The Dord of Darien

Gordon Edes is writing about baseball

Do I pick on this guy too much? I can’t help it; he keeps turning out badly-researched, badly-written stuff like this. This time around it’s a list of underachievers and overachievers for 2009, and it’s not completely egregious, but there are a fair few weird choices. Let’s roll:

"There are no Yankees listed – they’re too well-heeled to be recognized as overachievers, and so far their big-ticket players lived up to the hype, though CC Sabathia and Alex Rodriguez are on notice for October."

Is the size of their payroll really relevant? I mean, if Melky Cabrera is putting up the best numbers of his career — which he is — doesn’t that still count as overachieving, no matter how much Derek Jeter gets paid? And as for their big ticket players living up to the hype, well, let’s take a gander at that pitching staff real quick:

C.C. Sabathia: 16-7, 206.1 IP, 3.40 ERA, 1.129 WHIP, 3.28 K/BB, 131 ERA+
A.J. Burnett: 11-9, 183 IP, 4.33 ERA, 1.399 WHIP, 1.92 K/BB, 103 ERA+
Andy Pettitte: 13-6, 178.1 IP, 4.14 ERA, 1.357 WHIP, 2.09 K/BB, 108 ERA+
Joba Chamberlain: 8-5, 139.2 IP, 4.45 ERA, 1.525 WHIP (!), 1.76 K/BB, 101 ERA+
Chien-Ming Wang: 1-6, 42 IP, 9.64 ERA, 2.024 WHIP (!!), 1.53 K/BB, 46 ERA+

Yep, looks like Gordon’s right. No underachieving going on there at all. Wang’s out for the season with a shoulder injury, but holy dick was he terrible before he went down. Burnett, Pettitte, and Chamberlain have been entirely mediocre this season, and two of them make an awful lot of money to post those numbers. Sabathia’s been okay, but not exactly great.

In case you’re wondering: the bullpen’s been pretty good, and Mariano Rivera has, as usual, been ridiculous.

"Catcher

2008 Rookie of the Year single-handedly revived myth of sophomore slump. Got to the point where manager Lou Piniella preferred playing Koyie Hill over Soto, who has more strikeouts (63) than hits (60) and over 50 fewer RBIs than last season."

Nice sentence structure, Tarzan. Gordie’s definition of "over 50" apparently differs from mine, since I checked a knowledge engine and it pointed out that 86 – 40 is not, in fact, "over 50." Also, hey, he’s had 46 fewer RBIs, but it looks like he’s also had 231 fewer plate appearances. You think they could be connected in some fashion? And, hey, look: the team OBP this season is .330, compared to last year’s .354. Fewer men on base to drive in? Could this also be a factor in Soto’s RBI decline?

All of which is not to say Soto hasn’t been terrible this year, because he has. But Gordie sure picks a weird way to demonstrate that. I mean, more strikeouts than hits? That’s the stat you want to hang your hat on? Then you must also think this guy and this guy are pretty awful baseball players, even though their grown-up stats look pretty damn good. No. The real answer is: Geo is .225 / .331 / .404 / .735 this season, compared to last season’s .285 / .364 / .504 / .868. 33 points of OBP and a hundred points of SLG is a fairly meaningful drop. His OPS+ has gone from 120 down to 88. He is underperforming this year.

"Overachiever: Miguel Montero, Arizona Diamondbacks

Venezuelan-born catcher was hitting .219 on June 16, and .340 in 68 games since, with a chance to finish the season with over .300. His 14 home runs, after just five last season, suggest he could develop 20-homer power."

I would like to remind everybody that not picking Joe Mauer for this is completely insane. Mauer is leading the AL in everything, and would be leading all of MLB if not for that pesky Pujols. He is putting up Pujols-worthy numbers at catcher. That is overachieving. Montero, on the other hand… well, he’s having a nice little season, I guess. The increase in HR is largely illusory, though; hey Gordon, you should probably remember when you’re gushing about an increase in a counting stat to check for a corresponding increase in PA. Montero has almost twice as many PA for this season as he had for last season, which is a lot of the reason why his HR are up. Note that two years ago he hit 10 HR in only 244 PA, which is a much bigger increase in HR% (he’s been 4.1%, 2.4%, 3.5% for the last three seasons). That doesn’t really suggest he’s "developing power." And batting average is dumb. The end.

"First base

Giambi is enjoying a late-summer renaissance as a pinch-hitter for the Rockies, but his return to where it all began, Oakland, was a bust. Eleven home runs and a .199 average for $4 million made for a sour homecoming."

Doesn’t 11 HR in 328 PA qualify him to be an overachiever who might be developing 20-homer power, though? I thought it would. That notwithstanding, Gordon’s basically right, though, as usual, he citing dumb numbers as evidence. Giambi did stink up the joint in Oakland, where he OBP’d just .332, and slugged a miserable .364. He’s been excellent in Colorado, though, which is largely due to his insane BB/PA: in fifteen PA Giambi has walked six times. That’s enough to qualify him for the awesomeness title even if he had zero hits. Which he doesn’t.

