Which Pirates Might Surprise This Year?
by Charlie Wilmoth on Feb 15, 2011 4:59 AM EST
Email
PrintI'm working on a Q+A for Pittsburgh Sports Daily Bulletin. (It'll probably be available later this week, but they asked a lot of questions, so it'll take a day or so for me to finish it.) One of the questions they asked was which Pirates might surprise fans this year. You could interpret "surprise" to mean a lot of things, of course, but here are a few players who I think could have pleasantly surprising seasons.
-P- Charlie Morton. There's nowhere to go but up, really. Morton's track record is so sketchy at this point that it's extremely unlikely that he'll ever be the ace he sometimes looks like, but with his stuff and his Class AAA success in 2008 and 2009 and his modest success in the majors in '09, he could re-emerge as a middle-of-the-rotation starter. That probably wouldn't shock many Bucs Dugout readers, but I think a lot of other fans would be surprised. He's out of options, and the Pirates are clearly still pretty curious about him, so he has a very good shot at winning the last rotation job.
-P- James McDonald. This one is a little bit strange, since McDonald was so good last year. But his 2010 line could have been even better if John Russell hadn't repeatedly hung him out to dry. McDonald began most games looking like a Cy Young contender, but his stuff deteriorated rapidly after 45 pitches or so, and then he would get pasted. (He had a .627 OPS against in pitches 31-45 of his starts and a 1.026 OPS against in pitches 45-60. He calmed down a bit in pitches 61-75, so sample-size issues probably explain to some degree why McDonald was so bad from 45-60, but still - the decline in his stuff as games went on was undeniable. See update below.)
I can't believe the Pirates aren't aware of this problem. In PirateFest, Clint Hurdle spoke about how he wanted to preserve the Pirates' bullpen by having starters pitch deep into games, but hopefully he'll be able to rely on Paul Maholm and Ross Ohlendorf to pitch the longer outings. Unfortunately, Kevin Correia has a problem similar to McDonald in that he started to get rocked after about 45 pitches last year, and Ohlendorf wasn't exactly a model of durability in 2010. But this is where the Pirates' pitching depth could come in handy, as Scott Olsen and Jeff Karstens can both pitch long relief stints (assuming both are in the bullpen).
Ultimately, of course, McDonald needs to do a better job preserving his stuff deep into games. If he can't last more than 45 pitches more consistently, he can't be much of a starter in the long term. But if he can improve on that somewhat this year while also being used a little more intelligently, he could have a special season.
UPDATE: Well, check that. I was using ESPN's splits data, which appear to match Baseball Reference's, except that the numbers for BB-Ref's are for pitches 1-25, 26-50, 51-75, 76-100 and beyond 100. So the numbers for pitches 76-100 at BB-ref match the numbers for pitches for 46-60 at ESPN. BB-Ref's numbers make more sense (I was wondering why ESPN didn't have any numbers beyond 75 pitches), so those are probably accurate, which means that the big decline is after 75 pitches, not 45.
You can also check out McDonald's inning-by-inning splits at the same page at BB-Ref - that might resolve some of the confusion. Essentially, he did well through the first three innings, and then there was a pretty steep rise in OPS against after the third inning and a decline in his peripherals after the fourth or fifth. There are some issues with sample size, and it's not necessarily unusual for pitchers to struggle through the middle innings at times, but the decline appears to have come later for McDonald than I indicated up above. Still, it certainly would have helped his overall numbers if Russell hadn't been leaving him out there when he was plainly gassed.
-P- Rudy Owens. Owens probably won't make the team out of Spring Training or anything, but he's so polished that he could be surprisingly successful right away. The Pirates' ownership loves him, and if Zach Duke could blow through the league in his rookie season, I see no reason Owens can't.
Another potential surprise candidate might be Chris Resop, who could emerge as one of the National League's better setup men this year.
You'll notice I didn't put any of the Pirates' young hitters here. That's because, in the cases of Neil Walker and Jose Tabata, they were already surprisingly good last year, or because, in the cases of Andrew McCutchen and Pedro Alvarez, it's hard to believe they'd take anyone by surprise even if they broke out in a big way.
181 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
when does pitch 45 typically occur?
Just a basic math estimate would be somewhere in the 4th or 5th inning. Is that about right? If so, it could be zach duke second-time-thru-the-order syndrome. Duke often seemed to get rocked either right in the first (on the nights he had nothing) or in the 4th, after the opposition lineup had seen him once.
Or, with macdonald, is it maybe a case of not having the physique to last deep into a game with his A stuff?
Yes, 4th/5th inning. You can see his splits by inning here:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=mcdonja03&year=2010&t=p
It may be too small a sample from which to draw conclusions either way. But I think the decline in stuff has to have played a role.
by Charlie Wilmoth on Feb 15, 2011 6:40 AM EST up reply actions
I was coming here
to say the same thing. 45 pitches usually puts you right around the top of the lineup for the second time through. Could be that McDonald needs to vary his pitch sequences for everyone’s second time up. If he’s still throwing the same way to the same guys, of COURSE he’s going to get hammered.
I doubt this will happen
But Ronny Cedeno still has the tools to be in the top half of National League shortstops. His severe defensive problems at the end of last season had me ready to give up on him, but since he’s still in Pittsburgh I hope he can maintain his concentration for longer spells and realize his potential.
He hit 285/.320/.439 after the all-star break, so there’s at least a ray of hope that he can be a pleasant surprise.
Ronny is my pick
I think if he ups the consistency, he bat will play just fine.
by Wizard of Woz on Feb 15, 2011 9:19 AM EST up reply actions
He does have the tools as bolton suggests...
problem is that everyone has been trying to “up” his consistency since he’s been in the league. My guess is Hurdle gets sick of his shit and he ends up on the bench after a month or two.
orrrrrrrrrrr, hurdle might be able to push cedeno to reach some consistancy
more than likely, youre still going to be looking at a SS with an OBP hovering around 300
True, he’s never going to have a good OBP, but he might be able to slug better than .400. A shortstop with a decent glove — once again, a big if — and some pop has value.
