 |
 |
|
January 31, 2005
Outs to Runs
Permalink Chronicles of the lads is working on converting the Probabilistic Model of Range numbers to runs. Start with the previous link and work forward in time. Update: It's open source basebal research! Knee Deep
Permalink If you're planning a trip to Arizona to see Barry Bonds swat home runs, you need to go in late March. Bonds will be recovering over the next six weeks from knee surgery. Rearranging the Divisions
Permalink Baseball Think Factory links to an article in which Jim Bowden suggests that divisions should be arranged by revenue so that more teams have a shot at the post season. It's not really a bad idea, although revenue shouldn't be the standard. There are low revenue teams that do win, after all. I like the way the NFL picks interdivision opponents based on the previous season's records. So a bad team that gets suddenly good has an easy schedule to plow through. I suggested something along these lines for baseball last summer. The divisions would rearrange every season based on the previous season's record. The best teams would be thrown together, the worst teams would be thrown together and that would give everyone a shot at the playoffs. Sometimes you just have to mix the gene pool. Probabilistic Model of Range, Centerfielders
Permalink Here is the table lising 2004 centerfielders on the field for 1000 balls in play.
The first thing I notice is that Andruw Jones is very good and Bernie Williams is very bad. So in this case the system appears to be getting the end points right. The thing that really surprises me is the equality of Biggio and Beltran. Here's a table comparing them just with the Astros:
Beltran was much better with the Astros than Biggio; his poor fielding was a result of his time with Kansas City last year.
So the question for the Mets is, which Beltran will show up in centerfield next season? Neither is better than Cameron, and one is a lot worse. The Price of Sosa
Permalink Ivy Chat has a good handle on how much the Sosa trade is costing each side in terms of Sammy's salary. Thoughts on Range
Permalink There's a great discussion of the Probabilistic Model of Range going on at Dodger Thoughts. I was going to leave the following comment, but I keep getting an error so I'll leave it here. I think it's important to realize that I'm not measuring total defense here, I'm simply trying to measure range. So turning double plays is important, but I'm not trying to measure that here. Phillies Phielding
Permalink Tom G likes what the Probabilistic Model of Range is telling him about the Phillies defense and the composition of the pitching staff. Nomar Trade
Permalink Edward Cossette and others have raised objections to my characterization of the Nomar deal (see comments). Edward writes: To me, your data only confirms the veracity to Theo's reasoning that defense was the reason for the trade. I'm willing to admit that Edward has a point. So I'm going to step back from my earlier statement and look at the numbers again. There are two things I look at as a stat guy. One is the number, the second is the context. A month and a half is a short time frame for an evaluation. Anything can happen in 100 or so AB (look at Jeter's April hitting numbers). And anything can happen on 100 ground balls or so. Nomar came back rusty. You can see it in his June hitting numbers. But by July he had recovered his swing. Why wouldn't his fielding numbers come back also? He did show range improvement in July, but his numbers were still poor. What was the context for believing the small sample size of poor fielding numbers were valid? And I will admit that I haven't looked at context either. One is the context of his injury. I don't know how well the injury healed. It was good enough that he could hit well, but not good enough that he could play everyday. Obviously, the Cubs thought the injury healed well enough that they were willing to take Nomar in trade. It's possible that the Red Sox thought that Nomar's poor range would not improve due to the tenderness of his foot. That proved to be incorrect. The other is the long term context of Nomar's fielding. Were his poor fielding numbers the continuation of a trend? This one I can research. Yes, it was the continuation of a trend. In both 2002 and 2003, Nomar ranked near the bottom of the pack in PMR for shortstops on the field for 1000 balls in play. In 2002, he ranked 31 out of 36. In 2003, he ranked 28 of 38. Was his range costing the Red Sox outs? Yes. Nomar's offense, however, was making up for his defense. He did earn 52 win shares over 2002-2003. So, with Nomar's offense fine, did Theo really believe that Nomar's defense was costing them that much? Remember, the difference between a really great defensive shortstop and a really bad defensive shortstop over a full full season is 2 or 3 wins. And while Cabrera was good, he wasn't great. So you're talking about maybe 1 win defensively with Cabrera playing instead of Garciaparra. That doesn't seem to me to justify a trade on defense, especially when it's not a long term solution. As it turns out, Nomar earned 1.7 defensive win shares with the Cubs, and Cabrera earned 1.7 with the Red Sox. Overall, Nomar had 6 win shares with the Cubs, Cabrera 5 with the Red Sox. The tangible evidence says the Red Sox would have done about the same with Nomar or Cabrera at short. The tangible evidence says defense wasn't that important. The tangible evidence says the Red Sox drew the wrong conclusion from 1 1/2 months of fielding data. The intangible evidence says it was a great trade. Theo trades, runs allowed per game go down, runs scored per game go up and the Red Sox win the World Series. And every once in a while, Soriano swings at a low outside pitch and hits a home run. It's about process. Maybe this trade was about changing the personality of the team. That's fine, but I'd like to be told that rather than some fluff about defense. Maybe it was just that the Red Sox didn't want Nomar long term and tried to get what they could for him. There's nothing wrong with any of that, but they would have been rid of Garciaparra by the end of the year anyway. Here's what I believe. Theo didn't go to ownership and say, "We have to trade Nomar because he's killing us defensively." I believe ownership came to Theo and said, "Get what you can for Nomar, and find a way to justify it." And yes, that's pure speculation. But I know Theo is a very smart guy and knows about sample sizes. I know he has a very good handle on the value of defense vs. offense. And knowing that, the explanation for the deal does not make sense to me.
January 30, 2005
Probabilistic Model of Range, Second Basemen
Permalink Here's the table for major league second basemen in 2004. Again, fielders are included if they were on the field for 1000 balls in play.
Like the shortstops it wasn't a good fielding season for the second basemen overall. This table does give some credence to the idea that Jeff Kent is a better fielder than conventional wisdom says. I hope someday to improve this program to a point where it's similar to whatever DePodesta uses. This list should also make Phillies fans happy. They appear to have two of best in Utley and Polanco. And while Nick Green didn't add much to the Atlanta offense, he ate up balls at 2nd last season. At the other end of the scale, the Yankees look like they actually upgraded their range at second replacing Cairo with Womack. And if defense is so important to the Red Sox, I wonder how long Mark Bellhorn will last at 2nd. What a Catch!
Permalink Mike Piazza was married Saturday to Alicia Rickter of Playboy and Baywatch fame. I guess this means he's not gay. Not that there's anything wrong with that. :-)
January 29, 2005
Probabilistic Model of Range, Shortstops
Permalink It's time to start looking at individual players. We'll start with the position to get the most opportunities, the shortstops. As the following table shows, it wasn't a great season for these middle infielders.
One hypothesis for the overall poor play by shortstops in 2004 is the aging of the big players. Vizquel, Jeter, Garciaparra and Tejada are not youngsters anymore. A-Rod moving out of the position hurt also. All of these players will be a year older in 2005; it will be interesting to see if there is further decline in the position as a whole. It looks like the Nationals got a decent vacuum cleaner at short with their signing of Christian Guzman. With all the talk about Rich Aurilia being old and broken down, he did a very good job fielding. It also appears that the Angels got a nice upgrade replacing Eckstein with Cabrera. If Eck fields like that for the Cardinals, don't expect that team to be number one in defense again next season. Pokey Reese, who was supposed to spend most of his time at 2nd base before the Nomar Garciaparra injury, had the best range at shortstop in the majors in 2004. Nomar was down near the bottom. This gives us a chance to evaluate the Red Sox shortstops.
So if we go back to the Garciaparra/Cabrera trade, we can now see it in it's full light. It wasn't that the Red Sox defense had been bad all year; it's that it was bad with Nomar at shortstop. With Reese injured, Boston figured they needed another fielder at the position. However, Boston may have jumped the gun. There's some evidence that Nomar was just rusty. Compare Nomar with Cabrera after the trade:
So after the trade, Garciaparra had better range than Cabrera. Yes, Cabrera was able to play more. The uncertainty of Nomar's future health was certainly a factor in the deal. But given Nomar's play the rest of the way, Boston could have done without the trade and been just as good on defense, with Crespo or Reese (once he got off the DL) spelling Nomar occasionally. I felt at the time that defense was an excuse to move a player the Red Sox no longer wanted. This data does nothing to change my mind on the matter. Probabilistic Model of Range
Permalink I've been working on the software for this during the week, and have acquired updated ball in play data as well. I'm now ready to go full bore with the study. First, however, an update of a couple of tables shown previously. The good people at Baseball Info Solutions have been busy recording batted ball information this winter to complete the database, and that new data is included in the following table. This should replace the table found here.
The order of team changes a bit, but not much. It still looks like a poor defensive season overall. The other chart to update had to do with performance behind pitchers, and that's updated in the extended entry. K-Mart Special
Permalink The Chicago Sun-Times has more on the Sosa trade story, speculating that Jorge Julio might be in the deal as well. Julio does one thing well, strike out batters. Unfortunately, he also does two things not so well; he walks a lot of batters and gives up a lot of home runs. Hairston or Julio (or both with Farnsworth going to the Orioles as well), this deal is a give away. The Cubs are basically paying the Orioles to take Sosa off their hands. I wonder why more clubs aren't jumping in? According to the numbers in the article, it looks like a club can have Sosa for a marginal major leaguer, two prospospects and $17 million dollars in salary for two seasons. The upside is that Sosa hits 80 HR with a .360 OBA over two seasons and you get to promote Sammy chasing 600 HR, then Mays, then 700 if you decide to keep him. The downside is that you get 30 HR this year and 25 the next with more injuries and declining skills. It looks like Baltimore is willing to take the risk. It will all depend on who they deal as prospects, I suppose, but Peter Schmuck sees parallels in another deal: If the AL East is all about star power, than Sammy might be just the thing to boost the Orioles into the spotlight alongside the Yankees and Red Sox ... if he has anything left. Actually, if Sosa comes anything close to Albert's 1999, it will look like a very good deal for the Orioles.
January 28, 2005
Orange Sosa?