"Overachiever: Billy Butler, Kansas City Royals

Two things worth counting in Kansas City: Zack Greinke’s strikeouts and Billy Butler’s doubles. Butler, 23, came into the weekend with 45 doubles. The last players his age (or younger) to hit that many: Hanley Ramirez (twice), Grady Sizemore, Miguel Cabrera, Ryan Zimmerman, Albert Pujols (twice), Scott Rolen, Alex Rodriguez, and Cal Ripken Jr. Looks like long-suffering Royals rooters have a keeper."

I… what? Doubles? Gordon, you’re going to mention exactly one stat here, and it’s doubles? You are a very odd man. Billy Butler has indeed hit a lot of doubles this season, but that’s… about all he’s done. His other stats are almost completely irrelevant. As a better choice, I might suggest Boston’s own Kevin Youkilis, who not long ago was predicted to be a nice utility player who would get on base a lot, and has since steadily developed into an absolute monster. But, in all seriousness, how did you not pick Kendry Morales? If anybody in baseball is massively overachieving right now, it’s him. And weren’t you nominating him for some crazy second-half MVP just the other day? I seem to remember that.

"Second base

The Astros still have a year left on the three-year, $16.5 million contract they gave Matsui, who has been on the DL four times in two years, doesn’t steal bases anymore, and has a .640 OPS, the lowest of anyone at his position with at least 400 plate appearances. Texans think his name means “dead wood” in Japanese."

Kaz Matsui is terrible. The contract the Astros gave him was terrible. Your joke about his name was also terrible. And… did you just cite OPS, Gordon? WTF? If you know about stats like OPS, why are all your previous entries filled up with RBIs and counting stats not compared to PA? And goddamn doubles? You are a very odd man.

Oh, incidentally: Matsui has stolen 18 bases so far this season. That puts him on-track to tie his second-highest number of stolen bases ever, which he set last season. You’re just making this shit up, aren’t you, Gordon. You didn’t even try to look that one up.

"Overachiever: Aaron Hill, Toronto Blue Jays

No one doubted that Hill was a terrific player, but there were a lot of questions about how he would come back after missing most of last season with a concussion from colliding with teammate David Eckstein while chasing a pop-up. Hill has responded with 30-plus home runs, a near-.300 batting average, and has played every day. Now, if he could only learn to take a walk …"

Do I count as "someone?" Because I damn well did doubt that Aaron Hill was anything like terrific. And I still do. Gordon is right that his home runs are way the fuck up this season, but check out the increase in HR/FB: over the last five seasons, Hill has gone 1.7%, 2.5%, 6.3%, 2.2%, 12%. That suggests to me that somebody’s getting just a bit lucky this year. His XBH aren’t up across the board, and his line drive rate is pretty much spot-on his career average, so he’s had some lucky fly balls. So that’s all well and good. Gordon’s even leveling a decent criticism, which is to say that Hill’s walk rate is very, very low, and is hurting him rather badly.

That said, Milwaukee’s Rickie Weeks is a much better choice, since he’s actually been good at baseball this year, and doesn’t just have one weird freakish spike in one stat.

"Third base

They won’t miss Beltre in the Pacific Northwest, not when he forgot how to hit home runs after signing a five-year, $64 million deal with Seattle the winter after hitting 48 homers for the Dodgers. But the soon-to-be free agent left Mariners fans with an unforgettable lesson, one he failed to learn until he was sidelined with a bleeding testicle: Don’t play the hot corner without wearing a protective cup."

I don’t think Beltre "forgot" a damn thing; there’s no evidence that he ever knew in the first place. He had one freak season where he hit a ton of home runs, during which his HR/FB rate exhibited a huge spike, while his line drive rate and overall XBH% stayed pretty level. Wait, does that sound familiar? Like a player you might have heard about just recently? Hmm.

That notwithstanding, Beltre sucks. I don’t really have any complaints with his inclusion here.

"Overachiever: Pablo Sandoval, San Francisco Giants

Kung Fu Panda gave us baseball’s best new nickname and most improbable cult hero, but don’t be fooled by the roly-poly: He came into the weekend with the highest batting average of all third basemen in the majors."

I agree that Sandoval is adorable. I also agree that he’s good. What I don’t agree with is that "highest batting average of all third basemen" is a non-stupid stat. If you’re going to hump his batting average anyhow, why didn’t you point out that Sandoval leads the NL in doubles, a stat you’re completely queer for? It’s like I don’t even know you anymore, Gordon.

