Archive for Cubs

Since winning the National League Central in 2008 the Cubs have been in steep decline, culminating in a 101 loss season in 2012. Whether the organization is able to rise up from the cellar may hinge on a trio of hitting prospects, Javier Baez, Albert Almora and Jorge Soler. It’s easy to fall in love with Baez’s dreamy bat speed or Almora’s rare combination of tools and polish, but it is Soler who is the game’s next elite prospect. Read the rest of this entry »

Heath Bell and Carlos Pena were each claimed on waivers earlier this week, though it appears that neither player will be moving.

The Giants claimed Bell, most likely to bolster their bullpen given the injuries to Brian Wilson and Sergio Romo. The waiver claim could have also been submitted to block the Diamondbacks from acquiring Bell. The Yankees claimed Pena, even though Mark Teixeira plays virtually every inning at first base and Jorge Posada has performed well against righties this season with a .359 wOBA.

But given the Yankees place in the standings and the lack of need for the Red Sox, the claim on Pena probably wasn’t used as a blocking mechanism.

Both players should have been dealt back at the trade deadline, when teams could unilaterally work with one another. Both Bell and Pena might not represent massive improvements to anyone with only a month remaining in the season, but they could have impacted the playoff picture if traded in mid-July, when more teams were seemingly in the race. Let’s take a look at both situations.

Read the rest of this entry »

In looking at the league leaders this morning I found something pretty interesting: Of all players with a WPA of at least 1.84—excluding Matt Holliday who has been injured for a while—Aramis Ramirez is the only one with a home run total under fourteen. While Aramis has hit nine long balls everyone else contributing this much has hit their fair share more. It isn’t as if he ranks towards the bottom of this 1.84 minimum, either, as his 2.29 WPA currently ranks 7th amongst all hitters; and, yes, “their fare share” is in fact a triple-rhyme.

Through 62 games, this slugger is posting a .302/.417/.507 slash line, with 9 HR, 19 2B, and 43 RBI. If his OBP looks oddly high it is likely due to the fact that he has never finished a season higher than .373 in that department and his career mark comes in at .340.

Since he has posted batting averages over .300 in the past it would make sense that he is walking more this year. Confirming this theory is his 14.4% walk rate; one much higher than the 5.3-8.2% range he posted from 2002-2007. In fact, his career high is 9.7%. One of the main reasons his rate of walks has jumped is his drastic drop in swings at pitches out of the zone. Last year, he swung at 30.76% of pitches out of the zone whereas this year, just 23.54%.

He’s striking our more this year as well, with a 16.9 K% compared to 13% a year ago. A leading contributor to his increased strikeouts is a somewhat drastic drop in contact. Last year, he made contact 84.85% of the time; this year, just 78.47% of the time.

His overall production has not suffered much from the drop in contact but he does currently have a .331 BABIP. With regards to his balls in play, he is hitting 3% less grounders, replacing them with line drives. Additionally, though his flyball rate has stayed stagnant, his HR/FB has dropped from 13.3% to 10.8%.

It seems that Ramirez is making less contact but more of the balls he puts in play are falling in for hits. His “lack” of power this season should be attributed more to his decrease in home runs per flyball. If he has actually lost some power than his OPS will not remain .924 all season as it is not very likely to sustain a BB% that much higher than the range he has proven himself capable of; along similar lines, if his past performance is any indication he will still hit anywhere from 26-35 home runs by seasons end. Should these two stats reverse his OPS would remain in the general range. Now, BB% and K% are pretty quick to stabilize but this is a pretty drastic jump.

This just goes to show that a guy can be an extremely effective offensive contributor without hitting dingers each and every night.

I can remember May 22, 2002 like it was six years ago yesterday as I did not even need to look up gamelogs to remember the very first major league start of Mark Prior. A high school sophomore at the time, I would often use my lunch period to watch day games on either Gameday or MLB TV; on that day I was lucky enough to watch Prior make his Mark. Get it?

Breezing through the Pirates hitters with the greatest of ease, this would begin a five-game stretch in which the Cubs rookie struck out 43 hitters in 28.2 innings. Calm, cool, and collected, his fluid windup provided such an intimidating presence on the mound. On the whole, his rookie season consisted of 147 strikeouts in 116.2 innings; just 38 walks; a 3.32 ERA, 3.16 FIP, and a 1.17 WHIP; and a .230 BAA. He finished seventh in Rookie of the Year voting but, in just 19 starts, had risen almost entirely to the top of the Cubs rotation.

