B-ref User Survey
by Chris JaffeNovember 08, 2009
History instructor by day, statnerd by night, Chris Jaffe leads one of the most exciting double lives imaginable; with the exception of every other double life possible to imagine. Despite his lack of comic-book-hero-worthiness, Chris enjoys farting around with this stuff. His new book, Evaluating Baseball's Managers is available for pre-order. Chris welcomes responses to his articles via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
2010 impact rookies: Carlos Carrasco
by Alex PediciniNovember 07, 2009
Alex is a student in Boston. He welcomes all questions and comments here
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Ranking Yankee World Champions
by Chris JaffeNovember 06, 2009
History instructor by day, statnerd by night, Chris Jaffe leads one of the most exciting double lives imaginable; with the exception of every other double life possible to imagine. Despite his lack of comic-book-hero-worthiness, Chris enjoys farting around with this stuff. His new book, Evaluating Baseball's Managers is available for pre-order. Chris welcomes responses to his articles via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Great Moments in Plagiarization
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 06, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
The Nats lay people off
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 06, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
McCourt Update
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 06, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Twins strike for J.J. Hardy
by Evan BrunellNovember 06, 2009
Evan Brunell blogs the Red Sox regularly at Fire Brand of the American League. Stop by, or e-mail him with comments.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
My Morning in Exile
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 06, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
In the backwater swirling
by Brandon IsleibNovember 06, 2009
Brandon Isleib is a stat geek in all his endeavours, which makes him naturally inclined to baseball. He can be reached via the electronic mails.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Deep Thoughts: Tim Lincecum Edition
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 06, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
The 2009 Yogi Berra Award
by Max MarchiNovember 06, 2009
If you followed the blog I run for a couple of months before making it to The Show (i.e., The Hardball Times), you might remember a post about the bad ball swingers of 2008. Since Vladimir Guerrero is the poster boy of the third millennium greatest chasers, I gave the nickname "Vlad Guerrero Award" to the standings I produced.
Here I'm going to revisit that post, but I have decided to change the name of the award. Since awards are named after retired players, I went to Yogi Berra, because many sources report him as a batter who used to swing at anything within his reach, from his eyes—and higher—to his toes—and lower.
Before proceeding to the 2009 standings, let me remind you what I did a few months ago. First, I calculated the probability that a pitch is called a strike given its location. I calculated two sets of probabilities (one for right-handed batters and one for lefties), after standardizing the vertical component of the location taking the batter's height into account.
Then I classified as a "bad ball" every pitch that had a probability lower than 10 percent of being called a strike. The cut point was arbitrarily chosen, so if anybody has a better option, the suggestion is welcome.
Note: Repeating all the work I did on 2008 data I discovered a few errors in my code, so I urge you not to look at last year's result anymore.
Here is a graphical representation of the bad-ball zones.
The first table I will present shows the top 10 bad-ball chasers; that is, the 10 batters with the highest percentage of swings on bad balls.
Note: from now on I'm using 300 bad balls seen as the qualifier.
Table 1 - Swinging percentage on bad balls. Top 10.
last first pct bad balls
Olivo Miguel 39 574
Guerrero Vladimir 36 559
Soriano Alfonso 36 877
Rodriguez Ivan 36 529
Sandoval Pablo 36 972
Gonzalez Alex 35 542
Molina Bengie 35 612
Aybar Erick 34 628
Pierzynski A.J. 34 635
Cedeno Ronny 33 417Some usual suspects come on top.
A top 10 chart is often followed by a bottom 10 one, and I won't make an exception here, especially since the guys at the bottom of this list have the great virtue of letting pitches unlikely to be called strikes go by.
Table 2 - Swinging percentage on bad balls. Bottom 10.
last first pct bad-balls
Castillo Luis 10 725
Abreu Bobby 10 901
Ramirez Manny 10 610
Willingham Josh 9 625
Bautista Jose 9 488
Scutaro Marco 9 827
Iannetta Chris 9 448
Drew J.D. 9 719
Jones Chipper 9 820
Cust Jack 9 855After what I wrote this summer on Marco Scutaro we should have expected him to finish down on this list.
Do players mantain their chasing tendencies? In the following chart I have plotted the players' percentage of swings on bad balls in 2008 versus the same quantity in 2009.
It's quite clear that chasing balls is a permanent trait: To confirm what's already apparent in the above figure, the correlation between the plotted variables is 0.84 (with a 95 percent confidence interval of 0.79-0.87)
The first time I wrote about the subject, I introduced the net run value on bad balls to quantify the cost of swinging at those pitches.
For each bad ball I calculate the net run value as following:
{exp:list_maker}if the batter didn't swing, assign the run value of the pitch (likely the run value of a ball; but if the ump called it a strike, then the run value of a strike);
if the batter swung, assign the run value of the outcome minus the expected run value of the pitch had the batter not swung (that is something like 90-percent-plus-something times the run value of a ball, plus 10-percent-minus-something times the run value of a strike). {/exp:list_maker}
So here's what players have cost their teams by not refraining from swinging the bat.
Top 10, that is low cost for their team.
Table 3 Net run value on bad balls. Top 10.
last first net run value
Suzuki Ichiro -1.99
Keppinger Jeff -3.67
Iwamura Akinori -3.97
Castillo Luis -4.17
Ruiz Carlos -4.28
Gerut Jody -4.37
Lewis Fred -4.52
Millar Kevin -4.59
Paulino Ronny -4.61
Hinske Eric -5.00Bottom 10, i.e. high cost.
Table 4 - Net run value on bad balls. Bottom 10.
last first net run value
Longoria Evan -23.53
Teahen Mark -23.61
Pence Hunter -23.65
Francoeur Jeff -23.78
Cabrera Miguel -23.98
Morneau Justin -24.14
Cuddyer Michael -24.88
Peralta Jhonny -25.29
Soriano Alfonso -28.24
Howard Ryan -30.43Some of the players in the second list more than make up for their discipline shortcomings thanks to their powerful lumber; sometimes they might be deliberately giving up the chance of a walk because they feel their power is more needed. Soriano (I didn't want to point the finger at Francoeur, everybody's whipping boy when it comes to plate discipline), on the other hand, is listed at Fangraphs at 8.6 batting runs below average: his season would have been less disatrous had his bad balls swing percentage been closer to the MLB mark of 20.4 percent.
What about pitchers? Do they take advantage of opponent hacking tendencies? You would expect that the less-disciplined hitters get the highest percentage of bad-balls.
The correlation between bad-ball swing percentage and bad-balls seen percentage (out of all pitches seen), while significantly different from zero, is not very high at 0.255. Anyway there's at least one factor confounding the relation: the hitter's proficiency. Manny is in the bottom list of bad-ball chasers, but that's not a good reason for throwing him a lot hittable pitches.
Here are the top 10 pitchers at making opponent fish.
Table 5 - Swinging percentage induced on bad-balls. Top ten.
last first pct bad balls
Wuertz Michael 33 507
Pena Tony 30 352
Madson Ryan 30 369
Gregerson Luke 30 406
Nathan Joe 29 441
DiFelice Mark 29 302
League Brandon 29 391
Halladay Roy 28 1067
Rivera Mariano 28 342
Buckner Billy 28 432And now the bottom 10.
Table 6 - Swinging percentage induced on bad balls. Bottom 10.
last first pct bad balls
MacDougal Mike 14 309
Wilson Brian 14 420
Aardsma David 14 370
Cecil Brett 14 474
Miller Andrew 13 438
Hill Rich 13 342
Lewis Jensen 13 334
Cabrera Daniel 13 371
O'Sullivan Sean 12 321
Swarzak Anthony 8 306The first list contains three notable cutterballers: Mo, The Doc, and... well.. DiFelice; the other seven have their top weapon in either a slider or a mid-90s fastball (or a combination of the two). A couple of flamethrowers (and a former one in Daniel Cabrera) appear on the second list as well, but for the most part you can not point out a dominant pitch in the repertoire of the pitchers among the bottom 10.
Hey, I was forgetting to actually give away the Yogi Berra Award. We could give it to Miguel Olivo, because it's the batter with the highest percentage of swings on pitches way out of the zone. However, while Yogi used to throw his bat to any spherical object that happened to transit in the area where the game was played, his swings were successful more often than not, leaving opposing batteries wondering what they should have thrown him to avoid a double.
Thus Ichiro could be crowned for having totaled the highest net run value with his hacks.
But it doesn't sound good to me to attach an award to a negative contribution, so I will simply end this article with the list of the players with the most hits on bad-balls.
Table 7 - Base hits on bad balls. Top 10.
last first bad-ball hits
Sandoval Pablo 68
Phillips Brandon 64
Polanco Placido 61
Molina Bengie 60
Ramirez Alexei 60
Gonzalez Alex 55
Suzuki Ichiro 54
Cano Robinson 52
Loney James 51
Aybar Erick 51The Award is yours, Panda!
References and Resources
PITCHf/x data from Sportvision & MLBAM.
I used batter handedness and the coordinates of the pitch only when crossing the plate to estimate the likelihood of a pitch to be decreed a strike. Pitcher handedness, balls and strikes count and pitch type also have some weight on the umpire's decision. And the knowledge of the umpire tendencies may change the batter's threshold on pulling the trigger.
Max has been writing about baseball for six years to an Italian audience. He can be reached via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Cooperstown Confidential: The World Series, Oscar Gamble revisited, and Fred Brocklander
by Bruce MarkusenNovember 06, 2009
On the heels of a tense, hard-fought six-game World Series between the Yankees and Phillies, I’m more convinced than ever that managers in today’s game just can’t win. During the first half of the Series, Phillies skipper Charlie Manuel heard an unceasing line of questioning about his refusal to use staff ace Cliff Lee on three days’ rest. The questioning eased slightly after Joe Blanton earned a no-decision in Game Four and after Lee handled the Yankees for six innings of a Game Five victory in Philadelphia.
Just as the criticism of Manuel died down, his Yankees counterpart, Joe Girardi, heard a fair share of whispers over the opposite strategy: a continuing reliance on the three-man rotation (and a corresponding three days’ rest for his pitchers) in the latter stages of the Series. Writers such as the farcical Mike Lupica, whose analysis of postseason baseball always leaves us confounded, warned Girardi that he would be saddled with goat horns if the pitching strategy resulted in three straight losses to end the Series.
So which is it, three days’ rest or four days’ rest? In actuality, both Manuel and Girardi were probably right. The decision on how to use your starters rests with the composition of the pitching staff as a whole and the composition of your pitchers as individuals. In the case of Manuel, he had a No. 1 starter in Lee who had absolutely no experience pitching on short rest. Additionally, he had a deeper rotation of starters from which to choose, making the four-man rotation the sensible option. In fact, he actually possessed a good fifth option in rookie J.A. Happ. (If I’ll criticize Manuel on anything, it might be his minimal usage of Happ, a Rookie of the Year candidate who became an afterthought in the Phillies’ undermanned bullpen. In my mind, Happ would have been a better alternative to Blanton.)
In contrast, Girardi had better top-end starters than Manuel, but a much thinner rotation overall. Given the dropoff from No. 3 starter Andy Pettitte to journeyman right-hander Chad Gaudin, the reliance on the three-man rotation became a near necessity. It made even more sense considering that Pettitte, A.J. Burnett, and C.C Sabathia all owned experience pitching on three days’ rest, with Burnett and Sabathia both having yielded positive results in such situations in the past.
The obsession with postseason dissection of managerial moves has become a bit tiring. While it’s fun to first-guess and second-guess managers occasionally, let’s remember that players ultimately decide the results of the World Series. Manuel could have managed a better Series, but even more importantly, Jimmy Rollins could have hit better, Ryan Howard could have hit far better, and Cole Hamels could have acted as if he actually wanted to be in the World Series. If those three 2008 postseason heroes had come close to repeating their performances in 2009, the merits of Manuel’s four-man rotation would have been rendered moot.
More on Oscar Gamble
As a follow-up to last week’s story about the irrepressible Oscar Gamble, insightful reader Larry Rubin posted an intriguing note about the reasoning behind the 1969 trade that sent Gamble from the Cubs to the Phillies for an aging Johnny Callison. As Rubin points out, rumors have swirled—both at the time and in retrospect—that the Cubs parted ways with Gamble because of his preference for dating white women. Given the conservative ways of the organization and team ownership, the Cubs supposedly wanted their players to conform to strict racial lines when it came to dating and socializing. Gamble has always questioned this theory, perhaps in part because no one from the Cubs organization ever told him of the unspoken ban on racial “intermingling.”
For the sake of common decency, let’s hope that Gamble is right. If he’s not, the Cubs are only one of several franchises that have allegedly steered clear of players because of their dating preferences. The most famous example involves the Yankees of the 1950s, and their shabby treatment of Vic Power, a top prospect in their organization. An extraordinarily slick defensive first baseman, Power also hit for high averages throughout his minor league stops in New York’s system. His on-field talents prompted some writers to predict that he would become the first black player in the history of the Yankees franchise.
Well, that never happened. As Power rose through the system, he was deemed a bit too radical by the team’s front office, headed up by conservative general manager George Weiss. Weiss preferred a black player with a more reserved personality, someone who would fit in with a franchise that prided itself on old traditions. As a native of integrated Puerto Rico, Power was clearly not that man. Shocked by the segregationist practices here in the states, Power challenged the status quo. He tried to buck convention by staying in segregated hotels and eating in restaurants designated for whites only, and when he couldn’t, he spoke out about the injustices of the American system.
Still, the Yankees would have overlooked Power’s outspoken ways if not for his dating white women. Power was often seen in restaurants and nightclubs with his dates, which further infuriated Weiss. In the eyes of Weiss, this was an intolerable habit that would not be permitted by the organization. Weiss kept Power buried at Triple-A Kansas City in 1953 before trading him to the Philadelphia Athletics as part of an 11-man deal. The trade insured that Power would never don pinstripes under Weiss’ watch. Shamefully, the Yankees missed out on the talents of Power, arguably the finest fielding first baseman in history.
In similar fashion, the cross-town rival Mets might have lost the considerable talents of a future Hall of Famer. In 1966, the Mets owned the No. 1 pick in the amateur draft. They faced a choice of drafting a power-hitting catcher named Steve Chilcott or a young African-American outfielder named Reggie Jackson. With Jackson destined to make the major leagues within two seasons, the Mets would have formulated one of the game’s best and most athletic outfields: smooth-swinging Cleon Jones in left, Gold Glover Tommie Agee in center, and the rifle-armed Jackson in right field. I can’t think of any outfield in that era that would have combined such speed, defensive range, and power, with the exception of the early 1970s Giants outfield that featured Willie Mays in center flanked by a young Ken Henderson in left field and a budding Bobby Bonds in right field.
The dream outfield of Jones-Agee-Jackson would never materialize. Instead of taking Jackson, the Mets chose Chilcott, who would never play a game in the major leagues. As with Gamble, rumors have swirled periodically that the Mets opted not to take Jackson because of his tendency to date white women. The Mets general manager at the time was none other than George Weiss…
Remembering Brocklander
I completely missed the news over the summer, but the passing of former major league umpire Fred Brocklander deserves more than a momentary mention. Brocklander’s death at the age of 69, which occurred in August after a series of debilitating strokes, brings to mind one of the greatest League Championship Series in history. Those who are old enough to remember the 1986 playoff extravaganza between the Mets and Astros will probably recall the role Brocklander played in determining the outcome of that fall’s National League pennant.
A onetime replacement umpire who made his major league debut during the umpires strike of 1979, Brocklander made two calls that old-time Astros fans will certainly not forget. With the NLCS tied at two games apiece, Houston’s Craig Reynolds came to bat in the second inning with runners on first and third and only one out. Reynolds bounced to Wally Backman, resulting in a force-out at second base and a relay throw to first base. The first base umpire in the game, Brocklander called Reynolds out at first place. Replays clearly showed that he was safe. The double play call wiped out a potential run for the Astros, who would end up losing a one-run affair. After the game, Brocklander refused to acknowledge that he had missed the call on Reynolds at first base; the stubborn denial only enraged Astros fans further.
Then came Brocklander’s work behind the plate in Game Six, one of the classics in postseason history. During the Mets’ three-run ninth-inning rally, Ray Knight took what appeared to be an obvious third strike. Except that it wasn’t an obvious strike to Brocklander, who called the pitch a ball, which allowed Knight to prolong the at-bat and deliver a key sacrifice fly during a dramatic game-tying rally. Five innings later, the Mets walked off the Astrodome field with a clinching sixth game victory, thereby avoiding a dreaded match-up with Mets killer Mike Scott in Game Seven.
Astros fans probably won’t want to hear this, but Brocklander’s career amounted to more than just two blown calls in the ’86 playoffs. He umpired for 11 years in the major leagues, capping an officiating career that included time as a referee in Division 1 college basketball. In spite of 13 knee operations and a broken hand suffered over the course of his officiating career, Brocklander never missed a day of work due to injury.
Bruce Markusen is the author of seven books on baseball, including the award-winning A Baseball Dynasty: Charlie Finley’s Swingin’ A’s, the recipient of the Seymour Medal from the Society for American Baseball Research. He has also written The Team That Changed Baseball: Roberto Clemente and the 1971 Pittsburgh Pirates, Tales From The Mets Dugout, and The Orlando Cepeda Story.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Waiver Wire Offseason: AL
by Rob McQuownNovember 06, 2009
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Why the Philles lost the World Series
by Corey SeidmanNovember 06, 2009
It feels strange being on the other side of this, feeling what fans of the Brewers, Dodgers, Rays, Rockies, and Dodgers again, felt, after concluding a losing series to the Phillies. After all, my generation of Phillies followers hasn’t experienced much playoff despair.
I was four years old when the Phils lost the 1993 World Series, so aside from the 2007 sweep at the hands of the Rockies, I hadn’t been through a competitive postseason series that saw my team come up short.
But, without mincing words, the Phillies didn’t deserve to win the 2009 World Series. They failed to capitalize on a Game One win on the road, and were blatantly outplayed over the next five games. When opposing a fantasy baseball team like the Yankees, there is no margin for error. If you have runners in scoring position with less than two outs against the highest scoring team in all of major league baseball, you better knock them in.
The Phillies failed to capitalize with runners on time and time again, while their counterparts seemed to thrive in high-pressure situations. The clinching Game Six was merely a microcosm of the entire series; the Phils went 0-for-6 with runners in scoring position and left 10 men on-base, en route to a 7-3 loss.
After the NLDS and NLCS, I outlined the main reasons for the Phillies’ triumph. Several ingredients were: Ryan Howard’s transformation into a postseason monster, timely hitting at the bottom of the order, a dazzling performance by Pedro Martinez, the bullpen's abilityto bear down and strand runners in key situations, and, not to be forgotten, intelligent decision-making from Charlie Manuel.
Aside from Carlos Ruiz hitting .333 out of the eighth and ninth spots in the lineup, none of these factors carried over into the World Series.
Howard, who looked unstoppable before the week-long layoff in between rounds, went 4-for-23, with one homer, three RBIs, and a World Series record 13 strikeouts. In Games Two through Five, he was 1-for-14 with 10 strikeouts.
The bottom of the Phillies order was absolutely dreadful in the World Series. Pedro Feliz came up big in Game Four, going 3-for-4 with a game-tying homer in the eighth, but was 1-for-19 in the other five games. Ben Francisco, who played left field in two games in New York while Raul Ibanez played DH, went 0-for-6. Ruiz was the lone bright spot, leading all Phillies with a .333 batting average and .478 OBP.
Martinez, coming off of a magnificent start in the NLCS (seven innings, three hits, zero runs,) effectively shut down eight of the nine members of the Yankees lineup. All Yankees-not-named-Hideki Matsui were 7-for-35 against the righthander. Unfortunately, Matsui was 4-for-4, with two home runs, 5 RBIs and a walk vs. Pedro, skewing his numbers drastically. The Yankees may not have proved to be Pedro’s “daddy,” but Matsui, himself, certainly did.
The Phillies bullpen wasn’t hit exceptionally hard, but the unit didn’t live up to the standards it had set during the Divisional and Championship Series. Chan Ho Park, Ryan Madson, J.A. Happ and Scott Eyre combined to give up a mere two earned runs in 12.2 innings, but Brad Lidge, Chad Durbin, and Brett Myers struggled, giving up eight runs in 3.1 innings. Durbin couldn’t stop the Yankees either time he came in, and Lidge’s meltdown in Game Four dramatically changed the series, shifting an unquantifiable amount of momentum in the favor of the Yankees.
Manuel made several strange decisions, but, as I said with Joe Torre in the NLCS, it is much more difficult to push all the right buttons when you are constantly playing from behind. Manuel probably should not have left Martinez in during the seventh inning of Game Two, and, in my opinion, should have removed him after the second inning of Game Six. It was abundantly clear that Pedro had absolutely nothing in his second start. His fastball, which had reached as high as 92 mph previously, was hovering in the 84-86 range. Every Yankees player was hitting him hard, and if not for badly placed line-drive outs, the game could have gotten ugly much faster.
This year just wasn’t the Phillies year. Despite 93 regular season wins, and nine more in the playoffs, this was a flawed team. A lack of situational hitting and any sort of bench plagued the Phillies all season, and both aspects reared their ugly heads in the World Series. But more importantly, the season-long struggles of Lidge and Cole Hamels were once again prevalent at the most inopportune of times, and the performances of those two will surely be cited as the main reasons the Phillies fell short of repeating as World Champions.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Waiver Wire Offseason: NL
by Michael StreetNovember 06, 2009
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Bit dramatic, ain’t it?