"Shortstop

An All-Star in 2007, Hardy was sent to the minors in August to make way for prospect Alcides Escobar. Back now that rosters have expanded, Hardy has hit just 11 home runs after a combined 50 in the last two seasons, and his .226 batting average on a $4.65 million salary virtually guarantees a change of address next season."

J.J. Hardy is not underachieving. He has always been shit. Yes, he went to the All-Star game in 2007, a year in which he had a staggering OPS+ of exactly 100. League average. This was six points better than his career average of 94. He’s not really underachieving, he’s just bad. Edgar Renteria, now; there’s an underachieving shortstop. .252 / .309 / .331 / .641? Yikes. 68 OPS+? Yikes.

"Overachiever: Jason Bartlett, Tampa Bay Rays

Rays manager Joe Maddon told people Bartlett was his MVP last year, but Bartlett took his game to a rarefied level this season. Only two shortstops boast an OPS over .900 &ndash Hanley Ramirez and Bartlett, whose .913 OPS is roughly 170 points higher than his career number."

Maddon was almost definitely just trying to keep his dudes motivated when he said that. The only other possible explanation is that he is an insane crazy man, because Bartlett was fucking terrible last year. He is the absolute best possible choice for overachiever in this category this year, however, since he’s been a beast. Gordon even gives a good explanation of why he’s overachieving, and doesn’t feel the need to mention that his RBIs have gone up or that he’s struck out more times than he’s scored runs or any other completely true but utterly meaningless facts. Good job, Gordie! We’ll make a capable baseball writer of you yet!

As long as you learn that you need a semicolon on the end of that &ndash, anyhow. I like the en dash as much as the next guy, but, really, you need to do it right.

"Left field

Sori was sorry for the Cubs. Maybe it was the knee, which Soriano says will require surgery that he’d prefer to have now rather than in the offseason, but by every measure this was his worst season in the big leagues, as he was forced out of his leadoff spot and dropped to sixth in the order. It gets worse: The Cubs still owe the 33-year-old Soriano $90 million over the next five seasons."

Yeah, Soriano’s been rotten this year. That’s completely true. I disagree that it’s been his worst season by any measure, though; his walks are slowly coming up, which gives me hope that he might be learning some patience. But other than that, yeah, he’s been lousy.

"Overachiever: Chris Coghlan, Marlins

Here’s the deal, kid. We’re going to play you in the outfield, and you’re going to bat leadoff. You haven’t played outfield since you were 12, and have never led off in pro ball? Good luck. So what does Coghlan do? Hits .385 in August, and set a team record for hits in a month with 47. In a pitcher-heavy field, he could win Rookie of the Year."

Coghlan’s been okay, but come on. August batting average? You really, really want to base your case on August batting average? And hits in a month? That’s just weird. I’m sorry, Gordon, but Seth Smith is the choice here. And I don’t really care about how long it’s been since he’s played the outfield or whether or not he’s ever led off before.

"Center field

When the season began, these guys played side by side. J.P. Ricciardi gave away Rios to the White Sox just to get out from under his $66 million contract; Rios has hit .157 in 23 games for Chicago, which fell out of the race. Wells, meanwhile, is openly scorned in Toronto, but for the nearly $100 million left on his contract, which jumps to over $20 million per annum in 2011, Wells can afford a thick skin."

Vernon Wells has one of the worst contracts in baseball. He’s never really been any good, and they’re paying him like A-Rod. It makes no sense at all, really. But I don’t know if he really counts as "underachieving," since he’s kind of always been lousy.

Alex Rios, on the other hand, also has one of the worst contracts in baseball. And now the White Sox have to put up with him and his -5 OPS+ (!). I won’t lie; I love that that happened. But who really cares about batting average? I mean, really, Gordon. You’ve heard about OPS, by your own admission. Why lean on the creaky old crutch of BA when you could point out the hilarious fact that Rios’ OPS — OPS, not OBP — with the White Sox is .374?

Oh, incidentally, the biggest underachiever in CF this year is Tampa’s B.J. Upton.

"Overachiever: Nyjer Morgan, Washington Nationals

Freed from the purgatory that is Pittsburgh, Morgan hit .351 in 49 games with the Nats until breaking his hand at the end of August, which will sideline him the rest of the season. The 29-year-old center-fielder, a spare part his first two seasons in Pittsburgh, is second in the league with 42 stolen bases."

If you’re going to start by bashing Pittsburgh for being "purgatory," you might want to avoid mentioning that the dude went to Washington. Just an idea I had. Also, wait, are you serious? You’re picking Morgan as overachiever because of his batting average in 49 games? What the dick kind of crazy moon nonsense is this? As much as it pains me to say so, the answer to this question is Juan Pierre, who, while still not exactly good, is undeniably overachieving.

