SkyKing162's Baseblog |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 A fan of the Yankees, Red Sox, and large sample sizes. 
- My Links - 2003 DIPS Roto Values
- Useful Stats Links -
- Places I Visit Daily -
- Article Hall of Fame -
Atom Feed - Archives -
 |
8.13.2004
THIS BLOG HAS MOVED Finally. SkyKing162 v 2.0 is not only sexier, it's got more power. http://skyking162.greenmen.org Change your bookmark (haha, good one) and head on over to read about the switch. 8.12.2004
NOTES AND QUOTES My to do list (not in any particular order): - Write a couple kickass articles for the new site - Launch new site - Find a place to live - Start school year - Finish dump trades in two fantasy leagues - Make lesson plans for upcoming school year Quote of the summer (by Zach, a high school junior): "Rooting for both the Yankees and Red Sox is like being good at both math and English." 7.21.2004
KRUK'S THE MAN Ok, maybe that's a little extreme. But he did just say, on Baseball Tonight, that pitchers should pitch to Bonds more and intentionally walk him less. "He can't hit a homerun every time." If we translate that statement from Krukese into English, it's a pretty intelligent observation. The times that Bonds doesn't get on base more than makes up for the hits and homers. Look for a complete re-working of this blog in the next few weeks. It's almost ready now (WC3 Validated, XML feeds, cool flaming baseball logo, useable comments and archives, and more reliable host), but since I'll be travelling a lot and I want to kick things off with a high posting rate, don't expect things too soon. In the mean time, if anyone that reads this is both a Yankees and Red Sox fan, or used to be one, but is now the other, or knows of someone who fits either qualification, email me at skyking162 at gmail.com. Also, anyone else noticed that Joe Morgan wrote the book Baseball for Dummies. 7.13.2004
IGNORANCE IS THE KISS OF DEATH I absolutely hate feeling frustrated. And one of the easiest ways to become frustrated is to read about, experience, or interact in any way with ignorance. One of the best feelings in the world is to defeat ignorance. When you spend two years being infuriated by Joe Morgan "gotta-have-heart and bunting skills to win" chats, it's bliss to finally hear him say something about how getting on base is important. With all the discussion, data, and writings out there, it's infuriating that a lot of people don't take the time to understand what sabrmetrics is trying to accomplish. You don't have to agree with each conclusion, but don't bash it until you understand it. There's always a better way to do things. I can't stand people who just settle for the same old way, just because. Speaking of ignorance, why are we fighting the Civil Rights battle in the US for the third time? Women are people, too? Wow, let's treat them like equals. Blacks are people, too? Wow, let's treat them like equals. But those gay people, they're different. They're going to contaminate us "normal" people by getting married. How can the President and a majority of the people in America support the idea of actively taking away rights of some of its people? And why aren't there more people completely outraged at the idea? I'm obviously missing something in the anti-gay-marriage argument. At least I hope I am. Because if the whole "we must protect the sanctity of marriage" thing is just PC-speak for "we don't like homosexuality", I quit. So, what am I missing? Frustrated? You bet I am. 7.12.2004
7.11.2004
EL DUQUE TO START IN PLACE OF MUSSINA Our local paper mentioned a report by yankees.com that Orlando Hernandez will start today in place of Mike Mussina. With all the "problems" Yankee starters have had this year, it's great to know that there are quality replacements. Frankly, you've got to love the potential upside of the Yankee rotation. Mussina, Brown, Vazquez, Contreras, Lieber, and El Duque. That's six quality arms. Who can be counted on to post a sub-4.00 ERA with 100 IP the rest of the way? Nobody. Who could do it? Any of them. It'll be fun to see how it all works out. And no matter what, the offense will help the Yanks win a few games. Not a lot of posting lately. I took another trip (this time to visit ballparks in PIT, CIN, and CLE - I'll write about it eventually), and I've got another one coming up. Even if I'm not writing, I'm still playing around on my computer, and have a switch from Blogger to Grey Matter on my own server coming up. You're excited, I know. Under/over on Bonds' HRs in the HR Derby: 15. And I'll take the over. 6.30.2004
bo logh To all my friends who think I'm hopelessly obsessed with baseball: you're right. But at least I'm not obsessed with Klingon. Oh, and while I'm linking to weird stuff, check out this dude's attempt to get a Gmail account. Oh, and this one, too. NICK JOHNSON As a big Strat-o-Matic baseball guy, I constantly pay attention to hitter and pitcher platoon splits. For hitters, I like to see a big difference between how they hit lefties and righties (preferably favoring righties). For pitchers, the more consistent, the better. The reason? You can pick specific hitters to take advantage of opposing pitcher handedness, but when you pick your pitcher, you can't decide which of your opponent's hitters will be in the lineup. Why play a pitcher who gives up an extra .200 points of OPS against lefties, if you can help it? That's just asking your opponent to plop 7 or 8 lefties in to the lineup, even if some are merely mediocre. Anyways, I only bring this up because I was checking out Nick Johnson's page over at ESPN.com. As a Yankees fan, I enjoyed watching Johnson get on base for the past two years, and was disappointed to see him go to the Expos. After losing almost two months to injuries this year, what do his splits look like? (OBP SLG OPS) vs. L .486 .360 .846 vs. R .346 .500 .846 Hmm, consistent, yet... not. Nick's got an OPS of .846 against both righties and lefties, but he's doing it in drastically different ways. Patience against lefties, but no power to speak of (.280 AVG .080 ISO) with all his power (3 HRs, 7 2Bs in 72 ABs) against righties. As OBP is more important than SLG, he's actually been more productive against lefties so far. 6.23.2004
YET ANOTHER PRODUTIVE OUTS ARTICLE In case there was any doubt that Productive Outs and PO Percentage are a waste of digital storage space, as well as a waste of our time, Larry Mahnken sticks another (his sixth?) fork in POP. 6.22.2004
HAPPY BELATED FATHER'S DAY My obsession with baseball started with my dad's obsession with baseball. Our relationship is pretty much the epitome of the male bonding cliche. Dad was my Little League baseball coach - check. Dad took me and my friends to a minor league game for my 8th birthday - check. Dad and I stayed up way past my bedtime watching the Yankees win the World Series - check. Dad organized the world's coolest neighborhood trip to a weekend of baseball up in Toronto - check. Our Little League baseball team was a dynasty. In the International League, we finished first or second every year. Those were the glory days - sponsored by School Pictures, my short, skinny, non-imposing friends and I destroyed other teams with our coordination and competence. I threw the slowest pitch of anybody in the league, but since I could throw strikes and half the other kids couldn't hit, I didn't give up too many runs. We pulled the hidden ball trick at least once per game, and I even picked a kid off of second base from centerfield one time. As most relationships go, there came a point when I realized my dad actually wasn't the second-coming of Babe Ruth (although he did beat out Dale Berra for the second base job as a sophomore in high school). It's a rather fuzzy point, though. It may have been a couple years after he proclaimed, "Bernie Williams in centerfield? That guy will never amount to anything." Or it might have been during my college days when I came home to hear him saying stupid things at the TV, like "ugh, we need more veteran leadership." But it doesn't matter. The most important part of any parent-child relationship is that the child learns from the parent and takes things a step further. Hell, that's the most important part of any relationship. Thanks for the baseball education, dad. 6.17.2004
DEBAUCHERY, AND LOWE THROWS A GEM I'm back from driving around the northeast, getting to hang out with some friends that I spend way too little time with. The coolest part was that we didn't just rehash old college stories, but came up with new material. As a Red Sox fan, their recent descent in the standings has been disheartening. The pitching, a strength for the first two months, has suddenly looked shaky. Thankfully, the offense should get even better, due to Nomar and Trot returning, and the apparent choice to keep Bellhorn as the primary 2B. I was really scared, however, to see that Derek Lowe was starting in Coors this afternoon. He's had a rocky season, with more walks than usual, a slightly lower K rate, and a lower GB/FB ratio. The .300 BAA and 5.83 ERA are quite scary, although I'd hate to see what the ERA would look like if he hadn't been so stingy at giving up HRs. So how'd he do? He still walked more than he struck out (4/3). But fortunately, Lowe only gave up 4 hits and no HRs in 7 shutout innings. Kinda lucky if you ask me. It's also a testament to the pathetic abilities of the Rockies offense. Going forward, I don't see Lowe bringing that ERA below 5.00. Lastly, thanks to studes of Hardball Times fame who gave me a nice compliment over at his place. 6.08.2004
T.O. BABY I just finished my first year of teaching high school math, and I'm headed on a nice vacation. This blog won't get updated for about a week, but hey, you're all used to that anyways. Roger Clemens is pitching in Safeco field today agains the putrid Mariners' offense. My prediction? 8 IP, 7 singles, 2 walks, 1 run, and a win for the ex-Yankee/Red Sock. 6.06.2004
CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE Often times, people talk a whole lot of smack, and then don't follow it up with praise when things actually turn out alright. It's the opposite of the presidential promise phenomenon (talk like you're aiming for heaven, and follow it up with crap). Two of these cases concerning internet baseball came to mind to me today. First, MLB.com has become a pretty darn good website. As recently as last summer, it was pretty pathetic - horrible presentation, awful organization, and a complete lack of information. Now, however, the front page has a cutting edge rotating top story thing going, the stats are complete, the fantasy baseball options are prerty varied and interesting (if you're into that type of thing), and MLB.tv/MLB Radio are perhaps #1 on my list of reasons why the internet is a life requirement. Second, Baseball Prospectus used to get ragged on for giving a cold shoulder to fantasy fans. They didn't write any fantasy baseball articles, didn't provide fantasy baseball rankings, and generally seemed to be sabrmetric snobs. If that was ever true, it's certainly not now. The front of BP 2004 has a line catering to fantasy fans. The website now has a cheaper, more limited fantasy subscription option. And the site now includes a number of fantasy features: the dynamic player value spreadsheet, team tracker, and depth charts. Anyways, hats off to two baseball sites that listened to their critics and have made themselves better (a hard feat in BP's case). 5.31.2004
ABSENT MINDED PROFESSOR I don't usually write about myself, but if I can help anyone feel better about things that went wrong this weekend, then I'm glad to help out. On Friday, I managed to lose my wallet in the two mile drive between the bank and my house. Really. The bank didn't find it, and I didn't have it when I got out of my car 5 minutes later. I cancelled the credit cards, and have to go pay for a new license tomorrow. Then, this morning, I went into school early to finish writing my exams. Worked for about thirty minutes, then went out to my car to grab some more stuff. I brought out the wrong set of keys, locking myself out of the building, and everything important in the building. I had to walk a block to a pay phone and wake up my principal to let me back in. Other than that, it was a pretty good weekend. My cell phone even still works after I did my best to destroy it with water and sand at the beach. I rule. 5.30.2004
PROUD TO BE A RED SOX FAN Johnny Damon's out of the lineup today, and rather than put his replacement (Gabe Kapler) in the leadoff spot, Terry Francona used his head and reshuffled the lineup. The 1-2 punch today is Mark Bellhorn and Kevin Youkilis. Most people would cringe at Bellhorn as a leadoff hitter - you know, no speed. But his .390 OBP is higher than any other current leadoff hitter. And putting a rookie in the number two hole is a MLB feau paux - but with a career minor league OBP of three billion, that move seems pretty smart to me. Nice move, boys. JOHN KRUK I officially like John Kruk and all his antics. His baseball views are a little skewed (ok, extremely skewed), but he is entertaining. And not in the obnoxious way that Terry Bradshaw's "entertaining". Kruk's a good find for Baseball Tonight. Now they just have to do something about that whole baseball incompetence thing. Has he made any one ball jokes, yet? $100 AND $500 BILLS Fantasy baseball is a fun game. It builds ego, makes us feel like a part of the game, and keeps college friends together. And there's a battle line drawn between the people that play in shallow leagues versus deep leagues. At most discussion boards it goes like this: "Shallow leagues are no fun. They're so easy. Every team's an All-Star team." "Shutup. You're an elitist prick. I'll kick your ass in a shallow league." I think both arguments are correct, to a certain extent, and both sound really lame, too. Fantasy baseball is a zero-sum game. By definition, there will be one winner, one second-place finisher, and one big loser. Whether your team is "good" or "bad" depends on how your team finishes compared to the other teams. Just because a team has a lot of All-Stars doesn't make it a good team. Calling a player an All-Star means that he's good compared to other major league baseball players. If MLB contracted down to 6 teams, would Rafael Furcal be an All-Star anymore? No, he'd be replacement level talent. Just because a "good" player is available on the waiver wire doesn't mean he's going to help a team in a shallow league. My metaphor is this: if you pick up a $100 bill, that's great. Except if everyone else is picking up $500 bills. The absolute skill of Rafael Furcal doesn't change depending on the size of the league. It's his relative value that changes. Hell, if the league expanded to 30 teams, Neifi Perez might be league-average. As it is, he's extremely replaceable to MLB teams, but is still better than 99.99% of the world population. In some respects, it's harder to succeed in shallower leagues. The difference between one All-Star and another is hard to predict. 5.28.2004
RETURN OF THE KINGS Last year, the Red Sox led the known universe in most of the important offensive categories, including the most important category, runs. Many predicted a return to merely very good this year, and that was before Nomar and Nixon were lost to injuries. Both of those guys are close to returning, and it begs the question, how much will they help the Red Sox offense. Joe Morgan, a sabrmetric fave, said this in his recent ESPN chat: No, I don't think they will be lights out when they get back. But it will put them closer to where they were last year. They won't run away from the Yankees. The Yanks offense is just going to get better. The only thing the Yankees have to worry about is their pitching. I wouldn't get too overjoyed when Nomar and Trot come back. I'm not picking on Joe. I've moved past step 11 on the ladder of baseball competence.* But I disagree with him in this case, and it's a good question to answer. Let's take a look at how the Red Sox will look with Nomar and Nixon back in the lineup. Using the Marcel the Monkey projection system (I'd link to it, but the old Baseball Primer articles aren't available right now), here are what Nomar Garciaparra, Trot Nixon, Pokey Reese, and Kapler/Daubauch/McCarty were projected to do this year: Nomar:.298/.345/.509 5.6 AVG/OBP/SLG RC/25 Pokey:.247/.308/.360 3.7 Nixon:.278/.361/.503 6.0 Monster:.275/.340/.425 5.0 If we figure that each position's RC/25 is 1/9 the total offense (not true since RC/25 doesn't combine linearly), then the switch at both positions yields about .3 runs per game more. Over 162 games, that's an extra 50 runs. Using the estimate of 10 runs/1 win, the Red Sox improve by 5 wins per 162 games. If we prorate that to perhaps 3/5 of a season, the Red Sox will gain 3 wins. Now, the Red Sox will not run away from the Yankees most likely (how do you run away from a team that good?), but 3 wins is awesome. Personally, I will be overjoyed when Nomar and Trot get back. ----------------------- Ladder of Baseball Competence 1. Fall in love with Joe Morgan, Rob Dibble, Harold Reynolds, Jim Kaat, and other ex-ballplayers sharing their wisdom. 2. Start reading Jayson Stark and Peter Gammons, who provide lots of news, notes, and useless information. 3. Watch enough baseball to realize that hey, David Eckstein looks outmatched, but he gets the job done. 4. Start reading Rob Neyer, and have daily epiphanies for a week. 5. Start reading Baseball Prospectus, who Rob Neyer occassionally links to. 6. Fall out of love and start bashing Joe Morgan, Rob Dibble, Harold Reynolds, Jim Kaat, and other ex-ballplayers. 7. Fall in love with Baseball Prospectus. 8. Start cheating on BP with other BP, Baseball Primer. 9. Start bashing Rob Neyer. 10. Realize you're more than a two-website guy, and start reading all the baseball blogs. *11. Stop bashing Rob Neyer, Jayson Stark, Peter Gammons, Joe Morgan, Rob Dibble, Harold Reynolds, Jim Kaat and everybody else, realizing that everyone has their own contributions to the baseball world, and you can pick who you listen to. 12. Start your own blog, and spout off information that other people can make fun of. 13. Write blog entry referencing your own blog, and begin destructive self-referencing cycle. 14. Dunno, haven't gotten there yet. 5.24.2004
BASEBALL PROSPECTUS REMEMBERING DOUG PAPPAS When I first started reading a lot of sabrmetrically slanted baseball writing about five years ago, I got sucked in immediately because of the intellect and sense of "duh, why didn't I think of that" included in most articles. I only read Pappas' work when he was published at Baseball Prospectus, but he was a guy who thought for himself, and didn't bite on what others were offering. I often get asked by my high school students if I really add up prices at the grocery store, or measure out angles when working around the house. I'm proud to say that yes, I do in fact take an interest in the quality of my life, and do make an effort to be knowledgable about my decisions. I laugh at people who think supermarket discount cards really save them money, rely on mainstream commercialized news, or refuse to form their own opinions. Yeah, it's hard. Doug Pappas was one of those guys who formed his views based on research and preparation. His opinions carried weight because they weren't so much opinions as presentations of the facts. If you disagreed with his writing, you were basically calling him an outright liar. Buy what you want to buy, not what people are trying to sell you. WALKING THE USS MARINER PLANK If this is correct, might the Yankees be interested in Aurilia? Can he play 2B? Sure, he's played like a replacement player so far this year, but that's better than Enrique Wilson, and probably below the level of which Aurilia's capable. I don't want Aurilia to be the final answer this year, nor would he really help all that much, but jeez - Enrique Wilson? Come on. And don't answer me with Miguel Cairo. With Jose Vidro signing a deal with the Expos, there aren't many (any?) 2B available, as the A's are finding out. Once teams start to dump, Ray Durham, Junior Spivey, or Bret Boone might be available. Sure, it's lame to whine about the one position the Yankees are below average at, but it's a big hole. Can Aaron Boone heal in two more months? 5.23.2004
