Will Free Agents Fix the Pirates' Problems?
This is an extremely unlikely thing for me to link to, I know, but the fifth comment down in this thread is well worth your time.
2 months ago
Charlie
41 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Bucs Dugout
needs to sign MarkInDallas as a free agent.
by bucdaddy on Nov 23, 2009 10:00 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Then he should know better
than to try to teach advanced calculus to a special-ed class, shouldn’t he? Or is he just messing with their little minds?
by bucdaddy on Nov 23, 2009 12:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My first thought
was that he was like Sisyphus rolling the stone up the hill. To his credit it seems as if at least one of the usual posters begrudgingly agreed that MarkInDallas had a good point.
by MDBuc on Nov 23, 2009 1:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
MarkInDallas
that’s not THE Mark in Dallas, right? It’s a guy referencing him…?
by my dixie wrecked on Nov 23, 2009 7:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm an actual Squirrel...
what’s yer point? :p
by BlindSquirrel on Nov 23, 2009 8:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and i’m hoping he’s not doing anything with his “dixie” as he’s typing
by johnnycuff on Nov 23, 2009 10:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not referencing.
Just my name. Not the Cuban part. I don’t know him, but I have a friend that does.
by MarkInDallas on Nov 24, 2009 2:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Was his explanation of WAR correct?
“The WAR value is how many more wins you’d get from having that player start all year instead of the replacement player.”
I always thought it was an estimate of the number of wins above a replacement-level player that a given player produced for the actual playing time that he received.
by WestCoastBuc on Nov 23, 2009 10:08 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
His explanation looks good to me
WAR relies on counting stats (K, HR, BB, etc.) to be translated into rate stats (K/9, FIP, etc.) and then combines these factors into value stats. Since WAR is based on rates, those are independent of expected use, but WAR itself depend on expected playing time.
Viva Clemente!
by Roberto on Nov 23, 2009 12:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That is, assuming you are comparing 2 starters. You can’t compare a starter with someone who was a bench player with WAR. You’re right in the sense that you can’t cause your team to win a game in which you haven’t played.
by MarkInDallas on Nov 24, 2009 12:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
In the NFL I have heard it said that “Winners build through the draft, loser’s build through free agency.” The most obvious example of this is the Washington Redskins, who despite signing prominent free agents yearly, continue to struggle.
Obviously MLB is some what different; see the New York Yankees. But this adage may be true for small market baseball teams. Free agents are older and more expensive than drafted talent. Their inflated price tags, and increased injury risk can pose a great risk to small market teams.
by jonoz13 on Nov 23, 2009 1:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
What struck me
Was just how few truly “impactful” players there are in MLB – 48 guys above 4 WAR (about 1.5/team). Good teams, it seems, come from having a couple of those guys, a few good-not great players (avg. 2/team), and then filling in with OK players, rather than replacement players.
IOW, not even the Yankees field of team of 5 WAR guys (specifically, they fielded 7 guys more valuable than Andy LaRoche, but only 1 clearly more valuable than full-season Cutch; of the pitchers, CC is worth 6, but Pettite and Burnett together were worth only 6.4). Instead, they have a bunch of guys in the ~3 WAR range – fill your roster with those guys, avoid negative WAR guys, and you get up over 90 wins.
Put more abstractly, take 40 wins for a replacement-level team, average 2 WAR for your entire roster, and you’re at 90 wins. It doesn’t quite work that way (since most of your roster doesn’t play enough to rack up big WAR numbers), but it gives you a sense of the level of talent you need. A .500 team has 8 fielders averaging 3+ WAR, 5 SPs averaging 2+ WAR, a good bullpen, and no black holes on the bench (the Yanks had only one position player – Cody Rasmus – see significant playing time with a negative WAR; in contrast, Bixler managed -0.8 WAR last in ’08 with just 120 PAs).
by JRoth95 on Nov 23, 2009 2:45 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
To be clear
The Yankees’ 8 position players + DH averaged 4 WAR – they’re a very good team. But it’s not from having a half dozen (or even 3) 6 WAR guys – it’s from having 6 batters between 3 and 5.1, and having your 4th OF and 5th IF be decently above replacement.
by JRoth95 on Nov 23, 2009 2:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is exactly
my idea about building a rotation, that you don’t need an ace, simply 2-3 guys who are pretty good, 1-2 who are decent and (the real key) one who doesn’t black-hole the other four down to a sub-.500 level.