Nothing I have seen indicates that Cedeno can be an average shortstop
I have seen Ronny Cedeno in person and on television. While he has flashes the tools occasionally to be a good shortstop, he isn’t good enough to be a consistant average shortstop. He doesn’t have a good enough batting eye to hit and reach base enough to be an above average hitter and his glove is to inconsistant to be an average fielder and his leadership skills are non existant. Those are types of players who fill 90 loss teams and wash out of baseball by 2013.
I say we should turn the job over to Wimberly, Rule-V Rodriguez or Cireaco. I think an amalgam of those three would get us Cedeno’s production and we see a diamond in the rough.
I don't like Cedeno
But none of your options would be anything other than the worst shortstop in baseball.
Cedeno is much better offensively and defensively than any of them.
Defensively...
yeah probably. Offensively, pretty hard to be worse than Cedeno was. Ciriaco would probably be worse. IIRC Wimberly has a knack for getting on base so he may be able to maintain a decent OBP. Rodriquez, I don’t know what to make of him but I think he has some potential on offense. Anwyay, I agree that none of the options are likely to set the world on fire but I don’t know that Cedeno is “much” better offensively.
IIRC Wimberly has a knack for getting on base so he may be able to maintain a decent OBP.
2011 ZiPS, Wimberly (in Oakland): .245/.310/.295, 65 OPS+
rajai davis had greap OBP in the minors, now below average in the majors
just thought like throwing that out there
A good observation.
In general, high-OBP low-SLG guys in the minors lose a disproportionate amount of that OBP when promoted to the majors, since there’s no downside to just grooving strikes right down the pipe against them.
Last year
Among SS with 450+ ABs there were 5 SS worse then Cedeno’s according to fWAR
Aybar, Bartlett, Escobar, Betancourt and Izturis
With just hitting in mind, there were 6 with lower wOBA
Cabrera, Aybar, Hariston, Escobar, Ryan and Izturis
Cedeno is not the worst in baseball. It is not difficult to imagine that and of those replacements would be worse
by Wizard of Woz on Feb 16, 2011 3:57 PM EST up reply actions
Rodriguez ...
he’s probably the only guy who would catch Cedeno offensively.
But there are serious doubts whether he can play the position.
Most likely, he could spot start there. But you wouldn’t want him as a day-to-day guy.
I say we should turn the job over to Wimberly…
Wimberly isn’t a shortstop. He’s a guy who can fill in at shortstop on an occasional basis, which is a very different thing.
Honestly, a lot of people seem to be overestimating Wimberly’s offensive value, too. He’s been right around a .700 OPS in AAA the last two years – not exactly overwhelming stuff. He’s less than a year younger than Cedeno, too, so it’s not like there’s some huge untapped well of potential there.
Wimberly ...
looks like something between an organization guy and a utility guy.
He may get a chance to stick with the Pirates. But I really doubt it.
He’s older. He doesn’t have any power. He’s a singles hitter who can play multiple positions. That’s nothing somewhere real valuable on a losing team.
I also don’t see much upside as well.
I like him on a personal level...
…because he’s a fun guy. He’s enthusiastic and high-energy, and he runs like the wind and can play a bunch of positions. But none of that makes him a viable MLB starter.
Ronny Cedeno was far from the Pirates biggest problems last year....
While he is by no means an above-average SS (both off/def), if consistent – which, granted, is a big if – he will end up being a 1-2 WAR for the season, with surprising stretches of above-average play.
In other words, if our other positions reach their ceilings or play reasonalby close to their ability, we will be fine with Cedeno as our SS. I’m more worried about the C position, as I was not impressed with Snyder and will look to see him make bigger strides this season. As well as obviously our pitching staff, that, while improved, still isn’t ready for contention and won’t be until a guy like Maholm is a 4/5 starter, rather than a #2.
by CabreraKilledMyChildhood on Feb 15, 2011 10:53 AM EST up reply actions
Chris snyder
chris had a tough year and he said it himself in a interview yesterday, he ws basically on a team who didnt want him and was trying to trade him and was traded midseason. This year he’ll be comfortable and he’ll be working with the pitchers from spring training. the dudes average is never going to be great, .220-.230 but his work with pitchers and his defense is going to make this team better. doumit did not know how to work with pitchers. Snyder is smarter and a better game planner and will work with the staff and improve the pitchers confidence. also he can hit close to 20 bombs witch is nice to have in the 7th or 8th spot.
age of last winning season: 5
also he can hit close to 20 bombs witch is nice to have in the 7th or 8th spot
Snyder seems like a better defender, which is nice, but there’s a very real and quantifiable offensive cost to be paid by going with him instead of Doumit: about 15 points of OPS+. That needs to be kept in mind.
Let me quibble over the verb
Change “seems” to “is.”
OPS
does snyders extra home runs (maybe 5 or 6 more then doumit) make up for his lower OPS when compared to doumit?
age of last winning season: 5
Doubt it...
go to Fangraphs and compare the wOBA’s. I believe Doumit’s is significantly better than Snyder’s.
Nope.
They’re already included.
Snyder’s HR rate is hardly ahead of Doumit’s, anyway. I looked at this earlier today, and IIRC Snyder hits a HR about every 30 PA, and Doumit hits one about every 32 (per career rates). Over a full season’s starts, that’s a difference of a little over 1 HR. Snyder’s single season totals are mostly just higher because he’s been less injury-prone.
interesting
So from what i gather doumit is more valuable offensivley…..
i think snyder is a “smarter” player behind the plate then doumit he seems to gameplan better and work with the pitchers better. And its no question his defense is better…. Does snyders superior defense make him a better all around player then doumit as a catcher or does it break them even?
age of last winning season: 5
It kind of depends...
…on whether or not you think that Doumit’s defensive game will bounce back in 2011, and if so, how much. Also on whether you think that Snyder’s late-season slump is indicative of a larger problem (I don’t, but I’ve seen the issue raised a few times, and it’s not out of the question).
Having two starting-caliber guys on hand for a change is kind of nice, actually. Given the medical issues with both players, I’m sure we’ll need both of them this year (as long as they don’t force a Doumit trade purely for the sake of trading him).
If Doumit hits and is healthy ...
he could easily be starting in RF.
It’s not like Jones is an elite player.