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 05, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Judge to Jamie McCourt: No you can not have your job back
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 05, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Both sides come out ahead in Teahen swap
by Evan BrunellNovember 05, 2009
Evan Brunell blogs the Red Sox regularly at Fire Brand of the American League. Stop by, or e-mail him with comments.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
My Morning in Exile
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 05, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
The Yankees and the DUI checkpoint
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 05, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Top 10 prospects for 2010: Tampa Bay Rays and Baltimore Orioles
by Matt HagenNovember 05, 2009
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
TUCK! sez: Fuzzy math
by TuckNovember 05, 2009
Feedback and inquiries (original artwork, commissions, etc.): (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Offense/Defense number (Part 1)
by Brandon IsleibNovember 05, 2009
Blu Mar Ten's "Natural History" album came out this week, and I couldn't be more excited. Its excellence in experimental drum'n'bass reinforces that they're one of the best two-way bands out there, as their previous albums developed their other strength of evocative chillout music. Few bands are equally good in two genres, and it's one reason Blu Mar Ten is one of my top 10 groups.
What do three British musicians have to do with baseball? Simply, we're drawn in baseball, as with life at large, to people with multiple disparate talents. Bill James' Power/Speed number is an excellent example of measuring these combinations, even though it tells us little about productivity. The Power/Speed number takes the harmonic mean of a player's home runs and stolen bases [(2 x HR x SB)/(HR + SB), or the inverse of a normal mean multiplied by the numbers that went into the mean] to weigh the mean in favor of the lower number. That way, only players proficient in homers and steals will get high marks. Obviously, if a player has zero steals, the mean goes to zero, weeding out the Mark McGwires in favor of the Jose Cansecos.
In the spirit of the Power/Speed number, I present to you the Offense/Defense number. Using a player's batting and fielding Win Shares, we can take the harmonic mean and get a rough idea of how much he was contributing each half of the inning. This week, I'll break down infielders by position ranking. Doing this by position is important, as different spots on the field produce vastly different fielding Win Shares. For example, the best season at first base is 2,472nd in Offense/Defense number (O/D for short, though not Odie) since 1901. Random seasons just above it include Ira Flagstead's 1924, Duffy Dyer's 1972 and Ernie Young's 1996. Of the top 50 O/Ds since 1901, half are by shortstops. The numbers are unbalanced until you rank by position, where they make sense in context.
Each position will be listed to 25 spots. Although players are listed by primary position, all fielding endeavors are counted in fielding Win Shares. On a large scale, this only affects Gene Tenace in the first base rankings, since he had significant time at catcher, but a couple of other seasons get boosts from playing more challenging positions in small doses.
BWS and FWS are batting and fielding Win Shares, respectively. I've also given total Win Shares to highlight the differences in sum contribution and the balanced effort we're seeking.
Seasons run through 2008.
First base
| Name | Year | BWS | FWS | TWS | O/D |
| Tino Martinez | 1999 | 14.1 | 5.2 | 19.3 | 7.60 |
| Gene Tenace | 1974 | 17.3 | 4.7 | 22.0 | 7.39 |
| Ed Konetchy | 1915 | 22.8 | 4.4 | 27.2 | 7.38 |
| Dan Brouthers | 1892 | 29.5 | 4.1 | 33.6 | 7.20 |
| John Olerud | 1998 | 29.5 | 4.0 | 33.5 | 7.04 |
| Honus Wagner | 1898 | 17.3 | 4.4 | 21.7 | 7.02 |
| Roger Connor | 1890 | 21.1 | 4.2 | 25.3 | 7.01 |
| Todd Helton | 2004 | 27.4 | 4.0 | 31.4 | 6.98 |
| Jeff King | 1996 | 18.4 | 4.3 | 22.7 | 6.97 |
| Jimmie Foxx | 1937 | 19.3 | 4.2 | 23.5 | 6.90 |
| Keith Hernandez | 1985 | 23.1 | 4.0 | 27.1 | 6.82 |
| Gene Tenace | 1978 | 17.9 | 4.2 | 22.1 | 6.80 |
| Ed Konetchy | 1916 | 22.1 | 4.0 | 26.1 | 6.77 |
| Hank Greenberg | 1946 | 26.7 | 3.8 | 30.5 | 6.65 |
| Bill White | 1964 | 22.0 | 3.9 | 25.9 | 6.63 |
| Joe Torre | 1969 | 18.8 | 4.0 | 22.8 | 6.60 |
| Jimmie Foxx | 1929 | 30.0 | 3.7 | 33.7 | 6.59 |
| Jimmie Foxx | 1930 | 30.0 | 3.7 | 33.7 | 6.59 |
| Vic Power | 1959 | 15.2 | 4.2 | 19.4 | 6.58 |
| Mark Grace | 1992 | 20.8 | 3.9 | 24.7 | 6.57 |
| Mark Grace | 1990 | 18.2 | 4.0 | 22.2 | 6.56 |
| Jimmie Foxx | 1932 | 36.7 | 3.6 | 40.3 | 6.56 |
| Harry Davis | 1905 | 22.7 | 3.8 | 26.5 | 6.51 |
| Rafael Palmeiro | 1993 | 27.0 | 3.7 | 30.7 | 6.51 |
| Steve Garvey | 1976 | 22.0 | 3.8 | 25.8 | 6.48 |
A pretty colorful list to start off with, abounding in interesting seasons. Tino Martinez's five fielding Win Shares atop the list is an absurd amount; I haven't seen another first baseman contribute that much with the glove in any season. As mentioned, Tenace's time at catcher boosts him some, as does Jeff King's time at second, and Wagner's and Foxx's jaunts at third. (Before this, I didn't know that Wagner played no games at shortstop in the 19th century. Wouldn't have guessed.) That 1929-1930 produced the same component breakdown for Foxx is an eerie coincidence.
Greenberg's final Tigers season is a major surprise, but this list is primarily who you'd expect through the years.
Honorable mentions (players who would make the list if not for the 19th century): Martinez for 2001; George Stovall for 1908; Pete O'Brien for 1987.
Second base
| Name | Year | BWS | FWS | TWS | O/D |
| Frankie Frisch | 1927 | 23.0 | 11.1 | 34.1 | 14.97 |
| Ryne Sandberg | 1984 | 28.9 | 9.5 | 38.4 | 14.30 |
| Eddie Collins | 1910 | 29.8 | 9.3 | 39.1 | 14.18 |
| Nap Lajoie | 1908 | 22.1 | 10.4 | 32.5 | 14.14 |
| Jackie Robinson | 1951 | 29.3 | 9.0 | 38.3 | 13.77 |
| Eddie Collins | 1920 | 29.8 | 8.7 | 38.5 | 13.47 |
| Bobby Grich | 1973 | 17.3 | 10.9 | 28.2 | 13.37 |
| Sn. Stirnweiss | 1944 | 26.4 | 8.9 | 35.3 | 13.31 |
| Nap Lajoie | 1907 | 22.4 | 9.1 | 31.5 | 12.94 |
| Bobby Doerr | 1946 | 16.9 | 10.4 | 27.3 | 12.88 |
| Joe Morgan | 1975 | 36.2 | 7.8 | 44.0 | 12.83 |
| Eddie Collins | 1909 | 34.7 | 7.8 | 42.5 | 12.74 |
| Ryne Sandberg | 1991 | 28.4 | 8.2 | 36.6 | 12.73 |
| Craig Biggio | 1999 | 21.9 | 8.8 | 30.7 | 12.56 |
| Eddie Collins | 1915 | 32.0 | 7.8 | 39.8 | 12.54 |
| Bobby Avila | 1954 | 26.2 | 8.2 | 34.4 | 12.49 |
| Ryne Sandberg | 1991 | 24.9 | 8.3 | 33.2 | 12.45 |
| Fernando Vina | 1998 | 21.0 | 8.8 | 29.8 | 12.40 |
| Bobby Grich | 1975 | 20.0 | 8.9 | 28.9 | 12.32 |
| Nap Lajoie | 1906 | 25.0 | 8.1 | 33.1 | 12.24 |
| Roberto Alomar | 1999 | 27.0 | 7.9 | 34.9 | 12.22 |
| Nellie Fox | 1957 | 23.8 | 8.2 | 32.0 | 12.20 |
| Bobby Grich | 1974 | 24.4 | 8.1 | 32.5 | 12.16 |
| Craig Biggio | 1997 | 30.8 | 7.5 | 38.3 | 12.06 |
| Jerry Priddy | 1950 | 13.3 | 11.0 | 24.3 | 12.04 |
As second base increased in defensive importance over third base, the opportunities for fielding Win Shares came with it. All this goes to show how amazing Lajoie and Collins were; from 1906-1910 they made the top five seasons to date, and they're still on the list. And in between Collins and wartime, only Frankie Frisch's mark at the top has survived.
More than half the seasons on here come from Collins, Lajoie, Grich and Sandberg. Being too young to see Grich play, I never have fully understood his Hall of Fame candidacy, but I see it a lot more when three consecutive seasons put him on this list. Unlike the first base list, where slight variations in fielding mean a bit too much, this is some heady company. That Grich is on this list thrice while Morgan and Alomar make it once apiece may be good evidence of outstanding performance.
Stirnweiss's season is a reminder that in wartime, finding anybody with multiple skills of any stripe was of increased value. Every position but catcher and first base has at least one wartime season.
And Fernando Vina in 1998? Really? That's the fun of making lists like this. 1998 produced a lot of excellence in these lists: Ivan Rodriguez at catcher, Olerud at first base, Vina here and Andruw Jones in center field. 1999 had more, with I-Rod and Jones repeating, Biggio and Alomar here, and Robin Ventura at third base. This isn't the famous part of those years, but it's certainly historically significant. It's at least something else to remember the era by if the juiced bits weren't your cup of tea.
Shortstop
| Name | Year | BWS | FWS | TWS | O/D |
| Honus Wagner | 1906 | 34.2 | 11.3 | 45.5 | 16.99 |
| Honus Wagner | 1908 | 49.2 | 9.7 | 58.9 | 16.21 |
| Hughie Jennings | 1896 | 23.5 | 12.0 | 35.5 | 15.89 |
| Honus Wagner | 1912 | 23.6 | 11.8 | 35.4 | 15.73 |
| Joe Cronin | 1931 | 22.6 | 12.0 | 34.6 | 15.68 |
| Phil Rizzuto | 1950 | 23.8 | 11.3 | 35.1 | 15.32 |
| Joe Tinker | 1908 | 19.1 | 12.7 | 31.8 | 15.26 |
| Honus Wagner | 1905 | 36.8 | 9.6 | 46.4 | 15.23 |
| Joe Cronin | 1930 | 22.2 | 11.1 | 33.3 | 14.80 |
| Honus Wagner | 1909 | 33.1 | 9.4 | 42.5 | 14.64 |
| Cal Ripken | 1983 | 25.0 | 10.3 | 35.3 | 14.59 |
| Arky Vaughan | 1934 | 25.9 | 10.1 | 36.0 | 14.53 |
| Johnny Pesky | 1946 | 24.0 | 10.3 | 34.3 | 14.41 |
| Lou Boudreau | 1940 | 18.8 | 11.6 | 30.4 | 14.35 |
| Joe Cronin | 1933 | 23.3 | 10.3 | 33.6 | 14.29 |
| Cal Ripken | 1984 | 27.0 | 9.7 | 36.7 | 14.27 |
| Ozzie Smith | 1987 | 22.7 | 10.2 | 32.9 | 14.08 |
| Ron Hansen | 1964 | 19.3 | 10.7 | 30.0 | 13.77 |
| Terry Turner | 1906 | 15.0 | 12.7 | 27.7 | 13.75 |
| Rico Petrocelli | 1969 | 27.9 | 9.1 | 37.0 | 13.72 |
| Luke Appling | 1943 | 31.8 | 8.8 | 39.9 | 13.72 |
| Art Fletcher | 1917 | 14.7 | 12.7 | 27.4 | 13.63 |
| Bill Dahlen | 1892 | 22.8 | 9.6 | 32.4 | 13.51 |
| Pee Wee Reese | 1942 | 15.6 | 11.7 | 27.3 | 13.37 |
| Bill Dahlen | 1896 | 20.7 | 9.8 | 30.5 | 13.30 |
I think we can agree that Honus Wagner was good. Along with his first base performance, his record six spots on the lists aren't going to be topped for a while, although Joe Mauer has a relatively decent chance. Cronin makes this list from three Senators years, a section I know little about save for the 1933 pennant. Washington's success with prime-of-career middle infielders becoming managers is highly unusual. Perhaps the Nationals can do that with Ryan Zimmerman. . . . I'd like it.
This is the only list not to feature any seasons from the last 20 years, which seems odd. Of the famous AL shortstops of a decade ago, only Omar Vizquel generated at least eight fielding Win Shares, which he did twice but without sufficient hitting to matter. While everyone was looking at them, Orlando Cabrera's 2001 season broke the fielding Win Shares record, his 13.5 surpassing Rabbit Maranville's 13.3 from 1914. But as with Vizquel in 1991, his fielding outproduced his hitting, keeping him off this list. Although this is a defense-driven list, it's much less driven by defense than at other positions, as there have been several great defensive shortstops over the years.
Honorable mentions: Vern Stephens for 1944; Reese for 1949; Ray Chapman for 1917.
Third base
| Name | Year | BWS | FWS | TWS | O/D |
| Mike Schmidt | 1974 | 30.1 | 8.6 | 38.7 | 13.38 |
| Jimmy Collins | 1898 | 24.4 | 9.2 | 33.6 | 13.36 |
| Art Devlin | 1906 | 27.8 | 8.7 | 36.5 | 13.25 |
| Stan Hack | 1945 | 25.2 | 8.4 | 33.6 | 12.60 |
| Graig Nettles | 1971 | 16.9 | 9.8 | 26.7 | 12.41 |
| Jimmy Collins | 1904 | 18.5 | 9.3 | 27.8 | 12.38 |
| Fred Lindstrom | 1928 | 23.2 | 8.3 | 31.5 | 12.23 |
| Pie Traynor | 1925 | 16.4 | 9.5 | 25.9 | 12.03 |
| Bobby Wallace | 1898 | 15.2 | 9.9 | 25.1 | 11.99 |
| Tommy Leach | 1908 | 23.0 | 8.1 | 31.1 | 11.98 |
| Pie Traynor | 1927 | 16.5 | 9.4 | 25.9 | 11.98 |
| Robin Ventura | 1999 | 21.9 | 8.2 | 30.1 | 11.93 |
| Darrell Evans | 1974 | 19.9 | 8.5 | 28.4 | 11.91 |
| John McGraw | 1899 | 26.1 | 7.7 | 33.8 | 11.89 |
| Mike Schmidt | 1976 | 28.0 | 7.5 | 35.5 | 11.83 |
| Ken Boyer | 1960 | 23.5 | 7.8 | 31.3 | 11.71 |
| Ron Santo | 1967 | 30.2 | 7.2 | 37.4 | 11.63 |
| Tommy Leach | 1904 | 15.4 | 9.3 | 24.7 | 11.60 |
| Frank Baker | 1912 | 31.5 | 7.1 | 38.6 | 11.59 |
| Billy Shindle | 1889 | 18.1 | 8.5 | 26.6 | 11.57 |
| Frank Baker | 1911 | 27.7 | 7.3 | 35.0 | 11.55 |
| Bill Bradley | 1904 | 19.7 | 8.0 | 27.7 | 11.38 |
| Wade Boggs | 1984 | 20.1 | 7.9 | 28.0 | 11.34 |
| Jimmy Collins | 1899 | 11.8 | 10.9 | 22.7 | 11.33 |
| Mike Schmidt | 1983 | 28.0 | 7.1 | 35.1 | 11.33 |
That Schmidt hit the top spot in his second full year is all kinds of remarkable. With fewer bunts, third base was a tougher place to earn Win Shares as the years rolled on. Not only did Mr. Schmidt outhit his contemporaries, he outfielded them and several deadballers. Wartime aside, there's a gap from the '20s to the '60s on here, but Schmidt added to the emerging talent at third—Boyer, Santo, Nettles—with an exclamation point that nobody's approached since, even as Schmidt established himself as the best third baseman of history. George Brett would rival him with the bat, but in most every year Schmidt was a win better on defense. In terms of what we're investigating, Schmidt is up there with Wagner in terms of accomplishing some stunning results . . .
. . . which may have obscured Darrell Evans a bit. Evans had a fine season himself in '74 and again with an honorable mention the next year, but who was going to notice when there was Schmidt's accomplishments to gawk at? Evans was prodigious in his own right, but he would be second stringed instrument (didn't want to discriminate against fiddles) to Schmidt in all of them. Although there are many reasons Evans is underrated, Schmidt may be the biggest one of all.
For infield positions, Shindle's 1889 season is the only one that early, and it was also accomplished as a second-year player. As odd as it can be to parse out seasons that early, Shindle's clearly belongs on the list, as it doesn't suffer from the usual maladies of the era. The American Association of that year was high-scoring, but not abnormally so, at least not worse than when they moved the mound back 10 feet a few years later. And while the league did have a 27-111 team in it (Louisville), the rest of the teams were spread out about right. It wasn't balanced by any means, but neither was the National League at the turn of the century, and the pennant winners didn't benefit abnormally from Louisville's presence. For purposes of Win Shares, Shindle particularly didn't benefit, as his Baltimore team went 70-65. It just happened to be a fairly shallow team, with only seven players accumulating at least 10 Win Shares. Shindle led his position in putouts, assists and errors, which I'm guessing is a rather rare feat. At any length, he performed similarly in the Players' League the next year, then saw his offense decline as overall offense was inclining and was never remotely as useful again. (I've never heard anybody use it this way, but if decline goes one way, shouldn't incline go the other way?)
Honorable mentions: Ken Caminiti for 1996; Larry Gardner for 1912; Evans for 1975; Santo for 1964; Ossie Vitt for 1915 (no, really).
Next week
Outfielders and catchersReferences and Resources
Baseball Reference covered in Bill James and marinated for 5 hours.
Brandon Isleib is a stat geek in all his endeavours, which makes him naturally inclined to baseball. He can be reached via the electronic mails.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Ifs and buts
by Jonathan HalketNovember 05, 2009
Jonathan Halket is an economist in New York. He welcomes questions and comments here.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
And That Happened: World Series
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 05, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Liveblog World Series Game 6
by Mike FastNovember 04, 2009
Mike Fast is a Kansas City Royals fan who enjoys investigating baseball questions using PITCHf/x data. He welcomes questions and comments via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Rays get something for nothing in Iwamura trade
by Evan BrunellNovember 04, 2009
Evan Brunell blogs the Red Sox regularly at Fire Brand of the American League. Stop by, or e-mail him with comments.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
THT Live Roundtable: WS Edition
by Dan NovickNovember 04, 2009
Dan Novick is a lifelong Yankees fan, and still gets the chills every time Enter Sandman plays from the Yankee Stadium speakers. He welcomes comments and questions via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Viva Democracy
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 04, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
On Mike Lupica
by Dan NovickNovember 04, 2009
Dan Novick is a lifelong Yankees fan, and still gets the chills every time Enter Sandman plays from the Yankee Stadium speakers. He welcomes comments and questions via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
My Morning in Exile
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 04, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Player Profile: Jay Bruce
by Mike SilverNovember 04, 2009
Mike is a recent graduate of the UMass-Amherst Sport Management Program. He can also be found at Firebrand of the American League (firebrandal.com) and Statistically Speaking (Statspeak.net). If you have any questions or comments, you can reach him at mjasilver AT gmail DOT com. He would love to hear it.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Great Moments in Being Vicente Padilla
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 04, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Players worth remembering, 1925-1946
by Geoff YoungNovember 04, 2009
We've looked at players from 1969 to 1989 and from 1947 to 1968. In this installment, we travel further back in time to identify good players from a particular era who don't get a lot of attention nowadays.
As I've explained elsewhere, the methodology is crude—basically the top OPS+ and ERA+ of guys whose entire career falls within the time frame and who aren't in the Hall of Fame. The point isn't so much to rank these players as it is to highlight their accomplishments.
Catcher
Spud Davis
Career: 4713 PA, .308/.369/.430, 110 OPS+
'33 PhN: 540 PA, .349/.395/.473, 135 OPS+
The New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract ranks Davis as the no. 71 catcher in big-league history. In his prime (1931-1935), Davis was an offensive force, batting .328/.386/.466 (124 OPS+) during that stretch. I've cited his '33 campaign above, but he was plenty dangerous (.336/.399/.522, 135 OPS+) the previous season as well.
Davis' most similar players according to Baseball Reference are Smoky Burgess (who occupied this space in our previous installment) and, more recently, Don Slaught. James mentions Slaught in his writeup of Davis, as well as Brian Harper.
Honorable mentions: Harry Danning (TNBJHBA no. 55), Frankie Hayes (no. 75; technical note: he played 5 games in '47), Shanty Hogan (no. 94), Gus Mancuso (no. 74), Mickey Owen (no. 88), Rollie Hemsley (no. 69)
First base
Dolph Camilli
Career: 6352 PA, .277/.388/.492, 136 OPS+
'37 PhN: 570 PA, .339/.446/.587, 170 OPS+
Hal Trosky
Career: 5747 PA, .302/.371/.522, 130 OPS+
'36 Cle: 671 PA, .343/.382/.644, 146 OPS+
Camilli checks in at no. 29 all-time among first basemen. It took him a while to get going, but once Camilli hit stride at age 29, he went on a rampage. From 1936 to 1942, he hit .288/.409/.532 (153 OPS+).
