FanGraphs Baseball

The Hardball Times Baseball Annual 2015!

Ladies and gentlemen, The Hardball Times Baseball Annual 2015 is now ready and waiting to be devoured. It is the 11th edition of the book. This year marks the end of an era, as Dave Studeman worked on the Annual for the final time this year.

cover2015
As such, we really blew out the book this year — it checks in at 400 pages, which if you’re not familiar with the Annual, is 100 more pages than usual! The price, however, remains the same — $15.99. Or perhaps less depending on what point in time you purchase it from Amazon.

It is available now for purchase at Amazon, or direct from our independent publishing platform, Createspace. You can read a full breakdown of the table of contents in my post that went up a few minutes ago at THT Live.

This book is a labor of love for us every year, and for 11 years it has been Studes’ baby. We tried to make his last time around a special one, and we hope you’ll agree that it is. The book is full of posts from our great team here, including Dave Cameron, Jeff Sullivan, Eno Sarris, Carson Cistulli and Tony Blengino; old friends like Matthew Carruth and Steve Treder; and guests like Chris St. John, Alan Nathan and of course, sabermetric titans Craig Wright and Bill James.

We hope you enjoy it!!!


The Top-Five Reds Prospects by Projected WAR

This morning, Kiley McDaniel published his consummately researched and demonstrably authoritative prospect list for the Cincinnati Reds. What follows is a different exercise than that, one much smaller in scope and designed to identify not Cincinnati’s top overall prospects but rather the rookie-eligible players in the Reds system who are most ready to produce wins at the major-league level in 2015 (regardless of whether they’re likely to receive the opportunity to do so). No attempt has been made, in other words, to account for future value.

Below are the top-five prospects in the Reds system by projected WAR. To assemble this brief list, what I’ve done is to locate the Steamer 600 projections for all the prospects to whom McDaniel assessed a Future Value grade of 40 or greater. Hitters’ numbers are normalized to 550 plate appearances; starting pitchers’, to 150 innings — i.e. the playing-time thresholds at which a league-average player would produce a 2.0 WAR. Catcher projections are prorated to 415 plate appearances to account for their reduced playing time.

Note that, in many cases, defensive value has been calculated entirely by positional adjustment based on the relevant player’s minor-league defensive starts — which is to say, there has been no attempt to account for the runs a player is likely to save in the field. As a result, players with an impressive offensive profile relative to their position are sometimes perhaps overvalued — that is, in such cases where their actual defensive skills are sub-par.

5. Kyle Waldrop, OF (Profile)

PA AVG OBP SLG wRC+ WAR
550 .244 .282 .369 80 -0.3

Waldrop began the 2014 season by repeating at High-A Bakersfield and reacted precisely the way a club would want him to — which is to say, by exhibiting greater control of the plate and also producing better contact (or, at least a markedly higher BABIP, which is the best statistical proxy). He retained those improvements following a mid-June promotion to Double-A Pensacola, as well — which, that’s encouraging for a 22-year-old. Given his positional limitations, his future major-league value would appear to depend on the degree to which he’s able to convert his above-average raw power to games. Steamer, for its part, projects him to hit only 13 home runs per 600 plate appearances.

Read the rest of this entry »


Let’s Design a Cole Hamels-to-Boston Trade

Boy is it ever easy to trade away other people’s stuff. From a distance, it’s easy to recognize when a guy has to go, as things are uncomplicated by memories and emotions. It sucks the Philadelphia Phillies just about have to trade Cole Hamels. He’s great, and he’s been there forever, through some really good times, and people have developed an attachment to him. Even the Phillies have officially recognized the era is over, but moving Hamels would be a painful kind of closure. The front office doesn’t want to deal Hamels for younger, unfamiliar talent. But it has to happen. As popular as Hamels is, from an objective standpoint, he’s not getting better. And he’d mean a lot more to a team with a prayer of winning something over the next couple years.

So the Phillies ought to be looking to cash in on Hamels. More seriously than they did around the deadline, I mean. The Phillies are poised to gut what there is to gut, and Hamels is a front-line starter who’d hit a market thirsty for front-line starters. Probably the most popular rumor so far: Hamels leaving the Phillies for the Boston Red Sox, in exchange for a package that involved young players. Clearly, nothing has yet been agreed to, but clearly, there will be some more negotiations. So what could we conceivably see as a trade? Let’s design a Red Sox move for Cole Hamels.

