I recently posed a question to 12 players. It was a question that doesn’t have an easy answer. Given the subjectivity involved, it doesn’t even have a right answer.
If you have to win one game, who do you want on the mound?
Players could not choose a teammate and only active pitchers were eligible. Their responses are listed below in alphabetical order. Read the rest of this entry »
Super agent Scott Boras is known to boast about his clients’ market value, particularly as each player nears or enters free agency. Oh, Boras doesn’t come right out and give a number. Sometimes he gives a range. Sometimes he talks on background and allows a reporter to claim “Sources say Boras is looking for 5 years/$100 million for Johnny So-in-So.”
This week, Boras tried to set a floor for Reds outfielder Shin-Soo Choo, who will be a free agent this winter. Jon Heyman had suggested in August — based on discussions with “baseball executives” — that Choo’s new contract could be in the $90 million to $100 million range. On Wednesday Heyman followed up, noting the considerable backlash against such a high number for Choo. And there was backlash from Boras, too. He believes $90 million to $100 million is too low for Choo.
“As a custom of the industry, prognostications by executives this time of year are dramatically divergent from the real market,” Boras said in a phone interview. “I don’t think anyone correctly predicted what Jayson Werth or Carl Crawford got.”
The interesting question is what Boras predicted Werth and his other clients would get. How close were Boras’ pre-contract comments with the deals he eventually negotiated for his clients? Does he undersell? Oversell? Something in-between?
It’s not completely set in stone, but we can be pretty sure that next Tuesday, the Pirates and Reds are going to square off in the NL Wild Card game. If the Pirates sweep the Reds and the Cardinals can’t win a single game against the Cubs, then Pittsburgh and St. Louis would tie for the division title, but let’s be honest, that’s probably not happening. Without giving up entirely, the Pirates can start planning for next Tuesday’s win-or-go-home game.
So, let’s talk strategy. Last year, I appealed to the Braves to just skip the starter entirely, using Craig Kimbrel to open the game, and then mix-and-match behind him to take advantage of platoon match-ups and let the bullpen carry them to the division series. I still believe in in the theory of skipping the starter in an elimination game, but the reality is that the participants in these games are people, and they are used to set routines, and divergence from their established roles might have a negative impact on their performance. It is probably, in reality, too crazy of a strategy for any team to actually adopt.
Home-field advantage is a strange concept, or should I say, a strange reality. It doesn’t really matter, for our purposes, why it exists — it just matters that it exists. It’s there, all of the time, in every single baseball game, and while I wouldn’t say it’s an unspoken thing, it’s seldom thought of in depth. A team playing at home has an advantage it wouldn’t have in a neutral site. A team playing on the road is at a corresponding disadvantage. We accept that it is, and we don’t talk much about it, and when we talk about potential edges, it’s usually ignored in favor of pointing at match-ups. It’s almost too boring to point out Team X stands better odds because they’re playing in their ballpark. Someone’s always playing at their ballpark.
But home-field advantage is exactly what the Reds and Pirates have to play for this weekend. Very fleeting home-field advantage — home-field advantage in the one-game wild-card playoff between the two rivals. The teams will play three before they play one, and the Pirates are 50-31 at home, while the Reds are 49-28. Each would prefer to play before its own partisan audience. It’s obvious that it matters who gets to play at home. But how much does it matter? What’s a way that we can think about this?
The big secret isn’t much of a secret. As a base-stealer, Billy Hamilton has seemed automatic — but he did get thrown out in the minors. In fact, he got thrown out a whole mess of times.
Since debuting in 2009, Hamilton was thrown out stealing in the minors on 84 occasions, and his overall success rate was right around 82%. Granted, that’s excellent. Granted, maybe Hamilton has improved his ability to pick spots and read pitchers. Granted, who knows the contributions made by minor-league umpires or minor-league field conditions? But Hamilton had been thrown out stealing before. Plenty. It was going to happen to him eventually in the majors. That was inevitable. Major-league players are better than minor-league players.
But most people didn’t expect Hamilton’s first caught-stealing to come on Sept. 25. No one would’ve expected the opposing battery to consist of Daisuke Matsuzaka and Juan Centeno. Hamilton’s first steal came against Yadier Molina. People don’t even know who Juan Centeno is. More people know about him now. Centeno is the first big-leaguer to throw out maybe the next generation’s best base-runner, and Centeno himself might not be long for the big-league spotlight.
Joey Votto is the major-league leader in walks, by counting and by rate. He’s always been a guy willing and happy to take a free base, and I should note that the very term “free base” is disrespectful to the base on balls, as if walks don’t require work. Anyway, Votto is also the National League leader in on-base percentage. The point: Votto doesn’t make many outs, relative to the rest of his peers, because he’s disciplined about when he swings, and his swing is productive on contact.
Nevertheless, Votto slugged 37 dingers once, driving in 113 runs, and as such some people are displeased with his current standard of patience. Some people with “Reds” on their paychecks think Votto should be more aggressive, especially with runners on, since he’s paid to be a run producer. He is a run producer, but not in a way that makes everyone happy. Votto, some people say, isn’t good enough, considering what he allegedly could be.
