Jeff Sullivan FanGraphs Chat — 2/12/16

February 12, 2016

9:02	Jeff Sullivan: Hello friends

9:02	Jeff Sullivan: Welcome to the last Friday baseball chat before spring training?

9:03	BossMan: Mark Teixeira HOFer?

9:03	Jeff Sullivan: Can’t see it. He’d need to have an amazing back half of his 30s to even have a chance

9:04	Lee: Expectations for Blake Swihart?

9:04	Jeff Sullivan: Below-average offense overall, but not by too much, and the Red Sox in general will be satisfied with their catcher position

9:05	Davecat: How many Joey Votto’s away are the Reds from being good?

9:05	Jeff Sullivan: Two away from being decent, so I guess that means three away from being good?

9:05	Jeff Sullivan: Hopefully with two of those Vottos in the outfield and one in the starting rotation

9:06	Mary: What would the 2016 WARs be for the following players if they had been drafted/traded for by the Cardinals: Ackley, Zunino, Montero, Smoak.

9:06	Jeff Sullivan: Just for fun, let’s say…3, 2.5, 0, 1.5

9:06	Jeff Sullivan: I’m not sure if there’s a player-development system that could’ve done much of anything with Montero. Ackley though…what a waste that was

9:07	Jay: How does someone measure the effectiveness of an overhauled development system? Is it strictly results-based after X years, or can you look into the narrative as well?

9:08

Jeff Sullivan: It’s enormously difficult to look into the narrative and try to piece something together *outside* of the results. Every organization will have a philosophy and if you were to read an article that focuses on a system, you’d probably come away feeling pretty good about the organization just for the fact of having read an article that focused on it. The best you can do is examine the results; farms churn out so many players that it’s not really that much about a small sample size after a while

9:08	Jeff Sullivan: Of course, there’s the complication of scouting — how can you tell if the development is good but the scouting is bad?

9:09	Jeff Sullivan: You kind of have to group them together. I don’t know an alternative

9:09	j6takish: Jeff, I discovered this week that Javier Vazquez has 54 career war. Can you think of any other players whose public perception differs so wildly from their actual performance?

9:10	Jeff Sullivan: His problem is that his RA9-WAR is 11 wins lower because he always seemed to under-pitch his peripherals, which was frustrating

9:11	Jeff Sullivan: I think A.J. Burnett is a candidate for a guy who the public has underrated

9:13	Alex: Predictive metrics and projection systems are never too high on Sonny Gray, and yet he consistently outperforms them.

9:13	Jeff Sullivan: Well first let’s be clear about one thing — Gray will only reach 500 career innings in his first or second start of the year. So he hasn’t really consistently outperformed anything yet. He’s just outperformed something so far

9:14	Jeff Sullivan: But any projection system will take a while to come around on a soft-contact guy, which I think is the right approach. It seems like a skill of Gray’s but it does take a while to prove

9:15	Jeff Sullivan: That being said, Gray has the potential within himself to increase his bat-missing ability. The fans already think he’s an ace; with an adjustment or two, the projection numbers would agree

9:16	Aron: Most of the criticism of Taijuan Walker that I’ve seen has stemmed from his upright delivery. What potential ramifications does that carry, and have there been any examples of pitchers that have suffered because of a similar delivery (or had successful careers in spite of it)?

9:18	Jeff Sullivan: Watch some clips of Tyson Ross when you get the chance. You’ll come away believing it’s possible for a pitcher to succeed despite any kind of throwing motion

9:20	Jeff Sullivan: Walker is less extreme than that, and he’s most of the way to where he wants to be. Last year he started throwing a lot of strikes. The remaining key is command or at least control of his breaking ball

9:21	Jeff Sullivan: The fastball is built to live up in the zone and he’s able to bury his offspeed pitch — just needs that breaking ball to increase the speed range

9:22	RK: so gravitional waves huh

9:23	Jeff Sullivan: There’s nothing that makes me feel more stupid than trying to read about space

9:23	Bork: Use 3 words to describe the Orioles current situation.

9:23	Jeff Sullivan: Could be worse

9:24	Bill: How important is ownership? People in Seattle are always clamoring for their ostensibly absentee owners to sell, but as long as they provide an adequate payroll and give the front office flexibility, does it really matter?