"Right field

Lots of competition here – Milton Bradley’s nightmarish season with the Cubs, Magglio Ordonez’s loss of power with the Tigers – but Giles clinches the spot with his .191 batting average, which ranks last among the 296 big leaguers with at least 250 plate appearances. For this, the Padres exercised his $9 million option last November? That’s not all: The two-time All-Star also was sued for millions this spring by a former girlfriend who alleged physical abuse."

I’m not going to lie: being sued by an ex-girlfriend is not a very good reason to be on a list of baseball players who have underachieved. It’s almost as bad as citing batting average. Yes, Giles has been complete shit this year, posting a line of .191 / .277 / .271 / .548. His OPS+ has come down from last season’s 136 all the way to 53. Nice cherry-pick there, by the way, Gordon, with that "at least 250 plate appearances" thing. Giles’ 2009 PA? 253.

Oh, and, incidentally? Milton Bradley’s season has not been "nightmarish," unless your definition of a "nightmare" involves a team-leading .384 OBP. He hasn’t been anything like as good as he normally is, and I could completely understand calling him an underachiever, but "nightmarish?" Relax, Gordie.

"Overachiever: Garrett Jones, Pittsburgh Pirates

A career minor leaguer who made a brief cameo with the Twins two years ago, Jones hit seven home runs in his first 12 games with the Pirates, and the first baseman hasn’t stopped bashing, his 19 home runs leading all rookies. His career arc suggests this can’t last, but to paraphrase Bogie, he’ll always have Pittsburgh."

Man, imagine how awesome this guy would be if he were in Washington instead. Oh, quick note: when you’re writing about an overachieving right fielder, it’s not the bestest idea to refer to him as "the first baseman."

"Designated hitter

Burrell won a World Series ring with the Phillies and was thought to be the power bat that would send the Rays back to the Series this year, this time to win. Hasn’t worked out that way. Burrell hit three home runs in the first three months, and had just two singles during the eight-game losing streak that knocked the Rays out of the race in September. His .388 slugging percentage is tied with Ken Griffey Jr. for lowest among all DHs."

It’s true: Burrell’s power has been MIA this season. But you know what’s not a good piece of evidence that he’s underachieving? How many hits he had in an eight-game span. Watch your sample size there, Gordon.

Also, maybe I’m just a dick, but I’d call David Ortiz a bigger underachiever than Pat the Bat. They’ve been about equally awful this season, and Mr. Papi is usually a lot better than Mr. The Bat.

"Overachiever: Jason Kubel, Minnesota Twins

Kubel has posted career-best numbers across the board (.305 BA, 22 HRs, 81 RBIs). For that, he’ll be rewarded with the chance to hit outdoors in Minnesota for the first time next spring, as the Twins move into their new open-air ballpark. Let’s see how he hits with frost on his bat."

Don’t worry about Kubel’s hitting with frost on his bat — the opposing pitchers will be at a bigger disadvantage, since they’ll have frost on their balls </rimshot>. Jay Leno-quality jokes aside, knock off with the BA and the RBIs. Especially when they’re not very exciting. Kubel’s OBP has been a rather excellent .374 this year, which combines with his acceptable-but-not-great .529 SLG for a completely humdrum .904 OPS. From a DH, you’re probably after a little bit more than that, yeah? Well, you’re probably fucked; there’s been a massive power outage at DH this season. Kubel’s probably the best choice.

"Starting pitcher

Do you detect a pattern here? The Cubs are well represented on this squad, and Z ranks as the biggest cash-for-a-clunker on the club. In the second year of his five-year, $91.5 million extension, Zambrano so far has produced just eight wins while enhancing his reputation as emotionally unstable and professionally unreliable. The Cubs can’t afford to wait for him to grow up, but they’re stuck with him."

Whoa, one-upping me on the Leno jokes, are we Gordie? Cash for clunkers! That’s awesome. Topical. I mean, trade that rust bucket in, amirite? AMIRITE??

Oh, incidentally? Shut the fuck up about wins. Wins is the worst, dumbest, most worthless stat in all of baseball, except maybe saves. Z has been a little bit down this year, but, really, it’s only a little bit. He’s not even the biggest underachiever in his own rotation: that would be James Richard Harden. But, of course, Harden has one more win.

Finding the biggest underachiever at SP is pretty hard this year, though, so I can understand why you’d take a cheap shot at Z instead of actually thinking, or maybe doing any research. I mean, it’s not like there’s a five-time Cy Young winner with an identical record to Zambrano’s, but with an ERA that’s more than a run worse, an ERA+ almost thirty points lower, and a well-documented pattern of emotional and behavioral issues. Because that would be too easy.

"Overachiever: Randy Wolf, Los Angeles Dodgers

The two leading contenders for the National League Cy Young Award, Chris Carpenter of the Cardinals and Tim Lincecum, have made 17 and 18 starts, respectively, in which they have given up two or fewer earned runs. Wolf, a journeyman left-hander, has made 19 such starts, and the Dodgers are 19-11 when Joe Torre has given him the ball. At $5 million, he was a steal for GM Ned Colletti."

