Author Archive

How Billy Hamilton Stole Joey Votto Five Bases

Little less than a year ago, I wrote a post here called What Happens When Billy Hamilton is on Third Base? Answer: not much! Slightly more detailed answer: less than I was expecting!

What I’d expected, rather, what I’d hoped for the sake of an interesting post, was that every time the Reds had runners on first and third with Hamilton being the guy on third, that the guy on first would just take off every time. Like, no matter what, no matter who you are or what situation the game’s in, just run. It’s Billy Hamilton on third base for crying out loud. If they throw down to second, we’ve got ourselves a run. If they don’t, hey, free steal!

It happened less often than I wanted it to. Which, I thought was kind of peculiar. Couple other things popped up — teams altered their defensive alignments slightly, it made a rundown between first and second turn into a run and a runner on second — but for the most part I came away empty-handed and sad.

I understand this isn’t relevant to anything that’s going on right now. I also understand that my first two post ideas this morning failed miserably and around noon I started to panic, so I opened up the TextEdit document on my laptop titled “rainy day topics.” It isn’t raining outside, but I do need to get my Christmas shopping done today, so this is what you get. “joey votto stealing with hamilton on third” it says here next to this bullet point. Not sure where this came from. Guessing someone tipped me off on this. Wasn’t totally sure what it meant, but I had a pretty good idea.

The last time Joey Votto played a full, healthy season before this most recent one, he stole six bases. Over his previous three seasons, he’d average six steals a year. In 2015, Joey Votto stole 11 bases. Eleven minus six is five. That’s some math. Hey, what’s up with those extra five steals?

Read the rest of this entry »


Revisiting the Champs and the Projections

Yesterday, I ran an exercise on this site that required some audience participation. The premise was simple enough: the Royals, for the third consecutive year, haven’t looked like an elite team based on the third-party projection systems we host here on the site. The Royals, of course, have been an elite team, despite what the projections say, so there’s been some understandable hesitation in taking those projections at face value.

I simply asked everyone to take a look at each individual player projection, and either take the over, the under, or push. The idea is that, through crowdsourcing, we might be able to spot the individual places where the community thinks the projections are missing on guys, and then manually adjust the team projection from there.

And now for the seemingly ever-necessary reminder: The projections are not meant to be taken as gospel. They’re to be used as a guide. Anyone who reasonably understands what we do here on FanGraphs should get that, by now. We — we being the authors of FanGraphs — have no say in the projections. Just because the numbers say one thing doesn’t mean that every author has to agree. I can’t change the fact that the projections say what they do. I’m just here to report, and analyze, and think, and discuss.

The numbers are calling the current Royals roster a 78-win roster. That seems sort of silly. I think you’d be hard-pressed to find too many folks who’d think that sounds right. I’d certainly take the over, at least. Let’s see what the crowdsourcing results say. You should be able to click this image to view a larger version:

Read the rest of this entry »


August Fagerstrom FanGraphs Chat — 12/22/12

11:32
august fagerstrom: hello!

11:32
august fagerstrom: being that I missed last week’s chat, what with me being out of the country and all, we’ll go a little longer this week.

11:32
august fagerstrom: for now, though, I’m going to head down to the deli and procure myself a sandwich. get those questions in and I’ll be back around noon to commence chatting

11:33
august fagerstrom: also, we can totally talk about Star Wars if you guys want

11:33
august fagerstrom: today’s chat soundtrack: Vince Guaraldi Trio – A Charlie Brown Christmas

12:02
august fagerstrom: I just saw a man carrying a motorcycle up a flight of steps on my way back from the deli, so I suppose we can begin no

Read the rest of this entry »


The Champs and the Projections

Back in November, the Kansas City Royals were crowned champions of the baseball world, and rightfully so; they won all the necessary games! The Royals are the champions, and they’ll continue to be the champions until a new team is crowned champions in the upcoming October. Could be that the new champions are just a different Royals team, but that seems unlikely. Mostly, it seems unlikely because it’s really hard to repeat World Series titles. That hasn’t happened in 15 years. But also, it seems unlikely for another reason.