Camilli received no MVP consideration for his '37 campaign, but won the award in 1941. He hit .285/.407/.556 (165 OPS+) for Brooklyn that year.
According to James, Camilli was a bit intense:
When he went into a slump he would walk the streets for hours on end, trying to get his stomach to stop churning. If he made a key mistake he would brood about it for days. He wasn't exactly moody; he was just a worrier.Camilli's most similar player at Baseball Reference is Larry Doby. Among more recent players, Camilli is a little like David Justice, Ryan Klesko, or Danny Tartabull.
Trosky, the no. 38 first baseman in history according to TNBJHBA, had a short but productive career. In his best season, at age 23, he led the AL with 405 total bases and 162 RBI.
Trosky's most similar player at B-R is Wally Berger. Among current players, he's in the Derrek Lee - David Ortiz range.
James notes that Trosky's career ended prematurely due to severe migraines:
It is very clear... that Trosky's demise as a player is solely attributable to migraine headaches that made his life a living hell, and it is also true that Trosky's accomplishments as a hitter, up through age 26, are comparable to those of Gehrig, Foxx, Greenberg, and Mize.Honorable mentions: Nick Etten, Ripper Collins (no. 100), Zeke Bonura, Don Hurst, Gus Suhr (no. 73), Joe Kuhel (no. 64)
Second base
Buddy Myer
Career: 8187 PA, .303/.389/.406, 108 OPS+
'35 WsA: 720 PA, .349/.440/.468, 138 OPS+
Myer's three most similar players at B-R—Billy Herman, Arky Vaughan, and Joe Sewell—are in the Hall of Fame. Myer (no. 24 all time, between Davey Lopes and Johnny Evers) wasn't quite in their class, but he enjoyed a fine career.
Honorable mentions: Tony Cuccinello (no. 53)
Third base
Harlond Clift
Career: 6894 PA, .272/.390/.441, 116 OPS+
'38 SLA: 658 PA, .290/.423/.554, 143 OPS+
If not for the 76 games he played in 1947, Stan Hack would be our man. As it is, we'll go with Clift, who checks in at no. 37 all time according to Bill James.
Clift's most similar player at B-R is Ken Keltner. Among more recent players, Doug DeCinces and Andy Van Slyke aren't perfect fits, but they're in the general vicinity.
Clift is one of those guys that got off to a terrific start, peaked early, and then hung on for a while before retiring early. He's a little like Jim Ray Hart in that regard, although Hart was a better hitter. In the current era, Eric Chavez appears to be headed down a similar path.
Honorable mentions: Pinky Higgins (no. 60), Les Bell, Red Rolfe (no. 44), Billy Werber (no. 78), Pinky Whitney (no. 93; apparently "Pinky" was a popular nickname back in the day)
Shortstop
Dick Bartell
Career: 8743 PA, .284/.355/.391, 96 OPS+
'37 NYN: 616 PA, .306/.367/.469, 125 OPS+
Too bad Cecil Travis played 74 games in '47; he'd be a great fit here. As for Bartell, he was a two-time All-Star (1933, 1937) who placed sixth in MVP voting in '37.
Bartell played in three World Series, but was on the losing side each time. He hit .381/.480/.667 in the '36 Series.
According to James, who ranks Bartell as the no. 37 shortstop in history, "...he had a big mouth, and he took pride in not backing away from people... The second half of his career he was a player, like Albert Belle today, who was routinely booed in almost every city."
Honorable mentions: Glenn Wright (no. 60), Red Kress (no. 87), Woody English (no. 59), Lyn Lary (no. 80), Billy Rogell (no. 49), Frankie Crosetti (no. 67; technical note: he played a total of 20 games in '47 and '48), Billy Jurges (no. 96; technical note: he played 14 games in '47)
Left field
Bob Johnson
Career: 8047 PA, .296/.393/.506, 138 OPS+
'44 BsA: 626 PA, .324/.431/.528, 174 OPS+
There are some brilliant candidates here whose careers extend just beyond our parameters—most notably Charlie Keller and Lefty O'Doul, both of whom shone brightly, if briefly.
As for Johnson, he collected more than 2000 hits in his career and nearly 300 home runs. He scored 100 or more runs in a season six times and drove in as many on eight occasions (including every year from 1935 through 1941).
Johnson was named to seven All-Star teams. He ranks among the top 100 in both on-base percentage and slugging percentage (minimum 3000 plate appearances).
James rates Johnson the no. 31 left fielder of all time, which puts him in the not-so-exclusive and awkwardly named "Probably as Deserving of Enshrinement in Cooperstown as Jim Rice" club. Johnson's list of most comparable players at B-R is littered with names of fantastic players who are just this side of the Hall of Fame: Brian Giles, Ellis Burks, Moises Alou, Reggie Smith, Bernie Williams, and so on.
Honorable mentions: Jo-Jo Moore (no. 77), Joe Vosmik (no. 82), Rip Radcliff
Center field
Wally Berger
Career: 5663 PA, .300/.359/.522, 137 OPS+
'33 BsN: 574 PA, .313/.365/.566, 172 OPS+
Berger's most similar player at B-R is Trosky. Among more recent names, he's sort of like Pedro Guerrero. Several current players—Mike Sweeney, Carlos Lee, Aramis Ramirez, Cliff Floyd—show up in Berger's top 10, but given their respective environments, none of them is anywhere near the hitter he was.
Berger knocked 38 homers as a rookie for the Boston Braves in 1930. That was his career high, although he hit 34 in '34 and '35 (the latter of which led the NL, finishing three ahead of Mel Ott).
Berger finished sixth in the league in MVP voting in 1935; no shame in that, as the five guys ahead of him—Joe Medwick, Billy Herman, Arky Vaughan, Dizzy Dean, and winner Gabby Hartnett—are all in the Hall of Fame. Two years earlier, Berger had met a similar fate, finishing second in voting behind Chuck Klein and winner Carl Hubbell.
TNBJHBA puts Berger at no. 13 all time among center fielders, ahead of Hall of Famers Earl Averill, Edd Roush, Richie Ashburn, Hack Wilson, Hugh Duffy, Max Carey, and Lloyd Waner, and behind non-HOFers Jimmy Wynn and Dale Murphy.
Honorable mentions: Hank Leiber, Johnny Frederick, Vince DiMaggio, Sam West (no. 84)
Right field
Babe Herman
Career: 6226 PA, .324/.383/.532, 140 OPS+
'30 Bro: 699 PA, .393/.455/.678, 170 OPS+
Herman was basically a better Tony Oliva or Magglio Ordoñez. Over a four-year stretch (1929-1932), Herman was unstoppable, hitting .353/.412/.589 (155 OPS+).
Herman once was traded for a package that included Lance Richbourg, the emptiest .300 hitter of all time. Herman's career essentially ended at age 33 (he played in 17 more games the next season and then, after a seven-year layoff, 37 more at age 42).
According to TNBJHBA, Herman is the no. 50 right fielder in big-league history. James compares him to Oliva, Roger Maris, and Pedro Guerrero.
Honorable mentions: Ival Goldman, Bruce Campbell (no. 98), Pete Fox (no. 96)
Right-handed pitcher
Tommy Bridges
Career: 2826.1 IP, 194-138, 3.57 ERA, 126 ERA+
'36 Det: 294.2 IP, 23-11, 3.60 ERA, 137 ERA+
It's hard to say which of Bridges' individual season was his best. A remarkably consistent pitcher, Bridges always—except at the very beginning and end of his career—posted an ERA+ in the 110-147 range.
From 1932 to 1940, Bridges posted a 128 ERA+ while averaging 17 wins and 230 innings pitched per season. He won 20 games three times in his career, in consecutive years (1934 - 1936), no less.
Bridges spent his entire career with the Tigers, making six All-Star teams in the process and going 4-1 over the course of four different World Series ('34, '35, '40, and '45). His most similar pitcher according to B-R is Dave Stieb, although he also compares well to David Cone:
G IP W-L ERA ERA+ Bridges 424 2826.1 194-138 3.57 126 Stieb 443 2895.1 176-137 3.44 122 Cone 450 2898.2 194-126 3.46 120Those guys are all basically the same pitcher. Three Hall-of-Famers (Dazzy Vance, Bob Lemon, and Hal Newhouser) also appear on Bridges' list of 10 most similar players.
Bridges is the no. 77 pitcher all time according to TNBJHBA (Stieb checks in at no. 74, while Cone—who wasn't finished playing when the book was written—is ranked no. 98). James notes that Bridges had the best curveball of his generation.
Honorable mentions: Lon Warneke (no. 44), Wes Ferrell (no. 40), Curt Davis, Freddie Fitzsimmons, Hal Schumaker, Paul Derringer, Alvin Crowder, Bump Hadley
Left-handed pitcher
Larry French
Career: 3152 IP, 197-171, 3.44 ERA, 114 ERA+
'35 ChN: 246.1 IP, 17-10, 2.96 ERA, 133 ERA+
Like Bridges, French was a consistent pitcher. From 1930 to 1936, his ERA+ never strayed beyond the 114-133 range. His career K/9 of 3.39 ranks no. 82 out of the 104 pitchers in MLB history to work 3,000 innings or more (which tells us more about the era in which French pitched than about the man himself).
French's most similar pitcher according to B-R is Hall-of-Famer Rube Marquard, although French probably was a superior pitcher. A better match for French in my estimation is Larry Jackson:
G IP W-L ERA ERA+
French 570 3152 197-171 3.44 114
Jackson 558 3262.2 194-183 3.40 113Bridges is unranked in TNBJHBA.Honorable mentions: Thornton Lee (technical note: he made 32 appearances in '47 and '48—we include him here because there was a paucity of quality left handers during these years).
* * *
This is not a comprehensive list. As always, I learn a great deal from the collective knowledge of my readers. If you notice anyone I may have omitted, please let us know in the comments so that we can acknowledge other players from the era that deserve to be remembered.
References and Resources
Baseball-Reference, The New Bill James Historical Abstract.
Geoff Young covers the San Diego Padres at Ducksnorts and is a regular contributor to Baseball Daily Digest. He has written three books about the Padres, the most recent being the Ducksnorts 2009 Baseball Annual. Feel free to send Geoff comments via email.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Get rid of the DLF
by Joe DistelheimNovember 04, 2009
"Oh, what a big break. Matt Holliday had the game over, and somehow missed the ball with his glove. It hit him right in the groin, hopefully he's was wearing a cup, and it landed right in front of him. You talk about a painful error for Matt Holliday."
—Vin Scully’s call, Oct. 8
One major league uses the designated hitter and the other doesn’t. That makes them different because the pitcher bats in the National League, meaning one (usually) automatic out in the lineup at least a couple of times through the order, until pinch-hitter time.
That’s so obvious we don’t discuss it anymore. But here’s another fact, less obvious, we also don’t discuss: The sneaky National League really does use the DH. Difference is, in the NL he plays left field.
When we were kids (i.e., when I was a boy, before adults decreed that every child had to have a chance to play every position—league rule), kids without the slightest notion of the value of self-esteem decided who played where. The worst player went to right field. There being a dearth of left-handed-hitting adolescents in my Chicago neighborhood, the 12-year-old sabermetricians-in-charge figured right field offered the fewest chances to mess up.
In the big leagues, left field tends to be a bit less challenging than right. Shorter throws, for starters, after the misjudged fly ball lands safely. And so that’s where National League managers put the guy with the major league bat and the Babe Ruth League glove.
But it’s gotten silly. This past spring, I started to count the number of game stories I saw that began “Daniel Murphy’s error … (or fill in another left fielder’s name).” I ran out of fingers by Memorial Day.
Holliday’s bobble, coming as it did among the jumble of first-round playoff games, may not get the lasting notoriety of season-changers like the Ralph Branca pitch to Bobby Thomson or the Bill Buckner wicket shot or the Mickey Owen dropped third strike. And one hopes it doesn’t define his career, because, limited though he may be as a left fielder, he’s far from the worst in the league.
The National League of 2009, after all, also featured among its regular left fielders Raul Ibañez and Manny Ramirez, guys who call to mind the line about Dick Stuart and Michael Jackson: “They both wore one glove for no apparent purpose.” And Ibañez and Ramirez played left on teams good enough to make the postseason.
A team that won 86 games last year, Houston, stationed—and it's not by happenstance that I use the verb that's cousin to the word “stationary”—Carlos Lee on the third base side. Converted infielder Chase Headley logged the most innings in left for San Diego, converted catcher Josh Willingham for Washington, converted second baseman Chris Coghlan for Florida. The Mets mercifully moved Murphy to first base before he got killed out in the pasture.
Heck, before they got Holliday, the Cardinals’ most frequent left fielder was unrecovered fieldaholic Chris Duncan.
The Hardball Times statistics section shows each player’s RZR—Revised Zone Rating—for each position. That’s an advanced statistic that, to simplify, tells you how well a player can catch balls hit to him. (OOZ—Out Of Zone—indicates how effectively the player moves from his spot in pursuit of a batted baseball.)
To give you the clearest picture of the state of NL left fielding, the league’s position leader in RZR among those who played enough to qualify was Milwaukee’s Ryan Braun, a widely scorned third baseman who became a slightly less scorned left fielder. But he can hit!
At this point, I will tell you that I’m a Cubs fan, and you’ll guess where I’m going with this. My man, Alfonso Soriano! He’s Chicago's natural-born DH masquerading as a left fielder as he chases, circuitously, the balls of ivy.
Stats? We got stats. His RZR—remember it as the Matt Holliday Game Two stat—was .820, one shy of 100 points worse than Braun, better by three points than Carlos Lee. Being a better left fielder than Lee is like being a better dancer than Tom DeLay.
We also have stats that are no longer fashionable, but do tell you something. Am I allowed to say “fielding percentage” on the THT site? Soriano’s this past season was .950, .027 worse than the next-worst guy. He made 11 errors, more than twice as many as any other left fielder in the league. Either league, for that matter. Think what he could have accomplished if he hadn’t missed a quarter of the season with injuries.
There’s a baseball cliché that says “you have to see him every day to appreciate him.” Usually, it’s used—positively—to define the David Ecksteins/Adam Everetts of the major league world.
I have seen Hank Sauer play left field for the Cubs. I have seen Dave Kingman there, for badness sakes. But you really have to watch Fonzie every day to appreciate his appropriateness for DH. You have to see him going after fly balls using the great circle route method (good in long-distance navigation, not good in left field). You have to see him waving at bouncing baseballs like a man shooing a mosquito away. And avoiding the Wrigley ivy as if it were the poison kind. And doing eenie-meenie before throwing back to the infield—pick a base, any base.
It’s tough for us baseball traditionalists and National League partisans to accept the DH. It isn’t how they played baseball in the good old days. Pitchers aren’t good hitters, they never were, but their presence at the bat adds lots to game strategy.
It’s hard to make the case, though, that the designated left fielder adds anything to the quality of the game when his team’s in the field. Maybe it’s time to let Lee, Ibañez, Murphy, Ramirez, Soriano and their progeny do the only thing they can do in major league fashion.
Joe Distelheim is a copy editor for The Hardball Times website. He welcomes comments and suggestions via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Programming Note
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 03, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
The McCourt divorce: messier than you could possibly imagine
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 03, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
My Morning in Exile
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 03, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
From the WTF department
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 03, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
It’s the Hardball Times 2010 Annual
by Dave StudemanNovember 03, 2009
If you do, then we've got something you're going to like. It's the Hardball Times Annual 2010, created by the writing and editorial team at your favorite baseball site and published by ACTA Sports. There are 32 articles in this year's Annual, over 200 pages. You can lose yourself in these articles, revisiting the 2009 season with THT's "staff" writers or going back in history with Craig Wright, Steve Treder, Chris Jaffe and other ace contributors.
You can hone your understanding of some key baseball issues—and develop strategy for your fantasy baseball team—by diving into Corey Dawkins' analysis of baseball injuries or Bill James' opinions regarding which batters are most likely to do better next year.
And you can also lose yourself in baseball stats. The THT Annual kicks off with fielding numbers that won't be available in print anywhere else, such as John Dewan's team plus/minus fielding figures, Defensive Runs Saved and Revised Zone Rating. There will be a lot of detail for every player on every team, including Base Runs, Pitching Runs Created and our patented "Batted Balls" stats. Plus, three major "win-based" stats (Wins Above Replacement, Win Shares Above Bench and Win Probability Added) will be laid out for every single player.
As usual, I am getting ahead of myself. Here's a little more detail on this year's articles:
{exp:list_maker}Each division race in 2009 will be analyzed by one of THT's writers.
I'll have my usual "Ten Things I Learned This Year" submission
Craig Calcaterra will review the year's events in his inimitable way
Richard Barbieri will revisit the year's events in the context of baseball history
Max Marchi, our Italian correspondent, will talk the World Baseball Classic
Baseball America's Ben Badler will review the state of the Latin American baseball player "market"
Brian Borawski covers the business angle of baseball
Corey Dawkins has a nice analytic piece talking about baseball injuries
Bill James has developed a new system for predicting which batters will do better or worse next year
Jack Marshall reviews all those things that make up a player's character, building off his earlier THT article.
Geoff Young unveils his system for staying interested in the season even when your team is out of it. {/exp:list_maker}
Those articles comprise the first two sections. There are two more: History and Analysis.
{exp:list_maker}Craig Wright looks back at the amazing achievements of Grover Cleveland Alexander and his duel with Honus Wagner.
Chris Jaffe nominates his choice for the best World Series ever
Craig Brown remembers the year the players were set free
Steve Treder looks back on the productivity of farm systems over the years and wonders when and how the American League overtook the National
Warren Corbett puts famed manager Paul Richards in a box
Sky Andrecheck uses his Championship Leverage Index to highlight the year's games and weight player contributions
Greg Rybarczyk is back with Hit Tracker's take on all the home runs last year
David Gassko has a new system for predicting MVP and Cy Young award winners
Mike Fast and Dave Allen have written two fantastic overviews of PITCHf/x and what it means for baseball fans
Tom Tango analyzes how much starting pitchers have pitched in the past and present
Sean Smith reviews the evolution, and the logic, of relief pitching
Jeff Sackmann introduces a new approach to developing major league projections from minor league stats
John Walsh plumbs the depths of WAR to find those players who were better than we thought
I use the occasion of Lucky Lohrke's death to ask the question: Who truly were the luckiest players in baseball history? {/exp:list_maker}
We don't expect every article to hit your hot button, but if you're a baseball fan I'm sure there are plenty that will.
There's also a statistical section in the THT Annual, same as in previous Annuals. We know you can get lots of baseball stats online, so we do a couple of things to make our stats unique.
First, we present the stats in a way that helps you understand each team's season, its strengths and weaknesses. We've put a lot of care into the way our stats are presented. Each league section compares teams across many different important categories, and each team section has a graph of the team's year (we've included Sky Andrecheck's day-by-day Championship Leverage Index as a way of tracking a team's season), month-by-month team breakouts and batter, pitcher and fielder comparisons that let you easily see how each player contributed to the team.
Secondly, we have a lot of traditional stats but we also include a number of unique ones. Most notably, we've included the "Batted Ball" stats of just about every player on a team. These stats are a unique blend of stats and "scouting" type of information—you can read about them in my introduction to this year's Batted Ball Reports. As I mentioned, we also have some cutting-edge sabermetric stats, such as Base Runs and Pitching Runs Created, and we've got win-based stats for every player, too.
The stats are printed in the book, but those who purchase the THT Annual will also be able to download spreadsheets of Batted Ball and Win-Based stats for every single player in the majors. That way, you can sort and recalculate the stats any way you'd like.
Two other downloads will also be available for those who purchase the book. During the season, I sold subscriptions to my weekly Batted Ball Reports as a way of enticing people to purchase the Annual ahead of time. If you purchase the THT Annual now, you'll be able to download a PDF of all my weekly Batted Ball Reports. Admittedly, these will be a little late, but they serve as a good chronicle of the season. That's like getting another 125-page book along with the Annual.
Because we rushed to get the Annual to the printer (where it sits right now) so you could get the Annual more quickly, we finished before the postseason ended. Yeah, we wanted to finish before the weather forced us to move to a sunnier climate. So there will be one more download available to you: Sky Andrecheck's review of postseason play, once again making use of his Championship Leverage Index and WPA.
One last bonus: There are two special additions to the Annual I haven't mentioned. Tuck has contributed seven new "toons" to the book and Brandon Isleib has three outstanding sets of trivia puzzlers that will truly challenge the hardcore fan but will entertain the casual fan. Isn't that what trivia is supposed to do?
And that, my friends, is this year's Hardball Times Annual. Fantastic articles, chock full of stats, extra downloads and bonus features. What's not to like?
The Annual is available to $21.95 at ACTA Sports. I know you can get it for less elsewhere, and I can't blame you for doing so. But know that it costs money to run THT and advertising on the Internet, like everything else, has dried up. Sales of the THT Annual are now our major source of revenue and we don't really make much money on sales from Amazon and other discount publishers. We make the most money when you purchase the THT Annual through this link.
Please support THT and its writers, and future publications of the THT Annual and other THT publications, by buying directly through this link. If you do, you'll receive the book several weeks earlier than anyone else, because it will be sent directly to you instead of passing through various distribution centers and that sort of thing.
However you decide to purchase it, thank you for supporting the Hardball Times.