Permalink There's an unconfirmed report that Sammy Sosa is being traded to the Orioles. It looks like the Cubs will get Jerry Hairston and two prospects and still have to pay most of Sosa's 2005 salary. Unless these prospects turn out to be Trammell and Whitaker, it doesn't sound like a great deal for the Cubs. Hairston had a good year getting on base in 2004, but Sosa has 11 seasons in which he's had more HR than Hairston's had in his career (26). More when we know more. Three Beane Soup
Permalink Athletics Nation has a three part interview with Billy Beane, starting here. The Baseball Crank links to the interview and pulls out his favorite excerpts, if you don't have time to read the whole thing. It appears that Mr. Beane reads blogs and has high praise for them. I've always felt this incredible support from the cyber-world. We joke about it. Myself and Paul (DePodesta). The one thing I have that Paul hasn't really acquired yet in Los Angeles 'cause it takes time, is that kind of support. . . . [Getting beyond knee-jerk reactions is] what I love, for lack of a better word, about the blogger's world. There is a tendency to really analyze things in detail. Ultimately, because there is so much conversation and investigation on a site like yours, people may not ultimately agree with it, but they stumble onto what you're trying to do. Someone emailed me something written on a Cardinals' blog, and they had nailed all the things we were talking about. The economic reasons, the personnel reasons and the reasons we made the exchange. The world of a Web log will lend itself to a lot of investigation. And you will often stumble across the answer more than someone who has to write in two hours to meet deadline just to make sure something is out in the paper the next day. Sick Jay
Permalink Jay Jaffe lets loose on the Yankees at Futility Infielder. I'm in agreement on so many things it's difficult to pick one out, but this one's my favorite: I'm sick of being told how much better off the Yankees were with Tino Martinez than they are with Jason Giambi, and that they should have never let beloved Tino leave because gosh darn it, he's a team guy, and this team doesn't have the team guy thing like the Yanks did when Buster Olney's heroes roamed the House That Ruth Built, and that now that Tino's back he's going to show these new Yankees how to win and zzzzz.... And don't miss his take on the Yankees concept of a farm system. You'll really dig it. :-) Left Out
Permalink Sabernomics has noticed an anomaly among Hispanic baseball players; there are fewer lefties and he's wondering why. Maybe non-Hispanic switch-hitters are more likely to give up batting from the right side than Hispanics? This was my first thought, but the fact that the shortage of lefties occurs among pitchers as well leads me to think its something on the Hispanic side. In fact, due to the shortage of left-handed Hispanic pitchers, there are greater returns to becoming a switch-hitter if you are playing in Latin America (assuming the left-right ratio is the same as in MLB). It strikes me that to measure actual left-handedness you have to look at throwing arms. I've always thought that handedness was backwards when it came to batting. When you're young, you're told to pull the bat, not push. A righty pulls the bat with his left hand. Maybe that's why it's relatively easy to learn to bat from the other side. Switching makes your dominant side the pulling side. But it strikes me as rather difficult to learn to throw from the other side. So a good measure of the number of true lefties is a player's throwing arm. Using the Lahman database, and basing the calculation on birth country, I get 12.5% Hispanic lefties in the majors in 2004, 23.0% lefties among all other players. Is it genetics or culture? These countries don't strike me as so isolated that lefties would be forced out of the gene pool. There is anecdotal evidence that there's a cultural element. I have a good friend who is a lefty from Puerto Rico, so I wrote to ask him about the Sabernomics post. His reply: Being a lefty in Puerto Rico was not easy. It was not tolerated very well when I grew up, maybe now it is. All efforts are made to avoid it and this perhaps explains my ambidexterity: I throw and bat righty. Maybe someone can poll right-handed Hispanics and find out how many are natural lefties. Even just polling the right-handed throwing switch hitters might be enough to explain the difference. Barry Bye-Bye
Permalink It looks like Barry Larkin is about to retire. Larkin's doing a number of non-baseball activities this winter: None of those pursuits, you might notice, have anything to do with playing shortstop in the major leagues. Larkin has not had a great season this decade. Although it appears that some teams would like to employee him, he's not comfortable playing anywhere but Cincinnati: But Larkin still expressed a desire to play shortstop every day for someone and vowed to explore his options. As it turned out, most of the discussions he had about playing somewhere other than his hometown were internal. Larkin is one of a handful of recent retirees who will have spent his career with just one club (Gwynn, Puckett, Ripken, Yount, Brett, etc). It's loyalty that you don't see much from players or management anymore. With any luck, Barry will get a job with the organization. Of course, this doesn't help: If Larkin sounds relaxed, it's because he is. He takes a tongue-in-cheek poke at the "youth movement that I was told was going to happen" evolving into the Reds signing thirtysomething veterans like Joe Randa, Rich Aurilia, Kent Mercker and David Weathers this offseason. Then again, Larkin turns 41 this April, which would make nearly everyone around him in any baseball clubhouse a relative youngster. I have to agree with Barry on that one. Durability likely cost Barry Larkin a place in the Hall of Fame. In 19 seasons, he only played 150 games four times. Injuries cost him around 700 games; since he averaged better than a hit a game during his career, it's likely he would have had 3000 hits playing 150 games a season. He was good at getting on base, showed power for a shortstop (before the power boom of the 1990's) and knew how to steal a base. He stole 379 bases in 456, good for an astronomical 83.1% success rate. If the counters were higher, he'd be going to Cooperstown.
January 27, 2005
Dream Come True
Permalink Eric Brown has a blog about spending a week at Mets Fantasy Camp. (Hat tip SaberMets.) Be sure to read about his great AB vs. John Stearns. Bended Knee
Permalink There are lots of Joe Mauer knee bending sightings over at Batgirl.
January 26, 2005
Another Local Team!
Permalink Independent Thinking notes that Worcester, MA will have an independent league team in 2005. My mother-in-law lives just outside the city, so we'll probably catch some games there this summer. Replacement Value
Permalink Sabernomics is looking for information on calculating the true value of a replacement player. He argues that it should not be league minimum. Regardless of exact magnitude of the exploitation, certainly we can say the that teams receive more in value from reserved players than the wage they pay out to these players. To acquire a replacement-level player from another team will require compensating the team with reserve rights for the value lost. Therefore, it is incorrect to say that the purchase price of a replacement-level player is equal to the league minimum. Raul Mondesi is not reserved, and therefore does not suffer from the monopsonistic exploitation of a particular team. He is going to receive more compensation for his services than a reserved player. The question is, with the exploitation removed, how much should he be paid for the services (MRP) he will provide? While I don't have an answer, I have some ideas of where to start looking but have not thought it through. I would like to ask readers to lend me your suggestions in the comments section on a way to estimate the actual price of a replacement-level player. If you have any thoughts, leave a comment on his blog. Sabermetric Tracking
Permalink Red Sox Stats is a site that tracks sabermetric numbers for the Red Sox and their minor leaguers. It also maintains stats for all major league players. A useful reference. I also learn from the site that the Mets got their second choice, trading for Boston first baseman Doug Mientkiewicz. Boston may have picked the Mets pocket here. They get single-A first baseman Ian Bladergroen (what a great name!). Ian had a great season before a wrist injury sidelined him. Red Sox Stats lists the Sabermetric numbers for the duo, and Ian looks much better offensively than Doug. In a couple of seasons, this could turn out to be a very good trade for Boston. Meanwhile, the Mets go from wanting one of the premier sluggers in the game to one of the premier defensive players. Doug's had an excellent OBA in the past; he needs to get it back in the .370 range to contribute offensively. He's never been a power hitter, and Shea will only make that worse. He's there to catch the ball. Update: The Baseball Crank has more on the trade, and a lot more information on Ian Bladergroen.
January 25, 2005
Gone Fishin'
Permalink Carlos Delgado has agreed to a deal with the Marlins which should net him close to $13 million a season for at least four years. A nice pickup for the Marlins. The Marlins got 14 win shares out of their first basemen last year. Delgado contributed 17 in a partial season. Delgado is one of those great hitters who both gets on base and hits for power. This gives the Marlins a fairly fearsome middle of the order with Delgado, Lowell and Cabrera. If Lo Duca and Pierre can get on base decently, the Fish should fly across the plate. It also puts Delgado closer to his home of Puerto Rico, which probably helped. However, expect his home run totals to go down as Dolphin Stadium is a tough home run park, especially on lefties. A Friend in Need
Permalink Baseball Think Factory has opened up a thread on Larry Mahnken's disaster. Larry writes Replacement Level Yankees Blog as well as contributing to The Hardball Times. He's also a frequent and excellent commentor on this site. Larry lost everything in a fire at his apartment building last night. If you can spare anything, visit his blog and click his PayPal button. Iguchi Goochy Goo
Permalink The White Sox are about to add Tadahito Iguchi to their roster, their second Japanese import in two seasons. Iguchi will play second base. At SoxFest earlier this month, Williams told a crowd of about 1,000 fans that the way they embraced reliever Shingo Takatsu last season was a big topic of discussion among Japanese players looking to play in the major leagues. I don't know about that. My guess is that there wasn't as much interest as Iguchi might have believed. Take a look at Tadahito's stats. There's a huge jump in production at age 28, way out of line with the rest of his career. Why? This post suggests that shoulder surgery corrected a problem. I've never heard of surgery making you that much better, especially a few years into your career. I'm very skeptical of this player's last two seasons being real. This paragraph especially made me laugh. The signing continues the Sox' overhaul by adding more speed. They likely have become the fastest team in the major leagues. Iguchi and Podsednik make you the fastest team in the majors? I tend to equate speed with youth or Rickey Henderson. Podesnick is 29, Iguchi 30. Speedy Jermaine Dye is 31. Pierzynski is a catcher, so I doubt there's much speed there. Juan Uribe is young, but look how his base stealing deteriorated under Guillen! He was 19 for 23 through 2003, 9 for 20 in 2004. Picking your spots is much more important to successful base stealing than raw speed. And all that speed doesn't matter if you're players don't get on base. Again, I don't believe Iguchi's last two seasons are real. I think he'll be lucky to do as well as Kaz Matsui did in 2004 with a .331 OBA. That's not a great number for a #2 hitter. Podsednik had one great year and one bad year; he did draw a decent amount of walks in the minors, but his OBA was only around 340. I have to believe his bad year is closer to his actual abilities. Uribe has a .307 career OBA. Dye hasn't had a good OBA since 2001. These guys better be fast, because they're going to need to cover a lot of ground the few times they get on base. I'm sorry, I don't see a fast team here. I see a team that's stocking up on players just past their primes, who never had great primes in the first place. They'll need a lot of power from Konerko, Thomas and Everett to overcome the lack of baserunners due to the speedsters.
January 24, 2005
Asterisks?