Vlad/Doumit
You and Smizik are again on the same page.
It leads to the next question
Are you becoming more of a Smizik thinker?
Or is he becoming more of a Vlad thinker?
JMac...
pitched 63 innings in 12 starts at AAA last season before his recall and trade…so he wasn’t making it past the 5th inning terribly often in the minors either.
Overbay and Doumit. Possibly Lincoln and Morris.
by Adam Reynolds on Feb 15, 2011 9:17 AM EST via mobile reply actions
Doumit saw what John Buck earned this offseason, and he could pull the same next year in the best-case scenario. Its a contract year, he should be hungry. If Tony Sanchez progresses, we don’t need to take the risk past 2011, but someone else will if the one good year happens. He has to hit like he did the beginning and end. The middle of the season went poorly.
Overbay is a park play. He fits the NL Central where the Cubs, Brewers, and Reds have pitching that he matches up well against.
by Adam Reynolds on Feb 15, 2011 11:21 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Adam
I’m just intrigued by the statement: “Overbay is a park play. He fits the NL Central where the Cubs, Brewers, and Reds have pitching that he matches up well against.”
How did you determine that?
Sorry, I can’t find the park factors for LH/RH and power/contact.
As far as pitching, here are the lefties Toronto faced multiple times (up to 4):
Pettite, Sabathia, Lester, Price, Matusz, Danks, Gio Gonzalez. 1 each of Liriano, Buehrle, CJ Wilson, Braden, Brett Anderson.
Our division has: Wandy Rodriguez, Jaime Garcia, and maybe Travis Wood.
Outside the division, there’s Hamels, Lee, Bumgarner, Sanchez, Kershaw, and De La Rosa as far as tough LH to struggle against. We face the Phillies rarely, and probably same for the NL West teams.
So I think he got bit against a lot of very lefties in the AL conference, and I’m not sure we have that in the NL. To me, that points to good years for Overbay and Doumit as long as they don’t fall on their face.
by Adam Reynolds on Feb 15, 2011 1:41 PM EST up reply actions
I was just picking tough lefties. there’s also Zito, Duke, Wolf, etc.
by Adam Reynolds on Feb 15, 2011 1:46 PM EST up reply actions
Doumit's a good call..
I’m not convinced Snyder will lock down regular duty. I think Ryan will have an opportunity.
I'm not convinced...
…that Snyder’s spine will let him make it through a whole season as a primary catcher.
I'm also not convinced ...
that Doumit won’t end up on the DL season after hurting himself playing a game of Monopoly.
You can easily
throw out your back or hit your elbow on the table really hard while celebrating a free parking hit.
Well, yeah.
Which is why I was happy when we added Snyder, and why I think it’s dumb to try and dump Doumit for pennies on the dollar.
i totally agree
i think we should absolutely hold on to Doumit, unless he absolutely crushes the ball out of the gate. We have the salary space, certainly!
The problem
I think is that Doumit is in the final year of the contract.
The Bucs aren’t picking up the option. They are not offering arbitration.
As a result, pennies on the dollar may be the best result.
As a result, pennies on the dollar may be the best result.
A better result than keeping him and using him in ~80 games, instead of Jaramillo? Because I’d count that as a pretty substantial benefit.
Depends on whether he establishes value for himself
If he does during ST and early season someone needs a catcher, deal him.
It all depends on what NH is being offered.
But I still think they’ll swallow big $s.
But I still think they’ll swallow big $s.
If they need to “swallow big $” in order to move him, then they should just keep him, because the value of his performance as part-time starter and insurance policy for Snyder is greater than whatever value would accrue from a marginal prospect acquired in return.
Then he'll be on the roster all year
And I don’t really care.
The Pirates have been trying to peddle him for six months now.
Zero interest reported despite the team’s willingness to swallow millions.
If NH does that...
it will be another transaction I’ll add to the “what was he thinking?” list. As Vlad said, Doumit has value to the Pirates. If they can’t get value back no need to move him. It would be nothing but a salary dump. Wow, first time I used that phrase in a non-sarcastic way when talking about Huntington.
agreed
depending on the prospect(s) coming back, I could see eating some money, but otherwise, I’d just rather hold on to him
I will say Brad Lincoln...
he pitches with a chip on his shoulder and he is kind of an afterthought right now.
hopefully he doesn't try to hard though
because he may try to overthrow and that won’t help anyone.
Players who should be in the Hall of Fame: Pat TIllman, Dwight White, Donnie Shell, L.C. Greenwood, Ray Guy, Steve Tasker, Jack Butler, Greg Llyod, Andy Russel, Cris Carter, Kevin Greene, Curtis Martin, Willie Roaf, Andre Reed and Jerry Kramer
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." Martin Luther King Jr.
Canal Street Chronicles resident Steelers Fan
by WVPiratesfan on Feb 15, 2011 11:33 AM EST up reply actions
It won't happen....
and it probably shouldn’t happen for a lot of reasons, but part of me is really itching for Owens to break camp with the team. I’m starting to buy the hype on him.
I’ll also throw out a vote for Brad Lincoln. It sounds pretty strongly like he’ll be starting out at AAA, but my gut is that he’s going to dominate and be up in May. As for then? Obviously it’d be awesome if he turned out pitching as a starter like he did in Indy and Altoona the last couple years (before the callup), but as a power righty with only an iffy third pitch, I wonder if he wouldn’t be best suited to the bullpen, where I could see him dominating right away.
Redeemed.
Charlie...
Some source has JMac’s numbers wrong…Baseball-Reference.com has his splits…
Pitch 1-25… .562 OPS…70 AB
Pitch 26-50… .679 OPS…69 AB
Pitch 51-75… .627 OPS…67 AB
Pitch 76-100 1.026 OPS…53 AB
Pitch 101+ .900 OPS…10 AB
you have the big OPS in pitches 45-60 from ESPN. Their breakdowns…
Pitch 1-15… .562 OPS…70 AB
Pitch 16-30… .679 OPS…69 AB
Pitch 31-45…627 OPS…67 AB
Pitch 46-60… 1.026 OPS…53 AB
Pitch 61-75… .900 OPS…10 AB with no games more than 75 pitches.
