After Jerry Dipoto was hired as the general manager of the Mariners late in the 2015 season, his early tenure with club became one of the most anticipated programs of the fall season. How would he remake one of the most disappointing teams in the major leagues? Would he tear it down, or would he attempt to reload on the fly and stay relevant in 2016? One thing is for certain: it didn’t take very long to find out.

The champagne was barely dry in the road locker room in Citi Field when Dipoto began his handiwork. Much like an accident scene on the highway, the Mariners’ 2015 season and roster was briefly cordoned off, the gruesome but necessary cleanup work performed, and the road re-opened as good as new. Now that the first 13-week installment of “The Jerry Dipoto Show” is in the books, let’s look back at the highs and lows, and try to make sense of what it all means for the near- to intermediate-term future of the Seattle Mariners.

Episode 1 – The Pilot
Traded SS Brad Miller, 1B Logan Morrison and RHP Danny Farquhar to Rays for RHP Nate Karns, OF Boog Powell, LHP C.J. Riefenhauser.

Dipoto hit the ground running, just a few days after the end of the World Series, with one of the two largest and perhaps most controversial deals of his first offseason. Outfield and starting depth were two prime Mariner concerns for 2016, and middle infield one of their few areas of depth. Exit Miller, who was supplanted late last season by Ketel Marte at shortstop, only to struggle in a multi-positional role afterward.

Read the rest of this entry »

The 2015-16 offseason has been heralded as a historic one in terms of the volume of starting pitching projected to be available on the free market. There’s star-level talent (some of it already signed), in the persons of Zack Greinke, David Price and Johnny Cueto, as well as a bevy of mid-range targets certain to pull down three or more guaranteed years at a minimum of $10-12 million per season. The first big deals are in the books, and the prices in terms of dollars and years have been higher than the already elevated expectations.

What is the track record of both huge and mid-sized investments in starting pitching, and what does it portend for the clubs who have already made a splash in this year’s market? Does landing the big fish really mean you’ve “won” the offseason? Or might the clubs that either didn’t buy a lottery ticket — or held on to their own, suddenly more valuable tickets — come out ahead?

Read the rest of this entry »

With the Winter Meetings officially in high gear, some early themes and trends of the 2015-16 offseason are establishing themselves. Foremost among them is the substantial investment of years and mega-millions in the legion of starting pitchers on the free agent market. Sure, the game is flush with cash — and, certainly, there is quite a bit of high- to middle-end pitching talent on the market — but the first few officially consummated deals are coming in above projections in terms of years and/or dollars.

Zack Greinke, $34.3 million per year through his age-37 season? David Price, $31 million per year through his age-36 season? Hisashi Iwakuma, who has exceeded 180 innings pitched exactly once in his four seasons in the U.S., and who also endured nagging shoulder injuries during his time in Japan, guaranteed $15 million per year through his age-37 season?

John Lackey and Jeff Samardzija came in a bit closer to year/dollar projections, but they both bring their share of risk to the table. Another half-dozen starters are likely to put pen to paper in the next few days, and it’s a pretty safe bet that most of the contracts aren’t likely to end well.

Mike Leake, who just completed his age-27 season, could be one of those. He’s been connected to a handful of clubs, and is often mentioned as a consolation prize for the clubs missing out on the Greinkes, Prices and Johnny Cuetos. Though his age and durability would appear to be significant plusses, he seemingly oozes league-averageness. How much, and for how long, are clubs going to be willing to guarantee a pitcher with a round career ERA- of 100?

Read the rest of this entry »

We are living in a golden age of youthful, historic talent, especially among position players. From the Cubs’ deep group led by Kris Bryant to Manny Machado in Baltimore, a critical mass of impact talent has entered the majors in recent seasons. Last week, we put the career of this group’s standard-bearer, Mike Trout, into some sort of historical perspective. This time around, let’s do the same with the guy who had an even better 2015, National League MVP Bryce Harper.