Permalink Here's one way to handle records set while using steroids. :-) Behind the Pitcher
Permalink Update: I have improved data for the models, so I've updated the tables in a new post. They are in the extended entry. The order changes a little, but not enough to make a big difference. Something easy for me to do with the software I'm developing is to look at the defense behind particular pitchers with the Probabilistic Model of Range. The following chart lists every pitcher with at least 300 balls in play against him for a particular team.
The thing that struck me when I looked at this table was Curt Schilling at the top and Derek Lowe very close to the bottom. On the same team, with pretty much the same defense, Schilling received 28 more outs that expected (that's a whole nine innings worth of outs) and Lowe missed almost as many, -25. So what's going on? Here's a closer look at the pitchers on the Red Sox.
If there's a pattern here, I'm not sure what it is, except that Wakefield and Lowe had the lowest K per 9 in this group. What we really could be seeing is how pitchers effect the balls in play. It could simply be that the balls put into play against Schilling are easier to field than the balls put into play against Lowe! Voros McCracken's theory is that a pitcher has little to do with a ball in play being turned into an out. Tom Tippet found that that's not really the case, although the effect by the pitcher is small. (Links to both found here.) Maybe we've found a way to quantify that contribution. Of course, it could be all luck. Lowe had a very positive number last year. Schilling was on the plus side, but only by about 6 outs in 2003. Looks like a whole new line of study is opening. Maybe He Wanted to be on the Cubs?
Permalink Nina Maxwell writes: I thought this would be of interest to your readers--Florida Marlins pitcher Al Leiter teamed up with 1-800 Flowers and eBay to auction off a handmade teddy bear this week, and all the bid proceeds go directly to Save the Children. This is a wonderful charity doing great work particularly now, in light of devastating world events. Check it out--it's for a great cause! http://www.1800flowers.com/celebrityteddybears Baseball Musings is always happy to help out with a good cause. I wonder why he's not in a Marlins uniform? Age Old Problems
Permalink The Astros signing ancient reliever John Franco prompts Mike's Baseball Rants to explore teams with old rosters. He looks at the teams with the most 40 year-olds on the roster. Not a lot of successful teams in the list although the 1958 Yankees won the World Series with four forty year olds. Carlos Caravan
Permalink SaberMets has the latest news on the Carlos Delgado sweepstakes. More Range
Permalink As always, I'm getting very good feedback on a Probabilistic Model of Range post. I wanted to address some of the questions. I know we discussed this last year, but I forget the answer: is this data adjusted for ballpark? Ballparks are a parameter of the calculation. The adjustment is built in, rather than added later. For those of us interested in tracking stats and info but unable to wrap their brains around the math and the various acronyms, is there a way to turn the results into something simpler? The simplest way to look at it is to just concentrate on the last column. A negative number means the team performed below expectations. A positive number means they exceeded expectations. Thanks for running your system. I'm confused about the team out totals. It seems that if you add all the teams up, they collectively fielded close to 900 fewer balls than they should have. It's possible that I'm 900 balls short. There can be two reasons for this:
I've run checks and my code looks correct. Given that there were over 120,000 balls in play last season, 900 should not make a big difference in terms of the team averages. This is centered on the three-year average, which is why teams look like they were below average in 2004. Once again, thanks for the feedback.
January 23, 2005
Probabilistic Model of Range
Permalink Update: I have improved data for the models, so I've updated the table in a new post. The order changes a little, but not enough to make a big difference. Sorry, I hit the save instead of the preview button for this post. An explanation will be added shortly.
Explanation: Last year, I worked on a way of measuring range which I called a Probabilistic Model of Range (see the defense archives). I was basically repeating work done by Mitchel Lichtman which he named the Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR). Since Mitchel's work was more mature than mine, and since I had to write new software because the source of my data changed, I did not puruse these ranking for the 2004 season. However, I just learned that Mr. Lichtman is working for the Cardinals (congratulations, Mike!) and won't be publishing his results anymore. There's a niche to fill, so here it goes. I calculate the probability of a ball being turned into an out based on six parameters:
For each ball in play, the program sums the probability of that ball being turned into an out, and that gives us the expected outs. Dividing that by balls in play yields expected defensive efficiency rating (DER). That is compared to the team's actual DER. A good defensive team should have a better DER than it's expected DER. There are differences between this year's and last year's calculation. I'm now using three years of data instead of just one. Also, Baseball Info Solution charts balls differently that STATS, Inc. so there are many more vectors that in the previous system. I believe that actually improves the calculation. Finally, the numbers above are approximate; my database is from early October, and BIS had not input every ball in play yet. Still, it should be enough to get a feel for how good teams were on defense in 2004. The first thing to notice from the table is that it was a poor defensive season overall. Only four teams had a better DER than predicted by the model. The Cardinals and Red Sox were 1-2, and ended up the World Series. The Angels were last, but also made the playoffs. The Yankees continued their abysmal defense, while the Mets high ranking should help explain why so many of their pitchers had better ERAs than DIPS ERAs. The next step is to use this method to evaluate individual fielders. Watch for that in upcoming posts. Update: Just in case I wasn't clear on this, the model is built on three years data, but the chart above is just for 2004. Correction: Corrected the spelling of Mitchel Lichtman's name.Posted by StatsGuru at 01:38 PM
|
Defense • |
Probabilistic Model of Range
| Comments (24)
| TrackBack (5)
January 22, 2005
One More Year
Permalink Here's a more complete take on Roger Clemens returning to the Astros. The conventional wisdom was that Roger wouldn't come back unless the Astros signed Beltran. Looks like that was one-sided. Clemens said Carlos Beltran's decision to sign a seven-year, $119 million contract with the Mets rather than remain with Houston helped persuade him to play one more year. Clemens said he was "a little depressed" after Beltran spurned the Astros because he worried how that would adversely impact the team. And it looks like the fans had a big impact as well: Still, Clemens tried yesterday to distance himself from the hefty salary and joked about his phone "blowing up" with playful messages about his arbitration figure. It was not about money, Clemens said. It was about deciding if he could drag his body through another draining season. He said he thought he could. If you ask for $22 million, it's a bit about the money. :-)
January 21, 2005
Roger Returns
Permalink Roger Clemens will be back in an Astros uniform in 2005 as Houston and the fireballer split the arbitration numbers and agree to an $18 million contract. It's the highest salary for a pitcher ever, and the highest 1-year contract ever. What a way to end the year of the old pitcher! Steroid Links
Permalink Will Carroll provides a number of interesting steroid links (although the British Weight Lifting Study link at present points to another article). The rat study shows how tendons stiffen with steroid use; I wish, however, they had also shown the effects on the rats muscles. Dead Kennedys
Permalink Jean-Pierre Allard has the story on the renovations taking place at RFK stadium. It appears the Nationals are going all out to build a first-class playing surface. Braintrust
Permalink Alex Belth at Bronx Banter links to an article about the four young men working with Theo Epstein to help mold the Boston Red Sox. I'm sometimes asked what to study in college if you want a job in sports statistics. Given the diversity of the backgrounds of these four people, I guess my answer should be, "Whatever interests you. Just do it well."
January 20, 2005
Wager Wanders
Permalink Evan Brunell comments on an article indicating that the Florida Marlins are likely to move to Las Vegas. Good for the Florida legislature to refuse public funding for a new stadium. Florida, unlike a lot of other states, makes a ton of money off baseball through spring training. I doubt the Marlins and Devil Rays add that much more to the economy. I suppose if MLB really wanted the two teams to get new stadiums, they'd threaten to move Spring Training somewhere else. On the LIdge
Permalink Studes leaves a comment to this post on Win Probability Added. I didn't include specific team scoring in these stats. I took it out and inserted league-average offense instead. Well, win shares rates Lidge as the best reliever in baseball. Unless I'm misreading something, Lidge has 17 win shares, while Nathan in next at 16. Of course, there are many stats you could use to arrive at this decision. Lidge has a great relief ERA along with more innings than any reliever in the NL top 20. He blew away the competition in terms of inherited runners scored. So Lidge had a great ERA, pitched a lot of innings for a reliever and was exceptional at preventing runners on base from scoring. From these, one could make a good argument that he was the best reliever in the league last year. On top of that, Win Shares agrees. And of pitchers who faced over 300 batters, Lidge had the best DIPS ERA in the NL, 2nd only to K-Rod in the majors. WPA is a stat that favors middle relievers over closers because managers today use setup men in game critical situations. This does not mean that the setup man is a better pitcher; it just means that managers are misusing their staffs. As we saw this year, when someone excels in this role, they're turned into a closer. Lidge is less likely to do well in this stat in 2005, simply because he won't be used as much in situations with men on base and the score close. He'll also pitch fewer innings. It doesn't mean he still won't be the best reliever in baseball.
January 19, 2005
Resistance Is Futile
Permalink Jay Jaffe has a new link to The Futility Infielder homepage. Be sure to update your links. http://www.futilityinfielder.com/home.php Rating Relievers
Permalink Studes has an excellent study at The Hardball Times on ranking relief pitchers by Win Probability Added (WPA) (hat tip, Sabernomics). Studes uses a method where he calculates the probability of winning the game when the pitcher enters and leaves the game. The difference is the WPA for that game. If the pitcher has done his job, the probability has gone up, and he gets a positive mark. If the pitcher has allowed too many runs, the probability goes down, and the pitcher gets a negative mark. Brad Lidge was the best reliever in the majors using this metric. I've seen this type of analysis used before to find clutch hitters (you do the same thing, except look at how the AB changed the team's probability of winning). What Studes is doing here is finding out who pitched well in clutch situations. I'm not convinced this tells us something we don't already know. If it's another way of measuring wins (or saves or holds), but we already know that's a team stat, effected by the offense as well as the pitcher. If it's another way of measuring clutch performance, you need to believe clutch performance exists to get any value from this stat. I believe that the best players tend to do well in clutch situations; that's why they are the best players. I very interested to see how well this holds up from year-to-year. Incredible Design
Permalink Andrew Olmsted, a long time supporter of Baseball Musings, has a new look to his blog. Stop by and say hi. Correction: Fixed a typo. Brave Scouts
Permalink No Pepper links to an interview with Roy Clark, the scouting director of the Atlanta Braves. I thought this quote sums up why I like the Braves front office so much: Patrick Ebert: Speaking of some of the other scouting directors out there, do you ever watch what other scouting departments are doing and try to blend those ideas into what you’re doing? The Braves are always looking for a way to get better in every part of their organization. Exchanging Figures
Permalink The Transaction Guy has the list of players facing arbitration and what value each side puts on a 2005 contract. Most are pretty close. An interesting one is Casey Fossum. He's asking for $1.35 million, while Arizona is offering $800,000. Fossum was the 2nd unluckiest pitcher in the majors last year according to DIPS. I wonder if Casey's agent is aware of that? To Move or Not To Move
Permalink Mike Cameron has broken his silence on the Mets decision to move him to right field: Cameron, whose reservations about moving to right field had made him the subject of trade discussions, announced last night that he is now preparing to switch to right after all, a revelation that should keep the two-time Gold Glover in New York. Later he added: "I had reservations about it for the simple reason of I've never done it before," said Cameron, who did not exactly sound thrilled about his new position last night. "The one thing we came to terms with [yesterday] was I'm here to do what's in the best interests of the ballclub and try to put this team back on the map." This appeared to be very important to the Mets, as a management contingent visited the former CF. On their way down to their Dominican Republic baseball facility, Jeff Wilpon, Omar Minaya, Jim Duquette, Tony Bernazard and Willie Randolph stopped to visit Cameron at his Atlanta home. Cameron said the meeting was critical and answered a multitude of questions he had about moving. The Mets thought it necessary, too, especially to let Cameron know, in Minaya's words, "We don't take a change like [switching positions] for granted."
