If the first three weeks of the season are any indication, the Mets' Matt Harvey is the greatest pitcher of all time. Harvey has dominated opposing batters to the tune of 4-0, 0.93 with 10 hits allowed in 29 innings. He'd won just three games in his entire career before this (10 starts last season.)
And Cardinal first baseman Matt Adams is the greatest masher in history. His .524/.565/1.048 slash stats represent seven games of near invincibility. His 23 plate appearances have produced two walks and 11 hits -- three homers, two doubles and six singles. His 1.613 OPS is more than triple the league average.
Justin Upton leads the majors with nine bombs. Upton didn't smack his ninth last season until August, more than 100 games into the season. His .820 slugging percentage with Atlanta nearly doubles last year's work with Arizona. If you average out the Uptons, by adding in the struggles of Justin's older brother and outfield-mate BJ, you get a less Ruthian .235/.314/.568. I suspect the Uptons would cotton to an .882 OPS in 2013; they'd just like it distributed more evenly.
How about Mr. Vottomatic, Cincinatti's Joey Votto? There's nothing flukey about Votto pacing the majors in walks, but 24 free passes in 80 plate appearances is a bit rich for a guy with just one home run. Votto's on base average of .500 dwarfs his pedestrian .377 slugging average. Most players with upside-down OBP-SLG numbers are Slappy McSpeedster types, not MVP candidates.
Baltimore first baseman Chris Davis is a hero or zero kind of guy. Last season he helped the surprising Orioles by blasting 33 jacks, but otherwise fanned 169 times with just 37 walks, a nearly 5-1 ratio. He's improved on both in 15 games so far this year -- 13 Ks and nine BBs -- en route to the AL lead in homers, RBIs and OPS.
With 21 RBI in 16 games, journeyman backstop John Buck leads the majors, despite playing his home games in the offense-suppressant Citi Field surrounded by a lineup of Justin Turner, David Murphy and Ike Davis (and, to be fair, David Wright). Buck brought home 41 runs in seven times as many 2012 plate appearances.
But if power is your thing, Oakland's Coco Crisp is your guy. With five home runs, seven doubles and a triple in just 58 at bats, Crisp leads MLB in extra base hits. That's an extra base hit every 4.5 at bats. In his previous 4400 major league at bats, Crisp crushed 378 extra base hits, about once every 11.5 at bats. Can you say "regression?"
Kurt Suzuki can. The Nationals' catcher entered today's tilt against the Mets at a handsome .321/.444/.714. An oh-fer day left him at .281/.366/.625. Still attractive, but hardly photo-worthy. Two more days like that and he'll be right around his career numbers of .256/.313/.383.
That Ranger fireballer Yu Darvish is mowing down opponents like a landscaping business requires no regression. The Japanese import whiffed 221 in 192 innings last year. He's blowing them away at an even higher rate this year, but it's his consistency that's so noteworthy. In 33 lifetime starts, Darvish has fanned 10 or more one-third of the time.
It's been a painful start for another Far Eastern product, Reds outfielder Shin-soo Choo, but it could get him into the record books. Choo has thrust out an elbow, pointed a thigh, leaned in a sleeve and turned a back to seven hit-by-pitches in just 77 plate appearances. At this rate, a full season of visits to the batters box will obliterate the single season record of 51 HBPs, which has stood for 115 years.
Of course, "at this rate" may be the three dumbest words in the baseball lexicon, just ahead of "good RBI guy." It's still so early that Matt Cain doesn't yet have a win. Let's wait until Craig Kimbrell allows a run -- say June -- before we put any stock in the numbers.
20 April 2013
13 April 2013
How Great Is Mariano Rivera?
New analytic tools have led us to understand baseball better and in new ways. They have magnified the under-appreciated and shined light on the game's nuances. They have helped clubs work more efficiently and provided their early adapters with an edge on the competition.
But they have largely failed one area of the game. And that area's name is Mariano Rivera.
There doesn't seem to be any debate today that Rivera is the greatest reliever of all time. He's the all-time saves leader and possesses the lowest ERA relative to the league ever. He's allowed the fewest baserunners per inning in history. He's been well-nigh unhittable in 96 post-season games. He's spun one pitch into 19 dominant seasons. His worst season, at age 37, was merely excellent.
And yet, the analytic tools don't believe he's a Hall of Famer.
When applied to closers, new analysis asks the following question: where ya been? Appearing for just three outs every other day limits the value of a closer, according to Wins Against Replacement and its ilk, even when his work comes in high-leverage situations. Despite pitching into his 40s, Rivera has just 1200 frames under his belt -- about seven good seasons for a starter. The result is that he has accumulated just 54 wins against replacement, well below the standard for a Hall of Fame pitcher. WAR (or WARP) matters because it's the statistic that comes closest to describing a player's overall value in a single number.
That 54 is from Baseball-Reference, which is the most credible of the three main Sabermetric sites with regard to relievers. Baseball Prospectus pegs it at 31.4 while Fangraphs is at the median of 38.7. The discrepancy has much to do with whether the measurements use underlying data as the true level of performance; i.e., whether Rivera is given the credit (as he should be) for a career-long outlier BABIP or whether that's dismissed as luck.
By comparison, Fangraphs credits Mark Buehrle with 45.7 wins against replacement.
The problem, of course, is that comparing a closer to a starter because they're both pitchers is like comparing the ACLU to the Teamsters because they're both unions.
Misused and under-utilized though they are, closers can still be fairly analyzed by comparing them to each other. That limits the sample more or less to Rivera's contemporaries, but that should be enough, given his dominance.
Rivera's lifetime ERA+ of 205 is about half-again beyond the next best closer in history, Trevor Hoffman. He has the lowest walk rate, by far the highest strikeout rate, by far the fewest blown saves and nearly double the Win Probability Added of any short reliever in history.
ERA+ measures a pitcher's ERA relative to the league at the time. Rivera has limited opponents to 2.22 earned runs per nine innings at a time when the American League is scoring 4.55 against non-Rivera pitchers.
The bottom line is that this is a SABR problem, not a Sandman problem. Clearly, WAR (or WARP) is not designed to handle closers, or at least to compare them to starters. Whatever number of wins Rivera allegedly added to the Yankees with his bat-breaking contributions, they are not being reflected in the sabermetric record.
But they have largely failed one area of the game. And that area's name is Mariano Rivera.
There doesn't seem to be any debate today that Rivera is the greatest reliever of all time. He's the all-time saves leader and possesses the lowest ERA relative to the league ever. He's allowed the fewest baserunners per inning in history. He's been well-nigh unhittable in 96 post-season games. He's spun one pitch into 19 dominant seasons. His worst season, at age 37, was merely excellent.
And yet, the analytic tools don't believe he's a Hall of Famer.
When applied to closers, new analysis asks the following question: where ya been? Appearing for just three outs every other day limits the value of a closer, according to Wins Against Replacement and its ilk, even when his work comes in high-leverage situations. Despite pitching into his 40s, Rivera has just 1200 frames under his belt -- about seven good seasons for a starter. The result is that he has accumulated just 54 wins against replacement, well below the standard for a Hall of Fame pitcher. WAR (or WARP) matters because it's the statistic that comes closest to describing a player's overall value in a single number.
That 54 is from Baseball-Reference, which is the most credible of the three main Sabermetric sites with regard to relievers. Baseball Prospectus pegs it at 31.4 while Fangraphs is at the median of 38.7. The discrepancy has much to do with whether the measurements use underlying data as the true level of performance; i.e., whether Rivera is given the credit (as he should be) for a career-long outlier BABIP or whether that's dismissed as luck.
By comparison, Fangraphs credits Mark Buehrle with 45.7 wins against replacement.
The problem, of course, is that comparing a closer to a starter because they're both pitchers is like comparing the ACLU to the Teamsters because they're both unions.
Misused and under-utilized though they are, closers can still be fairly analyzed by comparing them to each other. That limits the sample more or less to Rivera's contemporaries, but that should be enough, given his dominance.
Rivera's lifetime ERA+ of 205 is about half-again beyond the next best closer in history, Trevor Hoffman. He has the lowest walk rate, by far the highest strikeout rate, by far the fewest blown saves and nearly double the Win Probability Added of any short reliever in history.
ERA+ measures a pitcher's ERA relative to the league at the time. Rivera has limited opponents to 2.22 earned runs per nine innings at a time when the American League is scoring 4.55 against non-Rivera pitchers.
The bottom line is that this is a SABR problem, not a Sandman problem. Clearly, WAR (or WARP) is not designed to handle closers, or at least to compare them to starters. Whatever number of wins Rivera allegedly added to the Yankees with his bat-breaking contributions, they are not being reflected in the sabermetric record.
07 April 2013
WAR on Fox! WAR on Fox!
Mark down this date: April 6, 2013.
That's the date that Fox's baseball coverage included discussions of OPS and WAR. Hallelujah!
Joe Buck introduced both notions without snark or derision. He explained the acronyms (On-base Plus Slugging and Wins Against Replacement) and discussed how they are calculated.
In the first discussion, Buck demurred a bit, noting that OPS is hard to calculate. But Fox inserted Ken Rosenthal into the discussion to explain that sabermetricans and front offices prefer OPS to batting average and home runs. Fox may have been setting the stage for using OBP stats in the future by having Rosenthal aver that on base percentage is more meaningful than batting average.
This is a true advance. But Fox wasn't done.
With Miguel Cabrera at the plate, Buck introduced the viewer to WAR. He explained how -- and why! -- Triple Crown winner Miguel Cabrera earned just the fourth highest WAR in MLB last year.
Supported by a Fox graphic listing the top four WARriors in 2012, Buck explained how Cabrera would fare less well because he's only an offensive force. He noted that Mike Trout, first by far on that list with nearly 11 wins against replacement, runs the bases and plays defense.
It's truly a watershed when a major TV network intransigent in its opposition to advanced metrics finally acknowledges that there is a better alternative to batting average and home runs. Kudos to Fox for accepting what has been proven and helping educate average fans.
The next giant leap will occur when Rosenthal explains on air to Buck the other key element of WAR. The three players ahead of Cabrera on the WAR list are center fielder Trout, second baseman Robinson Cano and catcher Buster Posey. Each plays a more difficult position and is being compared to weaker hitters than a third baseman, if that's what you want to call Cabrera.