You like how Gordon uses the Dodgers’ record in games that Wolf starts here instead of using Wolf’s W-L? How much you want to bet that’s so he could avoid having to deal with the fact that his "overachiever" pick is 10-6, which doesn’t look much different from the 8-6 that makes Zambrano such a huge failure? Idiot.

Wolf is a decent choice, what with his 1.095 WHIP and his 130 ERA+. But there’s yet another Randy elsewhere in the league who’s probably a better choice. Though, I’m sorry, we’re all beating around the bush and we fucking know it, because there’s one clear, obvious, definite, undeniable winner in this category, and it is this gentleman here, who probably fell off Gordon’s radar on account of he plays for the worst team in the American League. But you see how he leads the AL in ERA, WHIP, HR/9, and shutouts? And you see how he leads all of MLB in ERA+? God damn, dude. This was the easiest choice on this whole list, and you whiffed.

"Relief pitcher

Perfect last season, perdition this year. Lidge’s 10 blown saves and a 7-plus ERA finally cost him his job as Phillies’ closer, at least temporarily, this month. An incomprehensible fall from Eden."

"Purgatory," "perdition," "Eden…" you go to Catholic school, did you, Gordon? It’s showing just a hair. Lidge is a great choice, but only dumb people care about saves, and everybody knows that ERA is a horribly unreliable stat for people who only pitch 50 innings. That said, Lidge is looking at a 1.800 WHIP, a K/BB that’s down from last season by almost 1, a K/9 that’s fallen by 2.5, a H/9 that’s gone up by 4, a HR/9 more than twice as high as his career average (and more than six times as high as his incredible 2008), and an ERA+ that’s fallen from last season’s 225 all the way to a miserable 62. He is the easy, obvious choice here.

"Overachiever: David Aardsma, Seattle Mariners

First-year GM Jack Zrudiencik made some savvy moves for the Mariners this season. One was having faith in bopper Russell Branyan; another was to give Aardsma a shot to close, which he parlayed into 34 saves, a 2.15 ERA, and 10.5 strikeouts per nine innings. Should make for a nice payday ahead for a guy who’d been stuck in middle relief since starring at Rice."

Gordon. Seriously. Fuck off with your 34 saves. David Aardsma is the right choice — he’s having an incredible, Lidge-in-2008-like year, following his awful, Lidge-in-2009-like last year — but number of saves is a useless, arbitrary metric for showing that. K-Rod had 62 saves last year. Was he twice as good as Aardsma is this year? No, actually, he was worse. For fuck’s sake, man, Brad Lidge — your choice for underachiever, remember? — has 28 saves. Exactly six fewer. Those six saves are the difference? No. No they are not. Fuck off.

Incidentally, another good choice here is Angel Guzman, but Gordon ignored him because he’s not a closer.

September 13th, 2009 Posted by Darien | Baseball | no comments

Re: Gordon Edes is a moron

The Dodgers lost to the Cubs today. They now have the exact same record post-Manny-suspension as they did pre-Manny-suspension. So, in conclusion: fuck you, Gordie.

"In the first three games of a four-game series, Los Angeles has managed only three runs."

Yeah, who needs Manny anyhow? Haven’t missed him a bit.

May 30th, 2009 Posted by Darien | Baseball | no comments

Fire Gordon Edes

Where’s Fire Joe Morgan when sportswriters write shit like this? Here’s Gordon Edes writing about how much better the Dodgers are since Manny Ramirez got suspended for doping:

"Since Ramirez was suspended for 50 games on May 10, the Los Angeles Dodgers are 12-5, a .706 winning percentage, even after a 2-1 loss to the Chicago Cubs here Friday afternoon that ended a four-game road winning streak.

Before the suspension, the Dodgers were 22-11, a .667 clip."

Oh, Gordon. Oh, Gordon, Gordon, Gordon. Come on. You have to realise how completely fucking stupid that is. Even you need to be able to see that those records differ by exactly one half game. They are exactly as close as they possibly could be when you consider that 17 isn’t divisible by 3. That would be good data to support the suggestion that the Dodgers haven’t gotten worse since Manny left, but it doesn’t support your weird idea that they’ve gotten better. Oh, and, Gordon? Before you get any ideas: yes, actually, the Dodgers are a worse team without Manny. They’ve just been an insanely lucky worse team, as I was just talking about yesterday, in a post that I see was ostensibly about Andruw Jones.

And, of course, the best part is that "the Dodgers are getting along just fine without Manny Ramirez" headline right above a smaller headling that says "Dodgers lose to Cubs 2-1." Wow, yeah, one run was plenty. They don’t need Manny at all!

May 30th, 2009 Posted by Darien | Baseball | no comments

Gordon gets one right

… Mostly.

