Table of Contents

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

On McGwire's candidacy

I wrote this in response to Bill's inquiry over at RedLeg Nation, but thought I'd repost it here.


Here's Bill's question:

Scenario:

You're a HOF voter... do you vote for Mark McGwire or not? Why or why not?

And my response:

I do. I don't know if he took steroids or not. As far as I know, there's been no evidence presented that he did except that he refused to answer questions at the senate hearing. And I don't agree with "convicting" a guy on charges of long term cheating without evidence.

But even if there was evidence, he played in an era in which that sort of doping was permitted (or at least not restricted) and reportedly widespread. I'm not sure it's reasonable to try to correct baseball's mismanagement of the use of performance-enhancing substances after the fact. Do you want to throw anyone who used amphetamines out of the hall of fame as well? That goes back into the '60's. So, for me, it's about his performance as a player and nothing more.

And the performance is absolutely there. 583 home runs, career 0.394 OBP, career 0.588 SLG, career 0.982 OPS, 100.9 career WARP3. Six consecutive years with a 1.000+ OPS, during which he had 400+ plate appearances all but the last year. Yeah, for me, he's a hall of famer.

Monday, November 20, 2006

Reds sign Mike Stanton

Alongside the Gonzalez signing, the Reds also signed veteran lefthander Mike Stanton to a 2-year, $5.5 million deal ($2.75 million/year). Stanton, 39, was originally signed as a 13th round selection by the Atlanta Braves in 1987, which is the same year that some of my current students (college sophomores) were born. He rose through the Braves' system very quickly, though he was converted to relief by the end of his second minor league season. He made his debut in just his third year of pro ball at age 22, and has been a late-inning lefty ever since. Recent stats:

A lot of people have compared the Stanton signing to that of Chris Hammond last winter. Hammon is another aging lefthander, and we all know how that turned out. But there's a big difference. When Hammond was signed, he had already shown major drops in his peripheral stats in the previous season, and that loss of skill caught up with him by June to the tune of a 6.91 ERA. Stanton, on the other hand, hasn't shown signs of slowing down. Yes, compared to the performances of his mid-early 30's, Stanton's strikeout rate has dropped. But it's held constant the last 4 years at between 6-7 k/9. And all the while he has been consistently effective, which is especially evident in his peripheral-based FIP stats.

The key to his success seems to be that he doesn't allow many balls to leave the yard via the home run. In fact, his HR/9 numbers topped 1.0 (the approximate league-average) only one year from 1999 through 2006. That's a great thing for someone who will pitch half his games in GABP. The only thing about this is that I can't figure out how he does it. His GB% indicates that he's more of a fly ball pitcher than someone who induces grounders. So hopefully this doesn't reverse next year--I doubt it will. Provided that he's able to keep his ageless consistency going, Stanton should be a nice addition to the ballclub, particularly against lefthanders.

Overall, I like the Stanton signing. The one thing that causes me to raise an eyebrow is that it's a two year deal, which is always a risk when the player involved will be 41 by the end of the contract. Nevertheless, left-handed relievers tend to have good staying power due to their relatively low usage, so I'm hopeful and optimistic that we'll get the full length of his contract out of Stanton. If so, we'll have a solid veteran lefthander who can replace the injured (though maybe not retired?) Kent Mercker.

A few words on LaRue

Tomorrow I'll try to relay some thoughts on the LaRue trade. My opinion of it will depend in large part on how much of his salary the Reds are paying next year. I've yet to see those figures reported anywhere, and I may wait to say much about this until those numbers surface. I will say that I fully expect LaRue to rebound next year. He might not be in 2005 form, but his PrOPS last season was still in the 0.800 despite his otherwise apparent struggles. I've written about LaRue's OPS vs. PrOPS oddities in previous articles, so I'll just refer you there for now. ... Also, I have to say, this has to be the most excited anyone has been about being traded to Kansas City in a long time. :)

More on Gonzalez

Joe Sheehan discussed the Gonzalez signing at Baseball Prospectus today (if you don't have a subscription, but it on your Christmas list!). Below is the relevant clip. As you'll see, he comes to a rather different conclusion than I did.
So what makes Gonzalez a good stealth signing? After all, he has been above a .300 OBP as many times as he's below that mark, and he's coming off his third straight year with a sub-700 OPS. That anemic bat wouldn't seem to make him a good choice as any kind of free agent, much less one to praise.

