2000s

Via Baseball Think Factory, a Korean cartoon depicting the 2004 Indinas. Obviously, the captions are in Korean, so I have no idea what they say (if any reader knows the language, by all means translate it). But since a picture’s worth a thousand words, so I’ll give it a shot.

1. Jake Westbrook. Casey Blake, Ronnie Belliard, and Omar Vizquel are tired of fielding all of Jake’s ground balls.
2. Travis Hafner. He’s harmless against left-handers (I think that’s Mark Buerhle on the left), but mashes right-handed pitching.
3. CC Sabathia/Bob Wickman. Both pitchers are successful despite their bulkiness.
4. Victor Martinez. He’s a good player without the added weight.
5. Kaz Tadano. Well, this one should be pretty obvious. The batter is Alex Rodriguez, I think.
6. Coco Crisp. He beat out Alex Escobar and Grady Sizemore.
7. Jose Jimenez. He sucked.

Feel free to add your own captions.

Every so often, a baseball signing just completely shocks me. Alex Rodriguez was the last time it happened, but today’s (reported) signing has the same effect on me.

Magglio Ordonez has been for years one of the game’s most underrated players, maybe because he played in a division no one cared about nationally, or maybe it was his consistency. Most Indians fans know how good he is from experience; him and Frank Thomas would kill the Indians time after time throughout the late 1990s and early 2000s. He’s never hit 40 home runs in a season, but he’s also been one of the better hitters in the American League since 1998.

But I simply can’t imagine he’d ever get 75 million dollars from anyone. Especially after a career-threatening knee injury. Especially after an offseason where players like Adrian Beltre and Carlos Delgado didn’t really get market value. That’s what the Detroit Tigers are reportedly going to pay Magglio over the next five seasons. I had assumed that some team like the Mets or Cubs would get him at a reduced rate, he’d have a good year, and then go back on the free agent market and cash in. But I have to credit his agent for somehow getting a team to give him a five year contract.

In 2002, Jim Thome was the best position player on the market, coming off a career year, and he roughly got what Ordonez is getting. He’s going to get more than Vlad got last year.

The Tigers are probably forced into paying this much because of their past history, which you can justify on some level. They struck gold after signing Ivan Rodriguez late last offseason, and appear to be following the same script with Ordonez in this offseason. But with these types of signings comes an incredible amount of risk. I always like to ask myself when I see a contract is what the dollar amounts says about the player. For instance, Alex Rodriguez is being paid to be the best player in baseball. Magglio Ordonez is going to be paid to be one of the top 10 players in baseball. The problem comes when the monetary expectations (ie the contract dollars) doesn’t mesh with the baseball expectations (ie the performance on the field). I’ll bring up another example near and dear to our hearts: Matt Lawton. He’s a nice player, but the disconnect between his performance and his paycheck was fairly large. That’s what I see with this deal, but on a grander scale. Unless Magglio somehow ups his game to Pujolsian levels over the next five seasons, he won’t be worth what he’s getting.

And yes, if the Indians had given out a contract like this in the past two months, I’d be saying the same thing. When dollars don’t match performance, there’s a big problem, because most teams only have so much money that they can spend. The larger the gulf, the bigger the problem. The smaller the payroll, the bigger the problem. Now if the Tigers suddenly start spending $100M a year, they might not suffer as much from this contract. They are one year away from ridding themselves of Bobby Higginson’s Ferry-esque contract, so they’ll should be all right monetarily. But the bigger issue comes from the performance on the field; this is what happened to the Indians in 2002.

This signing definitely makes the AL Central more interesting, though. If everyone’s healthy, a Rodriguez-Ordonez-Young middle of the order is going to be scary to face.

Right about this time, trucks carrying baseball equipment should be on their way to Winter Haven. Baseball’s around the corner, and although LeBron has kept Cleveland sports fans fixated through the winter months, it’s nice to know that Spring Training is near.

I’ve also uploaded my rankings of the 36 pitchers on the Indians’ Top 100 list. Here’s the top ten, with WARP3 in parentheses:

1. Bob Feller (106.4)
2. Bob Lemon (88.1)
3. Mel Harder (76.1)
4. Stan Coveleski (68.8)
5. Early Wynn (62.2)
6. Charles Nagy (59.5)
7. Willis Hudlin (57.5)
8. Mike Garcia (57.1)
9. Addie Joss (52.8)
10. Sam McDowell (51.2)

I was a bit surprised that Nagy ranked so high, but revisting his statistics, he had an excellent career. After 1999 he was pretty much done, but during the mid 1990s, he was one of the best pitchers in the American League. Note that I’m ranking these pitchers by the time they spent with the Indians, so pitchers like Gaylord Perry will be lower in the list because they didn’t pitch long in Cleveland. The download link is to the right, under “Links.”