January 18, 2005
A Whopper
Permalink Roger Clemens has submitted a figure of $22 million dollars to arbitration. He earned $5 million last year, and has never earned more than $10.3 million in a season. The Astros offered 13.5 million, putting the mid-point at $18.25 million. In my opinion, Clemens is saying that if the Astros really want him back, they're going to need to pay him a truckload of money. I have little doubt the Astros would win the arbitration case. Randy Johnson is a better pitcher and he's making $16 million this year. My guess is that if the Astros push the arbitration and Clemens loses, he won't pitch. The Astros will probably have to make Clemens the highest paid pitcher in the history of the game to keep him in a Houston uniform. Update: Of course, Clemens gave the Astros a gift in 2004, pitching at a Cy Young level for only $5 million. If he were to agree to an $18 million contract for 2005, the Astros really got him for $23 million for two years, which is still a pretty good deal for a pitcher of that quality. Bird Squawks
Permalink Soccer Dad criticizes the Orioles owner for a lack of patience. Working Back
Permalink Alex Belth relays a trickle of information on Jason Giambi. There's a good discussion in the comments as well. DIPS Ahead
Permalink Jay Jaffe at Fultility Infielder has completed a Defense Independent Pitching Statistics (DIPS) study of 2004. Great work as always by Jay with help from Larry Mahnken, whose DIPS worksheet you can download here. Two columns I particularly like from the study are the Lower/Higher dERA than ERA columns; leader boards that point out who was unlucky and lucky in 2004. Looks like there were a number of Mets in the lucky (higher dERA) column. Leiter, Trachsel, V. Zambrano and Glavine all make the top 10. (Good defense and a tough park?) It also looks like unlucky Todd Van Poppel might be worth a look as a free agent. And of course, there's Derek Lowe, high on the list of unlucky pitchers. The Dodgers are counting on that pendulum to swing back. Enjoy! Grieveous Career
Permalink Scanning the list of available free agents today I noticed the name of Ben Grieve. Ben has been a puzzle to me since 1999. He had a great 1998, posting 22 win shares at age 22, his first full season in the majors. He leveled off at the 16-17 win share level for a few seasons, and has been in decline since. It has to be unusual for a player to have his best season at age 22, especially since his only real medical problem was during the 2003 season when he needed surgery to fix a blood clot in his shoulder. Ben's career OBA is .367, but his slugging percentage is an unremarkable .443. He does hit doubles, however. He also hits a ton of ground balls. Maybe that's the problem. His best home run seasons are the two in which he got the ball in the air the most. Still, it strikes me that he should be of some value to a team. He'd be a good #2 hitter. (AL #2 hitters averaged a .337 OBA and a .420 slugging percentage in 2004; NL .337 and .408). A fast artifical surface might help his grounders get through the infield. There aren't too many of those left, however. He seems like someone Toronto should want to pick up for under $1 million dollars. At age 29, he seems worth the risk.
January 17, 2005
Imagine If He Were Healthy
Permalink Albert Pujols' heel pain has returned. I didn't realize how much it bothered him last season.
Maybe if his heel was healthy he would have cracked the 100 extra-base barrier. He only had 99 in 2004. Finding a Home
Permalink Roberto Alomar has reached an agreement with the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, contingent on passing a physical. Alomar should be an improvement over Rey Sanchez. His back, however, wasn't in good shape over the winter. If Alomar has anything left, the Rays could have a very good offensive middle infield, especially if B.J. Upton lives up to his minor league numbers. Two Dips and a Dad
Permalink Larry Mahnken of the Hardball Times and the Replacement Level Yankees Weblog sends me a great tool, a DIPS worksheet. I'm also making it available by clicking here (it's a zip file). Larry's explanation: They're incredibly easy to use, and they feature Park Factors for every season since 1969. You can calculate a pitcher's entire career with them, using up to 30 team-seasons (more than you'll ever need). It automatically combines multiteam data if two to five consecutive columns are in the same season. You can choose to park-adjust HRs, SOs and BBs, some, or none at all, with a single click. They're better than ESPN's DIPS stats, because they're adjusted for parks, lefties and knuckleballers, and can also be used for past seasons. Enjoy! Update: Finally got the download link right. What Would I Do?
Permalink There are two comments to this post which deserve more attention. The first: David, why would you like to see a medical substance legalized? While the harm is not known for long-term use, they certainly are not good for you. At best, they don't harm you that much. The second: Well he** David, the criminal justice system sucks too. I mean there are people who are falsely convicted and the jury system is far from binary, it's "beyond the reasonable doubt" of twelve imperfect human beings, so in order to spare people from being falsely convicted let's just say to he** with the whole thing, and we'll let everybody get away with everything. Because it's an imperfect world after all. First of all, medical substances are legalized all the time. Ibuprofen used to be a prescription drug (it still is in high doses). And it's a performance enhancer. If you take Ibuprofen after exercise, your muscles recover faster, and you can exersice more often. You can lift every day instead of every other day. However, frequent use of Ibuprofen can also lead to liver damage. But you can control for this. You can get a physical once a year and have the doctor test your liver. Ibuprofen is an example of a drug that is effective at lower doses than originally thought. The birth control pill is another. The pill is now so safe that teenage girls will take it to prevent acne. It could very well be that if we allowed steroid use:
That's what many of the new drugs are about. Same result, fewer side effects. So my argument has always been legalize anabolic steroids and let players use them under a doctor's care and in the open. And then we can really learn about the risks and the rewards. But since steroids are not legal, what would I do instead of testing? What should be the rules? My time spent in information retrieval research taught me that multiple sources of information are better than a single data point. For example, in retireving documents with a search engine you need to look at the frequency of search terms in a document. But you also need to look at the frequency of those terms in the entire collection of documents. Words with high frequency in a document but low frequency in a collection are good search terms, because they zero in on a few stories about the subject. Some search engines add other information based on links, word position, meta data, etc. So why not do the same thing in baseball drug testing. For example, two players have a T/E ratio of 4. At that level either might be using testosterone or not. But one of the players has put on 25 pounds of muscle while the other hasn't changed. The guy who put on 25 pounds frequents a gym where arrests have been made for distributing steroids. Which one of these people is more likely to be cheating? Plus, with at least one drug test a year, you can establish a baseline for these tests. Was there a big change from previous results? If your T/E ratio suddenly goes from 1 to 5, that's good evidence something has changed. So don't have a cut off. Look at all the evidence. Realize that no one piece of information tells you the truth, but a number of factors pointing toward cheating makes the offense more likely. Depending on one number from a test is the easy way, but it's error prone. Gathering more information is somewhat costlier and requires judgement, but in the long run will be fairer to all involved. Kingdom Cub
Permalink Byron Clarke is writing a nice Cubs Blog, TheCubdom.com. Today he has a nice set of charts showing the values of the major league clubs based on Forbes Magazine rankings over the last four seasons. The articles don't make it clear, but it appears that Forbes is not counting TV properties in the value of the clubs. The Red Sox owners paid around $700 million for the club, but Forbes values the franchise at $533 million. If anyone knows the answer to that question, let me know. Also, if you look at the table from which Byron extracted the data, you see very high annualized rates of return for the clubs, many in double digits. Only the Indians have a real negative rate of return (although I have to wonder about the N/As). The Yankees have been a very good investment for George Steinbrenner. They were purchased for $20 million in 1973, of which George put up $500,000 of his own money. Now, they are worth over $800 million. My guess is that if you actually put them up for sale, they'd get close to $1 billion. All the revenue sharing in the world is not going to change the fact that the Yankees have $800 million in equity with which to play. That's why they can keep pushing payroll higher and afford to pay the luxury tax. Even Bud Selig had over a 9% rate of return on his investment in the Brewers (9% is what you get long term in the stock market). The Forbes rate is based on a value of $174 million, and Bud and company are getting $223 million for the franchise. In general, a major league team (if you're willing to be in it for the long haul) is a pretty good investment.
January 15, 2005
Ouch!
Permalink Batgirl tells the story of A.J. Pierzynski and Stan Conte. The guys in the audience will get to wince twice. Are you Positive?
