Tuesday, November 06, 2007
AN ALTERNATIVE PRESENTS ITSELF
Over the past couple of weeks, I've been posting about the possibility of the Angels acquiring Alex Rodriguez. Recent developments, long-rumored, present us with another potential option for improving the Angel offense.
The Florida Marlins are reportedly willing to put Miguel Cabrera on the market.
Miguel Cabrera is a young hitter of astonishing quality and achievement. He doesn't turn 25 until April; here are some stats of Cabrera and two other hitters through the age of 24:
Player B is Frank Robinson.
There are, however, certain negatives to Cabrera:
1. His defense.
By all accounts, both anecdotal and statistical, Cabrera is a bad third baseman. Per the Baseball Info Solutions data at the Hardball Times, he was approximately 15 plays below the league average on balls in his zone last year, worth over 10 runs (he also had an unexceptional total of plays made outside of his zone, though this doesn't necessarily mean anything). He was approximately -8 plays, or around -6 runs, below average in 2006.
2. His conditioning.
Miguel Cabrera is progressively becoming a fatter and fatter bastard. This bodes ill for his conditioning, long-term health, and his ability to play defense and run the bases.
3. He will cost a fortune -- in players.
The Marlins are allegedly seeking a young third baseman, a young pitcher, and a center fielder.
It just so happens that the Angels can offer such a package: Brandon Wood, one of Joe Saunders and Ervin Santana, and -- though he may be older than what the Marlins are looking for -- Chone Figgins.
This is a steep price, even for a hitter of Cabrera's talents. But while Brandon Wood is looking like the next Dean Palmer (not a bad thing with good glove at either of his potential positions), Cabrera is a sure bet.
Of course, trading one of Saunders and Santana would mean we'd have to go out and get a starting pitcher. Intriguingly, Florida is also looking to shop Dontrelle Willis. Would Florida accept a package of Wood, Saunders/Santana, Figgins, and maybe one more mid-level prospect (not Adenhart) for Cabrera and Willis? I suspect they'd think about it. Should the Angels?
Let's break this down:
- Is Miguel Cabrera a step up from Brandon Wood? Almost certainly.
- With Reggie Willits around to caddy Gary Matthews Jr and Garret Anderson, with the payroll flexibility to bring Juan Rivera back to support the corners, and with Maicer Izturis providing roughly league-average production as a infield backup, is Chone Figgins expendable? I like the guy, and he's coming off a big year, but I can't help but answer "yes".
- Is giving up one of Saunders and Santana and getting Willits an upgrade or downgrade, and if it's the latter, is it enough to negate the improvement made by adding Cabrera to the lineup?
By BB-Ref's linear weights figures, Cabrera has been +46.3, +56.6, and +45.7 runs above average, offensively, in each of the last three years; he's a good bet to be +50 or so in the next couple of years. Dock 10 runs for his D, he's still a +40 player, roughly 4 wins above average. Chone Figgins, whom Cabrera would be replacing in the lineup, over the past three years has been +1.8, -13.4, and +13.4 (these figures include basestealing, but not other baserunning). Even with his defense, I'd guess that Figgins in 2008 projects to be roughly average, maybe just a bit above.
So we're looking at maybe a 35-40-run difference between Cabrera and Figgins.
It is obvious that the difference, in the short term, between Saunders/Santana and Willits will be far less than 40 runs. Let's look at their totals the past four years, which of course for the Halos is only a couple of years (PR is Pitching Runs, or Earned Runs Prevented Above Average):
I'll spare you the details, but looking at Willis' batted-ball stats, we can see that he allowed home runs more frequently last year on flyballs than at most other points in his career, which could have been a big part of his struggles. Whether or not that's a fluky thing or a sign of a change in his skill level, I don't know. If he's healthy, I have trouble believing that he just forgot how to pitch or something.