Problem with the ESPN numbers…JMac threw AT LEAST 80 pitches in EVERY start with the Pirates.
So…actually…it appears the fall-off is after 75 pitches…which isn’t nearly as much of an issue…and a lot closer to where it occurs with many pitchers.
Using the B-R splits, Ohlendorf looks worse in this regard. He was pasted in the 51-75 pitch range last season.
by Adam Reynolds on Feb 15, 2011 9:42 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Glad to hear
If you’re falling off after 45 pitches, then you’re a long reliever, not a starter. 75 pitches is more acceptable and something to build off of.
That makes a lot more sense.
Weird mistake from ESPN there.
http://bleedblackandgold.com/
by Say Hey Johnny Ray on Feb 15, 2011 10:08 AM EST up reply actions
Not surprising that the original information was erroneous.....
As I stated last year, the perception that J-Mac fell off a cliff, to use some people’s words, was always blown out of proportion, in my eyes.
People also have to realize the cat is 26-years old, hadn’t pitched a 200-plus inning year in the Majors before, was worked mainly out of the pen for the Dodgers in years prior, and, was only pitching 5-6 innings in Triple-A before coming over to the Bucs.
Therefore, his first 75 pitches or so was normal to him and he was stretched out for that duration accordingly. If anything, a drop-off is to be expected rather than cause for concern.
And, finally, the same people were saying that he was losing several mph off of his heater last year…..until they were proven wrong, just as this time, when the actual Pitch F/X was studied.
Much ado about nothing….
by CabreraKilledMyChildhood on Feb 15, 2011 10:45 AM EST up reply actions
The mcdonald getting pulled too early stuff its silly BS. He needs to build arm strength after being a reliever, and his era was 3.52, not 5.80 or something. Plus his innings were extended die to infamous Milledge misplays at times, not exclusively his pitching. If the guy can’t catch popups, not much the pitcher can do there. His performance going deep into games was no worse than the rest of the staff, save Maholm. Singling out Mc Donald is bizarre.
by Adam Reynolds on Feb 15, 2011 4:29 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Agree with you on the McDonald stretching out his arm comment...
that kind of transition is to be expected for a pitcher his age.
There was also the infamous Doumit misplay in San Diego. But I recall several starts where the damage might have been limited if Russell had pulled McDonald a couple batters earlier.
Examples:
-August 27 against the Brewers. That’s a Milledge special, but in the game thread, people were complaining about Russell not pulling McDonald even before that happened, as he was plainly pretty shaky.
-August 11 against the Padres. That was the Doumit game, but Russell left McDonald in to give up four hits in the fifth even though he’d been shaky the previous inning. Again, people were talking about this in the game thread.
-August 21 against the Mets. I don’t remember this game, so it might be debatable, but he got teed up for a three-run homer in the fifth inning after obviously having issues in the fourth.
That’s not a large number of games, but McDonald didn’t start that many for the Bucs and struggled in even fewer of them.
Obviously, yes, McDonald needs to learn to pitch six-plus innings, but last year it looked like there were days when he was more than capable of that and days when he wasn’t, and in at least a couple of cases there were huge, honking warning signs that bad things were going to continue to happen, and Russell ignored them. And yes, better defense definitely would have helped, but it isn’t like the defensive flubs were the only plays that went wrong in those outings.
by Charlie Wilmoth on Feb 15, 2011 5:15 PM EST up reply actions
(“Several of” should probably be “at least a couple of”)
by Charlie Wilmoth on Feb 15, 2011 5:15 PM EST up reply actions
in at least a couple of cases there were huge, honking warning signs that bad things were going to continue to happen, and Russell ignored them
Young pitchers need to learn how to pitch out of jams. Work from the stretch with runners on, etc. And when they’re learning on the job, things sometimes go bad. That’s just how it works.
Noted. Thanks. That’s weird. I wondered why ESPN didn’t have any data after 75 pitches.
by Charlie Wilmoth on Feb 15, 2011 3:33 PM EST up reply actions
Surprises
I think Tabata surprises people with modest pop this year. He showed he could hit for average last year.
I think JH becomes an elite closer.
I think Brad Lincoln wins the #5 job and has a decent year.
I think JH becomes an elite closer.
May it be so!
I think Brad Lincoln wins the #5 job and has a decent year.
I hope Charlie Morton wins the #5 job and has a good year, and Brad Lincoln dominates in AAA, comes up in June/July when Maholm is traded, and has a decent year.
by BurgherKing on Feb 15, 2011 10:25 AM EST up reply actions
"...it's hard to believe they'd take anyone by surprise even if they broke out in a big way."
Maybe Harold Reynolds.
Well played....
Harold Reynolds, along with nearly every other ‘analyst’ on the MLB network do a disservice to the word analysis.
It’s as if players don’t appear on their radar until a) they make the all-star team or b) they play on a big-market team. Forget about Minor League players, save the Strausburg types – it’s as if the minors don’t exist to many of them.
by CabreraKilledMyChildhood on Feb 15, 2011 10:48 AM EST up reply actions
MLB network is terrible...
I watched a show last week where the reviewed the PECOTA projections of three players and it was hillarious. Mitch Williams and Reynolds were laughing like a couple of school girls because they thought the projection system was so ridiculous (of course they made no attempt at all to understand it). It’s funny to me how players assume they can just will themselves into performing. For instance, Pujols is going to have a record setting year, according to those two “analysts,” because he is going to be a free agent so he’ll want to prove he’s the best. Interesting, apparently Albert doesn’t want to be the best when it’s not a contract year.
MLB Network
I watch it.
But it’s really not a serious show. It’s the “Cops” of MLB coverage.
Silly. Not very deep. But you watch it anyhow.
Yeah, but without the catchy theme song.
It’s as if the producer are trying to get serious but they have the wrong analysts for that. They keep trying to introduce more and more advance stats but their staff is all former major leaguers who just laugh at them. My favorite is when they do trade proposals. Billy Ripken listed three teams he thought were good fits for Michael Young; that was entertainment at it’s best!!! Oh and by the way if this were the only channel you watched you would think Michael Young was as good as Pujols. They love the guy.