Gonzalez, however, is one of the top defensive shortstops in the game. While his numbers in Clay Davenport's system don't look good, Gonzalez consistently ranks among the top glove men in play-by-play systems or zone-based ones, such as the work of Mitchel Lichtman or Chris Dial. With the PBP systems largely in agreement on his value, I take those numbers more seriously than the Davenport ones. Gonzalez's defensive prowess elevates him from a replacement-level player to a slightly-below-average one, more than worth just shy of $5 million per season. He's one of the few players in the game whose defense really does make up for his offense.

Gonzalez may have a greater opportunity to help the Reds than he would on a normal team, too. The Reds don't have a strikeout staff (11th in the NL last year), and in particular, their bullpen is loaded with groundball guys. Gonzalez should help shore up a defense that has been among the worst in the game the past few years. The Reds still look to have major problems with outfield defense--and this signing is another reminder that the Reds no longer have Felipe Lopez at shortstop--but Gonzalez is a better player than his raw numbers indicate and should make them better in '07.
FWIW, I trust John Dewan's plus/minus scoring system more than those of Litchman or Dial. Both of those latter systems calculate fielding based on the number of balls hit into or through a particular zone on the field. While I think UZR (Litchman's system) is a bit more precise than ZR (which Dial then converts into +- runs saved), the Dewan plus/minus system is an improvement upon them. Instead of using zones for infielders, the Dewan system uses vectors, allowing much more precise tracking of where balls are hit and thus better evaluations how how often each particular type of batted ball is fielded on average. Furthermore, the Dewan system also takes into account how hard balls are hit and whether they are fly balls, line drives, or ground balls. So while it is moderately comforting to see the two zone rating-based systems giving Gonzalez's defense high marks, I'm not yet convinced. To be fair, however, I haven't yet purchased the 2006 Dewan plus/minus ratings (2006 leaders by position can be found in the Bill James 2007 Handbook, though I haven't yet figured out if it's possible to purchase all of the 2006 plus/minus stats).

Nevertheless, as before, I'd much rather Sheehan be right about this than me. The Reds really do need to get outstanding defense from Gonzalez for the signing to be worthwhile. And if he can provide that, I'll be very happy about this signing.

Update: JP at R&B has a more on Gonzalez, including a more detailed look using both Dial's and Dewan's stats. He also considers Gonzalez's performance starting and turning the double-play, which I did not consider. ... I'm still not convinced he's anything more than an average defensive MLB shortstop, but at least he's not below average. :)

Reds sign Alex Gonzalez

This hasn't been officially confirmed by the Reds yet, but they have apparently signed SS Alex Gonzalez, 29, to a three-year, $14 million deal ($4.7 million/year). He is the younger of the two MLB shortstops named Alex Gonzalez (the other played for Philadelphia last year). Gonzalez was signed as an undrafted free agent by the Florida Marlins in 1994 out of Cagua, Venezuela at age 17. He rose quickly through their system for his young age, making his major league debut as a late-season call-up in 1998 at age 21. In his time in the majors, Gonzalez has earned a reputation as an excellent defensive shortstop, and also a guy who has some pop in his bat as evidenced by the 23 home runs he hit in 2004. Recent stats: The remarkable thing about Gonzalez's lines, at least when I look at them, is that his OPS has remained almost perfectly constant in recent years despite the dramatic differences between his 2004 line and his 2005-6 lines. In '04, Gonzalez slugged 0.419, which is pretty decent for a middle infielder (though not as good as his solid 0.256/0.313/0.443 campaign of 2003). Unfortunately, his OBP was a miserable 0.270 in 2004. In '05 and '06, he was better (relatively) about getting on base and avoiding the stirkeout, but his power numbers dropped substantially. Whatever variant of Gonzalez we get next year, we're looking at a guy who is only a modest offensive improvement over a replacement player like Juan Castro...by one win, at most.