If there were any doubts his 2003 not only erased them but helped make people forget said doubts ever crept into their minds. Finishing 3rd (to Eric Gagne and Jason Schmidt) in Cy Young Award voting, Prior went 18-6 with a 2.43 ERA. His WHIP went down to 1.10 and he struck out 245 hitters in 211.1 innings. His FIP of 2.47 suggests his ERA was right on the money and he allowed just 15 home runs.

Prior pitched game six of the NLCS where some guy in the crowd prevented a ball caught in foul territory that Moises Alou forgave six years later (Question: Why isn’t Alex Gonzalez criticized more? His play was worse!).

The next season, an injury-riddled one, looked a lot like a slightly poorer version of his rookie year. Check it out:

2002:19 GS, 116.2 IP, 98 H, 14 HR, 38 BB, 147 K, 3.32 ERA, 1.17 WHIP
2004:21 GS, 118.2 IP, 108 H, 14 HR, 48 BB, 139 K, 4.02 ERA, 1.35 WHIP

In 2005 he missed more time, albeit not as much as the year prior (get it?), and pitched pretty well; though not as well as someone determined to be the next 300-game winner would be expected to pitch. That year he struck out 188 batters in 166.2 innings, posting a 3.67 ERA, 3.85 FIP, and 1.21 WHIP.

Missing most of the next season his actual playing time in 2006 proved disastrous. In nine starts he posted a 7.21 ERA and a 1.69 WHIP. His FIP of 6.60, which suggests his ERA may have been a bit high, was still high in its own right. 2006 would also be the first season in which Prior struck out less batters than innings pitched and posted a BB/9 above 3.64. After stranding runners to the tune of 76.7%-79.4% he posted an LOB of just 62.0%.

He missed last season with more injuries and the Cubs decided to let him go. Signing a low-risk deal with the Padres this offseason, hope still existed that Prior could shake the injury-plagued status that accompanies him everywhere these days and be, at the very least, a league average pitcher. This weekend’s news changed everything.

News surfaced this weekend that Prior, still just 27 years of age, would have surgery and miss the entire 2008 season. Often the player associated most with regards to Dusty Baker’s poor handling of pitchers, Prior will again miss significant pitching time due to a faulty shoulder. As Sam Panayotovich points out, it’s a shame because Prior had the abilities to dominate the league at the age of 23; now he’ll be lucky to make 20+ starts in a future season.

When Prior returned from the DL in 2004, Cubs announcers remarked that fans now felt their season had begun with their ace making his return. As my friend Evan Brunell remarked yesterday, “Now you know the season has really begun when ‘Mark Prior out for the season’ hits the newswire.”

Oh, how the tides have turned, and oh how sad of a downfall it has been.

Down three runs in the ninth inning on opening day, Kosuke Fukudome belted a three-run homer off of Eric Gagne to tie the game. The Cubs would ultimately lose, but Kosuke had earned himself the clutch label, and labels can be very hard to break. In certain cases these labels are undeserved, like calling David Ortiz clutch based on past results; the stats here at Fangraphs show he was one of the least clutch players last season and he has a -0.32 score this season. Likewise, players with negative labels will find themselves hard pressed to shake off the opinions pointed in their direction.

Looking at Kosuke’s numbers, however, it seems he was properly labeled, at least so far. In case you cannot recite all of his numbers off the top of your head, here they are:

Fukudome 2008
46 GP, 51-167, 11 2B, 2 3B, 2 HR, 17 RBI, 30 BB, 27 K
.305/.409/.439, .355 BABIP
1.11 WPA, 0.58 WPA/LI, 0.52 Clutch

More facts about him? Well, his home/road splits have been pretty drastic:

Home: .393/.505/.562
Road: .205/.292/.282

And his splits with runners on base are drastic as well:

Nobody On: 104 PA, .261/.346/.337, 12 BB, 18 K
Runners On: 95 PA, .360/.479/.547, 18 BB, 9 K

The clutch score is what stuck with me, though, as he ranks 10th in the NL. Looking at a few other areas that could determine clutchiness, the results seemed to match:

High Leverage: 40 PA, .412/.462/.647
Within 1 Run: 49 PA, .361/.463/.482
Tie Game: 100 PA, .419/.490/.581

The clutch stat here does not measure performance in clutch situations but rather how a player performs in the high leverage situations as compared to context-neutral situations. Based on that definition, Kosuke is definitely stepping up in the situations in which his team needs him to. He might not be lighting the world on fire with extra base hits but these numbers clearly suggest Kosuke still deserves the label assigned on opening day.

On April 14th, I wrote the following in a piece entitled “Busting Out: Corey Patterson”:

Patterson’s early season performance isn’t going to be sustained at this level (a 7% swinging strike rate is impossible to keep up), but there are legitimate reasons to believe that he’s adopted a new approach at the plate, and his continued contact ability could be just the ticket to stardom that people have been projecting on Patterson for most of this decade.

