<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Talking Baseball

Your weekday baseball fix. Some days.



Posted by Ben K. on Tuesday, February 10, 2004

Lord, I was born a ramblin' man

Finally, it's here. Or at least, it's almost here. In less than 5 days, Spring Training begins as pitchers and catchers report to their camps in Florida or Arizona. While many stars are already starting their work outs, for us baseball fans, the last few days before Spring Training opens are among the slowest days for news and trades. Outside of Greg Maddux, all high-profile free agents have landed contracts for the 2004 campaign (and beyond). So with no pressing topic, I'm going to offer my thoughts on a variety of subjects, ranging from contract extensions to the wonderful world of annual stat books. And in honor of last night's Grammy's and Peter Gammons' love affair with mentioning songs in his column, all of my headings are going to be song quotes. Just for kicks, really.

So Happy Together

Proving that the days before Spring Training are among the most boring in Major League Baseball, ESPN's lead story today was the stunning news that Mariano Rivera wants to remain a Yankee. Stop the presses. Can you believe that? Ok, maybe that's nothing to get too excited about, but there's actually an interesting twist to this story. Mariano is pitching in the final year of a contract valued at $39.99 million. He signed this contract back in February of 2001 when the Free Agent market was awarding players with much higher contracts than they get today. Rivera, who stands to make $8.89 million this season, did not mention any numbers in the short AP story. I would like to propose that Rivera should indeed get another contract worth about $8 million a year.

First, let's take a look at Rivera's numbers. Overall, Rivera was third in the AL with 40 saves. Breaking that down Bill James-style, Rivera had 23 easy saves (where he never had to think about the tying run), 12 regular saves (see the Rule Book), and, thanks to the Yankees' bullpen, an AL-leading 5 tough saves (where he entered with the tying runner on base and still recorded the save). Rivera, with 283 saves in 327 career opportunities, is the Yankees' save leader. More impressive was his 1.66 ERA, which was 0.40 runs lower than save leader Keith Foulke's. Rivera accomplished all of this by missing the first 25 games of the season with a groin injury. As the Yankees struggled along with Juan Acevedo's half-assed attempts at closing, had Rivera been healthy he would have approached 45-50 saves last season.

Some critics might look at these numbers and say that $8 million is now too much for a 34-year-old closer. Keith Foulke just signed a deal worth about $6 million a year, and his numbers are on par with the Rivera's. While über-closer John Smoltz stands to earn $11 million this year and Eric Gagne will one day reach the same monetary level, Yankee detractors might say that Rivera's performance and a history of groin injury should net him that same $6 million. I say look at the postseason intangibles.

In his career, Rivera becomes Mr. Automatic in October. He is 7-1 with 30 saves and a 0.75 ERA since 1996. That one loss was a game 7 blow up against the Diamondbacks when Rivera launched a ball into the outfield. He now does that every time he has to field a bunt. But that's not the point. Look at this postseason numbers. I don't see those from Smoltz, Gagne, Foulke, or anyone really. Last year, Rivera was once again utterly dominant in the postseason. Who could really forget his three innings of dominance in game 7 of the ALCS? His two saves and game 7 victory secured him another postseason MVP award and he was equally dominant against the Twins and the Marlins.

The secret, I contend, to Rivera's postseason success of late is, in fact, his groin injury. On average, Rivera only pitches about 65 games a season, much fewer than most closers. What this means is that when other pitchers are tiring in October, Rivera's arm is still feeling late-August/early-September fresh. If the Yankees can afford to keep Rivera on the bench--and with Paul Quantrill, Tom Gordon, and maybe even Steve Karsay, they most certainly can--then by all means, Rivera should get the first 25 games of the season off.

So in my opinion, Rivera lives up to this contract and any extension he may want. Making considerably less than the 37-year-old Smoltz, Rivera might even deserve more than $8 million a year. As long as he keeps closing games during the regular season and shutting down even the most potent offense of all-time (2003 Red Sox) in October, the Yankees should keep paying Rivera the big bucks.

She told me to walk this way

Last week, I received the 2004 Bill James handbook, and let me tell you, this book is a stat-lover's paradise. It has complete stats for every single Major Leaguer, along with Managerial stats, very complete fielding stats, lefty-righty matchups, and leader boards for every conceivable statistic. If you're a stat junkie or want to become one, this book is a must-buy.

Now that I've done my part selling the book, I'm going to explore a few of the more interesting statistics I found in the book. Quick, out of Nomar Garciaparra, Alfonso Soriano, and Ichiro Suzuki, who walked the least last year? Suzuki, as we all know, is a very disciplined hitter who can spray balls to fields. Garciaparra and Soriano are known for their free-swinging tendencies. I was surprised to see that Suzuki walked a total of 36 times last year. Soriano received 37 free passes, and Nomar got 38. How did I find this out, you may ask. Well, I consulted the league leaders in plate appearances. Soriano, Ichiro, and Nomar were two, three, and four, respectively. (If you known number one without looking it up, e-mail me, and I'll name the first person to get it right for my next post.)

