not be there. We do this to foreign baseball players to a degree as well, particularly those from Japan. We imagine that guys like Hideki Matsui and Ichiro Suzuki play and act with more class than the average ball player. Certainly, they are treated differently by the media. The Fan was contemplating this when reading the terrific Susan Slusser's account of Matsui's arrival at the Oakland A's camp. But one thing about the piece struck this Fan and it led to the question: Why does Matsui still need an interpretor or "translator" as she calls it?
Again, the Fan acknowledges that we as a nation are funny about foreigners. And perhaps this is not the most open minded and gracious thought the Fan has ever had. But it is still the thought and it needs to be expressed so the feelings can at least be dealt with. But the thought is, with Matsui entering the ninth season in his productive career, shouldn't he have mastered English by now? The same can be said for Ichiro, who still uses an interpretor. Ichiro is entering his eleventh season. Don't interpretors insert a layer of insulation for the players, not only from the press but from their teammates? If they go out to dinner, does a Mariner player have to ask Ichiro's interpretor to ask Ichiro to pass the salt? It's just weird to this observer, that's all.
When many players are signed from Latin America, one of the first thing teams do is to attempt to teach these players English. There is more effort to give these players assimilation skills to cope with playing in this country. Part of the reasoning behind the assimilation sessions is to benefit the player as it will be much easier for that player to function in this country if they have a working knowledge of our language. But the other part of it is for the fans who will be interested in interviews given by Latin ball players. Lord knows, Pedro Martinez and Luis Tiant gave some of the best interviews the fans ever were allowed to hear. That would not have been the same if those players were using interpretors. And yet, there are many interviews to this day where Hispanic players use interpretors and those interviews are more annoying than pleasurable.
While the Fan attempts to be enlightened and not pig-headed, the acknowledgement here is that the Fan has this old-fashioned notion that if you are making a living in this country, you should speak the language. To be fair, the Fan has no knowledge of whether U. S. players that go play in Japan attempt to do that. Bobby Valentine appears to speak Japanese from his stints as manager over there. But the Fan doesn't know if other players learn the Japanese language when they play over there. But if you asked the Fan's opinion, they should. They are the visitors there and they should know the language if they are earning their daily yen in that country.
There are many times when the Fan has watched a ball game and the pitching coach goes out to the mound to talk to the pitcher. The pitcher is Japanese and the catcher might be Hispanic. And yet the pitching coach does a bunch of talking and both the pitcher and the catcher nod a lot as if they understand. Do they? You have to wonder, don't you? And of course, in the past, there have been stories of Ichiro not meshing well with his teammates. Is that from Ichiro's personality or his lack of English language skills? Don't know.
The Fan has to do some soul searching on this one. The only thing for sure that the Fan knows is that when Hideki Matsui talked to the press after his glorious World Series heroics, this Fan wanted him to answer in English. The Fan wanted Matsui to talk to us in our language and not his own to his interpretor. Call that wrong if you will and you may be right. This Fan may be displaying some closet Neanderthal type of thought. But that's how the Fan feels. And how do we know that the interpretor is saying exactly what the player actually says. For all we know, Matsui could have been telling the interpretor that the guy with the microphone sure has a big nose. We don't know. The Fan doesn't want to think those kinds of things. The Fan only wants the honest to goodness truth about what Matsui was thinking and feeling at that big moment.
Slusser's article went to great lengths (she really is a good writer) to point out that Matsui's teammates did a lot to make their new DH feel welcome in that clubhouse. The Godzilla doll in his locker was very touching and very funny. But the question remains on how close knit the locker room can be if the baseball Godzilla can't talk to his teammates in their own language.
So what do you think? Is the Fan all wet on this? Probably. But that's the way this Fan was feeling here on Presidents Day when we celebrate our country with yet another patriotic holiday.
Monday, February 21, 2011
Annual President's Day All Star Team Post
In honor of our presidents, here is a repost of the all presidential All Star team:
Since it is President's Day here in the United States, a holiday that means that the government and the banks are closed, but most everyone else is still working, it might be fun to come up with an all President All Star Team. Come up with your own if you can think of those that were missed.
For another take on the holiday, check out fellow BBA member, Shawn Anderson's take over at the Hall of Very Good.
Since it is President's Day here in the United States, a holiday that means that the government and the banks are closed, but most everyone else is still working, it might be fun to come up with an all President All Star Team. Come up with your own if you can think of those that were missed.
- DH - Joe Carter
- LP - Whitey Ford
- RP - Grover Cleveland Alexander
- C - Terry Kennedy, Gary Carter
- 1B - Benjamin ("Ben") Harrison Taylor - Negro League player/manager in the Hall of Fame
- 2B - Jack Roosevelt Robinson - Jackie Robinson!
- SS - Derrel McKinley Harrelson - You'd know him as Bud Harrelson
- 3B - Travis Jackson
- OF - Otis Nixon or Willie Wilson
- OF - George Washington Case - three time All Star in the 40s
- OF - Joseph Jefferson Jackson - Shoeless Joe!
For another take on the holiday, check out fellow BBA member, Shawn Anderson's take over at the Hall of Very Good.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
84 Wins for the Tampa Bay Rays?
Baseball Prospectus has projected the American League East to finish with the following win totals: Boston (93), Yankees (92), Bay Rays (84), Orioles (81) and Blue Jays (76). Granted, those folks are pretty smart. But geez Louise, none of those looks right. For one thing, this is the second year in a row the Blue Jays have been projected behind the Orioles. How can that be? The Blue Jays have a better rotation, a better offense and prospects all over the place. The Orioles won't win 81 games. They might if they played in the AL Central. But they don't. But to this Fan, the 84 win total for the Bay Rays seems...well...ridiculous.
Let's list the reasons why the Bay Rays will blow past 84 wins. First, let's start with the rotation. David Price is simply one of the top five pitchers in the American League and he keeps getting better. 2010 was no fluke and Price is going to be just as good or better in 2011. Jeremy Hellickson will have a full year in the rotation and should be more consistently better than the departed Matt Garza. Well, Hellickson may not be better than Garza when Garza is on, but he'll be just as good overall. Jeff Niemann is a guy just waiting to put things all together. The guy is a monster and sometimes, those tall guys take a little while to figure it all out. But Niemann has been very good at times even when not putting it together. You can see the superstar there waiting to bust out. And then you have Wade Davis as your fourth best starter? Puhleese. Wade Davis and Phil Hughes are two solid young guys that are going to be good starters for a long time. Davis rebounded nicely last year after a poor start. If he gets his homer rate down and gets more confidence, look out. And let's finish off with James Shields. If Shields was your Number 2 or 3 starter like last year, you could be concerned. But if he's your number five starter, wouldn't that be better than 28 of the 29 teams out there? This rotation is very, very good.
The young players just keep coming. In the Fan's mind, the Rays are improved at shortstop, second base, first base, DH and utility. Desmond Jennings is projected as the next big thing. He hasn't shown it yet, but if he gets 600 plate appearances, he should show that his minor league days were no fluke. Jennings is a more disciplined hitter than Crawford and can be just as good an outfielder and base runner. Jennigs could be the rookie of the year if he gets off to a good start.
Reid Brignac is one of this Fan's favorite young players. Love watching this kid play. If he starts at shortstop every day and settles himself down into his major league career, you could see fielding as good as Brendan Ryan. He is also poised to be a lot better on offense than Bartlett. The Fan loves him some Reid Brignac.
Sean Rodriguez should improve at second base as well in his second year. He seemed to have some limitations in his game, but he's a fiery little guy and could become one of the better second baseman in the league. But if he falters, you have Ben Zobrist right there who can play second base every day with the best of them. Zobrist is a bit of a mystery. Was 2009 the real Zobrist or 2010? The two seasons don't even come close to looking like the same player. But Zobrist can play so many positions well that if he offense returns at all, he's the safety valve for any position.
Carlos Pena was so bad last year that anyone could be an improvement...even Pena himself if he had returned. The Bay Rays have some options with Zobrist and Dan Johnson. Any combination they come up with will be better than what Pena put together last year. This Fan is rooting for Pena to rebuild his career. But it won't be with the Bay Rays.
What can you say about the Bay Rays at DH? The position has been abominable for several seasons. Nothing they tried worked. This year, their DH will work. Even if Manny Ramirez doesn't have anything left, you have Damon and either one of those guys can out hit any Rays' DH of the last several years in their sleep. Personally, those signings were brilliant. Not only are they two veterans that have won before, but they can anchor down a young team and lead the way. This Fan feels that Manny is going to have a monster year. None of the projections do justice to how well Manny can hit this year since he doesn't have to play the field and can stay healthy. And like mentioned earlier, if he falters, there is Damon. And the amazing thing about those two signings? They were both cheaper than Pat Burrell!
The bullpen lost a lot of good arms. But bullpens can be rebuilt and the bullpen is less important if you have a great starting rotation. Rays' fans shouldn't worry about the bullpen. Maddon and others will work it out.
So what's left? Oh yeah, you have the best third baseman in baseball in Evan Longoria. You have an enigmatic centerfielder who never seems to figure it out. He can anytime. But if he doesn't? You can trade him, put Jennings out there. Then there is Matt Joyce. Joyce had a strange year last year. His final stats are not impressive. But he came on toward the end of the year and was a force in the post season. Joyce still has superstar potential just waiting to come out. And John Jaso is just fine behind the plate. He's not the best defensive catcher and his offense wore down toward the end of last season. But he is a useful player and better than a lot of teams' catchers.
The great thing about the Bay Rays is that they have so many options. The Bay Rays are not afraid to play young players, try them at new positions and mix and match to come up with the best outcome. Maddon is one of the best young managers in the game.
So yeah, 84 wins seems like a breeze for this team. So many divisions in baseball are going to be fascinating in 2011. But the AL East might just be the most fun three-team dogfight in history. Yeah, a lot has to go right for that to happen, but whenever the Fan thinks about the roster of the Bay Rays, 84 games seems ridiculous.
Let's list the reasons why the Bay Rays will blow past 84 wins. First, let's start with the rotation. David Price is simply one of the top five pitchers in the American League and he keeps getting better. 2010 was no fluke and Price is going to be just as good or better in 2011. Jeremy Hellickson will have a full year in the rotation and should be more consistently better than the departed Matt Garza. Well, Hellickson may not be better than Garza when Garza is on, but he'll be just as good overall. Jeff Niemann is a guy just waiting to put things all together. The guy is a monster and sometimes, those tall guys take a little while to figure it all out. But Niemann has been very good at times even when not putting it together. You can see the superstar there waiting to bust out. And then you have Wade Davis as your fourth best starter? Puhleese. Wade Davis and Phil Hughes are two solid young guys that are going to be good starters for a long time. Davis rebounded nicely last year after a poor start. If he gets his homer rate down and gets more confidence, look out. And let's finish off with James Shields. If Shields was your Number 2 or 3 starter like last year, you could be concerned. But if he's your number five starter, wouldn't that be better than 28 of the 29 teams out there? This rotation is very, very good.
The young players just keep coming. In the Fan's mind, the Rays are improved at shortstop, second base, first base, DH and utility. Desmond Jennings is projected as the next big thing. He hasn't shown it yet, but if he gets 600 plate appearances, he should show that his minor league days were no fluke. Jennings is a more disciplined hitter than Crawford and can be just as good an outfielder and base runner. Jennigs could be the rookie of the year if he gets off to a good start.
Reid Brignac is one of this Fan's favorite young players. Love watching this kid play. If he starts at shortstop every day and settles himself down into his major league career, you could see fielding as good as Brendan Ryan. He is also poised to be a lot better on offense than Bartlett. The Fan loves him some Reid Brignac.
Sean Rodriguez should improve at second base as well in his second year. He seemed to have some limitations in his game, but he's a fiery little guy and could become one of the better second baseman in the league. But if he falters, you have Ben Zobrist right there who can play second base every day with the best of them. Zobrist is a bit of a mystery. Was 2009 the real Zobrist or 2010? The two seasons don't even come close to looking like the same player. But Zobrist can play so many positions well that if he offense returns at all, he's the safety valve for any position.
Carlos Pena was so bad last year that anyone could be an improvement...even Pena himself if he had returned. The Bay Rays have some options with Zobrist and Dan Johnson. Any combination they come up with will be better than what Pena put together last year. This Fan is rooting for Pena to rebuild his career. But it won't be with the Bay Rays.
What can you say about the Bay Rays at DH? The position has been abominable for several seasons. Nothing they tried worked. This year, their DH will work. Even if Manny Ramirez doesn't have anything left, you have Damon and either one of those guys can out hit any Rays' DH of the last several years in their sleep. Personally, those signings were brilliant. Not only are they two veterans that have won before, but they can anchor down a young team and lead the way. This Fan feels that Manny is going to have a monster year. None of the projections do justice to how well Manny can hit this year since he doesn't have to play the field and can stay healthy. And like mentioned earlier, if he falters, there is Damon. And the amazing thing about those two signings? They were both cheaper than Pat Burrell!
The bullpen lost a lot of good arms. But bullpens can be rebuilt and the bullpen is less important if you have a great starting rotation. Rays' fans shouldn't worry about the bullpen. Maddon and others will work it out.
So what's left? Oh yeah, you have the best third baseman in baseball in Evan Longoria. You have an enigmatic centerfielder who never seems to figure it out. He can anytime. But if he doesn't? You can trade him, put Jennings out there. Then there is Matt Joyce. Joyce had a strange year last year. His final stats are not impressive. But he came on toward the end of the year and was a force in the post season. Joyce still has superstar potential just waiting to come out. And John Jaso is just fine behind the plate. He's not the best defensive catcher and his offense wore down toward the end of last season. But he is a useful player and better than a lot of teams' catchers.
The great thing about the Bay Rays is that they have so many options. The Bay Rays are not afraid to play young players, try them at new positions and mix and match to come up with the best outcome. Maddon is one of the best young managers in the game.
So yeah, 84 wins seems like a breeze for this team. So many divisions in baseball are going to be fascinating in 2011. But the AL East might just be the most fun three-team dogfight in history. Yeah, a lot has to go right for that to happen, but whenever the Fan thinks about the roster of the Bay Rays, 84 games seems ridiculous.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Where Will the Seattle Mariners Pick Up Nine Wins?
Slowly but surely, the projections systems are cranking out their data. ZiPS, Chone, Marcel, Bill James, Baseball Prospectus (and PECOTA) are just some of the systems that crunch the numbers and spit out their expected results. Since looking at statistics are one of this writer's favorite activities (though interpreting them are still a weakness), the Fan thought he would once again look at Ichiro Suzuki's page because all those hits and little else are so much fun to look at. While there, the plight of the Seattle Mariners as a whole crossed the mind and the Fan decided to see what was out there for projections for the wayward team. One, Baseball Prospectus, projects the Mariners to win 70 games. That's not very good, but at least it's nine games better than last year when the team finished at 61-101. But the question that projection brought up was: Where are they going to pick up nine wins?
The Mariners had the benefit of Clif Lee last year for thirteen starts. He won eight of them. There won't be any Cliff Lee this year. Despite heroic efforts, Felix Hernandez only won 13 games. If he pitches with similar dominance this coming season--and there is no reason why he shouldn't--then you can figure he'll win 15 or 16 games (BP gives him 17). That increase takes up half of Lee's slack. But we're still in the negative column. Where are the other wins going to come from?
The rest of the rotation is problematic. Once again, we have a hopeful Eric Bedard. We'll put that in the, "I'll-believe-it-when-I-see-it" category. There is Doug Fister, who at 27, should improve a bit. He does a great job of limiting walks and homers, but has a low strikeout rate. There is no reason he can't win ten games with a league average ERA. That's another plus four so we are still dead even with last year.
There is Jason Vargas, who will be 28 in 2011. He's another guy who limits walks (not as well as Fister) and homers, doesn't give up as many hits as Fister but doesn't strike out a whole lot more either. The best you can hope for there is another league average season with possibly ten wins. Okay, we're at plus one now.
But then you get into a whole lot of what ifs. One projection included youngster, Michael Pineda, an impressive 22 year old right-hander. The projection gave him six wins and a good strikeout to walk ratio. That's a lot of hope for a kid who has never thrown a pitch in the major leagues. But okay, we'll go with that. Those six wins are five better than Ryan Rowland-Smith, who took his hyphen and ran as fast as he could to Houston. So we are plus six. We only need six more wins to stay that far ahead in the rotation. The Mariners should be able to find them from Luke French or somebody.
So let's for the sake of argument, give the starting rotation a plus 6 for wins. We still need to find three more. It won't come from the relief pitchers. There is serious concern about David Aardsma, a pitcher for the record books if only because of all major league players that ever played, his name will always be first on the list. Aardsma has had some success as a closer, but he's not a mortal lock down guy. His 4.5 walks per nine make things adventurous and the team has no ability to overcome blown saves with its offense. Plus, Aardsma is injured and starts the season with a question mark.