(Yes, I’m looking at you, Pirates No. 5 Starters for the Past 10 Years.)
That’s the Bob Walk/Josh Fogg theory in a nutshell.
by bucdaddy on Nov 24, 2009 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The only problem
Comes playoff time – the Yankees-Phils matchup really highlighted that, where the Phils 1-5 SPs aren’t that much worse than the Yanks, but 1-3 (well, 2 and 3) they weren’t even in the same league.
Actually, that’s probably the highest leverage FA (or trade) pickup: once your team is playoff-ready with a solid but not great rotation, add a true ace who’s worth 1-2 wins per playoff round. The best part is that the ace replaces your #5, so the overall improvement in the team is pretty dramatic for a guy who only pitches 30 regular season games.
by JRoth95 on Nov 25, 2009 11:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Holy Crap
Maholm and Ohlie are so bad with the bat that they cost us 2 games – that’s breathtaking from guys who get to the plate about 90 times/year. In fact, in Ohlie’s case, it makes him replacement level overall.
Can that really be right? That suggests that, in the NL, above-average pitchers who hit poorly are essentially worthless.
by JRoth95 on Nov 23, 2009 3:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s hard to even comprehend how awful Ohlendorf was with the bat this year. Of the 51 pitchers who managed to get 50 plate appearances this year, Ohlendorf was dead last in WOBA (and also in standard batting average) by a fairly wide margin. Maholm wasn’t much better. He had the second lowest batting average, and his WOBA was 47th out of 51.
Fangraphs actually took a look at pitcher hitting a couple months ago, and they calculated that Pirates pitchers were a full 10 runs below average, and a nearly a full 20 runs worse than a team like the Cubs.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/spreads-in-pitcher-hitting-and-dh-hitting
by ElDuce on Nov 23, 2009 5:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
chewing the fat:
how about putting the 2nd fastest guy just before the pitcher so he can steal across to 3rd? In a sense it wastes the speed needed at the top of the order (where the speed demon is) but at least makes the axe styled batting from the pitcher at the plate a bit less useless.
by BlindSquirrel on Nov 23, 2009 7:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting
Isn’t Lincoln supposed to be pretty good with the bat? That alone could be worth a couple of wins.
by biggyv on Nov 24, 2009 11:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, Lincoln was a position player in college. Alderson is also supposed to be pretty good with the bat. He did hit 2 HR this year in 13 plate appearances. The 2009 draft class also had a good crop of hitting pitchers with Cain being a power hitting 1B, Von Rosenberg getting some consideration as a SS prospect, and Brooks Pounders was called “maybe the closest thing to Micah Owings in the draft”. Sometimes these things change quite a bit when guys don’t hit for a while, though.
by ElDuce on Nov 24, 2009 3:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess that explains why Jack Wilson and Cedeno were poor hitters.
No protection. :-)
by MarkInDallas on Nov 24, 2009 2:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the link
Interesting stuff.
Imagine how much worse the Pirates’ rotation would be if Duke weren’t there.
I loved that the mid-80s Mets had good-hitting pitchers (I think 4 of 5 were above-average); I don’t think I appreciated the real value it brought, as opposed to just being a nice little bump – seeing the impact Zambrano’s bat has is kind of amazing (it also helps me understand why he’s viewed so highly when it seems that we rough him up at least once/year). If only JVB had worked out….
by JRoth95 on Nov 25, 2009 11:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I went ballistic this year when JR insisted on having Ohlendorf swing the bat
when there were bases loaded and 1 out with Cutch coming up. I did the math and quickly realized there was a full 80% chance that if Ohlendorf made contact that he would GDIP. Of course, JR had him swing the bat and he hit into a GDIP.
