Using Advanced Metrics on The Machine Part 1
In less than a week, Joe Posnanski’s much awaited new entry into the book world officially arrives. The Machine — which as the insanely long subtitle will inform you – is all about the 1975 Reds is probably the most anticipated baseball literature release of the year. I’m guessing most of the readers of this site are also fans of Posnanski, so to rev the hype engine a little harder, how about some graphical looks at how that team stacked up to the other teams in the league?
First up, team wOBA:
That red dot, that’s the Reds. Creative I know. The Reds were the best offensive team in baseball during this season and it wasn’t all that close. Only Boston surpassed the .340 team threshold. The Reds lead the majors in BB% and were near the tops in ISO (and Speed rating, for whatever it’s worth) which you would expect from any top offense.
How did their player stack up against each other? Glad you asked.
This consists of every player with at least 100 plate appearances. In case you didn’t know – and holy smokes you better have known – Joe Morgan was a heck of a ballplayer. Morgan’s 21 BB% is jaw-dropping and his .327/.466/.508 line is just incredible. Hopefully Morgan’s buffoonery in announcing hasn’t caused some statistically orientated fans to discount his playing career because that would be an absolute crime.
How often is the second baseman the best offensive player on the team while the catcher is the second best? Johnny Bench’s .283/.359/.519 line is almost equal to George Foster’s .300/.356/.518 and Foster played the corner outfield. That guy Pete Rose was pretty good too, as was Ken Griffey and Tony Perez.
Later on a look at their pitching staff.
That’s pretty cool stuff. Morgan and Bench are just incredible, but the level of consistency among their everyday players is really something to see.
Joe Morgan, the ballplayer = awesome.
Joe Morgan, the announcer/analyst = -_-
I wonder if he actually realizes how valuable he was.
Hilarious observation. I have always wondered why Joe seems to not care about the aspects of the game he excelled in. I was just looking at it the wrong way. He had no idea he was excelling.
For all we know, maybe he just calls the game aesthetically and just likes certain stuff and we’ve all been way too hard on him.
Or he really just doesn’t realize how great he was. then blah. I know I don’t agree with Bill James about having Morgan ahead of Hornsby (even though the Historical WAR database on baseball projection has Morgan as a below average fielder…okay?), but he’s #2 to me. It was funny to hear Morgan arguing so hard for Hornsby, though, I actually give him credit for the time he did that.
And honestly, Morgan isn’t bad at everything. The little nuances he’s great at; I couldn’t talk nearly as long about pitcher/hitter adjustments, defensive positioning, and the like. When it comes to good ole know-how, he’s good. When it comes to researching teams and doing the HW, that’s what he’s bad at.
He walked all the time but doesn’t like players who walk a lot. WTF
“good things happen when you put the ball in play”
good things happen a lot more often when you don’t swing at pitches you’ll just weakly ground to the 2B and work the count / take a walk.
Maybe when your SLG is over .500 you think “good things happen when you put the ball in play” because, well, they do; meanwhile, you walk because the pitcher is afraid of you, not because you’re taking pitches.
Nah, I remember once in a JoeChat, Morgan even mentioned how if he felt like he couldn’t get a hit in a PA, he’d try to work for a walk.
Which really dumbfounds me, knowing he knows the ability to draw a walk is a skill, one he was really good at, and still brushes it off (unless said player can run fast).
He didn’t even play in a particularly offensive era either. For most of his career the lgOPS was under or around .700.
idk wat most of the stuff on this website means! hahahahaha. trying to learn tho.
if u wna help me learn shoot me an email…nmandarano@verizon.net
Not to derail this topic or anything, but it amazes me to realize the fact that the 1975 Reds have seven batters with at least 100 plate appearances that put up a wOBA of at least .350, but the 2009 Yankees – using the same qualifier – blow that out of the water with eight batters with at least a .370 wOBA; amazing.
Yeah, the Yankees lineup is impressive. And while some of these guys might be taking advantage of the park dimensions, the park is playing pretty close to neutral in terms of runs.
I believe wOBA is strictly a linear weighted based number, not era and park adjusted like EqA.
Example, Yaz and JD Drew have the exact same EqA’s of .303 (seasonally adjusted), and almost the same OPS+ (129 for Yaz, 128 for Drew). However, Yaz has a wOBA of .374, JD Drew of .385 (I think these are the #’s).
I could be wrong, though.
Yeah, I believe you’re right. So, it does dull much of the shine off this occurrence.
wOBA is set to the average OB% scale of that era, so it is era adjusted. I don’t think its park adjusted though.
I knew some part of it wasn’t adjusted
Not really amazing considering the difference in time period and ability to hoard talent. 1976 is actually even more impressive for the Reds, though. They had a team wOBA of .361. The Phillies were in second with a .336 wOBA.
I agree with Joe R. When Morgan sticks to the actual game, he is great. Explaining why a hanging slider might be the worst pitch to throw (because it is basically a mediocre fastball) and other little things like that is what Joe should stick to.
Wow, a hanging breaking ball is a bad pitch to throw. I feel enlightened.
In other words, Morgan is a terrible announcer. At everything.
I would just chalk that up to a bad example.
Basically Joe’s fine when he just sticks to what he knows.
He’s a terrible announcer, but i dont want him to be fired because i love listening to him make a fool out of himself, and i love criticizing him.