Just in case Max Scherzer’s season-ending injury wasn’t enough pitcher-specific tragedy for the week, baseball’s deities have handed down a tale of woe to another of the game’s top pitchers. Sandy Alcantara, last year’s NL Cy Young award winner, may miss the remainder of the season as well. While you could argue that teammate Jesús Luzardo has surpassed Alcantara as a top-of-the-rotation weapon, Alcantara’s history as one of the NL’s top workhorses makes his absence extremely ill-timed for the Marlins, who are currently fighting for their playoff lives against the Diamondbacks, Reds, and Giants.

Alcantara first landed on the IL about a week ago after experiencing discomfort in his forearm. Baseball people take forearm pain as seriously as the denizens of Middle-earth regard inscribed poems on mysterious rings, so Alcantara was shut down for further diagnosis. While he felt healthy enough to play catch on Wednesday, an MRI revealed that his forearm strain stems from a sprained UCL. While the worst-case scenario — namely, a Tommy John surgery that would cost him the rest of this season and likely all of 2024 — does not appear to be the immediate course of action, his 2023 status remains uncertain. When asked specifically about Alcantara’s return, Marlins manager Skip Schumaker avoided being too bullish on the prospects of getting him back this year, saying, “I don’t know. I can’t say yes. I can’t say no. I’ve just gotta be positive. I just gotta keep telling myself day by day and try to take advantage of the opportunity.”

I wouldn’t necessarily characterize Alcantara as having a rough season — I think something like Alek Manoah’s disastrous 2023 better fits that bill — but I can’t deny that it’s been a bit disappointing compared to his 2022. This year, Alcantara has posted his highest ERA as a Marlin, as well as his highest home run allowed rate and lowest strikeout rate. He’s been hit harder than usual, so none of these numbers are pure flukes. But while Statcast’s xERA isn’t happy about his season, ZiPS sees him as have a 3.60 zFIP, reflecting that the declines in his strikeout rate don’t quite match the smaller declines seen in his plate discipline data. It would be hard to say he’s been an ace this year, but the fact that Alcantara is able to eat so many innings has kept his value strong, and he was likely headed for his third-straight season of 200 innings and at least 3 WAR. The Marlins have a young rotation and many of their pitchers have significant injury histories. That makes it extra nice to have one of baseball’s dwindling number of pitchers who can casually go seven innings most nights.

In losing Scherzer, ZiPS estimated that the Rangers lost two percentage points in the playoff race and 0.4 percentage points in World Series probability. ZiPS likes Alcantara slightly better as a pitcher and feels more confident about the replacement options in Texas, so the impact on Miami’s fate is a skosh larger. First, I ran ZiPS assuming that Alcantara would miss the rest of the season:

If we ignore the Padres, who are on the verge of rounding to zero, the Marlins have the toughest road of any of the Wild Card contenders without Alcantara. Now, let’s assume the Marlins get one of those aforementioned Tolkienian rings, use its little-known power to heal elbow and forearm problems, and get Alcantara back into the rotation when he’s eligible on Tuesday:

In a very tight race, getting Alcantara back for a couple starts is still enough to snag the Marlins nearly four percentage points of playoff probability, about twice what a healthy Scherzer would have done for the Rangers. And as importantly, having him for the playoffs would change the top of the rotation enough to give Miami a much better chance of making a deep postseason run.

Naturally, the worst-case scenario would have a significant effect on Alcantara’s long-term outlook:

While the odds still favor Alcantara returning, if worst came to worst, there would be a lot of concerns. Would Alcantara’s changeup still be as devastating if he came back with a 95 mph fastball instead of a 98 mph one? Would the loss of an entire year reduce the chances of him finally finding the strikeout upside of his solid stuff, as Nathan Eovaldi eventually did? What are the chances he could return and still be one of the few pitchers who’s a good bet to throw 200 innings?

Thankfully, we’re not yet at the point where we have to answer those questions. Mason Miller suffered an UCL sprain in May, but has been able to come back with conservative treatment thanks to the A’s showing an abundance of caution in terms of hurrying him back. But if Alcantara’s 2023 is indeed over, the Marlins face a tougher path to the playoffs, certainly a tougher one than when both ZiPS and the FanGraphs playoff odds had them with an over 70% chance of making the playoffs back in July.

12:00

Dan Szymborski: Greetings, fair FanGraphs reader, it is a time for chats and chidings.

12:01

Dan Szymborski: Also, since it was being stubborn about getting on the front page, my queue is almost nothing, so this is YOUR best time for random nonsense.