That was the moment I realized that JR truly had no clue as to what he was doing.
by MarkInDallas on Nov 24, 2009 2:39 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
OK, so let's project
Reading the Tabata piece in the P-G, I’m feeling more optimistic about him. So let’s put up an April 2012 lineup and see what WAR might look like (this is intended as an optimistic, but not crazy, look):
Cutch – 5 WAR
Milledge – 2
Tabata – 3.5
Alvarez – 6
LaRoche – 3
D’Arnaud – 1.5
Sanchez – 1
???? (depending what happens with Pedro and Andy, this could be a 2B or a 1B)
Morton – 2
Lincoln – 2
Ohlie – 1
No Relation – 0.5
Misc. – 0
If we’re optimistic, we can add another win or two from the bench and bullpen. And the total is… a 70 win team, with maybe a few more from the final IF position. Oof.
Am I missing anyone? Am I seriously underprojecting anyone? I could certainly see getting another win out of the rotation and another win or two out of the batters, but I feel like I’m in the ballpark, and it looks like a team that would struggle to reach .500. I want to be clear: I put down WAR guesses first, and tallied later – I went into this thinking we’d be comfortably around .500. But unless a SP turns into a horse, the final IF piece ends up being a stud, or someone (Milledge or D’Arnaud most likely) breaks out, 2012 doesn’t look all that promising.
by JRoth95 on Nov 25, 2009 11:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I looked at Ohlendorf's WPA after his delivery change
His velocity went up after the delivery change and his accumulated WPA in his last 9 starts was .992, as opposed to -.315 prior. If he’s able to have that kind of success over the full season, he could be anywhere from a 3.5 WAR to 6+ WAR pitcher.
by MarkInDallas on Nov 25, 2009 5:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Also, on the bullpen...
This year, the Pirates had -11 pitching runs in the BP, which was 2nd worst in baseball. If they can get that to around league average, they’ll pick up 3-4 wins.
by MarkInDallas on Nov 25, 2009 5:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent
I was wondering about Ohlie – I liked what I saw late season, but some around here have suggested there wasn’t much to it. Still no guarantee what we saw will stick, but it looks like it was substantial. If Ohlie’s a 4-5 WAR guy, then 2012 starts to look a lot more solid, especially because I could see Lastings being strong by then (or do we lose him after 2011? I can’t recall right now).
by JRoth95 on Nov 27, 2009 12:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How did you come up with the 70 wins?
Using approximately 48 wins as replacement level, your numbers would add up to closer to 80 wins.
I think you are underestimating many of the players to some degree. I would expect Milledge to be at least a 3-win player. I could also see Tabata and D’Arnaud being a bit higher.
If Sanchez is not better than a 1-win player, he shouldn’t be starting. Even if he is just an average defender, he would need to be a black hole offensively to only be worth one win (2009 Jason Kendall-esque). If he plays a whole season, produces say +10 runs defensively and -10 runs offensively, he would be about a 3-win player. I would say that’s a reasonable expectation, although it would be difficult to quantify accurately due to the limitations on catcher defensive metrics.
I’d say you could also add a few wins to the rotation. Add that win or two from the bench/bullpen, and we’re looking at closer to 90 wins.
I am being optimistic here. I’d guess that we would be more likely to finish in the 85-win range, as not everyone will reach expectations. But I can definitely see a scenario in which we could be competitive.
Pittsburgh Lumber Co.
http://mvn.com/pittsburghlumberco
by MBandi on Nov 27, 2009 1:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I also look for Milledge to be worth at least 3 wins.
Certainly, if he isn’t it would be a disappointment. He accumulated 1 WAR with the Pirates in 58 games, and he really wasn’t healed and in the groove for half of that. If he played exactly as he did this year with the Pirates over 150 games, that would be 2.6 WAR.