Monday against the Mets, Votto came to the plate five times. He reached first base five times, all on walks. He drew a walk in the first, a walk in the second, a walk in the fourth, a walk in the seventh, and a walk in the ninth. The last batter to draw five walks in five plate appearances was Mike Baxter in August 2012, but that game was started by Edinson Volquez so it hardly counts. In all, we have a record of 33 games in which a batter walked all five times he hit. This is an unusual and exceptional performance, and I thought it ought to be examined through the lens of the Joey Votto Passivity Index. Could Votto have put balls in play, or were pitchers just not giving him anything?
Last night, the Pirates won their 90th game of the season, and in the process, they clinched the organization’s first playoff berth in 21 years. You probably know that this is also their first winning season since 1992 as well, so calling this team a breakthrough for the organization is probably understating the importance of the 2013 roster. So, now that they’ve reached the postseason — or at least Game One of the playoffs — let’s take a look at how they finally overcame two decades of futility to put an excellent team together.
I recently posed a question to 11 players and three coaches. It was based on the new selection process for awarding Gold Gloves. Beginning this year, defensive metrics will comprise 25 percent of the “vote,” with 75 percent remaining in the hands of managers and coaches.
How much should defensive metrics factor into the Gold Glove award?
Their responses are listed below in alphabetical order.
——
Gordon Beckham, Chicago White Sox infielder: “I don’t know exactly how all that stuff works, but I will say this: There are some people who go after a ball and not quite get to it, but they traveled a long way to come close. Do they get credit for that range? How you’re positioned also impacts whether you get to a ball. Is that factored in?
“Overall, I guess it’s just another tool. I don’t know how that stuff is measured, so I can‘t really offer much of an opinion as to whether it‘s a good thing or not.”
Tom Brookens, Detroit Tigers third base coach: “It should be factored in, although 25 percent would be as much as I’d like to see. My eyes tell me who makes good plays and who doesn’t. But honestly, a lot of times we don’t see certain players a lot. It’s sometimes hard to judge how good a guy is compared to another guy. We seen one guy play six games and another play 16. We’re inevitably going to see a lot of nice plays by the guy we saw 16 times, and it will stick in our mind. I’d be in favor of looking at the stats and evaluating them myself.”
Brian Butterfield, Boston Red Sox third base coach: “I’m still learning about the different methods of measuring range. When I vote… I think the majority should be the eyeballs of the coaches, but I also want to see the numbers. If a guy has a high error total, I certainly have to consider that.
“Before all the sabermetrics came in, I would tell our people upstairs that I want a numbers sheet before voting. I want to see things like errors and total chances. Sometimes total chances might better define a player. A guy positions himself better or has more range, and is he playing behind a strikeout pitching staff or a ground ball pitching staff? A lot factors in. Defining a good defensive player is an inexact science.
“You also only see guys a certain amount of times over the course of the season. I consider that and would hope other voters consider that too. I think the coaches need to take some time when they fill out their ballots. This is an important award for a young man. I don’t take it lightly, so if numbers make our choices better, that’s a good thing.”
Brian Dozier, Minnesota Twins infielder: “This is the first I’ve heard of it. I think they should [play a role]. In the past, a lot of who wins a defensive award has had to do with offensive stats. Guys I felt were the best at their position defensively didn’t win because they got out-hit. As much as I don’t like sabermetrics — you don’t play the game on paper — it could be a good thing as far as defensive awards.”
J.J. Hardy, Baltimore Orioles infielder: “I think that’s fair, and I think it’s good the coaches get a chance to look at those statistics. Obviously, statistics mean a lot. I think defensive stats are starting to hold more weight. They’ve started coming up with some new ones and if they show who the better defensive players are, I’m all for it.”
Torii Hunter, Detroit Tigers outfielder: “I don’t have no say about that, because I don’t really care for it. I’m not a big fan of sabermetrics.”
Austin Jackson, Detroit Tigers outfielder: “How much? All of it, really. It’s the Gold Glove, right? That’s what it should be based on. It will be interesting to see how it goes and I think it’s fine they’re doing that.”
Adam Jones, Baltimore Orioles outfielder: “The numbers should play a big role, because they let you know… but that’s not up to me. I just go out and play my best. But I do wonder how they measure. You have to look at how the outfielders are shifting. You’ll see certain balls drop because an outfielder is playing more to one side. A certain pitcher has higher velocity so you might play oppo, but he hits the ball where you’d have been for a pitcher with less velocity.
“But hey, however they feel like making it. One of the best centerfielders out there is Austin Jackson. He was my pick the last three years for the Gold Glove. I want to win it myself, but all I can do is go out there and play the best defense for my team.”
Mick Kelleher, New York Yankees first base coach: “For a starting point, 25 percent is good and we’ll see how it goes. I like the idea of incorporating that, because it will help us get away from it being a popularity contest where a guy with a good bat is always winning a Gold Glove. I’ve seen a lot of guys I felt were the best at their position not get the Gold Glove. That was happening when I was a player back in the 1970s. This could help correct that.