12:01

Dan Szymborski: While it’s too early to say exactly *what* will happen, I’m not particularly optimistic.

12:02

Dan Szymborski: The players complaints heading into the last CBA are going to be basically unchanged except for minimums salaries.

12:02

Dan Szymborski: The luxury tax threshold still grows slower than inflation and WAY slower than MLB revenue growth

Read the rest of this entry »

On Friday, the Rockies and starting pitcher Germán Márquez agreed on terms to a two-year contract extension worth a guaranteed $20 million. This was a lost season for Márquez, as an elbow injury and eventual Tommy John surgery resulted in him only making four starts. Unsurprisingly for a pitcher suffering a major injury, the second year of his new deal is heavily incentivized, with two roster bonuses and three inning bonuses. Márquez is expected to miss the first half of the 2024 season, but if he throws 160 innings in 2025, he’ll net a cool $22 million for the season. The contract also includes a $1 million assignment bonus, paid by his new team if the Rockies should trade him.

An elbow injury that requires a scalpel is never a welcome sign for anyone, but for Márquez, originally a free agent this fall, it was a particularly hard blow. The hope had been that he would bounce back from a pedestrian 2022 season that saw his FIP balloon to nearly five and his strikeout rate fall about 10% from 2021. While my thoughts on how the Rockies have been run since, well, 1993 are well-known, he was one of their biggest coups in franchise history. It’s hard to prove the Rays wrong on a young pitcher, but that the Rockies did, picking up Márquez and Jake McGee from Tampa Bay for Corey Dickerson and Kevin Padlo in 2016. Despite being only 28, he already looms large in Rockies history.

Jiménez’s three-year peak as an elite pitcher makes him the king of the mountain, but Márquez is only a couple good months behind him. When you consider offense as well (Márquez was once a Silver Slugger), the latter is already the leader. And while I can’t expect anyone in Denver to appreciate this, it certainly matters to me that my most recent memory of Márquez isn’t Buck Showalter throwing him into a playoff game for no particular reason.

Lest you think Márquez’s lofty standing is me damning the Rockies with faint praise, he’s long been one of the best-projected young pitchers in ZiPS WAR:

Naturally, his position in the rankings dropped as he failed to maintain his 2018 strikeout rate, but some of the decline is natural due to having fewer tomorrows remaining. With the kind of bounceback that ZiPS expected, he would have been looking at a pretty good payday in free agency. Here’s what his long-term projections for 2024 and beyond looked like before the start of 2023. I’m using a neutral park for this one since Coors Field is… complicated.

Based on that projection, ZiPS recommended a seven-year, $126 million extension or $116 million over six years. That’s not Gerrit Cole money and reflects the increased risk stemming from his 2022, but nine figures can buy an impressive haul of goods and/or services. It certainly would have been a better use of money than, say, signing an aging third baseman from the Cubs to play left field for $182 million.

I went ahead and told ZiPS that Márquez has missed time due to Tommy John surgery (I normally do this after the season) and re-ran the numbers.

ZiPS would have suggested two years at $18.2 million, but the difference between that and $20 million, in the context of MLB, is basically nothing. In any case, the fact that he is a pitcher who has survived Coors Field is almost certainly worth a bit more cash, even if ZiPS isn’t specifically valuing that here. In other words, the Rockies made a move that I cannot complain about.

Where does Márquez fit into the future of the Rockies? That’s a much trickier question. While the best result for him is that he makes a grand return next July and returns to his 2017–21 peak form, resulting in him getting that $100 million contract in a couple of years, I’m not sure the Rockies will take fullest advantage of this sunny scenario. If the organization is going to become competitive again, it has a lot of work to do, and Márquez rocking the NL inside out in 2025 likely makes him more valuable to the Rockies in terms of who they can acquire for him rather than his actual performance.

Trading veterans, especially veterans who had an important past in the story of the franchise, always appears to be psychologically difficult for Colorado’s ownership. But that’s a problem for the future Rockies. The team made a good move in extending Márquez to a low-risk, high-upside contract, and that’s good enough for me to pause my grumbling.

When the Phillies signed Trea Turner to an 11-year, $300 million contract over the winter, the second-largest contract in franchise history, they were probably prepared for Year 11 to be a bit underwhelming, not so much Year One. Turner got off to an excellent start in Philadelphia, beginning the season with 12 hits in the first seven games with two triples. Once his seven-game hitting streak was snapped, the next four months turned into an unbelievable slog: .225/.282/.354 with 10 homers. On the morning of August 5, his OPS hit a season-low .656. But over the last month, Turner has been one of the hottest hitters in baseball.

