FanGraphs Baseball

Introduction and #31-32

Roughly four years ago now, the present author facilitated a crowdsourcing project designed to place a “grade” on each of the league’s television and radio broadcast teams. The results weren’t intended to represent the objective quality or skill of the relevant announcers, but rather to provide a clue as to which broadcast teams are likely to appeal most (or least) to the readers of this site.

The results of that original exercise have been useful as a complement to the dumb NERD scores published by the author in these pages. Four years later, however, they’ve become much less useful. In the meantime, a number of the broadcast teams cited in that original effort have changed personnel. It’s possible that the tastes of this site’s readers have changed, also.

About a month ago, the present author began the process of reproducing that original crowdsourcing effort, facilitating a ballots for this site’s readers. This post represents the second installment of the corresponding results.

Below are the 30th- through 21st-ranked television broadcast teams, per the FanGraphs readership.

But first, three notes:

• Teams are ranked in ascending order of Overall rating. Overall ratings are not merely averages of Charisma and Analysis.
• The author has attempted to choose reader comments that are either (a) illustrative of the team’s place in the rankings or (b) conspicuously amusing.
• A complete table of ratings cast will appear in these pages Friday.

30. Philadelphia Phillies
Main Broadcasters: Tom McCarthy and Ben Davis/Matt Stairs.
Ratings (Charisma/Analysis/Overall): 2.3, 2.2, 2.2

Three Reader Comments
• “McCarthy routinely sounds more excited hawking WB Mason products than when the Phillies do something. Of course, the last couple of seasons, the Phillies are roughly as exciting as office supplies.”
• “Weekends with Schmidt are solid.”
• “RIP Harry Kalas.”

Notes
It might be difficult for those who’ve watched Phillies broadcasts in recent years to separate the quality of the club from the appeal of the broadcasters. Certainly, it must be difficult for the broadcasters themselves to muster enthusiasm for a poor team. In any case, if there’s a uniform criticism here, it regards McCarthy and the sort of “professional distance” he maintains, if that makes sense.

Read the rest of this entry »

Guess what! Here’s another place where the Cubs have been really super good. Ground balls — you’re familiar with them. When you’re the team pitching, you want those ground balls to get scooped up and turned into outs. From the Baseball-Reference Play Index, here are the best teams this year against grounders, as measured by slugging percentage allowed:

Twins in last. Cubs in first! Cubs in first by a decent amount. Now, we can track this historically. Here are the league-average marks since 1988:

Something truly bizarre happened between 2000 – 2002. That’s some bad data recording. Or at least, some inconsistent data recording. Those are the three crazy years, but just to be safe, let’s ignore the years before, too, and just focus on what’s happened since 2003. Since 2003, here are the top 10 lowest slugging percentages allowed on grounders:

SLG Allowed, Grounders, 2003 – 2016

Team	Year	SLG
Cubs	2016	0.202
A’s	2005	0.213
Cardinals	2004	0.213
Red Sox	2016	0.215
A’s	2010	0.221
Blue Jays	2008	0.222
Cardinals	2016	0.222
Astros	2006	0.222
A’s	2014	0.223
Mariners	2016	0.223

SOURCE: Baseball-Reference

2016 seasons very obviously incomplete.

Long way to go here — nothing is set in stone. The Cubs’ number will bounce around, and it isn’t quite fair to compare a partial season to a bunch of complete seasons, but this at least tells you about the Cubs’ pace. The Cubs are on pace to be phenomenally good against ground balls, as their lead above is one by 11 points over the 2005 A’s. That there are four teams in there from this season provides that necessary reminder that it’s too soon to go nuts, but, hey, all right, nice job Chicago.

StatCorner provides some related information. There, the Cubs have been 17 runs better than average on grounders. That ranks them No. 1, narrowly ahead of the Indians, and well ahead of the third-place Rockies. The Braves are at -15 runs because everything about the Braves has been terrible. This isn’t about the Braves, though. This is about the Cubs, and about another area where they’ve been an excellent baseball team. They can’t stay this good everywhere. But boy are they ever good.

Devised originally in response to a challenge issued by sabermetric nobleman Rob Neyer, and expanded at the request of nobody, NERD scores represent an attempt to summarize in one number (and on a scale of 0-10) the likely aesthetic appeal or watchability, for the learned fan, of a player or team or game. Read more about the components of and formulae for NERD scores here.

Most Highly Rated Game
Washington at New York NL | 19:10 ET
Scherzer (52.0 IP, 78 xFIP-) vs. Syndergaard (46.1 IP, 60 xFIP-)
One doesn’t require an unusually complex and only modestly useful algorithm to identify this evening’s encounter between Max Scherzer and Noah Syndergaard as the day’s most compelling. That said, the world is populated by a number of things one doesn’t expressly require — and which persist nevertheless. Like an attractive Jøtul-brand cast-iron stove in the corner of the living room, for example. Or like a table constructed from gas pipe and reclaimed pallet wood that you bought on Etsy and really brings the kitchen together. In conclusion: industrial-chic mailbox, brushed-nickel floating house numbers, strikeouts, average fastball velocity, and primitive entry door with strap hinges.