And the battle will finally be won when they both explain it to the satisfaction of Tim McCarver.
That's the date that Fox's baseball coverage included discussions of OPS and WAR. Hallelujah!
Joe Buck introduced both notions without snark or derision. He explained the acronyms (On-base Plus Slugging and Wins Against Replacement) and discussed how they are calculated.
In the first discussion, Buck demurred a bit, noting that OPS is hard to calculate. But Fox inserted Ken Rosenthal into the discussion to explain that sabermetricans and front offices prefer OPS to batting average and home runs. Fox may have been setting the stage for using OBP stats in the future by having Rosenthal aver that on base percentage is more meaningful than batting average.
This is a true advance. But Fox wasn't done.
With Miguel Cabrera at the plate, Buck introduced the viewer to WAR. He explained how -- and why! -- Triple Crown winner Miguel Cabrera earned just the fourth highest WAR in MLB last year.
Supported by a Fox graphic listing the top four WARriors in 2012, Buck explained how Cabrera would fare less well because he's only an offensive force. He noted that Mike Trout, first by far on that list with nearly 11 wins against replacement, runs the bases and plays defense.
It's truly a watershed when a major TV network intransigent in its opposition to advanced metrics finally acknowledges that there is a better alternative to batting average and home runs. Kudos to Fox for accepting what has been proven and helping educate average fans.
The next giant leap will occur when Rosenthal explains on air to Buck the other key element of WAR. The three players ahead of Cabrera on the WAR list are center fielder Trout, second baseman Robinson Cano and catcher Buster Posey. Each plays a more difficult position and is being compared to weaker hitters than a third baseman, if that's what you want to call Cabrera.
And the battle will finally be won when they both explain it to the satisfaction of Tim McCarver.
05 April 2013
A Successful Debut
Associated Press: Mariano Rivera made a successful debut as the Yankees defeated Boston 4-2.
Real Life: Rivera entered the game with a three-run lead. He relinquished a run on a walk and a double before retiring the side. For those of you scoring at home, Red Sox batters hit .250/.400/.500 against him and saddled him with an ERA of 9.00.
But he "earned" a save, so it must have been successful. At least according to dinosaurs like the Association Press.
Thirty-four years and counting.
Real Life: Rivera entered the game with a three-run lead. He relinquished a run on a walk and a double before retiring the side. For those of you scoring at home, Red Sox batters hit .250/.400/.500 against him and saddled him with an ERA of 9.00.
But he "earned" a save, so it must have been successful. At least according to dinosaurs like the Association Press.
Thirty-four years and counting.
04 April 2013
Adventures in Scheduling
Twenty-four thousand souls filled half of Target Field today to witness the Twins' 8-2 whipping of Detroit. The five-run eighth that blew open the game, indeed the final score, will be lost to history as Minnesota drifts into the cellar and Detroit to the top of the AL Central standings.
Witnesses to this event are likely to remember little of the contest but this -- the weather. It was another raw, windy, miserable early-April day in Minneapolis more conducive to sleigh riding than to the Boys of Summer. And yet it counted in the standings.
This scene is being played out across the Northeast and Midwest in places like Chicago and New York and Pittsburgh and Cincinnati. And while Mark Twain's lament about weather discussions being all talk and no action was facetious, a real American today has the right to a serious complaint about MLB's weather-related actions.
Consider this: Road teams this week included Miami, San Diego, Houston and Los Angeles, where Spring is fully sprung and ready for action. How hard would it be to rejigger the schedule so most early- and mid-April (and late September) games occur in warm weather? It would mean the Indians and Rockies and their ilk would wait until late April for their home opener, but they would avoid snow-outs and home field shivering. It would also mean fewer summertime games in the Dallas sauna, the Phoenix microwave and the San Francisco refrigerator.
Assembling a schedule among 30 businesses is a massive juggling act, particularly with all the other considerations, like avoiding dueling home games by teams that share markets. But wouldn't MLB like to have comfortable customers filling the other half of their stadiums?
Witnesses to this event are likely to remember little of the contest but this -- the weather. It was another raw, windy, miserable early-April day in Minneapolis more conducive to sleigh riding than to the Boys of Summer. And yet it counted in the standings.
This scene is being played out across the Northeast and Midwest in places like Chicago and New York and Pittsburgh and Cincinnati. And while Mark Twain's lament about weather discussions being all talk and no action was facetious, a real American today has the right to a serious complaint about MLB's weather-related actions.
Consider this: Road teams this week included Miami, San Diego, Houston and Los Angeles, where Spring is fully sprung and ready for action. How hard would it be to rejigger the schedule so most early- and mid-April (and late September) games occur in warm weather? It would mean the Indians and Rockies and their ilk would wait until late April for their home opener, but they would avoid snow-outs and home field shivering. It would also mean fewer summertime games in the Dallas sauna, the Phoenix microwave and the San Francisco refrigerator.
Assembling a schedule among 30 businesses is a massive juggling act, particularly with all the other considerations, like avoiding dueling home games by teams that share markets. But wouldn't MLB like to have comfortable customers filling the other half of their stadiums?
01 April 2013
Just As We Drew It Up
First, the 108-loss Astros beat Nolan Ryan in his home park. How perfect is that?
Then, the Red Sox thrash the Yankee understudies and their ace in The Bronx, with contributions from Gamecock Jackie Bradley, Jr. A victory for the Lesser of Two Evils.
Finally, my Nats ride a pair of blasts from The Future and seven shutout innings from Stephen Strasburg for an Opening Day win closed by Rafael Soriano.
Oh how I have suffered lo these many years. Dear God of Baseball, may this be my deliverance.
Then, the Red Sox thrash the Yankee understudies and their ace in The Bronx, with contributions from Gamecock Jackie Bradley, Jr. A victory for the Lesser of Two Evils.
Finally, my Nats ride a pair of blasts from The Future and seven shutout innings from Stephen Strasburg for an Opening Day win closed by Rafael Soriano.
Oh how I have suffered lo these many years. Dear God of Baseball, may this be my deliverance.
30 March 2013
Predictions Guaranteed or Your Money Back
On a major sports radio show today the hosts filled two of the short segments that interrupt the endless flow of commercials, promotions and public service announcements with a discussion of the 2013 MLB season.
Specifically, they offered their predictions about division winners and Wild Card participants, earnestly and authoritatively, with scant acknowledgment that they might as well have been predicting the weather in Wilkes-Barre six Tuesdays from now.
The programming break concluded and the network returned to its regularly-scheduled ads before eventually meandering back through another reading of yesterday's scores to the hosts, who would have had time to shower, shave, compete in a bocce tournament and call home in the interim. They then preceded to predict playoff winners right up to the World Series.
Listeners realize intuitively that this is all just for fun, that the hosts have to talk about something to fill literally 24 hours of each day with sports, and that no one is taking these predictions seriously. On the other hand, playoff results in baseball are a coin-flip the day before they start, even if you know who's squaring off and under what conditions. Discussing playoff outcomes in March has every bit the validity of guessing the number of stars in the universe.
Moreover, people with a mere glancing knowledge of baseball, which describes most all sports talk hosts, tend to predict last year's results. Their bold prognostications included the Nationals, Braves, Reds, Giants and Dodgers in the NL. Hey, what a coincidence: four of those five made last year's post-season and the other emptied its piggy bank on imported talent.
Let's instead recognize that part of baseball's beauty is its rampant unpredictability, a function of tomorrow's starting pitcher and winning percentages that rarely top 62% or fall below 38%, not withstanding this year's Astros.
In that vein, here are some real predictions, real in the sense that they will actually come to pass.
1. A team currently lost in the weeds will shock us slowly over 162 games and bust your playoff prediction bubble.
2. The credit for their advance will be spread wide, mostly in the cracks and crevices that are hard to discern, like relief pitching, bench play and luck. The sports media, unable to see how small improvements add up to a better team, will pronounce teamwork, a great clubhouse and a motivating manager responsible, primarily because there's no way to dispute empty claims.
3. One of the big-name teams will crash and burn. Probably your team.
4. Reports of the Yankees' demise are greatly exaggerated. They will make the playoffs and the universe will remain in stasis.
5. Another hotshot young Royals phenom will fail to fulfill his potential and the universe will remain in stasis.
6. Some team will finish exactly where everyone thinks they will, except their three best players will scuffle while three guys you never heard of will carry the team. In other words, we'll get everything wrong about them except their place in the standings.
7. By roughly game 40, some batter will have already socked more homers than he's ever produced in a single season en route to a break-out performance.
8. By roughly game 40, some pitcher will have already scored more wins and quality starts than he's ever produced in a single season en route to a break-out performance.
9. A pitcher like Roy Halladay, Tim Lincecum, Dan Haren or Ervin Santana will struggle to get outs again in '13 and we'll realize he didn't have an off-year in 2012; his career is in decline.
10. An everyday player will suddenly improve his on-base skills, power, base-stealing and defense, and we'll all assume he's juicing. Because that never happened before there were steroids.
11. Vin Scully will announce Dodger games for the 73rd consecutive year and the universe will remain in stasis. The Dodgers are a contender this year, so there's a chance that Scully will raise his voice at some point.
12. A third-rate outfit like the Indians or Padres will burst from the gate and electrify their fans before folding like origami and losing 89 games.
13. Attendance in Miami will drop below the Mendoza line for a rainy Wednesday night game against the Brewers. Or Rockies.
14. One of the teams that signed Justin Verlander, Buster Posey, Adam Wainwright, Rafael Soriano or Allen Craig to a rich, long-term deal will regret their decision and you'll shake your head at the team's stupidity even though all five contracts made sense at the time.
15. By April 3 at the very latest, John Sterling will grate on your nerves with his contrived braying at Yankee home runs.
16. On May 17, NBC News will declare Houston the loser in the AL West race.
17. On the last day of the season, the sudden-death game pitting two teams tied for the final Wild Card spot will draw lower ratings than an exhibition NFL re-run from 2004.
18. A giant sinkhole could open up beneath Busch Stadium but the St. Louis Cardinals will still compete this year because that's what they do every year. With Albert Pujols bolted and Chris Carpenter's cooked and Tony LaRussa retired and Stan Musial gone the Cards will still be in the mix.