During the hottest months of the summer, one of the most common questions I got was some variant of “is Trea Turner broken?” My usual answer was that he’d probably be fine, even if expectations had to be lowered a bit, but it felt a little less convincing. The zStats I ran for hitters in early August as part of the “full-fat” ZiPS saw Turner as having a better season than was reflected in his overall numbers, with a .728 zOPS compared to that .656 mark. That wasn’t enough to make the leaderboard, headed by Spencer Torkelson (with a .975 OPS since then), but it was still a significant gap. And I doubt the Phillies or the fans would have felt much relief even with the .264/.309/.419 line that zStats gave him.

Back then, I re-ran Turner’s long-term projections to see what kind of bounceback ZiPS was expecting. While the computer saw a pretty good recovery in 2024, it was well off his preseason numbers. There was also a lot more risk in the mix, significantly pushing his numbers in future years down. Read the rest of this entry »

The Angels surprised everyone on Tuesday when they placed six veterans from their big league roster on waivers. Four of the players — Lucas Giolito, Reynaldo López, Randal Grichuk, and Dominic Leone — were recently acquired by the Angels at the trade deadline, while the final two — Hunter Renfroe and Matt Moore — had been picked up last offseason. The Yankees followed suit by placing center fielder Harrison Bader on waivers. With waiver claim priority going from the team with the worst record to the best, the teams at the back end of the playoff races got first dibs. The Cleveland Guardians and Cincinnati Reds, two teams that would miss the playoffs if the season ended today, scooped up five of these seven players, with the Mariners grabbing a sixth in Leone. Only Grichuk went unclaimed. Carlos Carrasco, José Cisnero, and Mike Clevinger also joined the waiver wire without attracting any interest.

The Guardians were the most active team, adding Giolito, López, and Moore. Giolito was one of the bigger names traded at the deadline, and the Angels thought enough of him at the time to give up Edgar Quero, our 51st-ranked prospect, and former second-rounder Ky Bush in order to bring him and López to LA for one last-gasp attempt to grab a playoff spot. Giolito was a disaster for the Angels. His ERA and FIP were both near seven, and he only managed quality starts in two of his six attempts. López fared somewhat better, but was rather adventure-prone, only throwing a clean 1-2-3 inning once in 13 games for the Halos. Moore had a solid year in Los Angeles, but he can be fairly tricky to use, as he doesn’t have the typical profile of a lefty reliever, with his changeup and his knuckle-curve significantly tougher for righties to hit than lefties these days. Read the rest of this entry »

The idea of the Mets trading Pete Alonso would have seemed positively preposterous six months ago. Coming off a 101-win season, the Mets committed to a half-billion dollars in new contracts over the winter, entering the season with the most expensive team in history. But rather than battle the Braves for NL East supremacy, they’ve instead been fighting to stay ahead of the Nationals for fourth place, a mêlée they’re currently losing. The Mets have already traded off some of their veterans, including both Justin Verlander and Max Scherzer, so the idea of parting with Alonso doesn’t seem quite as farfetched as it once did.

There have been some sports radio rumblings about Alonso-related clubhouse issues, but I tend to not take those things too seriously. And even if I did, it’s not a surprising development in the context of a wreck of a season; unless you’re the late 1970s Yankees, winning tends to make people get along better. What I do take seriously are the reports from Ken Rosenthal at The Athletic. No deal was close, but the Mets reportedly talked to at least the Brewers and Cubs around the trade deadline, getting to the point where the players to be sent to New York were discussed.

The facts on the ground, divorced from any specific rumors, also make such a trade plausible this winter. Players a year from free agency are frequently discussed in trades, and while there’s no reason to think the Mets are going to tear the team down to a small, long-term core, a 75-win season — and that’s only if the Mets play decent baseball in September — makes some kind of short-term retool quite possible. In that case, trading the unsigned Alonso for players who can contribute past 2024 is an idea with considerable merit. Read the rest of this entry »

Some of the most frustrating arguments involving baseball statistics revolve around the use of expected stats. Perhaps the most frequently cited of these metrics are Statcast’s xStats, which use Statcast data for hitters to estimate the batting average, on-base percentage, slugging percentage, and wOBA you’d “expect” a hitter to achieve. Investigating how predictive xStats are compared to their corresponding actual stats has been a common research exercise over the last few years. While it depends on the exact dataset used, xStats by themselves generally aren’t much better than the actual stats at predicting the next year’s actual stats. But that doesn’t mean we should simply discard expected stats when trying to evaluate players.