Consulting their walk numbers, I was surprised to see that while Soriano certainly has a reputation for free-swinging, other high-profile stars have the same problem. Yet, they aren't doubted nearly as much as Alfonso is. On a positive note for the Yankees, Soriano increased his walk total by 15 over 2002 while Nomar has witnessed a steady decline since a career high of 61 walks back in 2000. Ichiro's walk numbers dropped by 32 last season and he received only 7 intentional walks as opposed to his AL-leading 27 in his 2002 MVP campaign. But that's a topic for another post. Now, I want to look at Alfonso and Nomar.

Something about the ALCS has bothered me a lot this off-season. Why did Nomar and Alfonso seemingly tank? Some say Alfonso's head was messed up; he was swinging at everything. Some say Nomar was well behind on the fastball. But it's remarkable how similar their stats were during the 7 game series. In the end, Soriano was 4 for 30 with one double and 11 K's. Nomar was 7 for 29 with 1 triple and 8 K's. In game 6, Nomar went 4 for 5. Without that night, Nomar and Soriano's numbers would have been perfectly identical. Which is weird because their regular season numbers were statistically identical. During the regular season, Soriano had 198 hits, 36 doubles, 5 triples, and 38 HR. He drove in 91 runs, scored 114, and created 112 more. He hit .290 with an OPS (On base + Slugging) of .863. Nomar had 198 hits, 37 doubles, 13 triples, and 28 HR. He drove in 105 runs, scored 120, and created 114. He hit .301 with an OPS of .869. It's remarkable how similar these two players' seasons were last year.

So I thought maybe they were so ineffective during the postseason because their approach to the game is tailored for long-term success. I don't think that this, by the way, is very deep analysis. It's just not something that Tim McCarver or Joe Buck would ever think to mention on a FOX telecast. (They suck. That's all there is to it.) Nomar and Soriano both go through extremely hot and extremely cold stretches of the season. When they're cold, they look horrible as they did during the ALCS. When they're hot, they look incredible. When Nomar's on a tear, it's impossible to throw a pitch by him, and when Soriano's swinging a hot stick, balls are leaping off the bat. I've never seen quicker hands than Soriano's as they fly through the strike zone. I think baseball analysts are wrong to question Soriano's ability to rebound from a poor postseason while assuming that Nomar's going to be ok. Both players will return to form next season as they endure good and bad extremes of the season. If anything, I would question Nomar more because of the off-field Alex Rodriguez trade shenanigans from this season.

And so it seems, only in dreams

Finally, I'll end with something really short. One of the more entertaining parts of the Bill James Handbook is his Career Assessments section on the last page before the glossary. Based on previous year's stats and career performance, James assesses which players have a chance to reach major career milestones. For example, it's interesting to see that Barry Bonds has a 52 percent chance of breaking Hank Aaron's home run record and a 20 percent chance of reaching 800 home runs. Alex Rodriguez has a 34 percent chance of reaching 800 but only a 43 percent chance of breaking Aaron's record. While it appears that Aaron's home run and RBI records are under assault, it's interesting to see that Pete Rose's hit record is the safest, based on Bill James' projections. Of the active leaders, only the 23-year-old Albert Pujols and the 27-year-old Alex Rodriguez have a chance to reach 4257 hits. Pujols has a 2 percent chance, and A-Rod has a 1 percent chance. If you believe Pujols to be 26 instead of 23 (like some do), then his chances are probably 0. This probability chart just goes to show what an outstanding ballplayer Pete Rose truly was. It's a big shame that he couldn't control his personality off field and that he refuses to show any remorse for violating some of baseball's more sacred gambling rules.


### So what do you think? We want to know. | | E-mail us ###



Posted by Ben K. on Friday, February 06, 2004

From Worst to....Worst

As we all know by now, Ivan Rodriguez, the team MVP of the 2003 World Series Champion Florida Marlins, signed a four-year, $40 million contract on Monday with the Detroit Tigers. Pudge gave up the chance to make around $16 million for two years in Florida to play with a team that lost 119 games last season, a total of 225 games over the last two years, and a three-year total of 321 losses, three short of the 87-year-old American League record held by the Philadelphia Athletics.

In the face of unprecedented losing, Pudge, of course, had all the right things to say about the signing and his new team. As MLB.com reported, Rodriguez said, "Believe it or not, when I was a kid, this was one of my favorite teams. I watched Detroit a lot on TV and have all those memories of a winning team all those years. I'm very happy to be part of this organization." It's a mystery to me how Pudge, who grew up in Vega Baja, Puerto Rico, almost 2500 miles away from Detroit was able to watch the Tigers on TV. Also, in examining Detroit's team history, I see four years during Pudge's life where they could be considered competitive. So I don't know what winning Tigers teams Rodriguez watched on TV, but that's not my point today.

Instead, I'm more concerned with another one of Pudge's quotes. In the same MLB.com article, he said, "This team to me is not a losing team. Any team can have a bad year. This team did and it's already behind them." But did the Tigers really simply have a bad year last year as their new All Star catcher so succinctly put it? Let's take a closer look.