Permalink In a comment to this post, Al Bethke wrote: I'm just not worried about false positives. I am worried about the integrity of the game, and with this strict policy, it is stronger than ever. I'm very concerned about false positives. As Jayson Stark points out:
False positives happen because drugs tests are presented to the world as Bernoulli random variables (player was positive or negative) when in reality the tests measure some indicator of drug use in a continuous fashion, and use a cut off to indicate positive or negative. Depending on where you place the cut off, you're going to get more or less false positives. And it's a tradeoff. In general reducing false positives means increasing false negatives, and vice-versa. A Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve is used to determine the cut off. The name derives from signal processing, the first use of this methodology. You can find a nice explanation of ROC curves at Steve's Attempt to Teach Statistics (StATS). To understand an ROC curve, you first have to accept the fact that MDs like to ruin a nice continuous outcome measure by turning it into a dichotomy. For example, doctors have measured the S100 protein in serum and found that higher values tend to be associated with Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. The median value is 395 pg/ml for the 108 patients with the disease and only 109 pg/ml for the 74 patients without the disease. The doctors set a cut off of 213 pg/ml, even though they realized that 22.2% of the diseased patients had values below the cut off and 18.9% of the disease-free patients had values above the cut off. Let's take testosterone as an example. It's a banned substance under the CBA (see page 160 of the CBA, page 171 of the PDF). Here's a research paper on the subject of developing a new way of testing for exogenous testosterone use. You see, you can't test for testosterone (T) directly, because we all make testosterone naturally. The standard test looks at the ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone (E). The ratio (T/E) should be about 1.0. The IOC used a cut off of 6.0 for the Los Angeles Olympic games. But, as the paper reports: The overall incidence of urinary T/E in the general population of healthy males not abusing steroids is <0.8% In other words, .8% is the upper bound of how many people are going to test positive for testosterone abuse falsely. In other words, if you test 1000 baseball players using this criteria, 8 may come up positive, even if no one is using steroids! Maybe 8 isn't a lot to Al, but it sure is a lot to me. But to get that number down to eight, you have to throw out almost half of the people who really are injecting testosterone! Take a look at this table from the paper. Using T/E >= 6.0 as a cut off, 25 of the 46 subjects getting injections of testosterone test positive, while 21 test negative. Even if you lower the cut off to 1.2, just slightly above normal, you still only catch 38 of the 46, while the false positive rate goes up five times. And people do use this test. The National Center for Drug Free Sport, Inc. offers a package of anabolic steroid tests, and lists the cut offs here (last table). The T/E cut off they use is 15:1; they're obviously afraid of returning a false positive, but they are clearly tossing out a lot of true positives as well. Where is the integrity in this? Half the players abusing these drugs are going to get away with it, while a small number of innocents are going to be branded cheaters. The union understands this, which is the reason they resisted testing for so long. The MLBPA's failure was not recognizing that their own rank and file didn't like their brothers using these drugs. Now those players have put their reputations and paychecks at risk to try to drive these substances from the game. I hope it turns out to be worth the risk. P.S. If anyone has the information, I'd like to know if the T/E test is used, and where the cut off is set. If anyone has the actual ROC curve for this ratio, I'd love to see that, also.
January 14, 2005
KC Kerfluffle
Permalink Brian Hipp writes:
It's interesting that a lucky season by the Royals in 2003 forced Sweeney's contract to vest. Without a winning 2003 season, this conversation would not be happening in KC. By the same token, 2004, with all the injuries to the pitching staff, was probably worse than it should have been. You never know. The Royals might bounce back again, and Sweeney will be happy. Of course, if Mike was tearing up the league as he was in 2002, the Royals might be winning more. But Brian is right; the contract is not the problem. Not signing the young stars long term has hurt this team more. Waiting for Godot
Permalink Balls, Sticks and Stuff links to an article by Alan Schwarz on patience at the plate. Schwarz discusses the problems with describing patience; is it the player who walks a lot, or the player who takes a lot of pitches, or the player who waits for his pitch? Many years ago I had a discussion about this at ESPN which made me stop using the word patient to describe hitters. Whenever I start using "patient", I delete it and use "selective" instead. Describing someone as a patient hitter labels them as passive. Selective indicates that they are actively involved in searching for the right pitch to hit. Yes, there is patience involved, but the selective hitter isn't afraid to swing at the first pitch if it's the pitch for which he's looking. A subtle difference, but one that more accurately describes the process. Turn the Cameron
Permalink The NY Post has more details today on the Mike Cameron situation: Nicotera explained the timeline yesterday to The Post. Essentially, as has been reported multiple times, back in October, Cameron met with Wilpon, Minaya and Duquette and selflessly volunteered to move to right if the Mets signed Beltran. In December, Cameron and Minaya spoke again, this time on the phone, and Cameron again insisted he was willing to slide over.
Brewers Sold
Permalink A huge conflict of interest was removed yesterday when the owners approved the sale of the Milwaukee Brewers to Mark Attanasio. Maybe Bud can be a commissioner for everyone now, not just the small market clubs. These small-market, mis-managed teams are a real bargain. Attanasio gets the Brewers for $220 million; if he can build the team into a winner like the Athletics, the value of that franchise will grow tremendously. There's a lot of room on the upside in Milwaukee. Mets' Attraction
Permalink Dave Isaacs once again taps into the general manager's chat room to discover how the Mets lured all those free agents to Shea. :-)
January 13, 2005
Lessons from the Changeup
Permalink Eric Liu is writing a series for Slate on Guiding Lights, stories of life changing teachers. In this piece Bryan Price, the pitching coach of the Seattle Mariners, teaches Eric how to throw a changeup, and more. Drug Deal
Permalink Here's the press release from Major League Baseball on the tentative agreement reached with the MLBPA. The agreement provides that every player will undergo at least one unannounced test on a randomly selected date during the playing season, and creates an additional program of testing randomly selected players. The agreement places no specific limit on the number of additional tests to which any player may randomly be subjected, and further includes random testing during the off-season, irrespective of a player's country of residence. I'm really against a suspension on the first offense, simply due to false positives (if anyone knows what the rate of false positives is on the various steroid tests, please pass it on). Someone who doesn't use steroids is going to lose ten days pay for some false indication. And because they are testing for so many different compounds, false positives are going to be that much more likely. I personally believe the penalty for a first offense should be more extensive testing, maybe twice a week for six months. That way, if it is a false indication, there's no public stigma attached to the player. Here's the ESPN report on the matter. Tom Glavine sums up the player's side: "Everybody believed that the program we had in place was having an effect and definitely it was doing what it was designed to do," Mets pitcher Tom Glavine, a senior member of the union, told AP. "But having said that, with the stuff that was going on and whatnot, it forced us to take a look at revising it or making it a little tougher. It was not a question anymore if that agreement was going to be enough. It was a question to address some of the new issues that came to light and get our fans to believe we were doing everything we could to make the problem go away 100 percent." A Piece of History
Permalink Mike's Baseball Rants links to the Library of Congress collection of Spalding Baseball Guides on-line. Each book in the index has the text of each page transcribed, plus an image of the page. A great historical research tool since the transcription allows any number of means of electronic search. Posted by StatsGuru at 03:19 PM
| Comments (1)
| TrackBack (0)
Somebody Says, So it Must Be True
Permalink I found this story in Newsday interesting. If the Mets are to add Carlos Delgado to their winter renovation, they'd prefer to clear some salary. An industry insider? Not even a Mets insider? That's pretty flimsy sourcing to go with a story. Here's what Minaya has to say. But yesterday, general manager Omar Minaya said the team wasn't planning on moving Cameron anywhere else but to rightfield. "Of course we want him here," Minaya said. "We love the idea of Carlos Beltran and Mike Cameron roaming the outfield at Shea Stadium." So Omar has had at least two conversations with Cameron where Mike said it was okay to move him to right. Now, someone outside the Mets organization says that Cameron's not happy with this? It doesn't make a lot of sense. Of course, I thought it would be logical to trade Cameron. He's a good fielder, but his offense isn't up to right field. Maybe this is an attempt by the "industry insider" to stir up trouble so he can get his hand on Cameron. Or it could be that Cameron gave the go ahead wanting to look like a team player but figuring that the Mets would be out bid for Beltran's services. We'll have to wait to see how this plays out.
January 12, 2005
Steroid Agreement
Permalink The AP is reporting that major league baseball will announce a new steroid testing policy on Thursday (tomorrow). Details are sketchy but it looks like more frequent testing and penalties for a first offense. More tomorrow when the announcement is released. Another Head Scratcher
Permalink While the internet baseball community has been busy trying to figure out why Paul Depodesta signed Derek Lowe to a four-year deal, another Moneyball GM, J.P. Ricciardi just traded for Shea Hillenbrand. So much for Moneyball GMs liking walks. Gone from the Jays is Adam Peterson, who's had a great K per 9 in the minors but inconsistent control. It's not a bad trade on value. But I would think an out machine like Hillenbrand would be the antithesis of what Ricciardi would want. Is he going to play first or third? If he's going to play third base well, his stats are okay. But as a first baseman he leaves a lot to be desired. Again, I don't understand why teams can't find a real OBA/Slugger guy floating around the minors who can catch a ball. Interviewing Dombrowski
Permalink The Detroit Tigers Weblog posts an interview with Dave Dombrowski, GM of the Detroit Tigers. This is the first time this winter I'm seen a GM asked about the insurance issue. The insurability hasn't changed. It is still out there. It may be that more clubs are willing to take the risk. People make too much of the Mets contract with Mo Vaughn because that contract was insured. But there's no way they've been able to insure seven years of Carlos Beltran. It looks like teams are willing to take on the risk of a fourth year on a pitcher, also, which I have to believe is a very risky proposition. I'm sure some of these contracts will come back to haunt the teams that signed them. Lowball Offer
Permalink Batgirl has information on the start of negotiations between the Twins and Johan Santana. The first offer is low ball, $19.5 million over three years. Now is not the time make the mistake the Pirates did with Barry Bonds. Don't upset Johan with arbitration. Ask him what he wants, and do your best to meet what he'd like to make.
I find it interesting that Santana either wants a two or four year contract. He's saying to let him be a free agent as early as possible or give me enough money and years to make me secure for life. I hope the Twins do the latter. Just look at his walks issued. They've stayed consistent the last three season while his innings have increased.
Santana is exactly the kind of player who should get big money. Time for the Twins to open up the vault. Stats vs. Scouts
Permalink Brad Dowdy at No Pepper has a link to a debate between two scouts and two statistians moderated by Alan Schwarz of Baseball America. Eddie Bane, Gary Hughes, Voros McCracken and Gary Huckabay compare and contrast the ways both sides evaluate players. If you only have time to skim, be sure to read the sections on seeing fear in players and predicting major league numbers from triple A results. How the Mets Were Won
Permalink Mike's Baseball Rants takes a stab at using win shares to predict how the Mets will fare this season. I like this post because Mike spells out all the assumptions he makes. He's pegging them at 87 wins if they sign Delgado. A Goon and a Thug
Permalink David Letterman interviewed Randy Johnson last night and he seemed genuinely upset that the Big Unit had to apologize for pushing the camera out of his face. Johnson: I guess I'm just not used to photographers jumping out of the bushes and all that but there's no doubt I was wrong ... One of the things I've loved about Letterman over the years is that he's not afraid to criticize the people who pay him. Johnson also said his favorite teammates were Curt Schilling and Luis Gonzalez. They also got into his nickname: Letterman: What is the origin of the nickname? At one point Letterman asked him about how he went from a good pitcher to a great pitcher. Johnson gave a generalization about the people who helped him along the way without naming names. As a baseball fan, I wish Dave had followed this up more, asking about Nolan Ryan's influence specificially. But it was a good interview for Randy; his sense of humor came through and Letterman threw the blame for the video incident onto the cameraman. A plus for the big unit.