Your friend and mine Gordon Edes wrote a new baseball column today. It’s actually mostly decent. The stupidest things in it come not from Gordon himself, but from intellectual luminaries like Ozzie Guillen and some nameless scout who sympathises with Ozzie Guillen. Let’s take a look:

"Someone had just mentioned to him that Chicago White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen had said the White Sox were a “horse(expletive) team” after closer Bobby Jenks blew a two-run lead in the ninth inning Thursday at Seattle by giving up home runs to Jose Lopez and Bill Hall, and the Mariners bullpen rang up a total of 8 1/3 scoreless innings before the M’s won in the 14th."

He’s right: Crazy Ozzie said that and a whole lot more in the process of throwing his team under the bus. Why does this man still have a job?

"’He’s right,’ said the scout, who didn’t want his name to be used. ‘That’s absurd, to lose a game like that. But what are you going to do? It’s been a tough year for the White Sox, one they’d like to forget.’"

Why does this man still have a job, also? It is just the White Sox, or is any team that’s ever blown a ninth-inning lead a horse-shit team made out of horse-shit players?

"’I’ll tell you what, nobody deserves to win in our division, and I hope whoever does win is eliminated in the first round in three games. Because if they somehow end up winning, that will just go to prove it makes no difference if you’re good enough to win 100 games in the regular season.’"

Way to be an asshole there, Charles. But, hey, here’s a fun fact. In 2006, the Fat Louis Fatinals won the NL Central with a stunningly good 83-78 record. They proceeded to win the World Series. So you know what? They already proved that how many regular-season wins you get doesn’t matter. Not that I expect you to remember that, since it was three entire years ago and certainly didn’t make any headlines at all.

"The Tigers have lost 8 of their last 11 games, a stretch that includes being swept at the pitiful Kansas City Royals, then losing two out of three to the Royals back home. ‘Not a good sign,’ manager Jim Leyland said."

Manager of the year.

"The Tigers this season have allowed more runs (673) than they’ve scored (670). Contrast that to the Yankees, who have a run differential of plus-148 (845-697). Detroit began the night ranked 11th in the league in runs scored, has just one .300 hitter (Miguel Cabrera) and has a 14-21 record in blowouts (games decided by five or more runs). The Tigers have a combined 2-11 record against the best two teams in the East, the Yankees and Red Sox, and were outscored 72-38 in those games."

Gordon, did you just write about run differentials? I… holy shit. You didn’t compare their like team strikeouts to the 1927 Yankees (1020 to 610, but please ignore that because it’s a stupid, stupid, meaningless comparison)? You actually cited the best, most meaningful stat for demonstrating that the Tigers aren’t very good? I don’t know what to say, Gordon. I’m impressed. Yes, by all rights, the Tigers should be under .500 right now (73-74, according to their Pythagorean). They have been meaningfully lucky.

"The Twins, a sub-.500 team when they lost Justin Morneau with a stress fracture in his lower back, have won five straight without their slugging first baseman and are an incongruous 10-2 this season when he has been out."

Look at this. I mean, look at it. Gordon Edes uses the word "incongruous" to describe the Twins’ performance without Morneau. It’s almost as though he’s aware that it’s a fluke, and that they’re not actually a better team without him. Gordon, are you feeling all right? You’re writing correct things. Do you need to lie down?

After that, he writes some more stuff about how the Twins aren’t as good as the Yankees, and then a whole bunch of shit about a baseball academy in Italy that’s fine. But then we get this:

"If you want to understand which teams run the bases well, you have to look beyond the stolen base leaders. Ari Kaplan, the Caltech-trained statistical analyst, big-league consultant and webmaster (ariball.com), took a look at which teams are best at going from first to third base on a single."

You absolutely do need to look beyond stolen base leaders. But… going first-to-third on a single? That’s a weird, weird, cherry-pick kind of stat. Why not look at baserunning as a whole, in some sort of format that accounts for all those times people attempt to take an extra base and get thrown out by twenty feet?

"Coming into play this week, Kaplan found that the Angels, known as an aggressive team on the basepaths, lead with the highest percentage of going from first to third on a single (with no runner on second): 31.2 percent of the time (84 of 269 chances). Baltimore is next at 30.5 percent (76 of 249 chances). Then Colorado at 29.5 percent (54 of 183 chances). On the bottom is Kansas City with 18.1 percent (42 of 232 chances)."

So… what he found is that how many times teams go from first-to-third on a single has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not the team is any good? I would agree. Because it’s a pretty absurd cherry-pick and doesn’t really reflect on the team’s baserunning ability.

"Chone Figgins of the Angels led all players in going from first to third on a single, doing so 52 percent of the time (26 of 50) without being thrown out. That includes 4 of 11 advances on balls hit to left. Erick Aybar of the Angels was next at 50 percent with 20 advances in 40 chances, with Shane Victorino of the Phillies third
at 38.5 percent (20 of 52)."