Since those words were written, Corey Patterson is pulling an o-fer. Eight days and 21 plate appearances later, and my fearless call that Patterson might be on the verge of a breakout year looks pretty foolish – he’s now hitting .183 and appears to be losing his grip on the Reds center field job. It’s hard to have a career year while sitting on the bench.

But, at the risk of cramming my foot even further into my mouth, I’m actually even more convinced than ever that Patterson has made significant strides in improving as a player. Despite his 0 for 18 run since the post went up, he’s walked three times while only striking out twice, and his season long K% still sits at a remarkably low 6.7%. That doesn’t happen by accident. If we take the 19% true talent strikeout rate that pretty much every projection system on earth forecasted for Patterson in 2008, the odds of him striking out four times or less in his first 68 trips to the plate was a whopping .0019%. That’s 1 in 500, basically.

Given his current strikeout rate in 2008, it’s remarkably unlikely that Patterson’s true talent strikeout rate is currently 19%. Given that we need to adjust our expectations of how often he’s going to make contact, and that it hasn’t affected his power output, I’m sticking with the theory that increased contact + sustained power = improvement. Call me crazy, but I still think we could look back at year’s end and say that Patterson had the breakout year we’ve been waiting for. Even if it got off to a bit of a rough start.

Back on April 3rd, I witnessed quite the odd series of events in the tenth inning of a Braves/Pirates matchup, ultimately resulting in Braves reliever Chris Resop coming into pitch, then moving to leftfield, then returning to pitch. Based on the looks I saw develop on the faces of the players involved, I was not the only one a tad confused as to exactly what was happening.

Mike Hampton had been scheduled to make his first start since 2005 but, as expected, this did not happen. A decision was made just prior to the game to scratch Hampton from the start and it was soon learned he would be placed on the disabled list. Since the umpires were already out on the field when the decision was made, the start of the game had to be delayed to allow replacement starter Jeff Bennett time to warm-up. Bobby Cox, after using seven pitchers in this seesaw game, and fulfilling his promise to give Peter Moylan the day off, was left with just Resop and Royce Ring as extra innings rolled around. The goal was for Resop to go the distance unless a crucial lefty-lefty matchup presented itself.

Resop began the frame by walking speedster Nyjer Morgan. Luis Rivas then sacrificed Morgan to second and Jason Bay walked; Morgan advanced to third on a passed ball. With runners on and lefty Adam LaRoche coming up, Cox decided to make his move. Matt Diaz came in from leftfield, Chris Resop went to leftfield, and Royce Ring came into pitch. Ring promptly struck LaRoche out, serving his LOOGY purpose. Ring came out, Resop came back into pitch, and Gregor Blanco replaced Resop in leftfield. As fate would have it, Resop gave up what would turn out to be the game-winning single to Xavier Nady as soon as he came back in. This proved to be the first time in eighteen years that an NL player both pitched and played the field in the same inning.

In that instance, the first game of a doubleheader between the Cubs and Mets, Les Lancaster accomplished the same feat. The day prior, June 12th, the Cubs got waxed 19-8, a game that saw the bullpen get used so heavily that even Doug Dascenzo, an outfielder, pitch. So we have pitchers playing the outfield and outfielders pitching in this article. In the 6th inning of the June 13th game, Cubs starter Jeff Pico had two outs, with one on, and an 8-5 lead when Les Lancaster came into relieve him. Lancaster made quick work of Mark Carreon to end the inning.

When Les trotted out to the mound for the seventh inning, however, things did not go as he planned. He gave up four singles while retiring just one batter; with the lead now just 8-6, and lefties coming up, Lancaster was replaced by Paul Assenmacher. Les moved to leftfield, though, so he could come back into the game. Assenmacher walked a batter and gave up two singles, handing the lead to the Mets. Lancaster came back into pitch and took the brunt of the Mets offense, lasting until the ninth inning. In two separate pitching stints that game, Lancaster’s line: 2.2 IP, 8 H, 9 ER, BB, K. His ERA ballooned from 3.79 to 5.02.

Another incredibly interesting story along similar lines took place on July 22, 1986, again in a game involving the Mets. The Mets roster was in shambles following a usage of relievers and the ejections of Ray Knight and Kevin Mitchell after a brawl. In the tenth inning, Gary Carter replaced Knight at third base while Jesse Orosco and Roger McDowell alternated between pitching and playing the outfield. Unlike the Resop, Lancaster, and Assenmacher examples, this one actually paid off as Orosco and McDowell combined to give up four hits and no runs in four innings of relief work. Orosco even caught a fly ball as Tony Perez hit a liner right into his glove in rightfield.

