Allow me to argue something that isn’t going to matter in a day or two. That’s the thing about writing about playoff series — no matter what, the relevance is fleeting. It all seems so important in the moment; it’s all over in just a few blinks of the eye. This argument probably isn’t going to mean very much, and it would’ve been better made before the ALCS began, but think about series keys. A full series is almost entirely unpredictable, only a little less unpredictable than one or two games, so think of this as a general series note, being made with the series in progress.

What it is, I think, is a matter of team identities. When people think about the Kansas City Royals, they think about defense, clutch hitting, and the bullpen. Holy crap, the bullpen, that’s been so valuable for them in the past. It seems like they got past the loss of Greg Holland without even missing a beat. The Toronto Blue Jays? When people think about the Blue Jays, they think about home runs, and David Price, and Marcus Stroman, and home runs. They’re the could-be and should-be and have-already-been offensive juggernaut put together to blast its way to the Series. The Blue Jays are supposed to have the obvious strength. The Royals are supposed to do more of the little things.

One of those being, get the late outs. And even the middle outs, depending on things. The Royals bullpen has a reputation, now, and it’s been fairly earned. The Royals bullpen is thought of as shortening ballgames, a group of arms the opponent doesn’t want to see because it means a total offensive shutdown. The way the pen gets talked about sometimes, it’s like it’s almost invincible. It is, without question, very good. Even without Holland. But an easy thing to miss is the Blue Jays aren’t much worse. Even without Brett Cecil. I don’t know to what extent the bullpens will matter over what’s left of this series, but it doesn’t look like a terrible mismatch.

Read the rest on Just A Bit Outside.

Free agency begins five days after the end of the World Series. As in other recent offseasons, FanGraphs is once again facilitating this offseason a contract-crowdsourcing project, the idea being to harness the wisdom of the crowds to the end of better understanding the giant and large 2015-16 free-agent market.

Below are links to ballots for five of this year’s free agents, representing the second collection of starting pitchers.

Other Players: Brett Anderson / Nori Aoki / Alex Avila / Mark Buehrle / Marlon Byrd / Asdrubal Cabrera / Yoenis Cespedes / Wei-Yin Chen / Bartolo Colon / Johnny Cueto / Chris Davis / Rajai Davis / Alejandro De Aza / Ian Desmond / Stephen Drew / Dexter Fowler / David Freese / Alex Gordon / Jason Heyward / Torii Hunter / Chris Iannetta / Austin Jackson / John Jaso / Kelly Johnson / Matt Joyce / Howie Kendrick / Justin Morneau / Daniel Murphy / David Murphy / Mike Napoli / Dioner Navarro / Gerardo Parra / Steve Pearce / Alexei Ramirez / Colby Rasmus / Alex Rios / Jimmy Rollins / Geovany Soto / Denard Span / Justin Upton / Juan Uribe / Chase Utley / Will Venable / Shane Victorino / Matt Wieters / Chris Young the Outfielder / Ben Zobrist.

R.A. Dickey (Profile)
Some relevant information regarding Dickey:

• Has averaged 218 IP and 1.8 WAR over last three seasons.
• Has averaged 1.7 WAR per 200 IP* over last three seasons.
• Recorded a 2.1 WAR in 214.1 IP in 2015.
• Is projected to record 1.3 WAR per 200 IP**.
• Is entering his age-41 season.
• Made $12.0M in 2015, as part of deal signed in December 2010.

*That is, a roughly average number of innings for a starting pitcher.
**Prorated version of 2016 Steamer projections available here.

Click here to estimate years and dollars for Dickey.

Read the rest of this entry »

Earlier this week, Red Sox president Dave Dombrowski compared the current Red Sox roster to the one currently featured by the Kansas City Royals. For those readers just arriving here today in a time machine from three years ago, that might be surprising. Because for a long time, that would not have been a gesture of praise. For a long time, the Royals were bad; the Red Sox, typically better. But last year Boston missed the playoffs and Kansas City went to the World Series. This year, again, Boston missed the playoffs and Kansas City is very possibly on its way to the World Series. It’s not particularly daring to suggest that the Royals are better than the Red Sox wherein baseball is concerned.

Dombrowski’s decision to compare his roster favorably to the Royals’ make sense: there’s a natural inclination in all of us to imitate the qualities of those we perceive to be better. So of course Dombrowski would compare his last place team to the club that has now reached the ALCS (and, maybe soon, the World Series) in two consecutive seasons. Heck, who wouldn’t want to be like the Royals?

To what degree, though, will the complexion of that Kansas City club, and the means by which it was built, actually influence Dombrowski’s choices this offseason when considering how to construct his own major-league roster? And to what degree will it influence other front offices? If the Royals win the World Series and become the chosen franchise to emulate, can we expect relievers to command top dollar, maybe more than otherwise? To find teams clamoring for contact-oriented athletes? A secret trustworthy source thinks so. Okay, fine, it’s Theo Epstein. Here’s what Epstein said to reporters this past Monday.