The rest of the bullpen is a hodge-podge of guys like Brandon League Average. Ha! The Fan loves that. Brandon League Average. hehe. Apologies. But anyway, the Mariners have some young guys that can throw hard like Dan Cortes, but this bullpen will be a work in progress. So let's give it the benefit of the doubt that it won't be any worse or better than last year. We're still up six games.
And finally we get to the offense. Baseball Think Factory makes the point that only four teams have more underperformed their projected offense than the Mariners did last year. And of the ten all time under performing teams, they collectively rebounded by +.0.6 runs per game the following year. But just what have the Mariners done to improve their offense? Their only hope there is that some of the players who were bloody awful last year get back closer to their career norms. Can you hope for that from Milton Bradley at this point? This Fan can't.
Chone Figgins is one that should improve. But most projections have him finishing with a .675 OPS instead of the .646 stinker he put up in 2010. The Fan thinks that is pessimistic. Figgins should improve and hit better than his .263 projection. Just putting him back to third base should be enough to add a level of comfort needed to hit better. Figgins and Franklin Gutierrez are this Fan's favorites for a nice rebound. Gutierrez has this bizarre odd/even year thing going. If that keeps true to form, this should be the good year. How scientific of the Fan, eh?
But shorstop and catcher are this Fan's biggest concerns. Catchers for the Mariners did not even hit above the Mendoza Line last year. Projections give starter, Adam Moore a .243 batting average for 2011. But that sounds awful high for a guy who didn't even hit .200 last year. The Mariners have some great fielding infielders like Jack Wilson, Brendan Ryan to figure out who is going to play in the middle of the diamond. The problem is that none of them are much on the offensive side. This Fan would say that Brendan Ryan has the most upside, especially away from LaRussa.
A real key to finding the four more wins from the offensive side will be guys like Justin Smoak, Michael Saunders and Dustin Ackley. They are all good prospects that have to take the next step in becoming productive major league players. Neither Smoak nor Saunders have shown much at the highest level in their brief looks.
There are two things to say about the Mariners this coming season. One is that there doesn't seem to be any possible way for the offense to be as bad as it was last year. But unless certain key things happen, it bloody well could be as bad. The back end of the rotation...well, let's say the entire rotation after Hernandez is suspect. If the offense rebounds just a little, the Mariners could pick up a few games up in the win columns. But this Fan just can't seem them winning 70 games as much as the brain tries to find a way.
The Mariners had the benefit of Clif Lee last year for thirteen starts. He won eight of them. There won't be any Cliff Lee this year. Despite heroic efforts, Felix Hernandez only won 13 games. If he pitches with similar dominance this coming season--and there is no reason why he shouldn't--then you can figure he'll win 15 or 16 games (BP gives him 17). That increase takes up half of Lee's slack. But we're still in the negative column. Where are the other wins going to come from?
The rest of the rotation is problematic. Once again, we have a hopeful Eric Bedard. We'll put that in the, "I'll-believe-it-when-I-see-it" category. There is Doug Fister, who at 27, should improve a bit. He does a great job of limiting walks and homers, but has a low strikeout rate. There is no reason he can't win ten games with a league average ERA. That's another plus four so we are still dead even with last year.
There is Jason Vargas, who will be 28 in 2011. He's another guy who limits walks (not as well as Fister) and homers, doesn't give up as many hits as Fister but doesn't strike out a whole lot more either. The best you can hope for there is another league average season with possibly ten wins. Okay, we're at plus one now.
But then you get into a whole lot of what ifs. One projection included youngster, Michael Pineda, an impressive 22 year old right-hander. The projection gave him six wins and a good strikeout to walk ratio. That's a lot of hope for a kid who has never thrown a pitch in the major leagues. But okay, we'll go with that. Those six wins are five better than Ryan Rowland-Smith, who took his hyphen and ran as fast as he could to Houston. So we are plus six. We only need six more wins to stay that far ahead in the rotation. The Mariners should be able to find them from Luke French or somebody.
So let's for the sake of argument, give the starting rotation a plus 6 for wins. We still need to find three more. It won't come from the relief pitchers. There is serious concern about David Aardsma, a pitcher for the record books if only because of all major league players that ever played, his name will always be first on the list. Aardsma has had some success as a closer, but he's not a mortal lock down guy. His 4.5 walks per nine make things adventurous and the team has no ability to overcome blown saves with its offense. Plus, Aardsma is injured and starts the season with a question mark.
The rest of the bullpen is a hodge-podge of guys like Brandon League Average. Ha! The Fan loves that. Brandon League Average. hehe. Apologies. But anyway, the Mariners have some young guys that can throw hard like Dan Cortes, but this bullpen will be a work in progress. So let's give it the benefit of the doubt that it won't be any worse or better than last year. We're still up six games.
And finally we get to the offense. Baseball Think Factory makes the point that only four teams have more underperformed their projected offense than the Mariners did last year. And of the ten all time under performing teams, they collectively rebounded by +.0.6 runs per game the following year. But just what have the Mariners done to improve their offense? Their only hope there is that some of the players who were bloody awful last year get back closer to their career norms. Can you hope for that from Milton Bradley at this point? This Fan can't.
Chone Figgins is one that should improve. But most projections have him finishing with a .675 OPS instead of the .646 stinker he put up in 2010. The Fan thinks that is pessimistic. Figgins should improve and hit better than his .263 projection. Just putting him back to third base should be enough to add a level of comfort needed to hit better. Figgins and Franklin Gutierrez are this Fan's favorites for a nice rebound. Gutierrez has this bizarre odd/even year thing going. If that keeps true to form, this should be the good year. How scientific of the Fan, eh?
But shorstop and catcher are this Fan's biggest concerns. Catchers for the Mariners did not even hit above the Mendoza Line last year. Projections give starter, Adam Moore a .243 batting average for 2011. But that sounds awful high for a guy who didn't even hit .200 last year. The Mariners have some great fielding infielders like Jack Wilson, Brendan Ryan to figure out who is going to play in the middle of the diamond. The problem is that none of them are much on the offensive side. This Fan would say that Brendan Ryan has the most upside, especially away from LaRussa.
A real key to finding the four more wins from the offensive side will be guys like Justin Smoak, Michael Saunders and Dustin Ackley. They are all good prospects that have to take the next step in becoming productive major league players. Neither Smoak nor Saunders have shown much at the highest level in their brief looks.
There are two things to say about the Mariners this coming season. One is that there doesn't seem to be any possible way for the offense to be as bad as it was last year. But unless certain key things happen, it bloody well could be as bad. The back end of the rotation...well, let's say the entire rotation after Hernandez is suspect. If the offense rebounds just a little, the Mariners could pick up a few games up in the win columns. But this Fan just can't seem them winning 70 games as much as the brain tries to find a way.
Friday, February 18, 2011
Strat-O-Matic Baseball and Fantasy Sports
Strat-O-Matic celebrated its fiftieth year recently and reading those stories sure brought back fond memories. In many ways it was the perfect game in that it took our built in love for the backbone of baseball (the stats) and forced them into a game where you could create your own season and see what happened. I remember the first time seeing an ad for the game in the Sporting News, a magazine I was fortunate enough to receive every week for most of my childhood. That magazine, which was always printed on newspaper stock, was devoured religiously for the great writing on each team AND the statistics section in the back. That this game was advertised by such a great periodical was good enough for me and it was ordered with paper route money.
And in many ways, Strat-O-Matic was a continuation on a tradition we kids had already built. I had created my own dice baseball game before that and my brother, a best friend and I played entire seasons based on this dice game. I remember that seven was a strikeout and a twelve was a homer because of the rarity of it. It wasn't a scientific game, but it was played and created with some rudimentary knowledge of how often certain events occurred in the game. Once we received Strat-O-Matic, we didn't need the dice game.
We must have played thousands of games of Strat-O-Matic as we created our own seasons with all the teams and played 162 game schedules for all the teams. That meant that we kept box scores and intimate statistics on the games' results. It's really too bad I never took this love of statistics to a professional level. I could be Tango Tiger right now if I had. Anyway, we had notebooks full of the score sheets and statistics. I remember that my favorite player was Mike Shannon, the former Cardinal who I believe still works on their broadcast team. For some reason, he was always a star in our leagues and always among the league leaders. There was a White Sox pitcher who was also fabulous for me but I can't remember his name. According to his playing card, he only started like 13 games with some success. I parlayed that into a thirty start season and he won over 20 games. Strat-O-Matic pitchers never got sore arms.
I think I stopped playing once I went off to college. In fact, I'm sure I did. Then a decade or so ago, the Fantasy sports craze started. And really, to me, Fantasy leagues are a natural evolution from those of us who played Strat-O-Matic (which is proving to be mighty tough to type over and over). Again, the game was based on statistics except this time, it wasn't the stats from the prior year, but as they were occurring in real time. Needless to say, I got highly involved in Fantasy baseball and football.
But I have had to stop. For one, they require time I no longer can justify to do it well. Secondly, I found it was changing how I was watching the games. In the past, I always watched games rooting for one particular team. For a Fan, there is always a hierarchy of teams. Now that I am a "journalist," I'm not sure I can list that hierarchy. But let's say the Rangers are ahead of the Angels on that hierarchy. So if the Rangers were playing the Angels on television, I would root for the Rangers.
But once you get into Fantasy sports, it changes how you root for games. Say you have Jered Weaver on your fantasy team and he was starting for the Angels in that game against the Rangers. Then what happens to who you root for? Since I write about baseball exclusively, I can safely say that I am a huge Patriots fan in football and have been since the Steve Grogan days. But with Fantasy, suddenly you are hoping that the running back on the hated Jets rushed for 100 yards when that might not be in the best interest of your favorite team winning the game. See what I mean? You become divided in your loyalties and that's stressful. All I wanted to do was watch a game and root for a team to win. Fantasy made that complicated and life is complicated enough.
But Fantasy sports are huge businesses now and a thousand blogs are devoted to just that aspect of sports. Each large mainstream media site has a featured Fantasy writer. And that's okay with me. I have no problem with that. As long as it builds interest in my favorite sport, all the better. I just can't do it anymore. This house was too divided and it drove me crazy.
And in many ways, Strat-O-Matic was a continuation on a tradition we kids had already built. I had created my own dice baseball game before that and my brother, a best friend and I played entire seasons based on this dice game. I remember that seven was a strikeout and a twelve was a homer because of the rarity of it. It wasn't a scientific game, but it was played and created with some rudimentary knowledge of how often certain events occurred in the game. Once we received Strat-O-Matic, we didn't need the dice game.
We must have played thousands of games of Strat-O-Matic as we created our own seasons with all the teams and played 162 game schedules for all the teams. That meant that we kept box scores and intimate statistics on the games' results. It's really too bad I never took this love of statistics to a professional level. I could be Tango Tiger right now if I had. Anyway, we had notebooks full of the score sheets and statistics. I remember that my favorite player was Mike Shannon, the former Cardinal who I believe still works on their broadcast team. For some reason, he was always a star in our leagues and always among the league leaders. There was a White Sox pitcher who was also fabulous for me but I can't remember his name. According to his playing card, he only started like 13 games with some success. I parlayed that into a thirty start season and he won over 20 games. Strat-O-Matic pitchers never got sore arms.
I think I stopped playing once I went off to college. In fact, I'm sure I did. Then a decade or so ago, the Fantasy sports craze started. And really, to me, Fantasy leagues are a natural evolution from those of us who played Strat-O-Matic (which is proving to be mighty tough to type over and over). Again, the game was based on statistics except this time, it wasn't the stats from the prior year, but as they were occurring in real time. Needless to say, I got highly involved in Fantasy baseball and football.
But I have had to stop. For one, they require time I no longer can justify to do it well. Secondly, I found it was changing how I was watching the games. In the past, I always watched games rooting for one particular team. For a Fan, there is always a hierarchy of teams. Now that I am a "journalist," I'm not sure I can list that hierarchy. But let's say the Rangers are ahead of the Angels on that hierarchy. So if the Rangers were playing the Angels on television, I would root for the Rangers.
But once you get into Fantasy sports, it changes how you root for games. Say you have Jered Weaver on your fantasy team and he was starting for the Angels in that game against the Rangers. Then what happens to who you root for? Since I write about baseball exclusively, I can safely say that I am a huge Patriots fan in football and have been since the Steve Grogan days. But with Fantasy, suddenly you are hoping that the running back on the hated Jets rushed for 100 yards when that might not be in the best interest of your favorite team winning the game. See what I mean? You become divided in your loyalties and that's stressful. All I wanted to do was watch a game and root for a team to win. Fantasy made that complicated and life is complicated enough.
But Fantasy sports are huge businesses now and a thousand blogs are devoted to just that aspect of sports. Each large mainstream media site has a featured Fantasy writer. And that's okay with me. I have no problem with that. As long as it builds interest in my favorite sport, all the better. I just can't do it anymore. This house was too divided and it drove me crazy.
Miguel Cabrera Merits Concern, Not Judgement
There is a certain slice of our society that received the news concerning the arrest of Miguel Cabrera with either glee or condemnation. Throw the bum in jail was probably an oft repeated thought. And yes, on the one hand, over-pampered athletes that make millions of dollars to do something we would all love to be able to do get little sympathy when they get into trouble. And yes, there is always the knowledge that what Cabrera chose to do could have killed somebody. The Fan gets all of those thoughts and ideas. And perhaps the Fan is an old softy, but this news was not good news. It was sad news.
It was sad because most of us believed that Cabrera was over the problems that made him an embarrassment at the end of the 2009 season when he let his teammates down during the pennant stretch. If Cabrera was not forthright about his shame at his problems, if he hadn't apologized so profusely or worked so hard to beat the alcohol, we wouldn't be sad. But he did all those things. He was a different man last year and his play reflected his sobriety and his new status as a dry ball player. That Cabrera was worth rooting for and someone to be encouraged about. His arrest is shocking to the system and shocking how far a person can fall.
But it really isn't shocking if you have any experience with alcohol or drug addiction. This writer has a family riddled with the stuff and it's a painful family shame and the stress is extreme. When you live through that kind of thing, you understand that addiction is never beaten. It is only handled and overcome on a daily basis. Many addicted who spend some time away from the root of their problem think that one drink won't hurt or that an occasional taste won't hurt. But it's all that is needed to restart the snowball from hell to start running down a hill. Consider cigarette smoking. Many have quit that awful and sad addiction for months or even years at a time only to fall prey to the addiction from a family stress situation or a few too many to drink at a party.
No, Miguel Cabrera doesn't get a free pass this time. He needs to confront and face this episode and work with doctors to get him back on the dry side. But the last thing Cabrera needs is judgement and punishment. If anything, facing his problem should be the alternative to punishment and only failing to work on solutions for his life should lead to suspensions and that sort of thing.
You have to have experience with addiction to know how difficult this is. If you and your family have been immune to this kind of situation, it's very difficult to explain to have you understand. Yes, all addiction stems from choices. Yes, to a strong degree, we have control over those choices. But life can be hard and sometimes resolve can crumble in a quick spate of depression. It happens.
Ultimately, this Fan will root for Cabrera. He's not just a rich ball player. He's a human being with a family and children. His blood runs red and he's part of the human family. How can you not root for him to learn from this experience and work diligently to keep it from being repeated? People around him are affected too and thus they need our support and prayers. Point fingers if you must. Be one of the throng that shout epithets to him at the stadium. Not this Fan. This Fan will be concerned with thoughts only on Cabrera being well and a healthy member of society and our human family.
It was sad because most of us believed that Cabrera was over the problems that made him an embarrassment at the end of the 2009 season when he let his teammates down during the pennant stretch. If Cabrera was not forthright about his shame at his problems, if he hadn't apologized so profusely or worked so hard to beat the alcohol, we wouldn't be sad. But he did all those things. He was a different man last year and his play reflected his sobriety and his new status as a dry ball player. That Cabrera was worth rooting for and someone to be encouraged about. His arrest is shocking to the system and shocking how far a person can fall.
But it really isn't shocking if you have any experience with alcohol or drug addiction. This writer has a family riddled with the stuff and it's a painful family shame and the stress is extreme. When you live through that kind of thing, you understand that addiction is never beaten. It is only handled and overcome on a daily basis. Many addicted who spend some time away from the root of their problem think that one drink won't hurt or that an occasional taste won't hurt. But it's all that is needed to restart the snowball from hell to start running down a hill. Consider cigarette smoking. Many have quit that awful and sad addiction for months or even years at a time only to fall prey to the addiction from a family stress situation or a few too many to drink at a party.
No, Miguel Cabrera doesn't get a free pass this time. He needs to confront and face this episode and work with doctors to get him back on the dry side. But the last thing Cabrera needs is judgement and punishment. If anything, facing his problem should be the alternative to punishment and only failing to work on solutions for his life should lead to suspensions and that sort of thing.
You have to have experience with addiction to know how difficult this is. If you and your family have been immune to this kind of situation, it's very difficult to explain to have you understand. Yes, all addiction stems from choices. Yes, to a strong degree, we have control over those choices. But life can be hard and sometimes resolve can crumble in a quick spate of depression. It happens.