Dave was called a "national treasure" by Rob Neyer. Seriously. Comments about this article can be sent to him through the miracle of e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Stephen Strasburg’s AFL Surprise
by Harry PavlidisNovember 03, 2009
Stephen Strasburg made an impressive start Monday in the Arizona Fall League. Working into the fifth inning, the top pick of the 2009 draft showcased his elite stuff. Despite the scouting on the Nationals phenom, eyebrows were raised by Strasburg's velocity.
The AFL has PITCHf/x installed in both Peoria (home of two clubs) and Surprise, leaving Mesa and Phoenix in the stone ages. Strasburg's visit to Surprise was just his second start in front of the PITCHf/x cameras and keen observers noted an increase in his already impressive velocity. On Oct. 22, Strasburg threw in Peoria, where he topped out just under the century mark. In Surprise, Strasburg broke 101 once, and threw 12 other pitches over 100 mph.
One benefit of the AFL is the sheer volume of pitchers used in each game. Of the pitchers appearing Monday in Surprise seven, including Strasburg, had also made an appearance in Peoria. The other six: Josh Wilkie, Drew Storen, Tanner Scheppers, Jeff Mandel, Scott Gorgen and Danny Gutierrez. Wilkie happened to pitch, along with Strasburg, in Peoria on Oct. 22.
Trust but verify
Isolating four-seam fastballs, let's start with a comparison of Strasburg and Wilkie in Surprise on Nov. 2 (red) and Peoria on Oct. 22 (blue) (click images to enlarge):
Strasburg
Wilkie
Two more pitched in Peoria on Oct. 21, so let's throw their fastballs into the mix
Gorgen
Gutierrez
Future Nationals closer Storen worked in Peoria on Oct. 19. He was faster in Surprise, too.
I can't say the PITCHf/x system was hot in Surprise, only the Washington blue-chippers.
Getting used to Strasburg
Stephen Strasburg is proving to be everything he was hyped to be. He threw 101 and sat at 98. He threw sinkers in the upper 90s. His change-up was 90 mph. His curveball had snapping movement and was thrown as hard as most sliders. He's a nightmare for hitters already.
Strasburg is also young and developing. All pitchers have some game-to-game difference in stuff—speed, movement and selection. Surprise may have been the scene of an unusually strong outing. It may be normal for him someday. Whatever it was, the speed wasn't an illusion.
References and Resources
PITCHf/x data from MLBAM
Pitch classifications by the author
Inspiration came via Twitter (@projectprospect and @bigmike05)
Harry Pavlidis admits he has a baseball problem. He also writes for Beyond the Boxscore, Out of the Ivy and his own blog, Cubs f/x. Feedback, questions and comments are appreciated - harrypav@gmail.com
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
And That Happened: World Series
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 03, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Avoid closers at your own risk
by Paul SingmanNovember 03, 2009
Paul has been managing fantasy baseball teams for many seasons and writing for THT Fantasy over the past year (and counting). In his first year competing in expert's leagues, he is both surprised and happy to say he finished in the top 30% of his three leagues. He welcomes readers' thoughts at his email here or in the comments below.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
When down 3 games to 2 in the World Series . . .
by Chris JaffeNovember 03, 2009
History instructor by day, statnerd by night, Chris Jaffe leads one of the most exciting double lives imaginable; with the exception of every other double life possible to imagine. Despite his lack of comic-book-hero-worthiness, Chris enjoys farting around with this stuff. His new book, Evaluating Baseball's Managers is available for pre-order. Chris welcomes responses to his articles via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
So, just how good was Damon’s steal?
by Nick SteinerNovember 02, 2009
Nick is a die-hard Cardinals fan living in LA. He welcomes comments, questions and hate mail via email
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Liveblog World Series Game 5
by Mike FastNovember 02, 2009
Mike Fast is a Kansas City Royals fan who enjoys investigating baseball questions using PITCHf/x data. He welcomes questions and comments via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
My Morning in Exile
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 02, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Quote of the Day: Johnny Damon
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 02, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
And That Happened: World Series
by Craig CalcaterraNovember 02, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
The World Wood Bat Association World Championship
by Adam GuttridgeNovember 02, 2009
Who goes to the World Wood Bat Association World Championship tournament in Jupiter, Fla.?
Well, the list of those who don’t is probably shorter. Eighty-five teams from all corners of the country, and even Puerto Rico (which had, I believe, three teams) and Canada were represented. Scouts attended by the golf-cart-full. One NL Central club had 17 in attendance. I talked to scouts from seven to eight teams, and nobody had less than a dozen scouts representing the club at the event. Oh, and the college recruiters. Don’t forget them; they’re everywhere too.
The players are the absolute cream of the crop from the amateur ranks (high school seniors and younger). They are essentially high school AAU teams. The teams are at times set up by associate scouts of MLB clubs who focus on a specific geographic region, or simply a prominent high school coach (or coaches) with deep roots in the region, or some sponsor throws together a roster (Perfect Game had a few teams, Mizuno, Rawlings, etc), or at times even a former major leaguer (John Cangelosi had a team, Chet Lemon has had one for years, others). Typically (though not always), they are mostly from one general region. I say ‘mostly’ because usually a team from New Jersey will have 12 players from NJ, two to three from NY/Conn/PA and sometimes one or two who are way out of place, like Texas or Georgia. Don’t ask me how that happens. Hell, even Wagner Mateo, the top Dominican prospect embroiled in controversy of the Cardinals reneging on his $3.1 million signing, was there playing for the ‘Texas Scout Team Yankees.’
I drove across the state early Sunday morning to catch the last two days of the tournament (which is spread out over eight fields and a stadium that is the Florida State League/Spring Training home of the Cardinals and Marlins).
Before I go into reports on the prospects I saw, I need to throw up a disclaimer. I was one pair of eyes trying to watch 85 teams, so this is by no means a comprehensive list. If I say one hitter had ‘the quickest hands I saw,’ that does not mean he necessarily had the quickest hands at the tournament. But, it probably means he’s close; for an analogy, if you went to the beach all day and strolled around, the prettiest girl you saw may not have been the prettiest girl at the beach. But she might have been, and she’s probably at least pretty close to it. That said, I had two things that helped: A) Some teams are more stacked than others. I’m going to see a hell of a lot more prospects watching the Orlando Scorpions for an hour than I will in the same time with the Colorado Slammers. B) The scouts. Generally, they are assigned a handful of teams to scout for the weekend. So kindly ask a guy who the most stacked team in his pool is, and if you do so politely, he’ll tell you. And if you’re too shy to ask, they’ll tell you with their feet.
Here we go, in no particular order:
(Name, Position, Graduation Year, Home City, Tournament Team)
DeAndre Smelter, RHP, 2010, Macon Ga., Canes
Smelter is an amazing physical presence; his listing of 6-foot-2 and 205 pounds does not do him justice—he looks more like a University of Georgia linebacker than a Georgia high school pitching prospect. So no big surprise that he’s also a bigtime football recruit, which may make him a difficult sign.
Smelter had the best fastball velocity I saw. Nothing came in lower than 91, and he was consistently sitting 93-94, touching 95 twice. I was told he hit 97 in an earlier outing. The fastball isn’t so movement-heavy, though, and while he wasn’t erratic, he was so-so hitting spots. All he has right now to complement it is a low 80s slider. It’s tight, but low movement (in other words, not the loopy version you see often at this level, but there isn’t enough horizontal or vertical break to it). He got the slider over consistently, however.
I’m not so thrilled with Smelter mechanically. He doesn’t strike me as a big injury-risk, because he’s not so jerky or max-effort. He flies open a bit, which he compensates for with adept glove-hand work, but sometimes his hips open early and the arm gets behind. His arm action is a bit long as well, which can contribute to the problems. The concerns here are that the momentum is going to the wrong places at times in his delivery, which can make command a big issue. Also, his arm slot and action had one observer questioning if he’ll ever be able to develop above-average offspeed offerings.
With a body built more for sprints than marathons and not much after a fastball, Smelter may be a guy who winds up in the pen. Right now, his main weapon is his fastball velocity, but A) That’s a damn important weapon, and B) That velocity is near the top of the charts for his class. In an average year, he probably falls between late first and early second rounds. His spring performance and his signability have the potential to push that in either direction.
Luke Crumley, RHP, 2011, Cleveland, Ga., Royals Baseball Club
Crumley has the ideal projectable pitchers body; 6-foot-4, 180. His fastball right now sits 88-90 mph, with the potential for a lot more as he fills out. He also showed a pretty nasty curveball that definitely looks like a future plus pitch. Just a high school junior, Crumley is already committed to Georgia (according to Mom).
Mechanically, there is a bit more effort in the delivery than you’d like to see, and his arm jerks a bit on the finish.
His draft day is 19 months away, and anything can happen between now and then (and let that be known for any 2011 player discussed here). But if he’s already hitting 90 with room to grow and a good looking second pitch, he’s a guy you want to follow.
Austin Sovay, RHP, 2012, Ft. Lauderdal, Fla., Marucci Elite
That’s right, a 2012 player already well on the radar. And he’s not alone.
I only saw Sovay pitch one inning, but it was impressive. Fastball 85-88, hit 90, and showed a good curve at 73.
He’s listed as 6-foot-5 190, which may be a bit low on the weight side. Not that he’s chubby, he just has big, muscular legs.
Mechanically, things are pretty simple for such a big guy. However, he has one of those Tim Hudson-esque floating front feet (it strides towards the plate, then stops and starts heading toward the 1B line as his hips open up).
Josh Tobias, 2B/3B, 2011, Greensbor, N.C., Canes
Scouts talk about the sound a ball makes coming off a bat. That was the first thing that got my attention with Tobias. “CRACK!”, and a line drive screams off into left field. I made a note to not go too far anytime soon, so I could see his next at-bat. Then again, “CRACK!!”, even louder than the first, a line-drive to right-center on a breaking ball. I couldn’t get enough; I saw Tobias more than any other player at the tournament, getting to see him in 10 or 11 PAs. One ended in a walk, and I’ll be damned if fewer than seven of them resulted either in line drives or ground-liners that made it out of the infield in one hop. (I was also told I missed a long homer the day before.)
His swing is a bit unorthodox. It’s semi-long and he finishes with his hands flying high, sort of like a mini-right-handed Fred McGriff. But he has great bat speed and covers the plate completely with hands that thrash through the zone lightning quick.
It’s a point I’ve made before, but one ‘tool’ that I feel gets overlooked at times is just plain old hitability. Scouts like to look at the components; are the hands quick, is the swing short, does he have a good swing path, does he recognize pitches well, does he keep himself balanced, etc. Those are all important pieces in projecting a player’s future success, and by no means would I advocate disregarding them. But the bottom line is this: Some guys plain old find the barrel with consistency, and others (even the ones with quick hands and short strokes) do not. Those components are intended to project those who can and will find the barrel, but it’s a very complicated view of things. Simply put, the difference between a routine groundball to the SS and a liner that goes over his head is a few millimeters of difference on the bat. Despite the hands, the shortness of the swing, the balance, etc etc… some guys are extremely coordinated with that bat in their hands, and others are just so-so. And Josh Tobias is great.
Now, I don’t want to create the impression that Tobias has some Hunchback of Notre Dame swing; that’s not the case at all, it just may not be what Walt Hriniak would use as his model.
As comps, I see shades of both Gary Sheffield and Dmitri Young here. An ultra-fast bat and swing to hit for average, a guy who handles both breaking pitches and good heat, and some serious raw power.
Going forward, I have two question marks; one is future power. Tobias is 5-foot-9. Sure, he’s just 16 and may have some growth left, but Dad is only about 5-foot-10. Then again, he’s 16 and hitting homers with a wood bat. The size may limit his ceiling with regard to power, but don’t get caught up in that; this one might be a mold-breaker. The main concern for me is finding him a position. His arm is sub-par and comes with a screwy, flailing sidearm motion. His actions and hands are also quite questionable. Veteran scouts will swear they’ve seen future gold-glovers who couldn’t field a lick in their teens, but I’m pretty discouraged with Tobias’ D (especially since the arm means in you move him to OF, it’s got to be left).
Still, he’s the best all-around bat I saw this weekend. As if I didn’t already love him enough, I’m told he’s committed to the Gators for college (though, as always, the draft may change that). Again, he’s a 2011 guy, so this is very early hype. But I’m keeping a very close on him going forward.
Austin Anderson, SS/2B, 2010, Sorrento, Fla., Orlando Scorpions
Anderson bats left-handed with a beautiful line-drive stroke who uses all fields. Plus bat speed, very short, quick stroke and consistently made hard contact. Saw him pull a left-hander for a long single to right-center, and later scream a liner into the left center gap off a righty. He’s an above-average runner; I had him at 4.08 to first base. The swing really made an impression on me, though, and he looked great playing second. Heard he has committed to Mississippi.
Tyler Green, RHP, 2010, Lake Jackson, Texas, Texas Scout Team Yankees
There were like two more Tyler Green’s (or Tyler Greene’s) at this tournament. Popular baseball name, I guess (don’t forget the Cardinals shortstop).
Green threw 88-91 from his tall frame, and the pitch had some great third-base run on it. He’s got some filling out left to do, which means he could add more velocity as well. He showed a slurve that he needs to mold into a slower, straight overhand curve. But the fastball velocity and movement are worth getting excited about.
Ladson Montgomery, C, 2010, Jacksonville, Fla., Orlando Scorpions
The most impressive live-game pop time I got from a catcher at 1.93. That’s near the top of the charts for a high school catcher to begin with, but consider this: It was Montgomery’s fourth or fifth game behind the dish in the last 65 hours. (Being a catching prospect at some of these showcases is just unreal).
But Montgomery isn’t all catch and throw. He’s got a legit left-handed bat, with moderate loft and a smooth plane. He’s a small guy, standing just 5-foot-9 (which can actually be a good thing for catchers), so he’ll probably be more of a doubles guy instead of over-the-fence power. But he has monster legs for someone his age and really gets his lower half and trunk into his swing.
Jake Cave, LHP/OF, 2011, Hampton, Va., Canes
Now here’s a really interesting guy. Look at Cave, and he’s very unassuming physically; 6-foot-1 quite skinny, slim hips, does not look so athletic.
Then you put him on a mound and watch him throw an easy 88-91 with plus command and a curve that makes you think Zito.
Then, you can take him off the mound, put a bat in his hand, and watch him take simply vicious hacks and display some pretty incredible raw power. For icing on the cake, he’s a plus runner straightaway (4.09 through first) and cuts bags quite well.
He’s a little more advanced on the mound right now than at the plate, in my opinion. He was a bit hack-heavy, and swung and missed more than you’d like to see (mostly on bad balls). It’s hard to tell if that’s a real trait or just a guy at a showcase trying to get his money’s worth.
Either way, this is an incredibly talented kid for the ’11 class. Shades of Nick Markakis at the plate, and something like a more powerful Zito on the mound. If the draft were tomorrow, he might be a supplemental-round pick. But he’s got another year to grow. Look out.
Chevez Clarke, OF, 2010, Marietta, Ga., East Cobb Baseball
Every tool in the shed. Clarke is just an electric player, simply put. He may well be a first-round talent this June.
He’s got an incredibly athletic body, with plus speed. He’s well polished with the bat (I only saw three ABs, they were all from the left side; he switch hits). The stroke is lightning-quick through the zone and has a mild uppercut, and he recognized pitches well. He’s a well above average runner, and aggressive on the basepaths.
He reminds me a bit of Denard Span, with the potential to develop a bit more in the power department (he’s got longer limbs). Defensively, he showed a cannon, and he certainly has the speed for center fielder. No read on his routes or judgment, however. Not sure if he can play the infield, but he sure does have the athleticism, body type and arm.
Parks Jordan, 2B, 2010, Winston-Salem, N.C., Canes
Beautiful left-handed line-drive swing (reminded me of Seth Smith), though I didn’t see much over the fence power potential.
He struck out on a questionable call, and threw a pretty mild tantrum. Sort of slammed his helmet in the dugout and was pretty verbal (though not toward the umpire). A lot of scouts look down on stuff like this, but I see two sides to the coin; on one hand, maybe he does not deal with failure so well. But to me, it at least shows he gives a damn, and I like guys with a competitive streak.
He’s not a high-round guy to me right now (I’d say more fourth-sixth), but he’s worth keeping an eye on. He’s committed to the University of North Carolina, which is a hitters hell. But if he’s able to prove me wrong and develop some more power during his college years, he could climb.
Wagner Mateo, OF, Free Agent, Texas Scout Team Yankees
Ah, the legend is here.
I don’t want to be guilty of making judgments based on the two ABs and about 12 pitches I saw Wagner, but I was underwhelmed. Of course, it would be hard not to be when a kid signed the biggest bonus ever for a Dominican position player just a few months back. He struck out on four pitches his first at-bat, including missing a curveball by 18 inches. I don’t think that was an aberration; he’s got a pretty noisy front leg load that appears likely to screw with his timing.
You could see the power in the swing, however. This is a strong, physical kid with room left to grow.
And really, if the guy had a sloppy tournament, can you blame him? Growing up in poverty, then having $3.1 million essentially handed to you then taken away… I remember being 16 and having a crappy week on the field when I was fighting with my girlfriend. The pressure on all these kids shoulders is pretty remarkable, but Wagner’s situation almost defies words.
Dwight Smith, OF, 2011, Peachtree City, Ga., Canes
Wowee. Fastest bat I saw in the tournament, and if his swing needs any tuning, that’s for someone far smarter than me. Power to spare (despite being 5-foot-11), good plate coverage, quiet hands and load… he’s dialed in.
It stands to reason; this is the son of the former big leaguer of the same name.
He’s a great athlete and an above-average baserunner. However, it looked like things were a bit of an adventure in the outfield.
I think he’ll be a top-round draft pick in 2011.
Manny Machado, SS, 2010, Hialeah, Fla., Royals Baseball Club
I bet he doesn’t get past the first round come June.
Machado has a big (6-foot-3), athletic frame with plenty of filling out left. His actions at shortstop were graceful and smooth, and he seemed to have plenty of arm.
The exciting thing about Machado is his power potential. His swing was a little long, and he did hack a bit. But he was right on 90-plus mph fastballs, and generates a lot of loft with his long arms and aggressive cuts. If there’s one thing that will get teams excited, it’s a combination of power potential and athleticism at a key position. Check all three boxes for Machado.
I am a little concerned, however, about his ability to hit for average. He seems to be a fastball-only hitter right now (a great fastball hitter, but still…), and while his long arms generate power, they also generate a long swing.
Keep an eye on:
Jared Lakind, Texas Scout Team Yankees—Serious potential power in LHH 1B.
Shane Kennedy and Sean O’Brien, Orlando Scorpions—I lump them together because they’re both much like Machado; big, athletic, wiry SS with good actions and power potential.
Curt Britt, Canes—Chris Parmalee part II, I swear. 2012 draft-eligible. Remember him.
Landon Lassiter, Canes—Steady SS with good body and potential plus bat, another 2012 guy.
Ryan Keller, Braves Scout Team—CA RHP who resembles Curt Schilling, sat 87-89 but CB was subpar. 2011.
Chris Triplett, Royals Baseball Club—Athletic, plus defensive 2010 SS with plus speed. Limited power for now.
Lance McCullers, Midland Redskins—Only saw him in passing, but looked beautiful around the bag at SS. College scout mentioned he has FB to 94 on the mound, confirmed by several others, which is just crazy for a 2012 guy.
Dominic Jose, Royals Baseball Club—Athletic, lanky body, sweet LH swing, cannon arm. 2011.
Adam Guttridge is a recent graduate seeking to continue his baseball career. Employment offers can be sent to (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Approaching unconscious competence
by Derek AmbrosinoNovember 02, 2009
Derek Ambrosino aspires to one day, like Dan Quisenberry, find a delivery in his flaw, you can send him questions, comments, or suggestions at digglahhh AT yahoo DOT com.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Managerial remarriages
by Chris JaffeNovember 02, 2009
Not returning to a stadium near you: former Houston manager Phil Garner
Last week the Houston Astros hired a new manager: Red Sox bench coach Brad Mills. Though he was a leading candidate for the job, many expected Houston to tab Phil Garner, who was another candidate for the spot. Garner was an interesting candidate because the Astros fired him just 26 months previously.
This got me wondering: What examples are there in baseball history of a team rehiring the manager previously drummed out of town? Are there any themes explaining these circumstances?
Frankly, it doesn't take too much for me to work up some interest in managers. As readers of this site may have noticed, I've written on managers more than a few times over the years. (And regular readers of this column may have already figured out that this paragraph exists largely as an excuse for me to plug and link to my book—Evaluating Baseball's Managers, 1876-2008—which is due out later this year.)
The remarried managers
First, I have to look up managers with more than one tour with a club. This is more difficult than it sounds for a few reasons. For example, way back in the day Jimmy Austin served a trio of tours with the St. Louis Browns. However, combined they were less than a half season. He was just the club's default interim manager. He was never really asked to manage the club. That hardly counts.
For that matter, Connie Mack technically had three stints with the A's. Twice he went on extended scouting trips, putting his son in charge. It's three stints, but come on. What I'm looking for are men who were given more than one legitimate chance. Not two interim stints. Not one long stretch with an interruption. More than one real shot.
This may sound like a simple guideline, but it can be a pain. There are a few managers I keep going back and forth on. For example, Red Schoendienst served one prolonged stint as St. Louis skipper, then two different interim stints (neither of which were just for a few days, either). Sure, it's only one prolonged period, but he was far more substantial than Austin and very few men managed three stints with any club. Ultimately, I left him out, but other borderliners were left in.