Here’s the pitching numbers I promised a couple days ago.

Name	BF	%SO	%BB	%GB	%OF	%IF	%LD
Sabathia	787	18	10	28	25	4	14
Westbrook	895	13	7	49	17	2	11
Millwood	628	20	9	28	22	3	14
Lee	802	20	11	23	27	3	14
Elarton	498	16	9	24	32	5	13

Traded 3B/OF Corey Smith to the San Diego Padres for 2B/3B Jake Gautreau

By “challenge trade” I mean clubs are swapping problems in the hopes that a change of scenery will help get their careers back on track. Both can play third base, though neither can play it well. Both are past first round busts. But there are a couple differences between the two. Gautreau has been sidelined with collitis (I guess DaJuan Wagner isn’t the only athlete to get it) in the past couple of years, while Smith has stayed relatively healthy. Gautreau was moved to second base last season, while Smith was moved to the outfield this offseason. Smith is three years younger than Gautreau, but Jake is closer to the majors. He also hits left-handed, so that’s a plus. All in all, you can understand the reasoning behind both sides of the deal. Given that the Indians have a bazillion third basemen in Cleveland, Gautreau might be groomed as a utility guy until needed in the majors.

I apologize for continuing on this Westbrook theme, but I found this article yesterday, and it piqued my interest even further. It goes a bit further than I have, examining what type of balls in play pitchers give up. The Hardball Times compiled the data and showed the outcomes (eg strikeouts, walks, groundball, etc) by percentage. It turns out that Jake gave up the greatest proportion of ground balls in the majors, 49%. More importantly, Westbrook also gave up a below-average percentage of line drives, 11%. Why is that important? HT figured the percentage of the time certain outcomes turned into outs, and line drives were caught only 26% of the time. So obviously if you’re a pitcher, giving up a lot of line drives isn’t a good idea.

So what’s the best type of out, then? Obviously #1 is a strikeout; you will almost always record an out if this happens (the exceptions being a strikeout combined with a wild pitch or passed ball). Infield flies are next at 97%. After that it gets a bit tricky. Outfield flies (75%) become outs more often than ground balls (72%), but ground balls never become home runs; outfield flies leave the park 12% of the time.

Where am I going with this? It’s very possible, if you’re an extreme ground ball pitcher, to be successful with a lower than average strikeout rate. There are two big caveats, though. Number one, the pitcher has to keep his walks down. Number two, he has to have a good infield defense behind him. Obviously the best outcome would be for Jake to raise his strikeout rate to 5.5-5.8, but if his ground ball percentage sticks around 50%, it’s very possible that he can be effective while posting substandard strikeout ratios. By effective I mean a 4.00-4.25 ERA, not a 3.38 ERA. That’s a good middle-of-the-rotation pitcher.

Brandon Webb, who makes a nice Westbrook comp, saw his ERA increase because his walk percentage ballooned to 14%. I’d take Webb over Westbrook because of his ability to combine his sinker with a healthy strikeout rate, but his stat line serves as a reminder of what can happen if you start walking batters without compensating with strikeouts.

I’ll throw out some percentages for other Indians starters tomorrow.

By the way, check out Dave Haller’s excellent article on Barry Larkin (and to a certain extent) Omar Vizquel.

Signed RHRP Paul Shuey to a minor-league contract; Invited him to Spring Training

Shuey is probably done thanks to all the injuries, but if you’re the Indians, why not bring him in? His degenerative hip isn’t going to go away, and he also is coming off a thumb injury, so he’s a real longshot to make the team. His strikeout rates had been going down even before missing the 2004 season, so I’m really tempering my expectations. He’s not yet to the Jason Bere setting on the toaster (burnt to a crisp), but his career outlook is getting slightly golden brown. Shapiro likes to take care of his former players, and Shuey is by all accounts a great guy to have on your team. I just don’t know if he can pitch anymore.

Signed OF Darnell McDonald to a minor-league contract; Invited him to Spring Training

The second Orioles bust signed this offseason (Jose Morban), McDonald is a former 1st round pick who never developed any power. Now that he’s been cut loose by the Orioles, he’ll have to ply his trade as a “veteren” minor-league outfielder. He posted a .662 OPS in AAA last year, which is not a good sign considering he’s coming off shoulder surgery. He doesn’t have the speed or range to play center field, so it looks like he’s going to be either Buffalo’s or Akron’s reserve outfielder.

This issue has been puzzling me for a while, and the Westbrook signing really brought it to the forefront. Given Westbrook’s method of pitching, is it fair to exact him to the same evaluation methods that we apply other more conventional hurlers to? First, let’s examine Jake’s peripherals, which are usually the most useful in making predictions.