HOME-ANNOUNCER ANNOYINGNESS I watched the last two innings of Randy Johnson's perfect game on TBS. The announcers were obviously calling the game from the point of view of the Braves, but still were able to show amazement and appreciation of Randy's performance. In fact, they were probably rooting for the perfect game in the two innings I watched. Tom Glavine's got a no-hitter through 6, and the Rockies announcers hate him, the umpire, and everyone involved. They've whined about some close calls ("You don't have to just give him the no-hitter, ump!"), and generally made Glavine's performance seem cheap and flukish. Regardless of the truth of their claims (somewhere in between no truth and all truth), nobody wants to hear a game called like that. And now they're whining about how cheap Cliff Floyd's nubly infield single was. Get over it, guys. Try to be entertaining and at least pretend you like the baseball game. BOSTON FIELDERS Watching (well, listening to) the NESN broadcast this afternoon, they ran a little feature on how the Boston defense has improved over the last ten games, committing only 3 errors, as opposed to 33 errors in the first 36 games, or something like that. Look, the Red Sox have the second-best DER in the American League. They've been fielding well all year. Yes, they'd have been even better with less errors, but that's a tautology. Considering Fenway's a hitter's park, it's pretty impressive that the Boston defensive numbers are so good. The offense is solid, but it's the defense that has them in first. Since mentioning the Red Sox wouldn't be complete without mention of the Yankees (it's like Laurel & Hardy, or 'intents and purposes'), the Bombers have a similar offense to the Red Sox (with more name recognition), but a much worse pitching staff. In fact, the Yanks are pretty luck to be sitting less than two games back of the Sox, since they've only scored 7 more runs than they've allowed. 5.20.2004
THE DIPS GET DIPS Hell has frozen over. The Bills will win the Super Bowl. ESPN.com now includes DIPS ERA in their sortable pitching stats. I don't know whether I should be really happy that the world wide provider of sports broadcasting has taken one small step for man, or to be unhappy that these numbers are now easily available to everyone in my fantasy leagues. I'll go with the first, and promte the dissemination of important information. Check it out. To find over- and under-rated pitchers, sort by DIPS% which compares dERA to actual ERA. 5.18.2004
MEAN PARENTS SUCK If I ever have kids, my number one goal is to not give them a name that will scar them for life. Parents who leave their kids with names like Dusk, Bubba, or Fiontonicia are just inconsiderate. But even worse are the parents that pair up a first name with their last name to create something horrible - Richard Small, I.P. Freely, and Amanda Hugankiss are schoolyard favorites. Do you really think your kids can ever love you if they know you picked their crappy-ass name? And then there's Randy Johnson. In case you're unaware, "randy" is a synonym for "horny" in Great Britain, and a johnson is... well, you know what a johnson is. My friends and I get a great chuckle out of The Big Unit's (snicker) name and nickname more frequently than we really should. It gets even better when his name is used in headlines. There are just some verbs that are completely inappropriate. I often wonder if the headline writers are trying to see how many people get it. Take the ESPN.com Scoreboard page, for example - Perfect game: Big Unit blows away Braves. I mean, really. Is that necessary? If only Albert Pujols had a "better" first name, Randy Johnson would have some competition. RANDY JOHNSON TURNS IT ON I don't believe in jinxes. To prove it, I'm typing this in the top of the 8th inning as Luis Gonzalez singles to right. Whether or not The Unit finishes of his perfect game, talking about it beforehand has no bearing on the outcome. Of course, I can only prove that if he finishes the perfect game, so I'm rooting for him to do so. I don't particularly like Randy, except that I always admire and root for exceptional talent, and he's on both my NL fantasy team and my Strat team. And it's always cool when rare events occur. Perfect through 8... How bad must the Braves hitters be feeling right about now? Oh, and how bad must they be? First, the Braves strikeout 18 times against Ben Sheets, and their next game they don't even get on base. Ouch. 25 in a row... So, DIPS says the lack of hits isn't due to Randy's ability. Do pitchers show skill on balls-in-play, but just not consistently? I've only watched two innings. Were all of the balls-in-play easy plays? 26 in a row... Man, this is cool. Two strikes... Eddie Perez managed to lay off the high heat. HE'S GOT IT! THE FOUR-MAN & THE COORS MAN I was listening to the Phillies broadcasters announce the Philadelphia at Colorado game yesterday afternoon, and they kept harping on the fact that if you're going to try a four man rotation, it just has to be done with four veteran pitchers that can work late into games. They made it seem like this was a foregone conclusion and that the Rockies were idiots. I hate arguing with anyone that proclaims the Rockies are idiots, but I don't think I agree with Phillies' announcers. Sure, the four Rockies' starters are on strict pitch counts, making their bullpen pitch a few innings every game. But since they know how long their starters will go, they can schedule their bullpen a little better than other teams. Plus, dropping the fifth starter gives them one more arm out of the bullpen. So if it's not a bullpen issue, is it a development issue? Are veterans more capable of pitching every fourth day than young starters? Are young starters at risk because they're pitching more often? Nope. It's not pitching frequently that tends to be bad for the arm, but throwing pitches when tired, as in high pitch counts. By limiting pitch counts, the Rockies are likely saving their young arms. And I can't really support this claim, but perhaps pitching more often will help them improve faster. Might these young starters on three days rest be less effective than on four days rest. Perhaps, but I don't think so. Either way, that's not a young/old issue. One other thing to consider is the rumor that pitching at Coors takes more out of you. The lack of oxygen creates more soreness and more fatigue. Is it more helpful to recovery to pitch shorter more often, or to pitch longer less often? I don't know. It would be an interesting thing to look at at. But again, that's not a young/old issue. I'm a fan of the four-man rotation. I think it's advantageous and not that much of a risk, especially if starting pitchers are brought up preparing for it. I can't wait for many of the organizations who use it in their minor league systems to try it at the major league level. It won't suddenly improve a team by 10 wins, but if you can add up lots of these half-game advantages, it makes a difference. --------------- Also, is there any hitter that's more attuned to his home ballpark than Vinny Castilla? Starts in Colorado = total domination. Moves to AL = suck. Moves to Atlanta = sucks a little less. Moves back to Colorado = total domination. In any case, his career definitely doesn't help the "Todd Helton would be a stud anywhere" argument. 5.16.2004
GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS, ESPN On Baseball Tonight, John Kruk was justed asked (I'm paraphrasing), "If you had to pick the AL Cy Young winner right now - the one pitcher you would want to start one game you had to win - would you pick Kevin Brown? Pedro Martinez? Curt Schilling? Who?" To which John Kruk replied, "Jarrod Washburn". Harold Reynolds agreed, saying "It's all about the wins. ERA can get distorted when pitchers have to pitch with a lead. They pitch to the score. Man, I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with Kruk." It's good, Harold, that you briefly realized Kruk is a crazy man, but you are horribly horribly wrong about this. ESPN, you pride yourself on being the World-Wide Leader in Sports. Frankly, you should call yourself the World-Wide Provider of Sports Broadcasting. True leadership implies having foresight, taking risks, and showing the courage to admit that the traditionalists just might be wrong. Revolutionary ideas, correct ideas, ideas that stand on their own and don't need spin-doctors to keep them alive, can only be contained for so long. Eventually they will catch hold and spread like wildfire among the sports world. It's already happening, and it will only continue to accelerate. We don't need the help of ESPN, but they could help fan the flames, and in the process, truly show themselves to be the sports leader they claim to be. If they stick with the status quo, they'll be left in the dust. Extra: For more of my thoughts in the Wins vs. ERA vs. Pitcher Talent issue, check out this thread at RotoJunkie. RED SOX PLEDGE If you tune into NESN broadcasts, you occasionally see ads of Red Sox players reciting a an altering version of the Pledge of Allegiance. I find a lot of Red Sox Nation thing annoying (mostly the anti-Yankee, non-baseball stuff), but this is pretty cool. I pledge allegiance to the fans, of the entire Red Sox nation. And to the Fenway faithful, in all the stands. One team, under Terry, unbeatable. With offense, and pitching - Play ball.It comes across better if you actually watch the commercial. SKYKING GETS 3000th HIT; LOCK FOR HALL They say 3000 hits is a the biggest milestone of them all - one of those numbers that all but guarantees a spot in the Hall of Fame. Add in the fact that it only took one year to get there, and I don't think there's really any doubt on this one. True, there have been slumps this past year, periods of non-posting that lasted longer than Derek Jeter's Luis Sojo impersonation. But between rotisserie baseball, Strat leagues, specific baseball news, and baseball analysis, I've got enough topics to keep me going at least a few times a week. Of course, those few times may all come on the same day when I find myself with some free time. As those of you who also try to keep a blog know, any notes containing even mild words of encouragement are awesome. Your emails and the list of referring URL's are the only sign to me that people actually read anything here. Not that I need others to justify my ideas, it's more that you justify the fact that I take the time to post my ideas here. (I don't really pay too much attention to the site counter because 75% of those hits are probably from my mother or me.) Anyways, comments are now working*, so it's easier to share you own opinions about the ideas I've shared. Currently, I'm especially interested in what people have to say about fantasy valuation. * - working as well as any other aspect of Blogger software. Dont' be surprised if this blog suddently goes GreyMatter one of these months. 5.15.2004