Though the boundaries can be shaky, it's normally pretty clear who belongs and who doesn't. The managers below were the ones who served multiple stints by my reckoning. I list them in order of their second hire:
Year Team Manager 1891 STC Charles Comiskey 1912 CWS Nixey Callahan 1927 BOX Bill Carrigan 1929 STC Bill McKechnie 1932 PIT George Gibson 1935 WAS Bucky Harris 1940 STC Billy Southworth 1941 CLE Roger Peckinpaugh 1944 CHC Charlie Grimm 1948 BRK Leo Durocher 1948 BRK Burt Shotton 1952 STB Rogers Hornsby 1955 DET Bucky Harris 1958 PHI Eddie Sawyer 1960 BOX Pinky Higgins 1967 PIT Danny Murtaugh 1969 OAK Hank Bauer 1974 OAK Alvin Dark 1976 CWS Paul Richards 1978 OAK Jack McKeon 1979 NYY Billy Martin 1981 STC Whitey Herzog 1981 NYY Bob Lemon 1984 NYY Yogi Berra 1985 CAL Gene Mauch 1990 ATL Bobby Cox 2008 TOR Cito Gaston
I'm sure I missed some, but ah well.
The list of 27 rehirings actually features 26 different managers. Bucky Harris is the only one to show up with two different clubs: the Senators and Tigers.
Harris went 22 years between stints with the Tigers, which ties him with Paul Richards for the longest gap between leaving and returning to a club's dugout. Berra went 20 years between his Yankee stints. The only other example of someone enduring more than 11 years was Rogers Hornsby, who went 15 years between being fired and rehired in St. Louis.
Harris is also one of the only men above to have more than two stints for a club, as he served three tours of duty in Washington. Charlie Grimm also had three stints with the Cubs (though the third was well under a season), Danny Murtaugh had four with the Pirates, and Billy Martin tops them all with five go-arounds under George Steinbrenner.
Though it had only been two years since Garner was fired, there is ample precedent for rehiring someone with such little turnaround time. Martin, Pinky Higgins, Jack McKeon, Whitey Herzog, Bill McKechnie, and Burt Shotton all returned to the dugout a year after being removed from it. Leo Durcoher, Bob Lemon and Danny Murtaugh all went just over a year.
Speaking of the circumstances surrounding these managerial remarriages, I classify the above into some overlapping categories: former players, nostalgia for golden days, company men, peculiar owners and bizarre circumstances.
Former players
Many of the managers listed above played for the teams that they managed for multiple times. In fact, most of them did: 16 of the 27 rehirings had this going for them.
Berra is the most obvious example as he was a Hall of Fame catcher who managed the club to a pennant in 1964. He returned as skipper in 1984, partially due to his association with the club, almost a decade after his last job running a club.
That said, many left little mark as players on the teams they later managed. The A's didn't rehire Hank Bauer to bring back memories of the halcyon days of the 1960-61 Kansas City clubs. A young Roger Peckinpaugh played approximately a half-season's worth of games with the Indians before making his name as Senators shortstop. Bucky Harris had 23 plate appearances for the Tigers.
Harris' Detroit experience reveals a second problem with this theme: His plate appearances came as player-manager in his first go-around. In fact, many of these managers were also player-managers, at least in their first go-around. Both Charles Comiskey and Nixey Callahan played in all their stints with St. Louis and Chicago, respectively.
Playing for a team got these players noticed by the club, which can explain their first hiring, but it doesn't necessarily explain their rehiring. Also, it should be noted this trend is on the wane. Only two of the last 10 listed above played for their teams.
Though playing for the teams they managed multiple times is arguably the most pronounced trend among those listed above, it's less than meets the eye upon closer inspection. That said, it does overlap with the second reason, which is a bit more important overall.
Nostalgia
Some managers get rehired because they are associated with a team's previous success. Eddie Sawyer is a good example of such a manger. In 1950, he led the Whiz Kids Phillies to their first pennant in more than 30 years. Though he left when the Whiz Kids' success proved fleeting, the club brought him back when their 1950s torpor proved to be more lasting.
Bill Carrigan is another such manager. He led the Red Sox to October success in the 1910s, so they brought him back when they sucked in the 1920s.
George Gibson shows how nostalgia can overlap with being a former player. In his younger days, Gibson caught for the 1909 world-champion Pirates. Later, he helmed them when they nearly claimed a pennant in 1921. In 1931 they had their worst season in more than a decade, causing them to tap this link to past glories.
Charles Comiskey, Carrigan, Bill McKechnie, Bucky Harris (Senators version), Charlie Grimm, Burt Shotton, Leo Durocher, Sawyer, Murtaugh, Billy Martin, Yogi Berra and Cito Gaston all won pennants with their teams before being rehired. That's almost half.
On the one hand, this is just a general trend in baseball: Men who had success before have an easier time getting rehired. It's a bit more than that, though. Twelve of the 27 cases involved a manager winning a pennant prior to being rehired, which is 44 percent. I don't know exactly what percentage of recycled managers won pennants in their previous stint, but I highly doubt it's over two-fifths of all rehired managers.
Even some of the non-pennant winners were signs of nostalgia, such as Gibson. Perhaps the oddest case was Hornsby. He never did much for the Browns, but he was a legendary ballplayer in St. Louis, thanks to his hitting with the Cardinals. In Veeck as in Wreck, Bill Veeck admitted he brought Hornsby to help appeal to the crowd.
Organization men
Many of the above managers became associated with one club, aiding their rehiring. Danny Murtaugh was an extreme example of this. Though he served four stints as Pirates manager, they never got rid of him. They just reassigned him to other posts in the organization. The only reason he didn't work one extended stretch in the dugout was due to a weak heart. He was a Pirate, through and through.
Pinky Higgins was in Tom Yawkey's Red Sox organization for almost all his post-playing career. He served as minor league manager, manager and front-office figure for about 20 years.
With others, organizational loyalty didn't necessarily run as deep, but they clearly became associated with one team. Martin may have managed several teams before becoming Steinbrenner's favorite manager to hire, but it's hard to think of him as anything other than a Yankee. He played for them, he took them to the World Series as manager, and after leaving the dugout he became their announcer. Similarly, Charlie Grimm became a Cub, and it's hard to think of Bucky Harris as anything other than a Senator.
To varying degrees, one can see Bill Carrigan, Billy Southworth, Eddie Sawyer and Cito Gaston as organization men.
Peculiar owners
By peculiar owners, I basically mean Charles Finley and George Steinbrenner, who are each personally responsibly for three rehirings.
Before Joe Torre, Steinbrenner was famous for his penchant for rapidly hiring and firing managers, signified by the five separate tenures of Martin. For a while, the Yankees seemed to perfect a mixture of hot-and-cold managers, by shuttling between the fiery Martin and mellow Bob Lemon in order to shake up the clubhouse atmosphere. Steinbrenner also hired (and soon fired) Berra, two decades after his first stint.
While Steinbrenner had the reputation as the ultimate hirer-and-firer of managers, Finley was probably worse at it. He twice hired and fired Hank Bauer, Alvin Dark and Jack McKeon. My personal favorite was the McKeon situation. He was hired in early 1977, only to be fired a third of the way through the season. As it turns out, he was on the sidelines for less than a year, as Finley brought him back a quarter of the way into 1978. After 1978, Finley fired him again. Even Steinbrenner would get dizzy at that pace.
Bizarre circumstances
Sometimes, a manager's two terms came due to just plain bizarreness that the statistical record itself doesn't fully explain.
The most bizarre of them all was the Leo Durocher-Burt Shotton cha-cha-cha in Brooklyn in 1946-48. Durocher was the Dodgers manager, but the commissioner suspended him for all of 1947 just before the season began. (The reasons were themselves bizarre—basically a new commissioner wanted to assert his authority.)
On the fly, Brooklyn honcho Branch Rickey hired Burt Shotton as a one-year fill-in, and they won the pennant. Durocher came back the next year, but Rickey really liked Shotton, so he maneuvered for Durocher to go manage the Giants so he could bring Shotton back.
These are two managers I considered not putting on the list. I felt I had to with Shotton, because he had two clear separate tenures. Durocher was one interrupted tenure, but the interruption was for a full year, and his boss liked the other guy so much he dumped Leo. I have to explain the inclusion of these two, but if I left them out I'd have to explain their exclusion. It was just an odd situation all around.
St. Louis had numerous odd situations. Comiskey managed St. Louis in the 1880s, but he jumped to the Players League in 1890s. When it folded, he came back.
Bill McKechnie took the Cardinals to a pennant in 1928, but he became a casualty in a battle between warring front-office factions that offseason. However, when the team underachieved in 1929, they brought him back the next year—only to let him go yet again when the season concluded.
Whitey Herzog was both manager and general manager. He wanted to focus on the latter duties, so he pulled himself from the dugout. Then he realized there was no one he trusted as much as Whitey Herzog to run the team, so he came right back.
Nixey Callahan left Chicago to try to enter the ownership ranks in the minors. When that didn't pan out, he came back to managing the White Sox for a brief while. Similarly, Bill Carrigan left the first time to pursue more profitable lines of work away from baseball. It was a different game back then.
Roger Peckinpaugh combined nostalgia with an odd situation. The Cleveland Indians revolted on manager Ozzie Vitt in 1940. Vitt survived the season, but a mellower figure was needed for the next campaign. Peckinpaugh had the advantage of being a known figure and a good guy from his previous stint, so the club tapped him.
Miscellaneous
Only a handful of hirings don't fit any of the above categories, or don't fit any well. Bobby Cox doesn't fit in, but he has one nice advantage. He was briefly both manager and general manager. He pulled a reverse Herzog: He decided to stay in the dugout and let someone else take over as general manager.
Gene Mauch doesn't fit any category. I'd love to know why Gene Autry dumped him then brought him back so quickly. I'm sure Mauch's sterling reputation plays a role, but I don't know the details of how it all played out.
Paul Richards became a second-time manager for a second-time owner. When Veeck re-purchased the White Sox he tabbed Richards as his field general. Richards had been in front offices for the previous 15 years or so, but he agreed to go back for his ill-fated managerial stint in 1976.
Bucky Harris technically can be classified as a player-manager for Detroit, but only dubiously. No one was recalling his two dozen at-bats when he was hired in 1955. He was just a well-respected veteran skipper for a team that wasn't looking for much more than that.
The only other oddity was perhaps the most successful rehiring of the bunch: Billy Southworth of the Cardinals. He played for them, but only for a little while at the end of a journeyman career.
He arguably had the least successful first stint of any of the 27, too. In 1929, he took over a team that won the pennant for McKechnie the year before and promptly piloted them below .500. He lasted barely 90 games. He didn't get another chance to manage for over a decade, one of the longest gaps of anyone here.
He made his mark during that gap though, as he managed St. Louis' minor league squads to a series of successful seasons. That's why it's possible to classify him as an organization man. (Then again, he left after just six full seasons in the 1940s.)
Conclusions
I'm not too surprised the Astros didn't hire Garner. Maybe I should be. After all, he played for the Astros for several years. His first term saw the Astros claim their first and only pennant, adding nostalgia for him.
Still, it virtually never happens these days. That in and of itself makes it difficult for a manager to be recycled by the team that trashed him in the first place. Garner might be the best candidate for a remarriage with his old franchise, but that still doesn't mean he's necessarily a good bet.
References and Resources
Sources: I looked through franchise records at Baseball Reference for managerial remarriages.
My memories of Bill Veeck's Veeck as in Wreck came in handy for the Rogers Hornsby bit. SABR's Deadball Stars of the American League helped with Callahan.
Photo from Icon Sports Media.
History instructor by day, statnerd by night, Chris Jaffe leads one of the most exciting double lives imaginable; with the exception of every other double life possible to imagine. Despite his lack of comic-book-hero-worthiness, Chris enjoys farting around with this stuff. His new book, Evaluating Baseball's Managers is available for pre-order. Chris welcomes responses to his articles via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Once down 3 games to 1 in the World Series . . .
by Chris JaffeNovember 02, 2009
History instructor by day, statnerd by night, Chris Jaffe leads one of the most exciting double lives imaginable; with the exception of every other double life possible to imagine. Despite his lack of comic-book-hero-worthiness, Chris enjoys farting around with this stuff. His new book, Evaluating Baseball's Managers is available for pre-order. Chris welcomes responses to his articles via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Liveblog World Series Game 4
by Mike FastNovember 01, 2009
Mike Fast is a Kansas City Royals fan who enjoys investigating baseball questions using PITCHf/x data. He welcomes questions and comments via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Joe Girardi Facts
by Jeremy GreenhouseNovember 01, 2009
Any questions? Feel free to email me.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Liveblog World Series Game 3
by Mike FastOctober 31, 2009
Mike Fast is a Kansas City Royals fan who enjoys investigating baseball questions using PITCHf/x data. He welcomes questions and comments via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Top minor league defensive players of 2009
by Alex PediciniOctober 31, 2009
Alex is a student in Boston. He welcomes all questions and comments here
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Should Jeter have bunted?
by Colin WyersOctober 31, 2009
Colin Wyers knows exactly how much of a nerd he is. He is very interested in hearing about any other concerns you may have; you can reach him by e-mail, and he will try his best to respond in a timely fashion. He also blogs at Statistically Speaking.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Mr. November
by Sean SmithOctober 30, 2009
Sean Smith is a lifelong Angels fan despite never visiting the west coast until April 2006. His work can also be found at baseballprojection.com and Anaheim Angels All the Way and he can be contacted by email.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Pearlman on McGwire
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 30, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Great Moments in Niche Blogging
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 30, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
My Morning in Exile
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 30, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
An impartial observer
by Craig BrownOctober 30, 2009
I’m a baseball fan.
Not exactly a surprise, considering you’re reading this at a baseball website to which I regularly contribute.
As you may know, the Royals are my team. I grew up in Kansas City and came of age when October baseball was the rule, not the exception. So the last 24 years have left me out in the cold once the postseason begins. Of course, since I’m a fan, I’ll watch the games. I find it's always more fun when you have a rooting interest (or a wager) in the outcome. Usually, I'll find a team that interests me for one reason or another and that will be the team I tepidly support for October. Sometimes, I’ll find a team to root against. Last year, I climbed aboard the Rays bandwagon early (like, in May) so I rode that one all the way to the bitter end.
In search of a team early this October, I decided I’d cast my lot with the Angels. No reason, really. They seemed like a nice team with some quality players who were fun to watch. I caught a lot of their games on television this summer when they’re were on late in the Central Time Zone thanks to Extra Innings, so I had followed them more closely than the other teams in the hunt. (I watched my share of Dodgers games as well—love listening to Vin Scully—but what can I say? I’m an American League kind of guy.)
It’s really more a process of elimination when your team isn’t playing in October and you need to find a temporary team to cheer. Here’s how my thought process broke down:
Boston - No. I liked the Sox more when they had that Curse.
Twins - No. They play in the Central, so I’m contractually obligated to hate them.
Los Angeles - The Angels are fine.
Yankees - No. We’ll get to them in a minute.
St. Louis - No. Never. There are simply too many reasons to list.
Colorado - No. Does anyone have an opinion on the Rockies?
Los Angeles - Maybe. Although I always took San Francisco in the whole Dodger/Giant debate.
Phillies - No. We’ll get to them in a minute.
By a straightforward process of elimination, I adopted the Angels as my October team.
Unfortunately, as will happen, my chosen team didn’t win the pennant. This left me without a team. Normally, I’d reassess and pick a new team (the benefits of temporary fandom) but this year posed a special risk.
You see, the Yankees are my least favorite team in the American League. And the Phillies are my least favorite team in the National League.
Oh, no.
This hatred for the Yankees and the Phillies isn’t something I manufactured. This is real. It’s part of being a fan.
Why I don’t like the Yankees
Forget all that Evil Empire stuff. It’s personal…
1976, 1977, 1978.
God, those years were painful. The Chris Chambliss home run to end the series in ’76… The Freddie Patek double play to end the series in ’77…. We're talking some permanent psychological scars.
In ’76. the Royals took an early lead in the decisive fifth game, but were trailing by the third after a Thurman Munson single and a Chambliss ground out. The Royals couldn’t do a thing against starter Ed Figueroa after the second inning and were down 6-3 entering the eighth. An Al Cowens single leading off the inning chased Figueroa. Reliever Grant Jackson gave up a single to Jim Wohlford, bringing up George Brett who promptly tied the game with a home run.
It was a cruel lifeline. Mark Littell, starting his third inning in relief in the bottom of the ninth, grooved a pitch to Chambliss, who set off a pandemonium bomb in the Bronx.
The next year was worse: The Royals were at home and led the fifth game from the beginning. They put two runs across in the first as Brett tripled to score Hal McRae, setting off a brawl in the process. Brett slid hard into third, angering Graig Nettles, who appeared to kick Brett. Brett jumped up and began swinging, landing a solid punch to Nettles’ jaw before the melee was halted. I loved every minute.
Tensions aside, the Royals held the lead until the ninth. Just three outs away from their first pennant, the Royals unraveled. A Paul Blair single, a walk to Roy White and a Mickey Rivers single tied the game at three. New reliever Littell (him again!) is brought in to face Willie Randolph, who drives in the go-ahead run on a sacrifice fly. A Brett error plates the third run of the inning and suddenly the Royals, who were on the brink of celebration, are on the edge of despair.
The collapse was complete when relief ace Sparky Lyle induced Patek into a series ending double play.
The ’78 ALCS was difficult as well, but since the Yankees won in four, it wasn’t as heartbreaking as the previous two. I mean, Ron Guidry pitched the fourth game of that series because the Yankees needed him in their one-game playoff with the Red Sox. Nobody was beating Guidry in ’78. The final game was a quality pitchers duel as both starters went eight innings, but the Yankees touched Dennis Leonard for two home runs. That was the difference. Doesn’t mean it didn’t sting.
Why I hate the Phillies
It’s simple…
1980
Finally, the Royals got by the Yankees in ’80, sweeping the ALCS in three games. The iconic moment in that series was the towering Brett home run against Goose Gossage to vault the Royals ahead in the seventh. Dan Quisenberry salted the game away with the final nine outs and the Royals celebrated the first pennant in their relatively short history
All was right in the world.
Until they went to Philadelphia.
The Royals dropped the first two at the Vet, the second a heartbreaker when Quisenberry couldn’t hold a two-run lead in the eighth. They returned to Kansas City and won Game Three in the 10th, then evened the Series behind a pair of Willie Aikens home runs the next day. With the Series even at two games apiece, it perhaps was destined to go the full seven.
Then Quisenberry coughed up another lead. A Del Unser pinch-hit double drove home Mike Schmidt and Manny Trillo brought Unser home with the go-ahead run on a two-out single, forcing the Royals to return to Philly needing both games to win the Series.
Of course, that didn’t happen as Steve Carlton and Tug McGraw held the Royals to a single tally in Game Six to bring the Phillies their first title in club history.
So I have an unpleasant history with these two teams.
Is it silly to dislike these teams so long after they crushed my preadolescent hopes of glory? Perhaps. However, as my friend Minda told me last night, there is no statute of limitations on sports grudges. I figured I’d just settle into this year’s Series with a certain degree of apathy. Maybe sometimes that’s the best way to view a major sporting event. This way, I can appreciate the good plays, chuckle at the blunders and wonder what the hell the umpires were watching when they inevitably blow a call. Without an emotional investment, I’m free to be a fan of the game.
Then, a funny thing happened on the way to impartiality and indifference...
I enjoy well-played, fundamentally sound baseball. (Which is strange considering I’m a Royals fan. Maybe there’s something there about wanting what you cannot have.) So in the first two innings of Wednesday’s game, I found myself locked in to the broadcast. An impartial observer. Sure, C.C. Sabathia wasn’t exactly sharp in the first inning, but his escape from a potentially disastrous start was compelling.
As we all know, Sabathia retired Jimmy Rollins and Shane Victorino to start the third. Then Chase Utley stepped to the plate.
Really, this at-bat was just awesome baseball. A great pitcher against a great hitter. Sabathia threw fastballs, sliders and a sinker. Utley took three pitches out of the zone and swung at five, fouling off all of them. On pitch number nine, Utley skied one to deep right…
“Get up!” I said to my television.
Huh? I thought I was impartial. I thought I’d just watch these games without a rooting interest. I thought I just wanted to see some baseball.
“Get up!” I said again, only louder.
Home run.
I did a little fist pump.
From there, it became effortless. I clapped when Utley crushed his second home run and marveled at how Cliff Lee toyed with the most potent offense in the game. I was delighted when Joe Girardi tried to find a reliever capable of getting an out and thought Alex Rodriguez looked right at home with his three-strikeout night.
It turns out that over 30 years later, I’m still not over the devastation of those playoff losses to the Yankees. I’m probably not over the World Series loss of ’80 either, but when it comes down to it, the Phillies broke my heart only once. The Yankees stomped on it thrice.
Don't get me wrong. If the Phillies win, I’m not going to climb up a light pole in celebration, or buy any of that overpriced, ugly championship gear that MLB will immediately begin hawking. I won’t do Google searches for the Phillie Phanatic or name my next child after Jayson Werth. I just know I would be happier with a Phillies championship than if the Yankees emerge as victors. Sometimes, that’s all it takes to be the team I pull for in the World Series. And since my Royals won't be returning to the postseason any time soon, this will be a ritual I'll continue to fine tune over the next several years.
Go Phillies. I guess.