Well… okay. But Erick Aybar is bad at baseball, and Shane Victorino, despite his awesome nickname (ha ha, Jimmy Rollins), isn’t much better. And are these guys good baserunners in general? Or do they just have a flukey spike in that one weird stat? If only there were some way we could answer this question. If only…

Well, yeah, of course there’s a way we can answer this question. This isn’t the fourteenth century, and there are plenty of smart people out there who’ve realised that just looking at number of stolen bases isn’t the very best way to tell if a dude has good baserunning skills. Baseball Prospectus has a stat called (I shit you not) EQHAR, which sounds more like a pirate stat — say, number of buckles swashed — but is in fact "Equivalent Hit Advancement Runs." It compares to "number of times the player goes first-to-third on a single" much the same way OPS compares to RBI.

What does it tell us? Well, Chone Figgins is indeed the EQHARiest player in baseball this year, and Erick Aybar isn’t second, but he’s not far off. Victorino, though… Shane? Shane? Where are you, Shane? Oh, there you are. You’re fiftieth on the list — three places behind noted speedster Ivan Rodriguez. You suppose they call him "Pudge" because of his speed? Yeah. I think so too.

"On the bottom, Daric Barton of the Athletics never went first to third in 18 chances. Neither did Jack Hannahan, who split the season between the Athletics and Mariners and was 0 for 14. Magglio Ordonez of the Tigers was 1 for 26, Bengie Molina of the Giants 1 for 23, and David Ortiz of the Red Sox and Aramis Ramirez of the White Sox were 1 for 22."

There you have it, folks. Statistical analysis has shown us a new truth: David Ortiz is not very fast. Hard to believe, but true.

Incidentally, there are two words in that paragraph that are very wrong. Can you spot them? Here’s a hint.

"One major league scout who attended Pedro Martinez’s 1-0 win over the Mets last Sunday was astounded by his pitch count, 130, his highest in a regular-season game since throwing 136 against the Mariners on May 1, 2001. But this was even more amazing: ‘He looked as good as he ever looked,’ the scout said. ‘Just blazing away. He hit 93, and that may have been with his 130th pitch.’"

The idea that Charlie Manuel left Pedro Martinez in to throw 130 pitches just made my brain bleed. Pedro Marinez is 37 years old and has a very long history of arm problems. Why in the name of Mark Prior would you leave him in for 130 pitches? Fuck the heck was that about, Charlie?

Remember this next time you hear somebody talking about how Charlie Manuel should be manager of the year.

"The same scout saw Cliff Lee a couple of nights later throw a complete-game shutout against the Nationals and said he was ‘magnificent.’ Added the scout: ‘That’s 12 wins from those two guys (Lee and Martinez). Where would the Phillies be without ‘em.’"

Aaaaaaaaargh Charlie Manuel what are you doing to your pitchers aaaaaaaaargh

That notwithstanding, Cliff Lee has been worth 18 PRAR to the Phillies this year. Pedro Martinez has been worth 12. Using the rule of thumb that ten runs is roughly equal to one win, we see that the Phillies, assuming they replaced Lee and Martinez with average AAA callups (worst-case scenario), would be 83-63, and in… first place. So, really, it hasn’t made that much of a difference. See how much fun math is? You can make scouts look like idiots!

"Chipper Jones, though, may have to take a hard look at the work he needs to do if he wants to bounce back from a disappointing performance this season."

Oh for pity’s sake. Would everybody just lay off of Larry Wayne for five minutes? Even in this season where he was "disappointing," he still put up an OBP of .389, which is very good and not far off of his career average. His SLG’s been way down — more than a hundred points off his career mark — but he’s still been good enough for a pretty decent OPS+ of 118. And what’s this I see? His BABIP was only .290? Hmm. But his line drive rate was still a career-average 20%? You know what that means, yeah? It means Chipper got unlucky this year. He had an above-average number of balls caught. Which means that what he needs to do next year is: be less unlucky.

I don’t think that’s liable to be a big problem. So calm down, Chipper, for fuck’s sake.

September 19th, 2009 Posted by Darien | Baseball | no comments

Mark DeRosa: the ultimate slugger

This appears to be the opinion of Janie McCauley, who is certainly easier on the eyes than Gordon Edes, even if she doesn’t know much more about baseball. By which I mean: she’s a woman. Writing about baseball. That’s pretty hot all by itself.

Unfortunately, the things she is writing about baseball are these:

For several years, the Giants pictured DeRosa’s powerful bat contributing in the middle of their lineup.

That is not very hot, Janie. That’s not hot at all.