GRASS IS GREEN IN YANKEE LAND, TOO Although the Yankees failed to take advantage of a number of opportunities to win today's game, there are some positive signs to take away from it on the hitting side of things. Alex Rodriguez hit two homeruns, his 8th and 9th of the season, and raised his average to .291. Anyone still worried about him? I almost snagged him in a trade in my Strat league earlier this year, when his owner was worried about the lack of SS eligibility and early season slump. I don't think right now is the time to revisit that deal. Bernie Williams continue to hit his way out of his horrible early season slump with a homerun. Bernie's a good hitter, and although he's getting old, and never had a ton of power, he's not totally finished. I expect a .280/.370/.460 kind of year from Bernie. And thank god he's playing, and hitting second, instead of Kenny Lofton. The only place I wouldn't mind seeing Lofton is second base. Gary Sheffield also hit a homerun, only his third of the season. It might just be a slump, or his pre-season thumb injury might still be bothering him. Either way, the Yankees heed him to be at least 80% of his traditional self to keep pace with the Red Sox this year. Whenever I have to tell people I'm both a Yankee fan and a Red Sox fan, they first demand an explanation (my dad brought me up a Yankee fan, then I went to school in Red Sox country and watched them daily), then they ask me how I can root for both of them. Well, in years like this when both organizations have great teams, it makes for one hell of a divisional race. DARTMOUTH VS PRINCETON I went to Dartmouth. Here's a link to an article in our school paper analyzing the Dartmouth vs. Princton playoff game from a sabrmetric point of view. As is pointed out over at Baseball Think Factory, there are some smallish flaws, but the author makes good points, and I can't resist posting a link to an article from my alma mater. YOUKILIS FAILS TO TAKE A WALK The Greek God of Walks, called up to replace Bill Mueller for the weekend, failed to take a walk in his first MLB game. Just goes to show you how minor league stats just don't translate to the Majors. And where did he get the idea that hitting a homerun would be productive? Just know your role, and stick to it, Kevin. Ok, seriously, great to see Youkilis produce in his first MLB game. He should only be with the Red Sox for a few games, until Mueller returns. Youkilis might put up similar production to Mueller this year if given the chance, but Mueller's a better fielder, and Youkilis could use the time in AAA. Two more pluses for the Red Sox today: Bellhorn hit a homerun and walked twice, and Arroyo pitched 8 shutout innings. How many times can you say a team is really happy with their two-hole hitter batting .236? And how happy must the Sox be that the fill-in for their disappointing submariner has turned out to be an above-average pitcher? Bellhorn: 236/398/407 for a OBP-heavy 800 OPS Arroyo: 1.09 WHIP, 3.53 ERA in 35 IP 5.12.2004
BEING FAMOUS AND VALUATION THEORY Studes mentioned this blog in the reference section of his Angels article over The Hardball Times and there have been a lot of extra hits here today. (That is, more than 7.) Thanks for the mention, and I'm glad to have "inspired" somebody else. I used to dislike the Angels, but the attitude taken by Arte Moreno, their new owner, has really impressed me. Their fast start has my prediction of them clearly winning the AL West looking pretty good right now. (And no, I'm not going to mention my bad predictions, like the fact that Miguel Cabrera will have a poor sophomore year.) Anyways. I'm not quite ready to type up a full entry on the idea, but I've been thinking a lot lately about fantasy valuation. For a long time I've been a big fan of the replacement model, where players get credit for their stats above and beyond positional replacement level, as a percentage of the overall pool. I'm changing my mind. To what, I'm not exactly sure yet. Replacement makes sense. If everyone has to have a shortstop, the 8 homeruns that every available shortstop will hit aren't worth anything. If there are 500 homeruns available above replacement, 10 homeruns above replacement should be worth 10/500 of the money allocated to homeruns. You pay for stats based on supply and demand. But here's the issue. Every category should have the same amount of money spent on it. (Well, not necessarily, but that's just a different, independent modification, so I'll ignore it for now.) Therefore the average money spent on homeruns by all teams should be the same as the average money spent on stolen bases should be the same as the average money spent on ERA, etc. And if a team spends that average amount of money in a category, they should expect to earn average roto points on that category. Now, what if a team spends more money that average on one category, and that same amount less than average on another category? In theory, the number of points gained in category one should cancel out with the number of points lost in category two. But does replacement theory guarantee that? No. In fact, it's quite possible that spending an extra $15 on one category will get you 3 points, while spending an extra $15 on another category will only get you 2 points. If you think of the number of stats needed to get a certain number of points in terms of the money you need to spend to get those stats, then you're really dealing with with the same unit for every category, that unit being money. (I think of this as normalization - but in a non-statistical way). Not all categories are are spread out in the same way. In some categories, it taks a lot of money to move from middle-of-the-pack to first place. In other categories, the distance is a lot closer. To quote from this good thread over at Mastersball. Traditionally, different categories tend to be spread out differing amounts. Why? I'm not exactly sure, but probably because the stats of some categories are spread between a lot of players (runs, rbis, strikeouts) while others are dominated by a small few (sbs, saves). So let's say the twelve teams are distributed like so in the HR and SB categories (the average team will spend 400/12 = $33 per category). These example distributions are both more dense towards the mean, and spread out towards the ends, which is typical. It's just that SBs are spread out more.HR: 18, 22, 25, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 41, 44, 48 So yes, I'm likely to eat a lot of my words that I've spewed about the replacement model over the years. But I think there might be some merit to combining the two techniques. It may makes sense to take into account replacement level before normalizing each statistic. I'm not sure. It may turn out not to matter. 5.09.2004
ESPN.COM MLB SCOREBOARD It seems as though Joe Kennedy just pitched a couple days ago. Well, that's because he did. The Rockies have moved to a 4-man rotation for the rest of the year or until disaster strikes, whichever comes first. I'm a big fan of the 4-man rotation, so I'll be hoping it works out "well" for the Rockies, mostly o that other teams won't be afraid to try it. Of course, it can't make your top four pitchers into studs; it can only allow you to avoid the awful fifth starter. Kennedy's the only Rockies pitcher flashing true skill, but we'll see if it keeps up the entire year. His dERA is at 3.88 compared to his actual ERA of 2.49, so he'll probably "disappoint" the rest of the season. But a Rockie with an ERA of 3.88 is something to be proud of. Let's go, Joe. 5.08.2004