Craig writes about the Royals at Royals Authority. The Royals Authority 2009 Annual, featuring detailed player profiles and a complete look at the minor leagues is now on sale. He welcomes all questions and comments via e-mail. Or just follow him on Twitter.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Cooperstown Confidential: The story of Oscar Gamble
by Bruce MarkusenOctober 30, 2009
When I think of the Phillies and Yankees simultaneously, I think of the 1950 World Series and Jim Konstanty, who used to live 22 miles up the road in Oneonta, N.Y. I also think of players like Charlie Hayes, Mike "The Hit Man" Easler, Jay Johnstone, Al Holland and Sparky Lyle, colorful characters and intriguing personalities who wore the pinstripes of both franchises. But no list of players common to both teams would be complete without the estimable Oscar Gamble.
Gamble’s professional career began with neither the Phillies nor Yankees organizations, but rather with the Chicago Cubs of the late 1960s. Signed by a Cubs scout named Buck O’Neil, a man whose eye for young talent was nearly as keen as his effervescent personality, Gamble moved through the Cubs’ system quickly as a speedy center fielder. That early assessment of Gamble’s playing ability probably doesn’t jive with what most readers remember about Gamble. Safe to say, the speed and the ability to play center field left Gamble quickly, eventually replaced by a powerful uppercut swing.
The Cubs liked Gamble so much that they rushed him to the big leagues at 19, during the ill-fated 1969 season, trying him as one of several possible remedies to their nagging center field problem. Playing a smattering of games for the contending Cubs, Gamble struggled offensively—primarily because he was not ready—and floundered defensively—mostly because he was ill-suited to play center field. In 24 games in center field, Gamble committed four errors.
Gamble’s failed tryout in center field likely played a part in his offseason departure. Perhaps realizing that Gamble lacked the physical skills to play the outfield at a premium level, the Cubs dealt him to the Phillies as part of a package for veteran right fielder Johnny Callison, beginning a series of transactions that would highlight his vagabond career. The Phillies moved Gamble from center field to the outfield corners, but watched him struggle to hit for either average or power during his three seasons.
Gamble’s most distinctive achievement in Philadelphia may have come during his last day with the Phillies. Playing in the final game at decrepit Connie Mack Stadium, Gamble became the last man to register a hit and an RBI in the ancient ballpark, which dated back to 1909. In the bottom of the 10th inning, Gamble’s game-ending RBI single gave Connie Mack Stadium a proper sendoff.
Just like the Cubs, the Phillies gave up on Gamble’s development. After the 1972 season, they traded him to the Cleveland Indians. Given the also-ran fortunes of the franchise at the time, few players wanted to play in Cleveland. For Gamble, though, it would provide the setting for his breakthrough as a major league slugger. He began to show significant power, particularly against right-handed pitching. The Indians didn’t trust him to play every day, but began to use him as a platoon player in both left and right field. In 1973, Gamble slugged 20 home runs in 432 at-bats, lifting his slugging percentage by more than 100 points to .464.
Gamble also begin to make his mark with his distinctive hair style. Still scuffling for playing time in a crowded Indians outfield, Gamble thought he might be able to gain some notice if he let his hair grow out. (Hey, when you’re a young, unproven player, you’ll do anything for more playing time, even if it has nothing to do with how you play!) The hair grew longer, and also wider and taller. Gamble’s oversized Afro made for quite a sight at Cleveland’s Municipal Stadium. As former Hall of Fame researcher Russell Wolinsky once told me, fans in Cleveland frequently serenaded Gamble with chants of “BO-ZO,” a sarcastic homage to the popular TV clown of the 1960s and 1970s who featured a similarly large tumbleweed of hair, albeit of a brighter red color.
As he raced across the Municipal Stadium outfield, or hustled his way around the bases, Gamble frequently lost his cap and helmet to the wind; even extra large sizes of headwear could not sustain the friction created by the unstoppable Afro. Even more distressingly, Gamble was usually left with a particularly bad case of “hat hair,” his Afro suffering severe indentations from both the soft cap he donned in the field and the helmet he wore at the plate.
Caps and helmets simply didn’t fit properly over his Afro, the largest of any player in the major leagues and one that rivaled the hairstyles in the American Basketball Association. (Old-time fans of the ABA might remember Darnell Hillman, the Indiana Pacers’ power forward whose hair made him appear five to six inches taller.) The problem reached such extremes in 1975 that Gamble held a contest in which he asked Indians fans for recommendations on how to wear his hats. “We’re open to all suggestions, except a haircut,” Gamble informed longtime Cleveland sportswriter Bob Sudyk.
Gamble also acquired a colorful reputation for other reasons during his Indians tenure. The Cleveland media recognized him as the flashiest dresser on the Indians. Gamble once wore a particularly patriotic pair of red, white and blue plaid slacks, finished off with red elevator shoes. While with the Indians, Gamble also opened a disco in 1976, though turning over the day-to-day operations of the club to his brothers.
As a member of the Indians, Gamble also developed a reputation for a questionable attitude. He frequently chafed about a lack of playing time, sometimes complaining about being benched against left-handed pitching. At least one critic considered Gamble disingenuous. “He talks about wanting to play,” an anonymous Indians player told Phil Pepe of the New York Daily News, “but when he gets the chance, he acts like he doesn’t want to play.”
For his part, Gamble regarded the criticism as off base and partly motivated by his appearance and race. “Yeah, people always ask me about my hair. I liked it, but I guess it did cause me to get a bad reputation,” Gamble told The Sporting News in 1979. “People took one look at that hair and thought I was a bad guy. There were some sportswriters who wouldn’t even talk to me. They thought I was some kind of militant with my beard and my hair.”
In actuality, Gamble was anything but militant. He was fun-loving, outgoing and accessible. Those qualities became evident to the beat writers in New York after the Indians traded him to the Yankees for right-handed pitcher Pat Dobson. But before Gamble could officially put on the pinstripes he had to remove some of his hair. George Steinbrenner ordered a haircut to keep Gamble within the team’s rigid regulations for grooming. Long hair and beards were simply non grata in New York. Steinbrenner ordered the team’s public relations director, Marty Appel, to arrange a haircut.
Gamble became one of the most quotable Yankees, often hamming up his responses in a larger-than-life manner. On the field, Gamble provided the Yankees with an expected level of power; he hit 17 home runs in 340 at-bats, while using his deep-crouch batting stance in which he actually seemed to face the right field stands at Yankee Stadium. Gamble emerged as an important role player for the ’76 Yankees, who reached the World Series before falling to the “Big Red Machine” in a four-game sweep.
After the season, the heralded free agent signing of Reggie Jackson made Gamble available—and then expendable, when the need for a shortstop influenced the Gamble-for-Bucky Dent exchange with the Chicago White Sox during the spring of 1977. While the trade ultimately would deny Gamble an opportunity to play for a world championship team, it would open up a grand career opportunity.
The summer of ’77 became a memorable one for Gamble. As one of the vital cogs in a White Sox team that became known as the “South Side Hit Men,” Gamble blasted 31 home runs and posted a .588 slugging percentage. Though he still saw his playing time limited to 51 at-bats against left-handed pitching, he played almost every game in which a right-handed pitcher started. The timing for a career-best season could not have been better, what with Gamble eligible for free agency at the end of the year.
Gamble enjoyed playing at Comiskey Park, but Sox owner Bill Veeck didn’t have the money to sign him to a long-term contract. Gamble took his open-market services to the San Diego Padres, who rewarded him with a lucrative multi-year contract. From a financial standpoint, Gamble could not have done better. In terms of baseball, Gamble might have been better off signing with one of the two new expansion teams, the Seattle Mariners or Toronto Blue Jays. Struggling to learn a new set of pitchers in the National League and finding San Diego’s Jack Murphy Stadium a detriment to his power swing, Gamble flailed away during the first half of the season. The Padres became so dissatisfied that they traded Gamble after just one season, sending him to the Texas Rangers as part of a deal for Mike Hargrove.
Gamble fit in well with a Rangers clubhouse that featured a number of other free spirits and colorful characters. Far more comfortable in the American League, Gamble re-tapped his power stroke, though he never again matched the kind of slugging numbers he had put up during his peak season in Chicago.
Gamble’s Rangers days didn’t last long, even though he was hitting .335 for the club. On Aug. 1, he suddenly found himself on the move again. Looking to rebuild during a disastrous season, the Yankees sent Mickey Rivers, another favorite of this author, to Texas. As part of the return package, the Yankees received Gamble, who was now a smarter and more patient hitter. (For his career, Gamble walked more than he struck out, usually a good indication of a skilled hitter with a smart approach.)
No longer questioned about his attitude, Gamble became especially well-liked by fans and teammates during his second stint in the Bronx. He became known as “The Big O,” a nickname supposedly given to him by longtime Yankees broadcaster Phil Rizzuto. Though Rizzuto probably never intended it, the nickname provided a humorous double entendre that not only played on Oscar’s name but also carried sexual connotations. For his part, Gamble began referring to himself as the “Ratio Man” because of his tendency to hit lots of home runs in small numbers of at-bats.
Gamble maintained his good-natured popularity in New York until the spring of 1982, when he vetoed a trade that would have sent him, first baseman Bob Watson and young right-hander Mike Morgan to the Rangers for Al Oliver. Teammates understood his decision, but Gamble’s veto infuriated Steinbrenner, who had long desired Oliver’s services. “The Boss” carried a grudge to such a degree that some beat writers felt he ordered manager Billy Martin to limit Gamble’s playing time as a form of punishment. In spite of some rough treatment from his owner, Gamble retained his ever-present smile before eventually returning to the White Sox, where he remained until his retirement in 1985.
Gamble has not worked in Organized Baseball since then, but has spent some time teaching the game as the youth level. He also advises young ballplayers who have aspirations to play professionally.
And, for those who are wondering, Gamble has lost most of the Afro that he once so diligently maintained. In what amounts to delicious but not desirable irony, Oscar Gamble is now completely bald.
Bruce Markusen is the author of seven books on baseball, including the award-winning A Baseball Dynasty: Charlie Finley’s Swingin’ A’s, the recipient of the Seymour Medal from the Society for American Baseball Research. He has also written The Team That Changed Baseball: Roberto Clemente and the 1971 Pittsburgh Pirates, Tales From The Mets Dugout, and The Orlando Cepeda Story.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
And That Happened: World Series
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 30, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Waiver Wire Offseason: AL
by Rob McQuownOctober 30, 2009
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Waiver Wire Offseason: NL
by Michael StreetOctober 30, 2009
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Frozen Ropes and Dying Quails
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 29, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Phillies trying to end World Series drought
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 29, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Great Moments in World Series History
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 29, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
22 milliseconds = $850K
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 29, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
My Morning in Exile
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 29, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Now that’s a game story
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 29, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Where does production come from?
by Jeff SackmannOctober 29, 2009
There are a lot of ways to build a winning ballclub. The method behind the Angels' success doesn't get the same attention as some other techniques, but perhaps it should. They've won 89 or more games six consecutive seasons, including 97 and 100 the last two.
What strikes me on first glance at the Angels roster is how many key contributors are homegrown. Mike Napoli, Jeff Mathis, Kendry Morales, Howie Kendrick, Erick Aybar and Robb Quinlan were drafted or originally signed by the Angels. Same goes for on-the-cusp contributors Brandon Wood and the recently traded Sean Rodriguez.
Starting pitching is even more dramatic. Jered Weaver, Joe Saunders, John Lackey and Ervin Santana all started their pro careers as Angels. If it hadn't been for Nick Adenhart's tragic death, L.A. could have gotten the vast majority of its starts from homegrown talent.
Of course, it doesn't hurt that the Angels have plenty of money to spend. They could afford Brian Fuentes, Vladimir Guerrero and Torii Hunter, and the disastrous Gary Matthews Jr. signing isn't going to consign them to the second division.
But $100 million only buys so much these days. In order to spend the money necessary to absorb a bad contract, fill necessary holes and still field a winning team, you need to have a whole lot of roster spots filled by homegrown (read: pre-arbitration and pre-free-agency) products.
Usually when we talk about this sort of roster construction, the team in question is the Twins, and there's no doubt they belong in the conversation. This naturally raises the question: Which teams have been best at developing players to contribute at the big-league level?
Player development in context
At the risk of belaboring the obvious, I'd like to step back and consider the various ways of acquiring players, and how these methods can contribute to a winning team.
1. The amateur draft
This is probably the best way to acquire lots of players on the cheap. Drafted players command very little salary their first three years in the bigs, and are cheaper than free agents for the three years after that. The flip side is the high risk: For every Jered Weaver, there are several early-round picks that blow out their arms or top out in the high minors.
2. International free agency
Similar to the draft, international free agents usually aren't very expensive. The risk still is high, probably even higher: Instead of signing players at ages 18 through 22, you can ink them as early as 16. While some of the best players in baseball were acquired through this route, a whole lot can go wrong between age 16 and the big leagues.
3. Trades
Success in the draft and in international free agency depends on talent evaluation; success in the trade market does too, though the type of player evaluation is somewhat different. Even if you target a minor league middle infielder (like Chone Figgins, when the Angels acquired him), you have more data to work with than you did when the same player was in high school or college.
Often, then, you are pitting your own talent evaluation against someone else's, betting that the player is more valuable than your trade partner thinks he is. Alternatively, both teams may be filling holes. The trade partners may agree on the skill level of a player, but one team may have a greater need at a given position.
4. The waiver wire, Rule 5, and minor league free agency
Statheads like me tend to geek out over these "free" ways to acquire players. It's exciting to find a diamond in the rough, even if it isn't much of a diamond. The upside of the waiver wire is the price; the downside is that it's rare to find a major contributor there. If you're relying too heavily on bargain-bin pickups, you're probably not building a contending team.
5. Free agency
You can always buy players at retail. That's how the Angels got Fuentes, Guerrero and Hunter. Good teams all have to fill holes this way, and the best general managers find ways to do so inexpensively, as Tony Reagins did in picking up Bobby Abreu on a one-year deal for $5 million. Unless you're the Yankees, you can only fill so many holes with free agents.
Stockpiling value
If you had to pick one of these five areas for your front office to master, which would it be? To me, it's a no-brainer: I want my front office to be the best drafting crew in the business.
There's simply no better way to get lots of value on your roster without spending too much money. Sure, everything here is important, but you can get by with mediocrity in the other categories if you knock the ball out of the park with the amateur draft every June.
Now we get to the part of the article where I try to quantify stuff. In general, measuring the overall impact of a front office is a fool's errand: There are just too many variables spread out over too many years. Guys making an impact now may have been drafted eight or nine years ago; a recent trade package can't be evaluated until five years from now.
Recognizing the limitations of any such effort, here's what I settled on: I want to know where each team's 2009 contributors came from, and how much value (over and above their salaries) they provided.
Who got what
Here's the methodology. Using Wins Above Replacement and corresponding dollar values from FanGraphs, I found the dollar value for every player who was worth 1.0 WAR or more in 2009. This introduces a bias by excluding many free agents who didn't earn their keep, but it has two benefits: It keeps us focused on players who really contributed, and it reduces the size of the project to something more manageable.
Next, I coupled that information with the actual salary of each player and the manner in which the player was acquired. I sorted acquisition methods into the five categories listed above.
Some players are a bit ambiguous, such as those who sign long-term deals with the clubs that drafted them. In those cases, I called them free agents if they had more than six years of service time, draftees if they had less. This underestimates the benefit of those long-term deals, but it seemed more logical for this purpose.
And then I added everything up. In the following table, I've summed the dollar values for each team in each category. For example, the four draftees who provided 1.0+ WAR for the Diamondbacks this year (Justin Upton, Mark Reynolds, Stephen Drew and Max Scherzer) were worth a total of $58.2MM more than they were paid.
Team Draft Int'l FA Trade Waivers FA ARI 58.2 14.4 28.8 15.4 9.1 ATL 44.6 29.7 47.1 6.2 4.9 BAL 27.9 - 18.4 4.4 16.2 BOS 89.9 - 19.6 - 22.9 CHC 29.8 - 7.9 - 17.5 CIN 54.2 6.6 15.6 3.8 -4.4 CLE 27.1 10.9 59.8 - 4.6 COL 56.9 24.8 40.2 14.5 -0.6 CWS 14.7 9.3 40.4 23.8 7.8 DET 65.8 - 23.3 - 5.7 FLA 54.7 - 52.2 23.4 - HOU 14.8 15.6 17.1 - -9.0 KC 66.3 - 23.2 12.8 3.0 LAA 48.8 36.4 34.1 - 30.3 LAD 77.1 - 12.8 - 25.6 MIL 62.1 - 10.2 9.1 22.2 MIN 103.1 4.8 6.1 - 4.6 NYM 12.9 - 11.8 9.3 -12.1 NYY 25.1 19.1 11.2 5.0 15.5 OAK 35.3 - 61.7 21.8 0.4 PHI 54.8 9.5 13.1 12.1 39.8 PIT 53.0 - 25.9 11.2 1.2 SD 19.6 - 80.1 15.2 7.4 SEA 5.4 44.0 34.8 - 17.1 SF 73.6 22.7 - 20.2 -6.1 STL 40.9 - 31.5 3.9 52.0 TB 85.9 - 77.0 4.3 22.6 TEX 51.5 - 57.6 13.5 -0.9 TOR 41.6 11.9 35.3 4.9 23.2 WAS 52.7 - 25.1 7.1 -0.6There's a lot of data here. Let's bullet-point some highlights:
- The Angels are among the better teams when taking all amateur signings together. What is most striking is how solid the Angels are in every category. Even if we consider the ugly Gary Matthews signing (not included here because GMJ didn't meet the WAR threshold), they still look pretty good in the free agent category.
- Usually when we talk about amateur scouting and player development, we talk about the Twins. And that's sure how it played out this year! Of their 15 players worth at least 1 WAR, 11 are Twins draftees who haven't yet reached free agency.
- The Red Sox and Rays aren't too far behind. Again, these aren't exactly surprises. The Sox front office is often noted for its savvy. The Rays get some of the same accolades, and they have had the additional benefit of many early picks.
- The teams who received the most benefit from trades are often those who have recently held fire sales. No surprise there, with the Indians, A's, and Padres near the top of the list. The team with the most marked trading savvy may be the Rays, who acquired Ben Zobrist, Jason Bartlett and Matt Garza this way.
- The Cardinals top the list in getting value from free agency. Locking up Albert Pujols didn't hurt.
- The Yankees aren't particularly impressive in any of these categories. Then again, if you spend $200 million with anything close to efficiency, there's no need to find extra value everywhere. Further, the picture could be different in a year or two: Bigger contributions from Phil Hughes, Ian Kennedy, Chien-Ming Wang and others could rocket them up the list.
- The Marlins were the only team with no 1+ WAR free agents. I can't say I'm shocked.
What does it mean?
All this data is descriptive, not prescriptive. It's great to get huge contributions from draftees making $415,000. It's much harder to pick the college and high school players who will come through five years later. (That's an understatement of epic proportions.)
What I think it does tell us is that, unless you've got a huge payroll or a crystal ball, free agency will only get you so far. It's telling that the free agents I've considered here were worth a total of $320MM above their contracts. That's not much—only a couple of wins per team. And I'm only counting the free agents who contributed. It's also inflated because it counts "hometown discount" contracts like the one Pujols is playing under.
Evaluating players is hard, but evaluating very young players is harder. As with most anything difficult, the rewards can be commensurately large. Since most of us aren't strategizing within a front office, we can take a simpler route. You want the rewards? Try being a Twins fan.
Jeff Sackmann is the creator of MinorLeagueSplits.com. With Kent Bonham, he founded CollegeSplits.com, which provides data on amateur baseball to about half of the 30 Major League teams. You can also follow him on Twitter.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
This annotated week in baseball history: Oct. 25-Oct. 31, 2009
by Richard BarbieriOctober 29, 2009
Oct. 31 is Halloween, the day when people everywhere dress up and head out to trick-or-treat and maybe put a scare into their neighbors. Richard looks back at the men born on this day and what might scare them.
In just a few days it will be Halloween, a favorite holiday of those who love either candy or immodestly dressed young women. (Or both, I suppose. Those aren’t exactly mutually exclusive likes.) But Halloween isn’t just about collecting treats, it’s also about frights. In that spirit, this week we’ll look at a few players born this day, and what might scare them the most.
Mickey Rivers: English teachers
At his best, Rivers was a pretty good player. Though an excellent base stealer—a 75% success rate across more than 350 career attempts, including 70 steals in 1975—he was sometimes guilty of demonstrating that you can’t steal first base. Nonetheless, his .327 career OBP is actually a few ticks above league average, and combined with strong defense in center field, Rivers was an asset. He won two World Series while with the Yankees, hitting .308 during his time in the postseason.
What made Rivers most notable was his sometimes trouble with the English language; he was easily the most quotable Yankee since Yogi Berra. Among other things, Rivers said his team would “do all right if [they] can capitalize on [their] mistakes.” Speaking of his time with the Yankees, Rivers reported that he, George Steinbrenner and Billy Martin were “two of a kind.” Asked about his willingness to play multiple positions, Rivers indicated he might have to “commute.”
So whether English teachers or perhaps just the English language itself would be Rivers’ Halloween scare is up in the air, but clearly all are liable to be in Mick the Quick’s personal haunted house.
Steve Trachsel: A quick game
Most of you have probably seen Trachsel pitch, which means you spent a long day watching a baseball. Trachsel pitched slowly. Very, very slowly. While no official statistic tracks time between pitches, Trachsel tended to take each game like he was being paid by the hour. Among other Internet commentaries, Trachsel was derided as the new human rain delay (taking over from Mike Hargrove), “SLOWEST WORKER EVER” (caps in original), and Steve “Slow Hand” Trachsel.
 |
| Pictures of Trachsel wandering around thinking about this pitch could not be found (Icon/SMI) |
One recent newspaper article observed that while instant replay might increase major league game times, it could not be any worse than Trachsel—who hadn’t pitched in the majors since June of 2008—who was “the one guy . . . so slow that he frequently hears boos from fans.”
