On this episode, we discuss the surging underdogs of the AL East before a chat about finishing up prospect lists in time for one of the most eventful weeks on the baseball calendar.
At the top of the show, David Laurila welcomes Geoff Arnold, broadcaster for the Baltimore Orioles. We hear about the club’s recent win streak, exceeding expectations in a very challenging division, and how doing so has made for an entirely different environment at the ballpark. Arnold tells us how stoked the team is for All-Star Jorge López, and how Tyler Wells deserved a nod as well. We also hear about the team’s strong farm system, why Brandon Hyde deserves consideration for Manager of the Year, how the team might handle the trade deadline, and who the O’s might take first overall in the upcoming amateur draft. [3:22]
In the second segment, lead prospect analyst Eric Longenhagen and managing editor Meg Rowley discuss the herculean task that was finishing the 2022 prospect lists. We hear about how the sausage is made when it comes to this annual feat, including how the process has changed over the years. The duo also look ahead to the crowded field of All-Star events, including the Futures Game and the amateur draft, and discuss what they are excited about while also lamenting the week’s imperfect scheduling. Finally, we hear suggestions for how the draft and Futures Game could be marketed differently at a time when fans seem more interested than ever in prospects. [34:34]
To purchase a FanGraphs membership for yourself or as a gift, click here.
To donate to FanGraphs and help us keep things running, click here.
Don’t hesitate to direct pod-related correspondence to @dhhiggins on Twitter.
Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley banter about Shohei Ohtani taking over the MLB WAR lead, a Taylor Ward/Jared Walsh mixup, an on-air “zombie runner” endorsement, another fruitless hidden ball trick attempt, and the need for an amended rule about replay reviews of slide plays, then (26:03) discuss the Blue Jays firing manager Charlie Montoyo and the revelation that the Royals have 10 unvaccinated players. After that (57:28), they meet major leaguers Vinnie Pasquantino and Bubby Rossman, banter more (1:08:45) about Spencer Strider, Sam Haggerty’s walk-up music, the “pie slice” anti-shift rule, a Pesäpallo water feature, and PGA golfers sponsored by MLB, followed by (1:27:26) a Stat Blast about managerial longevity and teams with the most sequential uniform numbers, info on the etymology of “muffin games” and “batter” vs. “striker,” and (1:43:28) a Past Blast from 1875.
As free-agent signings go, you could be forgiven for having missed Martín Pérez’s return to the Rangers. His agreement to a one-year, $4 million deal happened amid a flurry of signings in mid-March, just after the lockout ended, and the transaction even slipped through the cracks in our coverage. That will happen for a guy who’s been knocked around while bouncing around, but in his return to Texas, the 31-year-old lefty has pitched his way onto the AL All-Star team, making him the longest-tenured major leaguer from among this year’s first-time honorees.
The honor is well-deserved. In 106 innings thus far, Pérez has pitched to a 2.72 ERA (71 ERA-) and 3.07 FIP (76 FIP-). His FIP ranks fifth in the AL, and his ERA and 2.3 WAR both rank sixth. Already, all of those numbers represent career bests, including his WAR, which matches his total from 2016. At that time, Pérez was just 25 years old but already in the post-hype phase of his career.
The Rangers originally signed Pérez out of Venezuela on July 2, 2007, via a $580,000 signing bonus. As a 17-year-old he held his own against college draftees in the Northwest League in 2008 and made prospect lists in each of the next five seasons as the team looked to his arrival, hopeful that he could help further the Rangers’ run after back-to-back pennants in 2010 and ’11. The hype was intense. As Jamey Newburg, who has covered Rangers’ prospects dating back to the late 1990s, wrote for D Magazine in June, after splitting his 2009 season between Low-A and Double-A stops, “[H]e flashed unnatural confidence for a teenager, a willingness to throw any pitch in any count. Baseball America tabbed him as the 17th-best prospect in baseball, third among left-handed pitchers (behind Brian Matusz and Madison Bumgarner and ahead of Aroldis Chapman). His feel for the craft and unassuming build triggered comparisons to the likes of Ron Guidry and Johan Santana.” No pressure, kid!