MARLIN POWER SPLIT Three players on the Marlins have hit 9 HRs so far this year - Lowell, Choi, and Cabrera. Nobody else on the team has more than 2 HRs. The Cubs, on the other hand, have every member of their starting lineups with at least 3 HRs, plus their 4th outfielder, but nobody's hit 9 HRs. HELP. PLEASE. If the Dodgers had finished last in runs scored by only one run last year (instead of by 70 runs), they would have been expected to win 92.5 games, or 9 games better than they'd be expected to win given their actual runs scored. 92 wins would have been good enough for the Wild Card. (Which means there would be no talk about the amazing small-ball Marlins.) The Dodgers are off to a solid start this year, thanks to a competent, if not great, offense. As Bill James preached, there's value in being average. The 2003 3.19 team ERA didn't hurt, either. Let's look at another NL West team that's having both an amazingly good year in one respect, and an amazingly poor year in another - the San Francisco Giants. Barry Bonds v. 2004 is putting Barry Bonds v.2001-2003 to shame, which is hard to do. And the rest of the San Francisco offense? Um, yeah. Barry Bonds: 424/682/1.017 for a 1.699 OPS Rest of team: one other players with an OPS above .800 - Marquis Grissom at .906 Bonds has created roughly 30 runs, making 34 outs. That works out to be about 22 runs/game (25 batting outs). The rest of the team therefore has accounted for 98 runs in 720 batting outs. That works out to be 3.4 runs/game. Last year, the offense that held the Dodgers out of the playoffs scored 3.5 runs/game. It's just criminal that a lineup featuring one of the best hitters of all time having one of the best years of all time might rival one of the most pathetic lineups of all time. Were the Giants able to find two league-average OBP players to bat first and second, and one or two solid power hitters to hit fourth and fifth, San Francisco would destroy opposing pitching. Brian Sabean gets cut a lot of slack, even by sabrmetric types, because he's built many successful teams using his own methods. But the 2004 Giants are a complete waste of talent. Hell, if the Red Sox can find a way to be at the top of the league in fielding and bullpen ERA, the Giants can find some MLB-ready hitters. Update: The Hardball Times has Barry Bonds at 38 Runs Created. My 30 runs created was a rough estimate using Extrapolated Runs, making sure to treat the IBB differently from the non-IBB. If we credit Barry with creating 38 runs, that puts him at 28 RC/25 and the rest of the Giants offense at 3.1 RC/25. Way, WAY more pathetic. THE HARDBALL TIMES STATISTICS I love these graphs. Not only do they contain information slightly different from what you can get anywhere else, it's real easy to visually see how the teams compare to each other. Today I was looking at the DER (defensive efficiency ratio - the percentage of balls in play that the defense turns into outs) of the Anaheim Angels. The Angels have been a pretty good fielding team since their championship year, thanks in large part to Darin Erstad in centerfield. John Lackey pitched a shutout last night, yielding only three hits in 9 innings. He also only struck out 3 batters, thus relying on his fielders for a whole lot of help. Are the Angels still a good fielding team even with Erstad at firstbase? Nope. Their DER this year is basically in a three-way tie for last in the American League with Detroit and Minnesota. Their all turning balls-in-play into outs a 66.4% clip. The top team in the AL, Tampa Bay, is at 72.0%. Boston, following the "screw the fundamentals/Moneyball" approach, is second in the league in fielding. How were the Angels at fielding over the past few years? Looking at the historical graphs over at Baseball Graphs, I estimated the Angels DERs the years Erstad has played CF (since Edmonds left). Also, after each year is the number of games Erstad played in CF. 2004: 66.4% (13th in AL) - none 2003: 71.5% (4th in AL) - 66 (all when healthy) 2002: 73.5% (1st in AL) - 143 2001: 71.8% (4th in AL) - 146 2000: 71.5% (1st in AL) - 30 (112 in left, GAnderson in CF) Hmm, looks like some great fielding most of those years, and then a crash this year. Garret Anderson played CF in 14 games, actually posting lower range factors and zone ratings than Chone Figgins and Jeff DaVanon in the same number of games. Yup, if Erstad's going to be taking up a spot in that lineup, he should be in CF. 5.05.2004
ANTI-ANTI-MONEYBALL I've tried a few times to write about the anti-Moneyball backlash going on, especially over at ESPN.com and on Baseball Tonight. Each time my thoughts haven't come out very coherently, but Jay Jaffe was nice enough to write almost exactly what I was trying to write. I don't usually link to other articles, but this one is definitely worth reading. As far as Buster Olney's Productive Outs article goes, the part that amuses me the most is that the anti-statistics movement not only tries to use a statistic to prove its point, but uses the statistic poorly. As usual, the argument ends up being something like, "'Cause I said so." As far as ESPN baseball announcers go, the part that amuses me the most is that the guys who had pretty good careers (Joe Morgan and John Kruk) owe much of their success to OBP, especially Kruk who was approximately a career .300/.400/.450 hitter. 4.28.2004
WALK, DON'T RUN Mark Bellhorn, a favorite of mine, is having a rather strange year statistically. His average is barely above the Mendoza line, but his on-base percentage is on the leader board, and the ol' slugging leaves something to be desired: .214/.430/.357 Bellhorn has 12 hits and 21 walks in 16 games. On most other teams, he wouldn't be playing regularly, but the Red Sox know that a .787 OPS isn't bad, especially when the OBP component is so high. Think about it this way, would people be worried if he was a .357/.430 player, like many many other second basemen? Nope, and with the extrme OBP, Bellhorn's OPS is worth at least .30 extra points on the OPS scale we're traditionally used to dealing with. Since I was on a roll with ASS/Retrosheet, I decided I'd try to find any season between 1999 and 2002 in which a player had more walks than hits (excluding IBB). The biggest difference was John Jaha in 2000 when he had 33 walks versus 17 hits in not much playing time. If you set some sort of minimum playing time (I picked a minimum of 50 hits), the only player with more walks than hits was Jay Buhner in 1999 (69 walks, 59 hits). With a minimum of 100 hits, Barry Bonds had 143 walks and 156 hits in 1999. Tim Salmon 2001, Adam Dunn 2002, Barry Bonds 2002, Jim Thome 1999, John Jaha 1999, Robin Ventura 2001, and Mark McGwire 1999 aren't far behind. For players that managed 200 hits, Bernie Williams had the smallest gap between his walks and hits - 119 and 128 in 1999 and 2002 respectively. Here's hoping Bellhorn keeps that OBP in the .430 range, and can find the 2002 power stroke again. He should get the opporunity to play at least 3-4 games a week the whole year. WHEN HOMERUNS ARE HIT Yesterday, John Lackey pitched a pretty good game, and hadn't surrendered any runs through 6 2/3 innings, at which point he was pulled in favor of Scot Shields after he loaded the bases. No problem, of course, since Brandon Inge was coming to the plate and Inge is one of the worst hitters in the American League (with apologies to Darin Erstad, Willie Harris, and quite a few others, actually). Of course, Inge proceeds to hit a grand slam, slamming Lackey with 3 ER. Still not a bad outing, and much better than Lackey's previous starts this year. Tonight, Mulder hasn't been so hot, surrendering a bunch of hits and walks, before settling down and throwing a couple scoreless innings. He gave up a solo homerun to Jorge Posada, and was lucky Jorge didn't come to bat with men on base, like there had been most of the game. Mulder's outing would have been much worse had the HR come at a different time. That got me thinking, are homeruns more likely to be hit at different game states? Most importantly, do more homeruns get hit without anyone on base? That makes a little sense - pitchers probably pay more attention to preventing homeruns when it will cost them more. Using Retrosheet data and ASS, here's a chart showing the probability of a homerun occuring at the different base states in the years 1972-1992 and 1999-2002: basesit hr n hr/n Here's just 1999-2002 data: basesit hr n hr/n Looks like homeruns get hit more often with the bases empty, and not as much with runners in scoring position. Of course, once the bases get loaded, the rate increases again, probably because the pitcher has to throw strikes, or risk walking in a run. Of course, the reason might also be that the pitchers who allow a lot of baserunners are bad, and bad pitchers also give up homeruns. What about if we consider the number of outs? Does the number of outs alone affect when homeruns get hit? Using 1999-2002 data: outs hr n hr/n Hmm, a small advantage to the hitter with no outs. I don't know why, or if it's significant. I wonder if there are any unique combinations of base/out states that are extreme cases either for or against the hitting of homeruns: outs:basesit hr n hr/n Nothing crazy, but with no outs and the bases empty, homeruns occur at the highest rate. Those are the lead-off plate appearances (or plate appearances following lead-off homeruns), so maybe pitchers are just a little rusty or don't quite have their focus starting an inning. If anyone's got any other explanations, let me know. 4.19.2004
ESPN.COM: BARRY BONDS If it seems as though I have a man-crush on Barry Bonds, it's because I do. His OPS is now up to 1.903. No, that's a not a typo: 1.903. If you alternated doubles and outs, your OPS would "only" be 1.500. Barry's almost averaging doubles two out of three times he comes to the plate (.666 OBP, 1.333 SLG). Shiite. I know it's early, but what would it do for Barry's image and legacy if he were to win the triple crown this year? I mean, it's really not that good a measure of performance, but it's still really hard to do, and most baseball fans still see it as the Holy Grail. Leading the league in HRs and AVG are strong possibilities for Barry, but the RBIs might be hard considering the San Francisco lineup and number of IBBs he's bound to receive. I mean, do you really pitch to a player with a 1.903 OPS? Perhaps my favorite thing about Barry potentially winning the triple crown is how he would treat it. One, he realizes a 1.300 OPS is more impressive. Two, he wouldn't gloat. Three, he'd pay homage and act humble towards past triple crown winners. And four, he's probably be disappointed because the season was over and he'd have to listen to people praise him instead of being able to play baseball. 1.903 OPS? That's disgusting. 4.17.2004