These are just three examples of why baseball will forever be the most interesting and strategic sport. And, to tie everything together, Roger McDowell is currently the pitching coach for the Braves. I can only guess he experienced a wicked case of deja vu on April 3rd, thinking back to his similar experience over twenty years ago.

I posed this in the comments thread of the Appreciating Pat Burrell article but feel it is an important enough question to merit its own post. In an NPR interview, author Dan Gordon discusses the psychology of die-hard fans in an effort to promote his new book, Your Brain on Cubs. Towards the 31-minute mark of that interview Gordon says something interesting: He essentially says that Cubs fans are able to stay dedicated because they have come close many times to the World Series and so the fans know how sweet it will be when the team eventually wins a championship.

I want to combine this thought with something I heard last year on the radio and bring forth a question. Quite simply, would you rather be a fan of a team like the Marlins or the Giants? Not necessarily the specific teams or how they look in 2007 and 2008, but would you rather be a fan of a perennial contender for eight years or a team that would win two world series in that span and be below average the other six years?

The Giants had a winning record every season between 1997 and 2004, finishing in either first or second place; their average record in that span was 92-70. They made the playoffs four times and were within two games of either the division or the wild card in three of the other four seasons. The Giants made the playoffs or fell just short in seven of the eight years in that span. The Marlins, on the other hand, had winning records in just three of those eight years. In 1997 and 2003, when they won the world series, they won 92 and 91 games respectively; in 2004, a year removed from their second championship, they went 83-79, just barely breaking .500. Their average W-L in that span is 77-85.

Now let’s revisit the question posed at the start of the post. Strip away what we currently know about the Giants and Marlins: The actual teams are irrelevant and we need to focus on the type of team each is to answer properly. Would you rather be a fan of a team that would go 92-70 each year and give you a shot at the playoffs and/or world series, but not necessarily win a championship? Or would you rather be a fan of a team that would go 77-85 every year, but would step it up to 90+ wins just twice and win the world series in both of those seasons?

On the one hand you have the idea of winning two championships which, I’ll admit, I’ve never felt as a Phillies fan. Then again, on the other hand, you have the idea of whether or not you would even watch your team if they went 77-85 or worse in several consecutive seasons. For instance, I know that last year, I cared less about what the Phillies did in the playoffs than I did that they simply got into the playoffs. I’m curious to hear thoughts on which team would have a bigger Web-fandom.

Corey Patterson has always been thought of as a guy with tremendous potential. From 1999 to 2001, Baseball America ranked him as the 16th, 3rd, and 2nd best prospect in baseball respectively. The physical talents were obvious; terrific athleticism, quick bat, legitimate home run power, and serious speed from a guy playing a premium defensive position well. However, Patterson struggled to refine his approach at the plate, and by repeatedly chasing pitches out of the strike zone, he made himself a fairly easy out for opposing pitchers. If you can’t make contact, it is tough to be an offensive asset. For seven years, Patterson simply didn’t hit the ball often enough to live up to his natural talent, which led to him being bounced out of both Chicago and Baltimore and finding himself as an unwanted free agent this winter.

After an offseason of rejection, the Cincinnati Reds offered him a minor league contract on March 3rd, giving him a chance to fight for a roster spot in spring training. After they decided to send Jay Bruce to Triple-A to start the year, Patterson found himself with a regular job, and with the way his 2008 season has started (.57 WPA/LI and the Reds best hitter to date), he may just have found a home where he can remind people of the player they thought he would be.

It all starts with his strikeout rate. Look at the graph of his contact ability throughout his career.

During his time in Chicago, he was a strikeout machine. As you can see, this is something he’s clearly worked on improving, as the line from his 2005 to 2008 strikeout rate shows a huge decline. So far this year, he’s struck out two times in 46 plate appearances. That’s pretty remarkable for a guy with a career K% of 22.7%. His current K% of 4.8% puts him in a group with noted contact kings Casey Kotchman and Placido Polanco. When you look at the pitch data summary from his Baseball-Reference page, you can see the difference. Even though he’s seeing less strikes than in any other season, he’s only swinging at 72% of those pitches in the strike zone, compared to a career average of 81%.

By being more selective in which pitches to swing at, Patterson has managed to put himself in positions to hit pitches he can do something with, and that’s been manifest in his performance. Of his 11 hits, five are doubles and four are home runs, giving him a .405 Isolated Slugging Percentage that ranks fifth in all of baseball. Patterson’s early season performance isn’t going to be sustained at this level (a 7% swinging strike rate is impossible to keep up), but there are legitimate reasons to believe that he’s adopted a new approach at the plate, and his continued contact ability could be just the ticket to stardom that people have been projecting on Patterson for most of this decade.