Mike Trout snuck up on a lot of people in the 2009 draft. His athleticism was unquestioned, but believe it or not, Trout’s bat was the one tool that wasn’t a slam dunk during his amateur career. He swung and missed an awful lot against relatively ordinary high school talent in New Jersey, and hadn’t built up the requisite high-end wooden bat tournament dominance that one might expect out of a very-top-of-the-draft guy. Therefore, he didn’t go at the very top of the draft; he went 25th overall to the Angels.

No such doubts existed regarding Harper. He was barely a teenager when he was bombing 500 foot drives, albeit with an aluminum bat, in a home run hitting contest at Tropicana Field. He was locked in as a Scott Boras client at a very early age, and his precocious nature can perhaps be best summed up thusly: he was the first overall pick in the 2010 draft out of the two-year College of Southern Nevada, a full year before his high school class graduated. That’s a man-child for you.

This obviously set the bar at a very, very high level with regard to his eventual major league performance. So high, in fact, that his perfectly acceptable though not overwhelming 2012-14 performance was seen by some as a disappointment. Then 2015 happened. Any number of superlatives can be applied to his MVP campaign, but perhaps the greatest tribute that could be paid is that he was pretty clearly better than Mike Trout last season, by any measure.

How do Harper’s three good though not great seasons, plus his 2015 for the ages compare to other players at the same age and/or experience level? Let’s look at Harper in the same way we recently examined Trout.

Read the rest of this entry »

We are living in a golden age of youthful, historic talent, especially among position players. This was the case even before 2015, when the likes of Kris Bryant, Carlos Correa and Francisco Lindor — all 23 years old or younger — joined the party. Previously, the Cubs had run out a slew of young stud position players on a daily basis, and Manny Machado and Bryce Harper have been around enough to truly be called veterans at this point. All of these greats all reside in the shadow of the best young player of them all, however: some guy named Mike Trout.

With a little luck, or perhaps some better judgment among voters, Trout could very well be celebrating an unprecedented fourth consecutive MVP award right about now. He’s got one of those on the mantle, along with three relatively controversial second place finishes. While I did predict in an ESPN Insider article this past March that Josh Donaldson would win the 2015 AL MVP, there is no doubt that, if I had a ballot, I would have slotted the Blue Jay third sacker on the second line, behind the Angel center fielder.

How great is Trout, and where might all of this be headed? Let’s take a somewhat unorthodox look at his first four seasons relative to some of the game’s all-time inner-circle superstars, and see where he fits in.

Read the rest of this entry »

Yesterday, I published a post here examining the year-to-year correlations for a number of ball-in-play (BIP) pitching metrics. The results published there have some use on their own. As a practical application of that information, however, I’d like to take a look here at the nine potential free agent starting pitchers (besides Zack Greinke) whose teams faced a qualifying offer decision this offseason, and see how this analysis might impact their valuation.

Below, you’ll find two tables. The first, for reference, is a collection of all the year-to-year correlations from yesterday’s post. After that is a second table, featuring how each of the nine pitchers fared according to each metric. Comments regarding each pitchers in greater depth appear below that.

First, the correlation coefficients from yesterday’s post:

Correlation Coefficients, 2014-15 ERA Qualifiers

Metric	Coefficient
K%	0.81
BB%	0.66
Pop%	0.53
Fly%	0.76
LD%	0.14
GB%	0.86
FL/LD	0.37
GB AUTH	0.25
BIP AUTH	0.37
ERA	0.45
FIP	0.65
TRU ERA	0.72

Remember: a 100% correlation (1.00 in the above table) is obtained when the two sets of data are totally identical. The closer to 1.00, the higher degree of correlation between the two data sets.

Now what follows are the nine pitchers in question. Stats are presented as an index, where 100 is average, above 100 is above average, and below 100 is below average. Questions about the various metrics? A more thorough explanation can be found in yesterday’s post.