THE HR/2B CLUBS Ahh, the wonders of the Lahman database. I was able to answer the questions I posed in the previous entry. There have been 348 30 HR/30 2B seasons. Here are the players that have done it more than three times: First Last Total Lou Gehrig 9 Jeff Bagwell 8 Jimmie Foxx 7 Frank Robinson 6 Manny Ramirez 6 Ted Williams 6 Albert Belle 6 Barry Bonds 6 Duke Snider 5 Carlos Delgado 5 Frank Thomas 5 Babe Ruth 5 Willie Mays 5 Juan Gonzalez 5 Rafael Palmeiro 5 Billy Williams 4 Alex Rodriguez 4 Brian Giles 4 Hank Aaron 4 Chuck Klein 4 Vladimir Guerrero 4 Shawn Green 4 Hank Greenberg4 There have been 20 40/40 seasons: First Last Total Todd Helton 2 Lou Gehrig 2 Babe Ruth 2 Albert Belle 2 Carlos Delgado 1 Juan Gonzalez 1 Hank Greenberg1 Shawn Green 1 Rogers Hornsby 1 Larry Walker 1 Chipper Jones 1 Chuck Klein 1 Willie Stargell 1 Frank Thomas 1 Hal Trosky 1 Richard Hidalgo 1 There have been five 45/45 seasons: First Last Total Albert Belle 2 Larry Walker 1 Todd Helton 1 Lou Gehrig 1 The best season ever in this regard was Albert Belle in 1995 where he hit 50 HRs and 52 2Bs. In case you're curious, he also had one triple that year, to go along with 121 runs, 126 RBIs, 73 BBs, 80 SOs, and .317/.401/.690 for a 178 OPS+. His OPS+ was actually higher (190) in 1994, but Albert only played in 106 games. ESPN.COM: BARRY BONDS I was just perusing the Barry Bonds page at ESPN.com after noticing he took Eric Gagne deep last night. So far in 2003 Barry's line looks like .429/590/1.000. He's got 4 HRs, 4 2Bs, 11 BBs, and 3 SOs and only 28 ABs. If you project that out over a full year, it looks like 130 runs, 194 hits in only 454 ABs, 65 2Bs, 65 HRs, 162 RBIS, 178 BBs, and 49 SOs. The thing that strikes me (beyond the 1.590 OPS) is the 65 doubles and homeruns. I wonder what the highest level reached by a player in both the HRs and 2Bs. There's probably been a 30/30 season, and perhaps a 40/40 season, but anything much higher sounds really difficult. Do I really expect Barry to keep this up? No way. Just like I don't expect Jermaine Dye to hit 70 HRs this year, or Josh Becket to have a sub-1.00 ERA. Blah sample size blah. I've actually seen a few of Barry's games this year, and I've seen three of his doubles. They've all been down the third base line with the third basemen playing in the shortstop position. I think it's awesome that Barry has the ability and desire to "settle" for a double when he knows it's available. And of course, it's amazing that he seems to be able to do it whenever he wants. Barry's good. 4.16.2004
FOX GRAPHICS ENHANCEMENTS During the Yankees - Red Sox game tonight, Fox Sports plans to unveil a slew of new graphical enhancements aimed at younger fans. You can read about them in the above article. Some of it will be annoying - sound effects, rainbow colors to show the distance of a player's lead at first, and Tim McCarver (oh, he's not new?) - but some may help the intelligent fan. ESPN has had K-Zone for a while, and has started using a pitch tracker this year to show a pitch's trajectory. Both of these things will be picked up by FOX. The addition that could go either way is the new animated, talking baseball graphic named Scooter. It will pop up on the screen occasionally to explain baseball strategy to viewers. Now, if they go on and on about how the hit and run is fabulous, good teams need clutch hitting, and the intangibles that the Yankee clubhouse always has, I'll barf. But if the talking baseball shows me how to throw Barry Zito's curveball or Mike Mussina's knuckle-curve, or explains why on-base percentage is the most important basic stat and how to calculate it, or pops up in the eighth inning to yell at Dusty Baker for not yet removing Carlos Zambrano after 148 pitches, I'm all for it. However, even the optimist in me thinks FOX will go the first route and make me very angry at their ignorance. But if not, I'll be the first to sing their praises. I'll definitely be watching tonight at 8 pm on FOX, both to see how these new goodies enhance (or de-hance) my viewing experience, and to watch what should be a fun Yankees - Red Sox game. 4.14.2004
DEFENSE INDEPENDENT PITCHING STATISTICS Looks like someone else will be doing the DIPS daily dirty work this year, which means I don't have to. Not that my DIPS updates were anywhere near daily, anyways. I'm going to leave the link at the left active, so that you can use last year's DIPS numbers as a reference this year. Combining them (and 2002 numbers, in theory) with this year's data is the best way to judge pitchers. Kind of the like the Voltron (Power Rangers for you teenie-boppers) of pitcher analysis. In case you're new to DIPS, it's a (pretty accurate) theory which basically says that while pitcher skills includes walk rate, strikout rate, and homerun rate, hit rate on balls in play (singles, doubles, triples) isn't really much of a pitcher skill. Batting average on balls in play (BABIP) is more a measure of team fielding ability, home ballpark, and statistical variance ("luck"). Early in the year, a pitcher may give up more than his fair share of dinky singles, thus raising his ERA when he's shown the same skill as a similar pitcher with better luck. DIPS also takes into account the fact that equal amounts of the raw ingredients of scoring (walks, homeruns, singles, stolen bases, etc) don't always yield the same number of runs. In the short term, flukey things like a walk before a homerun versus a homerun before a walk play games with a pitcher's ERA. Even over a whole year these things don't even out. So, in conclusion, a DIPS ERA (dERA) is the best measure of a pitcher's actual shown ability. It's a better indication of future ERA than actual ERA. When making judgments about pitchers (say, for fantasy baseball) use it instead of ERA. 4.09.2004
MY ANTI-GUYS I have a much easier time coming up with players that won't do as well this year as last. Avoiding the letdowns has always been a strength of mine in fantasy leagues. I do well mostly because players I draft rarely flame out. If none of your players perform much below what you expect, you'll tend to do well. This is a list of overrated baseball players in general, not just fantasy players, however. Bill Mueller Mueller's always been a decent player. He's an above average fielder and had a few good offensive seasons with the Cubs and Giants, but nothing near what he did last year. Sure, Fenway helps, but I think it's much more likely that David Ortiz, Trot Nixon, and Jason Varitek duplicate last year's breakout seasons than Mueller. Jeremie Gonzalez I've mentioned Gonzalez before. His rate stats just don't back up the ERA he posted last year. Even if his skills improve, which is likely for a young pitcher, his ERA is will almost definitely be worse. He's not the pitcher people think he is. Miguel Cabrera He's a good young player that will likely have some All-Star type seasons. But fifteen good playoff games do not guarantee an awesome sophomore season. Counting on a 21 year old to be a stud is not often a good bet. Joe Mauer Joe Mauer's another highly touted prospect that I think will struggle this year, injury aside. His hitting style throughout the minors is a lot like Sean Burroughs - good average, but not a lot of power, and decent plate discipline. Expect a .270/.320/.380 year from Mauer. Dontrelle Willis He had a great start yesterday, but his 2003 season was overhyped due to a strong start. If two pitchers end with similar ERAs, their seasons were likely similar quality. But if one pitcher started strong and had his ERA slowly dift upward, his season is often seen as better than a pitcher that started poorly and slowly brought his ERA down. Willis isn't a bad pitcher, but don't expect a sub-4.00 ERA. Brandon Webb, on the other hand is a young pitcher that displayed good talent throughout the entire 2003 season. Carlos Zambrano Another pitcher that overacheived by a little, and got worked like an Iverson crossover dribble. A good pitcher, but he'll disappoint a lot of people this year. The Orioles OF Baltimore has a number of young outfielders who are all media darlings. They won't suck it up, but there's not a star among Luis Matos, Larry Bigbie, and Jay Gibbons. If I had to bet on the next Oriole star, it would be Jack Cust. Of course, he's only been given one AB so far this year. To be Continued... 4.08.2004
MY GUYS Joe Sheehan wrote a Premium article for BPro today about "his guys" - players that he likes this year, for one reason or another. It's a really good, if not spectacularly creative, idea. So, in proper "copying is the highest form of flatter" tradition, here are my guys for 2004: Kelvim Escobar For some reason, he always seemed to pitch better as a starter than a reliever with the Blue Jays. Escobar's one of those guys that's always had a lot of potential, but hasn't lived up to it. I think this is the year he does, with something like a a 3.50 ERA in a lot of innings. The Anaheim park is slightly better for pitchers than Toronto, and the Angel defense is much better. Adam Dunn & Austin Kearns Yeah yeah, I've written about them already. And it's not like people don't expect them to be good players. They were, after all, top prospects just a couple years ago. But I think Dunn and Kearns are going to absolutely explode this year. We're talking Bash Brothers Part Deux for many years to come. Derek Jeter He's fallen off the shortstop radar for some reason. Everyone assumes he's now the fifth best shortstop in the majors behind ARod, Garciaparra, Tejada, and Renteria. Personally, I'd take him third, and second this year considering Nomar's injury. Jeter's not a great fielder, but I foresee a .330/.390/.500 year with 30 SBs. In that Yankee lineup, he'll rack up the counting stats, too. Hideki Matsui His ground ball to flyball ratio last year was way below what he did in Japan. Matsui's what people call a "professional hitter" and can definitely make the adjustment to lift the ball more. He's got the power and contact rate to crush the ball, but just needs a little lift. Expect a 10 HR bump this year. Jeremy Bonderman Some might accuse me of cheating because of his great start yesterday, but I've felt since last year that he's a much better pitcher than he showed. Pitchers often need a year or two of experience before figuring out the major league thang. I expect Bonderman's skills to keep improving, and Comerica Park can cover up some of the mistakes. Mike Cameron Batting average is often overrated, but it's very hard to be any good at all hitting .220. Shea's not a great hitter's park, but Cameron will think it's Coors compared to Safeco. Arthur Rhodes Yeah, it's hard for a closer to be underrated, but if you ignore that fact, then Rhodes is being given the shaft this off-season. He's been one of the best relievers over the last few years, with a hiccup last year. He's a lefty, but dominates batters from both sides. Corey Patterson People seem to forget he was on fire last year before getting hurt. More of a scouts dream than an analyst's, but good fielding, average, and power will make anyone happy. Quick Hits Javier Vazquez will be the Yanks' top pitcher. Mark Bellhorn will be this year's Bill Mueller. Jeff Weaver will love LA. Freddy Garcia will show that a healthy ear is a great thing. Justin Thomson will be the Braves top pitcher in an otherwise ugly season. And finally, to go out on a limb, Barry Bonds will be good. 4.07.2004