But that's ok, this guy's supposed to be a defensive master, right? Well... it's true that his fielding percentage is quite good for a shortstop (career 0.970), making no more than 16 errors in any of the past 5 seasons. But his range is thoroughly average. His 2003-2005 3-year total under John Dewan's fielding system was -1 plays made over 3755 innings. Similarly, Clay Davenport's fielding system puts him at +1 runs saved over 422 games in the same time period. That's a far cry from Adam Everett's defensive prowess, and with minimally (at best) better offensive production.

Now I can deal with average defense from a shortstop if the offense is there. But unless he reverts to his classic-peak-at-age-26-to-27 form of 2003-2004, we're dealing with a guy who is barely producing above replacement level hitting. And, since he'll start the season at age 30, he might even be starting to slip defensively by the end of his new contract. I wouldn't mind having him as a cheap ~$1-2 million signee who might serve as a utility guy off the bench. But as a $4.7 million/yr starter over three years? I realize the market for middle-infielders is thin this year, but why can't Ryan Freel play 2B and Brandon Phillips play SS? Both are at least average defenders (and probably above-average), and are solid offensive performers. Investing in Gonzalez just doesn't seem to bring much return for the Reds. Except a weaker offense.

As usual when I criticize a player move, I really hope I'm wrong. But in this case, we're not dealing with a guy who has a lot of unknowns. Alex Gonzalez has a steady track record of just not being a very good player, on offense or defense. At least the Reds reportedly still have another $20 million to play with this offseason. Hopefully they can put it to good use. On that front, I'll profile the Reds' other unconfirmed signing, Mike Stanton, tomorrow.

Transaction Ketchup: Reds sign Bubba Crosby

The first free agent acquisition of Wayne Krivsky's first real offseason wasn't the most exciting move he's ever made. But did he get someone who is nonetheless useful? Well...

Bubba Crosby, now 30, was a first-round selection out of Rice University by the Los Angeles Dodgers in 1998. He had an unbelievable season that year, hitting 0.394/0.504/0.828 (1.332 OPS!) and being ranked as a first-team All American outfielder. ... Granted, that's not the last time he hit well. But after that sort of performance and his high draft slot, you can't help but feel his professional career has been a disappointment. It took him three seasons to get to AA (at age 25), and it wasn't until age 27 that he broke the 0.900 OPS mark as a professional ballplayer -- and even then it was in hitter-friendly AAA Las Vegas. There was talk at the time that he might be a late bloomer. Unfortunately, he hasn't hit since, albeit with limited playing opportunities. Recent stats:
I will say that Crosby does walk at a reasonable rate...usually...in AAA. But he hasn't had a batting average above 0.280 or a slugging percentage above 0.400 since 2003. Part of the reason might be that 2003 was the last time Crosby had a decent number of at-bats in a season, but thus far Crosby has shown very little ability to hit at the major league level. And, at 30 years old, there's little reason to think that he will start hitting now. On the plus side, he does seem to have modest speed and the ability to use it well.

So not much offense. How does he field? I don't have 2006 fielding stats yet, but the fielding bible (2005 stats) rated him at -2 plays in 144.2 innings in center field in 2005 (-19 plays/season) and -2 plays in 100 innings in right field (-27 plays/season). I think this is a case where low sample size makes extrapolations a bit dangerous, so I'd take those as indicating roughly average/just below average both positions. Clay Davenport's fielding stats generally support this, and put him as an average/just above average defender. So he won't hurt us defensively, but he's not special out there either.