The Tigers finished last season with a 43-119 record, setting a new American League record for most losses in a single season. This dubious achievement left them with a .265 winning percentage. They finished 47 games behind the AL Central-leading Minnesota Twins and 58 games worse than the best team in the majors last year. As a team, they hit just .240 with a .300 OBP and a .375 slugging percentage. They scored only 591 runs--less than 4 runs per game.

While the Texas Rangers' pitching staff was actually a little worse than that of the Tigers', Mike Maroth and company weren't exactly setting any records. Well, actually, Maroth himself did when, on September 5, he became the first pitcher since 1980 to lose 20 games in a single season. He would finish with 21 losses. Overall, the team finished with a 5.30 ERA. They managed three complete games and held their opponents scoreless only five times the entire season. The staff struck out a Major League-low 764 hitters while racking up a team WHIP of a stunning 1.51.

Pudge, I hate to break it to you, but this team did more than just have an unlucky bad year. The 2003 Tigers were one of the worst teams in the history of the game. Only two teams have lost more games then they did, and their level of ineptitude hadn't been reached since 1962. Despite Pudge's predictions that this team won't be a losing team in 2004, it's tough to argue otherwise. Bad breaks don't account for the horrible nature of the Tigers last year.

So the Tigers were bad. In another interview, Pudge even acknowledge this. "I know they had a bad season last year, but I think this is going to be a completely different season," he said. But is it really? Will the Tigers led by Ivan Rodriguez go from worst ever to first in the league next season? For a hint on the future of the Tigers, let's take a look at all of the teams in Major History that have lost more than 110 games.

I'm going to make this nice and easy. The following table will break down the teams that have been notoriously bad. It will have the team's record in the year they lost more than 110 games, the team's record the following season, the place in which the team finished that next season, and the number of games by which the team improved. Let's do it in order of teams that lost the most games. Also, as a note, I'm going to look at teams considered in the modern era of baseball. That is, only teams after 1903 are on this list.

 RecordNext SeasonStandingsGames Improved
1962 Mets40-12051-111Last Place+10
2003 Tigers43-119NANANA
1916 Athletics36-11755-98Last Place+20
1935 Braves38-11571-836th (out of 8)+32.5
1904 Senators38-11364-877th (out of 8)+26
1952 Pirates42-11250-104Last Place+8
1965 Mets50-11266-959th (out of 10)+16.5
1932 Red Sox43-11163-867th (out of 8)+22.5
1939 St. Louis Browns43-11167-876th (out of 8)+24
1941 Phillies43-11142-109Last place+0.5
1963 Mets51-11153-109Last place+2


The future for the Tigers does not look too good from what we see in this table. First, let's look at the bad news. The 1962 Mets are the only team on this list to lose more games than the Tigers. In 1963, they improved by only 10 games and are the only team on the list in consecutive seasons. In 1964, they lost 109, narrowly avoiding the list. It would be the only time they would so between 1962 and 1965. The 1939 Phillies are clearly the team on the list that improved the least. By losing 109 games the next season, they too avoided consecutive years on the list. Those Phillies, however, lost 100 games or more for five seasons in a row. They are the only team to achieve this dubious feat. The Tigers have lost more than 100 for only two seasons in a row.

Now for the relatively good news: The Tigers have to get better. On average, teams with over 110 losses improve by 16.5 games the next season. That would put the Tigers at around 59-103 for the 2004 campaign. Additionally, no teams have done worse in the season after losing over 110 games. So I think it's safe to say that Pudge's Tigers won't be any worse this season than the Pudge-less Tigers were in 2003. What it does mean however is that the Tigers will have lost 328 games in three seasons, thus setting a new record for most losses in three consecutive seasons. And to think Pudge could have stayed in Florida, defending a World Championship and not a loss record.

Is it really realistic though to assume that the Tigers will improve only by those projected 16 games? No and yes. no, because the Tigers' offense is radically better for next season. Rondell White, Fernando Viña, Pudge, and Carlos Guillen are all significant upgrades over last year's no-name offense. While Pudge's 23 win shares were the most he's had in four years, it's safe to say that he'll be better than Brandon Inge was behind the plate in Comerica last year. I don't think Pudge will reach 23 again, but he'll make a difference, as will the rest of the Tigers' additions. But the pitching has not improved. Detroit's pitching staff was not fooling anyone last year, and they won't be fooling anyone this year even with the help of Ivan Rodriguez.

In the end, I predict 95 losses from the Tigers. This would represent an improvement of 24 games over 2003, which is no small feat. But it's not really the "completely different season" that Pudge predicted. It's still a season of disappointment for the players and the fans, and it's most definitely a season at the very bottom of the mediocre AL Central.

Finally, Pudge also claimed that we, the fans, would see the Detroit Tigers in the playoffs "very soon." But unless the Tigers upgrade their pitching staff, those 96 losses may be the high-water mark for the Pudge era. Rodriguez will only get older, and the Tigers don't have much in the way of pitching prospects. I highly doubt, Pudge, the Detroit Tiger, will see a return to the October glory he enjoyed with the Marlins.


### So what do you think? We want to know. | | E-mail us ###