Ultimately, this Fan will root for Cabrera. He's not just a rich ball player. He's a human being with a family and children. His blood runs red and he's part of the human family. How can you not root for him to learn from this experience and work diligently to keep it from being repeated? People around him are affected too and thus they need our support and prayers. Point fingers if you must. Be one of the throng that shout epithets to him at the stadium. Not this Fan. This Fan will be concerned with thoughts only on Cabrera being well and a healthy member of society and our human family.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
When Did We Get a "Cardinal Nation"?
Yesterday, after Albert Pujols ended negotiations with the Cardinals due to his "self-imposed" deadline, Pujols released a statement to the USA Today. The statement, which, if you'll forgive this Fan, reads a bit self-serving and trite, personally addresses "Cardinal Nation" promising them his full effort just like always. It was the first time this writer had ever heard the term, "Cardinal Nation." Certainly, we have heard Red Sox Nation to the point of nausea. But the Fan never heard of Cardinal Nation. Is this a recent development?
Apparently this is not a overly new development. There is a Cardinal Nation blog that was started in June of 2010. But that wasn't that long ago. No, that's wrong. Their on-site archive only goes back that far, but there are posts to be found from that site back before then. There was or is another site called Cardinal-nation.com with the hyphen. How old is the term? Did it come before the Red Sox Nation or after? There is a Cardinal Nation Facebook group.
Simply doing Google searches, the term was being used in 2008 and 2007 and 2006. The Sporting News Books advertised its third edition "Cardinal Nation" hardcover book in 2005. So that brings us back to at least 2002. The Facebook group by that name was founded in 2001. Okay, so this has been around a while then? Who knew? Well, obviously Cardinal fans knew as this has been an ongoing thing for a long time.
So then the Fan was all wet. This isn't a situation of the Cardinals copying the Red Sox. It seems it's the other way around. This writer has been in New England for a long time and the whole Red Sox Nation thing didn't really begin until the Red Sox won the World Series and broke the curse. What was at first a pleasant feeling for long-suffering Red Sox fans has turned into an insufferable arrogance as that team's fans follow the team and are in attendance at stadiums all over the country. The Red Sox Nation has come to represent a snobbish and uppity feeling that the Red Sox and their fans are smarter and better than anyone else. Of course, the Fan knows not all Red Sox fans are like that. But still, if you mention the term to most baseball fans around the country, a distasteful look will occupy most faces.
And so it wasn't the Cardinals who copied the Red Sox, it was the other way around and this Fan is now properly educated. Thankfully, reading that trite and self-serving statement by Pujols led to an education in something the Fan wasn't aware of and is happy to have learned correctly. After this scientific study (...ahem) into the past, the Cardinals and their fans rightly own the term. Carry on, Cardinal Nation. Carry on.
Apparently this is not a overly new development. There is a Cardinal Nation blog that was started in June of 2010. But that wasn't that long ago. No, that's wrong. Their on-site archive only goes back that far, but there are posts to be found from that site back before then. There was or is another site called Cardinal-nation.com with the hyphen. How old is the term? Did it come before the Red Sox Nation or after? There is a Cardinal Nation Facebook group.
Simply doing Google searches, the term was being used in 2008 and 2007 and 2006. The Sporting News Books advertised its third edition "Cardinal Nation" hardcover book in 2005. So that brings us back to at least 2002. The Facebook group by that name was founded in 2001. Okay, so this has been around a while then? Who knew? Well, obviously Cardinal fans knew as this has been an ongoing thing for a long time.
So then the Fan was all wet. This isn't a situation of the Cardinals copying the Red Sox. It seems it's the other way around. This writer has been in New England for a long time and the whole Red Sox Nation thing didn't really begin until the Red Sox won the World Series and broke the curse. What was at first a pleasant feeling for long-suffering Red Sox fans has turned into an insufferable arrogance as that team's fans follow the team and are in attendance at stadiums all over the country. The Red Sox Nation has come to represent a snobbish and uppity feeling that the Red Sox and their fans are smarter and better than anyone else. Of course, the Fan knows not all Red Sox fans are like that. But still, if you mention the term to most baseball fans around the country, a distasteful look will occupy most faces.
And so it wasn't the Cardinals who copied the Red Sox, it was the other way around and this Fan is now properly educated. Thankfully, reading that trite and self-serving statement by Pujols led to an education in something the Fan wasn't aware of and is happy to have learned correctly. After this scientific study (...ahem) into the past, the Cardinals and their fans rightly own the term. Carry on, Cardinal Nation. Carry on.
Andruw Jones is a Great Addition to Yankees
Memories of Andruw Jones always begin with the 1996 World Series against the Yankees. His amazing performance in that series as a rookie included a .400 batting average in a losing cause. Never had a rookie made his presence felt so fast and so explosive. Has it really been almost fifteen years since then? And it's been half a dozen years since Andruw Jones was everyone's favorite center fielder. He was an early star on the fledgling days of ESPN's Baseball Tonight with his nightly highlight poetics and big homeruns. That Andruw Jones is probably long gone. But Jones is now a member of the Yankees, the team he almost beat single-handedly all those years ago. And he could be a significant player for the team this season.
Most know the story of the downfall of Andruw Jones. He got fat and lazy, the story goes. He got homer happy which led to a 51 homer season, but an erosion of the rest of his batting skills. According to Fangraphs, he was a $28 million player in 2005. Just three short seasons later, he famously batted .158 for the Dodgers with a .259 slugging percentage. He was lost and he was a disaster. The Rangers picked him up in 2009 and his power picked back up but he still hit only .214 in 331 plate appearances. What looked like a sure Hall of Fame career was going up in smoke. The Rangers gave up on him too.
Jones then signed with the White Sox in 2010 and ended up posting a 119 OPS+ despite batting only .230. But .230 with his power and his ability to work a walk showed some signs that perhaps his career wasn't dead after all. Hit hit 19 homers for Ozzie Guillen in only 278 at bats and gave the White Sox almost $15 million in value. He played all three outfield positions but was best in right field. He's no longer a viable centerfielder. Those days are gone unfortunately.
And so his year with the White Sox earned him a $2.0 million contract with the Yankees for 2011. As a fourth outfielder, if he performs exactly as last year, he will be a steal. He can give Granderson and Gardner days off against tough lefties and add a potent right-handed bat into the line up. And most importantly, Jones is a good insurance policy if the Yankees want to trade Swisher in the last year of his deal.
Not that there isn't cause for some concern. While Jones can still hit a fastball and his homer to fly ball ratio is excellent, his line drive percentage has shrunk to minuscule proportions (11 percent last year). While he has a very good eye and only swung at 25 percent of pitches out of the strike zone, he is still vulnerable to the slider off the outside of the plate, something the Yankees have had a heavy dose of over the years (Soriano, Thames, etc.). His power may take a hit in the spacious left field of the Yankees. But again, even with all those negatives, he will be more valuable than Thames was for the Yankees for several reasons.
First, Thames really couldn't play the field. So if you wanted to get his bat in the line up--particularly against lefties--he had to play in the field. That wasn't pretty to watch. Jones will not be that much of a loss in the outfield when he spells those wonderful fielding outfielders the Yankees have. Plus, Jones is a more disciplined hitter than Thames, has just as much power and still runs the bases fairly well (Thames was like a lumbering bull). Jones stole nine bases in eleven attempts last year. But most importantly, if the Yankees get to the post season, Jones has a proven track record there. He has hit ten post season homers in his career and has a .797 OPS over his post season career. Thames was brutal in the post season.
It's not like Andruw Jones is an old man. At 34, he is younger than people think (he was 19 his rookie season). And with a commitment after the lost years to conditioning, he could still have a few productive seasons within him. For $2.0 million plus incentives, Jones is a sweet deal for the Yankees.
Most know the story of the downfall of Andruw Jones. He got fat and lazy, the story goes. He got homer happy which led to a 51 homer season, but an erosion of the rest of his batting skills. According to Fangraphs, he was a $28 million player in 2005. Just three short seasons later, he famously batted .158 for the Dodgers with a .259 slugging percentage. He was lost and he was a disaster. The Rangers picked him up in 2009 and his power picked back up but he still hit only .214 in 331 plate appearances. What looked like a sure Hall of Fame career was going up in smoke. The Rangers gave up on him too.
Jones then signed with the White Sox in 2010 and ended up posting a 119 OPS+ despite batting only .230. But .230 with his power and his ability to work a walk showed some signs that perhaps his career wasn't dead after all. Hit hit 19 homers for Ozzie Guillen in only 278 at bats and gave the White Sox almost $15 million in value. He played all three outfield positions but was best in right field. He's no longer a viable centerfielder. Those days are gone unfortunately.
And so his year with the White Sox earned him a $2.0 million contract with the Yankees for 2011. As a fourth outfielder, if he performs exactly as last year, he will be a steal. He can give Granderson and Gardner days off against tough lefties and add a potent right-handed bat into the line up. And most importantly, Jones is a good insurance policy if the Yankees want to trade Swisher in the last year of his deal.
Not that there isn't cause for some concern. While Jones can still hit a fastball and his homer to fly ball ratio is excellent, his line drive percentage has shrunk to minuscule proportions (11 percent last year). While he has a very good eye and only swung at 25 percent of pitches out of the strike zone, he is still vulnerable to the slider off the outside of the plate, something the Yankees have had a heavy dose of over the years (Soriano, Thames, etc.). His power may take a hit in the spacious left field of the Yankees. But again, even with all those negatives, he will be more valuable than Thames was for the Yankees for several reasons.
First, Thames really couldn't play the field. So if you wanted to get his bat in the line up--particularly against lefties--he had to play in the field. That wasn't pretty to watch. Jones will not be that much of a loss in the outfield when he spells those wonderful fielding outfielders the Yankees have. Plus, Jones is a more disciplined hitter than Thames, has just as much power and still runs the bases fairly well (Thames was like a lumbering bull). Jones stole nine bases in eleven attempts last year. But most importantly, if the Yankees get to the post season, Jones has a proven track record there. He has hit ten post season homers in his career and has a .797 OPS over his post season career. Thames was brutal in the post season.
It's not like Andruw Jones is an old man. At 34, he is younger than people think (he was 19 his rookie season). And with a commitment after the lost years to conditioning, he could still have a few productive seasons within him. For $2.0 million plus incentives, Jones is a sweet deal for the Yankees.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
The Mark Kotsay Syndrome Revisited
A week or so ago in this space, we talked about how teams rely on veteran players to fill out their rosters despite that fact that many of them provide no overall value to their teams. Mark Kotsay was used as an example and we used his name for the "syndrome." But we very well could have used Jerry Hairston, Jr., Kotsay's teammate, Craig Counsell or any other of the dozens of players who continue to get jobs years after year despite the fact they provide a wins above replacement (WAR) in the negative numbers. In fact, a further study found that in 2010, there were 123 players (non-pitchers) who had over 100 plate appearances and finished with a WAR of zero or in the negative numbers. 123!
The Fan read off some of that list on his podcast last night and many of the names are no doubt familiar to you. Some will open the season as starters for their respective teams (Getz, Theriot). But many of the same group of guys that hang around year after year. Many of them are catchers of the Butera, Molina, Hester and Cash variety. If you can squat for five innings, you can play in the major leagues for fifteen years. It doesn't matter if you are any good or not.
The point of the original post was that these guys are kept around because managers and general managers are more comfortable with "proven" major league-experienced players than they are with youngsters. Many of those people will say that these veterans add to the clubhouse. That must be a lot of clubhouse value to those guys to keep so many of them without value around for so long. Kevin Millar made five or six extra years in his career because of his "clubhouse" gifts.
The other point in the original post was that these guys are more expensive than the major league minimum in most cases. Kotsay will make $800,000 or almost double the minimum. Many will make in the millions. Many teams cry poverty and budget restrictions and yet will sign Melky Cabrera, Pedro Feliz and others way above major league minimum despite their history of no or negative value. Feliz finished last year with a WAR of -2.3, the lowest non-pitcher with more than 100 plate appearances. Yet, Feliz has a job (with the Royals) for far over the minimum. It just seems to this observer that teams could save a lot of money and not lose a whole lot of player value by always rounding out their rosters with rookie players to act as their utility people. The Tampa Bay Rays do this to perfection most of the time. If the Fan was running a team, the utility guy would always be a first or second year player making near the minimum.
This topic fascinates the Fan and this writer finds it amazing that so many fringe players hang around so long. Not only does this cost teams money now but also later as these marginal players who hang around for years add to their retirement packages by playing that long. It seems foolish when you think about it. After some careful (unprofessional) study, the Fan found that the 123 total of 2010 was certainly not out of line for the total amount of MLB players with a zero WAR or with a negative number. Below is a little chart the Fan put together of the totals for each decade going back to the 1911. The number on the left is the decade and the number on the right was the amount of players with 100 plate appearances and zero or negative WAR.
At first the Fan was struck by how large the numbers have gotten over the years. If you used a graph to show the increase over the years, it would look like this:
But then the Fan remembered that the teams have increased over the years and so there would be many more players. The number of teams chart looks very similar to the one above. Those early decades had 16 teams and then it moved to 20 and then 24, then 26 and finally 30. So it's more instructive to look at the percentage of players over the years who fit our category. That is, the percentage of total players in a league for a decade.
And the percentage over the years looks like this:
1911 - 20 - 18.78% Dead ball era.
1921 - 30 - 17.15% Getting into live ball era
1931 - 40 - 15.70% Real hitters' era
1941 - 50 - 17.60% More mediocre players due to WWII
1951 - 60 - 16.38%
1961 - 70 - 18.66% First wave of expansion. Pitchers' era
1971 - 80 - 19.57% Still pitchers era?
1981 - 90 - 16.63%
1991 - 00 - 16.55%
2001 - 10 - 16.87%
As you can see, those numbers are pretty consistent over the eras with slight variations due to conditions in the game. You can also see that the last three decades have shown a vast improvement over the 1960s and 1970s, so perhaps we are getting smarter.
The conclusion of all this is that first, sixteen and a half to twenty percent of the majors has been made up of non-pitchers with at least 100 plate appearances that end up with zero or lower value. It also shows that managers across time have held onto players with little value as comfort food. That was okay in the old days when players cost relatively little. But it's simply not financially acceptable to keep pouring money into fringe players that have hung around for five years or more and have proven over and over that they offer little, no or negative value at a rate of pay much higher than the major league minimum.
The Fan read off some of that list on his podcast last night and many of the names are no doubt familiar to you. Some will open the season as starters for their respective teams (Getz, Theriot). But many of the same group of guys that hang around year after year. Many of them are catchers of the Butera, Molina, Hester and Cash variety. If you can squat for five innings, you can play in the major leagues for fifteen years. It doesn't matter if you are any good or not.
The point of the original post was that these guys are kept around because managers and general managers are more comfortable with "proven" major league-experienced players than they are with youngsters. Many of those people will say that these veterans add to the clubhouse. That must be a lot of clubhouse value to those guys to keep so many of them without value around for so long. Kevin Millar made five or six extra years in his career because of his "clubhouse" gifts.
The other point in the original post was that these guys are more expensive than the major league minimum in most cases. Kotsay will make $800,000 or almost double the minimum. Many will make in the millions. Many teams cry poverty and budget restrictions and yet will sign Melky Cabrera, Pedro Feliz and others way above major league minimum despite their history of no or negative value. Feliz finished last year with a WAR of -2.3, the lowest non-pitcher with more than 100 plate appearances. Yet, Feliz has a job (with the Royals) for far over the minimum. It just seems to this observer that teams could save a lot of money and not lose a whole lot of player value by always rounding out their rosters with rookie players to act as their utility people. The Tampa Bay Rays do this to perfection most of the time. If the Fan was running a team, the utility guy would always be a first or second year player making near the minimum.
This topic fascinates the Fan and this writer finds it amazing that so many fringe players hang around so long. Not only does this cost teams money now but also later as these marginal players who hang around for years add to their retirement packages by playing that long. It seems foolish when you think about it. After some careful (unprofessional) study, the Fan found that the 123 total of 2010 was certainly not out of line for the total amount of MLB players with a zero WAR or with a negative number. Below is a little chart the Fan put together of the totals for each decade going back to the 1911. The number on the left is the decade and the number on the right was the amount of players with 100 plate appearances and zero or negative WAR.
And the percentage over the years looks like this:
1911 - 20 - 18.78% Dead ball era.
1921 - 30 - 17.15% Getting into live ball era
1931 - 40 - 15.70% Real hitters' era
1941 - 50 - 17.60% More mediocre players due to WWII
1951 - 60 - 16.38%
1961 - 70 - 18.66% First wave of expansion. Pitchers' era
1971 - 80 - 19.57% Still pitchers era?
1981 - 90 - 16.63%
1991 - 00 - 16.55%
2001 - 10 - 16.87%
As you can see, those numbers are pretty consistent over the eras with slight variations due to conditions in the game. You can also see that the last three decades have shown a vast improvement over the 1960s and 1970s, so perhaps we are getting smarter.
