Colby Rasmus, the Astros, and Strikeouts
I don’t think one should require much convincing that the Houston Astros are taking a worthwhile shot in signing Colby Rasmus. Most simply, it’s a one-year contract for a 28-year-old, and it’s worth just $8 million. Rasmus has had a volatile career — last year he finished with a .287 OBP — but he was still overall an average hitter. The season before, he was a lot better than that. The Astros had a role for Rasmus, after dealing Dexter Fowler. If he’s good, he’ll help. If he’s really good, he’ll be worth a qualifying offer. If he’s bad, well, lots of Astros have been bad, and Rasmus alone won’t stop the Astros from getting where they’re trying to go. At the end of the day, 2015 is just a season the Astros have to play out before the seasons they want to play out.
So I don’t think the contract is necessarily that interesting. Rasmus is talented, and he’s trying to bounce back. The Astros, as a team, aren’t as good as the Mariners, Angels or A’s, so it seems like they’ll be fighting the Rangers for fourth in the American League West. A year from now, I doubt we’ll be thinking much about this. But there is one interesting note we can discuss in more detail: Rasmus strikes out a lot. Several Astros strike out a lot. It seems like the Astros are going to strike out a lot.
The caveat is that the season hasn’t started yet, so we don’t know what else the Astros might do, but let’s consider the current projected team depth chart. Rasmus is on it, as a regular. George Springer is on it, as a regular. Also, Evan Gattis. Also, Chris Carter. Also, Jon Singleton, to some extent. I pulled up each player’s 2014 contact rate, and then I weighted those by projected 2015 playing time. The result: a team contact rate of 74.5%. That assumes no changes from last season, but contact rate is a pretty stable metric.
Just last year, the Astros struck out 23.7% of the time as a team, a rate that was 2.2 standard deviations higher than the mean. Below, a table of projected 2015 team strikeout rates, with the corresponding standard deviations. Note that projections are based on Steamer and the depth charts, and for now, Steamer is projecting lower-than-expected strikeout rates across the board, by more than a full percentage point. So, the most important thing here is the standard-deviation column.
| Team | Projected K% | St. Dev. |
|---|---|---|
| Astros | 22.6% | 2.5 |
| Cubs | 22.0% | 2.1 |
| Padres | 20.8% | 1.3 |
| Marlins | 20.6% | 1.2 |
| Reds | 20.4% | 1.0 |
| Orioles | 20.0% | 0.8 |
| Yankees | 19.9% | 0.7 |
| Twins | 19.6% | 0.5 |
| Angels | 19.5% | 0.5 |
| Mariners | 19.3% | 0.3 |
| Pirates | 19.1% | 0.2 |
| Rays | 19.0% | 0.1 |
| Mets | 18.9% | 0.1 |
| White Sox | 18.9% | 0.1 |
| Dodgers | 18.8% | 0.0 |
| Diamondbacks | 18.7% | -0.1 |
| Rockies | 18.6% | -0.1 |
| Indians | 18.5% | -0.2 |
| Rangers | 18.1% | -0.5 |
| Nationals | 18.0% | -0.5 |
| Brewers | 17.9% | -0.6 |
| Phillies | 17.9% | -0.6 |
| Braves | 17.8% | -0.6 |
| Tigers | 17.7% | -0.7 |
| Blue Jays | 17.7% | -0.7 |
| Cardinals | 17.5% | -0.8 |
| Red Sox | 17.3% | -1.0 |
| Athletics | 16.4% | -1.6 |
| Royals | 16.3% | -1.6 |
| Giants | 16.1% | -1.8 |
The Astros are projected to strike out more than anyone. It’s them, then the Cubs, then a gap between second and third place. I noted that, last year, the Astros’ team strikeout rate was 2.2 standard deviations higher than the mean. This year they’re projected at +2.5, which is obviously even higher. So the Astros are projected to strike out a bit more, relative to the league.
As a quick aside, look toward the bottom of the table. Four teams in particular project to substantially reduce their strikeout rates. Those teams, compared to themselves in 2014:
- White Sox: -1.4 standard deviations
- Giants: -1.4
- Braves: -1.6
- Red Sox: -1.9
Last season, Boston’s strikeout rate was higher than the mean by 0.9 standard deviations. Their Steamer projection: lower than the mean, by 1.0 standard deviations. It’s the biggest projected change in baseball. It’s not surprising to see the Giants, given the additions of Nori Aoki and Casey McGehee. Nor is it surprising to see the Braves, who this year are going to be differently bad.