Trachsel finished with a career ERA+ of 99, which accurately reflected the roughly average pitcher he was. In year-to-year quality he varied from an ERA+ as good as 144 in 205 innings in 1996 to as bad 81 in the same number of innings just three years later. (For good measure, he led the league in losses that year.)
I don’t know why Trachsel so feared a swiftly delivered a pitch, but whatever the reason it is clear that—at least on the mound— Trachsel suffered from a strong case of tachophobia.
Dave McNally: Being second
Like Rivers, McNally is the owner of a pretty good career. He went 184-119 with a 3.24 ERA, won a World Series and was a three-time All-Star. Unfortunately for McNally, he seemed doomed to finishing second. In 1968, McNally went 22-10 with a 1.95 ERA, the 22 wins good for second in the league. His Orioles, meanwhile, also finished second.
In 1969, the Orioles won the pennant but ultimately were the runner-up to the Miracle Mets. McNally meanwhile, previously the ace of the Orioles staff, dropped down to—of course—No. 2 behind Mike Cuellar.
In 1970 the Orioles finally won a World Series, but despite 24 wins, McNally was only the second-best pitcher on the team behind Jim Palmer, who allowed 16 fewer runs despite pitching nine more innings. The next season McNally again won more than 20 games but was again not the best pitcher on the team, and the Orioles again lost the World Series.
Later in his career, McNally would appeal to arbitrator Peter Seitz to overturn the Reserve Clause, revolutionizing baseball. But even there McNally found himself finishing second; his case was filed along with Dodgers pitcher Andy Messersmith, and the case has become known as either the Seitz Decision or Messersmith-McNally.
To this day, McNally is second all-time on the Orioles franchise list in wins, starts and shutouts—to Jim Pamler, of course. Some people are fated to be haunted by the specter of being second place, and Dave McNally is one of them.
Harry Smith: Major league pitching
That might be a little harsh. Smith probably did not, strictly speaking, fear major league pitching. But maybe he should have. Over the course of his 10-year career (1901-1910), Smith hit a combined .213/.262/.255, which is pretty dreadful even by the standards of the dead-ball era. He saw his most action in 1903, coming to the plate 234 times and managing only 37 hits. All but five—three doubles and two triples—were singles.
Smith was not always quite that inept. Primarily a backup catcher, he did put up some lines above average for that role. His career numbers are still pretty terrible, however. His 214 career hits include just 31 extra-base hits. Among players with at least 1,000 at-bats (and excluding pitchers), only three players have fewer. He is also among the bottom 10 in runs scored, as well as hits, where only Rich Morales has fewer.
Other players could have made this list, including Fred McGriff, who is no doubt haunted by the 1994 work stoppage that almost surely cost him 500 home runs and a spot in the Hall of Fame, or Ken Keltner, who was chosen to be the perfect example of a borderline Hall of Famer by Bill James. Finally, there’s new addition Mike Napoli, haunted by Mike Scioscia’s odd notion that Jeff Mathis and Gary Matthews Jr. are better options in a playoff game.
Hopefully none of you have quite such a frightful thing scaring you these days, but in any case, Happy Halloween!
Questions, comments and thinly veiled threats can be mailed to Richard on the back of a twenty dollar bill or e-mailed to him at RichardBarbieri@yahoo.com
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Top 10 prospects for 2010: New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox
by Matt HagenOctober 29, 2009
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
TUCK! sez: And, it was SO a foul ball. Yeah, that’s it.
by TuckOctober 29, 2009
Feedback and inquiries (original artwork, commissions, etc.): (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
And That Happened: World Series
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 29, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Cliff Lee turns the Yankees into the Padres
by Nick SteinerOctober 29, 2009
Nick is a die-hard Cardinals fan living in LA. He welcomes comments, questions and hate mail via email
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Why the Phillies will win the World Series
by Corey SeidmanOctober 29, 2009
I meant to write a World Series preview that would be available to read on Tuesday night, but unfortunately, life gets in the way. With that said, maybe it was a blessing in disguise, as this series will be much easier to break down following Cliff Lee’s absolutely dominant performance in Game One.
The Phillies prized mid-season acquisition continued his unreal 2009 postseason by pitching a complete game in a 6-1, statement-making Phillies win. Unfortunately, he lost the shutout in the ninth inning due to an error by Jimmy Rollins, who continued the Phillies' streak of throwing into the opposing dugout rather than first base. All told, Lee allowed six hits and no walks, while striking out 10. He hasn’t allowed a free pass in three of four postseason starts, leading to a ridiculously low 0.60 WHIP. The most impressive aspect of Lee’s outing was his superiority over Mark Teixeira and Alex Rodriguez, who went a combined 0-for-8 with five strikeouts.
Best ever?
No writer should ever have to say this, but Cliff Lee’s performance in these playoffs has transcended words. His 0.54 ERA is the lowest ever recorded by a pitcher with 30 or more postseason innings. That’s right, the lowest in the history of this sport, which has been played since the presidency of Chester A. Arthur.
Looking ahead
Before the World Series started, I was ready to pick the Phillies to win in six games. Needless to say, that didn’t change after Game One. No, Lee will not be available to pitch again until at least Game Four, but that does not change the fact that the Phillies lineup came to play Wednesday night, scoring twice off Yankees ace CC Sabathia, twice off setup man Phil Hughes (both runs were inherited by AL K/9 leader David Robertson), and, for good measure, twice more off of Brian Bruney in the ninth inning.
Big hits came from all spots of the lineup, as Chase Utley homered twice, Ryan Howard doubled twice and drove in a run, Raul Ibanez had a huge two-out, two-run single, and Carlos Ruiz, Jimmy Rollins, and Shane Victorino all contributed to a few more insurance runs. Just like the previous two rounds, the offensive output was a complete team effort, showing that from top-to-bottom, this Phillies lineup is as good as it gets.
A.J. vs. Pedro
Traditional thinking would give the Yankees the advantage in Game Two, as they have their high-priced No. 2 starter, A.J. Burnett, on the mound, to face a “past-his-prime” Pedro Martinez. But Burnett does not have a pretty history against this specific Phillies lineup, and Martinez is coming off a seven inning, three hit performance that was easily his best outing with his new team.
Since 2006, Burnett is 1-2 with a 5.89 ERA in three starts against the Phils. He has allowed six homers in those three starts and hasn’t gotten out of the sixth inning in any of them. Rollins, Utley, Ruiz, and Jayson Werth have all homered once off Burnett, and Ryan Howard and likely-DH Matt Stairs have homered off the righthander twice.
Burnett has struggled against the Phillies because he is precisely the type of pitcher that this team is built to hit: a hard-throwing righty with bad control. This year, Burnett had the worst walk rate of his career since his first season, checking in at 4.22 walks per nine innings. Slightly more than half of his pitches—50.1 percent to be exact—were out of the strike zone, which doesn't bode well against a patient Phillies lineup that includes five players (Ruiz, Utley, Werth, Rollins, Ibanez) who swing at less than one quarter of the pitches they are thrown out of the zone.
Burnett, much like Pedro, will have to rely on the generosity of Game Two’s home plate umpire. If Burnett isn’t getting calls on borderline pitches, his effectiveness will drop significantly, because he is wild enough as it is. If Martinez can’t get calls on the corners, he, too, will assuredly struggle.
Movement and corner-painting are Pedro’s “bread and butter” at this point in his career, and the Yankees lineup will not give in—they’re even more patient than the Phillies. All Yankees regulars not named "Robinson Cano" are above league average at not swinging at pitches out of the zone.
Leaving the past
Much has been made about Pedro Martinez’s history vs. the Yankees, but I don’t see how the events of 2003 will impact his performance in Game Two. The numbers I’ve laid before you concerning Burnett have all been compiled in the last four seasons against a Phillies lineup that has remained the same, for the most part.
But this Yankees lineup is completely different from the one Pedro faced while pitching for the Red Sox, aside from Derek Jeter and Jorge Posada, two hitters that Martinez has held in check in his career. Posada has displayed a bit of power against Pedro, homering four times in 60 at-bats, but he is hitting just .183 off the right-hander. Jeter is hitting .256/.347/.395 off Pedro, with an OPS more than 100 points lower than his career number.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I am fully aware that Pedro Martinez circa 2003 possessed a different skill set than he currently does. Therefore, all numbers that he compiled against hitters like Jeter and Posada in that span of time should be thrown out the window. Jeter and Posada, in 2009, are better than Martinez, in 2009. If common sense tells you to throw out his outings against the Yankees in 2003, it also tells you to remove the batter-vs.-pitcher numbers Pedro put together during the prime of his career, when he just so happened to be one of the greatest pitchers to ever toe the rubber.
To me, the Game Two pitching matchup is even. If Pedro can maneuver in-and-out of the strike zone like he did against the Dodgers, he should out-pitch Burnett, who, despite his price tag, has never cemented himself as an elite pitcher.
Game Three
In Game Three, the advantage goes to Andy Pettitte, a pitcher the Phillies have only faced twice since 2006. In each outing, the lefty went seven innings and gave up four earned runs. The reason I see the Phillies struggling, however, is because Pettitte, the major-league record holder in pickoffs, will completely neutralize their running game, even with Jorge Posada behind the plate.
Pettitte’s splits are practically the same against righties (.270, one home run in 45 at-bats) and lefties (.271, one home run in 45 at-bats,) so it’s not as if the Phillies are facing a truly dominant southpaw. But after going up against two flamethrowers in Sabathia and Burnett, Pettitte could spell trouble for this lineup.
Tired of waiting
Cole Hamels has struggled all season and, quite frankly, I’m sick of making excuses for him. Early in the season, I blamed it on his absurdly high BABIP that would eventually regress. Then, I blamed it on the “Order of Operations” theory, which would explain his struggles as being the result of going “double-walk-homer-strikeout” rather than “homer-double-walk-strikeout.”
None of his peripherals decreased in 2009, which is a good sign, but last year’s World Series MVP just has not shown any ability whatsoever to recapture the magic he once had. More importantly, Hamels hasn’t been able to pitch effectively as a frontrunner. In all three of his prior postseason starts, he’s been handed a big lead and failed to hold his opponents down. If he pitches well against the Yankees, it will be an example of his true talent coming out at the right time.
But don’t bank on it.
No more bullpen talk
In my opinion, the one proven fact of the 2009 playoffs has been that bullpen-talk is meaningless. Pitchers who toss fewer than 50 or 60 innings simply cannot be viewed as “shutdown” guys. Rafael Betancourt, Huston Street, Jonathan Broxton, George Sherrill, Hong Chih-Kuo, Ronald Belisario, Phil Hughes, and David Robertson were all touted as great relievers, coming off of strong regular seasons. But all have fallen victim to the Phillies multifaceted offense.
The reason for this? Well, it’s all about the situation. During the regular season, all of these men were used primarily in leads. Facing the Orioles or Padres with nobody on and nobody out in the eighth inning of a game in mid-July is much different than coming in with the bases loaded and one out in September. Therefore, it doesn’t matter which team may have a better bullpen on paper. Don’t believe me? Look at Brad Lidge’s 2009 season, then his 2009 postseason.
The situation will always dictate a reliever's level of effectiveness.
The impact of Game One
The Phillies have now won the opening games of their last six playoff series—every round in 2008, and now every round in 2009. The road gets easier from here, as the Phillies now have the same number of home-games remaining as the Yankees do, and> hold a 1-0 advantage.
Eleven of the past 12 Game One winners have gone on to win the World Series, and since 1995, teams that win Game One on the road are 4-1.
It sure is nice building an early lead, especially when home-cooking is on the horizon.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Neyer: Ryan Howard is basically Shin-Soo Choo
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 28, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
IIATMS v. Wezen-Ball
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 28, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Frank Fires Back
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 28, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
My Morning in Exile
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 28, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Player Profile: Clayton Kershaw
by Mike SilverOctober 28, 2009
Mike is a recent graduate of the UMass-Amherst Sport Management Program. He can also be found at Firebrand of the American League (firebrandal.com) and Statistically Speaking (Statspeak.net). If you have any questions or comments, you can reach him at mjasilver AT gmail DOT com. He would love to hear it.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Why the Yankees will win the World Series
by Larry MahnkenOctober 28, 2009
In 1923, the Yankees christened the new Yankee Stadium with a pennant and World Championship. 53 years later, Chris Chambliss christened the renovated Stadium with the franchise’s 30th pennant. Both teams faced off in the World Series that year against the respective defending World Champions, and the 2009 squad is no different: winning a record 40th pennant in New Yankee Stadium’s inaugural season, facing off against the defending World Champion Philadelphia Phillies.
The Phillies come in hot, steamrolling the Rockies and Dodgers in four and five games respectively, and showing mettle in coming back in the ninth inning in the fourth game of both series to avoid series-tying losses. They won’t give up their title easily, and the Yankees will have to be at their best to take it from them. Despite the general dislike of the Yankees and frustration over the cold weather that this series will be played in, it is generally conceded that this World Series offers the best possible matchup, and is likely to present a worthy battle for Major League Baseball’s championship.
When they met in late May during interleague play, the Phillies took two of three at Yankee Stadium to break a nine-game Yankees winning streak, but the Yankees came back in the ninth inning of both of the last two games, the first time to win, the second to force extra innings. Those three games showed how well-matched these teams were, and how hard the Yankees will have to play to triumph.
There are some clear advantages for the Yankees coming into this series, beside the obvious home field advantage. For starters, they are clearly, on paper, the more talented team.
The middle of the Phillies order—Chase Utley, Ryan Howard, Raul Ibanez and Jayson Werth—appears to match up extremely well to the Yankees’ middle—Mark Teixeira, Alex Rodriguez, Hideki Matsui and Jorge Posada—but it’s the top and middle of the lineup where the Yankees have a heavy edge. Derek Jeter and Johnny Damon are much better at getting on base than Jimmy Rollins and Shane Victorino, work the count better, and also displaying comparable power and base-stealing ability.
The bottom of the Phillies lineup drops off, as most lineups do, with Pedro Feliz and Carlos Ruiz, while the Yankees’ keeps going with Robinson Cano and Nick Swisher, who posted OBPs over .350 and hit 25 or more homers each. Melky Cabrera is the “weak” spot in the lineup, but his numbers were above league-average for a center fielder, and he was able to tear up the Angels in the ALCS with a .391 batting average. The loss of the DH in the NL parks obviously drops Matsui from the lineup, but the depth of the Yankees’ lineup means that their three through six hitters remain about the same in quality, and in CC Sabathia’s second start, they’ll even have the edge in the 9th batting slot.
The Phillies are also extremely reliant on the home run, scoring just 450 runs without a homer, compared to the Yankees’ 540. If the balls do not fly out of the park in the World Series, the Phillies might have a hard time keeping up with the Yankees’ attack, which Twins manager Ron Gardenhire characterized as a “continuous pressure”.
Lefty-righty matchups don’t faze the Yankees, either. The only two Yankees hitters to show any kind of platoon split are Derek Jeter and Johnny Damon, a righty and a lefty. The same can’t quite be said for the Phillies, who did hit lefties slightly better than righties as a team this season, but whose best hitter, Ryan Howard, has grown increasingly inept against lefty pitchers, which the Yankees will be starting in four or five of the seven games, with two other lefties coming out of the pen.
Those starters are another edge for the Yankees, who will likely be using CC Sabathia twice on short rest in the series, and his matchup against Cliff Lee in Game One negates what would normally be viewed as a certain win by the Phillies. Philadelphia isn’t intimidated by Sabathia after knocking him out of Game One of the NLDS last season, but that start was Sabathia’s fifth in 17 days, while tonight’s start will be Sabathia’s fifth in 27 days.
The rest of the rotation for the Yankees offers solid but less overpowering talent, with A.J. Burnett and Andy Pettitte posting a 3.38 ERA against two of the best offenses in the American League during the first two rounds, with the only bad start being Burnett’s six-run Game Five in the ALCS.
The Phillies on the other hand are a little shakier after Cliff Lee. The Yankees are 23-15 all-time against Game Two starter Pedro Martinez, including seven wins in their last 10 times facing him. Cole Hamels was the 2008 World Series MVP, but who struggled for much of the season and has put up three poor starts so far in the postseason.
Should the games be decided by the bullpens (as more than one certainly will be), the Yankees have a probable edge as well. Despite some struggles in the first two rounds, Phil Hughes has been a dominant setup man for the Yankees all season, and is more likely than not to continue being so in the next week. Mariano Rivera is his untouchable self (and had the Rockies or Dodgers had him, the Phillies’ first two postseason series might have gone very differently), and the rest of the Yankees’ pen was generally effective in the first two rounds.
The Phils, on the other hand, struggled to find reliable relievers in the bullpen all season, with their previously untouchable closer, Brad Lidge, posting an astonishing 7.21 ERA in almost 60 innings and leading the majors with 11 blown saves. He’s been perfect in the postseason so far, but five games do not negate a whole season of struggles, and he remains a bit of a question mark in the ninth inning of a close game.
So all of these factors, all of which seem to clearly favor the Yankees, make the Bronx Bombers a cinch for their record 27th World Championship, right? Wrong.
The difference in all of these things is relatively insignificant, and seven games are too few for whatever advantage the Yankees might have to become apparent. The series will be decided by the little unpredictable things: a two-out rally, a double by a light hitter, a double play by a big slugger. Errors, bad pitches, bad managerial decisions and perhaps another blown call by an umpire will have a greater impact than who had a better No. 7 hitter, talent-wise. The Phillies’ extended wait for the start of the series may have an impact, but it didn’t last year in a similar situation with the Rays. Rain may mess up the Yankees’ pitching rotation, or even enhance it by allowing them to start just three starters on full rest in the first six games, should they get rainouts at the right times. Chad Gaudin, Joe Blanton or J.A. Happ may get starts later in the series, and may either pitch their team out of the game, or singlehandedly win it for them with a dominating performance.
Still, I expect the Yankees to prevail. There is so much front-line talent complemented by so much depth that the Yankees need a lot to go wrong for them to be defeated. This is the team that the Yankees have tried to put together since tearing apart the core of the late '90s teams after the 2001 World Series. This is more or less the roster that Brian Cashman wanted to put together after taking total control of the front office in2005. They’re four wins away from reaching that goal they’ve chased for almost a decade. They’re the best team in baseball, and they have seven more games to prove it.
Larry Mahnken is a staff writer for The Hardball Times, and co-editor of the Replacement Level Yankees Weblog. You can contact him with your comments, questions, romantic propositions and incoherent rantings at DLMahnken@hardballtimes.com.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
BOB: Dodgers divorce and the Cubs sale closes
by Brian BorawskiOctober 28, 2009
Dodgers divorce gets ugly
Earlier this year, John Moores, the owner of the San Diego Padres, began divesting his interest in the San Diego Padres to former agent Jeff Moorad. The underlying reason was that Moores was in the middle of a divorce and splitting a stream of purchase payments is a lot easier to split than a baseball team. Now, it looks like we’re going to go through a nastier repeat because Los Angeles Dodgers owner Frank McCourt and his wife Jamie have separated and Jamie has found herself out of a job. Just a day after the Dodgers exit from the NLCS, the Dodgers fired Jamie, who was the team’s chief executive officer.But Jamie is claiming she’s an owner so as far as I know, we’re entering a situation without a prior precedent. California is a community property state so for her to make that claim has some basis. Jamie has vowed to sue; the big issue is what the court says about the ownership of the team.
For now, the Dodgers are saying it is business as usual, but MLB is monitoring the situation. MLB president and chief operating officer Bob DuPuy called it a disruption but he also said the team is operating fine. DuPuy also said that there hasn’t been any encouragement from the league for the McCourts to sell the team. Ned Colleti, the team’s general manager, backed this up by saying he hasn’t seen any changes so far.
ALCS and NLCS a hit with viewers
MLB’s spin machine was back at it; now, MLB is touting the 2009 playoffs as a huge success. Considering it's being compared to one of the least viewed playoffs (last year), "huge success" might be a stretch. For the ALCS, the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim and New York Yankees series was up over 35 percent ratings wise from last year’s ALCS. The NLCS also showed a big boost with a 35 percent pop from 2008.Now that the World Series is here, expectations are high. FOX Sports executive producer Ed Goren has said that the company is anticipating this to be the greatest year-over-year improvement in World Series ratings history. Again, when you’re coming off of an all-time low, there’s plenty of room to improve so we’ll see what actually ends up happening. Having two high profile East Coast teams will definitely help.
Another big factor will be how long the series lasts. For the first time ever, the World Series has gone only five or fewer games in five straight seasons and these series blowouts have made their mark. Having the Yankees in there as the team many people love to hate will also help.