Mark DeRosa, career SLG: .424 — Player X, career SLG: .421
Mark DeRosa, career ISO: .149 — Player X, career ISO: .137
Mark DeRosa, career SecA: .245 — Player X, career SecA: .294

What hulking masher is Player X, the man Mark DeRosa seems very similar to? Is it David Ortiz? Perhaps Sammy Sosa? Could it even be the Babe himself? No, hyperbole fans, Player X is none other than noted slugger Brian Roberts, he of the 77 career home runs (his SecA is higher because he steals bases and walks, which Mark DeRosa does not do and sort of does, respectively).

(For reference: David Ortiz’ career: .545 SLG, .263 ISO, .417 SecA)

Still and all, Mark DeRosa is a worthwhile player. He gives you somewhat-average offense and he can play like fourteen different positions including Home Plate Umpire, so he’s fine. But let’s not get carried away talking about his powerful bat.

There was mutual interest three years ago when DeRosa first became a free agent. Now, both sides are finally getting their wish. DeRosa signed a $12 million, two-year contract with the club after passing a physical Monday.

Oh good lord. You’re paying him how much money, Brian Sabean? You’ve done worse (and sexier), but, damn. That’s some kind of overpay for a career 97 OPS+ dude.

One of general manager Brian Sabean’s top priorities this winter was to add a big hitter to drive in runs in the middle of the batting order, and DeRosa brings that ability.

He sure does. Just 3% less often than the average baseball player.

He can play several infield spots and the outfield, and it’s unclear whether he will work primarily at third base or bounce around.

Mark DeRosa, career FRAA at third base: 0

"The position I’d prefer to play is shortstop because that’s the position I played as a kid. But that doesn’t matter anymore," DeRosa said.

Mark DeRosa, career FRAA at shortstop: 15

Maybe it does matter just a teeny little bit, Mark.

Free-swinging slugger Pablo Sandoval

— also a third baseman —

is likely to bat cleanup, so DeRosa could easily fit into the No. 5 hole. DeRosa could play first or third.

Mark DeRosa, career FRAA at first base: -3

Maybe he could play shortstop. Just an idea. I mean, Edgar Renteria’s brutal in the field, and he’s looked completely cooked at the plate for a few years now.

"He’s a winning player and any organization wants as many players like Mark on the ballclub, especially ours that has a chance to turn the corner and get to the playoffs next year," Sabean said.

Mark DeRosa’s career Offensive Win Percentage is .513. That means a team with as many players just like him as it could possibly have would win 83 games. Good luck getting to the playoffs with 83 wins, Brian!

And, yes, I do know that the 83-win Cardinals won the fucking World Series in 2006. So shut up.

"To get him in here, he spoke of his willingness to show guys around a little bit. We need that. We need to get to the next level with guys like him."

Anybody have any idea what Brian’s talking about? I think we’ve lost him. He wants Mark DeRosa to… show guys around? Did he just sign a stadium usher for $12 million? I wouldn’t put it past him.

With DeRosa and new hitting coach Hensley Meulens, San Francisco is looking for a more patient approach at the plate focused on on-base percentage rather than just stepping in and swinging away.

The 2009 San Fransisco Giants had a team OBP of .309, good for dead last in MLB. This is appalling. So, yes, I support this plan. Though I would like to mention that it is pretty much not at all the same as signing Mark DeRosa for his powerful bat.

"You have to find an identity early on and we didn’t do that last year and it came back and bit us," Sabean said.

No, Brian, no. What bit you was that last-in-MLB OBP. You had an identity: a team of very bad hitters who make outs rather aggressively.

The Giants also are working on a deal to bring back infielder Juan Uribe.

Brian. Fuck the heck are you even doing? Are you paying attention to what you just said? Juan Uribe’s career OBP is fucking .298. He will not help your team, unless you’re still worried about making too many not-outs.

Sabean has been committed to boosting the offense for a team that boasts one of the top pitching staffs in baseball, led by two-time reigning NL Cy Young Award winner Tim Lincecum.

Then Sabean probably should have stopped wasting time on garbage like Juan Uribe and maybe gotten himself involved with the Matt Holliday bidding.

"That was one of the big overriding factors when I decided where wanted to play, the pitching factor," DeRosa said. "Pitching wins games."

2009 San Fransisco Giants: 611 runs allowed (best in MLB)
2009 San Fransisco Giants: 123 ERA+ (best in MLB)
2009 San Fransisco Giants: 1.255 WHIP (2nd in MLB)
2009 San Fransisco Giants: 88-74 (third place in the NL West)

Rumour has it that hitting is also a requirement for winning games.

So in the end, I guess I spent more time making fun of Brian Sabean than I did Janie McCauley. What can I say? He’s not as hot. Besides, if she thinks Mark DeRosa has a powerful bat, well, then I figure I have a chance, and I don’t want to mess this up.

December 29th, 2009 Posted by Darien | Baseball | no comments

I think I’ll make fun of some people