Back to Houston. They did bring in Jed Lowrie, who doesn’t strike out too much. Hank Conger’s strikeouts are manageable. Luis Valbuena is pretty good at putting the ball in play. You’ve seen enough of Jose Altuve to know of his skills. The strikeouts aren’t going to be completely out of control. But, there’s always some concern that the offense might ultimately underachieve, because of all the whiffing. This comes up frequently when a team looks like it’s going to have a whiffing problem. I, personally, don’t think there’s much of anything to worry about.
Here’s an obvious graph: wOBA and runs scored are very closely related. From the past decade:
That’s about as strong as a relationship ever gets, as baseball analysis is concerned. Runs are one measure of offensive productivity. wOBA is another such measure. One is a lot like the other. This doesn’t even bother to consider baserunning, but that’s almost always a minor thing.
Anyway, based on the runs/wOBA relationship, we can use wOBA to calculate an “expected runs” figure. I think I’ve done this very analysis before right here on FanGraphs, but I don’t remember if or when, so, here we are. Once we have expected runs, we can calculate the difference between expected runs and actual runs. Regarding these differences: is there any relationship between the differences and a team’s strikeout frequency? I’ve created a simple measure we’ll call K% Index, which is just team K% divided by league K%. So, a K% Index over 1 indicates a team that struck out a lot. The opposite is the opposite.
Turns out, yeah, no, nothing to speak of.
It’s a total mess. A total, random mess. High-strikeout teams have under-performed; high-strikeout teams have over-performed. Low-strikeout teams have under-performed; low-strikeout teams have over-performed. There is no observable relationship. Whatever the Astros end up expected to score, they should actually score something close to that amount. It doesn’t matter if they strike out 25% of the time.
There is something that’s missing. This analysis has considered after-the-fact relationships. What about players on teams projected to strike out a lot, and players on teams projected not to strike out a lot? Do players on strikeout-prone teams under-perform offensive projections? Do players on contact-heavy teams over-perform offensive projections? I don’t have an answer to these questions right now. Maybe someday I will. But I haven’t read anything convincing on the matter. I assume there’s nothing meaningful to it. I’ll believe the opposite when I have reason to do so.
As of this moment, based on Steamer and the depth charts, the Astros are projected to be 13 runs better than average, swinging the bat. For the most part they’ve built an offense around power, and they’re going to score runs because they’re going to hit dingers. At the same time, the Astros are projected to lose more games than they win, with a corresponding negative run differential. It’s not the strikeouts that are likely to hold them back from 2015 contention. Rather, it’s that it looks like the Astros have a relatively weak defense, and they also have a relatively weak rotation, particularly after the first couple guys. The product is getting better. Colby Rasmus should be good for the product. Yet the product isn’t yet better enough. The good news, perhaps, is no one thought it would be.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.
Are those numbers updated with yesterday’s trade? Given that Fowler strikes out a bit more than Valbuena the Cubs and Stros may be in a dead heat for most strikeouts.
As a Cubs fan I’ve been watching with interest as the Cubs seemingly ignore K rate for their draft picks and acquisitions during this entire rebuild. I’m a bit squeamish about whether its going to work out. I guess this winter the Stros just decided to join the party with the Gattis and Rasmus acquisitions so they can double the sample size of teams that strike out at a 22% rate yet still hope to win.
After watching a post-season where the teams that put the ball in play the most walked away from seemingly better teams I’m a little skeptical about whether this experiment will work.
I pointed this out yesterday in response to Jeff’s earlier post about the Giants’ signing Aoki, but it seems to me that the Giants have been making a point the past several years to target not just high contact hitters but hitters who use the whole field (and therefore less prone to shifts). They may be wrong in focusing on contact rate, since as Jeff’s graph indicates there seems to be no relation at all between K% and run scoring, at least in the regular season. But it is often mentioned as one possible reason the Giants have been successful in postseason and the interesting thing to me is that the Giants themselves seem to believe it’s true.