Pérez debuted as a 21-year-old in 2012 and spent part or all of the next six seasons with the team, but the hopes that he would develop into a homegrown ace faded as he battled injuries (including 2014 Tommy John surgery) and a hitter-friendly ballpark. In his time in Texas, he pitched to a 4.63 ERA (103 ERA-) and 4.44 FIP (103 FIP-), totaling 8.6 WAR. The Rangers signed him to a four-year, $12.5 million extension in November 2013, one that included club options for the ’18–20 seasons, but after picking up the first one, they had seen enough, declining his $7.5 million club option for 2019 and paying him a $750,000 buyout.
After reaching free agency, Perez signed modest one-year deals with the Twins and Red Sox, the latter twice; each of those deals included a club option that the team subsequently rejected as well, with Boston giving him what amounted to a 23% pay cut to return for 2020. Though his nomadic stretch began with a very solid first half for Minnesota in 2019, his second-half fade sent him packing. Last year, he pitched his way out of the Red Sox rotation and into its bullpen for the final two months of the season. For those three years, he pitched to a 4.88 ERA (106 ERA-) and 4.75 FIP (107 FIP-) and 2.8 WAR, with his 2021 numbers — a 4.74 ERA (105 ERA-) and 4.82 FIP (114 ERA-) in 114 innings — suggesting that he would be in for more of the same in 2022, though not necessarily with a contender.
To the Rangers, even those unimpressive 2021 numbers represented an improvement upon most of their returning options. While bigger names such as Clayton Kershaw and Carlos Rodón spurned the team’s advances to sign with contenders, just before the lockout Texas landed Jon Gray via a four-year, $56 million deal to head the rotation. Pérez was added in the post-lockout frenzy in the belief that he still represented not only a potential improvement but also a possible mentor for a young staff. “We want a guy with some experience, that’s been through some ups and downs in the big leagues and does things the right way,” said manager Chris Woodward at the time. “That would be probably more beneficial than anything they’ll do on the field to be honest with you. But the next part of that would be the expectation to compete on the field. Obviously we want to bring in somebody that’s gonna be good and that’s gonna pitch quality innings for us.”
Pérez has more than lived up to expectations for the Rangers already, not only with his performance but also, as Newburg reported, with his mentoring of several minor league hurlers. The 6-foot, 200-pound southpaw has never been a pitcher who has missed a ton of bats, and he isn’t suddenly doing so now; though his 19.7% strikeout rate represents a career high, it’s still 1.7 points below the rate of the average starter this season. That said, he’s coupled a slight increase in strikeouts (from 19.1%) with a slight drop in walk rate (from 7.1% to 6.0%), and so his 13.8% strikeout-walk differential is not only a career high, but also nearly double his 7.0% mark from 2012 to ’21. Read the rest of this entry »
Here’s an example of why baseball is complicated. By a lot of measures, Hunter Greene and Spencer Strider are near-identical players. Both are righty pitchers who rely on their four-seam fastballs, for good reason; they’re producing some of the highest average fastball velocities we’ve ever seen from a starter, pushing the limits of what’s possible. They’re doing that as rookies, with Greene, 22, only a year younger than Strider. These are bright futures we’re talking about.
And yet, the on-field results couldn’t be any more different. As of this writing, Greene owns a 5.43 FIP in 85.1 innings, which is close to replacement level. Meanwhile, Strider has been thriving in the Braves’ rotation, with a 2.07 FIP in 46 innings so far as a full-time starter. Baseball is complicated, because even when two pitchers execute a similar blueprint, one can end up with better numbers than the other. With Strider and Greene, something isn’t adding up. Read the rest of this entry »
Dan Szymborski: Feel free to flood with questions, no matter how goofy, because this didn’t appear on the site until five minutes ago, so my queue is looking rather ribsy.
12:05
DR: Where is the FG draft week coverage?
12:05
Dan Szymborski: That’s Eric’s department! I’m sure he has stuff planned
12:05
Greg: Is run differential more or less predictive if you remove the most extreme outcomes on either side of the spectrum (i.e. remove 5 biggest wins and losses for a team and then calculate run differential). Thinking about teams like the Pirates who have some sizable losses but very few sizable wins. Are they more like a -125 run diff team or a -85?
12:06
Dan Szymborski: I think generally, considering how many games there are, it wouldn’t really change things much
Robert Gasser is emerging as one of the most promising pitching prospects in the San Diego system. Over his last six starts with the High-A Fort Wayne TinCaps, the 23-year-old southpaw has fanned 47 batters while allowing just six earned runs in 36-and-two-third innings. On the season, Gasser has a 3.76 ERA to go with a 3.09 FIP; the latter is the third-best mark in the Midwest League.