2014-15 QO Candidates – Key Stats Scaled to 100

Name	K%	BB%	POP%	FLY%	LD%	GB%	F/L PRD	GB PRD	BIP PRD	ACT ERA	ACT FIP	TRU ERA
Brett Anderson	77	82	12	60	72	145	127	96	98	95	101	102
Wei-Yin Chen	97	71	153	109	96	92	98	102	100	83	104	89
Marco Estrada	91	104	168	148	74	73	70	89	74	78	110	75
Yovani Gallardo	77	118	65	84	105	111	97	108	96	85	100	102
His. Iwakuma	108	56	59	93	88	114	111	110	100	88	93	82
Ian Kennedy	121	98	104	119	108	84	114	103	121	110	116	101
John Lackey	97	79	133	98	97	100	92	111	96	71	92	91
Jeff Samardzija	90	74	111	115	101	88	90	103	102	124	105	94
J. Zimmermann	98	63	154	106	103	92	122	101	105	94	96	95

*****

Brett Anderson (Profile)
Status: Accepted qualifying offer from Dodgers

Anderson’s key strength is his stratospheric grounder rate, the highest in the majors last year, over two standard deviations higher than league average. His walk rate was also a positive, over one half standard deviation lower than league average. Our correlation coefficients tell us that these are likely true talents, and should recur moving forward. Unfortunately, the same doesn’t apply to his low liner rate, which was over two standard deviations below league average. As much of a ground baller as Anderson is, repeating his 66.3% grounder rate would be quite a feat, and any reduction likely will translate point for point in an increase in liner rate.

Read the rest of this entry »

The introduction of batted-ball data, first to the clubs and then to the public, certainly has caused a revolution in player evaluation. While the entirety of HITf/x and now Statcast data isn’t likely to be available to the masses anytime soon, the portions that are, including fairly complete PITCHf/x data, have changed the way fans, analysts, club personnel, and, yes, even players look at the game.

As I have often written on these pages, this data needs to be placed into context to be fully understood. There are ongoing issues with data capture, and the simple fact that not all hard or softly hit baseballs are created equal adds levels of nuance that must be understood before meaningful conclusions can be drawn. Another concern expressed by many is the uncertain predictive value of the batted-ball data, particularly with regard to pitchers. Today, let’s take a look at how this data correlates from year to year, from the pitcher’s perspective.

It’s been fairly well established over the years that a “ground ball” or “pop up” pitcher is a real thing: ball-in-play (BIP) type frequencies correlate quite well from year to year. The same applies to strikeout (K) and walk (BB) rates, both from the hitter and pitcher’s perspective. How about batted-ball authority? To examine this issue, I identified the 45 starting pitchers who qualified for the ERA title in either league in both 2014 and 2015. (Players who were traded mid-year and qualified overall but not in either league specifically were omitted.)

For each of these pitchers, the following statistics were scaled to 100 both for the 2014 and 2015 seaosns, with correlation coefficients calculated thereafter.

First, the rate stats:

• Strikeout rate
• Walk rate
• Pop-up rate
• Fly-ball rate
• Line-drive rate
• Ground-ball rate

Then metrics concerning projected production allowed (based on BIP authority):

• Fly ball/line drive combined
• Ground ball authority
• All ball-in-play authority

And, finally, runs-allowed measures/estimators:

• Earned run average
• Fielding independent pitching
• “Tru” ERA (based on BIP frequency and authority)

One note on the middle line item above. Fly balls and line drives were combined when calculating and scaling the Projected Production Allowed data. This was done due to the different manner in which was data was captured in 2014 (Sportvision) and 2015 (Statcast). In 2014, balls in play were classified as fly balls or line drives based on available vertical exit angle data. In 2015, such data was not available, so Statcast’s subjective classifications of BIP as either fly balls or liners had to be accepted.