PEORIA STRAT LEAGUE UPDATE It's been a while since I've written about the Schuykill Kings in the Perioa Strat-o-Matic League - mostly because nothing much has happened recently. The draft ended about a month ago, with my final 15 picks being pure "prospect" picks. They aren't actual prospects (as in minor leaguers), because only players with 30 ABs or 30 IP in 2003 are eligible for the draft. We're more talking the Cliff Lee/Orlando Hudson/Ken Griffey Jr variety. Players with poor recent years and the potential to take it to the next level this year. Note that it's not a snake draft. 2004 Draft: TR Adam Kennedy 2. Luis Matos 3. Jeremi Gonzalez 4. Kyle Farnsworth 4. Francisco Rodriguez 5. Jose Valentin 5. Craig Wilson 6. Jose Reyes 7. Randy Johnson 9. Victor Martinez 10 Scott Sullivan 11 Derek Lowe 12 Tony Armas Jr 13 Junior Spivey 14 Eric Dubose 15 Brett Myers 16 Adam Dunn 17 Jeff Weaver 18 Grant Balfour 19 Arthur Rhodes 20 Tomo Ohka 21 John Lackey 22 Darrin Erstad [AJ Burnett] I traded my first round pick (11th out of 12) for Adam Kennedy and a 4th and 5th round pick, which turned into Francisco Rodriguez and Craig Wilson. Kennedy was the last of the playable 2Bs for a twelve team league, and I like his chance to improve. Had I kept the pick, I would have drafted Matos, who I grabbed in the second round anyways. He hits righties pretty well for a CF and is a 2 fielder with a good arm. I don't really think he'll improve next year, but he's great his year. The same goes for Jeremi Gonzalez. DIPS says his skills represent an ERA about one full run higher than his 3.92 ERA last year . Oh well, maybe lightning will strike twice. The rash of relievers taken was due to my lack of starting pitching. The plan is to limit all starters to 6 IP per start and fill in with mucho innings from relievers. Borowski, Guardado, Mota, Farnsworth, Rodriguez, and Sullivan should shut teams down the last three innings. If I'm still in the hunt after a couple months, I'll make a strong push to trade for a quality starter or two. I'm really excited about my pitching prospects for next year. I should be able to pull a quality five from Millwood, Clemens, Beckett, Randy, Lowe, Myers, Weaver, Balfour, and Lackey. Plus, you can always get at least one more quality arm from the draft. The hitting prospects don't intrigue me quite as much, but I foresee some big years down the road from Dunn, Reyes, and Martinez. The latter two should be more valuable a couple years from now. In general, hitting prospects are better bets than pitching prospects. But I tend to keep many hitters year to year due to this fact (BGiles, Guerrero, Blalock, DLee should be studs for a while), and thus I need to take chances on fewer hitters. Plus, other teams in my league don't seem to understand the value of platoons, so I'm able to draft lots of one-sided players, especially righties that can only hit righties. Anyways, we just got the results for... Month One The Kings finished Month One a game under .500. We swept three games against the the worst team in the division, and then were four games under against the top two teams. Not a bad start, and I'm only a couple games out of first. In a month or two some teams will have given up, and the pitching acquisitions should begin. I love baseball. ONE BUCK MINIMUM Perhaps you all realize this already, and I'm just behind the eight ball, but I've been thinking a lot about the $1 minimum bid and how it affects valuation. You have to spend at least $1 on everyone you buy. Thus, that $1 doesn't really represent $1 worth of value, just the cost of aquiring a player. We've all noticed this phenomenon at the end of an auction. If you've got $6 left for four positions, you can't bid all $6 on one player. You can bid up to $3 on one player, leaving you with exactly $1 for the last three. If we gave every team $23 less dollars to spend on 23 players and allowed minimum bids of $0, the auctions would run exactly the same. Players would be nominated at $0 instead of $1, and we'd decide whether to up the bidding or drop out. Every team is spending $23 of their $260 the same way - in order to get 23 players. It's really the money spent above the minimum that has any value. So in reality, we should ignore $23 of each team's budget when assigning value to players. Go through the whole valuation process - find replacement, add up stats above replacement, compute $$/stat, and assign value - but only use $237 of each team's budget to value players. Then, add $1 back into everyone's price to represent the $1 minimum bid. The draftable pool will still add up to the actual total budgets, but value will be assigneed correctly - as value above $1 instead of value above $0. I just adjusted my dollar values using this approach and it bumps down the top players about $3. Nothing extremely significant, but the fewer irregularities in values and projections, the better off you are. It can all add up and cause some prices to be way off. 4.06.2004
ELTON JOHN NIGHT Ok, I'll admit it. I watch American Idol. I don't watch much TV - sports, HBO stuff, and the occasional reality TV show - but my roommates are into the Idol and I'm right behind. Add in a little Elton John and tonight's hour should have been the perfect show. It wasn't. I feel sorry for Sir Elton, as many of his great songs were abused like Koch and Marte. Jennifer Hudson tore it up, a couple others put in quality performances, but it was a weak night overall. My favorite performer still remaining after Amy Adams was wrongly evicted last week (if anyone has her number, let me know) is John the Red. Sure, he doesn't show much personality, and he doesn't exactly have the pop-star voice, attitude, confidence, body, looks, wit, stage presence or anything else. But there's just something about him that intrigues me. Although there were a number of mistakes in tonight's performance, I really liked it. However, if I were John the Red's personal advisor, I would have forced him to sing I Guess That's Why They Call It The Blues. Great song, and it has a great feel for a Rat Pack wannabe. If he survives this week, John's newfound personality just might carry him the rest of the way (if his voice comes back). Anyways, to summarize... JPL's annoying, the Hawaii sisters are annoying, I wouldn't mind seeing George Huff win, I hope John the Red finds himself and saves America from whiney pop-stars, and if you wouldn't mind putting Amy Adams in touch with me, I'll send you a prize. 4.05.2004
ARTICLE HALL OF FAME I'm going to start a new section over on the sidebar. Any articles out on the web that are truly outstanding will enter my personal Article Hall of Fame. These will be pieces of baseball analysis that are truly original, thoughtful, well-written, and not linked to by every other baseball blogger. These will be pieces that are really worth reading over and over again, and worth sending out to your friends. I'm proud to announce that the inaugural recipient of this extremely prestigious (I'm holding back the giggles) honor is the Zumsteg Revenue Sharing article discussed and linked to below. Additional members to follow whenever the hell I feel like adding them. A TRIP TO THE MARKET SIZE The local sports talk guys were discussing market size on my drive home today. I've always been amazed at how willy-nilly the terms "large market" and "small market" get thrown around. They're always used as antonyms, but the meanings change more often than an Oakland closer. Sometimes it's "successful" versus "unsuccessful". Sometimes it's "high-payroll" versus "low payroll". Sometimes it's "holy" versus "evil". And sometimes it's "open-pocket owner" versus "spend-thrift owner". But rarely do people use the terms to describe what they should - the fact that some teams have a large population of local people to support their teams and some have a small population off which to feed. As Derek Zumsteg points out in this fine article, there are other factors (like general interest in baseball and per capita income) that affect how much money can be gleaned from a metropolitan area, but in general, it's the population that matters. (Another great series of articles to check out are Doug Pappas' Behind the Numbers pieces. Here's a link to the seventh article, which has links to the six previous articles. There's supposed to be an eighth, but I can't seem to find it on Google.) Following is a table from the Zumsteg article (which you really should read), resorted in decreasing order by adjusted population. (Adjusted population divides the LA, NY, and SF markets in half for each team.)
