Archive for Teams

The idea of giving a six-year contract to a pitcher scares the dickens out of an awful lot of people. As for the idea of giving a six-year contract to Johnny Cueto? It seems all the more terrifying, given Cueto’s somewhat checkered history. But here we are, with the Giants following up on the Jeff Samardzija acquisition by signing Cueto for six years and $130 million. Before the Diamondbacks signed Zack Greinke, they were said to have offered Cueto six years and $120 million; he looks smart now for turning that down.

Absolutely, this is a six-year guarantee. For Cueto, he’s now looking at a floor of $130 million over six seasons, so it makes sense that’s how this is being reported. Yet as has become the trend, this is a deal with a player opt-out clause, two years in. The industry is seeing more and more of these, and the rest of us are still trying to figure out how to wrap our heads around them. The best I’ve seen it put: this kind of contract is a two-year deal with a four-year player option. And while, in the event of something going horribly wrong, the Giants will be stuck with a monster mistake, it looks to me like Cueto’s in line to leave after 2017. It seems like both parties want it that way.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Giants have signed Johnny Cueto to a six-year deal, with an opt-out clause after two years. The opt-out makes valuing these deals tougher than usual, but six years and $130 million seems like a lot for a guy that has a league-average career strikeout rate and a checkered injury history. And the opt-out favors the player, so those don’t make it look any better for the team.

That’s the negativity. You can still be excited about this deal, but it’s going to take a more nuanced look at the pitcher. You’ll have to look past some basic metrics.

Read the rest of this entry »

I saw a reference not long ago to the White Sox and Padres, regarding how they tell us it doesn’t matter who wins the offseason. The reference was made in an article about the Cubs. Now, the Cubs’ offseason isn’t over. Nor are the rest of the offseasons, so, who knows how the landscape will look by the end? But there are some crucial differences here. For one, there was more criticism of what the White Sox and Padres did. For two, the Cubs have worked on a team that was already legitimately good. As I write this, I believe the Cubs are the best team in baseball. It’s not irrefutable, but there’s a hell of an argument for the opinion.

More moves will be made, and we’ll see improvements to other contenders. The Cubs’ projection is unlikely to budge very much. Still, there are active rumors, surrounding players like Jorge Soler and Javier Baez. Reports suggest the Cubs are most interested in strengthening their starting rotation. Reports aren’t the same as actual moves, and actions speak louder than words and all that, but it’s worth wondering: how badly do the Cubs need a starting pitcher? Consider this part 1 of our series: how badly do the Cubs need anything?

Read the rest of this entry »

The Pirates’ ZiPS projections came out today, and it’s generally a rosy picture. If you give Pitching Genius Ray Searage some hope with Jon Niese, Jeff Locke, and Allen Webster in the back end of the pitching rotation, and have a little hope in the Jordy Mercer’s bat, you could see league-average or better production all around the diamond. Even if you don’t believe those arms can do it, the team has Tyler Glasnow and Jameson Taillon this year in the minors, perhaps ready to contribute further.

In any case, it looks like more of the same from the Bucs, except for one glaring situation: first base. Michael Morse is fun, Michael Morse has power, but Michael Morse is projected to be a replacement-level first baseman.

It appears, from recent comments made by general manager Neal Huntington to Rob Biertempfel, that the Pirates don’t have much money. Using arbitration projections for their current roster, they might have as little as $5 or $6 million to spend on first base, if they retain their $10 million closer Mark Melancon. How do they find a platoon partner for the right-handed Morse for that kind of scratch?

Read the rest of this entry »

The Chicago Cubs won 97 games last season, went to the National League Championship Series, and had one of the top prospects in baseball debut with outstanding success. Many teams might look at such a season, nod their heads with approval, and try to simply maintain a semblance of that high level of achievement when planning and making moves for the following season. The current version of the Cubs, however, are in win-everything mode, and they seem desperate to improve upon a 97-win season. With an aggressive Theo Epstein, deep-pocketed owners, and a clear window to make a run at a long-absent title, the Cubs have already made some of the biggest acquisitions of the 2015 offseason.

The biggest, of course, is Jason Heyward, a top 15 player by Wins Above Replacement during the 2015 season. With his eight-year, $184 million contract, he joins Anthony Rizzo and Kris Bryant as the young core of a team that could challenge for World Series titles for the foreseeable future. It’s easy to proclaim the Cubs as favorites to win one of the strongest divisions in baseball after this move – they did, in essence, turn one of their rivals’ best players into one of their own – but that idea is cemented by the fact that they now have three of the best 20 position players from last season by WAR. Take a look at the top 20 position players by WAR, with each player’s 2016 team:

The Cubs head into next season with three out of 20 of this past season’s best players, and that’s the kind of statement that forces everyone to sit up and take serious notice. Having two position players of this caliber is rare enough for a team in a given year; having three is a foundation on which dynasties are sometimes built.

If we assume that all three players will stay healthy and produce at around the same level next year, each will be in the top 20 or better for position players (per Steamer projections on FanGraphs, Rizzo, Bryant, and Heyward are all projected to be top 10 players, in fact). This got me thinking: what is the track record of teams that have this level of talent in their lineup? Have they accounted for a disproportionate number of World Series victories, even if we don’t take into account the strength of their respective pitching staffs?

Read the rest on Fox Sports.

On Friday, the Cubs won the bidding for Jason Heyward, convincing the outfielder to come to Chicago despite offers for more guaranteed money from the Nationals, the Cardinals, and reportedly one other team, perhaps the Angels. While Chicago’s offer of $184 million over eight years is certainly a substantial amount, he apparently could have taken $200 million guaranteed by going with one of the other offers. Instead he chose the Cubs, and along with putting him on baseball’s best team in 2016, the fascinating structure of the contract Chicago gave him may end up making this deal a big win for both sides.