19. And the Cubs won't be. Again.
20. Bold prediction: Miguel Cabrera will bat .300+ with 30+ home runs. There, I said it.
21. Baseball and I will renew our vows. We have never stopped loving each other.
Specifically, they offered their predictions about division winners and Wild Card participants, earnestly and authoritatively, with scant acknowledgment that they might as well have been predicting the weather in Wilkes-Barre six Tuesdays from now.
The programming break concluded and the network returned to its regularly-scheduled ads before eventually meandering back through another reading of yesterday's scores to the hosts, who would have had time to shower, shave, compete in a bocce tournament and call home in the interim. They then preceded to predict playoff winners right up to the World Series.
Listeners realize intuitively that this is all just for fun, that the hosts have to talk about something to fill literally 24 hours of each day with sports, and that no one is taking these predictions seriously. On the other hand, playoff results in baseball are a coin-flip the day before they start, even if you know who's squaring off and under what conditions. Discussing playoff outcomes in March has every bit the validity of guessing the number of stars in the universe.
Moreover, people with a mere glancing knowledge of baseball, which describes most all sports talk hosts, tend to predict last year's results. Their bold prognostications included the Nationals, Braves, Reds, Giants and Dodgers in the NL. Hey, what a coincidence: four of those five made last year's post-season and the other emptied its piggy bank on imported talent.
Let's instead recognize that part of baseball's beauty is its rampant unpredictability, a function of tomorrow's starting pitcher and winning percentages that rarely top 62% or fall below 38%, not withstanding this year's Astros.
In that vein, here are some real predictions, real in the sense that they will actually come to pass.
1. A team currently lost in the weeds will shock us slowly over 162 games and bust your playoff prediction bubble.
2. The credit for their advance will be spread wide, mostly in the cracks and crevices that are hard to discern, like relief pitching, bench play and luck. The sports media, unable to see how small improvements add up to a better team, will pronounce teamwork, a great clubhouse and a motivating manager responsible, primarily because there's no way to dispute empty claims.
3. One of the big-name teams will crash and burn. Probably your team.
4. Reports of the Yankees' demise are greatly exaggerated. They will make the playoffs and the universe will remain in stasis.
5. Another hotshot young Royals phenom will fail to fulfill his potential and the universe will remain in stasis.
6. Some team will finish exactly where everyone thinks they will, except their three best players will scuffle while three guys you never heard of will carry the team. In other words, we'll get everything wrong about them except their place in the standings.
7. By roughly game 40, some batter will have already socked more homers than he's ever produced in a single season en route to a break-out performance.
8. By roughly game 40, some pitcher will have already scored more wins and quality starts than he's ever produced in a single season en route to a break-out performance.
9. A pitcher like Roy Halladay, Tim Lincecum, Dan Haren or Ervin Santana will struggle to get outs again in '13 and we'll realize he didn't have an off-year in 2012; his career is in decline.
10. An everyday player will suddenly improve his on-base skills, power, base-stealing and defense, and we'll all assume he's juicing. Because that never happened before there were steroids.
11. Vin Scully will announce Dodger games for the 73rd consecutive year and the universe will remain in stasis. The Dodgers are a contender this year, so there's a chance that Scully will raise his voice at some point.
12. A third-rate outfit like the Indians or Padres will burst from the gate and electrify their fans before folding like origami and losing 89 games.
13. Attendance in Miami will drop below the Mendoza line for a rainy Wednesday night game against the Brewers. Or Rockies.
14. One of the teams that signed Justin Verlander, Buster Posey, Adam Wainwright, Rafael Soriano or Allen Craig to a rich, long-term deal will regret their decision and you'll shake your head at the team's stupidity even though all five contracts made sense at the time.
15. By April 3 at the very latest, John Sterling will grate on your nerves with his contrived braying at Yankee home runs.
16. On May 17, NBC News will declare Houston the loser in the AL West race.
17. On the last day of the season, the sudden-death game pitting two teams tied for the final Wild Card spot will draw lower ratings than an exhibition NFL re-run from 2004.
18. A giant sinkhole could open up beneath Busch Stadium but the St. Louis Cardinals will still compete this year because that's what they do every year. With Albert Pujols bolted and Chris Carpenter's cooked and Tony LaRussa retired and Stan Musial gone the Cards will still be in the mix.
19. And the Cubs won't be. Again.
20. Bold prediction: Miguel Cabrera will bat .300+ with 30+ home runs. There, I said it.
21. Baseball and I will renew our vows. We have never stopped loving each other.
29 March 2013
A Bunch of Lohsers
Here's my theory: Milwaukee Brewer management is so enamored with its crackling-smart win-now strategy of 2011 -- during which they leveraged acquisitions of Zack Greinke and Shaun Marcum for the last year of Prince Fielder's tenure in Wisconsin to a division title -- that they decided to reprise the approach this year.
That would explain why they've paid $33 million and their top draft pick for three years of 34-year-old flash-in-the-pan Kyle Lohse. If Lohse is a number two starter, as his contract suggests, then I'm a number two pencil.
Last year, Lohse pitched the most innings, won the most games, lost the fewest, struck out the most, had the most quality starts, the best K/BB rate, the lowest WHIP and by far the lowest ERA of his journeyman career. After 10 seasons of 88-98, 4.80, Lohse has responded to Dave Duncan's tutelage in St. Louis for a pair of 30-11, 3.10 seasons.
So he's a new pitcher, right? Yeah, not so much. Lady luck has escorted the California righty the last two years, and left him in the care of good Cardinal defense when she's been unavailable. Whether she returns for a third year is up to her, and no one ever accused Milwaukee's fielding of aptitude.
Moreover, and sadly for the team's faithful, it's not 2011 anymore. Fielder, Greinke and Marcum are gone and the Brewers are making a beeline for the basement in the NL Central. Even if Lohse's second act continues, and that's not the way to bet, he might catapult them to .500 in 2013. But he'll cost them in future years, because signing a free agent offered a deal by his incumbent team costs a first-round pick, something the Brews' barren system could little afford to sacrifice.
A lot of mediocre teams are acting as if there are eight extra Wild Cards instead of one and flipping the future for a very uncertain present. It's going to work for someone someday and maybe this is the Brewers' year. But probably not, and Lohse's signing reduces the odds that the next few will be their years either.
That would explain why they've paid $33 million and their top draft pick for three years of 34-year-old flash-in-the-pan Kyle Lohse. If Lohse is a number two starter, as his contract suggests, then I'm a number two pencil.
Last year, Lohse pitched the most innings, won the most games, lost the fewest, struck out the most, had the most quality starts, the best K/BB rate, the lowest WHIP and by far the lowest ERA of his journeyman career. After 10 seasons of 88-98, 4.80, Lohse has responded to Dave Duncan's tutelage in St. Louis for a pair of 30-11, 3.10 seasons.
So he's a new pitcher, right? Yeah, not so much. Lady luck has escorted the California righty the last two years, and left him in the care of good Cardinal defense when she's been unavailable. Whether she returns for a third year is up to her, and no one ever accused Milwaukee's fielding of aptitude.
Moreover, and sadly for the team's faithful, it's not 2011 anymore. Fielder, Greinke and Marcum are gone and the Brewers are making a beeline for the basement in the NL Central. Even if Lohse's second act continues, and that's not the way to bet, he might catapult them to .500 in 2013. But he'll cost them in future years, because signing a free agent offered a deal by his incumbent team costs a first-round pick, something the Brews' barren system could little afford to sacrifice.
A lot of mediocre teams are acting as if there are eight extra Wild Cards instead of one and flipping the future for a very uncertain present. It's going to work for someone someday and maybe this is the Brewers' year. But probably not, and Lohse's signing reduces the odds that the next few will be their years either.
23 March 2013
Peeking In the Record Book
Twenty-thirteen could be a big year for Jim Thome, if he manages to make an MLB team and get in games. With 50 more strikeouts, Thome will become the sport's all-time Whiffer King, passing Reggie Jackson with 2,598 futilities.
Bobby Abreu also has his sights set on posterity. If the 38-year-old outfielder can get into 59 games this season, he'll move into the Top 10 for games played without a World Series appearance, with 2,406. (Fittingly, Rafael Palmeiro is first with 2,831.)
Sadly, Thome and Abreu have entered involuntary retirement mode. The Twins have allegedly kicked Thome's tires and found him wanting at 42, while the Orioles have suggested they might bring in Abreu if the alternatives gag them in Spring Training.
But there are others who can look up the history's ledger and see opportunities to climb into the top reaches. Alex Rodriguez, for example, is seventh of the home run list, but can pass Willie Mays for fourth with just 14 more jacks. He's also within 99 hits of 3,000 and 47 RBIs of fourth place (passing Barry Bonds). The price for all that is five more Ks, which would move him ahead of Sammy Sosa (2036) to third all-time. But there's good news in that regard. Adam Dunn, a much more prolific fanning machine, sits just one strikeout behind ARod and figures to play fulltime for the White Sox, who owe him $30 mil over the next two years.
His teammate is 12 hits from 10th place on the all-time list. Where Derek Jeter has an advantage is that last year's injury -- a broken ankle -- isn't keeping him off the field in 2013. ARod could be out all season with his hip woes, and will almost certainly miss most of the first half. With 132 more safeties Jeter clips Cap Anson for sixth place, after accumulating 216 last year. Jeter can also move up to 15th on the strikeout list ahead of Manny Ramirez with 70 more strike-threes. He fanned 90 times last year.
Albert Pujols is starting to introduce himself to the record books. With 25 more dingers, he becomes the 26th member of the 500 Club. Another five puts him in the top 25, ahead of Eddie Murray.
On the hill, Mariano Rivera's next save breaks the all-time save record of 608, currently held by Mariano Rivera. Aside from Trevor Hoffman's 601, Rivera is already 130 saves ahead of anyone else, pending his last season in 2013. With 31 more saves, Jason Isringhausen can move into 11th place with 331. Joe Nathan is two behind Izzy.
Andy Pettitte leads all MLB pitchers in career wins with 245, good for 51st in history. Two more cracks the top 50 and 15 more gets him to 41st place. Roy Halladay leads active pitchers in finishing what he started with 66 complete games, nearly twice as many as second-place CC Sabatha (35). That slots him in at 644th on the all time list, just 683 behind Cy Young.