Read the rest of this entry »


Evaluating the Prospects: Cincinnati Reds

Evaluating the Prospects: Rangers, Rockies, Diamondbacks, Twins, Astros, Red Sox, Cubs, White Sox, Reds & Phillies

Scouting Explained: Introduction, Hitting Pt 1 Pt 2 Pt 3 Pt 4 Pt 5 Pt 6

If you asked me before I started making calls on the Reds what I expected from their system, I would’ve said average to a bit below.  I was surprised to find they have at least average depth and a surprising amount of high end talent; they have an above-average eight 50+ FV players and three more that could’ve been in that group.  While there isn’t a slam-dunk, top-20 overall prospect in the bunch, this is an impressive group, buoyed by aggressive international signings and an instinct to look for talent in unusual places in the draft.

One of those tendencies is going after athletic relievers with three pitches and making them into starters.  This approach failed nominally with Aroldis Chapman, but he’s obviously worked out pretty well.  Iglesias, Lorenzen and Howard were all signed in the last 12 months with little to no starting experience and all have the chance to turn into mid-rotation starters.  A fringe benefit of having two athletic, legitimate hitting prospects that are top pitching prospects in an NL organization is that they should be above average hitters (among pitchers) if they become big league starters.

After trades to acquire Mat Latos, Sean Marshall, Jonathan Broxton and Shin-Soo Choo depleted the system, Reds execs feel like the cupboard is full once again, with much of the top minor league talent in the upper levels.  Due to this and a big group of experienced 20-something big league contributors (Devin Mesoraco, Jay Bruce, Homer Bailey, Todd Frazier, Mike Leake, Chapman, Latos), the MLB growth assets list is shorter than most and includes an interesting case in Negron.

Read the rest of this entry »


Q&A: Dave Owen, Detroit Tigers’ Director of Player Development

As Detroit’s director of player development, Dave Owen is in charge of a farm system seemingly short on sure-thing talent. The team’s top prospect (according Baseball America), Devon Travis, was traded to Toronto for Anthony Gose. The No. 2 prospect, Steven Moya, struck out 161 times in Double-A. No. 3, Buck Farmer, had an 11.57 ERA in a four-game cameo after being promoted to the big leagues. No. 4, Derek Hill, is 18 years old and hit .208 in rookie ball.

It would be a mistake to dismiss the potential of the Tigers’ system. Moya had 35 home runs this year and has light-tower power. Farmer’s failure followed eye-opening performances in the minors. Hill was the 23rd-overall pick in this year’s draft.

The trio doesn’t represent the only talent in the pipeline. Jonathon Crawford, the Tigers’ first-round pick on 2013, had a 2.85 ERA in low-A West Michigan. Kevin Ziomek, last year’s second-round pick, had a 2.27 ERA and an 11.1 K/9 on the same club. A number of other players possess potentially promising futures as well.

——

Owen on the organization’s approach with first-year players: “We let them play. We want to give the kids a chance to breathe. I don’t think it’s right to do much with them the first year. We don’t have all the answers. How can we start making adjustments the first time we see a kid play? That first year is such a whirlwind for them anyway, with the draft and everything going on. We want to see them and evaluate, and we”ll eventually work in a few tweaks here and there.”

On Derek Hill: “We got Derek this year in the draft, so I’ve just seen him a little bit. It’s a small sample size, but this guy is exciting. He’s fun to watch. He’s just a young kid – he’s just out of high school – but he can really run. He’s a glider who runs easy and can really cover some ground. He’s a true centerfielder. At the plate, it looks like he’s going to be able to use all fields. I can see him being a base stealer. This kid has the raw potential to be a really good major-league player.”

On Steven Moya: “He’s got a chance to be a special guy. He’s got great power and it’s not just pull. He’s got power all over the park. He can go out to left field and center field. It’s a nice package. He’s a big, young man – a big, strong kid. He’s got a great body.

“Sometimes he is (too aggressive). He’s still learning himself as far as strike-zone discipline and pitch recognition. Mo’s working on that. He’s learning how teams are going to attack him – how they’re pitching him — and he’s learning how to make adjustments to compensate for that.

“It’s important to be realistic and know you have weaknesses that you need to make better. Mo does. He has a tremendous idea of what he needs to do and he’s very diligent about working on them.”

On advancing players through the system: “Our role is to get these kids in spots to gain experience and have success. We want to give them an opportunity to grow as players. Movement, as far as promotions from one level to the next, is really… a lot of it depends on success. A lot of it depends on how they’re playing. You want to keep challenging these guys. Let’s say a player is in Grand Rapids, our (West Michigan) low-A ball club, and he’s tearing it up. If you don’t feel that league is challenging him anymore, you push him to the next level. You keep doing that and hopefully he ends up in Detroit.”