See, we’ve got player and team projections here on the site, and when looking toward the future, it’s usually better to rely on the projections than to rely on whatever subjective beliefs we can quickly work up in our own heads. The projections, by and large, are pretty darn good, and those pretty darn good projections thinks the Royals roster, as currently constructed, is the opposite of pretty darn good. Right now, at this very second, the Royals, the world champion Royals, are being given MLB’s sixth-worst team projection, a little worse than the Twins and Orioles and a little better than the Padres and the Rockies.

I know, I know. The projections didn’t much like the Royals in 2014, either, and they were one game away from being the champions. The projections didn’t much like the Royals in 2015, either, and now they are the champions. The projections have a two-year history of whiffing on the Royals, and plenty of Kansas City fans have scoffed at the forecasted 2016 numbers listed here on this site.

But this Royals roster, at this very second, is quite a bit different than the roster that won the World Series. The roster that won the World Series had a Johnny Cueto in the rotation, but this one doesn’t. The roster that won the World Series had an Alex Gordon and a Ben Zobrist in the lineup and the field, but this one doesn’t. The roster that won the World Series had a right fielder with more than 86 career games played, but this one doesn’t. The Royals have lost a lot — Cueto, Gordon and Zobrist were worth about nine wins last year (not all to the Royals, of course) — yet they’ve gained very little.

Of course, they’re going to gain some, but they’re not getting Cueto or Zobrist back, and it sure doesn’t look like they’re getting Gordon back. Looks like Omar Infante might again be the Opening Day second baseman, and the best starting pitcher they could hope to land looks like Scott Kazmir right now. Plenty of big-name outfielders are still out there, but the Royals don’t figure to be players for them. More than likely, the Royals pick up a veteran, mid-tier outfielder for one corner, and run a platoon in the other.

While the Royals seem likely to add some projected wins through the end of the offseason, it doesn’t figure to be many. Even if they were to pick up, say, five projected wins through the rest of their offseason moves, a figure that feels high, their team projection would still fall below league average, pitting them between the Rangers and the White Sox.

Point is: no matter what happens, the 2016 Royals aren’t going to project well, by the numbers we currently have, and that’s fascinating. More likely than not, the World Champions will project as something like a .500 team, at best, on Opening Day, and people aren’t sure how to feel about that, especially given the last couple years. Rightfully so. I’m not sure how to feel about it either, which brings us to the second half of this post.

Read the rest of this entry »


Neil Walker Is More Than Just a Ben Zobrist Plan B

All along, it seemed like the Mets were the clear frontrunner for Ben Zobrist. The Nationals and the Giants hung around in the periphery, but the Mets were among the earliest suitors, were perhaps most vocal suitor, and the fit made plenty of sense. It came down to the wire, enough for Mets fans to truly get their hopes up, but seemingly at the last minute the Cubs swooped in and made Zobrist their own. Turns out the Cubs had been in on Zobrist all along, but the public didn’t know that, and to New York fans, missing out on Zobrist must have felt like a crushing blow. Zobrist is the kind of player that any team would like to have.

One day after missing out on Zobrist, though, the Mets did what they perceived to be the next-best thing. They acquired Neil Walker from Pittsburgh in exchange for left-handed starter Jon Niese. Niese is set to earn a little over $9 million this season, with a pair of similarly-priced club options in the following two seasons. Walker is in his final year of arbitration, projected for $10.7 million by MLBTradeRumors, and for those reasons, Walker’s been an offseason trade candidate from the start. The Mets could’ve used a second baseman, having lost Daniel Murphy, and having something of a surplus of starting pitching. The Pirates needed starting pitching, having lost A.J. Burnett and J.A. Happ, and having something of a surplus of infielders. This is what the offseason is for.