Most 2015 projections project Gattis playing a lot more than I expect in LF. The Astros may play Rasmus in LF with Marisnick in CF. Rasmus had a problem with balls getting over his head last year which would not be a problem in LF in Houston as those are likely off the wall or HRs. Marisnick playing more than projected would hurt the offense, but this configuration of the defense would likely help the defense more than the offense is hurt.
I suspect that Singleton will get a fairly short leash and Carter/ Gattis will get a lot of time at first with Grossman/ Marisnick in LF.
It’s my understanding that Rasmus was told to play unnaturally shallow. The team was trading SLG for BA, which has it’s own break-even as far as strategies go, but would probably make his numbers look better or worse depending on actual balls in play. I’d love to see a heatmap of balls he got to compared to his peers based on time in the air.
Marisnick won’t even make the team out of ST.
As a side note, has anyone noticed that the Astros are suddenly a very interesting team? A rotation of Keuchel, Feldman, McHugh, Oberholtzer and Peacock with their newly acquired bullpen combined with a line-up of Castro, Singleton, Altuve, Lowrie/ Gonzalez, Valbuena, Gattis, Rasmus, Springer and Carter is nothing to sneeze at.
If you match them up with my Cubbies its hard to say which is the better team- and they’re in an easier division with a lower payroll.
Thank you, Jeff Luhnow.
80 wins isn’t aggressive, is it? Their division has arguably gotten weaker.
I think 80 wins is still moderately aggressive. No one in that division has gotten markedly better, but ANA/OAK/SEA all project to be above .500 and Texas should be less bad by virtue of better health. Not saying the Astros will lose 100, but I think 80 wins would be like an 80th-90th percentile result.
If I told you a year ago a rotation of Keuchel, Feldman, McHugh, Oberholtzer and Peacock would be interesting, it would have raised a few eyebrows. I’m still not sold. I need to see basically all of the do it again before I believe.
There is nothing interesting about anything involving Scott Feldman.
Brad Peacock is not a fun pitcher to watch, and to some extent neither is Scott Feldman; you’re also more confident in Jon Singleton than many of us.
But I do, broadly, agree: the Astros are pretty interesting. Two or three pretty good pitchers, a bullpen that won’t have diarrhoea all over the mound every night, and at least three very fun batters in Springer, Altuve, and Chris “fences or bust” Carter. The Astros won’t be my idea of hot primteime viewing in 2015, but they won’t be dull, either. I’ll watch.
The Cubbies.
Wow wrong on so many counts. No they still don’t look that interesting, no the rotation does not look very good, and no the team does not project to win enough games to be relevant. Also over the last year, three, or even five the ALW is better then the NLC by winning percentage, and are part of the harder league, so your smoked thinking that they have a harder devision.
The Astros were the clearly-worst team in baseball a few years ago. But they got a new owner, a progressive GM, and they’ve been making smart moves. They took a big step forward last year, and it’s easy to get excited about their continued improvement. But there’s a lot of steps between 51 wins and a playoff contender. But they’re still probably a bottom-third team.
Steamer projects the Astros to be below-average in nearly every way: their rotation (4.28 FIP, tied for 22nd in WAR), bullpen (3.91 FIP, tied for 21st in WAR), batting average (.241), OBP (.309), baserunning (-2.2 runs below average), and fielding (-21.4 runs below average). The only exception is their power (.164 IsoP), which should be good enough to result in an above-average offense despite the contact issues.
Interesting, but shouldn’t we consider their projected OBP and WOBA to have a better idea of their runs projection?
A high strike out player can be an above avg hitter(mike trout last year) or can be a below avg hitter like Singleton was last year.
This team will definitely hit dingers. But will their on base ability be at least avg to allow them to score an above avg number of runs per game?
Also another thing to consider is that low obp high strike hitters ussualy dont take quality at bats.(of course one has to analyze the players rates and hitting abilities).
What do you think jeff?
This strategy is not surprising as potential upside run production gives you a chance to win games. Over the long haul it’s a wash but a few well timed home runs could make a difference. Just an opinion but the FO may be under more pressure to win than what is indicated and high-contact, high-power is too expensive for a team at this stage.
What doesn’t make sense is if you have a long-term view of building a top-tier team, why would you pile on so many hitters with contact issues. While I haven’t seen any research on the topic, my sense is that the high strikeout / high power strategy won’t fare well in the post season as these hitters will be over-matched against top level pitching.