Now I'm not going to ride Wayne Krivsky too hard for this signing. After all, he only spent $400k on this guy, which is only $10k above the minimum. We can always release him. But I'd rate Crosby as #6 in our outfield depth right now. Obviously Griffey, Dunn, and Freel top the list, although the Reds like to avoid giving Freel a real job, so I'll pencil him in as the #4. That puts Denorfia as the right fielder, and he clearly deserves this real shot as a regular. And Norris Hopper is my #5 outfielder, as he has skills (contact and speed) that should make him useful off the bench. So I'm not really seeing how Crosby is any kind of upgrade, or even where he fits in. Nevertheless, odds are very strong that he'll make the opening day roster. As long as he doesn't start over Denorfia--or even platoon with Chris in the outfield--I won't freak out too much.

I'll conclude with this quote from the 2005 Baseball Prospectus Annual on Crosby, just because I find it really funny: "Winner of the Columbus Shuttle Frequent Flyer Award, Crosby didn't get to do much besides pinch-run, sub on defense, and fetch Joe Torre his pre-game cup of herbal tea. He's not vastly overqualified for any of those roles."

Sunday, November 19, 2006

Advice for posting stats?

I'm having a miserable time posting stat tables on this site, so I thought I'd solicit those reading this for help. Here's the rundown of what I've tried:
  • Until recently, copying-and-pasting from Excel into blogger has worked great. Now, however, I'm finding that only the lines for the rows are showing up. Column lines are not, which makes many of my (cramped) tables hard as heck to read. This seems to be a browser issue, as it happened once I upgraded to the latest FireFox. But I need this site to be readable by any browser, so that's no help. I've tried every manipulation of the table html code I can think of, and nothing seems to be working.
  • I've also tried using the "pre" & "/pre" html tags to just post preformatted text (see below). Unfortunately, blogger seems to remove any spaces I leave in this text when I post a message. So that's no good either.
  • I've also tried taking a screen capture of the table in excel and then posting that graphic to this site. Unfortunately, blogger resizes any images I post here once they get wider than half a screen length. Most of my tables are fairly wide, which makes them all-but-unreadable.
  • I've also borrowed a page from Joel Luckhaupt at RedsAndBlues.com (as an aside, congrats to Doc Scott and JP on their new site) and used EditGrid. This looks terrific (see here), but unfortunately I am unable to edit these posts once I publish them due to some sort of bug with the blogger software. And none of the other online spreadsheet programs seem to have the ability to imbed a small table into a website like editgrid does.
So, anyone else have any ideas? Thanks if you do. I'm sending this request to blogger as well, so if they get back to me with anything I'll post their solution here.

Transaction ketchup: Gil for Woody

And now for the fun stuff.

Tonight, I'm going to try to give my take on the Reds' other transactions. In order to keep all this organized and to make future linking easier, I'm going to give each transaction a separate post. So, first off, let's look at the one least likely to impact the Reds next year. :)

Acquired IF/OF Jerry Gil from the AZ Diamondbacks for RHP Abe Woody

Gil is 24, and signed as an undrafted free agent in 1999 by the D-backs out of the Dominican. Stats:

Gil is apparently a good defender (Krivsky indicates his "natural position" is at shortstop), and has shown impressive power for a middle infielder. He also has some modest speed, which never hurts. But my goodness, talk about a lack of patience. His walk rate in '05 and '06 was lower than his home run rate!! I'm not saying that every hitter has to be a patient-type individual, but unless you're slugging 70 a year, you sure as heck should be walking more often than you homer. His OBP is suffering as a consequence, breaking 0.300 only once over the past three years--and then, just barely. His K-rate is fairly high as well, so it looks like he's mostly just a swing-at-anything kind of guy. I have doubts about whether he'll ever be able to adjust to MLB pitching. But he's apparently an athletic kid, and we didn't pay all that much to get him. So what the heck.

Who did we send? 24-year old RHP Abe Woody. Stats:

Woody was a 31st-round selection of the '05 draft, but has pitched well in pro ball as a reliever. He made the jump from rookie ball to high-A in 2006, and continued to pitch well. His biggest asset appears to be his ability to induce the ground ball, though he struck men out at a good rate this year. But he was also a 23-year old pitching in high-A ball as a reliever, so I'm not going to get too worked up about him.