Yet, in reading reactions to the trade, I couldn’t help but notice that it seemed the consensus was that Walker was a somewhat disappointing fallback plan to Zobrist. A lesser option, or a little brother, or a poor man’s Zobrist. They’re both switch-hitters, and they’ve both been around for a while, and they both play second base, and they were both targeted by the Mets, and they’ve both experienced success (even if Zobrist’s peak has been higher than Walker’s) and so the comparison isn’t surprising.

But I think to categorize Walker as anything less than Zobrist’s equal, at this stage in their careers, would be unfair to Walker. Regard their performance over the last three seasons, with Zobrist’s defensive numbers only coming from his time spent at second base:
Read the rest of this entry »


Yankees Get Younger with Starlin Castro, Slightly Better

Brian Cashman wants the Yankees to get younger. Did you know that Starlin Castro is only 25 years old?

Somewhat lost in the shuffle of last night’s winter meetings madness was the trade that sent Castro to the Yankees in exchange for right-hander Adam Warren and utility man Brendan Ryan, mere minutes after Castro had been displaced in Chicago by the Cubs’ signing of Ben Zobrist.

Castro, it seems, developed something of a bad rap in Chicago, and the writing of his departure had been on the wall for some time. It’s easy to forget that Castro is still just 25, though, and for a 25-year-old, he’s accomplished quite a bit. For instance, Castro already has nearly 1,000 hits! Getting to 3,000 essentially makes you a lock for the Hall of Fame, and by age 25, Castro is already one-third of the way there. Through his age-25 season, Castro has accumulated more hits than all but 20 players in baseball history. Of those 20 players, 14 are Hall of Famers, and the other is Alex Rodriguez. Of course, I don’t at all mean to insinuate Castro will achieve 3,000 hits or make the Hall of Fame, but players who a) debut young enough and b) perform at a good enough level to continue to receive playing time generally go on to have rather successful careers.

Anyway, that’s just an anecdote about Starlin Castro that I happen to enjoy. What actually matters is that the Yankees felt an upgrade at second base over Dustin Ackley and Rob Refsnyder was in order, and that the Cubs had a young second baseman to spare. This is how trades come together.

Read the rest of this entry »


Cubs Sign Ben Zobrist, Initiate Next Phase of Offseason

The reliever period of the offseason is over. We can now move on. Most of the league, it seemed, was waiting on Ben Zobrist’s decision before kicking their offseason into high-gear. Zobrist has made his decision. He’ll be going to the Cubs, on a four-year deal worth $56 million dollars. With Zobrist out of the way, you’ll soon begin hearing Yoenis Cespedes rumors, and Justin Upton rumors, and Alex Gordon rumors. Zobrist was the domino that needed to fall to set the rest of the offseason into action. That much is true for the Cubs, too.

With Zobrist in the fold, the Cubs held an obvious surplus of talent. Too many players for too few positions. The Starlin Castro rumors and the Javier Baez rumors had persisted for so long, and it was clear the Cubs had something else lined up when they agreed to terms with Zobrist. Within the hour, Castro had been shipped to the Yankees for righty Adam Warren and veteran utility man Brendan Ryan.

Castro is simply the fallout from the Zobrist move. Castro’s owed $37 million over the next four seasons, and no longer had a position in Chicago. That’s pricey for a backup. Something had to give. The Yankees needed a second baseman, and the money isn’t much a factor to them, and so they were willing to part with a 28-year-old swingman with eye-popping projections and a utility man on the last legs of his career. Castro should be fine as the starting second baseman in New York, and it’s easy to forget he’s still just 25 years old. Between Castro, Dustin Ackley and Rob Refsnyder, the Yankees shouldn’t need to worry about second base. But the Yankees aren’t the interesting part of the action, here. The Cubs are.

Read the rest of this entry »


Jason Heyward as a Center Fielder

The Chicago Cubs clearly had two primary areas in need of improvement at the beginning of this offseason: starting pitching and center field. The word was that the Cubs were in on David Price, but we know that didn’t happen, and so instead the Cubs went with a more cost-effective choice in John Lackey.