9:24	Jeff Sullivan: That’s essentially what you’re looking for. You want enough money, and very limited interference. The interference is frequently a problem

9:26	Jon: Trout starts making $33 mil a year in 2018–with a barren farm system and Pujols’ dead money clogging the books, any chance the Angels start fielding offers at that point, or do you think they’re committed to making sure he’s an Angel for life?

9:27	Jeff Sullivan: In 2018, Trout will be 26, getting paid way, way less than he’s worth

9:30	Jeff Sullivan: I want to apologize for any perceived hiccups because right now I’m having connection issues and I just lost a longer answer to the above question

9:31

Jeff Sullivan: Obviously the Angels will have to try to figure out if Trout is willing to stick around beyond the end of his contract, but he’s almost irreplaceable and I can’t imagine another team being willing to ante up for what would be an almost unprecedented talent exchange. The Angels, I think, have positioned themselves to forever try to build around Trout, and it’s tough to see a better starting point than that

9:31	Jeff Sullivan: Like, if it weren’t for Trout, the Angels might be a team you’d expect to rebuild, but Trout keeps them from having to rebuild almost by himself.

9:32	Jeff Sullivan: It’s hard to be awful with an 8-win player

9:32	Currywurst : How do you feel about the Phaneuf trade, and why do you hate it?

9:32	Jeff Sullivan: I like it, and I’ve intentionally avoided reading any analytical articles or arguments because I don’t want to be told not to like it

9:33	Jeff Sullivan: My hockey fanhood operates nothing like my baseball fanhood

9:33	Jeff Sullivan: and dammit it’s going to stay that way

9:33	Bob: The AL has a DH every game. So why does WAR negatively effect DH?

9:34	Jeff Sullivan: Designated hitters don’t play defense

9:34	Saul: Is there any way to quantify “bad clubhouse guy” – thinking of negative value added by Latos, for example. Seems like a lot of people have said that chemistry happens when the team wins.

9:35	Jeff Sullivan: There’s no good and clean way. I mean, over the course of a career, you could see how a guy’s teams have done relative to preseason projections, but that folds in sooooooooooooo many variables

9:37

Jeff Sullivan: An alternate approach would be to find a selection of “bad clubhouse guys” and see how they’ve been paid, relative to expectations. Latos is clearly being underpaid given the pitching market, and that seems like a reflection of his perceived personality. But how do you identify bad clubhouse guys? Not many out there like Latos

9:38	Kim: How is the international draft/signing system “broken” as people have been claiming, and how might they fix it? Ask the Dodgers to please stop signing all of the good Cuban players?

9:38	Jeff Sullivan: The spending limitations in place haven’t functioned like spending limitations at all so big-spending teams are throwing resources out there while smaller-market teams are having trouble competing, or not even trying

9:40	Jeff Sullivan: Their dream scenario is the international draft, but if that’s a ways away and if they want to preserve something like the status quo for now, they need stronger restrictions, and maybe bigger spending pools

9:41	Davecat: Iglesias or Desclafani going forward?

9:41	Jeff Sullivan: Iglesias by a little but I like them both as big-league starters

9:42	Guest: Vegas win totals came out yesterday, and SF has the most at 90 (!!!). Are the people in Vegas really buying into the whole even year BS? I almost can’t even fathom the idea that a bunch of fanboys are responsible for setting lines that impact millions and millions of dollars.

9:42	Jeff Sullivan: I don’t know why the Giants would be ranked above the Cubs, but it’s easy to see how the Giants could be a really good baseball team this year

9:43	Jeff Sullivan: The infield is outstanding and then you’ve got excellent chances for rebound seasons from Span/Cueto/Samardzija

9:43	Who cares?: What’s the big deal about pitchers and catchers reporting? Spring training is only very marginally less shitty than the rest of the off-season….

9:44	Jeff Sullivan: I’m actually mostly in your corner, but for other people it’s symbolic. People love symbols

9:45	Matt: How would that Kemp to the A’s trade work? The Padres, I assume, would have to cover a pretty significant portion of the contract, and even then I can’t imagine the A’s would surrender any big prospects.

9:46	Jeff Sullivan: Padres send Kemp and money, A’s send Butler and a low-level prospect or two, Padres immediately dump Butler, Padres PR tries to emphasize the prospects’ strengths

9:46	Jeff Sullivan: It would be a dump the Padres try to push as something otherwise

9:46	GnG: Why would the Padres try and trade Kemp to the A’s?