The conclusion of all this is that first, sixteen and a half to twenty percent of the majors has been made up of non-pitchers with at least 100 plate appearances that end up with zero or lower value. It also shows that managers across time have held onto players with little value as comfort food. That was okay in the old days when players cost relatively little. But it's simply not financially acceptable to keep pouring money into fringe players that have hung around for five years or more and have proven over and over that they offer little, no or negative value at a rate of pay much higher than the major league minimum.
Josh Hamilton Leads Rangers for Repeat
Peter Gammons wrote a wonderful piece on how Josh Hamilton has inspired a former number one pick and addict, Jeff Allison. It's a great story as only Peter Gammons can write it. With Josh Hamilton, his past will always be a part of the story, and his past also leads to the real fear that he can always fall again. Every indication is that Hamilton has his life under control and while we all pray that is the case, as long as he plays for the Texas Rangers, he will lead that team as they begin their run to defend their American League title.
Much has been written about the Rangers this off season. They didn't get Cliff Lee to stay. They signed Adrian Beltre and then we have all been obsessed with what's going to happen with Michael Young. But the real story for the Texas Rangers is Josh Hamilton, who if he can stay healthy, is the best player in the American League. And the bad news for the rest of the league is that Hamilton, at age 29, should be at the peak of his powers.
Of course, if you are talking about Josh Hamilton and not talking about his drug past, you have to talk about his injuries. People wonder whether Hamilton's past is a part of his injury-riddled present. That seems to be a difficult argument to make. What we do know is that Hamilton has missed significant time in every season except 2008. That season, he drove in 130 runs. And Hamilton is a much better player now than he was in 2008, which was his first full season after breaking in with the Reds the year before.
Instead, Hamilton seems a lot like Larry Walker. Walker, when he was healthy, was simply a brilliant ball player. But his style of play simply led him to miss a boat load of games over the course of his career. Hamilton seems a lot like Walker. Certainly from a talent standpoint, the two are very similar. What the Rangers have to hope for is that Hamilton can play 155 games. Until he can put a couple of those types of seasons together back to back, there will always be a question of injury.
Baseball needs Hamilton to be healthy because he simply can do things others can't. His homer against the Yankees in the ALCS was amazing. He was fooled by the pitch, his front leg and hips were already gone but somehow he got the head of the bat on the ball and hit it out of the park. Josh Hamilton is the best player, with more pure talent than any player this Fan has seen since Barry Bonds.
As Peter Gammons wrote, President Bush said we all love a reclamation project. And as such, Josh Hamilton is our favorite story in baseball. If Jeff Allison can make it to the major leagues, he'll be another favorite. We root for guys who have overcome the depths of despair to succeed using the talent they were born with. Baseball needs Josh Hamilton and it needs him healthy. The Rangers need him that way too. Because if he is healthy, the Rangers are clearly better than anyone else in the American League West.
Much has been written about the Rangers this off season. They didn't get Cliff Lee to stay. They signed Adrian Beltre and then we have all been obsessed with what's going to happen with Michael Young. But the real story for the Texas Rangers is Josh Hamilton, who if he can stay healthy, is the best player in the American League. And the bad news for the rest of the league is that Hamilton, at age 29, should be at the peak of his powers.
Of course, if you are talking about Josh Hamilton and not talking about his drug past, you have to talk about his injuries. People wonder whether Hamilton's past is a part of his injury-riddled present. That seems to be a difficult argument to make. What we do know is that Hamilton has missed significant time in every season except 2008. That season, he drove in 130 runs. And Hamilton is a much better player now than he was in 2008, which was his first full season after breaking in with the Reds the year before.
Instead, Hamilton seems a lot like Larry Walker. Walker, when he was healthy, was simply a brilliant ball player. But his style of play simply led him to miss a boat load of games over the course of his career. Hamilton seems a lot like Walker. Certainly from a talent standpoint, the two are very similar. What the Rangers have to hope for is that Hamilton can play 155 games. Until he can put a couple of those types of seasons together back to back, there will always be a question of injury.
Baseball needs Hamilton to be healthy because he simply can do things others can't. His homer against the Yankees in the ALCS was amazing. He was fooled by the pitch, his front leg and hips were already gone but somehow he got the head of the bat on the ball and hit it out of the park. Josh Hamilton is the best player, with more pure talent than any player this Fan has seen since Barry Bonds.
As Peter Gammons wrote, President Bush said we all love a reclamation project. And as such, Josh Hamilton is our favorite story in baseball. If Jeff Allison can make it to the major leagues, he'll be another favorite. We root for guys who have overcome the depths of despair to succeed using the talent they were born with. Baseball needs Josh Hamilton and it needs him healthy. The Rangers need him that way too. Because if he is healthy, the Rangers are clearly better than anyone else in the American League West.
Monday, February 14, 2011
My Valentine Girl
A long time ago in a place far away, I fell for a cute little blond while in Manchester, New Hampshire. I was totally lost and alone at a (then) small party school for rich kids called New Hampshire College. The cute little blond and I were probably the only non-rich kids in the whole school. The college was relatively new and did not even require SAT scores, hence the dumping ground for all troubled rich kids everywhere. The only reason I was there was because it was the only application I'd completed of the dozens my Sicilian mother had given me in her hopes for the American Dream. Naturally, the school accepted me. So there I was.
The cute little blond was driven to be a good student by an inferiority complex while I cared more about how long I could keep winning to keep the pool table. The drinking age was 18 then and the snack bar served pitchers of beer for next to nothing. Not a good idea in retrospect.
The cute little blond, finished her two year degree in fashion merchandising. That was the stupidest major she could have possibly taken but her father had talked her out of the physical education path she had wanted to pursue. He didn't see the later trend in the booming fitness business. She never used the degree.
I had gotten a job at Radio Shack and was making relatively good money and lost interest in classes. After two and a half year, the college and I were ready to be rid of each other. Instead, I married the cute little blond. Soon after, our son was born.
Our son was perfect in every way. I'd never seen a more perfect looking baby. And he was my buddy. By then I was working the graveyard shift at a tannery in Berwick, Maine and had my days free to do whatever me and my handsome lad wanted to do. We went to the lake together, took walks, played baseball, watched baseball. He came with me to my bowling leagues and would go in the nursery with the other kids. All the babysitters there adored him. So did the waitress, Lisa, at the local Friendlies who always knew exactly what the boy wonder wanted to eat. Truth be told, his dad had as big a crush on Lisa as the boy wonder did.
I love my son more than anything. We had a great childhood together. We went to Disney. We shared baseball. I coached him in Little League. It was wonderful.
But as the years went by, there wasn't another child. I went about my work in the tannery and the cute little blond, who never did work, started her workout career. She eventually came in third in the Miss New Hampshire body-building competition. I won the New Hampshire bowling tournament, but I was far from the cute little blonde's fitness inspiration.
And so it became an unusual household. The boy wonder would bring his friends home, run past Dad and ask Mom to make a muscle. If he needed a jar or bottle open, he asked Mom. The joke became that Mom had the muscles and Dad's biological clock was ticking. I wanted another child. I wanted a girl.
But it didn't happen. The years went by. The cute little blond and I had marital troubles. She was prone to depression and was the analytical, plan-everything type of person. I was the "artist" and the dreamer. During one phase when reconciliation was occurring and the boy wonder was sixteen, that oops moment came and the cute little blond was pregnant. It was probably one of the rare occasions when her body fat was high enough to allow that to happen. Who knows. But at the age of 40, I was going to have another child. The question was, what sex would it be? We refused to find out during the exams by the doctor.
During the pregnancy, all kinds of opinions were offered. She's carrying high or low or something and it's going to be a boy. I held out hope for a girl. I steeled myself for whatever it might be, but I REALLY wanted a girl. This was all happening fifteen years ago.
At last, the cute little blond went into labor. We had moved to northern Maine by then and I took her to the hospital in Caribou. After a lot of fraught moments (the cute little blond was 40 after all), the baby was born...and it was a girl! And she was perfect. Next to her brother, she was the most beautiful baby I had ever seen. And she had full lips! That's an inside joke. I always kidded the cute little blond that she had chicken lips and kissed me like an auntie. We named her Shaina Lise (my ideas both) which to me is the perfect name. And she was born, most fittingly...on Valentine's Day.
She turned fifteen today. She's so far unaffected by the pitfalls of the teen years. She's a good girl. A while ago I told her that I had always wanted a little girl and that she has been everything and more that I ever wanted. She has the good looks of her mother with some of my better features. She's imaginative, ambitious, and unbridled in her outlook on life. Her favorite shirt says, "Today is going to be awesome."
Needless to say, I am as smitten with her as the first time I took her out of the birthing room to show her to her brother. The boy wonder, now a man, hugged me and said, "You have your little girl, Dad." It was a wonderfully touching thing for him to say and I'll never forget it. That was my first real Valentine's Day. There have been fifteen of them since. I will always treasure February 14th because that's the day my little Valentine girl was born.
The cute little blond was driven to be a good student by an inferiority complex while I cared more about how long I could keep winning to keep the pool table. The drinking age was 18 then and the snack bar served pitchers of beer for next to nothing. Not a good idea in retrospect.
The cute little blond, finished her two year degree in fashion merchandising. That was the stupidest major she could have possibly taken but her father had talked her out of the physical education path she had wanted to pursue. He didn't see the later trend in the booming fitness business. She never used the degree.
I had gotten a job at Radio Shack and was making relatively good money and lost interest in classes. After two and a half year, the college and I were ready to be rid of each other. Instead, I married the cute little blond. Soon after, our son was born.
Our son was perfect in every way. I'd never seen a more perfect looking baby. And he was my buddy. By then I was working the graveyard shift at a tannery in Berwick, Maine and had my days free to do whatever me and my handsome lad wanted to do. We went to the lake together, took walks, played baseball, watched baseball. He came with me to my bowling leagues and would go in the nursery with the other kids. All the babysitters there adored him. So did the waitress, Lisa, at the local Friendlies who always knew exactly what the boy wonder wanted to eat. Truth be told, his dad had as big a crush on Lisa as the boy wonder did.
I love my son more than anything. We had a great childhood together. We went to Disney. We shared baseball. I coached him in Little League. It was wonderful.
But as the years went by, there wasn't another child. I went about my work in the tannery and the cute little blond, who never did work, started her workout career. She eventually came in third in the Miss New Hampshire body-building competition. I won the New Hampshire bowling tournament, but I was far from the cute little blonde's fitness inspiration.
And so it became an unusual household. The boy wonder would bring his friends home, run past Dad and ask Mom to make a muscle. If he needed a jar or bottle open, he asked Mom. The joke became that Mom had the muscles and Dad's biological clock was ticking. I wanted another child. I wanted a girl.
But it didn't happen. The years went by. The cute little blond and I had marital troubles. She was prone to depression and was the analytical, plan-everything type of person. I was the "artist" and the dreamer. During one phase when reconciliation was occurring and the boy wonder was sixteen, that oops moment came and the cute little blond was pregnant. It was probably one of the rare occasions when her body fat was high enough to allow that to happen. Who knows. But at the age of 40, I was going to have another child. The question was, what sex would it be? We refused to find out during the exams by the doctor.
During the pregnancy, all kinds of opinions were offered. She's carrying high or low or something and it's going to be a boy. I held out hope for a girl. I steeled myself for whatever it might be, but I REALLY wanted a girl. This was all happening fifteen years ago.
At last, the cute little blond went into labor. We had moved to northern Maine by then and I took her to the hospital in Caribou. After a lot of fraught moments (the cute little blond was 40 after all), the baby was born...and it was a girl! And she was perfect. Next to her brother, she was the most beautiful baby I had ever seen. And she had full lips! That's an inside joke. I always kidded the cute little blond that she had chicken lips and kissed me like an auntie. We named her Shaina Lise (my ideas both) which to me is the perfect name. And she was born, most fittingly...on Valentine's Day.
She turned fifteen today. She's so far unaffected by the pitfalls of the teen years. She's a good girl. A while ago I told her that I had always wanted a little girl and that she has been everything and more that I ever wanted. She has the good looks of her mother with some of my better features. She's imaginative, ambitious, and unbridled in her outlook on life. Her favorite shirt says, "Today is going to be awesome."
Needless to say, I am as smitten with her as the first time I took her out of the birthing room to show her to her brother. The boy wonder, now a man, hugged me and said, "You have your little girl, Dad." It was a wonderfully touching thing for him to say and I'll never forget it. That was my first real Valentine's Day. There have been fifteen of them since. I will always treasure February 14th because that's the day my little Valentine girl was born.
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Predicting the Top Seven Catchers of 2011
Much like the shortstop position, there is a bit of a swoon in Major League Baseball when it comes to catchers. You have top of the line guys like Joe Mauer and Brian McCann and then the ranks start thinning out very quickly. And yet even the worst catcher in the majors last year had a positive WAR value simply because of how important the position is the the game. If you really stop and think about it, there never has been any great era for catchers, has there? The top catchers of all time stand out so much because there was so much mediocrity everywhere else. For every Johnny Bench, there was a Rich Gedman. The thing about catching is that there is this tie to the pitching staff that's never really been measured. Rick Dempsey was the Orioles catcher for so many years because his pitchers swore by him. Jason Varitek can say the same thing. Maybe some day there will be this measurement us amateurs can go to that's called a catcher's pitching index or something. But for now, all we have is WAR and at least that component has fielding and hitting built into it's algorithm. Based on those flawed figures, here are the Fan's top catchers for 2011.
Joe Mauer - Of course you have to start with Mauer. He's a batting champion and has that sprawling, heads-up tag he made against the Yankees last year to sink our teeth into. According to Fangraphs, he wasn't the best overall catcher last year. Fangraphs listed Brian McCann ahead of him in WAR. But you can never bet against Mauer retaining the top spot in 2011. The only question from year to year is his health. He hasn't been a rock of health like Ivan Rodriguez over the years. Plus, his defense has been questioned of late. Fangraphs gave him a negative figure last year. That may be due to some of the nagging injuries he played with all year. But again, if you were in a school yard and picking teams, Mauer would be your first pick.
Brian McCann - As mentioned, McCann had the highest WAR of all catchers last year. He's been hailed as an offensive catcher his entire career, but his scored well for his defense last year, which is what pushed him ahead of Mauer. Both Mauer and McCann have been entrenched for years now which is a nice anchor for their pitching staffs. If there was some sort of catching pitching index, McCann would probably score very highly. But what makes McCann so good is his offense. McCann's slash line for the last five years reads: .290/.361/.496. If there wasn't a Joe Mauer, McCann would get a lot more attention. He's one of the best.
Buster Posey - It seems impossible for Buster Posey to have dreamed a better debut season. He came in and along with some improbably contributors, helped the Giants win a World Series. Posey also displayed remarkable dexterity and nimbleness behind the plate that wasn't expected (take heart Montero fans) and scored very well for his defense as well as his offense. The real question for 2011 is whether he can increase his patience when batting. His 6.8 percent walk rate leaves a lot to be desired. Also to be seen is whether NL pitchers make adjustments when facing him and how the young catcher handles those adjustments. But this guy is very, very good and with a bump in all his offensive numbers, could be the top of the class of 2011 catchers. He's that good.
Yadier Molina - The youngest of the Molina brothers turned out to be the best catcher of the bunch. There is no question that he is the best defensive catcher in baseball. Plus, you can't argue with the success he's had catching St. Louis pitching. The only question concerning Molina is his offense, which has hit hard times of late. If he could just hit his slash line of the last five years (.271/.333/.362), then he'll easily be the third best catcher in the game in 2011. But the problem with Molina is that he doesn't walk enough, which when he isn't hitting, can't give him any impact in the line up. Molina doesn't strike out much either. No catcher has struck out less often in the last five years than Molina. But he has to hit better than 2010. The Fan is betting that he will.
Russell Martin - This pick may surprise you. But Martin had, by all accounts, a really bad year last year, which ended abruptly with a bad injury. But even his "bad" abbreviated season garnered him a 2.1 WAR, higher than a lot of starting catchers around the league. Martin will take over for Jorge Posada, who catching days have passed him by. Posada was rated the second worst defensive catcher in 2010 (behind only Doumit). Martin might turn out to be one of the most unheralded improvements any team has made this off season. The Fan believes he will handled the pitching staff better and his defense will certainly be the best the Yankees have had for years. Of course, he has to be healthy to make this prediction work out. But no worries. Even if he can't stay healthy, Jesus Montero is a pretty darned good Plan B.
Carlos Ruiz - The Phillies catcher had a bust out season in 2010. With a slash line of .302/.400/.447 along with solid defense, Ruiz has become the focus of the Phillies and their great run. Plus, he is going to have fun handling what looks to be a great pitching staff. The thing with Ruiz for the Fan is just how much was 2010 a fluke or a progression? He was very good in 2009, but not good like 2010. Even if he slides back a bit, he's a rock for the Phillies and is certainly among the best in baseball. The Fan isn't sure he shouldn't be rated higher. If Martin rounds back to his old form, he's the better catcher. But if not, Ruiz is better than the 2009 and 2010 versions of Martin.