He isn’t the same pitcher the Padres drafted 71st overall last summer out of the University of Houston. Gasser still throws from a low three-quarters slot, but his arsenal has changed, and to a certain extant, so has his attack plan. Armed with a more diverse mix that includes tweaked grips, the 6-foot-1 El Dorado, California native doesn’t believe in being bland.
David Laurila: What is your M.O. on the mound? In other words, how do you get guys out?
Robert Gasser: “Honestly, just keeping them off balance. I think that’s the most important thing for me. Throwing all of my pitches in the strike zone consistently gives me an opportunity to miss barrels while I’m changing speeds and location.” Read the rest of this entry »
There is a rule in baseball that allows managers to intentionally walk opposing batters automatically. More specifically, “following the signal of the manager’s intention, the umpire will immediately award first base to the batter.” Depending on who you ask, it’s either a minor time saver or completely pointless.
There is a generally accepted practice in baseball that intentional walks are either issued at the start of a plate appearance, after first base becomes open, or when the count begins to favor a batter. You won’t find that anywhere in the rulebook, but it’s true nonetheless. It’s a common-sense practice: the only other time you can walk a batter intentionally is after a pitch tilts the count in the pitcher’s favor, and if an intentional walk makes sense then, it probably made sense before that pitch was thrown.
Baseball conventional wisdom isn’t always correct. In the case of when to intentionally walk a batter, though, it follows straightforward logic. Allow me to make an analogy. Let’s say you and I have made a strange deal. I have 60 seconds to accomplish some task – call it untangling a knot. If I manage it, you’ll owe me $10. Before I start, I make you an offer: you can just hand me $5 now and we’ll call the whole thing off. You can trade the possibility of a $10 loss for the certainty of a $5 loss.
Let’s further say that you turn me down, and that the clock starts. For the first 10 seconds, I don’t do anything — maybe I stubbed my toe and am hopping around in pain. After those 10 seconds, I offer you the same deal: for $5, we can call the same thing off. You wouldn’t take me up on it, of course. You liked your odds enough that you didn’t opt out before, and now I’m less likely to accomplish my task.
Anyway, Tony La Russa intentionally walked José Ramírez yesterday. He did so automatically, in keeping with the rules of the game, by signaling to the umpire from the dugout. He did it in contravention of the generally accepted practices of the game, though, by issuing the walk while Ramírez was behind 0-1 in the count.
In an abstract sense, it’s pretty clear why you wouldn’t do this. The knot-untangling game is a clunky analogy but it gets the point across. There’s no reason to run the numbers: by the numbers, the walk doesn’t make sense. But abstractions don’t always tell the whole story, so let’s look at the specific circumstances around this walk and see if any of them can shed some light on what happened here.
First, the situation. Ramírez came to bat with two outs in the fifth inning. Amed Rosario, the previous batter, had doubled to make the score 4-0 and now stood on second base. Davis Martin, the White Sox starter, stayed in to face Ramírez. Pitching coach Ethan Katz came out for a discussion with Martin. After that meeting came this pitch:
From there, La Russa had seen enough: he walked Ramírez. Martin recovered to strike Franmil Reyes out, escaping the inning. It didn’t matter, in either case; the Sox only scored once all game, and Cleveland held on to win 4-1.
“…Sometimes… they get themselves out. And if they get good patience, it’s like an unintentional intentional walk. So that’s what Ethan went out to say, and the first pitch was on the plate. He fouled it off, so I said, well, put him on. I just think it’s lack of experience for Davis and understanding more about that situation. Because he’s smart enough to know to pitch off the plate and he got it on, cost him two runs. He was supposed to do it again, and after one strike, said no.”
First things first: that explains the pitching meeting. Katz was out there to tell Martin to pitch around Ramírez. Ramírez had singled in two runs in the third inning, as La Russa alluded to above. Easy peasy, right? He wanted Martin to get Ramírez to chase, Ramírez didn’t, let’s face the next batter.
Only, that description glosses over the change in count, which is the most meaningful thing that happened on that first pitch. If you’re looking to record an out, a foul ball is a pretty good place to start. José Ramírez is one of the best hitters in baseball. For his career, he’s hitting .279/.356/.507, and he’s better than that now. Even after 0-1 counts, he’s hitting .266/.307/.472 for a perfectly acceptable 106 wRC+.