Some other active players will move up the hierarchy in their particular specialties. Todd Helton is four doubles from the top 20. Carl Crawford cracks the top 100 with four more triples, and gets to 49th in stolen bases with 24 more thefts. Ichiro, now at 51st in steals, gets to 41st with 30 more. Juan Pierre, now 19th all-time, needs 32 to swipe 15th place from Kenny Lofton, with 623.
Finally, there is the fine work of Paul Konerko, who can pass Frank Robinson for 20th all-time by grounding into eight more double plays. Don't laugh: 12 of the ballers in front of him are Hall of Famers. Nonetheless, he's probably more focused on the 78 home runs he needs for 500. At 37, and with 96 in his last three seasons, it seems likely. Go Paulie.
18 March 2013
Getting Hosed: A Short Hoops Interval
When the NCAA men's basketball brackets were first revealed on CBS last night, Oregon's shocking 12 seed jumped off the screen. A top 25 team, the Ducks were among the Pac-13's (or whatever number it is now) elite and swept the league tournament, defeating UCLA, a team given a six seed, in its home city.
Analyst Doug Gotlieb, a former Oklahoma State star and current college hoops savant, jumped down the throat of the selection committee chair, bluntly demanding an explanation (which he didn't get.)
March madness, indeed! In a rational universe, Oregon almost certainly merits an eight seed, maybe a nine. Dropping them four lines means the NCAA sachems rated them 16 teams lower than the rest of America did. The irony is that the committee did the Ducks a favor. The eight-nine line is the tournament death star because the winner draws a nearly unbeatable #1 seed everytime.
As I've documented before, there's virtually no difference between a six seed and a seven, eight, nine, or even a 10 or 11. Everyone from six to 11 is talented but flawed and it doesn't take a lot going right for an 11 or wrong for a six, to produce an upset, as we've seen repeatedly in the tournament.
This line of reasoning fails at the top of the bracket. There are discernible gaps between the top seeds and teams just a little bit lower.
What this adds up to is: an eight seed has no advantage whatsoever in the first round and a giant hill to climb in the second. A 12 seed is just slightly less likely to survive the first round but significantly more likely to defeat a four-seed -- or the 13 -- in the second round.
I assume the Oregon coach is smart enough to zip his team's lips publicly but to deal the disrespect card privately every chance he gets.
Which means the team that really got hosed was Oklahoma State, a fifth seed with a win-or-go-home first-round contest against an angry #8 in the 12 spot.
Analyst Doug Gotlieb, a former Oklahoma State star and current college hoops savant, jumped down the throat of the selection committee chair, bluntly demanding an explanation (which he didn't get.)
March madness, indeed! In a rational universe, Oregon almost certainly merits an eight seed, maybe a nine. Dropping them four lines means the NCAA sachems rated them 16 teams lower than the rest of America did. The irony is that the committee did the Ducks a favor. The eight-nine line is the tournament death star because the winner draws a nearly unbeatable #1 seed everytime.
As I've documented before, there's virtually no difference between a six seed and a seven, eight, nine, or even a 10 or 11. Everyone from six to 11 is talented but flawed and it doesn't take a lot going right for an 11 or wrong for a six, to produce an upset, as we've seen repeatedly in the tournament.
This line of reasoning fails at the top of the bracket. There are discernible gaps between the top seeds and teams just a little bit lower.
What this adds up to is: an eight seed has no advantage whatsoever in the first round and a giant hill to climb in the second. A 12 seed is just slightly less likely to survive the first round but significantly more likely to defeat a four-seed -- or the 13 -- in the second round.
I assume the Oregon coach is smart enough to zip his team's lips publicly but to deal the disrespect card privately every chance he gets.
Which means the team that really got hosed was Oklahoma State, a fifth seed with a win-or-go-home first-round contest against an angry #8 in the 12 spot.
17 March 2013
And Now for Something Completely Different
Today we're going to talk about pop-up rate and Z-contact, their inverse correlation to BABIP and their effect on DIPS projections.
Ha! Just kidding! I mean, that's what we'll be discussing , but you won't know it. What you will know is that we've engaged in a new and fascinating discussion that might help you win your fantasy baseball league.
Ha! If anything in this blog were actually fascinating, Braindrizzling would be positively thrumming with annoying but remunerative pop-up ads and flashing banners. Far more likely, you'll find it mildly relevant if you manage to read to the end.
First things first: this blog post owes everything to Dave Cameron and Voros McCracken. It is a recapitulation of this fine post by Cameron at Fangraphs.
Fourth things second: there will be no math and you won't be quizzed on it next week. However, there will be a wee bit of trailblazing that will help us understand yet a skooch better how pitchers succeed or fail.
Second things third: the abridged version of the back story. Sabermetricians, led by McCracken in '99, realized that pitchers can control Ks, BBs, HBP and HRs, and not much else. Fielding, ballpark and luck are much more relevant than pitcher aptitude to whether a grounder punches through for a single or gets gobbled up by the shortstop for a 6-4-3. Their BABIP-against, that is, the batting average on all those other balls put into play, tends to be random. Sort of. Hurlers with high BABIP one year often have low ones the next and vice versa. Not all and not always, but more or less. Void where prohibited by law.
Except: flyball pitchers give up fewer safeties than worm killers. On the other hand, those fly ball hits more often fall in as doubles and triples and those four hoppers through the infield rarely push the hitter past first.
So when the SABR dudes attempt to project pitching ERAs, they don't look at a pitcher's previous ERA but at the constituent parts -- HR, K, BB, HBP -- and assume an average BABIP going forward. These projections have bested projections using just previous ERA by a significant and consistent amount over the last decade, particularly as further refinements -- like ground ball and fly ball proclivities -- have helped salt the projections.
In English, if you want a prediction of Johnny Cueto's ERA in 2013 because you're considering making a bid on him in your fantasy league, his 2012 ERA of 2.78 says GO! But his constituent parts whisper FLUKE! They project a 3.74 ERA in 2013, assuming a league-average BABIP.
And now for something completely different: Suppose Dave Cameron tells you that he has a formula that's NEW AND IMPROVED! It can account 15% better for the batting average against a pitcher on balls put in play. That means he can get you a better idea of the pitcher's ERA and WHIP, and give you a leg up on the innumerate competition. Has Dave Cameron ever lied to you before?
In a nutshell, what Cameron found is that pitchers who induce a lot of pop-ups and who get batters to swing and miss on more pitches in the strike zone, reduce their BABIPs. It's partly why consistently good pitchers, like Justin Verlander and Jared Weaver, post consistently low BABIPs. In other words, we've found another way that BABIP is not entirely random for pitchers. (It's not random at all for batters, as anyone who's watched Ichiro knows intuitively.)
If Cameron's conclusion is supported by more research -- because this is how science advances -- pitching projections will get 15% better. How big a deal is that? Five advances of 15% each double the accuracy of projections. (Trust me on the math; I stayed in a Holiday Inn near MIT.) But even without four more Eureka moments among the seamheads, you can look up a pitcher's pop-up rate last year and squeeze out an edge on the competition in your fantasy league.
The naysayers will still neigh because advances of these stripe -- small and complicated -- are hard to see. The projections still won't identify the lucky dogs, the breakthroughs and the cliff divers. They won't be able to predict which pitcher tamed his control tiger, altered his mechanics and added 4 mph to his heater, or just figured something out. Truth is, luck is still way too big a factor in baseball to overcome with science. But if science can help you win your fantasy league you probably want to listen to the scientists.
Ha! Just kidding! I mean, that's what we'll be discussing , but you won't know it. What you will know is that we've engaged in a new and fascinating discussion that might help you win your fantasy baseball league.
Ha! If anything in this blog were actually fascinating, Braindrizzling would be positively thrumming with annoying but remunerative pop-up ads and flashing banners. Far more likely, you'll find it mildly relevant if you manage to read to the end.
First things first: this blog post owes everything to Dave Cameron and Voros McCracken. It is a recapitulation of this fine post by Cameron at Fangraphs.
Fourth things second: there will be no math and you won't be quizzed on it next week. However, there will be a wee bit of trailblazing that will help us understand yet a skooch better how pitchers succeed or fail.
Second things third: the abridged version of the back story. Sabermetricians, led by McCracken in '99, realized that pitchers can control Ks, BBs, HBP and HRs, and not much else. Fielding, ballpark and luck are much more relevant than pitcher aptitude to whether a grounder punches through for a single or gets gobbled up by the shortstop for a 6-4-3. Their BABIP-against, that is, the batting average on all those other balls put into play, tends to be random. Sort of. Hurlers with high BABIP one year often have low ones the next and vice versa. Not all and not always, but more or less. Void where prohibited by law.
Except: flyball pitchers give up fewer safeties than worm killers. On the other hand, those fly ball hits more often fall in as doubles and triples and those four hoppers through the infield rarely push the hitter past first.
So when the SABR dudes attempt to project pitching ERAs, they don't look at a pitcher's previous ERA but at the constituent parts -- HR, K, BB, HBP -- and assume an average BABIP going forward. These projections have bested projections using just previous ERA by a significant and consistent amount over the last decade, particularly as further refinements -- like ground ball and fly ball proclivities -- have helped salt the projections.
In English, if you want a prediction of Johnny Cueto's ERA in 2013 because you're considering making a bid on him in your fantasy league, his 2012 ERA of 2.78 says GO! But his constituent parts whisper FLUKE! They project a 3.74 ERA in 2013, assuming a league-average BABIP.
And now for something completely different: Suppose Dave Cameron tells you that he has a formula that's NEW AND IMPROVED! It can account 15% better for the batting average against a pitcher on balls put in play. That means he can get you a better idea of the pitcher's ERA and WHIP, and give you a leg up on the innumerate competition. Has Dave Cameron ever lied to you before?
In a nutshell, what Cameron found is that pitchers who induce a lot of pop-ups and who get batters to swing and miss on more pitches in the strike zone, reduce their BABIPs. It's partly why consistently good pitchers, like Justin Verlander and Jared Weaver, post consistently low BABIPs. In other words, we've found another way that BABIP is not entirely random for pitchers. (It's not random at all for batters, as anyone who's watched Ichiro knows intuitively.)