The problem is that people do understand the projection systems and they are bad. They’re a half decent tool for putting together a fantasy team. By their own judgement, they call themselves “excellent” for hitting about 70 percent of a flexible target.
Saying that Pujols will have extra motivation isn’t the same as saying he doesn’t want to be the best when its not a contract year.
Yes it is.
Saying that Pujols will have extra motivation isn’t the same as saying he doesn’t want to be the best when its not a contract year.
If he is doing the best he can every year how will a contract year be any different? I agree with you on projection systems. I wasn’t implying that they are. What I found amusing was the way those guys immediately attacked something that appeared to challenge their way of looking at things. Anything that appears to even be mildly SABER those guys attack it before even attempting to understand it. As “analysts” they should make an attempt to try and understand advanced stats. At least that way when they disagree with it they sound more informed and thus the more convincing their argument would be.
Contract year
Not that players exactly “try harder” but contract years do add for extra motivation, although i see it more in the NHL then any other league. And i think some players play just for the money and then get a big contract and fall on there asses no scientific proof though
age of last winning season: 5
The problem is that people do understand the projection systems and they are bad.
Which still puts them considerably ahead of the main alternative being offered in that broadcast, i.e. Mitch Williams’s wild-ass guess.
Unless you’d care to take the Pepsi Challenge, Pete? Predict BA/OBP/SLG lines for everybody we’ve got in camp, and then at the end of the year we can see who came closest, you or ZiPS?
At least you recognize that they are bad.
Only in the sense that no system involving predictions of individual humans’ behavior is ever going to be foolproof.
I take it from your lack of enthusiasm about the challenge that you’re willing to stipulate that ZiPS is better at forecasting player perfomance than you are?
What exactly is your expectation of success rate?
Check out this article about cracking the lottery
I got it from inside the book. Anyway, he figured out a way tp correctly discern a winning lottery ticket. How much success would he need to be successful? I think a 70% success rate is pretty good.
by Wizard of Woz on Feb 15, 2011 3:25 PM EST up reply actions
Well, yeah, since they're the ones who were trying to make the determination.
If someone else were to assess them, we’d be using those people’s definition of success instead.
Jones
I’m going to say Garrett Jones is the biggest surprise. He was really terrible against lefties last year and had no business playing with one on the mound. If you simply eliminate his lefty numbers, he makes a big improvement.
If you give him the benefit of the doubt that he was probably taking some of those against-lefty at bats into his against-righty at bats, I think his OPS for 2011 is considerably over 800. That would be a nice improvement.
if he can mash right handers
I do think he’ll have trade value. Not top prospects, but solid trade value.
by BurgherKing on Feb 15, 2011 10:26 AM EST up reply actions
yes, well, that too
I m hoping Lambo will force him out in 2012, at which point we can get something back for him, if he mashes.
by BurgherKing on Feb 15, 2011 11:30 AM EST up reply actions
When I moved to Pittsburgh
He was mashing the ball and was my son Jacobs favorite Pirate but 2010 was bad.
It was mentioned how his stance changed over the year and while I did not notice it myself until reading it, he really did not stride like he had the year I moved here. He stuck up his foot and put it down almost on the plate. He looked lost and clumsy swinging last year.
He is my guess on surprise of 2011.
by jackiegleason on Feb 15, 2011 10:47 AM EST up reply actions
Jones had...
about three different batting styles throughout the year that I noticed. He was all over the place.
i actually got pissed at Jones...
after each time that he hit a dribbler to 2B, which was usually twice a game, he would cuss at himself, put his head down, and THEN run to first… from july to september, thats what i saw from him. run it out first, THEN cuss yourself, son.
Alvarez and Tabata
Combine for 60 HRS, the lumber company back in business.
Alvarez and McCutchen
It’s gonna happen
by Pensburgh Pirates on Feb 15, 2011 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
50 combined would be optimistic
but entirely possible.
I think the projected mean HR output between those two would be 42-45 and it’s not a stretch to think McCutchen could add 4-5 on his total last year or Alvarez could go for 30+.
I was thinking sometime in the next 2 years
Although they’re not as reliable a source as some others … ESPN is predicting 28/17 this year. I think 36/24 is also realistic, next year. Or a year after that?
by Pensburgh Pirates on Feb 20, 2011 2:52 PM EST up reply actions
I know Charlie mentioned Walker as a surprise last year, but I think Walker could take some pretty nice strides this year with his defense. Anyone can feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, but last year was Walker’s first as a second baseman, and I thought he showed a decent amount of potential in spite of his struggles overall. If he can improve at defense while continuing to be solid offensively, I would be pleasantly surprised.
I also have similar thoughts about McCutchen—if he can improve his defense, I think he has a good chance at becoming the best CF in baseball. Now, I don’t think being the best amongst his peers is essential to his development, but McCutchen improving at defense would really help the Pirates out.
As for underachieving players, I would have to go with Morton. I really hope he gets it together—when he’s on, he’s a treat to watch, and he could really help the pitching staff if he plays well this season.
by Kidspud on Feb 15, 2011 11:09 AM EST via mobile reply actions
There's a certain amount of selection bias...
…involved in those splits-by-pitch-count, since you’re more likely to pull a pitcher right after he gives up some runs. He might not have actually been tired in the 6th, but he won’t get the chance to pitch the 7th or 8th and show it, so you’ll never know.
What about Josh Rodriguez?
I realize he’s a backup at this point, but if/when Ronny falters that may be all JRod needs to tear into ‘11. I’m not really sure what kind of D he has, but if he can hit .300 he’ll be quite a surprise, and a daft Rule 5 grab.
by Pensburgh Pirates on Feb 15, 2011 12:20 PM EST reply actions
Matt Diaz
Im going to say he bats over .330 or above since he will see a lot of left handed pitchers
Rudy Owens
I’ve been espousing his prowess all over prospect sites the past few weeks. He will bring the reckoning this year.
I’ve been using Travis Wood’s 2010 statline as a comparison. I think Owens is a better pitcher than Wood, but Wood’s statline was way over his ability anyway, so I think it works. I’d actually prefer for Owens to stay down in AAA til June because I think he’ll be a mainstay for the next 5+ years and I’d rather limit his service time in a year we’ll still suck to make him cheaper in a year we can compete.