On aggressively promoting Buck Farmer: “Sometimes it just comes down to timing – specific needs our organization needs at a specific time – and at that time it was Buck Farmer. It very easily could have been Jonathon Crawford or Kevin Ziomek. There were quite a few guys on that Grand Rapids team that are good-looking prospects.

“As a group, we just felt like (Farmer) was a kid who had the weapons to compete. Not that the other guys don’t. This is definitely not any disrespect for any of of other players, it’s just that we felt it was the right time to give him a shot.”

On Jonathon Crawford: “Jonathon has tremendous ability. He’s a kid who was our top pick, so we expect really good things out of him. He’s kind of in the same mold of a lot of those guys – with Kevin (Ziomek), with Chad Green, with (Austin) Kubitza, with Buck. It’s about consistency with his pitches, consistency with his delivery, commanding his fastball and his secondary stuff. When he’s right, man, he can dominate. He has power stuff. It’s really exciting. And he’s a good athlete. He’ll find his place.”

On Kevin Ziomek: “Kevin has a great feel for pitching. I’m really looking forward to him continuing his growth. He’s got three average-to-plus pitches, and he’s got some deception in his delivery. He’s a good-looking kid. He’s got that first full season under his belt and he’s been through a spring training, so he knows what to expect next year. I know we expect a lot out of him.”

On Robbie Ray: It’s hard to go to the big leagues and stay. A lot of guys will go to the big leagues and then get send back down. They’ll use that to help them and Robbie is one of those guys. He understands now what it’s like, and that are adjustments to make. Baseball is a game of adjustments. You get there and see what it’s all about – you get in the mix – and find out ‘this wasn’t working as well as I thought it should be.’ You work on that and get it right. You make yourself better so you’re more prepared when you go back. Robbie has a tremendous arm. With him, I think it’s more location and repeating his delivery.”

On the Devon Travis deal: “Dave Dombrowski is very smart and he’s always going to ask for a lot of opinions, not only of me, but of other people in our organization. We all have our opinions of what a guy is going to do in the future, and how he fits. It’s ultimately Dave’s decision – he’s the boss – and he’s going to do his homework before he makes this kind of move.

“I talked to Devon after the trade was made and told him how much we appreciate what he did for the Tigers. He’s a young man who is very professional. We do everything we can to help all of our guys grow as players, and I wished Devon continued success.”


Effectively Wild Episode 577: Backloaded Contracts and Listener Emails

Ben and Sam banter about non-revelatory rumors and new details about the Giancarlo Stanton deal, then answer listener emails about front-office roles, offensive eras, and more.


FanGraphs Audio: Dave Cameron Analyzes All Atlanta Deals

Episode 505
Dave Cameron is both (a) the managing editor of FanGraphs and (b) the guest on this particular edition of FanGraphs Audio — during which edition he discusses mostly the recent baseball deals involving Jason Heyward, Russell Martin, and (vitally) Tommy La Stella.

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 37 min play time.)

Read the rest of this entry »

00:36:35

FanGraphs After Dark Chat – 11/18/14

5:32
Paul Swydan: Hi everybody! Jeff and I will be here at 9 pm ET to cram some baseball down your cramholes. In the meantime, gorge on the polls I’ve set up!

See you soon!

9:00
Paul Swydan: Let’s get it.

9:00
Comment From Pale Hose
Can we can an after dark preview of the Hardball Times Annual? Is there a tentative release date?

9:00
:

Hi everyone and useful info for the off season.

9:01
Paul Swydan: That’s Jeff’s way of saying he’s already sick of the offseason. 🙂

9:01
Jeff Zimmerman: This is all Paul’s baby. I have seen the cover.

Read the rest of this entry »


White Sox Sign Andrew Miller Lite(?)

If you’re anything like me, you kind of forgot that Zach Duke was still a major-league baseball player. And in fairness, less than a year ago, Duke no longer looked like a major-league baseball player. So the news that Duke got picked up by the White Sox for three years and $15 million came as a mild surprise to me, for two reasons. Immediately, I thought, that seems like a lot for a regular lefty middle reliever.

But Duke is no regular lefty middle reliever. In an effort to stick, Duke changed his throwing motion, which you can visualize here with the help of Texas Leaguers:

DukeRelease

This past season, for a full season, Duke committed to a couple of arm slots, one lower and one higher. In 2013, Duke experimented with the lower slot against lefties, but in 2014 he used it against lefties and righties alike. For an idea of how this looks, behold 2011 Duke and 2014 Duke:

dukeold

dukenew

Duke, in addition to changing his delivery, has also tweaked his pitches and pitch mixes. The end result: Zach Duke, in 2014, in no way resembled previous editions of himself.