“If you have a great defensive year and lead the league in fielding, you should win it. It shouldn’t be a popularity contest. And defense is just like offense. You don’t lead the league in hitting six years in a row, and you don’t lead in defense every year either. But we’ve had guys win the Gold Glove 10 years in a row, just because of his reputation. Don’t get me wrong, they’re good fielders, but you couldn’t tell me there wasn’t somebody along the line who didn’t deserve it more. So in my opinion, 25 percent is a good starting point, and if we like how it’s working out, maybe we can increase it.”
John McDonald, Boston Red Sox infielder: “Ideally, you judge off of watching guys day in and day out, rather than highlights and offensive numbers. I think there’s a place for the metric side of it, although numbers, like anything, can be skewed. I think having 25 percent metrics is a good thing. When you put managers and coaches in front of a ballot, offensive numbers factor into their Gold Glove awards. I know that, because I’ve heard coaches talk about it. ’He didn’t hit well enough for me to vote for him.’ That blows me away.”
Lyle Overbay, New York Yankees infielder; “If I knew what all the defensive metrics were, I’d be able to offer a good opinion. I can’t really comment on things I’m not educated on. But I do think there should be something else that goes into it as a deciding factor. The coaches have a lot on their minds and sometimes maybe don’t do all their homework.
“As far as the process, I guess I’m glad they’re doing something. I can’t sit here and bash [the metrics] because they might be doing a good job with that. I know at times, if you haven’t played for a big-market team or hit well enough, you never got a Gold Glove.”
Brendan Ryan, New York Yankees infielder: “I think it should be part of it. I don’t know to what extent, but I like the idea of a panel devoting its time to getting it right. You have a nice blend of black-and-white numbers and a panel paying attention to what’s going on.
“It’s hard for the AL East to pay attention to the AL Central and have an accurate reading on what, say, a third baseman is bringing to the table defensively on an everyday basis. I don’t think it’s fair to the players in the league. Take me for example. I haven’t played against the Orioles hardly at all. Not saying I deserve to win, but they haven’t seen me play, so how would they know?
“We shouldn’t just keep repeating what we do. We should continue to get better when it comes to getting things right. The game is evolving.”
Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Boston Red Sox catcher: “A lot, I guess, but it depends on which defensive metrics. What are they going off of? I do know that in the past, the guy who wins the Gold Glove is the guy who hits the best. Brendan Ryan is one of the best gloves in baseball, but if he hits a buck-eighty, he’s not going to win one. If he hits .280, coaches will more likely look at him and say, ‘He does it day in and day out.’ That’s not right.”
Shane Victorino, Boston Red Sox outfielder: “Stats are used in every other aspect of the game. The game is judged by stats. Writers look at them when it comes to things like the MVP and the Cy Young. I think it’s good to implement them. But on the backside of that, what elements are they going to use? Do they account for the field you play on, the ground you cover? What metrics are going to be used?
“The coaches who are voting don’t get to see certain players very often. That makes it tough for them to judge. If you don’t see someone play every day, you can’t know how good he is. But you can look at metrics; you can line up all these pieces of paper and see, ’OK, this guy has five outfield assists and this guy has 10; this guy has one error and this guy has three.’ Numbers justify how good a player is defensively, just like offensive numbers. I’d like to be able to vote on my personal judgment, but I don’t see all of the players every day. I think it’s good to implement stats.”
——
Note: Thanks to Brandon Warne of ESPN Minnesota for procuring the quote from Brian Dozier.
The AL Cy Young race has gotten pretty interesting. A month ago, Max Scherzer looked like a near lock, with his glistening 19-1 record and strong peripherals that supported the idea that he’d pitched like an ace this year. However, he’s gone 1-2 with a 4.66 ERA in his last five starts, perhaps opening the door for voters to take a closer look at all the candidates. And when they’re investigating, they just may find that the difference in quality of competition is a pretty significant factor this year.
Typical Billy Hamilton story outline: Ordinary introductory paragraph noting Hamilton’s speed when running the bases. Reference to Hamilton’s record-breaking stolen-base numbers in the minor leagues. Note regarding Hamilton’s immediate base-stealing success in the majors. Cautionary remark pertaining to Hamilton’s limited offensive potential at the plate. Renewed appreciation of footspeed. Statement that Hamilton could be one-of-a-kind, at least for his generation. Explanation that — while base-running scores tend to be close to zero — Hamilton looks like an actual valuable weapon. Insert joke that Hamilton is so fast he’s already finished reading this article.
Run-of-the-mill paragraph pointing out how slow Jose Molina is. Note that Molina is perhaps the game’s slowest runner. Obligatory reference to Molina’s high-quality pitch-framing. Joke that Molina slows the game down in more ways than one. Acknowledgment that no one expects catchers to be able to run; decent speed is just gravy. Acknowledgment of Molina’s relatively advanced age. Note that this is not intended as a criticism. Statement that this is just a fact, to which Molina would certainly admit without shame.
Predictable musing about how Hamilton and Molina might compare.