Geovany Soto - Would you have guessed that among all MLB catchers, Soto had the highest walk percentage in 2010? This Fan wouldn't have. Soto's season was hidden by the Cubs falling out of the race so fast last year. But he had a great offensive season. The difficulty with Soto is that he doesn't rate out well as a defensive catcher. Soto rates as one of the poorer defensive catchers in the game. But, darn, he is a good offensive catcher with a high OBP (obviously), a solid .280 batting average that can improve and good power (.497 slugging percentage in 2010). Now he just has to get better with the mask on.
Joe Mauer - Of course you have to start with Mauer. He's a batting champion and has that sprawling, heads-up tag he made against the Yankees last year to sink our teeth into. According to Fangraphs, he wasn't the best overall catcher last year. Fangraphs listed Brian McCann ahead of him in WAR. But you can never bet against Mauer retaining the top spot in 2011. The only question from year to year is his health. He hasn't been a rock of health like Ivan Rodriguez over the years. Plus, his defense has been questioned of late. Fangraphs gave him a negative figure last year. That may be due to some of the nagging injuries he played with all year. But again, if you were in a school yard and picking teams, Mauer would be your first pick.
Brian McCann - As mentioned, McCann had the highest WAR of all catchers last year. He's been hailed as an offensive catcher his entire career, but his scored well for his defense last year, which is what pushed him ahead of Mauer. Both Mauer and McCann have been entrenched for years now which is a nice anchor for their pitching staffs. If there was some sort of catching pitching index, McCann would probably score very highly. But what makes McCann so good is his offense. McCann's slash line for the last five years reads: .290/.361/.496. If there wasn't a Joe Mauer, McCann would get a lot more attention. He's one of the best.
Buster Posey - It seems impossible for Buster Posey to have dreamed a better debut season. He came in and along with some improbably contributors, helped the Giants win a World Series. Posey also displayed remarkable dexterity and nimbleness behind the plate that wasn't expected (take heart Montero fans) and scored very well for his defense as well as his offense. The real question for 2011 is whether he can increase his patience when batting. His 6.8 percent walk rate leaves a lot to be desired. Also to be seen is whether NL pitchers make adjustments when facing him and how the young catcher handles those adjustments. But this guy is very, very good and with a bump in all his offensive numbers, could be the top of the class of 2011 catchers. He's that good.
Yadier Molina - The youngest of the Molina brothers turned out to be the best catcher of the bunch. There is no question that he is the best defensive catcher in baseball. Plus, you can't argue with the success he's had catching St. Louis pitching. The only question concerning Molina is his offense, which has hit hard times of late. If he could just hit his slash line of the last five years (.271/.333/.362), then he'll easily be the third best catcher in the game in 2011. But the problem with Molina is that he doesn't walk enough, which when he isn't hitting, can't give him any impact in the line up. Molina doesn't strike out much either. No catcher has struck out less often in the last five years than Molina. But he has to hit better than 2010. The Fan is betting that he will.
Russell Martin - This pick may surprise you. But Martin had, by all accounts, a really bad year last year, which ended abruptly with a bad injury. But even his "bad" abbreviated season garnered him a 2.1 WAR, higher than a lot of starting catchers around the league. Martin will take over for Jorge Posada, who catching days have passed him by. Posada was rated the second worst defensive catcher in 2010 (behind only Doumit). Martin might turn out to be one of the most unheralded improvements any team has made this off season. The Fan believes he will handled the pitching staff better and his defense will certainly be the best the Yankees have had for years. Of course, he has to be healthy to make this prediction work out. But no worries. Even if he can't stay healthy, Jesus Montero is a pretty darned good Plan B.
Carlos Ruiz - The Phillies catcher had a bust out season in 2010. With a slash line of .302/.400/.447 along with solid defense, Ruiz has become the focus of the Phillies and their great run. Plus, he is going to have fun handling what looks to be a great pitching staff. The thing with Ruiz for the Fan is just how much was 2010 a fluke or a progression? He was very good in 2009, but not good like 2010. Even if he slides back a bit, he's a rock for the Phillies and is certainly among the best in baseball. The Fan isn't sure he shouldn't be rated higher. If Martin rounds back to his old form, he's the better catcher. But if not, Ruiz is better than the 2009 and 2010 versions of Martin.
Geovany Soto - Would you have guessed that among all MLB catchers, Soto had the highest walk percentage in 2010? This Fan wouldn't have. Soto's season was hidden by the Cubs falling out of the race so fast last year. But he had a great offensive season. The difficulty with Soto is that he doesn't rate out well as a defensive catcher. Soto rates as one of the poorer defensive catchers in the game. But, darn, he is a good offensive catcher with a high OBP (obviously), a solid .280 batting average that can improve and good power (.497 slugging percentage in 2010). Now he just has to get better with the mask on.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Will Travis Snider Get His Chance in 2011?
Back in 2006, the Toronto Blue Jays made Travis Snider their number one pick. The fourteenth overall pick, Snider was drafted ahead of guys like Kyle Drabek, Joba Chamberlain, John Johnson, Daniel Bard and Chris Coghlan. Granted, he was a rawboned eighteen year old at the time and fresh out of high school, but it's been five years. The thought of him in the Jays' starting line up has been a dream of Toronto fans for several years now. Snider has seen action in parts of the last three years, but it seemed as if his manager, Cito Gaston, did not want to commit to Snider full time. Now that there is a new sheriff in town with new manager, John Farrell, the question becomes whether Travis Snider will truly get his shot.
And even more intriguing a question if Snider does get to play is how he will do. Snider might not have benefited from trends around him in Toronto. The drop in the team's on base percentage from a league average in 2008 and 2009 in the .330 range, the Blue Jays fell to .312 in that category last season. And it seemed to this observer that was a direct strategy of the manager. While the Blue Jays certainly hit the long ball with monumental ease, a .312 on base percentage is going to cost you some games. What is somewhat frightening from a prospect standpoint for Snider is that his on base percentage has mirrored the team as a whole. While his plate appearances in the last three years have increased from 80 to 276 and finally to 319, his OBP has gone from .338 to .328 to last year's .304. And worse yet, the drop in his OBP began in the minors. He was a patient hitter early in his minor league career. The longer he played in the minors, the lower his OBP became (with the exception of 2009).
So what can we expect if Travis Snider gets to play? Well, for one thing, he hits some of the most explosive home runs in baseball. He and Jose Bautista could have a lot of fun slamming the ball over the fence. If Snider gets 600 at bats, he should hit 30 homers with 40 doubles. But will he hit for average? Thus far, he has the batting average of Bautista without the walks. He'll strike out about 100 times, which isn't bad, but his batting average needs to be higher than the .241 and .255 he's put up the last two years.
It's not really laughable as it seems that Snider's comps on baseball-reference.com are Pete Inkaviglia and Willie Mays. He could be either one of those guys at the plate. Incaviglia was once one of the biggest college prospects ever to come to the majors. He put up a lot of homers early, but didn't walk much and didn't hit for average and he became sort of a bust as a first round pick and only compiled a little over 8 in WAR for his career. Of course we all know what Mays did.
But Travis Snider isn't exactly Willie Mays in the outfield either. And where is he going to play? Jose Bautista has stated publicly that he's rather play the outfield than third base. That cements right field to Bautista. Snider really isn't a center kind of guy, which leaves him with left? This Spring Training will be interesting as Farrell has to figure all of that out.
What the Fan knows is this: Travis Snider was a big commitment by the Toronto Blue Jays when they made him their first round pick in 2006. At some point, they have to give him the chance to earn that pick. Letting him have fifteen at bats a week isn't going to do that. So they either have to play him, or cut their losses or use him as trade bait. Personally, this Fan would like to see Snider get a chance to show what he can do with 600 at bats. The Fan just hopes that if Farrell allows that to happen, Snider will deliver.
And even more intriguing a question if Snider does get to play is how he will do. Snider might not have benefited from trends around him in Toronto. The drop in the team's on base percentage from a league average in 2008 and 2009 in the .330 range, the Blue Jays fell to .312 in that category last season. And it seemed to this observer that was a direct strategy of the manager. While the Blue Jays certainly hit the long ball with monumental ease, a .312 on base percentage is going to cost you some games. What is somewhat frightening from a prospect standpoint for Snider is that his on base percentage has mirrored the team as a whole. While his plate appearances in the last three years have increased from 80 to 276 and finally to 319, his OBP has gone from .338 to .328 to last year's .304. And worse yet, the drop in his OBP began in the minors. He was a patient hitter early in his minor league career. The longer he played in the minors, the lower his OBP became (with the exception of 2009).
So what can we expect if Travis Snider gets to play? Well, for one thing, he hits some of the most explosive home runs in baseball. He and Jose Bautista could have a lot of fun slamming the ball over the fence. If Snider gets 600 at bats, he should hit 30 homers with 40 doubles. But will he hit for average? Thus far, he has the batting average of Bautista without the walks. He'll strike out about 100 times, which isn't bad, but his batting average needs to be higher than the .241 and .255 he's put up the last two years.
It's not really laughable as it seems that Snider's comps on baseball-reference.com are Pete Inkaviglia and Willie Mays. He could be either one of those guys at the plate. Incaviglia was once one of the biggest college prospects ever to come to the majors. He put up a lot of homers early, but didn't walk much and didn't hit for average and he became sort of a bust as a first round pick and only compiled a little over 8 in WAR for his career. Of course we all know what Mays did.
But Travis Snider isn't exactly Willie Mays in the outfield either. And where is he going to play? Jose Bautista has stated publicly that he's rather play the outfield than third base. That cements right field to Bautista. Snider really isn't a center kind of guy, which leaves him with left? This Spring Training will be interesting as Farrell has to figure all of that out.
What the Fan knows is this: Travis Snider was a big commitment by the Toronto Blue Jays when they made him their first round pick in 2006. At some point, they have to give him the chance to earn that pick. Letting him have fifteen at bats a week isn't going to do that. So they either have to play him, or cut their losses or use him as trade bait. Personally, this Fan would like to see Snider get a chance to show what he can do with 600 at bats. The Fan just hopes that if Farrell allows that to happen, Snider will deliver.
Why Cano and Swisher's Defection to Scott Boras is Trouble for Yankees
Robinson Cano, the Yankees star second baseman and Nick Swisher, the personable media star and valuable outfielder have both signed Scott Boras as their agent. Cano was represented by Bobby Barrett and Swisher by Joe Bick. This development is not a coincidence as both are free agents after the 2011 season unless the Yankees sign those players to long-term extensions. The Yankees do not negotiate during the season as we all learned with Mariano Rivera, Derek Jeter and even Joe Girardi. With Boras as their new agent, those two players almost certainly will be on the open market once this coming season is over.
Robinson Cano is the most important part of this discussion. His young age and stardom at a premium position stands to make him a lot of money in free agency. Swisher will be 31 in 2011 and will have to hope for someone to give him a Werth kind of deal, which will not be likely. But Boras finds a way to get his clients the money. And that's what is so troubling about this development.
The Yankees would probably let Swisher walk. They have enjoyed his contribution which has been far over the value of his current contract. But a right fielder is easier to replace and less important in the grand scheme of things than a premier second baseman. However, Swisher is more than just a valuable player. He has become a fan favorite, a twitter darling and a madcap kind of presence in the Yankee locker room that in the past was a bit stodgy. Many credit such characters as Swisher and A. J. Burnett with loosening up the stiff atmosphere around the club and many say that contributed to their 2009 championship after so many disappointments. While that is impossible to measure and discounted by analysts (it's about the performance, Baby), Swisher has also provided pop in the line up and on base opportunities.
But Robinson Cano is a whole other kettle of fish. If you use just one hand to count the best second basemen in baseball, Cano would certainly occupy one of those fingers. He made only three errors in the field in 2010. He's become a power threat with two seasons in a row over 24 homers. He's accumulated 1,075 hits in his six seasons and he has learned how to earn a walk. His 57 walks in 2010 were a career high. If he continues improving his walk performance combined with a low strikeout total, add in his defense and doubles totals and you have a superstar. Cano is not an Alphonso Soriano who only adds a few weapons for a team. Cano is the real superstar. And he will be playing the 2011 season at the age of 28.
His relative youth and elite class at his position will make Cano a pile of dough on the open market. If the Yankees do not get some sort of extension done in the next couple of weeks, added to their stance of not negotiating during the season, Boras will almost certainly make Cano his blue chip of the 2012 free agent season. The Yankees, who suddenly seem to have a budget, will have to outbid everyone else to keep their star second baseman. That will be really expensive. With Boras, you can forget a home town discount.
And say the Yankees do outbid everyone to keep Cano and sign him long-term, then they will have an infield signed for years and years to current superstars that in a few years grow older and older and older together. To be sure, few will shed any tears if the Yankees are stuck in such a position four or five years from now (though Jeter will be off the books by then). Even so, of all their players, Robinson Cano seems to have the highest future upside. They almost have to make that deal.
Brian Cashman and the Steinbrenners had to collectively groan when the news was announced of the Boras hiring for two of their star players entering their final season in Yankee control. It will force their hand to have to aggressively shop Swisher who is a valuable cog in the Yankee line up and won't be as easy to replace as they might think. And it means they will have to open their wallets for Robinson Cano if they are to keep one of the best players at his position for a long time. The aggressiveness of the Red Sox this off season further complicates their decision making. Good luck with all of that.
Robinson Cano is the most important part of this discussion. His young age and stardom at a premium position stands to make him a lot of money in free agency. Swisher will be 31 in 2011 and will have to hope for someone to give him a Werth kind of deal, which will not be likely. But Boras finds a way to get his clients the money. And that's what is so troubling about this development.
The Yankees would probably let Swisher walk. They have enjoyed his contribution which has been far over the value of his current contract. But a right fielder is easier to replace and less important in the grand scheme of things than a premier second baseman. However, Swisher is more than just a valuable player. He has become a fan favorite, a twitter darling and a madcap kind of presence in the Yankee locker room that in the past was a bit stodgy. Many credit such characters as Swisher and A. J. Burnett with loosening up the stiff atmosphere around the club and many say that contributed to their 2009 championship after so many disappointments. While that is impossible to measure and discounted by analysts (it's about the performance, Baby), Swisher has also provided pop in the line up and on base opportunities.
But Robinson Cano is a whole other kettle of fish. If you use just one hand to count the best second basemen in baseball, Cano would certainly occupy one of those fingers. He made only three errors in the field in 2010. He's become a power threat with two seasons in a row over 24 homers. He's accumulated 1,075 hits in his six seasons and he has learned how to earn a walk. His 57 walks in 2010 were a career high. If he continues improving his walk performance combined with a low strikeout total, add in his defense and doubles totals and you have a superstar. Cano is not an Alphonso Soriano who only adds a few weapons for a team. Cano is the real superstar. And he will be playing the 2011 season at the age of 28.
His relative youth and elite class at his position will make Cano a pile of dough on the open market. If the Yankees do not get some sort of extension done in the next couple of weeks, added to their stance of not negotiating during the season, Boras will almost certainly make Cano his blue chip of the 2012 free agent season. The Yankees, who suddenly seem to have a budget, will have to outbid everyone else to keep their star second baseman. That will be really expensive. With Boras, you can forget a home town discount.
And say the Yankees do outbid everyone to keep Cano and sign him long-term, then they will have an infield signed for years and years to current superstars that in a few years grow older and older and older together. To be sure, few will shed any tears if the Yankees are stuck in such a position four or five years from now (though Jeter will be off the books by then). Even so, of all their players, Robinson Cano seems to have the highest future upside. They almost have to make that deal.
Brian Cashman and the Steinbrenners had to collectively groan when the news was announced of the Boras hiring for two of their star players entering their final season in Yankee control. It will force their hand to have to aggressively shop Swisher who is a valuable cog in the Yankee line up and won't be as easy to replace as they might think. And it means they will have to open their wallets for Robinson Cano if they are to keep one of the best players at his position for a long time. The aggressiveness of the Red Sox this off season further complicates their decision making. Good luck with all of that.
Friday, February 11, 2011
The Day a Father and Son Hit Homers Back to Back
Of all the players that have played baseball over the years, only a few instances have occurred where a father and son both played in the major leagues (it's happened 178 times). It's rarer still to have a father and son play on the same team. It is even rarer for the father and son to play in the same game. But has it really been more than twenty years now since September 14, 1990 when both Ken Griffeys--father and son--playing on the same team--the elder batting second with his son batting third--hit back to back homers off of Kirk McCaskill?
The elder Ken Griffey was a pretty good ball player. He played 19 years and compiled 2143 hits. He had a little power, but hit only 152 homers in all those years. He finished with a career 118 OPS+ which is pretty darn good. He didn't drive in a lot of runs and scored a lot early in his career, but not so much from the middle on. He was a less than adept fielder in the outfield. Yet, he was one of those "professionals" that every manager loved to have around. He was a good bat off the bench late in his career and he hung around a long time.