Wood’s 2010: 102 IP, 86 K, 3.51 ERA, 1.08 WHIP (the WHIP is the biggest stretch, based on a .259 BABIP, but Owens doesn’t walk anyone, so 1.20 is realistic).
I also like Lincoln if he can back up his 8.04 K/9 rate from AAA last year. That’s rare for Pirates prospects and would be welcome in the Burgh if he could prove it’s real through June.
JOSH FIELDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sleeper pick of the decade!
Any Garrett Atkins love?
It was ages ago, yes, and at Coors Field, yes….. but there’s always a little optimism when you have a guy that put up a .965 OPS and is still a reasonable age of 31..
A career .800 OPS isn’t too bad.
Maybe Atkins will force his way into the lineup and into a deadline trade?
Yep.
There’s a well-documented “Coors field hangover” effect from the pre-humidor period that suppressed the road numbers of Colorado hitters for the first few days of a road trip. As such, a pure road line will tend to underestimate the abilities of Colorado hitters of that era. Not to mention the fact that the weighted schedule gave Colorado hitters a disproportionate number of divisional games in Petco, the worst place to hit in MLB. And of course, you’ve also got the normal variation within any given hitter’s home/road splits to contend with.
Oh, and also...
…the general tendency of hitters to put up better-than-expected numbers at home and worse-than-expected numbers on the road, regardless of home park. IIRC, it’s about 30 points of OPS in the modern context.
Not quite, Vlad
Using the benchmark of 30 points of OPS:
here are Atkins’ career home-road splits:
Home OPS: .875
Road OPS: .728
I didn’t pull out his 2010 statistics with Baltimore. But they actually weaken the argument:
Home OPS last year: .518
Road OPS last year: .602
Not quite, Vlad
Not quite what? You accounted for one out of about five factors in the non-exhaustive list I provided.
If a guy’s home numbers are higher than his road numbers even after accounting for park effects (on both the home and road halves) and the 30-point global split, then that still doesn’t mean anything in and of itself because 50% of all hitters are going to have their home/road splits tilted in that direction purely through random variance. Which is why you can’t use home/road splits that way. It doesn’t work. It will consistently give you wrong, misleading results.
Seriously, Vlad
This is one where you should say I forgot to check when Atkins played there before hypothesizing a Coors Field effect.
1. Are you serious about the weighted schedule having such a dramatic effect on his statistics?
But regardless, it’s not the cause. He has a line of .293, .355 and .775.
2. The only other factor I see is normal variation in home-road splits.
I don’t see the data supporting it. But if you want to believe it, fine.
I think you are wrong. I think you know you are wrong. Come on, admit it.
This is one where you should say I forgot to check when Atkins played there before hypothesizing a Coors Field effect.
As it happens, I did, but that doesn’t change the validity of the other objections I raised.
Are you serious about the weighted schedule having such a dramatic effect on his statistics?
It’s a complicating factor that could provide a swing of double-digit points of OPS. Which, if you’re trying the “double his road numbers and that’s his true talent” thing that angus suggested, is enough to make a noticeable difference in your results.
The only other factor I see is normal variation in home-road splits.
I don’t see the data supporting it. But if you want to believe it, fine.
H/R splits, Atkins, by year:
2005: .903/.649
2006: .999/.993
In what possible world is that NOT at least partially an example of normal variation? And in a number that varies that widely from year-to-year, what’s your confidence interval on four years’ worth of numbers?
I think you know you are wrong.
I think that you’re wrong about thinking that I know that I’m wrong. Because I don’t, and I’m not. If you want an accurate assessment of the hiting ability of a player in an extreme environment, you can’t just look at his road stats.
I hate having to rehash this kind of crap over and over and over, as with the “RHBs regress toward the same platoon ratio” thing or the “our shitty defense makes pitchers look much worse than they are, and has for years” thing. But if I don’t, then guys reading this thread are going to use bad methods and end up out in the weeds when they try to start doing analyses.
Another example:
Over Atkins’s career, the OPS split between his May (.649) and June (.873) numbers is even bigger than the split between his road (.728) and home (.875) numbers. Is the May/June split also based in skill, rather than random variance?
Again ...
that’s not solid research methodology. You are breaking up his career into months, years and then saying, “See, there is normal variation.”
Of course there is. That’s why I used his entire data in my post.
Again … that’s not solid research methodology. You are breaking up his career into months, years and then saying, "See, there is normal variation."
I’m not selecting the endpoints at all – games happened in the month in which they happened. The distribution is essentially random. I didn’t even pick the biggest possible gap between months – that’d be May and September/October.
I’m just pointing it out as an example of the kind of split that can arise through pure randomness for even a hitter with as large a career sample as Atkins’s.
Want another one? Look at his career first half/second half splits: .773 OPS pre-ASB, .831 post-ASB. That’s a gap of almost sixty points, due to nothing at all.
Did Coors field inflate his numbers? Sure, it probably did. Did it inflate them to the extent that his home/road split suggests? That’s highly doubtful.
Using those kind of endpoints ...
here’s why statisticians get real nervous when you do it.
A cancer study came out a few years ago that showed if your last name began with a certain letter, you were more likely to survive.
Obviously, I don’t know a serious statistician who says it’s anything other than normal variance.
But when you start choosing months or even years—when you have a bigger dataset—it’s cherry picking data to fit your hypothesis.
Let me put it this way: I’m willing to put up money that if you control for normal variation in home-road splits that it still would be statistically significant.
Any interest in a small wager? If I’m going to do the analysis, I need to make it worth my time.
But when you start choosing months or even years—when you have a bigger dataset—it’s cherry picking data to fit your hypothesis.
But I wasn’t advancing a hypothesis that he underwent some miraculous transformation between May 31 and June 1. I was just pointing out that substantial variance exists. Which, duh.
Let me put it this way: I’m willing to put up money that if you control for normal variation in home-road splits that it still would be statistically significant.
Oh, sure. Part of the split is a legit reflection of ballpark effects.