Astros front office is likely not under too much pressure, but is likely trying to convince the owner to open the wallet next offseason once they actually get paid for being on TV locally. Astros current front office has been compiling lots of high contact hitters in minors. Gattis trade is most likely Singleton insurance. Rasmus is just a stop gap. Astros have been “bargain bin” and “dumpster diving” in free agency so it is not very representative of what they value more than other teams (which I believe to be contact and defense, even though Gattis trade is opposite to most of their other non “bargain bin” moves).
If Singleton under performs, Gattis and Carter man first base/DH. If Singleton performs, Astros have Gattis or Carter to dangle as trade bait for a team that “needs” right handed power.
At the winter meetings the owner announced Luhnow had been given an extension: http://m.mlb.com/news/article/103664876/astros-owner-jim-crane-gm-jeff-luhnow-recently-received-contract-extension . Not the sign of a GM in hot water
The goals of signings are mainly about getting better on the field, but with several constraints:
1) The powers that be (other owners, MLBPA, commish, agents, local bigwigs) have given Crane/Luhnow/Astros a pass the past 2 years on their payroll level because they understood the situation the franchise was in, including the RSN disaster. With the RSN situation resolved, Crane went out and said they planned on adding ~$20m in payroll. If they reneged on that and had an extreme-outlier payroll sitation again, everyone would have gone ape$hit. Luhnow was/is obligated to spend money on something for reasons that are essentially political.
2) Granted that target date for playoffs is 2016-17, the Astros do not want to spend money now in a way that costs them opportunites in the future. Rasmus’s deal is 1-year. Jed Lowrie’s is front-loaded. Their current payroll commitments for ’16 are only $35M (although Gattis, Keuchel, Carter, & Castro have arbs), and only $20m committed for 2017. Expect them to be in the mix for Price or Zimmerman next offseason
3) Given their desire to not tie up 2016-17 payroll yet, that sharply limits the kind of player they can acquire this offseason. All quality FA’s want 4+ years and will still demand a you-suck premium from the Astros. That limits them to bottom-tier starters (what Lowrie is now), relief pitchers (Gregerson/Neshek), and flyer/reclamation projects (Rasmus).
4) Because of the you-suck premium, getting to mediocrity in 2015 has long-term value above and beyond the attendance and goodwill improvement (make no mistake as a fan- watching mediocrity is way better than watching suck). Being just ‘ok’ give way more credibility with free agents than does being bad. If they crack 80 wins, they can credibly tell David Price, “With you, we’re a contender.”
Here’s a relatively recent article on Crane’s growing impatience and increasing reliance on Ryan and Biggio. Interesting read…
http://headlinesamerica.com/madden-robertson-signs-with-white-sox-but-astros-emerge
Maybe this is the year Yu Darvish gets the perfect game against the Astros.
Marwin Gonzales will always be a fan-favorite in Houston.
Astros management have got to be feeling pretty good about themselves today. They upgrade in the infield, get better defensively in the outfield, bring in some pitching depth, and even save $1.5m-odd in salary in 2015.
I’m with Fergie’s Boys on this: they are suddenly an interesting team. Most likely they aren’t doing anything special next year. But the team has so many boom/bust types that there’s an outside chance that everything clicks and they go on an absolute tear.
There are a ton of x factors to be sure. There are only three or four reliable veterans on the whole team. But…. there are enough upside plays there that this team could actually make a playoff spot even if a couple of them really bust. We don’t actually know what the ‘Stros payroll cap really is since they’ve been taking and saving for three years but given how low their projected payroll is, you have to figure they have $10-20M to spend on a big acquisition if they want to spend. We know they have the prospects to make that sort of deal interesting too.
Personally, I think removing Bo Porter from the situation guarantees some improvement too.
He almost certainly wouldn’t be interested (and with Straily and, reportedly, Vogelsong in the mix, they probably aren’t too), but add James Shields to that rotation and suddenly they look like one of the giant mess of average teams in with a shot of being this years’ Royals. Agree, they surely have a bunch of money to play with.
I’d say that with Vogelsong, they’re already there. Keuchel and McHugh have to prove they can repeat their 2014 years but if even one of them does, there’s nothing wrong that that rotation. Keep in mind that since Colorado and Houston are in the NL, that’s probably the toughest pitching assignment in baseball between the hitters’ park and the DH.