My preference would be to only give up Wood and Figgins -- that does open a shortstop hole in 2009, but we don't know that Wood would fill it, anyway, though if we still have him in 2008 I'd love for him to return to that position at AAA -- for Cabrera. I think there's a good chance that both of Saunders and Santana will be at least as productive (and cheaper) than Willis in the next few years (based on their component stats and relative ages), so I don't know that I'd like to exchange one of them. But I can see talks moving in that direction, and, despite the money, Willis is probably a solid bet to shore up the bottom of the rotation.
As for the question of Cabrera vis-a-vis A-Rod, the question is really "What are we more willing to part with -- players or money?" I don't know what Arte's answer to this would be. From a roster construction standpoint, the ideal would be to sign A-Rod and hold on to all our chips; Wood can be bred for short, Saunders and Santana can develop, and we still have Figgins to play or be traded for a pitcher if we don't trust in the tykes.
Even re-signing Cabrera and/or Willis in future years would likely cost less (combined) than A-Rod would -- though of course that's a few years down the road -- so that's obviously a more cost-effective solution in terms of dollars (though adding a shortstop to the payroll -- or re-signing Orlando Cabrera -- in lieu of the bargain Wood is another financial cost to consider in that scenario).
I do think these are the best two alternatives of which we're aware; there is occasional talk of Miguel Tejada, but Tejada's on the wrong side of 30 and is not a hitter of the caliber of either Rodriguez or Miggy, and may well demand a package of similar value (to the Cabrera package) in exchange.
So, money or players? I don't know.
The Florida Marlins are reportedly willing to put Miguel Cabrera on the market.
Miguel Cabrera is a young hitter of astonishing quality and achievement. He doesn't turn 25 until April; here are some stats of Cabrera and two other hitters through the age of 24:
Player PA OPS+ HR AVG OBP SLGPlayer A is Hank Aaron.
Player A 3173 145 140 .316 .365 .543
Cabrera 3072 143 138 .313 .388 .542
Player B 3156 142 165 .298 .380 .552
Player B is Frank Robinson.
There are, however, certain negatives to Cabrera:
1. His defense.
By all accounts, both anecdotal and statistical, Cabrera is a bad third baseman. Per the Baseball Info Solutions data at the Hardball Times, he was approximately 15 plays below the league average on balls in his zone last year, worth over 10 runs (he also had an unexceptional total of plays made outside of his zone, though this doesn't necessarily mean anything). He was approximately -8 plays, or around -6 runs, below average in 2006.
2. His conditioning.
Miguel Cabrera is progressively becoming a fatter and fatter bastard. This bodes ill for his conditioning, long-term health, and his ability to play defense and run the bases.
3. He will cost a fortune -- in players.
The Marlins are allegedly seeking a young third baseman, a young pitcher, and a center fielder.
It just so happens that the Angels can offer such a package: Brandon Wood, one of Joe Saunders and Ervin Santana, and -- though he may be older than what the Marlins are looking for -- Chone Figgins.
This is a steep price, even for a hitter of Cabrera's talents. But while Brandon Wood is looking like the next Dean Palmer (not a bad thing with good glove at either of his potential positions), Cabrera is a sure bet.
Of course, trading one of Saunders and Santana would mean we'd have to go out and get a starting pitcher. Intriguingly, Florida is also looking to shop Dontrelle Willis. Would Florida accept a package of Wood, Saunders/Santana, Figgins, and maybe one more mid-level prospect (not Adenhart) for Cabrera and Willis? I suspect they'd think about it. Should the Angels?
Let's break this down:
- Is Miguel Cabrera a step up from Brandon Wood? Almost certainly.
- With Reggie Willits around to caddy Gary Matthews Jr and Garret Anderson, with the payroll flexibility to bring Juan Rivera back to support the corners, and with Maicer Izturis providing roughly league-average production as a infield backup, is Chone Figgins expendable? I like the guy, and he's coming off a big year, but I can't help but answer "yes".