Read the rest of this entry »

The free agent signing season should kick into gear soon, shortly after the results of Friday’s qualifying-offer acceptance deadline determine which free agents require draft pick compensation. The starting pitcher market will be particularly intriguing to monitor, with a healthy supply/demand situation from the players’ perspective further enhanced by the Cards’ loss of Lance Lynn for the entire season due to Tommy John surgery.

David Price, who does not require draft pick compensation, and Zack Greinke, who does, stand alone at the top of the market. Beneath them, among others, stands Jeff Samardzija, who is statistically coming off of the worst season of his career. What is his true talent level, and how he might he fare in this offseason’s market?

Samardzija’s backstory, obviously, is quite unique. Baseball was essentially his second sport early in his college career at Notre Dame; he was a highly renowned wide receiver, thought to be a likely future high round NFL draftee. As his two-sport career progressed, however, his fastball ramped up into the mid-to-upper 90s, while his football production plateaued.

I was a scout for the Milwaukee Brewers throughout Samardzija’s baseball career, and had the opportunity to see him pitch many times, particularly during his junior season. The raw arm strength was always there, and by the Big East tournament of his draft season, he was pumping it up there at 98-99 mph. His slider flashed plus, but it was quite inconsistent.

Read the rest of this entry »

Baseball’s hot stove season got off to an uncharacteristically early start this time around, as the Rays and Mariners made a “challenge” type of trade, centering around two young, inexpensive players with plenty of years of control remaining, shortstop Brad Miller and starting pitcher Nate Karns. I agree with most of Dave Cameron’s thoughts in the immediate wake the trade: one’s opinion of this deal largely depends on whether one believes Miller is truly a regular shortstop, and whether ones believe Karns is a long-term rotation fixture.

While there are no absolutes in the projection of either player’s future, and there are other players in the deal who will eventually impact the net result, this trade will likely come down to Miller vs. Karns. What does the weight of the evidence suggest at this point in time regarding those two players?

Read the rest of this entry »

The 2015 season will forever go down as (literally) a banner year for the New York Metropolitans. A National League championship pennant will forever fly above Citi Field, and with youthful pitching studs Jacob deGrom, Matt Harvey, Noah Syndergaard and Zack Wheeler in place for the foreseeable future, a competitive future appears assured. As someone who has spent many years in a major league front office, I can assure you, however, that the page is turned from the present to the future at record speed in the game of baseball. The Mets, and all 29 other clubs, must quickly take stock of who they are and put the wheels in motion toward the club they which to become moving forward.

There is no such thing as a perfect ball club in this day and age. The champion Royals themselves lack offensive power, and their starting rotation was far from fearsome. One can easily make the argument that the Mets owned the starting pitching advantage in each and every World Series contest. Obviously, the Royals’ superior team defense, bullpen, position player durability and ability to make contact more than offset their shortcomings.

The Mets are a very curious case. On the last day of July, they stood 30th and last in the major leagues in runs scored. It’s pretty unique to travel from that low point to playing meaningful games in November. Their other chief weakness, which just happened to be the one that reared its ugly head when the stakes were the highest, was the Mets’ subpar team defense.

While no one would have placed the Mets’ overall defensive ability on par with that of their World Series opponents, both old-fashioned and new-age metrics agree that the National League champions profiled (at worst) as an average defensive club. You want old school? The Mets ranked fifth in the NL in fielding percentage, and made the fifth-fewest errors. You want a little more new-school? They ranked second in the NL in defensive efficiency, i.e., turning batted balls into outs. So far, they look positively above average.

Let’s get a little more cutting-edge, and move on to FanGraphs’ team defense page. Here we find the Mets 17th in overall defense, 13th in UZR/150, 19th in error runs, and 10th in range runs. Now we’re talking straight up major league average.

What if we were to take a look at the issue from a somewhat different perspective, both incorporating batted ball data into the equation, and evaluating team defense from a head-to-head perspective; how did clubs perform defensively as compared to their opponents over 162 games, in the same ball parks, with the same weather conditions?

Read the rest of this entry »