Late season has cons but no fixes on the horizon
Regardless of how long the World Series lasts, it’s going to leak into November, and if the series goes to seven games, we’re looking at a November 5 finale. This all assumes there are no weather problems and all seven games are played as scheduled. While this is problematic (think of the Twins playing in a November World Series in their new open air stadium), there’s no easy solution. Tyler Kepner at The New York Times provides some ideas, but then resolves that most of them are untenable. The World Baseball Classic and the calendar didn’t help, and he rules out shortening the season and playing only in warmer weather spots combined with a March start to the season.Cubs sale closes
It took over two-and-a-half years, but the Chicago Cubs finally have a new owner. The ownership group headed by Joe Ricketts was given the reins yesterday; the group now owns 95 percent of the team, Wrigley Field and a 25 percent interest in Comcast Sportsnet. The final number was $845 million for the majority stake. The Tribune Company retained a five percent stake to get out of paying a bunch of taxes. This is the largest baseball deal on record, surpassing the sale of the Boston Red Sox, which sold for $660 million, back in 2002.Brian Borawski is a member of SABR's Business of Baseball Committee and writes about the Detroit Tigers at his own website, TigerBlog. He welcomes comments, questions and suggestions via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Strikeout rates through the years
by Geoff YoungOctober 28, 2009
I've been thinking about strikeouts. Specifically, I've been thinking about pitcher strikeout rates (K/9) and how they have changed over time.
When you imagine a pitcher who blows people away, do you have a specific K/9 in mind? The answer might depend on when the question was asked. Over the past 100+ years, strikeout rates have steadily climbed, with periodic dips here and there:
In the first two decades of the 20th century, rates for all MLB typically hovered in the 3.5-3.7 range. In the '20s, they slid to around 2.8. They returned to the mid-3.0s until 1952, when a new high of 4.19 was established (breaking the previous mark of 4.00, set in 1911). Since then—well, this will be easier to view as a table:
| Years | Low | High | Avg* |
|---|---|---|---|
| *This isn't a true average. I've simply summed the K/9 for each season and divided by number of seasons (as opposed to summing strikeouts and innings), which gives us a rough enough approximation for big-picture stuff. | |||
| 1901-1909 | 2.98 | 3.87 | 3.55 |
| 1910-1919 | 2.89 | 4.00 | 3.67 |
| 1920-1929 | 2.69 | 2.95 | 2.81 |
| 1930-1939 | 3.04 | 3.63 | 3.32 |
| 1940-1949 | 3.27 | 3.89 | 3.55 |
| 1950-1959 | 3.77 | 5.09 | 4.40 |
| 1960-1969 | 5.18 | 5.99 | 5.70 |
| 1970-1979 | 4.77 | 5.75 | 5.15 |
| 1980-1989 | 4.75 | 5.96 | 5.34 |
| 1990-1999 | 5.59 | 6.61 | 6.14 |
| 2000-2009 | 6.30 | 6.91 | 6.56 |
A few things caught my eye:
- The lowest aggregate strikeout rates in the '60s (5.18) were higher than the highest in the '50s (5.09)
- The highest rates in the '70s and '80s (5.96) fall short of the lowest rates of the 2000s (6.30)
- What would have been an exceptionally high rate in the '90s (6.61) is now slightly above average (6.56)
I won't get into possible reasons for the steady climb (e.g., less emphasis on batters making contact, changes in pitcher usage leading to more fresh arms late in games), enlightening though such discussion might be. I'm interested now in the comparison of rates across time and our perceptions of various pitchers based on those rates.
For example, look at Dwight Gooden's 1985 season. He completely dominated the opposition that year and easily won the Cy Young Award, but his K/9 rate was 8.72. Not so great, right? Well, it was good enough for second in the National League, whose K/9 checked in at 5.50. In 2009, however, Gooden's totals would have placed him 10th in a league that averaged 7.03 K/9.
Tools like ERA+ and OPS+ adjust for context. Wouldn't it be useful to apply a similar adjustment to other metrics such as K/9? Without getting into park effects (a discussion for some other day), what if we made a simple adjustment to account for league norms? The basic formula would be simple: (player K/9)/(league K/9)*100. Numbers above 100 are above league average, numbers below 100 are, yep, below average.
In Gooden's case, we get 8.72/5.50*100 = 159. How would that play in 2009? Well, Tim Lincecum led the NL with 10.43 K/9. Running his numbers, we get 10.43/7.03*100 = 148.
So, Lincecum had a much higher strikeout rate (by 1.71) in 2009 than Gooden did in 1985. But taking context into account, we see that the entire league had a much higher strikeout rate (by 1.53) in 2009 than in 1985. In today's environment, Gooden's 8.72 K/9 from 1985 would translate to 11.15 (i.e., 8.72/5.50*7.03), which looks more impressive and gives us a more proper appreciation of his accomplishments.
Express numbers in big units
We could evaluate multiple seasons or even entire careers in a similar manner. For example, Nolan Ryan's career K/9 checks in at a spiffy 9.55. That's nice, but it doesn't compare well with Randy Johnson's 10.61.
Okay, but how much of this is due to Ryan and Johnson, and how much is due to their respective environments? Check out the top 10 strikeout rates (min. 162 IP) for each pitcher:
| Ryan | Johnson | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Year | K/9 | Year | K/9 |
| 1987 | 11.48 | 2001 | 13.41 |
| 1989 | 11.32 | 2000 | 12.56 |
| 1973 | 10.57 | 1995 | 12.35 |
| 1991 | 10.56 | 1997 | 12.30 |
| 1972 | 10.43 | 1998 | 12.12 |
| 1976 | 10.35 | 1999 | 12.06 |
| 1977 | 10.26 | 2002 | 11.56 |
| 1990 | 10.24 | 1993 | 10.86 |
| 1978 | 9.97 | 1994 | 10.67 |
| 1974 | 9.93 | 2004 | 10.62 |
There is no comparison, at least not in terms of raw numbers. But when we introduce context, the picture changes. Here's that same list, with a few extra bits of information added to the mix:
| Ryan | Johnson | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | K/9 | Lg K/9 | Adj K/9 | Year | K/9 | Lg K/9 | Adj K/9 |
| *Johnson split '98 in the AL and NL. For the sake of simplicity, I used MLB average in this instance; a more accurate method would be to prorate his time spent in each league, but again, this will suffice for our purposes. | |||||||
| 1987 | 11.48 | 6.00 | 191 | 2001 | 13.41 | 6.92 | 194 |
| 1989 | 11.32 | 5.43 | 208 | 2000 | 12.56 | 6.68 | 188 |
| 1973 | 10.57 | 5.07 | 209 | 1995 | 12.35 | 6.00 | 206 |
| 1991 | 10.56 | 5.71 | 185 | 1997 | 12.30 | 6.20 | 198 |
| 1972 | 10.43 | 5.48 | 190 | 1998 | 12.12 | 6.56 | 185* |
| 1976 | 10.35 | 4.73 | 219 | 1999 | 12.06 | 6.64 | 182 |
| 1977 | 10.26 | 4.97 | 207 | 2002 | 11.56 | 6.71 | 172 |
| 1990 | 10.24 | 5.60 | 183 | 1993 | 10.86 | 5.71 | 190 |
| 1978 | 9.97 | 4.49 | 222 | 1994 | 10.67 | 6.03 | 177 |
| 1974 | 9.93 | 4.89 | 203 | 2004 | 10.62 | 6.69 | 159 |
Now let's look only at Adj K/9, and order Ryan's and Johnson's top 10 seasons according to this metric:
| Ryan | Johnson | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Year | Adj K/9 | Year | Adj K/9 |
| 1978 | 222 | 1995 | 206 |
| 1976 | 219 | 1997 | 198 |
| 1973 | 209 | 2001 | 194 |
| 1989 | 208 | 1993 | 190 |
| 1977 | 207 | 2000 | 188 |
| 1974 | 203 | 1998 | 185 |
| 1987 | 191 | 1999 | 182 |
| 1972 | 190 | 1994 | 177 |
| 1991 | 185 | 2002 | 172 |
| 1990 | 183 | 2004 | 159 |
This is no knock on Johnson, who racked up some terrific strikeout numbers during those years, but isn't it interesting how something that seems so clear when viewed one way can become less certain when examined through a different lens? Perhaps most telling is the comparison of Ryan's '78 and Johnson's '01:
| Ryan | Johnson | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| K/9 | Lg K/9 | Adj K/9 | K/9 | Lg K/9 | Adj K/9 |
| 9.97 | 4.49 | 222 | 13.41 | 6.92 | 194 |
Johnson's strikeout rate is nearly 35 percent higher than that of Ryan, but he's pitching in an environment whose rate is 54 percent higher than that of Ryan's.
So what?
It's disturbingly easy to fall into the trap of believing that the way things are now is the only way they ever have been or ever will be. It's easy because change often is more subtle than we expect, slowly worming its way into our consciousness while we're busy going about the business of everyday life.
When did teams start using 11- and 12-man pitching staffs? When did umpires start throwing balls out of play after they'd bounced in the dirt? Who knows. Things evolve and—unless they're obvious and call attention to themselves, like the designated hitter experiment or enforcement of the balk rule—often go unnoticed until one day, like David Byrne, you may ask yourself, "How did I get here?"
For this reason, it's good to look back at Gooden's '85 or Ryan's '78 and recognize that even though their strikeout rates might not be mind-blowing by current standards, they are no less impressive. Stick this year's Lincecum in the 1978 AL and he'd be below 7 K/9 (more precisely, 6.66, good for fourth in the AL behind Ryan, Ron Guidry, and—brace yourself—Ken Kravec); that's no knock on Lincecum or his abilities, just a reflection of the difference 30 years can make.
I'm not really stating anything new here (Derek Jacques discussed making adjustments to strikeout rates a while back at Baseball Prospectus, and I'm sure others have entertained similar ideas), but every now and then I think about these things. I hear people cite this statistic or that statistic as definitive proof of something or other in all possible universes, and it inspires me to hop onto my humble soapbox and invoke the names of long-forgotten Kravecs.
Plus I get a kick out of considering alternate realities. It is fun to contemplate how Johnson might have performed in Ryan's environment, or what Gooden's 1985 performance might have looked like had it occurred in 2009.
There could be practical applications of this as well, perhaps to provide additional context in the evaluation of minor-league players. For example, how does Adam Wainwright's 10.06 K/9 at Macon in 2001 look in light of the South Atlantic League's 8.03 mark that year? How does this differ from if he'd posted the same strikeout rate in the International League, which checked in at 6.93 K/9?
There are more questions like these that we might wish to answer. Perhaps you have some of your own.
References and Resources
Baseball-Reference, of course.
Geoff Young covers the San Diego Padres at Ducksnorts and is a regular contributor to Baseball Daily Digest. He has written three books about the Padres, the most recent being the Ducksnorts 2009 Baseball Annual. Feel free to send Geoff comments via email.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
The McCourt Divorce: Reader’s Digest version
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 28, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Milton Bradley’s plate discipline
by Nick SteinerOctober 27, 2009
Nick is a die-hard Cardinals fan living in LA. He welcomes comments, questions and hate mail via email
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
“It’s Slumdog, but with baseball, baby!!”
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 27, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Cornering the market on ticket sales
by Dan NovickOctober 27, 2009
Dan Novick is a lifelong Yankees fan, and still gets the chills every time Enter Sandman plays from the Yankee Stadium speakers. He welcomes comments and questions via e-mail.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Quote of the Day
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 27, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Why I’m not a divorce lawyer
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 27, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
My Morning in Exile
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 27, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
“Win one for George”
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 27, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
And Nothing Happened
by Craig CalcaterraOctober 27, 2009
Craig writes the Shysterball blog for the Hardball Times.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Why the Yankees beat the Angels
by Larry MahnkenOctober 27, 2009
Buster Olney wrote an excellent book pinpointing Game Seven of the 2001 World Series as the "Last Night of the Yankees Dynasty," but the decline of the team may more accurately have had its origins a year later in the 2002 ALDS. The Yankees were the best team in baseball again, they had the best lineup, the best closer, and one of the best rotations. They were going to steamroll past the Angels, back to the World Series, back winning championships.
But the Angels exposed the Yankees as an old, slow, defensively terrible team without much bullpen depth, and in the years that followed the Yankees ceased to be "the" top team in the league to "a" top team, to just another good team, to just another also-ran. 2009 was the first time since that series where the Yankees could be pointed to as clearly the best team in baseball, so it was appropriate that the Angels stood in the way of their first pennant in six years.
It was, in the end, a closely fought series, though not necessarily a well-played one. The Angels battled the Yankees in every game, and had just a few plays turned differently, the series would have had a different outcome. The Yankees walked away with their 40th pennant, and these are the reasons why.
Greed
No, I don’t mean the Yankees’ greed for top free agents—that hadn’t won them much of anything in previous years, anyway. No, this is the greed of MLB in trying to secure as many prime-time games as possible by adding an extra day off to the League Championship Series, allowing the Yankees to use only three starting pitchers, negating the Yankees’ biggest weakness and one of the Angels’ biggest advantages.
The extra day allowed the Yankees to start CC Sabathia three times in seven games—only once on short rest—while using A.J. Burnett and Andy Pettitte on full rest in their two starts. They avoided any starts from Chad Gaudin or Joba Chamberlain. The Angels, on the other hand, had a four-man rotation set from the start, which would have given them a distinct advantage had the Yankees been forced to do the same.
Sabathia went on to shut the Angels down twice on his way to MVP honors, forcing the Angels to win every game against Burnett and Pettitte to stay alive, something they failed to do.
Limiting the boners
Going in, one of the storylines about the Angels’ success since Mike Scioscia took over the team, and success against the Yankees in particular, was how the Angels "played the game the right way," and how they executed all the fundamentals. In the bottom of the first of Game One, that storyline was challenged.
With two out and Johnny Damon on second, John Lackey induced a weak popup to the left side from Hideki Matsui. Erick Aybar and Chone Figgins moved over to it, and then inexplicably let the ball drop between them without so much as reaching to catch it, scoring Damon. A throwing error on a pickoff in the sixth by Lackey led to the Yankees’ fourth run, and while Sabathia’s pitching ensured that the Yankees probably would have won anyway, it set a tone for the series.
In Game Two, Erick Aybar neglected to touch second base on an easy double play (which despite the controversy was an indisputably correct call), giving the Yankees a chance to win the game with a runner on second and one out (though they would fail to capitalize), and Maicer Izturis’s ill-advised attempt at a forceout in the 13th sent home the winning run when it went past Aybar.
Finally, in the decisive Game Six, trailing by just one run in the bottom of the eighth, Scott Kazmir threw away two sacrifice bunt attempts, sending home an insurance run and setting up another, sealing the pennant for the Yankees. There were other failings in the series, but those were the most important ones. The Yankees were generally able to limit their serious failures to an idiotic baserunning play in Game Four that Tim McClelland screwed up the call on, but ultimately didn’t matter much.
Saliva
Just kidding.
Angels fanboys thought they had caught something when they posted a video of Mariano Rivera spitting while holding the ball, and accused the greatest relief ace in postseason history of building his career on an illegal pitch. Ignoring that a spitter acts nothing like Rivera’s pitches do, the video itself showed Rivera’s spit passing nowhere near the baseball. Rivera laughed off the accusation when questioned about it, and continued to be his dominating self.
He finished off the Angels in the ninth in Game One, then kept the game tied for over two innings in Game Two. He saved the Yankees from a first-and-third nobody out situation in Game Three, and then in Game Six pitched two innings to finish off the game and the series.
Rivera wasn’t perfect in the series, but the near-automatic nature of his appearances has been a calming agent on the Yankees for years. In the postseason, where he pitches nearly every day, he’s one of the most valuable players the Yankees have. In a postseason where closers have suffered notable failures, Rivera’s value stands out even more.
Lineup depth
In the ALCS, Hideki Matsui posted a measly .670 OPS. Mark Teixeira's was a puny .550, and Nick Swisher put up a pathetic .442. Still, the Yankees scored at least four runs in every game, and posted a team OPS of .835 in the series.
The Yankees’ lineup is so deep that even four horrid performances couldn’t shut them down. Sure, Joe Saunders kept them in check for most of Game Two, and John Lackey did the same for most of Game Five, but the lineup kept grinding away, putting guys on base, getting scoring opportunities, even if they couldn’t always cash in. The non-reliance on any one or two players put the Yankees in a position to win every game, and in the end the Angels couldn’t overcome that.
Fallen angels
The Angels did their part to lose the series on offense, too. Vlad Guerrero, Howie Kendrick and Jeff Mathis had great series, and Torii Hunter had an okay series, but everyone else in the Angels lineup was horrid.
Bobby Abreu and Figgins combined for a .250 OBP and .455 OPS at the top of the lineup, and the rest of the team had a .453 OPS. The Angels survived on the strength of their starting pitching—it was their bullpen and lineup that let them down.
A-Rod
Once again, Alex Rodriguez had a magnificent series, his game-tying home run with the raindrops falling in the bottom of the 11th in Game Two may go down as the iconic moment of his career. Not once during the entire series did he swing at a ball and not make contact, and his 1.519 OPS would have made him a worthy co-MVP. His unclutch reputation is apparently dead and buried as he prepares for his first World Series, still seeking the one thing he has yet to accomplish in his career.
The Yankees move on to face the defending World Champion Phillies this week in what promises to be their toughest challenge yet. They’ve made it back to the World Series for the first time since Aaron Boone’s homer, but that year ended with a bitter defeat to the Marlins. The Yankees have played all year with a determination that nothing will be handed to them, and that attitude has served them well. It will be a necessary attitude to maintain in the coming games.
Larry Mahnken is a staff writer for The Hardball Times, and co-editor of the Replacement Level Yankees Weblog. You can contact him with your comments, questions, romantic propositions and incoherent rantings at DLMahnken@hardballtimes.com.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Why the Angels lost to the Yankees
by Sean SmithOctober 27, 2009
The Angels lost because the Yankees are the better team, and they played better baseball for six games. End of story. Sometimes it really is that simple.
I suppose I owe you a little bit longer article than that, so as painful as this is, here it goes:
Clutch-Rod is a better player than Choke-Rod
They look the same, but when the Angels beat the Yankees in 2005 Choke-Rod went 2-for-15 with zero RBIs. Had this player come up in Game Two, Brian Fuentes would have struck him out and at the very least, the Angels would be playing game seven as I write this. Clutch-Rod hit .429 with a 1.519 OPS this series, and induced more fear in a six-game series than fear-based Hall of Famer Jim Rice did in his entire career. (Anyone who wants to even debate this must show me an instance where Rice was walked intentionally with nobody on.)
In some of the recent series where Choke-Rod disappointed the Yankees, there was much talk about him not being right at the plate, pressing, and Joe Torre even dropped him to eighth in the batting order. This series, the announcers kept mentioning how focused and locked in he was. I don’t believe that there was some mental deficiency that prevented him from hitting before, or that he’s some sort of superman now over and above his typical, excellent level of play. He’s just a streaky hitter, and just happened to hit bad streaks in previous postseasons. Trying to beat the Yankees is tough enough—beating them with Clutch-Rod hitting his best is damn near impossible.
The Yankees starting pitchers pitched better
CC Sabathia had a tremendous pair of games. A.J. Burnett pitched a good game and a bad game, and Andy Pettite pitched a decent Game Three and an excellent Game Six. For the Angels, John Lackey pitched wonderfully in Game 5. His Game One was so-so. He was unlucky to have bad defensive support, as two of the four runs he gave up were unearned, but frankly he’s lucky that more runs didn’t score, given that he allowed nine hits and three walks in less than six innings, only striking out three. In addition, one of the errors leading to a run was his own.
Joe Saunders pitched an excellent Game Two and a pathetic Game Six, while Scott Kazmir was terrible in Game Five. Weaver’s Game Three start was mediocre, as he alternated between pitching out of jams and allowing solo homers, but things could have been much worse than three runs allowed. In total, if I were Girardi I would have been happy with five out of the six efforts by my starters, and if I were Scioscia I would have been satisfied with only two, by Saunders and Lackey.
Mariano Rivera
The Angels scored a run off him! However, it was too little and too late, and overall Rivera was his typical superhuman self, twice working out of jams with runners on third and less than two out.
The Angels defense was weak
In Game Two, the Angels lost on an error, which was a mental error more than anything as Izturis had no good reason not to take the easy out at first. They may have lost that game anyway, but the error made it certain. Two ugly errors on bunts changed the score in Game Six. In the end, they didn’t affect the outcome, just made the game a lot uglier than it should have been. The Angels made eight errors in six games. It happens sometimes, I’m sure they can find a six game regular season stretch where they were just as bad if not worse, but this was atypical. This team made only 85 in the regular season, and only one against the Red Sox.
I’m disappointed that the Angels are not going to the World Series, but they can look back fondly on so much of the 2009 season. They won 97 games despite a rotation that suffered both injuries and a fatality. They finally beat the Red Sox in the playoffs, something I’ve been waiting 23 years for, and did it in ideal fashion, beating a closer who had never allowed a postseason run. And while there the play against New York left a lot to be desired, they gave the Yankees a good scare, pushing the series back to New York and until the eighth inning bunt errors, I doubt many Yankee fans were feeling secure.
There were a lot of great moments for Angels fans to remember in 2009, and it’s likely the last time we’ll see the team as it was constituted. Several key players head to free agency, and between them and young players like Brandon Wood future Angels teams will look a lot different.
Best of luck to the Yankees as they go for their first ring in almost a decade, and may they silence the mocks of Red Sox fans who chant “Year Two Thou-sand.”
Sean Smith is a lifelong Angels fan despite never visiting the west coast until April 2006. His work can also be found at baseballprojection.com and Anaheim Angels All the Way and he can be contacted by email.
<< Return to Article
The Hardball Times
Worst Fielders of 2009
by Sean SmithOctober 26, 2009
Sean Smith is a lifelong Angels fan despite never visiting the west coast until April 2006. His work can also be found at baseballprojection.com and Anaheim Angels All the Way and he can be contacted by email.
<< Return to Article