The only thing I know for sure is whatever team wins the World Series their particular style of play will be completely in vogue and trumpeted from the rooftops by the media all offseason — and in front offices — as the way to win. If we win the World Series it’s going to be a necessity for every team to develop their own core of young, homegrown position players. If the Mets win it will be required that you have four ridiculous young starting pitchers on the same staff. If the Royals win you need to have speed and athleticism and contact up and down your lineup. If the Blue Jays win you need to fill your lineup with righthanded, epic mashers and make a huge trade at the deadline.

It’s tempting to say Epstein is overstating the case. After all, are MLB teams, ridiculously rich enterprises increasingly run by the cream of the Ivy League, really so susceptible to something as frivolous as who wins a single four-game series? Hell if I know, but even if I did know I’d take Theo Epstein’s opinion over mine. And faced with a choice between conducting a tedious study to verify the truth of his claim or just blindly accepting it blindly, well, in Theo we trust, eh?

Read the rest of this entry »

Read the rest of this entry »

Sitting on the desk of nearly every manager in baseball before any given game are several large packets of information, compiled by that team’s analytics department about that day’s opponent. The packets are thick, and the front pages typically contain images with which you’re likely familiar simply from reading FanGraphs every day. Red and blue heat maps, sometimes varying by handedness, pitch type or count. Spray charts, usually with lines as the visual component rather than dots, and almost always split up by ground balls, fly balls and line drives. The middle and back pages, presumably, get more and more detailed, and the most interesting thing I’ve seen is command data for each opposing pitcher, split up by pitch type.

Condensed versions of these packets are placed in players’ lockers several hours before first pitch, met with varying levels of reception. Some can be seen rigorously studying them, others will give them one quick glance over before crumpling them up and throwing them in the trash.

Information is a good thing, but sports are still physical and reactionary by nature, and for some players, information overload certainly exists as a con. In all reality, for a middle-of-the-season noon game against the Phillies on getaway day, it probably doesn’t matter too much. We’re past that point in the season, now. The scouting reports are to be read. The packets are to be studied.

Over the next week, one American League team will be learning everything there is to know about the New York Metropolitans. Their unique individual tendencies, strategies, weaknesses and strengths. Where they hit the ball, where they pitch the ball, where they stand in the field, how they react to different situations and more. In the grand scheme of things, the advantages to be gained from this information are small, sure, but every little advantage in the World Series is an advantage in the World Series.

Somewhere in the middle of that packet in the manager’s office may exist a page about a team’s tendencies, at the plate, by count. It’s a page that might be skipped over in July. It’s not a page that gets skipped in October. No pages get skipped in October.

Read the rest of this entry »

Twitter was apoplectic. Drug tests were demanded. Old suspensions were being brought up. Hands were wrung. Edinson Volquez? Throwing 96s and 97s deep into his start? Where is this velocity coming from? This can’t possibly be right.

Turns out, Volquez hasn’t even added the most velocity this postseason. He’s fourth or fifth among starters, depending on your definition, and he’s not too far from the the norm that we should be bugging out. The postseason, like the debut, comes with adrenaline, and that adrenaline leads to a bump in velocity. Baseball is that simple sometimes.

Read the rest of this entry »

Ben and Sam discuss a smattering of postseason topics, including Kyle Schwarber, a playoff-team draft, ALCS Game 6, and more.

Podcast (effectively-wild): Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

The Mets just made the formula look pretty simple. You want to win in the playoffs? You have to hit, especially at the right times. You have to be good in the field, and you have to be aware on the basepaths. And you have to have good pitching, and you want to give the ball almost exclusively to the good pitchers. Baseball looks pretty simple when a team does literally everything well, and while you don’t want to just project the Mets’ NLCS performance ahead into the World Series, there’s no denying the fact that the Mets didn’t just beat the Cubs — they clobbered them. They outplayed the Cubs everywhere, and the Cubs would probably be the first to tell you that.

There’s obvious consolation for the Cubs and their fans. If there are any teams set up better for the future, you’re talking about maybe just the Dodgers, and this was a Cubs team that arguably arrived a little ahead of time. There are going to be more opportunities, and there are very likely going to be some NLCS wins. This pain will fade; the future’s too beautiful. One year ago, the Royals felt worse. Now they’re on the verge of getting back to the Series. You know all this stuff. Four losses aside, the Cubs are doing fine.

Yet before we all start to look ahead, to next week and to next season, I want to take a quick chance to reflect on the NLCS that just wrapped up. I don’t do this to rub anyone’s noses in it. I do it just because I think it’s interesting. Within a historical context, just how noncompetitive was this series?

Read the rest of this entry »