- Is giving up one of Saunders and Santana and getting Willits an upgrade or downgrade, and if it's the latter, is it enough to negate the improvement made by adding Cabrera to the lineup?
By BB-Ref's linear weights figures, Cabrera has been +46.3, +56.6, and +45.7 runs above average, offensively, in each of the last three years; he's a good bet to be +50 or so in the next couple of years. Dock 10 runs for his D, he's still a +40 player, roughly 4 wins above average. Chone Figgins, whom Cabrera would be replacing in the lineup, over the past three years has been +1.8, -13.4, and +13.4 (these figures include basestealing, but not other baserunning). Even with his defense, I'd guess that Figgins in 2008 projects to be roughly average, maybe just a bit above.
So we're looking at maybe a 35-40-run difference between Cabrera and Figgins.
It is obvious that the difference, in the short term, between Saunders/Santana and Willits will be far less than 40 runs. Let's look at their totals the past four years, which of course for the Halos is only a couple of years (PR is Pitching Runs, or Earned Runs Prevented Above Average):
Pitcher BF K/BF BB/BF HR/BF H/BF ERA+ PR PR/IPAs you can see, Willis has been better over the past few seasons than the two Angel youths. However, somewhat like Santana, he's coming off a bad season where he pitched well below-average.
Willis 3725 .165 .077 .022 .241 113 +28 +.032
Saunders 816 .152 .082 .025 .257 97 - 3 -.016
Santana 2104 .174 .083 .030 .235 92 -20 -.041
I'll spare you the details, but looking at Willis' batted-ball stats, we can see that he allowed home runs more frequently last year on flyballs than at most other points in his career, which could have been a big part of his struggles. Whether or not that's a fluky thing or a sign of a change in his skill level, I don't know. If he's healthy, I have trouble believing that he just forgot how to pitch or something.
My preference would be to only give up Wood and Figgins -- that does open a shortstop hole in 2009, but we don't know that Wood would fill it, anyway, though if we still have him in 2008 I'd love for him to return to that position at AAA -- for Cabrera. I think there's a good chance that both of Saunders and Santana will be at least as productive (and cheaper) than Willis in the next few years (based on their component stats and relative ages), so I don't know that I'd like to exchange one of them. But I can see talks moving in that direction, and, despite the money, Willis is probably a solid bet to shore up the bottom of the rotation.
As for the question of Cabrera vis-a-vis A-Rod, the question is really "What are we more willing to part with -- players or money?" I don't know what Arte's answer to this would be. From a roster construction standpoint, the ideal would be to sign A-Rod and hold on to all our chips; Wood can be bred for short, Saunders and Santana can develop, and we still have Figgins to play or be traded for a pitcher if we don't trust in the tykes.
Even re-signing Cabrera and/or Willis in future years would likely cost less (combined) than A-Rod would -- though of course that's a few years down the road -- so that's obviously a more cost-effective solution in terms of dollars (though adding a shortstop to the payroll -- or re-signing Orlando Cabrera -- in lieu of the bargain Wood is another financial cost to consider in that scenario).
I do think these are the best two alternatives of which we're aware; there is occasional talk of Miguel Tejada, but Tejada's on the wrong side of 30 and is not a hitter of the caliber of either Rodriguez or Miggy, and may well demand a package of similar value (to the Cabrera package) in exchange.
So, money or players? I don't know.
Labels: Alex Rodriguez, Brandon Wood, Chone Figgins, Dontrelle Willis, Ervin Santana, Garret Anderson, Gary Matthews Jr, Joe Saunders, Juan Rivera, Maicer Izturis, Miguel Cabrera, Miguel Tejada
Thursday, September 27, 2007
GARY
So Gary Matthews Jr is injured, and may or not be available for the postseason. What would this mean for the Angels?