This analysis has been presented many many times by many many people. But it's even a good kick in my pants each time I see it. The order of this list is not what most people would guess off the tops of their heads. We should not be penalizing teams for spending lots of money. Revenue sharing should be based on market size. If you're in a big market and spending lots of money, good for you. Just share some of it. If you're in a small market and spending next to nothing, you shouldn't be rewarded for having a crappy team. It's the small-to-mid markets who are spending money and succeeding on the field that should get the most money from revenue sharing. MLB should reward the teams that are doing everything they can to win, and not the owners that spend nothing and just pocket the revenue sharing money coming their way. 4.04.2004
SCORE BARD'S PERIODIC TABLE OF BLOGS This blog, as of March 28, is a member the Transitoid Series of Score Bard's Periodic Table of Blogs. I'm Yb (Ytterbium - a naturally occuring element first discovered in Sweden and available commercially for $875 per kilogram), way over at the right. The Score Bard has always had my respect over at Baseball Primer - his ideas are intelligent, original and concise, and his writing seems to softly stroll along. I'm no writer, but I think he does it right. His website, humbug.com, is one of the few websites I link to over on the left sidebar. The first blog in the Transitoid Series is the Mark Cuban weblog, which I find pretty amusing. He writes some pretty analytical stuff about NBA refs, and philosophical entries about basketball and sports in general. Cuban's obviously a really smart guy with a passion for life. Oh, and the reality show where he'll give away a million bucks to whoever amuses him most will be great. PREDICTIONS I feel compelled to predict some stuff that will happen during MLB 2004. That way, I bring up the predictions that turn out, forget the ones that didn't, and come off looking like a genius. Ok, everyone reading this is probably too smart to fall for that, but even Baseball Prospectus takes credit for individual forecasting successes. The Standings These are on a hunch. I could take some projections from different sources (PECTOA, ZiPS, Diamond Mind, Marcel the Monkey, etc), which would be the smart thing to do, but I'm going to do this subjectively off the top of my head. I have, however, looked at all these projections at some point this spring. AL East New York Yankees Boston Red Sox Toronto Blue Jays Baltimore Orioles Tampa Bay Devil Rays It's funny, picking the Yankees is actually somewhat against the norm this year. The Sox are good, but injuries will cause them to fall behind the Yankees pace. Things might be different come playoff time, though. AL Central Chicago White Sox Minnesota Twins Cleveland Indians Kansas City Royals Detroit Tigers I think the young Indians players will surprise people this year. The Royals greatly overacheived last year, and even though they appear to have gotten better, they're going to make Rob and Rany wish they hadn't started up again. AL West Anaheim Angels Oakland Athletics Seattle Mariners Texas Rangers I don't like the A's offense, the Big Three are showing weaknesses, and the Angels are solid all around. Angel pitching is especially poised to break out this year, led by Kelvim Escobar and John Lackey. The Mariners will finish closer to the bottom of the division than the top. NL East Philadelphia Phillies Montreal Expos New York Mets Atlanta Braves Florida Marlins Yup, that's right, the Florida Marlins will go from first to worst. That offense is ugly. One of Penny/Beckett/Pavano will have a phenomenal year, but it's unlikely that all three go crazy. Benitez will solid, but he's only a closer. The Braves offense will come crashing down, and they don't have the pitching to keep it afloat. The Mets in third? Yes, I'm crazy, but I also think they're making smarter moves this year. NL Central St. Louis Cardinals Houston Astros Chicago Cubs Cincinnati Reds Milwaukee Brewers Pittsburgh Pirates The Cardinals still have great fielders and solid bats. They've added a few quality starters this year which should push them over the top. I don't like the Cubs pitchers to repeat last year's performance, and the offense isn't really all that good. The Reds offense (i.e. Dunn and Kearns) will go crazy, but untill they can find people to pitch, they'll be in the bottom third. NL West San Francisco Giants San Diego Padres Arizona Diamondbacks Los Angeles Dodgers Colorado Rockies I like the Padres, as do many other people, but with all their improvement, they weren't a very good club last year. The Giants managed to throw together just enough to complement Bonds. The Dodgers will get better, but it'll be next year at the earliest that all of DePodesta's moves (and gifts from Bean/Ricciardi) start paying off significantly. The Rockies should challenge the Pirates and Brewers for worst NL team. Playoffs The Red Sox and Astros will make it into the playoffs as Wild Card teams, and the Red Sox will make it to the Series, led by Pedro, Schilling, and Kim. In the NL, the Cardinals squeak out the pennant, but fall short against the Red Sox. Of course, since I'm picking the Red Sox, there's no way they'll go anywhere. 4.03.2004
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT - FREE MLB ALL ACCESS In case you missed the blog entry over at USS Mariner, MSN and MLB are offering a ridiculously great deal on MLB All Access. Basically, you can buy MLB.tv for $80 for the whole season to watch tons of games over the internet. Or, you can pay $110 for MLB All Access, which includes the MLB.tv live games plus condensed games, radio, and highlights. Or (and this is the best option in case you couldn't figure it out) you can pay $30 for MLB All Access by signing up for MSN Premium. It's $10 per month, and you get the first three months for free. I've signed up for the third option (duh), will enjoy my three months for nothin', and then spend the $30 for the rest of the season if I find it worthwhile. 3.31.2004
CONTEXT AND SCARCITY If a baseball team wins 80 games, is that good? Depends. Is this a major league baseball team during a 162 game season? Is this a major league baseball team during a strike-shortened season? Is this a major league baseball team over an entire decade? Is this a little league squad that only played 80 games over one summer? If a baseball player (in MLB) hits 30 homers, is that good? Is it as good if he plays in Colorado? Is it as good if he plays in Detroit? Is it good if he only batted 200 times? I think you get the idea. Whatever happens on the baseball field is context dependant. During a MLB season, many things tend to cancel each other out. Nobody bats against Pedro every game. Nobody hits in Colorado every game (although half the time is pretty significant.) There are many things in "real" Major League Baseball that are consistant year to year and aren't given second thought. The number of players per team, the numbers of teams in the league, and the way the game is scored (more runs win) are just a few examples. In fantasy baseball, however, these things can change. And most people don't adequately adjust their strategy for different situations. Is a fantasy league head-to-head or rotisserie? Is it 5x5, 4x4, or some crazy 8x6 configuration? Are you playing against 8 other people, 12 other people, or 20 other people? Do you have to draft five outfielders and two catchers, or two outfielders and five catchers? When you start changing around the number of teams, and the number of players per team, the amount of players that will end up on someone's team changes. The total number of players drafted and the number of players at each position determine how you value those players. And that, my friend, is the most misunderstood (or perhaps the most ignored) aspect of fantasy baseball. Eventually I may post something longer, but here's the quick and dirty explanation on how to value players: Find the replacement level at each position. By replacement level, I mean the amount of HRs, AVG, RBIs, RUNs, whatever, that you'd get at each position if you had to settle for the worst player picked. For each player above replacement at each position, add up their stats above replacement. All of the stats combined from every player slated to be drafted make up the draftable pool of stats. Take the amount of money to be spent per category ($260*hit-split*#teams/#hiting-categories) and divide it by the draftable stats in each category. This gives you a category $/stat ratio. For each player, multiply his stats above replacement by the category $/stat ratio to find the amount of money he earns in that category. Add up the values in each category to get each player's total value. Don't pay for what you can get for free, and pay for stats according to what percentage of the overall pool each player provides. 10 homeruns is awful from a player when you can get a 15 homerun player from the free agent pool and there are 1500 total homeruns to be drafted. But if you can't get anything more than 5 homeruns from the free agent pool and there are only 500 homeruns to be drafted (circa 50 years ago), then that player has a lot of value. Are things really that different between a 12 team mixed league and a 12 team "only" league? What's this scarcity thing all about? I mean, isn't it harder to find a quality SS in a deep league than a shallow league? You can't draft a bad player when picking from both leagues. This goes back to the idea of context. Carl Everett was pretty good in an AL-only league last year. Pretty studly in fact. But in a mixed league, he actually loses a lot of value. Why? Because he's not that much better than replacement level for that size league. If it's true that anyone can find a pretty good outfielder, then in order to win, you need to have players better than "pretty good." Ok, so let's talk actual numbers. Here are replacement levels for four different groups of players, based on 2003 stats in a 12 team 5x5 mixed league. Traditional 14 hitter lineups are used.
What does that table mean? Well, for example, a catcher will have, on average, 40 fewer RUNs, 40 fewer RBIs, and 11 fewer HRs than a firstbasemen with equal value. That's a fact. How much more would you pay for a player with eight extra homeruns? That's how much more you should pay for the privelege of moving a firstbasemen over to shortstop. Throw in the thirty extra RBIs and ten extra RUNs you'd get from the move, and you've got yourself a significant position scarcity effect. Let's look at the same table, this time for a 24 team mixed league. This simulates a 12 team "only" league, but is easier on me because I don't have to remove half the players from my list, and also removes the flukish differences between the AL and NL player pools.
What do you know... each position has replacement levels that are almost exactly the same. Only a difference of three HRs, thirteen RUNS, and fourteen RBIs. Position eligibilty is not as significant in deeper leagues, although it still affects value to some extent. How do the top players compare between the two size leagues - do their rankings stay the same? 12 Team League: Soriano ARod Sheffield Pujols Beltran Lopez Renteria Pierre Boone Garciaparra Helton Bonds Podsednik Ichiro Wilson Wells Lee Ramirez Delgado Furcal Crawford Posada IRod 24 Team League: Pujols Pierre Sheffield Beltran Soriano ARod Renteria Podsednik Ichiro Helton Crawford Bonds Nomar Boone Wells Ramirez Lee Lopez Abreu Delgado Those are similar lists, but in very different orders. As was shown with the replacement levels, the middle infielders and catchers lose ground to the outfielders and corner men going from a 12 team to 24 team league. It's also interesting to note that players at the same position can flip-flop rank order. Why is that? Because the player pool changes. Adding in more players alters the total number of each stat available to be drafted. Flooding the draftable player pool with more SBs relative to HRs decreases the value of each SB relative to each HR. Finally, let's take a look at the SB versus HR issue. So many people out there don't believe Juan Pierre, Carl Crawford, and others like them are worth so much. Listen, there aren't many SBs available. When a player has such a huge chunk of the pool, they're worth a lot of money. To paraphrase Lawr Michaels from the MLB experts draft, a category is a category. It doesn't matter if you get your points from the ERA category, the HR category, or the SB category. In a 24 team mixed league, there are 2700 draftable HRs versus only 1600 draftable SBs. For every SB drafted, there are 1.6 HRs drafted. So a 60 SB freak like Pierre is like having a 96 HR power hitter. Can you imagine having a hitter on your team with 96 HRs? Yikes. Sure, the power hitters usually also huge RUN and RBI numbers, adding to their value, but the value advantage in those categories is nothing compared to the SB (50 cents each) versus HR (30 cents each) advantage. Add in a solid AVG and RUNS, and you've got yourself a speedy fantasy stud. As always, if you've got questions, want more info, or just want to invite me into your fantasy league, email me. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