For the rest of the Cubs offseason, that means two things. For one, the rotation appears to be complete. It’s now deeper than last year’s, still has two aces at the top, and doesn’t have an obvious hole. Of course, if something came up, the Cubs could still improve, but no longer does the need exist for another starter, of any caliber. What the Lackey move means, also, is that the Cubs have some extra money to spend in the outfield. If they were in on Price, that means they were prepared to spend somewhere in the range of $200 million, and on Lackey, they spent just $34 million.

It should come as no surprise that talks have turned to Jason Heyward.

Patrick Mooney of CSNChicago reported that “the Cubs have envisioned Jason Heyward batting leadoff and playing center at Wrigley Field” and that they’ve “had Heyward on their radar for a long time.” Gordon Wittenmyer of the Chicago Sun-Times asked general manager Jed Hoyer about the financial implications of going after a top outfielder, and Hoyer responded that “We have some available resources. I think that much is clear.” Jesse Rogers of ESPN thinks it’s more likely the Cubs wind up with Heyward than Dexter Fowler. All of this has come out within the last 24 hours.

In addition, the Cubs are bidding against the rival St. Louis Cardinals, and the effects of the Cubs potentially acquiring Heyward would be two-fold, in that it would also mean the Cardinals weren’t acquiring him.

Clearly, the pieces are in place here. Heyward to the Cubs, on the surface, makes a great deal of sense. Theo Epstein stated back in October the desire to improve the team’s outfield defense, and Heyward has rightfully earned a reputation as an excellent defender. The interesting part, though, is that the Cubs are clearly interested in Heyward as a center fielder, given the existence of Kyle Schwarber and Jorge Soler in the corners, and 97% of Heyward’s major league innings have come in right field. He’s started just 30 games in center field, and his price tag is going to be somewhere around $200 million. That’s a significant investment to make when you’re planning to play a guy in unfamiliar territory. It’s a significant investment no matter where you’re planning to play him, but it might be viewed as especially risky given the circumstance.

But should it be?

Read the rest of this entry »


August Fagerstrom FanGraphs Chat – 12/8/15

11:37
august fagerstrom: coming to you guys live from FanGraphs house in Nashville! start filling up that queue and we’ll get started in ~20 minutes

11:58
august fagerstrom: alright, let’s do this!

11:58
Crazy Buck Martinez: Please give me some good reasons not to be terrified of the Red Sox next year.

11:59
august fagerstrom: incredible bullpen, ace starter, Mookie Betts + Xander Bogaerts, and Hanley and Sandoval can’t possibly be worse

11:59
august fagerstrom: if I were a Red Sox fan, I’d be feeling pretty good about this year

12:00
Matt: If the White Sox were to sign Upton or Cespedes and trade for Frazier, would that make this legit contenders? Or would it be smarter for them to hold onto their top prospects and go after someone who would cost as much as Frazier (Lawrie, Asdrubal Cabrera, etc.)?

Read the rest of this entry »


The Disaster A’s Bullpen Might Not Be a Disaster Anymore

Are you tired of reading about reliever signings yet? If you are, well then I’m sorry for this post, but at least it’s almost over. There’s only a couple good relievers left now, because they’ve seemingly all signed in the last 24 hours. The Athletics did some work on their bullpen when they acquired Liam Hendriks from Toronto for Jesse Chavez a few weeks back, and last night they did some more work by signing Ryan Madson to a three-year deal worth $22 million guaranteed.

Now, the thing about signing Ryan Madson to a three-year deal is, that’s three times as many years as he’s pitched since 2011. By the end of that 2011 season, Madson was seen as one of the best relief pitchers in the game, but then he needed Tommy John surgery, and he was seen as a hopeful comeback story. He missed 2012, of course, but experienced some setbacks in 2013 and was seen as a less-hopeful comeback story. After having not pitched in 2014, either, Madson was seen as retired.

And then suddenly, Madson was pitching in the World Series for the Kansas City Royals, and suddenly Madson could again be viewed as one of the best relief pitchers in the game, and suddenly Madson signed his name on a piece of paper that said he’d make at least $22 million dollars over the next three seasons, no matter what.