But again, the question isn’t whether walking Ramírez made sense. I think I would have walked him there from the start, but I don’t believe it’s an obvious choice either way. The question, instead, is whether the information in that foul ball tilted the balance in favor of an intentional walk.
We know La Russa’s case: the pitch being on the plate proved to him that Martin couldn’t follow his instructions. He wanted pitches out of the zone, he didn’t get them, and he didn’t need to see anything more. It’s not that Ramírez made devastating contact – per Statcast, that foul ball was 63 mph off the bat, though I’m not sure how accurate foul ball exit velocity readings are – but merely the location of the pitch that made an intentional walk a good option.
I can’t tell you what the odds of Ramírez getting a hit on a ball in the strike zone were. La Russa can’t either – but from the sound of his comments, it sounds deterministic. In the third inning, when Martin left a pitch over the plate, it “cost him two runs.” Let’s see the pitch in question:
Unquestionably, two runs scored on that play. Unquestionably, Ramírez hit a single. He even hit the ball pretty hard. But is that a process failure by Martin? I’m not so sure. He threw a well-located changeup that Ramírez put on the ground into the shift. Position your second baseman three steps to the right, and that might be an out instead. Ramírez is great – but he’s hardly a guaranteed base hit every time a pitch is in the strike zone.
There’s really not much more to say than that. In La Russa’s mind, a pitch in the strike zone was unacceptable. I don’t for a second think that Martin meant to throw that changeup in the zone. Pitchers miss their targets sometimes, and Reese McGuire was setting up fairly close to the zone anyway.
I’m just an analyst on the internet. I’ve never managed a team. I won’t claim to know any of the exact numbers here, or whether Katz came out to tell Martin that any pitch in the strike zone, regardless of outcome, would lead to an intentional walk. But if I were La Russa, I wouldn’t give that order.
I’m just projecting, but it seems to me that La Russa is substituting absolutes for probabilities. You can pitch Ramírez in the zone and get an out. You can try to miss the zone and hit it. It’s not black and white – sometimes a bad process leads to a good outcome, and vice versa. That’s baseball in a nutshell: the edges are small either way, and both sides can’t win. All you can do is give yourself the best chance to succeed – pitchers have singled against Jacob deGrom, and Mike Trout has struck out against bad relievers. There are no absolutes.
Maybe I’m misunderstanding La Russa’s logic. Maybe there’s a detail left out somewhere, or something lost in translation. I don’t think so, though. Sometimes, you have to take people at their word. La Russa didn’t care about the fact that the foul ball made the count 0-1. It didn’t enter into his decision making. It wasn’t a question of whether Ramírez’s odds of getting on base changed after the combination of a pitch in the zone and a foul ball. It was just: pitch in zone, walk.
If you like La Russa’s decision making this year, this one won’t change your mind. In fact, you probably agree with him that baseball can be reduced to a binary. Pitches in the zone when you want to throw them out of the zone turn into runs, and so on and so forth.
If you haven’t liked La Russa’s decision making, on the other hand, this is just more evidence. When you deal in absolutes, you miss out on the fact that hitters do worse after 0-1 counts than overall, or that getting the other team’s best hitter to ground the ball into the shift is an overall good thing. You might also inadvertently belittle your pitcher after the game; “he’s smart enough to know” is something people say about children or pets.
If you came here to see the math behind another unlikely intentional walk, I’m sorry. There really isn’t any. You either trust that Tony La Russa knows enough that when he makes a wildly counter-intuitive decision, it’s for good reasons, or you don’t. As best as I can tell, there have never been any similar intentional walks, though our pitch-by-pitch database only goes back to 2002 and it’s entirely possible I missed some anyway. Is your faith in La Russa’s genius enough to outstrip that? That’s for you to decide on your own.
Bashing the White Sox is commonplace these days, and you can’t say the negativity hasn’t been earned. Widely expected by fans, reporters, pundits, and computer projection systems (as well as their sarcastic creators) to steamroll one of the worst divisions in baseball, the Pale Hose have struggled to consistently stay at .500, let alone stay ahead of the Twins and Guardians. Yet there are still reasons to think that the Sox, if not the team they were believed to be, can still salvage the 2022 season without divine intervention.