While I’m not going spend too much time talking about how predictive xStats are versus the actual ones, I do want to briefly touch on some of the existing work on the subject. Jonathan Judge at Baseball Prospectus examined many of the expected metrics back in 2018. He also spoke with MLBAM’s Tom Tango about the nature of expected stats and their usage:

Earlier this week, we reached out to BAM with our findings, asking if they had any comment.

MLBAM Senior Database Architect of Stats Tom Tango promptly responded, asking that we ensure we had the most recent version of the data, due to some recent changes being made. We refreshed our data sets, found some small changes, and retested. The results were the same.

Tango then stressed that the expected metrics were only ever intended to be descriptive, that they were not designed to be predictive, and that if they had been intended to be predictive, they could have been designed differently or other metrics could be used.

Read the rest of this entry »

12:00

Dan Szymborski: And we are LIVE

12:01

Dan Szymborski: No, they’re supposed to be presents for people who know what the trade deadline is.

12:02

Dan Szymborski: You don’t expect me to give *all* the secrets away do ya?

Read the rest of this entry »

Suffice it to say, the 2023 season has not gone the way either the New York Yankees or their fans had hoped. The team’s current nine-game losing streak is their longest in 41 years. And while the team’s 60-65 record isn’t on the same grim level as those of the Athletics or Royals, it’s still awful by the franchise’s typical standards. New York has teetered on the edge of .500 a few times recently, including being outscored in three of four seasons from 2013 to 2016, but you have to go back to 1992 to find the last time they crossed that negative line. Rather than tear everything down to the foundation when things go wrong, the Yankees tend to be a team that reloads and tries again next time. But can they do that this offseason?

The Yankees have had some bad breaks this season, but blaming everything on that would be a mistake. I’m not going to wax poetic about why this season has been so miserable — other writers have already laid out the club’s tale of woe — but we still need to review the basics to get a good view of where things truly stand. The pitching bears quite a lot of the blame. In detailing how the preseason PECOTA projections for the Yankees diverged from what has actually happened, Patrick Dubuque didn’t mince words at Baseball Prospectus:

Two of the Yankees’ seven starters have met expectations so far, and it’s their two worst ones. Injuries have pressed those sixth and seventh (and eighth) starters into service, even more so than our depth chart team anticipated. But when you imagine a collapse like the Yankees have had, you assume that it’s injuries. You envision Aaron Judge’s plate appearances replaced by Billy McKinney’s, like the world’s most unprepared Broadway understudy. While Brito and Randy Vásquez haven’t bailed the team out, they also didn’t make the hole. And at this point, it’s more hole than boat.

Read the rest of this entry »

Padres fans in 2023 don’t have a ton to be excited about. The Friars have been in win-now mode for the last four seasons and are staring down their second losing campaign during that span. One of the two winning seasons was kind of ruined — for everyone in the world — by a raging pandemic, leaving fans with only one year that was both normal and an enjoyable experience since 2010. Unlike a lot of teams with a similar performance record, it’s not for lack of investment in the team. Just a few months after the gigantic trade that brought Juan Soto to town, the team signed Xander Bogaerts to a $280 million contract and kept Manny Machado from opting out with an even spicier $350 million pact. The Padres also agreed on a $100 million contract for Joe Musgrove and locked up Yu Darvish for $108 million. That’s more than $800 million, so we’re not talking about the case of, say, the White Sox having issues in part because they couldn’t be bothered to fill giant holes in the lineup because that would have required money.

As gloomy as the season feels right now, there are still legitimate reasons to think the Padres are a good baseball team. Their 68–54 Pythagorean record is 10 wins above their actual record, and records derived from run differential are more predictive than win-loss record. The projections all still agree there’s a lot to like and similarly have a good record, relatively speaking, of predicting the future. And this holds true even when talking about teams with the largest disagreement between the projections and the record. Looking at the 25 teams that FanGraphs like better than their seasonal winning percentage the most, coin flips missed their rest-of-season winning percentages by an average of 86 points, season to-date records by 81 points, and FanGraphs records by 65 points. Those 25 teams had played .396 ball through August 14 of their seasons; FanGraphs projected a .476 RoS winning percentage, and the actual RoS winning percentage for those teams was .458. We weren’t imagining things.

But the fundamental problem the Padres face is that it’s simply far too late to be the team they hoped they were. Our projections still believe they are a .572 team, but that’s only good enough for a 19% chance of making the postseason with a divisional probability that rounds to zero; the ZiPS projections have it at 15%. While those are still pretty good odds, especially compared to how the season has felt, it’s still far more likely than not that this year ends up being a dark companion to the 2021 season that also ended in stunningly bleak fashion.