Though time is starting to erode Junior Griffey's accomplishments, he was by far the better player. You can't take away his 600 homers or the fact that it would have been a lot more if the injury bug didn't plague him late in his career. Revisionists are rewriting his defensive skills, but for many of us, he was the class of his generation, even if the numbers weren't quite as superlative as we thought they were. Even so, he was the Mariners' first round pick in 1987 and just two years later, his era began as the starting centerfielder for the Mariners starting in the 1989 season. He had star written all over him.
Meanwhile, the elder Griffey was stumbling toward the end of his career. He was released twice in 1988, once by the Braves and then by the Reds. The Reds signed him again in 1989 but cut him in 1990. The Mariners, in a decision of sheer brilliance, picked him up. What a public relations bonus! Both the father of the phenom and the phenom himself would play for the same team. The first time they played together in the field, they made history. When Griffey Sr. hit a homer against against Mike Boddiker on September 7, 1990, the pair made history as both father and son had homers for the same team in the same season.
The pair made history again when the elder Griffey connected off of the Yankees' Tim Leary on May 6, 1991 when a father's son scored on the father's homer. That would be the elder Griffey's last major league homer. But September 14, 1990 takes the cake by a landslide. That was the day they hit back to back homers.
The fifth place Mariners were playing the fourth place Angels in Anaheim. It was a dry, 82 degree night in southern California. Derryl Cousins was the home plate umpire. Kirk McCaskill was the Angels' starting pitcher. He was the inning eating variety of pitcher, neither spectacular, nor terrible. He finished 1990 with a 12-11 record and a 3.25 ERA. He didn't strike out many and probably walked more than he should. But he gave you innings. he would lose 19 games the following season. If you could hear the announcers for that game, they probably called him a "crafty right-hander."
Harold Reynolds led off for the Mariners. He was a slick-fielding second baseman for the Mariners before he was the hugging broadcaster. He led off the game against McCaskill with a walk on five pitches. McCaskill then got the elder Griffey into an 0-2 hole and must have thrown one of the worst 0-2 pitches ever as the ancient Griffey smashed it on a line over the left-centerfield wall. His son was there at the plate to greet him. But then it was the son's turn. History was about to happen.
At first, it didn't look like history was going to happen as McCaskill went to a 3-0 count to the younger Griffey. In an attempt to simply throw a strike, McCaskill must have been surprised the second year player had the go ahead sign and swung at the offering. He too hit the ball on a line over the left-centerfield fence. History was made as for the first time ever (and the only time since) a father and son had hit back-to-back homers in a game that counted.
As it turned out, the heroics by the family affair weren't enough. The Angels still won the game because Matt Young, as he was often apt to do, had a big five-run inning that featured wild pitches, walks, hits and all sorts of mayhem. Young was one of those pitcher that would keep both teams in the game. He struck out a lot of guys but walked a lot. He was the A.J. Burnett of his time. He did his thing and then the Angels scored two more runs on a couple of errors later in the game and won the thing 7-5. But nobody will remember a game between a fourth place team and a fifth place team. It was just another near-the-end-of-the-season grinder kinds of games that meant little in the grand scheme of things. Dave Winfield hit a homer for the Angels on the way to his Hall of Fame career. But it was a momentary magical event in that first inning when the most improbable thing that could happen in baseball happened. A father and son hit back-to-back homers.
This quote from Junior can be found here. But it says a lot about the event and its place in history:
Indeed, it's an event that will probably never happen again.
Here's a link to the video of the event. Very worth watching!
The elder Ken Griffey was a pretty good ball player. He played 19 years and compiled 2143 hits. He had a little power, but hit only 152 homers in all those years. He finished with a career 118 OPS+ which is pretty darn good. He didn't drive in a lot of runs and scored a lot early in his career, but not so much from the middle on. He was a less than adept fielder in the outfield. Yet, he was one of those "professionals" that every manager loved to have around. He was a good bat off the bench late in his career and he hung around a long time.
Though time is starting to erode Junior Griffey's accomplishments, he was by far the better player. You can't take away his 600 homers or the fact that it would have been a lot more if the injury bug didn't plague him late in his career. Revisionists are rewriting his defensive skills, but for many of us, he was the class of his generation, even if the numbers weren't quite as superlative as we thought they were. Even so, he was the Mariners' first round pick in 1987 and just two years later, his era began as the starting centerfielder for the Mariners starting in the 1989 season. He had star written all over him.
Meanwhile, the elder Griffey was stumbling toward the end of his career. He was released twice in 1988, once by the Braves and then by the Reds. The Reds signed him again in 1989 but cut him in 1990. The Mariners, in a decision of sheer brilliance, picked him up. What a public relations bonus! Both the father of the phenom and the phenom himself would play for the same team. The first time they played together in the field, they made history. When Griffey Sr. hit a homer against against Mike Boddiker on September 7, 1990, the pair made history as both father and son had homers for the same team in the same season.
The pair made history again when the elder Griffey connected off of the Yankees' Tim Leary on May 6, 1991 when a father's son scored on the father's homer. That would be the elder Griffey's last major league homer. But September 14, 1990 takes the cake by a landslide. That was the day they hit back to back homers.
The fifth place Mariners were playing the fourth place Angels in Anaheim. It was a dry, 82 degree night in southern California. Derryl Cousins was the home plate umpire. Kirk McCaskill was the Angels' starting pitcher. He was the inning eating variety of pitcher, neither spectacular, nor terrible. He finished 1990 with a 12-11 record and a 3.25 ERA. He didn't strike out many and probably walked more than he should. But he gave you innings. he would lose 19 games the following season. If you could hear the announcers for that game, they probably called him a "crafty right-hander."
Harold Reynolds led off for the Mariners. He was a slick-fielding second baseman for the Mariners before he was the hugging broadcaster. He led off the game against McCaskill with a walk on five pitches. McCaskill then got the elder Griffey into an 0-2 hole and must have thrown one of the worst 0-2 pitches ever as the ancient Griffey smashed it on a line over the left-centerfield wall. His son was there at the plate to greet him. But then it was the son's turn. History was about to happen.
At first, it didn't look like history was going to happen as McCaskill went to a 3-0 count to the younger Griffey. In an attempt to simply throw a strike, McCaskill must have been surprised the second year player had the go ahead sign and swung at the offering. He too hit the ball on a line over the left-centerfield fence. History was made as for the first time ever (and the only time since) a father and son had hit back-to-back homers in a game that counted.
As it turned out, the heroics by the family affair weren't enough. The Angels still won the game because Matt Young, as he was often apt to do, had a big five-run inning that featured wild pitches, walks, hits and all sorts of mayhem. Young was one of those pitcher that would keep both teams in the game. He struck out a lot of guys but walked a lot. He was the A.J. Burnett of his time. He did his thing and then the Angels scored two more runs on a couple of errors later in the game and won the thing 7-5. But nobody will remember a game between a fourth place team and a fifth place team. It was just another near-the-end-of-the-season grinder kinds of games that meant little in the grand scheme of things. Dave Winfield hit a homer for the Angels on the way to his Hall of Fame career. But it was a momentary magical event in that first inning when the most improbable thing that could happen in baseball happened. A father and son hit back-to-back homers.
This quote from Junior can be found here. But it says a lot about the event and its place in history:
“After he hit his, I was watching him run the bases. When he crossed home plate, he said “That’s how you do it son!’ and went back to the dugout. I looked at him and then after I hit mine, I couldn’t wait to get to the dugout and say “That’s how you do it Dad!’ He waited until after I congratulated everyone else, then he gave me a hug and said you did it. That’s something that will never be done again. Everyone else in the dugout was shocked and excited to see a part of history.”
Indeed, it's an event that will probably never happen again.
Here's a link to the video of the event. Very worth watching!
Twins Would Be Foolish to Trade Francisco Liriano
Frankly, reports of the Twins being interested in trading Francisco Liriano seem half-baked. Why would they weaken their rotation because they have six possible starters? For one thing, three of those six didn't pitch very well last season. For another, why would you be interested in trading a pitcher that gave you $24 million in pitching value last year with a $1.6 million salary? Liriano is going to make $4.3 million in 2011. He could have a mediocre year and earn that much for the Twins. It would be silly to trade him.
Again, this Fan doesn't believe the hype. Sure, Liriano has always vexed the Twins. He doesn't fit their mold of a strike throwing machine, though he did post his best walks per nine ratio since 2006. But still, he walked 2.7 batters per nine when the team averaged 2.4 as a whole. This is a team, after all, that released Craig Breslow because he walked too many batters. They should have thought that one through a little harder. Plus, Liriano did have two really lost seasons in 2008 and 2009. For sure, that has left a bit of the nerves in the Twins going forward.
But seriously, Liriano, if he is as close to being as good as he was in 2010, is a stud pitcher that would make most managers drunk-happy. He only gave up nine homers in 191+ innings. His 3.62 ERA is totally misleading. That stats show that Liriano was unlucky. He posted a batting average against of .331 on balls in play. That should really be around .300. He was particularly unlucky on the road, where is BABIP skyrocketed to .362.
To gauge a true look at how well Liriano pitched in 2010, you have to look at his Fielding Independent Pitching (FIP) and his xFIP. His FIP was 2.66 and his xFIP was 3.06 according to Fangraphs. Liriano induces way more ground balls than fly balls and as such, he induced fifteen ground ball double plays. Again, this is a very good pitcher.
The only thing the Twins could be thinking IF they are thinking about trading him (again, the Fan doesn't believe it), is the post season. The Twins have made the playoffs several times and can't get past the first round. Liriano has not produced in the post season. But again, if you look closely at that game he pitched against the Yankees in the 2010 Division Series, he was a bit unlucky again. He struck out seven in his six innings, gave up no homers and just seven base runners. But he still gave up four runs.
No, it's not a good idea to trade Francisco Liriano. He is under the Twins control for the next couple of years and he will be relatively cheap. For the value he can add to that pitching staff, they would have to get a whole bunch of value in return to make the deal worthwhile. But unless that is the case, trading Liriano would be stupid.
Again, this Fan doesn't believe the hype. Sure, Liriano has always vexed the Twins. He doesn't fit their mold of a strike throwing machine, though he did post his best walks per nine ratio since 2006. But still, he walked 2.7 batters per nine when the team averaged 2.4 as a whole. This is a team, after all, that released Craig Breslow because he walked too many batters. They should have thought that one through a little harder. Plus, Liriano did have two really lost seasons in 2008 and 2009. For sure, that has left a bit of the nerves in the Twins going forward.
But seriously, Liriano, if he is as close to being as good as he was in 2010, is a stud pitcher that would make most managers drunk-happy. He only gave up nine homers in 191+ innings. His 3.62 ERA is totally misleading. That stats show that Liriano was unlucky. He posted a batting average against of .331 on balls in play. That should really be around .300. He was particularly unlucky on the road, where is BABIP skyrocketed to .362.
To gauge a true look at how well Liriano pitched in 2010, you have to look at his Fielding Independent Pitching (FIP) and his xFIP. His FIP was 2.66 and his xFIP was 3.06 according to Fangraphs. Liriano induces way more ground balls than fly balls and as such, he induced fifteen ground ball double plays. Again, this is a very good pitcher.
The only thing the Twins could be thinking IF they are thinking about trading him (again, the Fan doesn't believe it), is the post season. The Twins have made the playoffs several times and can't get past the first round. Liriano has not produced in the post season. But again, if you look closely at that game he pitched against the Yankees in the 2010 Division Series, he was a bit unlucky again. He struck out seven in his six innings, gave up no homers and just seven base runners. But he still gave up four runs.
No, it's not a good idea to trade Francisco Liriano. He is under the Twins control for the next couple of years and he will be relatively cheap. For the value he can add to that pitching staff, they would have to get a whole bunch of value in return to make the deal worthwhile. But unless that is the case, trading Liriano would be stupid.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Weaver's Arbitration Hearing Continues Angels' Weird Off Season
After spending a gazillion dollars to acquire Vernon Wells from the Blue Jays, the Angels quibbled with Jered Weaver, their best player, for a million and a half dollars. In a rarity for a Scott Boras client, a pre-hearing deal with Weaver did not come together and his case went to the arbiter. Weaver lost the case meaning he'll make $7.365 million in 2011. Weaver submitted $8.8 million. You would think a $1.1 million difference could have been overcome.
Having the case go all the way to a hearing leads to several questions:
1. Are relations between the Angels and Boras that bad that the two sides can't even settle a case as close as this one?
2. How will Weaver respond to this hearing and how much will it reduce the likelihood that Weaver will stay with the Angels long term?
3. How can the Angels be so spend-thrifty on one hand and so niggling on the other?
Of course, the Fan likes to ask questions more than answer them. But we have heard all along that the Angels and Scott Boras are not on each other's Christmas card list and we can point to several Boras clients on the market this off season that were linked to the Angels' wish list. None of those players were signed by the Angels.
Which also leads to speculating about the second question. If the Angels and Boras are already in cold water, how will that impact the negotiations with Weaver once the pitcher reaches free agency? And will Weaver give the Angels a "hometown" discount now that his case had to go to a hearing over a measly one and a half million dollars? The Fan would think that the chances of the Angels signing Weaver long-term just took a giant hit and with Boras as his agent, the odds were long to begin with.
And why is this important? As we have certainly seen this off season, starting pitching is at its highest premium. Every team covets those assets and were willing to suspend logic and reason to land someone like Cliff Lee for way too much money spread out over way too many years. And Jered Weaver is arguably as good or better than Cliff Lee (a fact that would surprise quite a few folks). Weaver led the Angels in WAR this year at 5.4 (bWAR) and has done so two of the last five years. He had a masterful 2010 season despite his 13-12 final record.
And Weaver is one of those guys who is going to give you 34 starts and 220 innings every season. In 2010, he struck out 9.3 batters per nine innings while only walking 2.2. His WHIP was a minuscule 1.074. The only thing he didn't do well in 2010 was find a way to win more ball games. Santana had an ERA of 3.89 compared to Weaver's at 3.01 and went 17-10. Sometimes things just work out that way. Weaver came in fifth in Cy Young voting and could easily have finished second.
So here we have one of the best pitchers in the American League going into his season before free agency. His team had a chance to lock him up for a while and failed. If the Angels saw the writing on the wall, they should know that Boras will have his client on the market for open bidding, a situation certain for the Angels to lose. That said, the other thing this situation creates is the need for the Angels to deeply consider trading Weaver if they fail to get off to a good start and fall out of contention early.
The Angels seem more puzzling every day...
Having the case go all the way to a hearing leads to several questions:
1. Are relations between the Angels and Boras that bad that the two sides can't even settle a case as close as this one?
2. How will Weaver respond to this hearing and how much will it reduce the likelihood that Weaver will stay with the Angels long term?
3. How can the Angels be so spend-thrifty on one hand and so niggling on the other?
Of course, the Fan likes to ask questions more than answer them. But we have heard all along that the Angels and Scott Boras are not on each other's Christmas card list and we can point to several Boras clients on the market this off season that were linked to the Angels' wish list. None of those players were signed by the Angels.
Which also leads to speculating about the second question. If the Angels and Boras are already in cold water, how will that impact the negotiations with Weaver once the pitcher reaches free agency? And will Weaver give the Angels a "hometown" discount now that his case had to go to a hearing over a measly one and a half million dollars? The Fan would think that the chances of the Angels signing Weaver long-term just took a giant hit and with Boras as his agent, the odds were long to begin with.
And why is this important? As we have certainly seen this off season, starting pitching is at its highest premium. Every team covets those assets and were willing to suspend logic and reason to land someone like Cliff Lee for way too much money spread out over way too many years. And Jered Weaver is arguably as good or better than Cliff Lee (a fact that would surprise quite a few folks). Weaver led the Angels in WAR this year at 5.4 (bWAR) and has done so two of the last five years. He had a masterful 2010 season despite his 13-12 final record.
And Weaver is one of those guys who is going to give you 34 starts and 220 innings every season. In 2010, he struck out 9.3 batters per nine innings while only walking 2.2. His WHIP was a minuscule 1.074. The only thing he didn't do well in 2010 was find a way to win more ball games. Santana had an ERA of 3.89 compared to Weaver's at 3.01 and went 17-10. Sometimes things just work out that way. Weaver came in fifth in Cy Young voting and could easily have finished second.
So here we have one of the best pitchers in the American League going into his season before free agency. His team had a chance to lock him up for a while and failed. If the Angels saw the writing on the wall, they should know that Boras will have his client on the market for open bidding, a situation certain for the Angels to lose. That said, the other thing this situation creates is the need for the Angels to deeply consider trading Weaver if they fail to get off to a good start and fall out of contention early.
The Angels seem more puzzling every day...
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
Elvis Andrus Versus Starlin Castro
We have already talked about the dearth of good shortstops in the majors, particularly in the American League. The National League has more good shortstops, but overall, the picture in the majors is bleak. Two of the new breed of shortstops have caused quite a buzz in their early career stages. Both entered the majors and an astoundingly young age. Elvis Andrus is entering his third season for the Rangers and he doesn't turn 23 until August. Starlin Castro made many of us groan when he became the first player in the majors who was born in the 1990s. The question posed here is: If you had a choice of the two, which would you want? Oh! And before the Fan forgets, Ian Desmond could fit into this conversation since he too is young. But he hasn't created the buzz of Castro and Andrus. So if you want Desmond in the conversation, you might have to write your own post.