Strikeouts per 9 innings: 4.8

For the average pitcher, this isn’t really an encouraging sign. The ability to strike out hitters is the surest way of run prevention, and pitchers with lower strikeout ratios have a lower margin for error in allowing runs.

Walks per 9 innings: 2.6

This is pretty good. Westbrook finished 14th in the AL in BB/9, which doesn’t really signify anything by itself.

Hits per 9 innings: 8.7

Above average numbers here, but nothing to get excited over.

Home Runs per 9 innings: 0.79

This is pretty good. Jacobs Field has been a fairly neutral park in recent seasons, so I’ll just assume that this ratio doesn’t need to be adjusted much.

DIPS ERA: 4.19

DIPS stands for Defense Independent Defense Statistics. This is, essentially, Westbrook’s ERA independent of his defense. Given that his ERA was .90 runs lower than his dERA, this is a red flag. This seems to indicate Westbrook was lucky last season.

BABIP: .263

BABIP stands for “Batting Average of Balls in Play”. This is the “batting average” of balls put in play. And like the dERA, the BABIP indicates Westbrook was lucky with where where his pitches were hit.

SLG% Against: .386

This is an encouraging sign. This is the slugging percentage of the batters that faced him last season, and it’s the 4th best in the league. This indicates the hits Westbrook did allow were more likely to be singles than extra-base hits.

GB/FB Ratio: 2.72

Westbrook only trailed Derek Lowe in this category.

What does all this indicate? First of all, Westbrook was pretty lucky last season, and his ERA is likely to go up. But I’m wondering out loud if Westbrook’s sinker causes more “weak contact” than the average pitcher. I watched most of his starts in 2004, and when he was on, hitters couldn’t hit the ball with any authority, and most of the time any contact resulted in weak grounders to short or second. DIPS ERA uses the assumption that MLB pitchers do not differ greatly on their ability to prevent hits on balls in play, but there are a couple possible exceptions. One is a knuckball pitcher, whose general goal is to keep hitters off balance. Another one could be extreme groundball pitchers, who try to pitch to “weak contact” by throwing heavy sinkers. I don’t know of any way to substantiate this, so for now this is a just a wild theory. I’ll peg Westbrook for an ERA of 4.25 or so next season based on his peripherals, but I’ll also be interested to see if his BABIP changes appreciably. Obviously to be successful with a strikeout rate of 5.0 or less, a pitcher has to keep his walks down as well as keep the running game under control, both of which Jake did in 2004. But if his BABIP continues to stay low, it may indicate that his sinker is good enough almost by itself to make Westbrook a valuable pitcher.

Sources: ESPN, STATS, Inc.

Signed RHSP Jake Westbrook to a two-year, $7.5M contract, avoiding arbitration

This deal I can handle. Like with Blake’s deal, the Indians have a 2007 club option. I don’t know whether Westbrook will be eligible for free agency after the 2006 season, but judging by the terms of the contract, I’ll assume that he wouldn’t have his 6 years of service in until after 2007. Because free agency is based on service time, it’s difficult to know whether a guy like Westbrook, who bounced back and forth between Cleveland and the minors the past several season, will be a free agent in 2006 or 2007.

Westbrook, like Blake, is due for a regression next year. Unlike Blake, I think Westbrook will be worth his contract. Jake’s style of pitching means that he’s subject to more variability in his numbers than a strikeout pitcher, but his sinker is good enough to make him a solid middle-of-the-rotation starter if healthy. Given the market for starting pitching, Westbrook at $2.9M this season and $4.25M in 2006 is a pretty good value even if his ERA climbs back to the 4.00 range.

With Westbrook’s signing, the Indians have taken care of all their major offseason business. Shapiro has hinted that he’ll try to sign a couple younger players to long-term deals (Martinez and Hafner come to mind), but that usually happens in Spring Training.

I had intended to answer yesterday’s question by using theoretical players. Now I’ll use Casey Blake instead.

Re-signed OF Casey Blake to a two-year, $5.4M contract, avoiding arbitration

Blake was a “super-two,” meaning he was arbitration-eligible even though he had less than three seasons worth of service time. The Indians, if they choose, have Blake for four more seasons. Casey is not your typical arbitration player; he’s one of the older players on the roster, and before the 2003 season, only baseball junkies knew who he was. He started his career with the Toronto Blue Jays, drafted as a senior out of Wichita State. He got a cup of coffee with the Jays, but he couldn’t crack the major-league roster. He then moved to Minnesota, to Baltimore, and back to Minnesota, and had accumulated a grand total of 49 major-league at-bats before the Indians invited him to Spring Training. He beat out Greg LaRocca (who?) and hasn’t looked back. Now he’s guaranteed $5.4M over the next two seasons, probably more than he’s made his entire professional career put together.