Well, first of all, let's take a look at how Matthews has done this year. As you may recall, there was some handwringing in the Halosphere when Matthews, after having put up the first good offensive season of his life, was signed to a deal that will keep him in Angel red until the year 2011. He did okay in the first two months, hitting 286/339/452 through May (an OPS+ of 111). Along with his solid defense, that was just fine.
But the second half has been nothing but struggles for Matthews, who has hit 211/296/392 since the All Star Game, and hasn't been completely healthy of late. Interestingly, if you add 75 points to that batting average, you get a line of 286/371/467, an improvement on his first half; he actually had more walks and extra-base power in the second half than in the first, but he wasn't getting the hits to fall in.
At any rate, as of now he's got a 98 OPS+, which ranks 10th out of the 21 major league center fielders with 120 or more games. His fielding stats aren't too hot, either.
Here's something simple: how Matthews has done the past few years by average, OBP, and slugging, as compared to the park-adjusted league average, reported by BB-Ref:
Oh, wait, I left out a year:
Without Matthews in the lineup, we could see any and all of these combinations:
Surprisingly (maybe), Maicer Izturis has also out-produced Gary (on a per-plate appearance basis, at any rate) this year, notching an OPS+ of 104. Ztu put up a 106 last year, so it seems like this may actually be his real level of ability. In fact, his last two years resemble each other quite strongly:
All things considered, I'd have to say this team could withstand Gary Matthews Jr's absence during the playoffs. I'm not saying that as a shot at Gary: the fact is this team has succeeded because of uncommon depth. I'll probably write about this sometime, but a lot of things have gone wrong for the Angels this year, but the team has managed to stay in front because of these seemingly endless reservoirs of guys like Willits and Izturis who can step in and perform at an above-average level when someone gets hurt.
I'm actually saddened by the prospect of Gary's being unable to play in October, as he signed with this team to get that shot, and regardless of my skepticism over his contract, he seems like a good guy who has worked hard and given his all, and I'd love to see him contribute. But the reason he can even ponder playing in October is that he's on a team with the foresight and resources to still get there even when nearly everything goes wrong.
Well, first of all, let's take a look at how Matthews has done this year. As you may recall, there was some handwringing in the Halosphere when Matthews, after having put up the first good offensive season of his life, was signed to a deal that will keep him in Angel red until the year 2011. He did okay in the first two months, hitting 286/339/452 through May (an OPS+ of 111). Along with his solid defense, that was just fine.
But the second half has been nothing but struggles for Matthews, who has hit 211/296/392 since the All Star Game, and hasn't been completely healthy of late. Interestingly, if you add 75 points to that batting average, you get a line of 286/371/467, an improvement on his first half; he actually had more walks and extra-base power in the second half than in the first, but he wasn't getting the hits to fall in.
At any rate, as of now he's got a 98 OPS+, which ranks 10th out of the 21 major league center fielders with 120 or more games. His fielding stats aren't too hot, either.
Here's something simple: how Matthews has done the past few years by average, OBP, and slugging, as compared to the park-adjusted league average, reported by BB-Ref:
Year AVG OBP SLGPretty consistent, huh?
2004 -.008 -.013 +.013
2005 -.018 -.016 +.003
2007 -.013 -.009 +.005
Oh, wait, I left out a year:
Year AVG OBP SLGSo, to the surprise of no one, except maybe the Angels, Gary Matthews Jr reverted to being the hitter he was before his "breakout" season; he's an average hitter. No more. No less.
2004 -.008 -.013 +.013
2005 -.018 -.016 +.003
2006 +.033 +.026 +.050
2007 -.013 -.009 +.005
Without Matthews in the lineup, we could see any and all of these combinations:
3B FigginsAs a hitter, Reggie Willits has been a bit better than Matthews so far this year. Willits, like Matthews, has slumped a bit after a hot start, but has still managed to hit 276/377/323 in the second half (not too far off of what I speculated he might do back in May, though I'm happy to say he has maintained his walk rate to a greater degree that I thought he would). By the numbers, his defense in center seems to be worse than Matthews', and this reflect my subjective view of their relative glovework, as well.