January 11, 2005
Johnson New Conference
Permalink I'm watching it on Tivo now. It looks like you could put two Brian Cashmans inside Randy Johnson. Update: Johnson on his condition: "I might be 41, but I'm a young 41 and I feel great. I've never felt better and I'm looking forward to what I have left in me and I feel like I have a lot left to give and I'm looking forward to the challenge." Update: Johnson has nothing but nice things to say about Arizona and the Diamondbacks. Update: Good humorous quote about pitching in the New York pressure cooker: I will have at least 35 starts here. I will pitch a lot of very good games here. I can tell you right now, I will lose at least 1 or 2 games here; (laughter) I'm not going to go undefeated. Baker on Lowe
Permalink Jim Baker is very negative on the Derek Lowe deal (requires subscription). I'm with Jim on this point (emphasis added): I think everyone of our ilk assumes that DePodesta--who could have gotten what I got on the math SAT when he was still in the third grade--has figured out something that the rest of us are too intellectually ordinary to comprehend. There is this to consider: DePodesta is interested in making a splash, one that will set him apart from the system from whence he came and the Lowe deal is a means to that end. If Lowe, who, from all appearances, put the "me" in mediocre, has a miracle year in Los Angeles, then DePodesta's reputation will grow. Even if Lowe tanks in the final two or three years of his contract, it will be the initial rush that everyone will remember. That's quite a gamble, though. He could have passed on Lowe and nobody would have noticed that he was not on the Dodgers for 2005 and beyond. I'm hoping that there is something that DePodesta sees in Lowe that I don't. But at the moment, I still believe it was too much money for too long a time. Winners or Losers?
Permalink The Sports Economist has an interesting take on why the no-trade non-offer from the Astros caused them to lose Carlos Beltran. A no trade clause is worth little to a player if the team is winning. It has value to a player if the team is losing and they need to restructure the roster. Beltran's request can thus be viewed as a request from McLane for a commitment to win, and should that commitment not be there, to allow Carlos some choice among teams in a future trade. In effect, Carlos was saying to Drayton, "I want to win, badly. Do you?" Unfortunately for Houston fans, Drayton's answer was negative. I've never thought about no-trades in that context before. I always looked at them as security for the player's family, a way of knowing where they will be for the next few seasons. (In Carlos' case, a no-trade would have kicked in sometime in the 5th year of the contract when he became a 10-5 man.) It seems there are other economic motives as well. Yankees Treadmill
Permalink Alex Belth sums up my feelings about the Randy Johnson deal nicely in this post. Press Conferences
Permalink The Mets and Yankees annouce their new high price stars today. The Mets will introduce Beltran at 11 AM EST, and the Yankees will follow at 2 PM EST with the Johnson news conference. Both can be heard on MLB radio. Update: Looks like ESPNews will be carrying the announcements as well. Update: The first question was in Spanish and about the Yankees. Unfortunately, that's all I could understand. If anyone heard the question and answer, please let me know what was asked and answered. Update: It was a short confernce. Beltran refered to the team as "The New Mets." I call it the new Mets because this organization is going to a different direction, the right direction, the direction of winning. On Pedro Martinez: Well, I just gotta say it was a big influence when I saw the Mets going out and adding Pedro. It also seems that Minaya was a big factor as well. Carlos said he's known Omar since he was 18. Minaya said other players would want to be on the Mets once they signed Pedro, and he's claiming this signing as proof. Beltran was also asked how Shea might affect his home runs.
Looks like he has the right attitude to deal with Shea. Indians Economics
Permalink Bud Shaw of the Cleveland Plain Dealer uses the signing of Juan Gonzalez to a minor league contract to look at the Indians finances. Attendance took a hit in 2001, then another in 2002 when the payroll diet hit a $78 million plateau. Dolan is still trying to make up the deficit spending of those two seasons. He waits for the Indians to seriously contend before giving into buyer's lust. Hopefully, he still has some of that lust for the kind of hitter Gonzalez was in 2001, but there's a catch to even that. I have to disagree with Shaw here. The Indians are in a weak division. They have a good offense and a few good pitchers. Shapiro's plan for the winter didn't work out: Just the hint of a slowdown in player salaries prompted the union to mutter about collusion. Salaries readjusted accordingly over this past winter, making General Manager Mark Shapiro's only available strategy of striking early in the pitching sweepstakes obsolete within the first week. Which may be a good thing in the long run. The Indians have maintained payroll flexibility. Their minor league system is intact. Last year, they didn't make the big trade to try to put the team over the top. I believe this year they will pull the trigger. Remember this statement by Shapiro from the start of the 2004 season: "We're much further than last year," Shapiro said. "We have core players identified. We have a group of other guys we think potentially can be core players that we didn't know about a year ago. We're within 12 months [of contending]. We hope sometime in July or in the offseason, we'll be adding players with the intent of winning our division. Mark was right about his team's ability. He has Billy Beane's ability to get the team good at a low cost. This is the year they want to win the Central. Will he have Beane's ability to make the big pickup that actually puts the squad in the playoffs? Their first plan failed to bring in the players they need. What's the backup plan, and will it work?
January 10, 2005
Stark Reality?
Permalink Jayson Stark has a short article on how the Mets are now going after Carlos Delgado. It doesn't make a lot of sense to sign Delgado at this point if you expect Mike Piazza to be playing first. Joel Sherman in the NY Post has the Mets going for a better defensive first baseman. The Mets apparently are turning away from Carlos Delgado, which is the right thing no matter how wonderful a slugger he is. Delgado only masquerades as a first baseman. The Mets want to emphasize defense at the position to assist Reyes, Wright and Kaz Matsui. Travis Lee is the flavor of the moment. I prefer the surer health/New York makeup of John Olerud. Frankly, I'd rather have Piazza's or Delgado's bat at first where they can't do that much defensive damage. I suppose you could come up with a platoon where Piazza catches against righties and Delgado plays first, and Piazza plays first against lefties and Phillips catches. I'd love to hear from Mets fans on this. Summarizing Sabermetrics
Permalink Sully at the house that dewey built does a wonderful job of summerizing the study of baseball stats. He also seems to be a very open minded fellow. Off to a Good Start
Permalink CBS New York tried to get footage of Randy Johnson going to the doctor's for his physical this morning. Randy didn't appear too happy about it. You can read the story and see the video here. It's one of those situations where the camera men are best ignored. Just be quiet and walk on by, or at least say how happy you are to be in New York. Update: Johnson has apologized for the incident. Having a Ball
Permalink Soxblog has some thoughts on the controversy surrounding Doug Mientkiewicz and the ball he caught for the final out of the World Series. Looks like the ball belongs to Doug. I'm sure they can work a deal to compensate Mientkiewicz for either letting them display the ball or buying it outright. Correction: Fixed spelling. Leaky Case
Permalink CrimProf Blog speculates on the likely leakers in the BALCO case. (Hat tip, Instapundit.) He's narrowed it down to either one of the defendants or someone on the government side. I like his reasoning for ruling out the defense lawyers. The defense attorneys and the defendants might have had an incentive to leak, since Bonds denied knowledge that the substances were steriods and said that he didn't think the BALCO defendant from whom he received the substances would have provided him with illegal steriods. It seems perhaps unlikely that one of the defense attorneys leaked the information, however, because leaking secret grand jury evidence to the media, and then moving to dismiss charges by blaming the government for the same leak, is a high risk venture that would take serious moxy if not insanity. Too much to lose, not enough to gain. Green Back to a DBack
Permalink The Diamondbacks and Dodgers finally got the deal finished. Arizona has obtained Shawn Green after coming to an agreement on reworking his contract. The deal will give Green a $2 million signing bonus, $10.5 million this year, $8 million in 2006 and $9.5 million in 2007. The agreement includes a mutual option for a fourth year, with a $2 million buyout should the Diamondbacks decide not to retain Green. I guess it's okay with the union that Green takes a pay cut this year as long as he's getting more years on the contract. The DBacks describe the deal this way: The Diamondbacks also get pitchers Javier Vazquez and Brad Halsey, along with $9 million, from the Yankees. Of course, the DBacks still have an old team, and who knows how the minor leaguers they traded will pan out. William Juarez looks like the real deal. His strikeout and walk rates are excellent. Green's career appears to be in decline. He peaked in win shares in 2001 at 34, and since has had 30, 20 and 17 in 2004. How much of that was injury is not known. He had a very good 2nd half in 2004; he could have finally healed, or it could just be luck. I suspect his stats will look very good this year as BOB is a very good offensive park. Whether or not his increased offense is meaningful is the question. Finally, Kendrick's statement above seems to indicate that the Diamondbacks will keep Vazquez in the rotation. We'll get to see if his second half was a fluke in the 4th easiest NL park for home runs. Correction: Fixed Shawn Green link.
January 09, 2005
Beltran a Met
Permalink The NY Times and others are reporting that the Mets and Beltran have reached a deal, seven years for $119 million. Another good job by Boras. It also makes me wonder what Beltran would have done three years ago if the Royals had offered him a long term contract for half the money? I still don't understand why teams don't try to lock up young talent long term (5+ years) before they become eligible for arbitration. That way, you'll get their best years, you insulate yourself from salary inflation, and you don't have to waste time with arbitration hearings. And if the player bombs, you haven't lost that much money compared to what you lose signing a Mo Vaughn type. With all the players they've traded, the Royals would have been a pretty good team over the last few years if they had managed to keep their stars. Top Honors
Permalink Congratulations to Brian Gunn and Rich Lederer! Their column on Jim Edmonds (which appeared on the now defunct Redbird Nation) was picked as one of the top 10 sports columns of 2004 by The Daily Fix of the Wall Street Journal. It was the only blog entry so honored. Great work guys (and we still miss you, Brian). Houston, Goodbye!