I think now that he is healed and his power seemed to be coming back towards the end of the season, 3 – 4 WAR is most likely.
I think it will be interesting to see who is worth more at the end of next year – Lastings or Nyjer. At this moment it could be a push.
by MarkInDallas on Nov 27, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
When I asked about wins for a replacement team earlier this year, I heard 40 and I heard a higher number – I don’t think it was 48, but maybe it was – so I went with 40. If 48 really is a good number for an all-replacement team, then I’m much more optimistic.
I’m happy to agree to your points about most of these players – as I said, I was trying to be optimistic but realistic, so I didn’t just want to assume that guys would do better than what they’ve shown plus a bit more. Regarding Lastings specifically, I think I failed to adjust his 2009 WAR for playing time, so yeah, 3 is a minimum (healthy) number for him. I’m assuming 2012 will be Sanchez’ first full season, so I don’t feel comfortable assuming much for him – probably more than 1, but not over 2 (he certainly could be, but I won’t project it, is what I’m saying).
But yes, you’re right – assuming 48’s a good number, then 2012 looks pretty good even without any real breakout players. And thanks for the feedback.
by JRoth95 on Nov 29, 2009 2:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I often use the WAR spreadsheet found here.
They use 48.5 wins as NL replacement level and 43.5 wins as AL replacement level. The reasoning is included if you follow the link. I’m sure one can make the case to add or subtract a few wins from either number.
Pittsburgh Lumber Co.
http://mvn.com/pittsburghlumberco
by MBandi on Nov 29, 2009 5:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We could find an affordable bullpen arm or two
in MLB or Japan as has been pointed out recently.
I think we also need to find someone else to be a productive addition to our OF mix.
Otherwise, I’d pretty much like to see us stay the course as outlined by NH/FC and keep building a winning team a couple of years down the road through our farm system, and astute trades when we have extra talent at certain positions.
Free agency is not the cure-all for the Pirates’ ills.
by patthatt on Nov 23, 2009 3:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Just my opinion, but...
I think Ankiel is a perfect example of what he was talking about by “taking a flyer” on a player whose value has dropped because of a bad season. Ankiel could be a great addition to the lineup on a one year deal, and if he plays well, he could be traded for something of at least moderate value or just chase the money next winter in free agency.
I don’t usually do this, but I’d love to see the Pirates get him.
Austin Kearns is another player who could sort of the fit that mold, but I don’t think he has as much upside as Ankiel for the upcoming season.
by Suffering Buc on Nov 23, 2009 5:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Omitted...
I think the biggest need is to find a LHRP somewhere. Eyre, Beimel, Schoenweis, whoever.
by Suffering Buc on Nov 23, 2009 5:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
suffering buc
No thank you on Austin Kearns. I thought he looked about a biscuit away from 250 lbs. this year and that was about 50 points higher than his batting average.
He needs R. Lee Ermey to whip his fat arse into shape before even considering him for a roster spot.
I can just see us bringing him as this year’s Craig Monroe and getting virtually nothing out an investment of a few hundred thousand bucks.
by patthatt on Nov 23, 2009 6:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Also:
“I think the biggest need is to find a LHRP somewhere. Eyre, Beimel, Schoenweis, whoever.”
Let’s not get too carried away about signing just any old lefty.
Think back to a guy we didn’t get toward the end of spring training this past season and he signed with the Dodgers.
Did none too well, huh?
by patthatt on Nov 23, 2009 6:54 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks very much for highlighting my post
I myself was pretty surprised at the small number of high value free agents that are found among the 4+ WAR players. This was really an interesting exercise and sure reinforced my understanding of how difficult and downright unrealistic it is for a small market team to go out and get an impact free agent paid as such.
As to the question of why I post over there..I guess I like a challenge. :-)
Anyway, thanks again for taking notice!
by MarkInDallas on Nov 24, 2009 12:33 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