Read the rest of this entry »

We’re back, with another one of these! Previous community polling topics have included front offices, ownerships, pitching coaches, general enthusiasm, and so on. Now I’m here to ask you about team chemistry. You know, that thing that’s impossible to measure, that thing that continues to be debated as if nothing has ever been settled, because nothing has ever been settled. That thing that exists — or doesn’t exist — mostly within a community that does not include yourself, because you yourself are not a major-league baseball player. How does your favorite baseball team get along? You don’t know. How do you think your favorite baseball team gets along?

I don’t know why I’m asking this now, exactly. It’s just coming out of curiosity, and I wouldn’t be any less curious tomorrow, or a week from now. But the timing, I suppose, isn’t bad — we’re deep enough into the season that teams should have personalities, but we’re not so deep everything will just be colored by wins and losses. Braves and Twins aside, everyone still gets to think they have a chance, so nothing has totally gone off the rails.

I do know I’ve been reading the Ben Lindbergh/Sam Miller book, and they’ve discussed chemistry prioritization and observation. I also read this post by Kate Preusser last week, and while that was specifically about the Mariners, it must’ve cemented the topic in my mind. I don’t want to talk about any particular team up front because I don’t want to bias any of the voting down below. But for something that gets talked about so often, I’m a little surprised we haven’t tried this before.

Don’t get me wrong — none of us actually know anything about team chemistry, for sure. I don’t think there’s even an agreed-upon definition. But we do get to observe how players interact, some of the time, and we get to read about more. So I think fans can get a certain sense of how the roster fits together. Whether there’s adequate leadership, whether there’s adequate support, whether there’s adequate interaction between all groups. What idea do you have about your favorite baseball team? Your idea might be wrong, but you might’ve also been wrong about the pitching coach, and I doubt that stopped you from voting back whenever that poll post went up. I’m just hunting for informed opinions. There’s information within informed opinions.

What I love about these poll posts is that they allow us to establish a context. Instead of saying, oh, this team seems to get along, or this team seems unhappy, we have an average, we have comparisons. It’s only by seeing the whole landscape that you can try to identify the standouts. This is why I could use your help! I sure as shoot couldn’t generate this data by myself. I need help from the community, so I can come back and analyze the voting a day or three from now.

You probably have a favorite team, or a couple favorite teams. You probably have some kind of mental definition of team chemistry. How good do you think is the chemistry of your favorite team? We can probably learn something from this. Even if we can’t, at least this is a few minutes you can distract yourself from thinking about the roiling sea of horrors that threatens to drown us all every day that we breathe.

Read the rest of this entry »

Episode 653
Dave Cameron is the managing editor of FanGraphs. During this edition of FanGraphs Audio he examines what the data reveal about slumps, injuries, etc — specifically looking at Yordano Ventura‘s fastball velocity and release point, and then Troy Tulowitzki’s contact rate on pitches in the zone and also exit velocity.

This episode of the program is sponsored by SeatGeek, which site removes both the work and also the hassle from the process of shopping for tickets.

Don’t hesitate to direct pod-related correspondence to @cistulli on Twitter.

You can subscribe to the podcast via iTunes or other feeder things.

Audio after the jump. (Approximately 45 min play time.)

Read the rest of this entry »

Ben and Sam banter about Joey Votto, then discuss what they’d ask Rob Manfred if they knew he’d answer honestly.

Teams were waiting for months, literally months, to see what Tim Lincecum would look like on the other side of his hip surgery. He finally held his showcase, before scouts representing most of the organizations in the game, and, here, let’s put you in their shoes. It’s Tim Lincecum pitching!

All right, that is most definitely Tim Lincecum, and he is most definitely pitching. Is he pitching like a major-league-caliber starter? A major-league-caliber reliever? How many millions of dollars do you give him? Lincecum threw a few dozen pitches, looking like this. Based on that experience, teams had to get negotiating.

Lincecum was certain to sign somewhere. It always felt like he was most likely to sign somewhere out west, even with the Giants not super open to letting him start. Now we’ve just about got a resolution, and it’s the obvious one. Jon Heyman reported Lincecum was leaning toward the Angels, and Ken Rosenthal had some confirmation. This still isn’t finalized, but it’s almost there. I don’t know about the money, but it doesn’t really matter, because it’s not any of our money, and because we can guess that Lincecum is signing for a low base with some incentives. The Angels would’ve had to offer enough to stand out, but their location works to their benefit.