I’m just saying that you can’t get any significant knowledge about Atkins as a neutral-park hitter by looking at his road splits that you couldn’t get from looking at his raw line with component park factors for his home park.
Vlad
First, I am absolutely convinced you are wrong and am giving you a hard time. Good natured, though.
Here is why I disagree with your Petco hypothesis. Atkins has a career line of .293, .355 and .775 at Petco. That’s really not going to have much of a statistical effect. In fact, his Petco numbers are better than his road numbers overall and only mildly below his home numbers.
Also, you know the reason why you don’t use part of the data (2005 and 2006) when you can use all the data.
You can have “normal variation” in a small sample. But you have less “normal variation” in a larger sample (his entire career).
Of course, you can find more “variation” when you cut the sample. You demonstrated that. But it is statistically meaningless.
When you look at his entire career,it’s hard to attribute the ops differences to normal variation.
In fact, I don’t know a statistician who would do so.
FYI: I did not do confidence intervals. I don’t have SPSS on my laptop anymore. But I’m very confident that his career differences are not due to normal variation.
Finally, you are misstating my argument. I never, ever have said that when a guy plays in an extreme environment look at his road numbers.
You know that. I said when you look over his entire career it’s not due to:
1. Coors Field effect
2. Petco Park (look at the numbers)
3. Normal variation (look at the numbers)
Your last two paragraphs are straw man arguments.
Atkins has a career line of .293, .355 and .775 at Petco. That’s really not going to have much of a statistical effect.
Argh!
You’re making the same error in micro-analysis here that you were making in macro-analysis earlier: comparing his performance in those games to his larger performance and assuming that the gap between the two is reflective of the benefit/harm apportioned by the park environment. You can’t do this. It will get you into all kinds of trouble, sooner or later.
In reality, Atkins probably did have his line pushed down in the games at Petco – it just happened to have been pushed up even more by a better-than-expected performance in those few games than it was pushed down by the park effects.
Also, you know the reason why you don’t use part of the data (2005 and 2006) when you can use all the data.
I’m not “using part of the data”. I’m pointing out that Atkins had a 300-point swing in his road OPS from one year to another, and that in general the higher a stat’s year-to-year volatility, the less it reflects an actual skill and the more it reflects external factors (such as random variance).
I never, ever have said that when a guy plays in an extreme environment look at his road numbers.
Then why are you arguing with me? That’s exactly what angus was doing when I raised my objection. Didn’t you read the entire conversational thread? If you wanted to change topics, rather than engaging in the one in which we were engaged when you dropped in, you should have bloody well said so.
Your last two paragraphs are straw man arguments.
No, they aren’t. They’re the entire reason that I’m arguing about this in the first place. By fighting me on this, you’re actively lowering the level of knowledge of everybody who reads the thread.
Actually no, Vlad
I am not making a micro-analysis mistake. Sorry. I am not pulling out his Petco numbers to prove anything. I presented them to disprove a Vlad hypothesis.
The Vlad hypothesis: Petco pulled down his numbers and he played extra games there.
The numbers show otherwise. Petco did not drag down his road OPS at all.
I’d welcome a counter argument to how Petco hurt his career road OPS. Seriously, make a sound statistical argument using his entire career data. You can’t.
Finally, I presented data to show random variance is no better an explanation than the Coors’ effect for the difference in road splits. Again, I’ll be more than happy to make a friendly wager that I’m right statistically.
I’ll respectfully disagree that I’m lowering the level of knowledge of everybody who reads the thread. Let’s have a statistician look at both of our work.
I’m pretty confident that he’ll find my work on more solid ground.
The numbers show otherwise. Petco did not drag down his road OPS at all.
Yes it did. If the balls that he hit at Petco over his career were good for a .775 OPS there, they would likely have been good for a higher OPS in a neutral park (.800 or .850 or whatever, depending on park and league environments at the time). You are not guaranteed an equal quality of hitter’s results in each ballpark environment, so you can’t take outcomes and compare them to expected outcomes from road line and call it a day. Your analysis of the situation is predicated on the assumption that his performance in Petco was of the same quality as his average career road performance, but you haven’t taken any steps to demonstrate this (and I don’t see how that you could, unless you go down to the game-by-game level and start counting G/L/F rates).
Finally, I presented data to show random variance is no better an explanation than the Coors’ effect for the difference in road splits.
By saying that, you are ipso facto conceding that you can’t use pure road numbers as a model of neutral park performance, which is the point that I was making when you started this kerfluffle. So I’m not sure why you’re fighting me on it.
Vlad--You get the last word
First, you made three hypotheses for the difference in his home and road OPS numbers.
1. Coors effect. You’ve admitted that that theory was wrong.
2. Petco effect. Wrong. His OPS at Petco is higher than his road OPS. Petco hardly is dragging down his numbers.
3. Random variation. I don’t know a statistician who would take your argument seriously. It’s pretty easy—even for a social scientist as I am—to eyeball datasets. I can tell that it’s more than random variation even after you control for the expected home versus road OPS.
And just a few quick responses to your post:
1. Petco is harder on left-handed batters than right-handed batters.
2. You have no way of knowing what he would have done at a neutral park. You are assuming because most hitters are hurt by Petco that he was. That’s a dangerous assumption, I believe.
3. I never said that you could use pure road numbers as a model of neutral park performance. I posted that earlier. Instead, I said that “random variance” alone is not a viable hypothesis. That Atkins, even after controlling for home-road splits, would still have statistically different splits.
Finally, I’m just giving you a hard time. Don’t take it personally. You rarely make a mistake like you did with suggesting it was due to Coors Field.
Anyhow, I enjoyed the debate as always. You get the last word.
I never said that you could use pure road numbers as a model of neutral park performance.
Which is fine, I guess, but that’s what we were talking about when you jumped in. As such, I assumed that that was what you found disagreeable.
You are assuming because most hitters are hurt by Petco that he was. That’s a dangerous assumption, I believe.
Pretty much every dimension of Petco is more unfavorable to hitters than the average park. Deeper fences, more foul territory… even the batter’s eye doesn’t get good reviews from hitters. I guess it’s theoretically possible that there might be a hitter who would be helped by Petco compared to an average park, but I can’t imagine an actual working example.