Permalink Carlos Beltran will not be on the Astros in 2005. Beltran, the 27-year-old center fielder who helped the Astros to their first playoff series win and captivated the city's baseball fans with his amazing array of skills, turned down the biggest contract in Astros history just a few minutes before an 11 p.m. Saturday deadline and chose to sign with the New York Mets. If Beltran really wanted to stay in Houston, they could have found a way around those sticking points. This rumor was correct; it appears that Boras was using Houston to drive up the price. The Mets are believed to have increased their bid from $112M to about $119M over seven years in attempts to complete a shocking offseason double by adding the market's best hitter (Beltran) and pitcher (Pedro Martinez). If the Mets do get Beltran, look for a trade of Mike Cameron, possibly to the Diamondbacks. I'm not sure how much the Mets can get for Mike, since he'll start the season on the DL after surgery on his left wrist. Wrist injuries have a way of knocking down hitting stats; once the wrist heals, it seems to take a while for a hitter to get his stroke back. So the Mets are making big splashes this winter, signing both Pedro Martinez and Carlos Beltran. As replacements for Leiter and Cameron, the Mets picked up an additional 18 win shares, or six wins. Maybe seven if Pedro bounces back to a 20 win share season. Wright and Reyes still have lots of room for improvement. If they each could get to 15 win shares this season, that would add another five wins. So the way the team stands right now, the Mets look to be about a .500 team. It just goes to show how small an impact one or two players can make. It's up to management now to surround those two with good players so the fans will show up to see the stars and victories. Update: Now the big question in Houston is, can the Astros keep Clemens? Update: One of the commentors below reports that the Mets are planning on playing Cameron in right, not trading him. Much of Cameron's value as a player lies in his defense. Last season, Mike put up 5.9 win shares defensively, or 33% of his value came from his defense. Beltran was about even, at 6.0 win shares on defense, but that represented less than 20% of his value. If you move a player from center to right, his defensive value will go down, simply because there are less balls for a right fielder to catch. There are two reasons for this:
What is important defensively for a right fielder is a strong arm. Cameron had 7 assists last season in 135 games in center field. Beltran had 8 in 89 CF games for the Astros. If the Mets are going to have an arrangement where Beltran and Cameron are both in the outfield, it should be Cameron in center and Beltran in right. That takes the most advantage of each player's strengths. I'd actually rather see the Mets keep Floyd, a good hitter and trade Cameron if they're going to play Beltran in center. Mike, as a great defensive player at an important defensive position has value. Maybe Houston would be willing to part with a prospect for Mike now that they're short a CF. :-)
January 08, 2005
La Russa Retained
Permalink It looks like Tony La Russa will be managing the St. Louis Cardinals for the next three years. The club is expected to announce next week a three-year agreement that will keep manager Tony La Russa in place through the 2007 season, when he will rank as the third-winningest skipper in the game's history. The deal is the longest signed by La Russa since being named Cardinals manager in October 1995 and would put him second to Red Schoendienst for the longest stay in the position should he serve its complete term. I was impresseed with La Russa when he was with the Athletics, less so with the Cardinals. He's coached for two great general managers in Alderson and Jocketty, so he's often had good teams on the field. He's certainly won with them. But watching him the playoffs, he does little things like giving away outs that really annoy me. Yet he wins, and he's being rewarded for that. Getting Along
Permalink Paul Sullivan of the Chicago Tribune looks at how the Cubs management and players can heal the rift with Sammy Sosa now that it looks like the slugger will remain in Chicago. Frankly, it's my opinion that Sammy has most of the work to do; he has to show that he's part of the team. Of course, nothing cures animosity like winning. If Sosa comes out of the gate showing his power and the Cubs are in the heat of the pennant race, he'll be forgiven quickly. D.L. in L.A.
Permalink If the they can get the Green deal done, the Dodgers will use the green they've saved to sign Derek Lowe. It's a four-year deal at $8 million a year. I don't know what DePodesta sees in Lowe. His main talent as a pitcher is not allowing a ton of HR. In his superb 2002 season he walked less than 2 per 9 and gave up a HR every 18 innings. Both those are up over 50% since then. LA had a better defense than Boston in 2004, so maybe Paul believes that will bring Lowe's ERA down. It's an interesting decision, especially the length of the contract. If it goes bad, DePodesta will be reminded of it for four years. Green Again
Permalink The DBacks have a new window of opportunity to negotiate with Shawn Green. If I were Green I might not want the extension. Arizona is a pretty good offensive park. Give Shawn a year there, and he might be a much more attractive free agent. That said, Shawn may also know that his skills are fading, and he's trying to get the greenbacks as a DBack while he has some leverage.
January 07, 2005
Green Management
Permalink The new Diamondbacks management doesn't appear to be doing all that well so far. They've managed to dump Randy Johnson, but they're not getting the players they really want for him. They've failed to reach an agreement with Shawn Green, meaning that deal is dead. So now they have a minor league catcher they don't want, and a pitcher (Javier Vazquez) who wants to go back east. Moorad and company know what they want, but they don't have a solid plan for getting there, or at least a good backup scheme if things fall apart. I guess it's different game than auctioning players to the highest bidder. Sorry Sir
Permalink Sir Sidney Ponson has apologized for his actions in Aruba. "I'd like to say that I'm not at all proud of what happened and the way I behaved on the beach that particular day," Ponson told reporters Wednesday in his native Papiamento language before boarding a private jet headed to Miami. "I would like to apologize to everybody, but especially to the young people of Aruba, who always considered me their role model. I'm very sorry for what took place and I would surely never let this happen again." Good for him. He still awaits a trial that may interfere with Spring Training.
January 06, 2005
Unit Extended
Permalink It looks like Randy Johnson and the NY Yankees have reached an agreement on a contract extension that will run through 2007. Johnson gets the same $16 million a year he was earning with the Diamondbacks. That's a lot of money for a pitch who will be 43 at the end of the contract. I guess the Yankees are thinking they have another Nolan Ryan on their hands. At age 40, Ryan went 8-16, but with a 2.76 ERA to lead the NL. At age 43 he went 13-9 while striking out 232 in 204 innings. If he's anything like Nolan was in his 40's, it will be worth the money. That's a big if, however. I'd still rather spend the money on Beltran. Beltran a Met?
Permalink In the unconfirmed rumor department, a reader sent a link to this story on NYFansites.com, indicating the Mets have reached an agreement with Beltran. Beware the caveat, however:
The Tigers, however, are out of the running. Update: If the numbers are right, the Mets are getting a pretty good deal. Compare him to Manny and A-Rod before they signed their big deals.
Beltran's price tag does not seem out of line to me when you compare it to the big deals of earlier this decade. However, it's pretty clear that Miguel Tejada picked the wrong year to become a free agent. Tejada'a numbers were as good if not better than Beltran's, and he only got $11 million a year. Update: A couple of people asked in the comments about a comparison to Vlad Guerrero. I actually did the comparison and didn't include it because it wasn't that close. The problem is that Vlad had a serious injury in his contract year, only picking up 18 win shares. Plus, while Vlad had five 20+ win share seasons, he's never had a 30 win share season. Vlad's back was a big question mark as he filed for free agency, and that was going to keep his price down. Beltran is coming off his best year after improving two years in a row.
January 05, 2005
Battle for the Angels
Permalink Anaheim is going to court to try to block the Angel's name change. Anaheim officials claim the name violates a stadium lease agreement that has provided nearly $30 million in public subsidies to renovate the club's ballpark.
Beltran and Taxes
Permalink Outside the Beltway looks at the tax implications of a New York team signing Carlos Beltran, both for the player and the teams. Candy Alley
Permalink I saw this over at Baseball Primer; Tom Candiotti is bowling with the pros. Valley resident and flutterball specialist Tom Candiotti, who played 15 major league seasons with Milwaukee, Cleveland, Toronto, Los Angeles and Oakland, has been added to the field of 64 on a special Commissioner's Exemption. Tom and I worked together on Baseball Tonight On-line for ESPN during the 2001 season and I really enjoyed his commentary. He notes the similarities between bowling and pitching: He qualified for the Tucson event by obtaining his PBA card (carrying a 200 average in a sanctioned league for a complete season). Candiotti said pitching and bowling are worlds apart, but there are certain concepts that carry over. My dad's best friend growing up was signed by the St. Louis Cardinals as a pitcher but blew his arm out throwing too many curve balls at a young age. However, he did go on to be a great league bowler. Maybe someone should start a new specialty league; the Major League Pitcher's Pro Bowling Tour (MLPPBT). It'd be a great way for these guys to stay in the public eye after they retire. Who wouldn't want to see Roger Clemens facing Randy Johnson on the lanes?
January 04, 2005
Large and At Large
Permalink Sir Sidney Ponson was released from jail today. Ponson appeared before a judge Tuesday and prosecutors said they would not oppose his release as he awaits trial, the daily La Prensa reported. The 28-year-old right-hander faces charges of public violence and simple aggression. No trial date has been set. I wonder if Ponson will claim that Pete Gray really did it? :-) Class of 2005
Permalink It's Boggs and Sandberg. Update: Wade Boggs is no surprise. His 3000 hits and high batting average and OBA made him an easy pick. Sandberg makes it on his third try. I'm sure they're celebrating in Chicago. Ryne was a very productive 2nd baseman from 1984 through 1993. While his numbers may not be a gaudy as some second sackers of today, remember his prime years were before the offensive explosion of the 1990s. He gathered 346 win shares in his career, 38 coming in his big 1984 season that led the Cubs to the playoffs. He added 3 more 30+ seasons in the early 1990s. A great a second baseman, it's too bad his career was cut a bit short. It's nice to see the writers recognize his accomplishments after short changing him on his first ballot. Hall of Fame Day
Permalink Baseball will announce the new inductees to the Hall of Fame today. You can watch it live on MLB.com. (It's not the point of this post, but I really like the way MLB is developing radio and TV on the web. Eventually, it will slide right in to satellite radio and TV, if it hasn't already done so.) I find myself becoming less interested in Hall of Fame arguments as time goes on. Most take two forms:
The first argument is usually made fan-to-fan. I don't believe it has much bearing on the voting. The second often leads to debate in the media. To me, it's a weak argument. The Hall isn't about being good, it's about being great, and greatness comes in many forms. So if you are going to get in being good for a long time, you better reach an important milestone like 3000 hits. I'd much rather see a player go in who had five unbelieveable seasons in the middle of his career than one who above average skills that happened to age well. It looks like Wade Boggs is the leading candidate for enshrinement this year. Whenever I think of Boggs, I think of Tony Gwynn also. Two great hitters who on the surface look very similar but had very different approaches to the game and different career paths. Here are their career averages:
Boggs and Gwynn both had high averages, but Wade was better at not making outs. Tony was the better hitter in that he was more likely to get a hit when he stepped to the plate. But Boggs was the better offensive player because he didn't use up the team's supply of outs. So you'd use these two hitters in very different ways. If you have a man on 2nd with two out in ninth, and you need that one run, you send up Gwynn. Tony is more likely to get the hit to drive the runner home. But if the situation is bases loaded and you need one run, you send up Boggs because he's more likely to reach base, and his reaching base will push the run across. Boggs and Gwynn are also different in the path of their careers. Boggs had the best part of his career in his first half, Gwynn in his second.