And here’s the problem: the Padres project to be worse in the future than they are now. You could say that about most teams, but the Padres are also a team that has a massive amount of payroll already tied up in a declining roster, an unsigned Soto approaching free agency, and probably not a lot of room left to grow in a payroll sense. Complicating things even further is the financial collapse of Bally Sports, as the team has not yet figured out how to replace that revenue. Forbes estimated the Padres lost $53 million in 2022, and things are likely to get worse from there. Peter (Seidler) actually saw a wolf.

Running some up-to-date projections for players signed long-term demonstrates the enormity of the team’s challenge. I’m going to start with the Padres’ core of six players who have guaranteed contracts with annual salaries of at $10 million or more through at least the 2026 season. Whatever happens elsewhere on the team, these six are almost certainly going to be part of the foundation.

You may cringe looking at the end of Machado’s contract, but ZiPS already expected that before the season. Machado put together a strong enough July — though he’s slumped since then and is nursing a sore hamstring — and experienced a clear return to defensive form to cause his 2024-and-on projections to tick up slightly. While ZiPS didn’t like the deal, it doesn’t like it any less than it did in February.

Bogaerts was mired in a deep slump in May and June, aided by a sore wrist, but has hit a more Xanderian .290/.351/.413 since the start of July, in-line with preseason expectations. As with Machado’s recent deal, the Padres go into this contract knowing that they’re paying for Bogaerts to decline.

This is a bit of an awkward projection because it highlights an assumption in team construction that turned out not to be true. Typically, a decent defensive second baseman who can credibly fake playing shortstop will usually fare well at first base, but that just has not happened, at least so far, with Jake Cronenworth. With Ha-Seong Kim 김하성 firmly entrenched as a starter, the Padres have a player with value but not a logical place to play him in order to get that value. The difference is extreme enough that ZiPS thinks that Cronenworth is now more than a win per season less valuable at first than second base.

Add in the fact that Cronenworth is having a down year (and a pretty odd one in terms of Statcast data), and there’s just a lot less reason to like his future than there was before.

Where the positional gods punished the Padres with Cronenworth, they were far kinder here. Tatis’ bat isn’t quite where it was, but he’s actually turned out to be an excellent defensive outfielder, at least so far. Given his age, he’s the one player who projects to finish out his contract as a plus contributor to the team.

ZiPS was always fairly pessimistic about the Darvish extension, and without him reversing the continued slow decline in his peripherals, it hasn’t changed direction since the start of the season. While I always say “hitters age, pitchers break,” Darvish is at an age where cliffs do, in fact, beckon. ZiPS didn’t even want to project the final two seasons of his extension; I’ll be kind and not force it to, so we’ll call those zero-WAR seasons, which is sunnier than what ZiPS would say if I made it.

The performance projections of Musgrove have stayed about the same — hardly surprising considering that when he was healthy, he was having a similar season to last year. But his return this season remains up in the air, and new injuries create new risk for a pitcher, so his projected innings totals have dropped considerably.

OK, let’s throw everybody into one table, complete with their salaries.

If the projections hold true, these six will make up less than a third of the WAR needed to be a 90-win team as soon as 2026, when they combine for $120 million in salary. Unless the team continues to spend more and more money, it’s going to get harder and harder to use dollars to patch holes, which means that the farm system has to get back to producing very quickly. The Padres aren’t likely to be able to win on the backs of these six players for very long, which means that they likely have to come up with a whole new core of talent around these players.

The risk here is one of dynastic failure. I’m not calling the Padres a dynasty in terms of baseball success, but more how the term has been used historically. Lots of warlords in history managed to get a throne, but to establish long-term rule, they had to survive the transition to the next rulers. The Astros are an example of a team that has avoided dynastic failure; only a handful of the players on the team that won the World Series in 2017 were still on the roster when Houston won the World Series in 2022. Only Jose Altuve and Alex Bregman remain among the Astros’ offensive contributors today, and the only pitcher still in Houston, Lance McCullers Jr., won’t pitch again until 2024 [and Verlander who I forgot about for some very odd reason -DS]. They basically came up with nearly an entirely new team in five years.

Baseball history is riddled with successful teams that were unable to transition to the next era without a significant interregnum, such as the Utley-Howard Phillies and the Tigers during the peak Miguel Cabrera years. But those Phillies won a World Series, and while the Tigers didn’t, they had more playoff success than these Padres teams have had. To achieve that success, the Padres are going to have to be extremely creative over the next five years, lest they end up as one of the great “what ifs” in baseball history. Spending money and having a few big stars won’t be enough.