If Cameron's conclusion is supported by more research -- because this is how science advances -- pitching projections will get 15% better. How big a deal is that? Five advances of 15% each double the accuracy of projections. (Trust me on the math; I stayed in a Holiday Inn near MIT.) But even without four more Eureka moments among the seamheads, you can look up a pitcher's pop-up rate last year and squeeze out an edge on the competition in your fantasy league.
The naysayers will still neigh because advances of these stripe -- small and complicated -- are hard to see. The projections still won't identify the lucky dogs, the breakthroughs and the cliff divers. They won't be able to predict which pitcher tamed his control tiger, altered his mechanics and added 4 mph to his heater, or just figured something out. Truth is, luck is still way too big a factor in baseball to overcome with science. But if science can help you win your fantasy league you probably want to listen to the scientists.
16 March 2013
The Meaning of "Spring Training"
Spring Training is a Dominican phrase meaning "people being idiots." ("Ring" = thing people wear, +"p" = just the people + "s" = plural, so Spring = many people; "training" = hoping to know something someday, but currently quite stupid.)
This is borne out by a report from the Grapefruit and Cactus Leagues I read yesterday, written by a veteran journalist not heretofore known to be a moron. It said, among other things, the following:
This spring, scouts are raving about how much Bryce Harper has improved. He is hitting .444/.459/.806 with three home runs in 37 plate appearances this spring.
It seemed like the Indians were really reaching when they signed lefthander Scott Kazmir as a minor-league free agent over the winter. Kazmir has not pitched in the major leagues since the first week of the 2011 season, and he posted a 5.34 ERA in 64 innings for the Sugar Land Skeeters in the independent Atlantic League last season. However, Kazmir has yet to allow a run in eight Cactus League innings this spring and also pitched three scoreless innings in a B game. In his eight official innings, he has given up just five hits and one walk while striking out eight.
(In the same article, the author refers to a player who couldn't master the game's "basic fundamentals." The writer could use a lesson in mastering the "basic fundamentals" of covering Spring Training.)
There's actually only one "basic fundamental" about Spring Training: it rarely matters. Bryce Harper is hitting .444 in 37 plate appearances against fellow 20-year-olds whose training wheels are being adjusted so they can be successful for the Double-A West Tennessee Diamond Jaxx this year.
Scott Kazmir threw 11 good innings spread over three starts, at least one of which was against ball boys and hot dog vendors. That is supposed to have more weight than two years of evidence that he's no longer among the top 400 best hurlers in the world.
Dear writer, here's how you know when Bryce Harper and Scott Kazmir are ready to break out: when they blow off Spring Training. When they use it to master a mechanical change or experiment with a new grip -- that's when they've really made it.
That theory, however, does not apply to Roy Halladay. Phillie fans should be creasing brows about his first Spring Training start. It's not that Halladay got lit up like doobie at a hipster party; it's that his velocity, which has dipped each of the past two seasons, ebbed again below 90. That is portentious in two ways:
1. There is a point at which a lack of fastball velocity can sap the value of every other pitch. If your heater is 89 and your change is 85, no one's getting fooled, not even Adam Dunn and Mark Reynolds.
2. The Phillies are already little more than three great starters and the cast from Jurassic Park. If Halladay is no longer effective, Philadelphia's quest for a .500 season is in jeopardy.
So okay, Spring Training can mean something. Halladay's next two starts will determine whether the first one was another sign of the apocalypse or just a fissure in Doc's space-time continuum. But before more of those Kazmir stories get written, can we please use a little judgment?
07 March 2013
Gays and Ballplayers and Locker Rooms, Oh My!
Let's suppose you're a narrow-minded, ignorant homophobe (to be doubly redundant) baseball player and you feel you'd be uncomfortable with a gay teammate in the locker room with you. Allow me to make three small observations:
1. Boy are you in for a shock. 5%-15% of population x 25 guys on a team = 1-4 gays per squad.
2. Substitute "black" for "gay" and go back 60 years. Fun with racism!
3. Which would you prefer, showering in the stall next to a naked gay teammate hitting .360 or
showering in the stall next to a naked straight teammate hitting .190?
See? Turns out you're not such a narrow-minded, ignorant homophobe after-all.
1. Boy are you in for a shock. 5%-15% of population x 25 guys on a team = 1-4 gays per squad.
2. Substitute "black" for "gay" and go back 60 years. Fun with racism!
3. Which would you prefer, showering in the stall next to a naked gay teammate hitting .360 or
showering in the stall next to a naked straight teammate hitting .190?
See? Turns out you're not such a narrow-minded, ignorant homophobe after-all.
06 March 2013
Mike Trout's Getting Rooked (Or He's Not)
Shortly after Marvin Miller took command of the baseball players' union he discovered to his horror that the baseball card companies -- well, company: Topps -- were inducing rookies and minor leaguers to essentially give away the rights to their likeness by offering a handful of coins and Major League blandishment. Miller proposed to Topps that they negotiate a deal that would more fairly compensate the players for the millions that Topps was reaping.
Topps told Miller they had no reason to negotiate with him. "We don't see your muscle," they told him.
So Miller visited every MLB camp the following spring and exhorted the players not to sign the deals no matter their affinity for baseball cards. In return, he promised the players he would get them a better deal.
When Topps ran into a series of brick walls, they called Miller. Seeing his "muscle," they worked out a new deal that doubled player royalties and earned their union hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars, specifically 510 of them, is the amount that Mike Trout will "earn" in 2013, thanks to a four percent raise from his employer. That is his reward for one of the most extraordinary seasons in baseball history. Trout will take home $20K above the minimum salary for second-year players.
Mike Trout's MVP-level season was worth roughly $60 million on open-market last year, based on his 12+ WARP and a market value of nearly $5 million per win. For that performance, he earned the MLB minimum of $480,000.
Trout is unlikely to come close to repeating that in his sophomore season, but even if he's half as valuable, he's still outperforming his salary by $29.5 million.
What Angel management understands is that he has no "muscle." The Collective Bargaining Agreement signed by the league and the union gives teams total control of players until they reach salary arbitration in year three. This is designed to compensate teams for the substantial investments they make in player development.
Angel owner Arte Moreno is hardly known for austerity. He's made Google-sized investments in Albert Pujols and Josh Hamilton, and has a Lehman Brothers deal with Vernon Wells. He could have thrown Trout an extra hundred grand -- couch cushion change for the franchise -- to reward him for propelling the team to contention and ingratiate the franchise to the player come free agent time. But he didn't have to. And so, Trout will earn all year what Alex Rodriguez will "earn" in three games -- three games, that is, that ARod won't play.
But even a 21-year-old knows that "my time will come," and possibly soon. L.A. brass of Anaheim may already be working on a deal with Trout's representatives to buy out arbitration and a year or two of free agency. It may be wise to lowball his current compensation to create an incentive to sign a long-term deal. Arte Moreno didn't turn a half-million dollar ad agency into an $8 billion asset by making bad business decisions.
And when Trout gets his consolation prize -- whether he's 21 or 23 when it happens -- it will be in the Powerball range. In the meantime, he's the highest-paid 21-year-old this side of ... well, Bryce Harper, whose leverage is apparently greater. Harper earns $2 million this year, a mere $23 million below his value.
Topps told Miller they had no reason to negotiate with him. "We don't see your muscle," they told him.
So Miller visited every MLB camp the following spring and exhorted the players not to sign the deals no matter their affinity for baseball cards. In return, he promised the players he would get them a better deal.
When Topps ran into a series of brick walls, they called Miller. Seeing his "muscle," they worked out a new deal that doubled player royalties and earned their union hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars, specifically 510 of them, is the amount that Mike Trout will "earn" in 2013, thanks to a four percent raise from his employer. That is his reward for one of the most extraordinary seasons in baseball history. Trout will take home $20K above the minimum salary for second-year players.
Mike Trout's MVP-level season was worth roughly $60 million on open-market last year, based on his 12+ WARP and a market value of nearly $5 million per win. For that performance, he earned the MLB minimum of $480,000.
Trout is unlikely to come close to repeating that in his sophomore season, but even if he's half as valuable, he's still outperforming his salary by $29.5 million.
What Angel management understands is that he has no "muscle." The Collective Bargaining Agreement signed by the league and the union gives teams total control of players until they reach salary arbitration in year three. This is designed to compensate teams for the substantial investments they make in player development.
Angel owner Arte Moreno is hardly known for austerity. He's made Google-sized investments in Albert Pujols and Josh Hamilton, and has a Lehman Brothers deal with Vernon Wells. He could have thrown Trout an extra hundred grand -- couch cushion change for the franchise -- to reward him for propelling the team to contention and ingratiate the franchise to the player come free agent time. But he didn't have to. And so, Trout will earn all year what Alex Rodriguez will "earn" in three games -- three games, that is, that ARod won't play.
But even a 21-year-old knows that "my time will come," and possibly soon. L.A. brass of Anaheim may already be working on a deal with Trout's representatives to buy out arbitration and a year or two of free agency. It may be wise to lowball his current compensation to create an incentive to sign a long-term deal. Arte Moreno didn't turn a half-million dollar ad agency into an $8 billion asset by making bad business decisions.
And when Trout gets his consolation prize -- whether he's 21 or 23 when it happens -- it will be in the Powerball range. In the meantime, he's the highest-paid 21-year-old this side of ... well, Bryce Harper, whose leverage is apparently greater. Harper earns $2 million this year, a mere $23 million below his value.
03 March 2013
Just One More Good Year
Sandy Koufax's bifurcated Major League career would have made Henry Jekyll proud: the mediocre first half (seven years, 36-40, 4.06, six wins against replacement) and the spectacular second half (six years, 129-47, 2.24, 44 wins against replacement.)
Considering the totality of his career achievements, Koufax is a pale shadow of the average Hall of Fame hurler. Yet omitting the Left Arm of God from Cooperstown is unthinkable. His peak years, in which he posted ERAs an astonishing 43%, 59%, 86%, 60% and 90% better than league average, were the equal of anyone's, ever.
Where Koufax's career was an avalanche, Don Sutton's was the inexorable drip, drip, drip of a waterfall in drought. Sutton truly excelled in just three seasons, but his reliably good performance across 23 years earned him a bust in the Hall as well.