CF Willits
RF/DH Vlad/Rivera
3B Izturis
CF Willits
RF/DH Figgins/Vlad
3B Izturis
CF Figgins
RF Vlad/Rivera
Surprisingly (maybe), Maicer Izturis has also out-produced Gary (on a per-plate appearance basis, at any rate) this year, notching an OPS+ of 104. Ztu put up a 106 last year, so it seems like this may actually be his real level of ability. In fact, his last two years resemble each other quite strongly:
Year AVG OBP SLGIzturis might just be a better hitter than Matthews at this point, and seems to be a pretty good defensive option on the hot corner. And while Juan Rivera took some time to adjust, he is hitting 348/375/652 over the last two weeks, so he may be rearing to go, as well.
2006 +.024 +.032 -.016
2007 +.026 +.019 -.006
All things considered, I'd have to say this team could withstand Gary Matthews Jr's absence during the playoffs. I'm not saying that as a shot at Gary: the fact is this team has succeeded because of uncommon depth. I'll probably write about this sometime, but a lot of things have gone wrong for the Angels this year, but the team has managed to stay in front because of these seemingly endless reservoirs of guys like Willits and Izturis who can step in and perform at an above-average level when someone gets hurt.
I'm actually saddened by the prospect of Gary's being unable to play in October, as he signed with this team to get that shot, and regardless of my skepticism over his contract, he seems like a good guy who has worked hard and given his all, and I'd love to see him contribute. But the reason he can even ponder playing in October is that he's on a team with the foresight and resources to still get there even when nearly everything goes wrong.
Labels: Gary Matthews Jr, Juan Rivera, Maicer Izturis, Reggie Willits
Friday, May 04, 2007
DESCENT
After two fine games in Kansas City, the wheels came off a bit in the last two days. Ervin Santana finally pitched a good game on the road; I was very impressed with his mixture of pitches, both in terms of pitch selection and location. He moved the ball in and out very well and kept out of predictable patterns. Sadly, one fastball too many strayed over the middle of the plate, and he lost the game. It happens.
Most impressive in his outing was that he issued only one walk. He did give up 11 hits, more than you'd like to see, but as we know that's the sort of thing that evens out over time; when you challenge batters to earn their way on base, sometimes they do, but more often they don't. The fact that he was pounding the strike zone was good to see; in his previous losses this year, he had walked 13 batters in 14 innings, which is simply unacceptable.
Jered Weaver still hasn't had an ideal start, by his standards, but let it be known that the first two runs he allowed yesterday were both by baserunners who should never have been on base in the first place. Gary Matthews Jr.'s elliptical paths to flying baseballs sometimes cost us and sometimes don't, and yesterday cost us big when his incompetence led to a Ross Gload triple. Reggie Willits mis-read a ball in the fourth that led to a lead-off double. With a pitcher like Weaver on the mound, the outfield has to be on their game, and they weren't here. Still, his peripheral numbers -- 9 strikeouts against 2 unintentional walks and 7 hits in six innings -- were solid, and in the long run he'll be fine.
The real problem the last two games, as it has been and will be again, was the offense. Players not named Vladimir Guerrero went 3-for-30 yesterday with one walk and no extra-base hits; the day before, they were 6-for-28 with one walk and three doubles. That adds up to a 155/183/207 line for Non-Vlads over the two games, and we're simply not going to win when that happens. And as currently constituted, this is an offense incapable of scoring runs in a hurry; Matthews is the only semi-legitimate power threat in the lineup outside of Vlad (unless you want to count Shea Hillenbrand, who has one extra-base hit in 87 AB this year, or the struggling Mike Napoli), which means the singles have to string together to make the runs happen. Casey Kotchman's season has been fits and starts so far, but hopefully he can step up behind Vlad and make some run production ensue.