The case for the contract being a big win for the Cubs is easy; Heyward is a very good player who will be paid like a decent one during his time in Chicago. To this point, Heyward has put up +28 WAR in six years in the majors; for the Cubs to break even on the total guaranteed money in this deal, Heyward would have to only put up about +20 WAR over the next eight years. This is essentially the kind of performance the Cubs are paying for with this deal.

Read the rest of this entry »

Last week, I wrote a piece about Derek Fisher, who was supposedly part of the package going back to Philly in exchange for super-reliever Ken Giles. Now that the dust has finally settled on that trade, we’ve learned that Fisher wasn’t actually involved. So I basically wrote about Derek Fisher for no reason in particular. Instead, the Astros included former first-overall pick Mark Appel. A couple of guys named Arauz — Harold and Jonathan, going to Philly and Houston, respectively — were also included.

It hasn’t exactly been smooth sailing for Appel since he went first overall back in June of 2013. Between 2013 and 2014, he pitched to a 5.93 ERA and 3.86 FIP over 121 innings, with most of his work coming in A-Ball. His ERA and FIP converged last season, when he put up a 4.45 ERA and 4.30 FIP between Double-A and Triple-A. All told, Appel’s struck out 20% of opposing batters, and has walked 8% over the past two and a half years — roughly the same as an average minor leaguer.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Boston Red Sox didn’t trade Henry Owens during the Winter Meetings. They still might trade him, depending on what kind of offers they receive for the 23-year-old lefty. While there’s no such thing as too much pitching, Boston does have depth in that department, and Dave Dombrowski likes power arms. Owens isn’t necessarily velocity deficient, but he’s more finesse than flamethrower.

Once viewed as untouchable, Owens is no longer looked at as sure-thing stud. He failed to dominate in Triple-A, and his 11 big league starts were a mixed bag. The club’s former top pitching prospect split eight decisions and finished with a 4.57 ERA and a 4.28 FIP.

As expected, Owens showed off an excellent changeup, which he threw 24.7% of the time after being called up in early August. How well he commanded his fastball largely dictated whether he was rock-and-rolling or getting rocked by opposing batters. The fastball averaged 89.1 mph, a tick or two less than in past years.

Owens talked about his first two months of MLB action in the closing days of September.

———

Owens on pitch sequencing: “It’s definitely an evolving process for me. When I came up and pitched against the Yankees and Detroit – the teams I faced early on – I was predominantly fastball. I was trying to establish my stuff and see how it played up here. After a few outings, I started mixing it up more. Not my repertoire, per se, but the sequencing changed. Of course, it can change in any game, and depend somewhat on the lineup.” Read the rest of this entry »

After having typically appeared in the very hallowed pages of Baseball Think Factory, Dan Szymborski’s ZiPS projections have been released at FanGraphs the past couple years. The exercise continues this offseason. Below are the projections for the Pittsburgh Pirates. Szymborski can be found at ESPN and on Twitter at @DSzymborski.

Other Projections: Atlanta / Cincinnati / Kansas City / Philadelphia / Toronto.

Batters
Andrew McCutchen has produced between -15 and -20 fielding runs in center field over the past two seasons, according both to Defensive Runs Saved (DRS) and Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR). It’s not ideal, that, but it also represents basically all the flaws in McCutchen’s current profile. Indeed, ZiPS projects the Pirates’ center fielder to improve slightly on his WAR total this coming year in slightly fewer plate appearances.

Because his role was unclear entering 2015, Jung-ho Kang was omitted from the infield portion of last year’s Pittsburgh depth chart; this year, he’s the centerpiece of it. The algorithm in Dan Szymborski’s computer doesn’t account specifically for how Kang’s season ended with a torn meniscus and fractured tibia. What it does account for is how Kang recorded something less than a full complement of plate appearances. Projected to miss all or some of April, Kang’s projected plate-appearance total (494) seems reasonable.

The most notable weakness among the club’s positional projections appears to be first base, currently occupied by Michael Morse. It would be a surprise to find that position occupied by Morse on opening day.

Read the rest of this entry »

Given the competitive nature of the baseball industry, teams don’t go around spilling their secrets. If a team had a perfect formula for predicting injuries, it wouldn’t be in their interest to give that jewel away to the teams they are trying to beat on the field. The same is true, to a lesser extent, with player evaluations. If a team thinks the league is overrating one of its prospects because the league doesn’t have complete information, it doesn’t benefit the team to tell the league why it’s wrong.

As a result of this dynamic, we always have to take public comments from clubs with a grain of salt. Comments from team officials are designed to serve the team’s interest and that means they don’t always reveal the complete truth. We accept this as part of life, but generally expect teams to be somewhat constrained by things that sound true. For example, if the Braves had discovered some type of flaw with Shelby Miller, they wouldn’t have told everyone they were shopping him because he was due to break down. They would say they were shopping him because he’s a valuable player and they’re looking to rebuild. The latter isn’t totally untrue, it’s just not the full truth.

Teams know things they don’t want to share and we assume they only share things that serve their interest. Sometimes it’s about public relations, sometimes it’s strategy, and sometimes it’s to build good will with the media. There are lots of reasons that teams might choose to share information, but in most cases they’re not forced to say anything at all. Most of the time, teams say what we expect them to say. A lot of the time it’s largely the truth, but sometimes it isn’t.

Read the rest of this entry »