Maybe it’s a risky move. It’s definitely a risky move, but maybe it’s a risky move that doesn’t work out, too. Even the non-risky moves have a chance of not working out. Maybe you think this one is especially risky, given the 35 years of life that Madson has lived and the three years in a row of wanting to pitch but not being able to. Alternatively, you could take the stance that Madson last year proved he was finally able to get over that arm injury, and if that’s the case, what difference is missing three years to missing one year, given he’s truly over the injury? A couple years extra rest for the arm could be viewed as a good thing, if you wanted it to be.

After all, Madson couldn’t have been more similar to his previous self, which was, again, considered one of the best relievers in the game the last time we saw him, prior to this year. Consider that, during Madson’s peak years in 2010-11, his fastball sat 94, and that last year it sat 94.3. Consider that, in those previous two years, Madson struck out 27% of batters and walked 6%, and that last year, he struck out 23% of batters and walked 6%. The ERA was in the mid-2’s, and then it was in the low-2’s. The ground ball rate went up. The arsenal is, more or less, the same. Madson had previously established an elite level of performance, and this year, he simply returned to it. If you took away the years in front of the stat lines, you wouldn’t realize he took any time off at all, let alone three years.

So while the three years and tens of millions of dollars may seem risky — and they still probably are — look at Madson then, and look at Madson now. We’ve no reason to believe that a healthy Madson won’t be effective, and, for now, we’ve no reason to believe Madson is anything but healthy.

And the Madson signing is just another example of an A’s organization that seems to not need much time before buying into a player’s comeback or breakout. The A’s were the team that bought into Scott Kazmir in 2014 after just one season, and the A’s are the team that made a point of acquiring both Liam Hendriks after one good season, and Rich Hill after just four amazing starts. Part of that, surely, is a byproduct of their financial restrictions and the ever-looming necessity to find value at the cheapest cost, but perhaps the A’s have some sort of internal belief in players quickly establishing a new level, or re-establishing a previous level. Anyway, if you think the Madson deal seems over-the-top, it’s the years that surprised you, not the money. The market has been set for what good free agent relievers get paid, and Madson is simply earning along with his peers.

That’s been the Madson angle, but what about the A’s angle? They are the team that will ultimately benefit, or the opposite of benefit, from Madson’s performance or lack thereof, after all. Well, last year, the bullpen ERA was the second-worst in the majors. The bullpen FIP was the third-worst. The bullpen WPA was the first-worst, and couldn’t have imaginably been gotten any lower. And to that last point, there’s some reason for optimism, even in such a negative number. Jeff Sullivan already wrote about how the A’s were perhaps the most unlucky team we’ve seen in the BaseRuns era, due to their bullpen, and for those same reasons, why they might be in line for a rebound season.

The most simple way of looking at it is this: last year, the A’s actual record had them winning 68 games, but their projected record, according to BaseRuns, had them winning 80 games, and that’s a significant difference. Most of that difference is due to their bullpen, and from last year’s bullpen, many of the serial offenders are gone. Dan Otero, Eric O’Flaherty, Edward Mujica, Fernando Abad — all no more. In their place, well that’s where Hendriks and Madson come into play, and those guys were just as good, recently, as the bad group was bad. Sean Doolittle dealt with shoulder injuries throughout last year, and when healthy, Doolittle’s ranked among the game’s elite. Fernando Rodriguez will be back again, and he was one of the few relievers who didn’t kill the A’s last year. Evan Scribner was one of the relievers who killed the A’s last year, but he also posted one of the best K-BB%’s in baseball, and if you squint past the atrocious home run rate, you could see the potential for a relief weapon in Scribner.

What was just arguably the worst relief unit in baseball is currently projected for the sixth-highest bullpen WAR in the majors, and while I did just write about why the bullpen projections can be a bit wonky, it’s better to be near the top than the bottom, especially when you’re coming from the bottom. At the very least, the A’s seem to have improved a major weakness, and that’s all the offseason’s about, anyway.