Thus the premise for the widely used "JAWS" rankings for Hall of Fame contenders: both full career value and peak value are relevant. Whereas some players earn their ceremony for sustained excellence, others get in with bursts of greatness.
This is why 2013 is so important for Robinson Cano's Hall of Fame resume. Cano has not played nearly long enough to accumulate the career numbers for the Hall, but another eight-win season catapults him to average peak WARP for Hall of Fame second basemen. After that, it would just be a matter of accumulating the remaining 30 WARP or so over the second half of his career. That feat is accomplished by playing well, if not spectacularly, for another six-seven years before tailing off in his late 30s.
It's not quite fair to say Cano's age-30 season is a make-or-break campaign for his Hall of Fame resume. He's young enough, after all, to slip for a year or two before rebounding in another season. The Hall is filled with gentlemen who were absent from the discussion at age 30 but sprang into it thereafter. Paul Molitor jumps to mind: although he was a seriously fine player in his first nine seasons, he'd never cracked .842 in OPS before his age-30 campaign. In his 30s, he perenially batted above .300, crossing .850 OPS six times, including three seasons above .900. Molitor also contributed value to the Brewers - and then Toronto and Minnesota -- every year through his age-40 season.
More numerous are the meteors who start their career on fire but flame out just when this discussion might have begun. Dwight Gooden found his cliff at age 25, but Fred Lynn posted five 4+-win seasons in his first seven years, then starting after age-30 never reached that height again.
So it's premature to place the burden of Robby Cano's Hall of Fame case on the shoulders of 2013. But another performance like last year's, or the year before or the year before that, begins to put him in the rarefied air that is breathed only along Otsego Lake.
Injuries limited Roy Halladay to 156 innings and a 4.49 ERA in 2012, adding almost nothing to his Hall pass. A bounce-back 2013 would really solidify the case for old Harry Leroy, because he's right at the standards on both career and peak. He owes some of his voluminous value to durability -- 220 innings or more in each of the six years previous to last -- which Hall voters and the general public seem to esteem less than actual greatness. Another top-five pitching performance this year would make it difficult to deny Halladay entrance in 2020, or whenever. The question is whether at 36 he possesses the might to once again throw 230 frames of sub-3.00 ERA. (There is this hope: it's a contract year for Halladay.)
The noodle just began wrapping around this question and these two names emerged from the goo. If you are thinking of a player whose ticket might be one more good year from getting punched, put his name in the comment section and we'll dig in.
Considering the totality of his career achievements, Koufax is a pale shadow of the average Hall of Fame hurler. Yet omitting the Left Arm of God from Cooperstown is unthinkable. His peak years, in which he posted ERAs an astonishing 43%, 59%, 86%, 60% and 90% better than league average, were the equal of anyone's, ever.
Where Koufax's career was an avalanche, Don Sutton's was the inexorable drip, drip, drip of a waterfall in drought. Sutton truly excelled in just three seasons, but his reliably good performance across 23 years earned him a bust in the Hall as well.
Thus the premise for the widely used "JAWS" rankings for Hall of Fame contenders: both full career value and peak value are relevant. Whereas some players earn their ceremony for sustained excellence, others get in with bursts of greatness.
This is why 2013 is so important for Robinson Cano's Hall of Fame resume. Cano has not played nearly long enough to accumulate the career numbers for the Hall, but another eight-win season catapults him to average peak WARP for Hall of Fame second basemen. After that, it would just be a matter of accumulating the remaining 30 WARP or so over the second half of his career. That feat is accomplished by playing well, if not spectacularly, for another six-seven years before tailing off in his late 30s.
It's not quite fair to say Cano's age-30 season is a make-or-break campaign for his Hall of Fame resume. He's young enough, after all, to slip for a year or two before rebounding in another season. The Hall is filled with gentlemen who were absent from the discussion at age 30 but sprang into it thereafter. Paul Molitor jumps to mind: although he was a seriously fine player in his first nine seasons, he'd never cracked .842 in OPS before his age-30 campaign. In his 30s, he perenially batted above .300, crossing .850 OPS six times, including three seasons above .900. Molitor also contributed value to the Brewers - and then Toronto and Minnesota -- every year through his age-40 season.
More numerous are the meteors who start their career on fire but flame out just when this discussion might have begun. Dwight Gooden found his cliff at age 25, but Fred Lynn posted five 4+-win seasons in his first seven years, then starting after age-30 never reached that height again.
So it's premature to place the burden of Robby Cano's Hall of Fame case on the shoulders of 2013. But another performance like last year's, or the year before or the year before that, begins to put him in the rarefied air that is breathed only along Otsego Lake.
Injuries limited Roy Halladay to 156 innings and a 4.49 ERA in 2012, adding almost nothing to his Hall pass. A bounce-back 2013 would really solidify the case for old Harry Leroy, because he's right at the standards on both career and peak. He owes some of his voluminous value to durability -- 220 innings or more in each of the six years previous to last -- which Hall voters and the general public seem to esteem less than actual greatness. Another top-five pitching performance this year would make it difficult to deny Halladay entrance in 2020, or whenever. The question is whether at 36 he possesses the might to once again throw 230 frames of sub-3.00 ERA. (There is this hope: it's a contract year for Halladay.)
The noodle just began wrapping around this question and these two names emerged from the goo. If you are thinking of a player whose ticket might be one more good year from getting punched, put his name in the comment section and we'll dig in.
23 February 2013
The Inscrutable East
Has there ever been a team assembled quite like the 2013 Toronto Blue Jays? At 73-89 last season, the Jays continued a 20-year trend in which they finished third or lower in the AL East 19 times. The team was hampered mostly by a dearth of starting arms and a ghastly array of division rivals.
Following the 2012 season, GM Alex Anthopoulos made the bold gamble to strike while the Yankees and Red Sox were cold. New York remains a threat, but the team is trimming budget as it ages. Boston is in retreat, Baltimore in regression and Tampa in St. Pete. The sun is shining for a year or two as the Ontarions to make hay.
To a roster leaning heavily on boppers Jose Bautista and Edwin Encarnacion, and closer Casey Janssen, Anthopoulos overlayed the core of the Miami Marlins. After busting in Florida, Jose Reyes, Josh Johnson and Mark Buehrle were shipped north to join R.A. Dickey from the Mets and Melky Cabrera from exile, along with backups Emilio Bonifacio and Macier Izturis.
Will it work? Is that enough? They play 162 games to answer such questions. Certainly there is sufficient muscle on this squad to win the division. The three newcomers on the mound are a nice mix of veteran inning munchers and one-time phenom, joining Brandon Morrow fresh off his 2012 coming-out ceremony (a 2.96 ERA in 21 starts.) Most GMs would trade their luxury suite dinner spread for a rotation of Dickey, Buehrle, Johnson, Morrow and whoever.
On paper, the lineup is stacked. Aside from first base, Jays manager John Gibbons will write the name of an above-average player at every starting position, particularly if centerfielder Colby Rasmus and catcher JP Arencibia nibble at their potential.
The bench has some working parts, with Bonifacio a nice back-up plan at almost any spot on the field. Bullpens are notoriously fickle and hard to predict, but the presence of several former starters -- Brett Cecil, JA Happ and Carlos Villenueva -- adds some stability.
Yet there's trepidation. The Reyes-Johnson-Buehrle play was a flop in the NL, and now it's on the road in the brutal AL Beast. Miami's signings were generally considered folly; why does Toronto get a pass for paying the back ended portion of them?
And there are questions. Dickey's knuckler has flummoxed, but will it knuckle in a dome? Is Johnson fully repaired? Can Bautista stay on the field? Were Melky's 2012 exploits simply a PED-fueled quirk? Is Encarnacion a slugger (42 homers last season) or has the clock struck midnight (38 homers combined in the two previous seasons)?
More to the point, can a 73-win team suddenly become a 93-win team? The Brewers exercised a similar strategy two years ago, knowing that Prince Fielder would take his salads elsewhere the following season. They bet the house -- or more accurately, the farm system -- on Zack Greinke and Shaun Marcum, who helped deliver 96 wins and the division before Fielder bolted and Milwaukee tripped back into the pack in 2012.
Alex Anthopoulos is betting millions of Canadian dollars that the formula, expertly applied, can work again, even against the toughest competition. And he's betting that there's no time like the present. If you love baseball more than the Rays and Yankees, you're rooting for him to be right.
Following the 2012 season, GM Alex Anthopoulos made the bold gamble to strike while the Yankees and Red Sox were cold. New York remains a threat, but the team is trimming budget as it ages. Boston is in retreat, Baltimore in regression and Tampa in St. Pete. The sun is shining for a year or two as the Ontarions to make hay.
To a roster leaning heavily on boppers Jose Bautista and Edwin Encarnacion, and closer Casey Janssen, Anthopoulos overlayed the core of the Miami Marlins. After busting in Florida, Jose Reyes, Josh Johnson and Mark Buehrle were shipped north to join R.A. Dickey from the Mets and Melky Cabrera from exile, along with backups Emilio Bonifacio and Macier Izturis.
Will it work? Is that enough? They play 162 games to answer such questions. Certainly there is sufficient muscle on this squad to win the division. The three newcomers on the mound are a nice mix of veteran inning munchers and one-time phenom, joining Brandon Morrow fresh off his 2012 coming-out ceremony (a 2.96 ERA in 21 starts.) Most GMs would trade their luxury suite dinner spread for a rotation of Dickey, Buehrle, Johnson, Morrow and whoever.
On paper, the lineup is stacked. Aside from first base, Jays manager John Gibbons will write the name of an above-average player at every starting position, particularly if centerfielder Colby Rasmus and catcher JP Arencibia nibble at their potential.
The bench has some working parts, with Bonifacio a nice back-up plan at almost any spot on the field. Bullpens are notoriously fickle and hard to predict, but the presence of several former starters -- Brett Cecil, JA Happ and Carlos Villenueva -- adds some stability.
Yet there's trepidation. The Reyes-Johnson-Buehrle play was a flop in the NL, and now it's on the road in the brutal AL Beast. Miami's signings were generally considered folly; why does Toronto get a pass for paying the back ended portion of them?