The Angels are obvious because they’re out west, because their rotation sucks, and because they’re somewhere around the fringes of the race. They just managed to sweep the Mariners in Seattle, which was very impressive of them, but their record is not good, and they could use the shot in the arm. The most interesting starter on the Angels is out for a year. The second-most interesting starter on the Angels is healthy and active, but he’s interesting because his velocity has fallen off of a cliff. Andrew Heaney might be done for the year. Tyler Skaggs has had some bumps in his recovery from Tommy John. C.J. Wilson is testing out a new arm slot. Jhoulys Chacin just got picked up from a horrible team for nothing and added to the rotation. Matt Shoemaker has an ERA of literally 9.12. Hector Santiago is useful, and Nick Tropeano is also looking useful, but, I mean, read this paragraph again if you have to. What do the Angels have to lose? How bad could Lincecum possibly be? And, people know him. They like him, and they’re intrigued by him. He generates buzz. That much is undeniable.

Lincecum, for what it’s worth, isn’t game-ready yet. Not for the majors — he’ll go to the minors for some kind of stretch, looking to settle in. No one could actually know how well he’s going to do, but Lincecum has always hung on to one thing. Even as his stuff declined, Lincecum kept on generating swings and misses.

The question now is how much stuff he has. Reports from the showcase had Lincecum topping out around 92, and in 2010, he was effective with a fastball that averaged 91.3. Talk from last fall suggested that Lincecum’s hip surgery could be restorative, and that’s why there’s the perception of upside. If he has some power back, that’s helpful. And even more important, if Lincecum doesn’t hurt anymore, he could achieve improved mechanical consistency, which is at the heart of everything. Better consistency = better location = better results. Every single time a player comes back from injury, you can see reason to hope, and this situation is no different. It’s easy to believe. Everyone wants to believe in a comeback.

The Angels, though, aren’t expecting Lincecum to be in Cy Young form. That would be silly of them to expect, and that would be silly for Lincecum to expect. Truth be told, I don’t know if the Angels are expecting anything. It’s just, their situation was this: The team isn’t good, and it’s been beset by injury. There was some money available, and Lincecum provides potential value, at minimal cost. If he doesn’t work out, well, Matt Shoemaker hasn’t been working out, and Lincecum is more interesting than he is. If he does work out, hey, that’s super, maybe something could happen here. This has been the most obvious potential match since the Garrett Richards news broke. Don’t listen to those people out there; sometimes you can predict baseball.

Sunday, in what was undoubtedly one of the coolest moments of his career that no one remembers, Ian Desmond slugged a lead-changing and eventually game-winning home run. Desmond homered off of a horrible pitch, and then he flipped his bat, which is funnier now.

I’m not convinced there’s anything to learn there. Most hitters would be able to punish a hanging two-strike curveball. Desmond last year probably would’ve been able to punish a hanging two-strike curveball. That being said, Desmond only saw a hanging two-strike curveball because he’d stayed alive in the at-bat. The previous pitch:

One pitch is one pitch, no more and no less. In isolation, it’s a normal-looking foul ball, and maybe Desmond fouls off the same ball a year ago. But a year ago, and even before, Desmond struggled against high fastballs. A year ago in particular, Desmond struggled against plenty of things. That’s why he wound up signing a one-year pillow contract toward the end of the offseason, but a month and a half in, now, Desmond is looking like a total success. Ian Desmond has helped the Rangers scoot back into first place.

Read the rest of this entry »

With Starling Marte away on paternity leave, the Pittsburgh Pirates have called up prospect Alen Hanson from the minor leagues. Hanson was off to a fine start in Triple-A, slashing .288/.309/.398 with seven steals. He spent all of last season at the Triple-A level, too, and hit similarly well: .263/.313/.387 with 35 steals. Throw in that he’s primarily a middle infielder, and it’s clear Hanson had little left to prove in the minors.

If it feels like Hanson’s been on the prospect radar for ages, it’s because he has. Originally signed out of the Dominican way back in 2009, he began gracing top-100 lists after a .309/.381/.528 showing in Low-A back in 2012. Despite his lengthy minor-league tenure, Hanson still has youth on his side. He’ll will play the entire 2016 season as a 23-year-old. Read the rest of this entry »

If you look at Nick Castellanos‘ traditional statistics, you obviously will notice that something is different. His OPS is nearing 1.000 after messing around in the 700 level before. This was the kind of improvement we were hoping for! The wait is over!

If you look at the next level, things begin to muddy. Basically 40% of the third baseman’s balls in play have fallen for hits, compared to 33% in the past. His walks and strikeouts are about the same as his previously established levels, and his batted-ball spray, in terms of pulling versus going oppo, remain roughly the same, too. He’s added a few fly balls, as he’s cut his grounder rate nearly 40%, so we could call it a little bit of power growth plus a lot of luck, and call it a day.

But we’ve got another level of statistics now, and if we look into those numbers, we see the type of growth that seems sustainable, and points to a small step in approach that may lead to a giant leap in production — even if projection systems usually call for restraint in such situations, even for a 24-year-old.

Read the rest of this entry »