Sorry. Meant Colorado and AZ are in the NL (obviously). Houston is the only hitter’s park in the AL.
What ?!?
Houston has a 100 park factor, neutral.
(Colorado) 117
Rangers 106
Red Sox, White Sox, (Diamondbacks) 104
Yankees, Blue Jays 103
Orioles, Tigers 102
Royals, Twins 101
Houston is actually a below average AL park for offense.
Power and strikeouts are a good way to build an offense. – 2014 Barves
well, they had the strikeouts, but were 14th in the NL in slg%.
….ISO?
Also, 2013 Braves. When they had a really good offense.
For a CF who (for whatever reason) has had trouble with balls hit over his head… enjoy that hill, Colby.
Its probably not so much the hill as the deep center field. He’ll probably just stop well short of the hill and hope the ball bounces back to him. However, with that weird dimension to the deep center field, he could have a lot of balls fall in for extra bases.
that hill should be outlawed. it’s a completely unnecessary safety issue
A quick google search shows there a lot of people hurt from running into outfield walls, while conversely, no on has ever hurt themselves on Minute Maid’s hill in CF.
It might not be there next year.
No one comments on the fact that in the outrageous free agent market this offseason, a player who projections at minimum for 2 WAR only gets $8M?
He’s 28-year-old, has been worth 2.65 WAR/600 over his career, and had a 4.8 WAR season as recently as 2013. The crowdsoruced fan projection has him at 2.6 WAR, which should translate to about $15.6M/year. How does no one bid higher than $8M? Is it because of the fallout with LaRussa a few years ago?
Rasmus reportedly didn’t get along with the staff in Toronto either. I’m sure that pushed his value down quite a bit.
However, you’re right that this was a huge bargain. I initially saw a report of only $4M, which would have made it an even bigger bargain than Aoki if only because Rasmus has more upside.
After the Aoki deal, this one looks like a complete rip off!
Rasmus has been so incredibly inconsistent that this seems about right for both parties. Three bad years and three good years, with the bad year the last in the chain. Astros pay for the down-year Rasmus. Rasmus hopes he can play like he did during his up-years, which will then allow him to get big contract next year. Everyone’s a winner!
I don’t know that Rasmus projects “at a minimum” for 2 WAR. The crux is the defensive value of a centerfielder who has been hurt a lot. When he is healthy, he is a fine defensive player. When not, he is pretty bad. I have no idea what defensive projection to give him to him for 2015 (and the playing time projection is no picnic either). My best guess is a -5/150 defensive projection and 500 PAs. He’s probably a 1.5 WAR player at that. The key piece of evidence though would be the medical reports.
3 of the past 4 seasons he’s failed to hit above .225 or have an obp north of .300.
Is it just coincidence that the seven teams with the lowest projected k% all happen to be serious contenders?
Yes.
Pitching is all about striking batters out. Why is there less of an emphasis on low strikeout hitters?
Pitching is also about not putting guys on base and avoiding solid contact.
Well, the short answer is that hitters have more control over BABIP and power than pitchers do. That’s why there’s more correlation between K% and run-scoring for pitchers than there is for hitters.
Thanks and good point. I would love to see the long answer if you have a link to a place where i could read it in greater detail.
Hmm… Buster Olney and Jeff Sullivan must be twins separated at birth: http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/buster-olney/post/_/id/9215
All those strikeouts make this team both boring and frustrating.
All those Homeruns make this team both interesting and exciting.
Yes, I know this is Fangraphs and we are supposed to believe that all the value of a player is in his projected WAR, but still I have to say this. I think Rasmus’s baggage is particularly unsettling as an Astro, where he will be their most experienced position player. Nobody would ever intentionally use Colby as a role model but if he has any clubhouse influence on all those kids it will only be harmful.
I’d say Jed Lowrie is their veteran role model, but it’s easy to make an argument for Rasmus since he has played more games.
I would say Chad Qualls and Scott Feldman are their veteran role models. They also have some guys hanging around the organization with personal service contracts named Biggio, Bagwell, and Clemens.
Can we repeat this exercise for walks & K’s? The Astros look like they are going to set all kinds of TTO records.
Singleton’s 2015 projection: .261/.363/.477
The Astros have upgraded their defense at SS, 3B, and CF.