They’re Still Relevant in All the Projection Systems
Yes, when you look at the White Sox, you see some major, gaping holes, many of which are problems of the team’s own making, whether because of poor evaluation or inaction. Coming into the season, they were near the bottom of the league in our positional power rankings at second base and right field despite an offseason that saw a plethora of good options at those positions. They also didn’t assemble much in the way of depth in places where they had injured players or underwhelming options. Similar to my approach to mowing my backyard, they did the bare minimum.
But all of this is already baked into the cake, so to speak. The projection systems still assume that Leury García is awful and that Chicago needs another bat; the forecasts for players like Yoán Moncada, Yasmani Grandal, Eloy Jiménez, and Lance Lynn have already taken major hits. As for the team’s lack of depth, the ZiPS projected standings use a methodology that attempts to properly discount teams with underwhelming Plan Bs. Read the rest of this entry »
On June 19, the Mariners lost 4–0 to the Angels. It was their second straight shutout loss, ending an 11-game homestand where they went 2–9, dropping them to a season-low 10 games under .500, and leaving their postseason odds at a minuscule 5.3%. Since then, they’ve gone 16–3 and tied the Blue Jays for the final American League Wild Card spot after sweeping them in four games last weekend, passing five teams in the standings during this hot streak and digging themselves out of a pretty deep hole.
As you’d expect for a team playing so well, Seattle has seen contributions from all across the roster. But the pitching staff has been particularly strong, leading the majors in ERA at 2.99 since the beginning of June — a period that includes that aforementioned horrible homestand. In that same span, the starting rotation has posted a 3.06 ERA, and from June 2 to 26, it put together a 24-game streak of allowing three or fewer earned runs. The group’s collective FIP and xFIP during this period are both more than a full run above their ERA, likely indicating some amount of good fortune, but any team that rattles off 16 wins in a 19-game stretch is bound to benefit from some luck. Still, despite the gap between their results and their peripherals, many of Seattle’s starters have made beneficial adjustments to their arsenals that have fueled a lot of their recent success.
Mariners Starters, Since June 1
Player
IP
K/BB
ERA
FIP
xFIP
Robbie Ray
49.2
3.24
1.99
3.67
3.51
Logan Gilbert
47
3.64
3.45
4.05
4.04
Marco Gonzales
43.2
1.33
2.89
4.62
5.00
Chris Flexen
39.2
1.93
3.40
3.44
5.08
George Kirby
38.1
5.67
3.99
4.94
3.67
It all starts with the reigning AL Cy Young award winner, Robbie Ray. Diminished velocity led to a rough first couple of months; through his first 11 starts of the season, his ERA was sitting just under five, though his FIP and xFIP both painted a more optimistic picture. Some of that likely had to do with his propensity to allow a bunch of runs in a single bad inning in nearly all of his starts. But in his start against the Astros on June 6, he made a change to his pitch repertoire, adding a sinker — a pitch that’s now become an integral part of his arsenal:
Last year in Toronto, Ray leaned into his four-seam fastball and slider as his two primary pitches. He continued that trend in Seattle to the point where he was essentially a two-pitch pitcher during the first two months of the season. Whether it was the diminished velocity or batters simply figuring out his approach, he wasn’t nearly as effective. By introducing a sinker into his mix (and throwing his curveball a little bit more, too), he’s given opposing batters a new wrinkle to figure out. Read the rest of this entry »
From the point at which the Twins chose him with the second overall pick out of a Georgia high school a decade ago, Byron Buxton figured to make an All-Star team, or several of them. Yet not until Sunday, in the midst of his eighth major league season, did the powerful and fleet-footed center fielder officially become one. Buxton was among the reserves added to the American League team via a vote by his fellow players.
The honor is well deserved given that the 28-year-old Buxton ranks fourth among all outfielders in WAR (limiting the definition to those who have played at least 50% of their games in the pasture):
By WAR and wRC+, where his mark of 132 is in a virtual tie for 11th among the same group, Buxton is clearly having a strong season, but as his slash line shows, it’s been an uneven one. He’s hardly the first player to make an All-Star team despite carrying an on-base percentage below .300, even in the past decade; Salvador Perez did it annually from 2014-18, in seasons where his first-half OBP was as low as .259, and where his final mark as low as .274 (both 2018). Likewise with batting average when, for example, Mike Zunino had a first-half mark of .198 just last year. Read the rest of this entry »
Sponsor Us on Patreon
Subscribe to Stathead
Facebook Group
Twitter Account
EW Subreddit
Effectively Wild Wiki
iTunes Feed
Get Our Merch!
Dan Szymborski