First, we'll dispense with the easy part. Neither Andrus or Castro will be banging balls out of the park. Castro hit three in his rookie season and judging from his minor league career, that's the most you can expect. Some of the projections have Castro hitting six homers in 2011, but that isn't very significant. Andrus hit six homers his rookie season but hit zippo, nadda, none in 2010. It's pretty hard to go 674 plate appearances, half of which are in a good hitting park, and not hit a homer. Heck, Even Brett Gardner hit five of them. So power isn't their game. But for Andrus, it goes beyond that. In 1,215 plate appearances in his first two years, Andrus only hit 32 total doubles and added 11 triples. That's not exactly punching the ball with authority. Castro on the other hand, hit 31 doubles and five triples in his rookie season. Castro's slugging percentage then was .408. Andrus has put together two seasons with his slugging percentage below that (.371 and .301). The .301 is incredibly low for a full time player. Advantage, Castro.
Castro also hit for average as he batted a nice and even .300 his rookie season. Andrus has hit .267 and .265 his first two seasons. Advantage Castro. But that may be evened out by their walk percentage. Andrus walked 9.5 percent of the time in 2010. Castro finished with a walk percentage of 5.7 percent. Thus, Castro's on base percentage was .347 and Andrus finished at .342. That's a virtual wash.
Andrus strikes out with greater proficiency. He struck out 16.3 percent of the time in 2010. That's a little lower than his minor league stats, so it shows he is cutting down some on the strikeouts. Castro finished with a strikeout rate of 15.7 percent, which again is nearly a wash. The one difference is that Castro averaged a lot less strikeouts in the minors, and his 2011 figure should be a lot lower than his rookie season. Andrus swings at far less pitches out of the strike zone (21 percent) compared to Castro (32 percent) and Andrus makes contact at a slightly higher rate when he swings. Add all those up and it looks like you again have a wash.
Elvis Andrus appears to be the better base runner of the two. His speed component is 5.7 compared to 4.7 for Castro. And Andrus stole 15 bases in 18 attempts. Castro tried to steal 18 times and was only successful 10 times. Seems like he should be better at stealing than that. Advantage Andrus with the one reservation that with his speed, he should convert more of his singles into doubles.
Elvis Andrus and Starlin Castro both had remarkably similar line drive percentages (19.5 and 19.3 respectively). Both hit many more ground balls than fly balls. But Andrus hit much less line drives in 2010 than he did in 2009 and hit more ground balls. More on that later.
Now we get to fielding and for a shortstop, that's a pretty important component of value. Castro made 27 errors in his rookie season. Only Ian Desmond made more. Andrus only committed 16 errors after making 22 his first season. But as we know now, fielding percentage isn't the only thing we need to look at. UZR, despite its problems, at least breaks fielding down into three categories, which help us see a fielder's overall skill. There are the errors, the range and the double play success. Obviously, Andrus bested Castro in the error department (Castro almost cost the Cubs a full win with his errors). But Castro shows much more range and is given better ratings in converting double plays. Combine them all together and Andrus comes out on top with a Fangraphs' final score of 0.1 for his fielding (down from 2009 though). Castro, due largely for his errors, scored a -2.1. Advantage, at least for now, to Andrus.
Just one more note about fielding. According to the Fans Scouting report, Andrus has better instincts, a better first step, better speed, gets rid of the ball quicker and is slightly more accurate. Castro has the greater arm strength. Their overall scouting score in the field gives Andrus a 76 score and Castro a 62. Those scores seem to give Andrus a clear edge on the fielding side.
The thing the Fan likes about WAR is that it combines all of these things into one score. It's not the be all and end all to the discussion, but it's a good place to look. Castro, in about a dozen less games than Andrus, finished with a WAR of 2.0 (Fangraphs version). Andrus finished up at 1.5 (down from 3 the year before).
After going through this whole process, the Fan has gotten himself very confused. Andrus had a higher value his rookie year than Castro did his. But Andrus second year was half as valuable as the year before and under what Castro did for his rookie year. It appears that Castro will always be the better hitter, while Andrus gets on base more with walks and runs the bases better. Andrus is also the better fielder. The Fan guesses that the final conclusion on these two will have to wait a few years until we have more of an idea how their careers progress. They are both so young and have all those years ahead of them.
We should spend a moment here and talk about Andrus' offense. It has to be a great concern to the Rangers that Andrus is not making progress as a hitter. With his line drive percentage down and his ground ball percentage up, it would seem that Andrus seems content to be a slap hitter. But that may not be in his best interest as his "slaps" wind up as outs too often. How long will the Rangers be willing to live with a shortstop with a .301 slugging percentage? Again, Andrus does offer the Rangers an excellent fielder on the left side, which when combined with Adrian Beltre, should certainly prevent a lot of runs. But again, the Rangers had to have expected a lot more offense than Elvis has shown. It will be interesting to see what kind of year Andrus has in 2011.
So what do you think? Who would you take? Elvis Andrus? Or do you like the upside to Starlin Castro better? It's a tough call, isn't it?
First, we'll dispense with the easy part. Neither Andrus or Castro will be banging balls out of the park. Castro hit three in his rookie season and judging from his minor league career, that's the most you can expect. Some of the projections have Castro hitting six homers in 2011, but that isn't very significant. Andrus hit six homers his rookie season but hit zippo, nadda, none in 2010. It's pretty hard to go 674 plate appearances, half of which are in a good hitting park, and not hit a homer. Heck, Even Brett Gardner hit five of them. So power isn't their game. But for Andrus, it goes beyond that. In 1,215 plate appearances in his first two years, Andrus only hit 32 total doubles and added 11 triples. That's not exactly punching the ball with authority. Castro on the other hand, hit 31 doubles and five triples in his rookie season. Castro's slugging percentage then was .408. Andrus has put together two seasons with his slugging percentage below that (.371 and .301). The .301 is incredibly low for a full time player. Advantage, Castro.
Castro also hit for average as he batted a nice and even .300 his rookie season. Andrus has hit .267 and .265 his first two seasons. Advantage Castro. But that may be evened out by their walk percentage. Andrus walked 9.5 percent of the time in 2010. Castro finished with a walk percentage of 5.7 percent. Thus, Castro's on base percentage was .347 and Andrus finished at .342. That's a virtual wash.
Andrus strikes out with greater proficiency. He struck out 16.3 percent of the time in 2010. That's a little lower than his minor league stats, so it shows he is cutting down some on the strikeouts. Castro finished with a strikeout rate of 15.7 percent, which again is nearly a wash. The one difference is that Castro averaged a lot less strikeouts in the minors, and his 2011 figure should be a lot lower than his rookie season. Andrus swings at far less pitches out of the strike zone (21 percent) compared to Castro (32 percent) and Andrus makes contact at a slightly higher rate when he swings. Add all those up and it looks like you again have a wash.
Elvis Andrus appears to be the better base runner of the two. His speed component is 5.7 compared to 4.7 for Castro. And Andrus stole 15 bases in 18 attempts. Castro tried to steal 18 times and was only successful 10 times. Seems like he should be better at stealing than that. Advantage Andrus with the one reservation that with his speed, he should convert more of his singles into doubles.
Elvis Andrus and Starlin Castro both had remarkably similar line drive percentages (19.5 and 19.3 respectively). Both hit many more ground balls than fly balls. But Andrus hit much less line drives in 2010 than he did in 2009 and hit more ground balls. More on that later.
Now we get to fielding and for a shortstop, that's a pretty important component of value. Castro made 27 errors in his rookie season. Only Ian Desmond made more. Andrus only committed 16 errors after making 22 his first season. But as we know now, fielding percentage isn't the only thing we need to look at. UZR, despite its problems, at least breaks fielding down into three categories, which help us see a fielder's overall skill. There are the errors, the range and the double play success. Obviously, Andrus bested Castro in the error department (Castro almost cost the Cubs a full win with his errors). But Castro shows much more range and is given better ratings in converting double plays. Combine them all together and Andrus comes out on top with a Fangraphs' final score of 0.1 for his fielding (down from 2009 though). Castro, due largely for his errors, scored a -2.1. Advantage, at least for now, to Andrus.
Just one more note about fielding. According to the Fans Scouting report, Andrus has better instincts, a better first step, better speed, gets rid of the ball quicker and is slightly more accurate. Castro has the greater arm strength. Their overall scouting score in the field gives Andrus a 76 score and Castro a 62. Those scores seem to give Andrus a clear edge on the fielding side.
The thing the Fan likes about WAR is that it combines all of these things into one score. It's not the be all and end all to the discussion, but it's a good place to look. Castro, in about a dozen less games than Andrus, finished with a WAR of 2.0 (Fangraphs version). Andrus finished up at 1.5 (down from 3 the year before).
After going through this whole process, the Fan has gotten himself very confused. Andrus had a higher value his rookie year than Castro did his. But Andrus second year was half as valuable as the year before and under what Castro did for his rookie year. It appears that Castro will always be the better hitter, while Andrus gets on base more with walks and runs the bases better. Andrus is also the better fielder. The Fan guesses that the final conclusion on these two will have to wait a few years until we have more of an idea how their careers progress. They are both so young and have all those years ahead of them.
We should spend a moment here and talk about Andrus' offense. It has to be a great concern to the Rangers that Andrus is not making progress as a hitter. With his line drive percentage down and his ground ball percentage up, it would seem that Andrus seems content to be a slap hitter. But that may not be in his best interest as his "slaps" wind up as outs too often. How long will the Rangers be willing to live with a shortstop with a .301 slugging percentage? Again, Andrus does offer the Rangers an excellent fielder on the left side, which when combined with Adrian Beltre, should certainly prevent a lot of runs. But again, the Rangers had to have expected a lot more offense than Elvis has shown. It will be interesting to see what kind of year Andrus has in 2011.
So what do you think? Who would you take? Elvis Andrus? Or do you like the upside to Starlin Castro better? It's a tough call, isn't it?
Tuesday, February 08, 2011
The Mark Kotsay Syndrome
Mark Kotsay joined his sixth team in his fourteen year career when he signed recently with the Milwaukee Brewers. Way back in 2002, Kotsay was a fairly valuable player. But he ceased to be valuable a long time ago and yet, every year, he signs a new contract. The Fan has nothing against Mark Kotsay. More power to him if he can keep garnering a paycheck doing something he loves. Good on him, as they say. What the Fan doesn't understand is why teams feel the need to make these kinds of moves.
So, let's pick on Mark Kotsay. According to baseball-reference.com, Kotsay has had a negative value for four years in a row and five of the last seven years. That's pretty brutal. And for most of that time, teams were signing him for $6 to $8 million dollars. At least the Brewers only paid $800,000. Kotsay has had negative defensive metrics eight of the last eleven years. It's not like he's going to be a defensive whiz for you. His only real skill at this point is that he can play four or five different positions. The question is: Do you want him to?
Kotsay is mostly an outfielder who can play a little first base. The Brewers are set this year for first base so that's a moot point. So he's an outfielder. His stats are virtually identical in either league, so you're not going to get National League bonus points. He's going to be 35, so it's not like he's going to get better in the outfield or as a hitter. Again, we are talking about a guy who has had a negative value for four straight years. The indication that tells us is that he's not going to be worth the $800,000 so all he is then is a placeholder in the outfield when someone needs a day off. Is that worth $800,000? This Fan doesn't think so.
Why not? Okay, the Brewers have a guy in Triple A (Nashville) named Trent Oetjen. He's not on anyone's top ten list of Brewers' prospects. He's not on Keith Law's Top 100. He's just a guy in Triple A who happens to hit pretty darn well. For Nashville last year, Oetjen batted .320 with a .906 OPS. Yeah, that's Triple A. But the guy isn't a big time prospect. He's just a guy plugging away in Triple A. But for half the cost of Kotsay, couldn't he be the placeholder for outfielders taking a day off? How could it hurt? If he ends up with a negative value like Kotsay, at least it will be a less expensive negative. Why don't more teams do that?
The Fan isn't picking on the Brewers in particular. For every Kotsay, there is a Hairston or an aging Molina or Gregor Blanco and a Getz. All these fringe major league players have to get raises every year they play in the majors. But the Fan has this brilliant kind of idea: Why not always have a first year marginal guy to be your utility guy? Wouldn't that be cheaper and in the long run give you about the same value?
Oh sure, for every one of these arguments, some GM could rebut that Kotsay and Hairston and Molina and others are "good clubhouse" guys that help a team gel and are like player-coaches. Folks, that's bull-tacky.Teams are going to win or lose based on performance and not "chemistry." Chemistry never helped the Finley-owned Oakland A's.
No, I think guys like Kotsay and Molina and Hairston and all the other marginal major league players out there serve as comfort food for the GMs and the managers. "Hey, at least we have a pro in there who won't embarrass us." Well, yeah, but they won't help you either. It just baffles this little mind to wonder why this happens so often and how these guys have such long careers of mediocrity.
It's not Mark Kotsay's fault. He's just hanging on and riding the wave as long as he can. The Fan would do the same thing. And it's not really the Brewers' fault either. ALL the teams hang onto or sign that veteran who "gives you some versatility." Why else would Melky Cabrera be heading into his fifth or sixth season? No, it's a disease that most teams share. For now, the Fan will call it the Mark Kotsay Syndrome. Hey, the disease has to be named for somebody. Perhaps in a year or two, we can name it for Aaron Miles.
So, let's pick on Mark Kotsay. According to baseball-reference.com, Kotsay has had a negative value for four years in a row and five of the last seven years. That's pretty brutal. And for most of that time, teams were signing him for $6 to $8 million dollars. At least the Brewers only paid $800,000. Kotsay has had negative defensive metrics eight of the last eleven years. It's not like he's going to be a defensive whiz for you. His only real skill at this point is that he can play four or five different positions. The question is: Do you want him to?
Kotsay is mostly an outfielder who can play a little first base. The Brewers are set this year for first base so that's a moot point. So he's an outfielder. His stats are virtually identical in either league, so you're not going to get National League bonus points. He's going to be 35, so it's not like he's going to get better in the outfield or as a hitter. Again, we are talking about a guy who has had a negative value for four straight years. The indication that tells us is that he's not going to be worth the $800,000 so all he is then is a placeholder in the outfield when someone needs a day off. Is that worth $800,000? This Fan doesn't think so.
Why not? Okay, the Brewers have a guy in Triple A (Nashville) named Trent Oetjen. He's not on anyone's top ten list of Brewers' prospects. He's not on Keith Law's Top 100. He's just a guy in Triple A who happens to hit pretty darn well. For Nashville last year, Oetjen batted .320 with a .906 OPS. Yeah, that's Triple A. But the guy isn't a big time prospect. He's just a guy plugging away in Triple A. But for half the cost of Kotsay, couldn't he be the placeholder for outfielders taking a day off? How could it hurt? If he ends up with a negative value like Kotsay, at least it will be a less expensive negative. Why don't more teams do that?
The Fan isn't picking on the Brewers in particular. For every Kotsay, there is a Hairston or an aging Molina or Gregor Blanco and a Getz. All these fringe major league players have to get raises every year they play in the majors. But the Fan has this brilliant kind of idea: Why not always have a first year marginal guy to be your utility guy? Wouldn't that be cheaper and in the long run give you about the same value?
Oh sure, for every one of these arguments, some GM could rebut that Kotsay and Hairston and Molina and others are "good clubhouse" guys that help a team gel and are like player-coaches. Folks, that's bull-tacky.Teams are going to win or lose based on performance and not "chemistry." Chemistry never helped the Finley-owned Oakland A's.
No, I think guys like Kotsay and Molina and Hairston and all the other marginal major league players out there serve as comfort food for the GMs and the managers. "Hey, at least we have a pro in there who won't embarrass us." Well, yeah, but they won't help you either. It just baffles this little mind to wonder why this happens so often and how these guys have such long careers of mediocrity.
It's not Mark Kotsay's fault. He's just hanging on and riding the wave as long as he can. The Fan would do the same thing. And it's not really the Brewers' fault either. ALL the teams hang onto or sign that veteran who "gives you some versatility." Why else would Melky Cabrera be heading into his fifth or sixth season? No, it's a disease that most teams share. For now, the Fan will call it the Mark Kotsay Syndrome. Hey, the disease has to be named for somebody. Perhaps in a year or two, we can name it for Aaron Miles.
Twitter - I'm Getting Addicted
I've always known that I have an addictive character trait. First, there is family history with alcohol and I was heading down that road when I was young and dumb and went to college for the first time. After I woke up in a closet upside down, I swore off hard liqueur and haven't touched it since. But the thing about addictive tendencies is that you can get addicted to anything. I was addicted to chatting on IRC and AOL back in the early 1990s. I know that I'm addicted to Coca-Cola and greasy foods. And there are other addictions I'd rather not talk about. Now I'm addicted to Twitter.