And there are questions. Dickey's knuckler has flummoxed, but will it knuckle in a dome? Is Johnson fully repaired? Can Bautista stay on the field? Were Melky's 2012 exploits simply a PED-fueled quirk? Is Encarnacion a slugger (42 homers last season) or has the clock struck midnight (38 homers combined in the two previous seasons)?
More to the point, can a 73-win team suddenly become a 93-win team? The Brewers exercised a similar strategy two years ago, knowing that Prince Fielder would take his salads elsewhere the following season. They bet the house -- or more accurately, the farm system -- on Zack Greinke and Shaun Marcum, who helped deliver 96 wins and the division before Fielder bolted and Milwaukee tripped back into the pack in 2012.
Alex Anthopoulos is betting millions of Canadian dollars that the formula, expertly applied, can work again, even against the toughest competition. And he's betting that there's no time like the present. If you love baseball more than the Rays and Yankees, you're rooting for him to be right.
17 February 2013
Who Is Baseball's L.A. Lakers?
It's said that everyone has a twin somewhere in the world. Does every baseball player and team have a twin in another sport? As the NBA interrupts its interminably unproductive regular season for an All-Star exhibition, it's a good time to determine where there are analogs across leagues.
For example, which MLB team is most likely to repeat the work of the 2012-13 L.A. Lakers, a Ferrari of assembled talent playing like a jalopy? It seems as if the Toronto Blue Jays are setting themselves up for that, having imported the failed Miami Marlins' roster for a run at an AL East title. But it feels different with the Blue Jays, perhaps because they're no longer commanded by General Footshooter and perhaps because they are a year removed from novelty.
MLB's Angelinos are both candidates for this comparison because both have spent lavishly on talent and are expecting upper echelon results. Of the two, the Dodgers seem more vulnerable to under-performance because their imports seem less strategic and they're starting with a weaker base.
This year's Miami Heat is the MLB squad with a world class roster and championship-or-bust designs. Perennially that would be the Yankees, but management's efforts to put the payroll on a diet have trimmed some of the excess talent from the Bombers this season. The L.A. Angels feel like the team built for both the short and long haul and most likely to elicit yawns for winning the World Series.
The baseball version of the San Antonio Spurs is the St. Louis Cardinals. Both franchises have been successful for two decades despite small-market profiles and middling payrolls. They both have management with aptitude and vision, strong on-field (court) leadership, a culture of modesty and excellence, and star players who act like professionals. The Spurs no longer have the most talent, but they have the best record in the NBA so far. The Cards never had the most talent, but won two titles in six years and got to Game 7 of the pennant last year after losing the best player on the planet to free agency.
The Phoenix Suns are a once-proud franchise now in some semblance of disarray. Their 17-36 record so far this year looks a lot like the Boston Red Sox' final month of 2011. Also like the Sox, they have no pitching.
It's too early to tell who will be baseball's version of the Chicago Bulls, treading water until their ascendant superstar's triumphant return. But their opposite is in New York. The Yankees are hoping to make waves while avoiding the return of their dimmed star.
We won't even mention the Charlotte Bobcats and Pittsburgh Pirates. Their fans have suffered enough.
LeBron and Kobe have no equal in horsehide. Prince Albert still generally needs a last name, has never been a brand and is no longer the unquestioned king of the game. But Mike Trout, Bryce Harper and Stephen Strasburg appear to be the Kevin Durant and Derrick Rose of baseball. Like Rose and Durant, the baseball trio has made the All-Star team every year they've spent in the league. Maybe the Bulls should have shut down Rose in last spring's playoffs to avoid catastrophic injury.
Tim Duncan and Derek Jeter are sports doppelgangers. Bright, beloved, biracial, respectful Hall of Famers with lots of team-based jewelry. Neither ever says anything controversial. Neither has been able to reach a grounder hit six feet to his left for eight years.
Jarvas Varnardo averages less than a point per game for the Heat and less than a third of a rebound as the last guy off the bench for Miami. But he and Dwayne Wade will sport the same ring if Miami repeats as NBA champs. That would make him the Eli Whiteside of basketball. The 32-year-old catcher backed up Buster Posey last season for the World Champion Giants -- which is like being Robert Deniro's understudy. Whiteside got into 12 games with a double, a walk, a .396 OPS and a ring. And then he got waived.
Finally, Charles Barkley has Curt Schilling, the retired great who can't seem to shut up. Actually, Barkley has Barkley and Schilling has Schilling, which might be the crux of the issue.
For example, which MLB team is most likely to repeat the work of the 2012-13 L.A. Lakers, a Ferrari of assembled talent playing like a jalopy? It seems as if the Toronto Blue Jays are setting themselves up for that, having imported the failed Miami Marlins' roster for a run at an AL East title. But it feels different with the Blue Jays, perhaps because they're no longer commanded by General Footshooter and perhaps because they are a year removed from novelty.
MLB's Angelinos are both candidates for this comparison because both have spent lavishly on talent and are expecting upper echelon results. Of the two, the Dodgers seem more vulnerable to under-performance because their imports seem less strategic and they're starting with a weaker base.
This year's Miami Heat is the MLB squad with a world class roster and championship-or-bust designs. Perennially that would be the Yankees, but management's efforts to put the payroll on a diet have trimmed some of the excess talent from the Bombers this season. The L.A. Angels feel like the team built for both the short and long haul and most likely to elicit yawns for winning the World Series.
The baseball version of the San Antonio Spurs is the St. Louis Cardinals. Both franchises have been successful for two decades despite small-market profiles and middling payrolls. They both have management with aptitude and vision, strong on-field (court) leadership, a culture of modesty and excellence, and star players who act like professionals. The Spurs no longer have the most talent, but they have the best record in the NBA so far. The Cards never had the most talent, but won two titles in six years and got to Game 7 of the pennant last year after losing the best player on the planet to free agency.
The Phoenix Suns are a once-proud franchise now in some semblance of disarray. Their 17-36 record so far this year looks a lot like the Boston Red Sox' final month of 2011. Also like the Sox, they have no pitching.
It's too early to tell who will be baseball's version of the Chicago Bulls, treading water until their ascendant superstar's triumphant return. But their opposite is in New York. The Yankees are hoping to make waves while avoiding the return of their dimmed star.
We won't even mention the Charlotte Bobcats and Pittsburgh Pirates. Their fans have suffered enough.
LeBron and Kobe have no equal in horsehide. Prince Albert still generally needs a last name, has never been a brand and is no longer the unquestioned king of the game. But Mike Trout, Bryce Harper and Stephen Strasburg appear to be the Kevin Durant and Derrick Rose of baseball. Like Rose and Durant, the baseball trio has made the All-Star team every year they've spent in the league. Maybe the Bulls should have shut down Rose in last spring's playoffs to avoid catastrophic injury.
Tim Duncan and Derek Jeter are sports doppelgangers. Bright, beloved, biracial, respectful Hall of Famers with lots of team-based jewelry. Neither ever says anything controversial. Neither has been able to reach a grounder hit six feet to his left for eight years.
Jarvas Varnardo averages less than a point per game for the Heat and less than a third of a rebound as the last guy off the bench for Miami. But he and Dwayne Wade will sport the same ring if Miami repeats as NBA champs. That would make him the Eli Whiteside of basketball. The 32-year-old catcher backed up Buster Posey last season for the World Champion Giants -- which is like being Robert Deniro's understudy. Whiteside got into 12 games with a double, a walk, a .396 OPS and a ring. And then he got waived.
Finally, Charles Barkley has Curt Schilling, the retired great who can't seem to shut up. Actually, Barkley has Barkley and Schilling has Schilling, which might be the crux of the issue.
11 February 2013
A Smoaking Gun and Other Stories
At the risk of putting too fine a point on a previous post -- aw hell, there's no risk: we're going to shave the nub to within a millimeter of its life -- Baseball Prospectus released their projections for MLB players today and here's what the Tarot cards suggest for Justin Smoak:
.224/.313/.371 with 14 HR in 470 plate appearances for the Mariners this season. With weak baserunning and slightly below average defense, Smoak grades out essentially to replacement-level at first base, even after factoring in the park he plays in.
In other words, you can pick up any old Tom, Dick or Justin Smoak off the waiver wire and expect about the same production.
Add in the missing 150 plate appearances, which suggest either an injury or a demotion; in either case his contribution during those 30 games is zero.
By comparison, to which the previous post alludes, Matt Wieters's forecast comes in at .259/.330/.422 with 19 HR in 588 plate appearances while dinging him slightly on defense behind the plate. Wieters is worth a pair of wins against replacement in this forecast, which makes him a solid regular but not a star.
These are projections, not predictions, so even if Smoak breaks out and Wieters breaks down, the system can't be said to be "wrong." (In fact, the system includes the odds of breakout and collapse as well, but the math is obtuse.) It just means that players who have performed the way these two have at their ages in the past have tended to perform like the projection going forward.
According to BP's projection system, the top 10 players offensively in 2013 will be:
It's also interesting to see the system projecting a return to stardom for Hanley Ramirez, whom it ranks as the 21st best offensive player. That is based on the Dodgers leaving him at short and giving Dee Gordon the seasoning he needs in Albuquerque.
The system also sees a return to relevance for newly shorn Tim Lincecum with a 3.10 ERA in 174 innings and a return to normalcy for Gio Gonzalez with a 3.67 ERA and the same value to his team as Milwaukee's Mike Fiers.
As for the unprojectable R.A. Dickey? Canada won't want to hear this. The system sees a 38-year-old moving to a tough division in the tougher league and projects 224 innings of a 4.41 ERA with a below .500 record. But then, R.A.'s beaten the odds before.
This is the kind of conjecture we have at our disposal as pitchers and catchers loosen up in Florida and Arizona.
.224/.313/.371 with 14 HR in 470 plate appearances for the Mariners this season. With weak baserunning and slightly below average defense, Smoak grades out essentially to replacement-level at first base, even after factoring in the park he plays in.
In other words, you can pick up any old Tom, Dick or Justin Smoak off the waiver wire and expect about the same production.
Add in the missing 150 plate appearances, which suggest either an injury or a demotion; in either case his contribution during those 30 games is zero.
By comparison, to which the previous post alludes, Matt Wieters's forecast comes in at .259/.330/.422 with 19 HR in 588 plate appearances while dinging him slightly on defense behind the plate. Wieters is worth a pair of wins against replacement in this forecast, which makes him a solid regular but not a star.