You can see where Bogg's advantage in OBA helps him out in win shares. Boggs averaged 22 win shares per season vs. 20 for Gwynn. Boggs is going into the hall because of the great seasons he had early and a subsequent good career that allowed him to reach the hit milestone. Gwynn saved his best averages for late in his career, although injuries and a strike limited his playing time. Two great hitters, two different approaches, two different career paths to the Hall of Fame. We'll see if Boggs gets in later today. Correction: I made a math error. Boggs actually has 394 win shares, which gives him an average of 22 win shares per season and moves him even closer to Gwynn. The mistake has been corrected above.Budget in the Bronx?
Permalink Murray Chass pens a piece in today's NY Times saying that the Yankees are not interested in Carlos Beltran if the Johnson deal is completed. But if a weekend signal is accurate, the most intriguing story has yet to happen. If it does happen, it will be a nonmove, as opposed to the Martínez, Wells, Johnson, Hudson and Mulder moves. Chass points out how having the Yankees out of the bidding war hurts Boras and Beltran's chance at a giant contract (although the way the Mets have been spending money, he might do just fine). This is also probably good news for the Astros, as it gives them less competition to retain Beltran's services. It also makes the Yankees decline more inevitable. This was a chance for the Yankees to reverse the aging process a bit by bringing in a centerfielder in his prime. Instead, A-Rod will be the youngest position player at age 29. The right side, including Bernie Williams, are all over 35. Posada is getting old for a catcher. A 40+ year old is going to anchor the rotation. At some point, the Yankees are going to need a major overhaul; maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon. They're going to find themselves in need of a centerfielder, second baseman, catcher and staff ace. Filling any one of those positions with a great player is difficult; filling all at once is nearly impossible. Beltran is the right move for the Yankees to make long term. They should forget Johnson and go after Carlos. He would take care of centerfield for four or five years. They could then keep Navarro and let him develop as a catcher and keep Halsey and see if he develops as a pitcher. Instead, in their quest to win now, the great team of the 1990's is quickly reverting to the okay team of the 1980's. A losing record won't be far behind.
January 03, 2005
Inching Toward NY
Permalink One more obstacle is out of the way in the Randy Johnson deal as the commissioner approved the trade. And it will be three way swap as Navarro will end up with the Dodgers for Shawn Green. The stumbling block will be contract extensions for the Big Unit and Shawn Green. Birds' Nest
Permalink The Birdwatch is a new group blog about the Cardinals. Stop by and say hi. Be sure to check out Josh's introduction: Last year I was watching a game on TV via Tivo, it was a no hitter through 4. My wife asked me what I thought the chances of the pitcher taking it all the way were and I replied: "You don't talk about a no hitter! It's bad luck!". Good luck, Josh! Lost in Lala Land
Permalink My good friend Jim Storer just called me to complain about the Angels name change. He feels it's wrong to have a preposition in a team's name, especially when it confuses the reader. Where exactly do the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim play? Do they play in Los Angeles but live in Anaheim, or the other way around? It looks like there's going to be a fight over this: But the American League club's latest in a series of name changes could provoke a fight with the Anaheim City Council. Anaheim officials claim the change breaks the terms of the team's 33-year lease with the city. The Angels have been an unusual team in that they've changed their location designation four times while only moving once. Other teams (especially in the early days) experimented with nicknames, but the Angels can't decide where they are. Los Angeles, California, Anaheim and now LA-Anaheim. They should have finished the deal and called themselves the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, California! Maybe the Nationals should be called the Montreal Expos of Washington! And we can rename both the Twins and Rangers the Washington Senators of (Minnesota/Texas). Or, to get as many prepositions in as possible, The St. Louis Browns of Baltimore in Orioles Park at Camden Yards! They'll always be the California Angels to me. Jon Weisman has more.
January 02, 2005
Week in Review
Permalink The audio for this post can be found here. Happy New Year to all the Musings Mavens! It's been a quiet week in baseball. Outside of New York and Arizona it looks like most GMs got a week to relax. The big news is that the Randy Johnson to the Yankees deal is on again. Once more, the Diamondbacks blinked and called the bombers to get the Big Unit moving again. From the Yankees point of view, the deal is very similar to three-way they tried to make with the Dodgers; the difference is that Arizona will get Brad Halsey instead of Eric Duncan along with Navarro and Vazquez. It's also likely that Vazquez and Navarro will be traded away once they are in the Diamondbacks possesion. Stay tuned. This deal fell apart once before, and it can happen again. If it does go through, I'm sorry to see the Yankees trading another young lefty pitcher. They made that mistake with Al Leiter and Ted Lilly. In a few years they may need to trade for Halsey again, or pay him tons of money in the free agent market. One thing is certain in the Bronx; Tino Martinez is a Yankee once more. The aging first baseman who hasn't had a good season since he left New York will be the insurance policy against Jason Giambi's health. With Womack at 2nd, there's not going to be a lot of offense from the right side of the Yankees infield if Tino plays everyday. The other big rumor has Roberto Alomar playing second base for the Cardinals next season. As reported on this blog, Alomar was not able to play winter ball due to his September back injury. The Cardinals are only paying him half a million dollars. If he works out, it's a steal, but at this point in his career, I think the Cardinals could have done better with someone younger and even cheaper. There was action in Cincinnati as Eric Milton signed a nice three-year contract that will pay him over $25 million. Eric says he's going to Cincinnati because he believes that they made the moves in the off-season that will help them win. The Reds need to improve a lot more than their record indicates, however. Cincinnati finished nine games better than their expected total given their runs scored and allowed. I have a feeling Milton is heading to Great American Ballpark because they gave him the best offer, not due to their diligence improving the club. Finally, Sir Sidney Ponson got into a joust with some fellow Arubans over his jet skiing. A fight broke out and Ponson socked it to de judge, landing him in jail for Christmas. And New Years. Being a pitcher, you'd think he'd have a file hidden away that he could use to escape! I hope 2005 brings your favorite team a championship and good luck to you!
January 01, 2005
The Game's Afoot!
Permalink Elephants in Oakland has an interview with career minor leaguer Matt Watson of the A's farm system. Wherever Matt has received significant playing time, he's gotten on base very well, yeat at age 26 in 2005 he's only gotten 17 days of major league experience. 2005
Permalink |
Navigation
EMail
Home About the Author Dedication Baseball Musings Radio Show Sporting News Columns Day by Day Database Lineup Analysis Defensive Charts, Probabilistic Model of Range Syndicate this site:  Full post feed: Robot Podcast Feed Terms of Service Mitchell & Ness Throwback Jerseys
View blog authority
Tickets and Other Links
Buy MLB Baseball tickets online including Boston Red Sox tickets, New York Yankees tickets, Baltimore Orioles tickets, Chicago Cubs tickets, San Francisco Giants tickets, Washington Nationals tickets, Los Angles Dodgers tickets, Florida Marlins tickets. San Diego Padres tickets, Cardinals box seats and premium astros tickets. We also carry concert tickets and theater tickets.
MLB Baseball Baltimore Orioles Tickets Boston Red Sox Tickets Chicago Cubs Tickets Chicago White Sox Tickets Houston Astros Tickets LA Dodgers Tickets New York Yankees Tickets Washington Nationals Tickets and St Louis Cardinals Tickets GET ME IN! is the leading marketplace for: Sports Tickets Football Tickets Rugby Union Tickets Rugby League Tickets Hong Kong Sevens Tickets MotoGP Tickets Grand Prix Tickets NBA Tickets NFL Tickets Theatre Tickets and Concert Tickets Ticketamerica.com MLB Tickets Chicago Cubs Cincinnati Reds Houston Astros Milwaukee Brewers Pittsburgh Pirates St. Louis Cardinals Boston Red Sox New York Yankees Tampa Bay Devil Rays Premiership football tickets FA cup tickets Champions league tickets Football tickets Olympics tickets Super Media Blog
Calendar
Recent Entries
New RSS Feed
New Look Coming Team Offense, Arizona Diamondbacks Lastings Impression Pledge Drive Update Long Term Lester Stadium Pictures Lugo and Lowrie Pledge Drive Update Team Offense, Pittsburgh Pirates
Search
Archives
By Category:
Advertising (10) Agents (12) All-Star Game (173) All-Time Greats (239) Army Strong (8) Attendance (174) Authors (3) Awards (169) Base Running (78) Baseball (1581) Baseball Jerks (219) Blogs (759) Books (129) Broadcasts (568) Charity (49) Cheating (665) Collectibles (15) College (1) Colleges (3) Commissioner (40) Conditioning (1) Contests (10) Crime (100) Cuba (1) Deaths (169) Defense (372) Demographics (8) Discipline (12) Division Races (724) Draft (63) Equipment (25) Fan Rant (46) Fan Violence (10) Fans (58) Fantasy Baseball (38) Feats (3) Films (3) Free Agents (782) Games (5549) History (102) Hit Streaks (22) Humor (64) Ice Cream (4) Illnesses (135) Independent Leagues (16) Infrastructure (3) Injuries (1122) International (76) Interviews (168) League Championship Series (1170) League Division Series (923) Little League (2) Management (1281) Mascots (4) Matchups (698) Mechandising (46) Minor Leagues (12) Movies (9) News Media (96) Oddities (1) Offense (216) Old Timers (4) On Base (18) Opening Day (210) Opening Day Impressions (19) Other (321) Owners (73) Pennant Races (32) Pitchers (2911) Players (1524) Podcasts (185) Post Season (59) Power Hitting (5) Pranks (1) Predictions (145) Probabilistic Model of Range (108) Public Relations (8) Records (153) Rivals (2) Rookies (44) Rules (25) Salaries (12) Scheduling (22) Science (1) Scoring (5) Series (61) Simulations (5) Sluggers (752) Spring Training (117) Stadiums (279) Standings (25) Statistics (996) steroids (1) Strategy (171) Streaks (14) Superstitions (16) Team Evaluation (937) Team Movements (58) Tickets (56) Trades (700) Transactions (321) Umpires (53) Uniforms (17) Union (22) Welcome! (3) women (4) World Cup (170) World Series (657) By Month: March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002
Credits
  
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