My question is whether giving Blake two years is worth it. He’s moving to the outfield, where you almost have to expect Blake to repeat his 2004 season in order to be a productive outfielder. I really don’t see Blake doing that, though. His 2004 numbers are completely out of whack compared to what he did in the minors and in 2003. Yes, he hasn’t gotten a real chance before now, but at age 31, his career shouldn’t be compared to guys like Victor Martinez or Travis Hafner, both of whom have better minor-league resumes and who are on the better side of 30. The Indians made this decision based on Blake’s intangibles, saying that his work ethic and his attitude had a large say in the two-year deal. That’s all very nice, but you still have the data to contend with. I wouldn’t categorize Blake’s output in 2004 as a Brady Anderson-sized fluke, but at the same time you have to expect some kind of regression next season. The Indians are compounding this by moving him to left field, where a team’s best offensive outfielder usually resides. Relying on Blake to repeat what may be a career year just to be an average outfielder isn’t a gamble that’s likely to pay off. For instance, let’s see where Blake’s 2003 and 2004 OPSs would have placed him among 2004 AL left fielders:

Manny Ramirez 1.010
Hideki Matsui .912
Carlos Lee .891
Jose Guillen .848
Casey Blake .839 (2004)
Lew Ford .826
Shannon Stewart .826
Raul Ibanez .825
Craig Monroe .825
Eric Byrnes .814
Rondell White .790
Matt Lawton .787
Carl Crawford .779
Larry Bigbie .766
Eric Young .754
Casey Blake .723 (2003)
Reed Johnson .698

Essentially, if Blake is as good in 2005 as he was in 2004, he’s a pretty decent player, even for a left fielder. If, however, he reverts back to his 2003 form….well, let’s just hope he doesn’t do that. Which is why I don’t like this signing. If Aaron Boone stays healthy and Blake regresses to his earlier self, there’s a big problem. He’s not a good enough defender to play second base, and if he’s not adequate as a left fielder, he definitely wouldn’t meet the offensive standards that’s expected of a first baseman.

Getting back to yesterday’s question….no, I would not give that fictious player a salary commensurate of a 100 T player, because more than likely, he won’t be a 100 T player over the life of his contract. Because the player’s age says that 2004 was more of a fluke than a legitimate break-out, it’s not likely that the player will even maintain his T level next season. In this real-life situation, the medium involved is arbitration, which is a different environment to work in. The Indians weren’t going to lose Blake if they didn’t agree to a deal before the arbitration hearing, and given the figures submitted by Blake and the Indians, his 2005 salary wouldn’t be a whole lot different if the two sides had gone to arbitration. But the guarenteed second year means that the Indians may be paying $3.05M for a player without a position in 2006. Like Rotoworld said, Blake is a player you really need to go year-to-year with. Which makes this move the first real dud of the offseason for the Indians.

In today’s economic environment, good player evaluation is a vital component of a successful organization. I would define the term as follows: the rating of baseball players. Now of course this rating system has many factors in it. Also, different rating systems have to used for different types of players, ie a team probably won’t use the same criteria to rate a possible free agent target and a high school senior. For my purposes, I’m going to use a fictious measure, T, to serve as an example through the subsequent parts of this series. T stands for Talent, a term used often but never explained. Also assume that as T goes up, the value provided to the organization increases proportionally.

Now the trick is, if you’re the GM, to place a T measure on a player. At the major-league level, this isn’t too difficult. Since at the major-league level everyone’s numbers are relevent, you can use statistical analysis for the offense, and teams usually have their own defensive measures to use. I should however differentiate between current value and projected value, which is a totally different animal. Current value is what a particular player is worth at a given point in time. This is useful for in-season moves such as rental trades. The more tricky measure, projected value, comes into play when teams are looking at a player in the long-term view. In this instance, age is a huge factor, as well as career trends and peripheral statistics from the past couple of years. Let’s say that a player is worth 100 T as of the last day of the season. However, this player is a free agent, and the team is pondering whether they should pay him what he’s asking for. Let’s assume that the these are the players’ previous T rankings:

2001: 80 T (Age 28)
2002: 70 T (Age 29)
2003: 75 T (Age 30)
2004: 100 T (Age 31)

Because the player’s 100 T season happened to coincide with his walk year, he expects to be paid as a 100 T player. Also assume that his walks and strikeouts in 2004 did not differ dramatically from his previous three seasons. What do you as GM do?

I’ll give you my answer, along with the various facets that went into it, tomorrow.