You rarely make a mistake like you did with suggesting it was due to Coors Field.
I try my best.
The “Coors hangover” is an interesting historical data artifact. I’m almost sorry to see it go.
Oops
I hit post before I typed one last item.
Vlad, remember when you took your stats courses. I had five of them in graduate school.
You learned about the individual fallacy. Specifically, it is statistically improper to take macro-level data and apply it to an individual.
That’s exactly what you are doing by assuming by Petco deflated his statistics.
Remember when you learned the individual fallacy?
The classic example is that countries with protestants have a higher suicide rate than countries with Catholics.
The individual fallacy: One protestant individual has a higher fallacy rate.
It’s not statistically valid.
You learned about the individual fallacy. Specifically, it is statistically improper to take macro-level data and apply it to an individual.
I think it would be improper to assume that the park effects operating on the league-wide player population applied in exactly the same magnitudes for any individual player within the sample (including Atkins), but I don’t think it’s improper to note the mere existence of a suppressive force. If you drop a feather and a cannon ball off the top of a building, the different aerodynamic profiles will affect the time of each object’s fall, but both of them eventually reach the ground. Similarly, there’s no in-game circumstance in which more foul territory is going to improve a hitter’s performance. One guy may lose more outs on foul popups than another (as a function of FB rates and such), but the park is still impeding the offensive production of both players.
THIS
Right here, is where I got up to before becoming bored with the conversation.
by BlindSquirrel on Feb 16, 2011 8:07 PM EST up reply actions
Global home/road split was 42 points last year, BTW.
I went ahead and checked, just in the interest of accuracy.
.750 for MLB at home, .708 for MLB on the road. Link.
37 points in ’09, 39 points in ’08, 27 points in ’07, etc.
Yahoo says you are wrong
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/7145/splits;ylt=AmOEWx8ss96Xb2bN2T3Fl.FCLcF for 2010.
Here are the numbers I listed before.
I’m not sure why my numbers are so dramatically different than yours.
But they are.
No, it doesn't.
Those links in your post above go to Atkins-specific split pages. If you look at the link in my post, it’s to all-MLB splits, because we were talking about the magnitude of the generic home-field advantage. Since you apparently wanted to argue, I went ahead and looked up what the actual number was for recent seasons, rather than just relying on my memory of “about 30 points”.
Well ...
since the humidor was introduced in Colorado in 2002—three full years before Atkins had any significant at bats—I really doubt it affected him tmuch.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5386
defending the Atkins diet; it works very well for the first month...
after that first month, and well after your exercise routine is under way, i recommend abandoning it and going with a diet full of fibre and veggies. bring in carbs a little bit
quicker than atkins allots for them for that added energy burst you will need once your body feels depleted.
yeah, just as boring as metrics… i know, i know
Not to me...
I’m into eating healthy and eating organic foods so I like to talk about different diets and foods almost as much as metrics.
Didn't say I liked that I have to pay more...
just try to eat as healthy as possible. In fact, I feel like I’m doing my part by buying more organic products in the hope that increased sales will force mainstream markets to start carrying more organic products thusly driving the price down as they become more available…and hopefully purchased!
eh, a tomato is a tomato
there is no taste difference, there is no health difference. just a price difference… how do i know this?
by white angus on Feb 16, 2011 11:16 PM EST up reply actions
The episode they did on organic food was great.
by Wizard of Woz on Feb 17, 2011 9:27 AM EST up reply actions
Doubt it
Look at the past few years and his home-road splits.
He’s likely a pinch hitter if he makes the team (doubtful).
Look at the past few years and his home-road splits.
You shouldn’t use home/road splits that way.
You don’t need ‘em to make the case aganst Atkins, anyway. The fact that he’s a poor defender who put up a 61 OPS+ over the last two seasons (551 PA) is probably enough in and of itself.
Vlad
Look at my responses above. It is appropriate to look at home-road splits for Atkins.
The humidor certainly wasn’t a factor. It was introduced three years before he had any significant at bats in Colorado.
Also, his splits far exceed your 30 points of OPS standard.
Your point on the use of home-road splits is well taken. But you can look at them in the right context. And Atkins, I believe, is an appropriate case to look at.
Look at my responses above. It is appropriate to look at home-road splits for Atkins.
No, it isn’t – look at my response to your response. You don’t have any evidence that it isn’t just normal, random variance creating the disparity. There are lots of guys who put up splits that large or larger in neutral settings, purely as a result of variance.
Vlad
I’ll again respectfully disagree. The yahoo statistics—which seem to differ from your data set—show a much higher than expected difference.
There is zero way the yahoo data would be attributed to statistical noise or random variance.
Bowker surprrises
I think Bowker pulls a 1st year Garrett. I’m going with Doumit and the always forgotten but not forgone Steve Pearce.
Olsen
I think Olsen can do well in our park. He will take over the fifth spot after Morton can’t get it done. I hope I am wrong, but I am not impressed with Morton’s composure on the mound. I think he lacks many skills you can’t teach. This may not be his fault, since his stuff probably allowed him to dominate most of his career until he got to the majors. After watching Lincoln a few times last year, I am not convinced he has the stuff to be a Major League pitcher. I hope I am wrong. I was not impressed with his movement or inability to get out of the low 90’s. He doesn’t seem to have the control necessary to be good at the top level with his stuff. I hope I am wrong and we can keep Olsen in the pen, but I think he has a great spring and starts in the rotation. He then has a very solid year as a starter and suprises many. Just my opinion!
Another example of home/road splits and Colorado players:
Matt Holliday.
From 2004-2008, Holliday’s raw road OPS was .845. Not bad, but not a superstar-level performance, either. A person expecting that to be his true level of talent would not have bid on him as an elite FA.
From 2009-2010, i.e. the post-Coors portion of Holliday’s career, he’s put up a .915 OPS. 70 points of raw OPS higher than one would have expected from the generic road split. Even more than that if you adjust for the declining league-wide levels of offense (4.33 runs/game in 2010, 4.64 in 2004).
That’s why you can’t use home/road splits that way – you’ll get the wrong answer.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bucs Dugout
Related FanShots on Bucs Dugout
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