Let’s go back to 1950. Let’s look at all the pitchers who threw at least 30 innings in back-to-back seasons. All right, so, in 2013, Duke struck out just under 13% of hitters. In 2014, he struck out just over 31% of hitters. That gain of more than 18 percentage points is the third-largest gain in the spreadsheet. The second belongs to Wade Davis, and that can be explained by a shift from the rotation to the bullpen. The biggest gain, kind of hilariously: +21%, for 1974-75 Skip Lockwood. It’s hilarious because the biggest drop in the spreadsheet is: -20%, for 1979-80 Skip Lockwood. Anyway, enough about Skip Lockwood.

Zach Duke turned himself into something else. And though he lowered his arm slot, he was highly effective against lefties and righties, and he generated a ton of groundballs. Zach Duke became an awesome reliever, and with that in mind, consider this passage from MLB Trade Rumors:

Earlier today, reports indicated that David Robertson is seeking a four-year deal in the mold of Jonathan Papelbon‘s $50MM contract, and the asking price on top lefty reliever Andrew Miller might not be much lower. Jason Mastrodonato of MassLive.com hears from a source that Miller is seeking “at least” a four-year deal and isn’t listening to any offers that have anything less than an “astounding” average annual value.

Now is when I get to take some liberties. We know that, for the overwhelming majority of players, it’s important to look at more than just the most recent season. But with a guy like Duke, who’s changed his own profile, the past is of little predictive meaning, because what Duke did in 2012 doesn’t tell us anything of value about how he’ll do in 2015. He doesn’t throw like that anymore. So now, this table. Understand that this table is biased. It’s comparing one guy’s single season to two other guys’ past three seasons. But I still think this is of interest, even though I concede I’m pushing an agenda:

Pitcher Year(s) K% – BB% FIP- xFIP-
Zach Duke 2014 24% 56 56
Andrew Miller 2012 – 2014 27% 57 59
David Robertson 2012 – 2014 25% 64 62

Consider what you might expect Miller or Robertson to do in 2015. Duke kind of just did that. It was the first time he’d ever done that, but it was also the first time he’d ever pitched like he pitched, so. Miller and Robertson might be slightly more reliable, but the White Sox didn’t sign Duke for a Miller/Robertson price — they got Duke for a relative bargain, even though his odds might be almost as good.

So it’s an interesting move. The White Sox aren’t yet a contending team, so maybe it’s a little odd to see them putting a veteran in the bullpen on a multi-year contract. But for one thing, the Sox might not be too far away, and for another, if Duke does well, he becomes easily tradeable. If he has another season or two like the last one, he could bring back one or two good prospects, because he’d look a lot like how Andrew Miller looked. And if Duke busts, or gets hurt, or just under-performs, it’s not a crippling investment and the White Sox’s window isn’t yet open anyway. They can afford a wasted $15 million, if it comes to that. And the upside is significant.

Relievers are volatile, and Duke has had just one good season. Andrew Miller and David Robertson are also relievers. Maybe, the White Sox signed Andrew Miller lite. Or, maybe, the White Sox signed Andrew Miller.


La Stella Trade Provides Clues to Valuation of Bonus Slots

On Sunday — while much of America watched football, and at least one American (the author, in this case) shopped for boxed wines at a local discount grocer — the Atlanta Braves traded Tommy La Stella to the Chicago Cubs in exchange for right-hander Arodys Vizcaino and the right to spend about $800 thousand more internationally (without penalty) between now and July 2nd.

At face value, and perhaps even below face value, the motivations for the trade are somewhat obscure — insofar, that is, as Chicago very famously has a surplus of promising young infielders while Atlanta, now more than ever, lacks a reliable option at second base. That said, it’s probably wise to proceed with any further consideration of this deal under the assumption that all the actors in it are behaving rationally, as Chicago and Atlanta — in particular with the elevation of John Coppolella’s influence in the latter’s front office — have smart and well-informed decision-makers.

In terms of incentives for making such a trade the Cubs have the most glaringly obvious one. Because they far exceeded their international spending limit in 2013-14, they’re forbidden during the present international signing period from offering more than a $250 thousand bonus to any one prospect. Despite that, however, they were still assessed bonus slots — one for $2.3 million, one for $458 thousand, one for $309 thousand, and so on — like all the other 29 major-league teams. These slots, logic would appear to dictate, have value to the Cubs only as a tradeable asset. Otherwise, they would merely disappear come July 2 of this next year.

Read the rest of this entry »