9:46	Jeff Sullivan: Why would they try to keep Kemp on the Padres?

9:46	Bork: Here’s an interesting one – Joey Votto a HoFer?

9:47	Jeff Sullivan: The odds are against it — he needs more seasons like the last one. He’s positioned to age all right, and the voting pool will be younger and more progressive by the time he’s up for election, but right now I’d say it’s more unlikely than likely

9:49

Covelli: Jeff, it took me an embarrassingly long time to cognitively distinguish between the surnames Sullivan and Zimmerman. I apologize for all the questions about Quick Looks and the Mash Report. So, here’s a question for you, who is more dominant at their chosen craft Wade Davis Pitcher or Wade Davis Ethno-Botanist?

9:49	Jeff Sullivan: Wade Davis Ethno-botanist. Wade Davis Pitcher needs to string a bunch more years of this together to stand a chance

9:50	Jeff Sullivan: I somewhat recently finished Davis’ Into The Silence (about Everest, Mallory, etc). Wonderful book!

9:50	whay: Have you ever gone to Spring Training in person? Worth it?

9:51

Jeff Sullivan: Everyone says it used to be more worth it, when it was cheaper and more low-key, but I never attended spring training before it sold out. It’s okay and I’m not heartbroken that we don’t have a company trip to Arizona next month. It’s not going to leave you bankrupt so it would be a fun weekend trip with the right company. But don’t go down there expecting to be blown away by incredible baseball action. It’s mostly about relaxation and sunshine

9:51	Jeff Sullivan: Full disclosure: I really don’t like going to Phoenix

9:52	GnG: Why would the A’s EVER consider getting Kemp from the Padres?

9:52	Jeff Sullivan: The A’s get to play with a DH and the Padres don’t

9:52

John Nash: Liked your Dickerson piece. Did it strikes you as a bit out of character for a team like the Rays, that usually plays it’s cards close to the vest and is always looking to exploit information asymmetry, to announce in the media a team-wide shift in hitting approach? If the back and forth adjustments of hitters and pitchers is all just an extended exercise in game theory, do you see an advantage to be gained by publicly announcing a change in approach like that?

9:54

Jeff Sullivan: It was definitely out of character for the Rays to just broadcast how they changed, so I figure *they* figure it was going to be obvious anyway. Opponents would’ve noticed in a hurry; it’s not like it’s a particularly subtle thing, and since it’s also sort of a league-wide adjustment it’s not Rays-specific. This isn’t a team exploiting an inefficiency. This is a team and a league responding to a change within the game, brought on by pitching dominance

9:54	Davecat: Do you think Mesoraco returns to 2014 form?

9:54	Jeff Sullivan: Not that good, but I expect him to be strong. Forgotten player

9:55	j6takish: You didn’t ask about him in your poll, but cole hamels has never had a 5 WAR season, has only posted a sub 3 era twice and wasn’t even the best pitcher on his own team for most of his career. He is widely considered to be an “ace”

9:55	Jeff Sullivan: He’s had six 5-WAR seasons by runs instead of FIP. I think he deserves credit for that. He’s not a conventional, overpowering ace, but he’s been so good for so long I don’t disagree with the label

9:56	Jeff Sullivan: For me he’s more Bumgarner-ace than Kershaw-ace. Which implies a hierarchy of aces. But you might just prefer fewer aces and that’s fine

9:57	Hannah Hochevar: Hi. You’ve written about how “interesting” Despaigne’s arsenal is. Any chance he turns that interesting into successful with a change of scenery? And, if so, which team do the O’s deal him to right before he puts it all together and wins a Cy Young?

9:57	Jeff Sullivan: The problem is there’s a difference between interesting and good

9:58	Jeff Sullivan: Despaigne is too hittable, and he doesn’t really have much in the way of a chase pitch. He’s more about trying to be bewildering and that’s an uphill battle

9:59	Jeff Sullivan: There’s ability there and he’s creative enough he could find a path to being a No. 4 but as the Orioles intend, he should be considered depth

9:59	Matt: What meaningful projections can be gleaned from Spring Training performance?

9:59	Jeff Sullivan: I think you’re basically looking for velocity changes or repertoire changes. If a guy comes in suddenly throwing a regular changeup, and he didn’t used to have a changeup, that’s a good sign