At first, Twitter was a means to an end. You can click a post you've just created and create a "tweet" that automatically puts a link to your new post on Twitter. I'm not about gaining "followers" like a lot of people are. I could care less really. I do care about attracting new readers, so that's why I created my account. But a funny thing happened. The first person I followed on Twitter was Nick Swisher. Nick Swisher!? Get out! I could actually get tweets from a real ball player? Yeah, even at my age, I'm still into hero worship. Sheesh.
But following players are actually quite boring. Swish likes to promote his charitable work and uses Twitter to do so. More power to him, that's great. But it's not really interesting. Curtis Granderson tweets things from his Yahoo Sports tear-off calendar or something and tweets birthdays of long lost players. Whuh? Logan Morrison of the Marlins can be interesting, but really young players like him and Austin Jackson are...well...young. So the glow has worn off quickly then.
No, the real juice for me is following the writers. There are writers with wit and those with sarcasm, but you get a glimpse in 140 character segments of who these people are that are what I aspire to be. Some are hysterical like Dan Szmborski (@DSzyborski). A morsel? One of his recent tweets: "I had a bad case of mono. But then I discovered one of the speakers was unplugged." Well, it was funny to me.
Keith Law will respond to fans, usually sarcastically since their questions are usually pretty dumb. The same can be said for Kevin Goldstein. But all of these wonderful writers are tweeting regularly and it's fascinating. Peter Gammons tweets. Imagine! One of my all time icons as a writer and there he is on Twitter. Joe Posnanski is on there. Jonah Keri and so many others. I just soak it in and dream. They always seem to have the right answers and the right way of looking at things. They cut through the BS and see the real stuff most of us miss. It's awesome.
I also enjoy working with my fellow BBA members, particularly those who are like me and striving for success. On Friday, everyone shares "followers." They call it #FF day which stands for Friday Follows or something or other. I do enjoy when one of my tweets gets retweeted. It's all so weird sounding, isn't it? That's how you know it's an addiction. But when someone retweets you (reposts your post so others can read it), it's sort of a thrill, especially when it's a known writer. Gawsh, I'm sounding like a groupie. And maybe I am. Except I don't want to sleep with these people. I just want to be where they are.
So now you know one of my dirty little secrets. I'm getting addicted to Twitter. But at least it's yet another way of losing sleep that doesn't make you have regrets in the morning.
At first, Twitter was a means to an end. You can click a post you've just created and create a "tweet" that automatically puts a link to your new post on Twitter. I'm not about gaining "followers" like a lot of people are. I could care less really. I do care about attracting new readers, so that's why I created my account. But a funny thing happened. The first person I followed on Twitter was Nick Swisher. Nick Swisher!? Get out! I could actually get tweets from a real ball player? Yeah, even at my age, I'm still into hero worship. Sheesh.
But following players are actually quite boring. Swish likes to promote his charitable work and uses Twitter to do so. More power to him, that's great. But it's not really interesting. Curtis Granderson tweets things from his Yahoo Sports tear-off calendar or something and tweets birthdays of long lost players. Whuh? Logan Morrison of the Marlins can be interesting, but really young players like him and Austin Jackson are...well...young. So the glow has worn off quickly then.
No, the real juice for me is following the writers. There are writers with wit and those with sarcasm, but you get a glimpse in 140 character segments of who these people are that are what I aspire to be. Some are hysterical like Dan Szmborski (@DSzyborski). A morsel? One of his recent tweets: "I had a bad case of mono. But then I discovered one of the speakers was unplugged." Well, it was funny to me.
Keith Law will respond to fans, usually sarcastically since their questions are usually pretty dumb. The same can be said for Kevin Goldstein. But all of these wonderful writers are tweeting regularly and it's fascinating. Peter Gammons tweets. Imagine! One of my all time icons as a writer and there he is on Twitter. Joe Posnanski is on there. Jonah Keri and so many others. I just soak it in and dream. They always seem to have the right answers and the right way of looking at things. They cut through the BS and see the real stuff most of us miss. It's awesome.
I also enjoy working with my fellow BBA members, particularly those who are like me and striving for success. On Friday, everyone shares "followers." They call it #FF day which stands for Friday Follows or something or other. I do enjoy when one of my tweets gets retweeted. It's all so weird sounding, isn't it? That's how you know it's an addiction. But when someone retweets you (reposts your post so others can read it), it's sort of a thrill, especially when it's a known writer. Gawsh, I'm sounding like a groupie. And maybe I am. Except I don't want to sleep with these people. I just want to be where they are.
So now you know one of my dirty little secrets. I'm getting addicted to Twitter. But at least it's yet another way of losing sleep that doesn't make you have regrets in the morning.
Monday, February 07, 2011
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.
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.
The Giants Won't Repeat...Will they?
No team has repeated a World Series title since the Yankees in 1999 and 2000. It's just not an easy thing to do. But the Giants showed last year that they have the time of pitching that can win a short series. The problem is that they have to get there first. The Dodgers don't appear they can be as bad as last year, the Rockies have improved as have the Diamondbacks. What the Padres do depends on their pitching, but they don't appear to be the factors they were last year. The Giants won 92 games last year and it would appear they need to win 90 to repeat as division winners. Is their 2011 team within two wins of last year?
For the Giants, it all comes down to pitching. With Lincecum, Cain and Bumgarner, the Giants may have three of the top ten pitchers in the National League. Barry Zito can still fill out innings, just don't expect much more. The real key is Jonathan Sanchez. Sanchez mysteriously lost some velocity last year and was ineffective for much of the latter third of the season. And Sanchez was the weakest link on the post season rotation as well. Sanchez simply throws too many pitches. If Sanchez could ever find the key to pounding the strike zone, he could be a tremendous fourth starter for the Giants and that alone could be enough to carry the division. Of course, good health is crucial. The Giants did not lose any significant time by any of their pitchers last year, which is pretty remarkable in itself.
Another key for their pitching staff is Matt Cain. Cain has long been undervalued by analysts for a long time now. The post season showed what a great pitcher he can be. The prevailing wisdom is that Cain is simply lucky. Lucky? For two years in a row? His Batting Average on Balls in Play (BABiP) was .267 in 2009 and .254 in 2010. Yes, you can look at that and say he's lucky. But is he? If he is, someone better find out his superstitious rituals then and copy them, because his string of luck has lasted a long time. All this Fan can tell you is that Cain led the rotation in Walks plus Hits for Innings Pitched (WHIP) and has lowered his walks per nine for three years in a row. Will his "luck" take a hit this year due to Tejada at short instead of Uribe? It could.
Tim Lincecum is always a question mark in this writer's mind. His slight build and the incredible torque he uses to pitch just seems bound for a short career. The Fan hopes he's wrong, but with Lincecum, the Fan is always waiting for the other shoe to drop. It did drop for a while last summer when Lincecum struggled. But then he pulled it together down the stretch and into the post season, where he was terrific. Thankfully, the Giants have Bumgarner emerging as the new ace of the staff. Bumgarner possesses great control and good velocity, a hard combination to beat. For a young guy, he had the lowest walks per nine innings of all the starters.
The Giants' bullpen appears set. The big three of Wilson, Romo and Casilla were lights out all season. But we all know how unpredictable bullpens can be. There is a weakness in lefty relievers on the team, but the three pitchers just mentioned can get anybody out. Runzler was very good at many points last season, so he may be their top lefty. Affeldt walks too many batters to be a good LOOGY.
The Giants 2011 batters have so many ups and down sides. Posey will have a full season, which is an up side. Tejada will not replace Uribe's production. That's a down side. Sandoval has worked hard this winter to get in shape. That's an up side. There's no way that Aubrey Huff and Pat Burrell repeat their success last season. That's a down side. Brandon Belt looks like the real deal, but how will he do out of the gate? If he falters, Cody Ross is just an okay player despite his post season heroics. The Fan can't see Freddie Sanchez repeating his mild success of 2010. Andres Torres should be better than last year. See all the ups and downs? Over the course of the season, the Giants just have to be a little better than last year with their pitching to repeat the division. But if the pitching falters at all and this line up doesn't at least produce last year's frail offensive performance, there won't be any repeats of anything.
Nobody expected the Giants to do what they did last year. But that's the glorious thing about baseball. Anything can happen and it certainly did with the Giants. If the Giants just play their game and forget about having to prove anything, they could be just fine. But a lot must go right for this team to avoid being a one-hit wonder.
For the Giants, it all comes down to pitching. With Lincecum, Cain and Bumgarner, the Giants may have three of the top ten pitchers in the National League. Barry Zito can still fill out innings, just don't expect much more. The real key is Jonathan Sanchez. Sanchez mysteriously lost some velocity last year and was ineffective for much of the latter third of the season. And Sanchez was the weakest link on the post season rotation as well. Sanchez simply throws too many pitches. If Sanchez could ever find the key to pounding the strike zone, he could be a tremendous fourth starter for the Giants and that alone could be enough to carry the division. Of course, good health is crucial. The Giants did not lose any significant time by any of their pitchers last year, which is pretty remarkable in itself.
Another key for their pitching staff is Matt Cain. Cain has long been undervalued by analysts for a long time now. The post season showed what a great pitcher he can be. The prevailing wisdom is that Cain is simply lucky. Lucky? For two years in a row? His Batting Average on Balls in Play (BABiP) was .267 in 2009 and .254 in 2010. Yes, you can look at that and say he's lucky. But is he? If he is, someone better find out his superstitious rituals then and copy them, because his string of luck has lasted a long time. All this Fan can tell you is that Cain led the rotation in Walks plus Hits for Innings Pitched (WHIP) and has lowered his walks per nine for three years in a row. Will his "luck" take a hit this year due to Tejada at short instead of Uribe? It could.
Tim Lincecum is always a question mark in this writer's mind. His slight build and the incredible torque he uses to pitch just seems bound for a short career. The Fan hopes he's wrong, but with Lincecum, the Fan is always waiting for the other shoe to drop. It did drop for a while last summer when Lincecum struggled. But then he pulled it together down the stretch and into the post season, where he was terrific. Thankfully, the Giants have Bumgarner emerging as the new ace of the staff. Bumgarner possesses great control and good velocity, a hard combination to beat. For a young guy, he had the lowest walks per nine innings of all the starters.
The Giants' bullpen appears set. The big three of Wilson, Romo and Casilla were lights out all season. But we all know how unpredictable bullpens can be. There is a weakness in lefty relievers on the team, but the three pitchers just mentioned can get anybody out. Runzler was very good at many points last season, so he may be their top lefty. Affeldt walks too many batters to be a good LOOGY.
The Giants 2011 batters have so many ups and down sides. Posey will have a full season, which is an up side. Tejada will not replace Uribe's production. That's a down side. Sandoval has worked hard this winter to get in shape. That's an up side. There's no way that Aubrey Huff and Pat Burrell repeat their success last season. That's a down side. Brandon Belt looks like the real deal, but how will he do out of the gate? If he falters, Cody Ross is just an okay player despite his post season heroics. The Fan can't see Freddie Sanchez repeating his mild success of 2010. Andres Torres should be better than last year. See all the ups and downs? Over the course of the season, the Giants just have to be a little better than last year with their pitching to repeat the division. But if the pitching falters at all and this line up doesn't at least produce last year's frail offensive performance, there won't be any repeats of anything.
Nobody expected the Giants to do what they did last year. But that's the glorious thing about baseball. Anything can happen and it certainly did with the Giants. If the Giants just play their game and forget about having to prove anything, they could be just fine. But a lot must go right for this team to avoid being a one-hit wonder.
Sunday, February 06, 2011
Rockies or Rangers - Who Needs Michael Young More?
The reports of the Rangers wanting to trade Michael Young refuse to die. Buster Olney seems to be at the epicenter of the rumors but Olney has never once mentioned the Rockies. But other writers have stated openly on Twitter that the Rockies are the team the Rangers have been talking to. And how does all this counter Nolan Ryan stating earlier that Michael Young will be the opening day DH for the Rangers? It all seems a bit puzzling, but perhaps it has all been created because Young no longer wants to play for the Rangers. But the question the Fan keeps asking himself is which team needs him more, the Rangers or the Rockies?
A second questions is when Michael Young became Mike Young? Okay, perhaps that question doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. But the Fan hates when people change the names players go by in mid-career. The Fan remembers giving up even mentioning Albert Belle after a while. Alright, enough about that topic. Let's get back to the topic at hand.
Why would the Rockies want Michael Young? The Rockies are obviously set at shortstop with Tulowitzki. But Tulo has found a way to get hurt here and there and it would be nice to have Young around in case that happens again (heaven forbid!). Young's other two positions are second and third. The Rockies have two guys in those positions coming off two disappointing years in a row. Clint Barmes plays second and Ian Stewart plays third. Stewart is just okay in the field and Barmes seems to be pretty darn good playing second. So adding Young at either place hurts little at third but a lot at second. But both of those Rockies have really struggled at the plate despite the deceiving power numbers that are inevitable at Coors Field. Steward ended up with a 0.9 bWAR last year and Barmes finished with a bWAR of 1.0 thanks largely to his fielding. Young has averaged a bWAR of 3.0 for his entire career, so he is a significant upgrade for the Rockies in either case.
But there is another possibility here. The Rockies outfield is pretty pathetic. The Rockies could slide Young into left and gain significantly. So the bottom line is that the Rockes could desperately use someone like Michael Young. The question is how much of that value they are willing to obtain and at what cost. Young is going to be making $16 million this year. That's a lot of coin for a guy who will be worth more in the $8 to $10 million range. Can the Rockies get the Rangers to eat $6 million of the deal? That would make the deal worthwhile for the Rockies.
What about the Rangers? This Fan loved their plan to have Young as the DH and also be able to play all over the field to spell others and create some good split match ups. If the Rangers trade their long time star, they will lose a lot of flexibility as well as lose a DH who will give them three wins above replacement. Those three wins are hard to replace with what's left on the market. Branyon is still out there, but he is a health risk and can't hit lefties. Plus, Branyon can only slide over to first base if needed. He wouldn't be a good bet to play anywhere else. So the bottom line here is that the Rangers are much better off with Young than without him. The only instance where it's better to trade him is if he'll hurt the team by pouting. But Young seems too much like a pro to let that happen once the season starts. The Fan would hesitate to ever think Young would be a distraction or a problem once the games begin.
On balance, the Rockies could use Young more than the Rangers can. Young improves the Rockies much more than hurts the Rangers if they lost him. All of that equation changes though on who is paying Young's salary and at what proportion. This writer can't imagine the Rangers would get much in return for Young with the money that is on the table in salary. Saying all that, the Rangers are better off keeping Young as another cog for another run at the AL West title.
A second questions is when Michael Young became Mike Young? Okay, perhaps that question doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. But the Fan hates when people change the names players go by in mid-career. The Fan remembers giving up even mentioning Albert Belle after a while. Alright, enough about that topic. Let's get back to the topic at hand.
Why would the Rockies want Michael Young? The Rockies are obviously set at shortstop with Tulowitzki. But Tulo has found a way to get hurt here and there and it would be nice to have Young around in case that happens again (heaven forbid!). Young's other two positions are second and third. The Rockies have two guys in those positions coming off two disappointing years in a row. Clint Barmes plays second and Ian Stewart plays third. Stewart is just okay in the field and Barmes seems to be pretty darn good playing second. So adding Young at either place hurts little at third but a lot at second. But both of those Rockies have really struggled at the plate despite the deceiving power numbers that are inevitable at Coors Field. Steward ended up with a 0.9 bWAR last year and Barmes finished with a bWAR of 1.0 thanks largely to his fielding. Young has averaged a bWAR of 3.0 for his entire career, so he is a significant upgrade for the Rockies in either case.
But there is another possibility here. The Rockies outfield is pretty pathetic. The Rockies could slide Young into left and gain significantly. So the bottom line is that the Rockes could desperately use someone like Michael Young. The question is how much of that value they are willing to obtain and at what cost. Young is going to be making $16 million this year. That's a lot of coin for a guy who will be worth more in the $8 to $10 million range. Can the Rockies get the Rangers to eat $6 million of the deal? That would make the deal worthwhile for the Rockies.
What about the Rangers? This Fan loved their plan to have Young as the DH and also be able to play all over the field to spell others and create some good split match ups. If the Rangers trade their long time star, they will lose a lot of flexibility as well as lose a DH who will give them three wins above replacement. Those three wins are hard to replace with what's left on the market. Branyon is still out there, but he is a health risk and can't hit lefties. Plus, Branyon can only slide over to first base if needed. He wouldn't be a good bet to play anywhere else. So the bottom line here is that the Rangers are much better off with Young than without him. The only instance where it's better to trade him is if he'll hurt the team by pouting. But Young seems too much like a pro to let that happen once the season starts. The Fan would hesitate to ever think Young would be a distraction or a problem once the games begin.
On balance, the Rockies could use Young more than the Rangers can. Young improves the Rockies much more than hurts the Rangers if they lost him. All of that equation changes though on who is paying Young's salary and at what proportion. This writer can't imagine the Rangers would get much in return for Young with the money that is on the table in salary. Saying all that, the Rangers are better off keeping Young as another cog for another run at the AL West title.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)