These are projections, not predictions, so even if Smoak breaks out and Wieters breaks down, the system can't be said to be "wrong." (In fact, the system includes the odds of breakout and collapse as well, but the math is obtuse.) It just means that players who have performed the way these two have at their ages in the past have tended to perform like the projection going forward.
According to BP's projection system, the top 10 players offensively in 2013 will be:
- Albert Pujols
- Joey Votto
- Ryan Braun
- Miguel Cabrera
- Mike Trout
- Troy Tulowitzki
- Adrian Gonzalez
- Andrew McCutcheon
- Robinson Cano
It's also interesting to see the system projecting a return to stardom for Hanley Ramirez, whom it ranks as the 21st best offensive player. That is based on the Dodgers leaving him at short and giving Dee Gordon the seasoning he needs in Albuquerque.
The system also sees a return to relevance for newly shorn Tim Lincecum with a 3.10 ERA in 174 innings and a return to normalcy for Gio Gonzalez with a 3.67 ERA and the same value to his team as Milwaukee's Mike Fiers.
As for the unprojectable R.A. Dickey? Canada won't want to hear this. The system sees a 38-year-old moving to a tough division in the tougher league and projects 224 innings of a 4.41 ERA with a below .500 record. But then, R.A.'s beaten the odds before.
This is the kind of conjecture we have at our disposal as pitchers and catchers loosen up in Florida and Arizona.
08 February 2013
Now You See Him; Now You Don't
"Past results are not indicative of future returns."
It's the standard caveat rolled out by every mutual fund, after touting its polymath insights and market-beating deliverables. And it's part of the fine print we ignore while pouring our life savings into Bernie Madoff's trough, or the Parkcentral Hedge Fund.
The retirement this week of Brandon Webb reminds us that everyone who makes a living firing a baseball overhand should wear a tag with the same warning.
Webb is a strong-armed, 230-pound right-hander who commanded the mound from 2003-2008. He hurled more than 1300 innings over six years for the Diamondbacks to the tune of a 3.26 ERA, a Cy Young and two runner-ups. In short, he was a stud on a Hall of Fame path.
Then, in his first start of 2009, a funny thing happened to his shoulder. Well, not funny if you're Brandon Webb, or the guy cutting the checks owed to him for 2009 and 2010, which totaled $15 million. Four innings into the '09 season the Arizona workhorse was done for the year.
And for 2010.
And for 2011.
And for 2012.
And now, for evermore.
After five 200-frame seasons, the fraying of Brandon Webb's labrum and rotator cuff prevented him from tossing another MLB pitch. He tried a comeback in '11, but 12 unproductive Double-A innings put him back under the knife and on the DL.
Think back to Opening Day 2009. Brandon Webb's on the hill, arguably the best pitcher in the game entering his age-30 season. He wears consistency, sturdiness and reliability like a second glove. Any reasonable extrapolation of his career, even if you build in decline, suggests a solid return on investment.
And then, poof!
It's should serve as a a red flag to teams thinking of handing the car keys to their seemingly-indestructible ace pitchers. The Mariners are poised to guarantee Felix Hernandez a week of federal budget deficits for his next, undoubtedly awesome, seven years of service. If you were going to bet on anyone to deliver for that long, King Felix would be the guy.
But so was Bernie Madoff.
It's the standard caveat rolled out by every mutual fund, after touting its polymath insights and market-beating deliverables. And it's part of the fine print we ignore while pouring our life savings into Bernie Madoff's trough, or the Parkcentral Hedge Fund.
The retirement this week of Brandon Webb reminds us that everyone who makes a living firing a baseball overhand should wear a tag with the same warning.
Webb is a strong-armed, 230-pound right-hander who commanded the mound from 2003-2008. He hurled more than 1300 innings over six years for the Diamondbacks to the tune of a 3.26 ERA, a Cy Young and two runner-ups. In short, he was a stud on a Hall of Fame path.
Then, in his first start of 2009, a funny thing happened to his shoulder. Well, not funny if you're Brandon Webb, or the guy cutting the checks owed to him for 2009 and 2010, which totaled $15 million. Four innings into the '09 season the Arizona workhorse was done for the year.
And for 2010.
And for 2011.
And for 2012.
And now, for evermore.
After five 200-frame seasons, the fraying of Brandon Webb's labrum and rotator cuff prevented him from tossing another MLB pitch. He tried a comeback in '11, but 12 unproductive Double-A innings put him back under the knife and on the DL.
Think back to Opening Day 2009. Brandon Webb's on the hill, arguably the best pitcher in the game entering his age-30 season. He wears consistency, sturdiness and reliability like a second glove. Any reasonable extrapolation of his career, even if you build in decline, suggests a solid return on investment.
And then, poof!
It's should serve as a a red flag to teams thinking of handing the car keys to their seemingly-indestructible ace pitchers. The Mariners are poised to guarantee Felix Hernandez a week of federal budget deficits for his next, undoubtedly awesome, seven years of service. If you were going to bet on anyone to deliver for that long, King Felix would be the guy.
But so was Bernie Madoff.
06 February 2013
Blowing Smoak at Reporters
Let's engage in a little hypothetical hijinks.
Let's suppose your friend complained to you that he didn't understand why Oriole backstop Matt Wieters is selected to the All-Star squad while Mariner first-sacker Justin Smoak is considered a flop. The two are contemporaries from the Charleston, SC area and former first round picks in the MLB draft. Consequently they get compared 'round these parts.
After all. your companion notes, Smoak's 162-game average for the first four years of his career is a .223 BA with 21 HR and 71 RBI. Wieters' performance during the same period is .260, 21 & 79. It's a red pubic hair's difference, right?
Knowing the progressive sort that you are, no doubt you would patiently explain to your unenlightened friend that Smoak has managed to stay on the field more than 130 games in a season just once while Wieters has done so three times. You would point out that Triple Crown stats were demonstrated 33 years ago to be woefully inadequate to the storytelling task and that the difference in OPS, .749-.683 in favor of Wieters, is not insubstantial.
You would further mention that Smoak is a lumbering first baseman, the lowest form of defensive player this side of the DH, and Wieters is a Gold Glove catcher, the most grueling position on the field. More to the point, the two should be compared to hitters at opposite ends of the offensive spectrum -- Wieters to catchers and Smoak to first basemen. Viewed against their position-mates, Wieters has been worth eight-and-a-half wins compared to a replacement level catcher while Smoak IS a replacement level first baseman.
And that's just the offensive side of the equation. Accounting for their glovework takes the former to 14.7 wins against replacement in four years and the latter down to 2.7 wins BELOW replacement. In other words, an All-Star and a bust.
Sadly, you were not around to apprise the author of this story in my local paper of such considerations. And so, a professional journalist, whose area of expertise is supposedly sports, managed to pen this stunning piece of ignorance. He will not be fired or reprimanded or even educated because no one at his paper has the slightest awareness that they are living in the Dark Ages.
And none of his knowledge-challenged colleagues or editors will be fired, reprimanded or educated themselves because neither their colleagues at other newspapers in South Carolina, or in the Southeast, or nearly anywhere, nor their TV or radio counterparts, nor virtually anyone else who is considered a sports reporter or commentator or analyst has the slightest idea about the advances in their field since they stopped learning anything new back in 1974.
And so they continue to peck out tripe like this on their IBM Selectrics, completely oblivious to the development in the interim of the IBM Wheelwriter, word processor, personal computer, smartphone and tablet. They are the Amish of journalism, refusing to adopt advancements of science and technology, continuing to view the game as their great-grandfathers did with horses and buggy metrics.
Thirty-three years since Bill James's first Baseball Abstract. It'll be 34 years in March.
Let's suppose your friend complained to you that he didn't understand why Oriole backstop Matt Wieters is selected to the All-Star squad while Mariner first-sacker Justin Smoak is considered a flop. The two are contemporaries from the Charleston, SC area and former first round picks in the MLB draft. Consequently they get compared 'round these parts.
After all. your companion notes, Smoak's 162-game average for the first four years of his career is a .223 BA with 21 HR and 71 RBI. Wieters' performance during the same period is .260, 21 & 79. It's a red pubic hair's difference, right?
Knowing the progressive sort that you are, no doubt you would patiently explain to your unenlightened friend that Smoak has managed to stay on the field more than 130 games in a season just once while Wieters has done so three times. You would point out that Triple Crown stats were demonstrated 33 years ago to be woefully inadequate to the storytelling task and that the difference in OPS, .749-.683 in favor of Wieters, is not insubstantial.
You would further mention that Smoak is a lumbering first baseman, the lowest form of defensive player this side of the DH, and Wieters is a Gold Glove catcher, the most grueling position on the field. More to the point, the two should be compared to hitters at opposite ends of the offensive spectrum -- Wieters to catchers and Smoak to first basemen. Viewed against their position-mates, Wieters has been worth eight-and-a-half wins compared to a replacement level catcher while Smoak IS a replacement level first baseman.
And that's just the offensive side of the equation. Accounting for their glovework takes the former to 14.7 wins against replacement in four years and the latter down to 2.7 wins BELOW replacement. In other words, an All-Star and a bust.
Sadly, you were not around to apprise the author of this story in my local paper of such considerations. And so, a professional journalist, whose area of expertise is supposedly sports, managed to pen this stunning piece of ignorance. He will not be fired or reprimanded or even educated because no one at his paper has the slightest awareness that they are living in the Dark Ages.
And none of his knowledge-challenged colleagues or editors will be fired, reprimanded or educated themselves because neither their colleagues at other newspapers in South Carolina, or in the Southeast, or nearly anywhere, nor their TV or radio counterparts, nor virtually anyone else who is considered a sports reporter or commentator or analyst has the slightest idea about the advances in their field since they stopped learning anything new back in 1974.
And so they continue to peck out tripe like this on their IBM Selectrics, completely oblivious to the development in the interim of the IBM Wheelwriter, word processor, personal computer, smartphone and tablet. They are the Amish of journalism, refusing to adopt advancements of science and technology, continuing to view the game as their great-grandfathers did with horses and buggy metrics.
Thirty-three years since Bill James's first Baseball Abstract. It'll be 34 years in March.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)