Most impressive in his outing was that he issued only one walk. He did give up 11 hits, more than you'd like to see, but as we know that's the sort of thing that evens out over time; when you challenge batters to earn their way on base, sometimes they do, but more often they don't. The fact that he was pounding the strike zone was good to see; in his previous losses this year, he had walked 13 batters in 14 innings, which is simply unacceptable.
Jered Weaver still hasn't had an ideal start, by his standards, but let it be known that the first two runs he allowed yesterday were both by baserunners who should never have been on base in the first place. Gary Matthews Jr.'s elliptical paths to flying baseballs sometimes cost us and sometimes don't, and yesterday cost us big when his incompetence led to a Ross Gload triple. Reggie Willits mis-read a ball in the fourth that led to a lead-off double. With a pitcher like Weaver on the mound, the outfield has to be on their game, and they weren't here. Still, his peripheral numbers -- 9 strikeouts against 2 unintentional walks and 7 hits in six innings -- were solid, and in the long run he'll be fine.
The real problem the last two games, as it has been and will be again, was the offense. Players not named Vladimir Guerrero went 3-for-30 yesterday with one walk and no extra-base hits; the day before, they were 6-for-28 with one walk and three doubles. That adds up to a 155/183/207 line for Non-Vlads over the two games, and we're simply not going to win when that happens. And as currently constituted, this is an offense incapable of scoring runs in a hurry; Matthews is the only semi-legitimate power threat in the lineup outside of Vlad (unless you want to count Shea Hillenbrand, who has one extra-base hit in 87 AB this year, or the struggling Mike Napoli), which means the singles have to string together to make the runs happen. Casey Kotchman's season has been fits and starts so far, but hopefully he can step up behind Vlad and make some run production ensue.
Labels: Casey Kotchman, Ervin Santana, Gary Matthew Jr (scenic routes to the ball of), Gary Matthews Jr, Jered Weaver, Mike Napoli, Reggie Willits, Shea Hillenbrand, Vladimir Guerrero
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
A TOTAL MESS
Well, we won yesterday's game, as you know, but that was one big ugly mess for the last half of the game.
Kelvim started off well, then hit some trouble; just coming off the DL, that's not really a surprise. And then the bullpen meltdown ... it's rare that our top three guys give up runs, but all three in one game? Madness.
Some good things: Kendry getting some hits (let's see him a bit more at DH while we have him, shall we?), Gary Matthews Jr continuing to heat up, and, of course, Vlad's prolonged dismantling of opposing pitchers.
Vlad also came as close to making a run by himself, non-home-run-division, in the ninth. He doubled, natch, and then advanced on Garret Anderson's deep fly to center; that wasn't really a no-brainer, with two outs some guys might stay at second and not risk it, some might have mis-read it and gone halfway instead of tagging up, but he got it right. And on the wild pitch, he got a great jump off third, and needed it, as Ivan Rodriguez had a perfect flip back to the plate. That flip was for naught, though, as Vlad's great jump got him home before Todd Jones even made it to home plate. Nothing special, really, but good fundamental play to capitalize on an opponent's mistake.
Anyway, now our good friend Joe Maddon comes in to town, so it's a good chance for the Lads to string some wins together.
***
I just wanted to make sure everyone saw this item in the Times:
Well, we won yesterday's game, as you know, but that was one big ugly mess for the last half of the game.
Kelvim started off well, then hit some trouble; just coming off the DL, that's not really a surprise. And then the bullpen meltdown ... it's rare that our top three guys give up runs, but all three in one game? Madness.
Some good things: Kendry getting some hits (let's see him a bit more at DH while we have him, shall we?), Gary Matthews Jr continuing to heat up, and, of course, Vlad's prolonged dismantling of opposing pitchers.
Vlad also came as close to making a run by himself, non-home-run-division, in the ninth. He doubled, natch, and then advanced on Garret Anderson's deep fly to center; that wasn't really a no-brainer, with two outs some guys might stay at second and not risk it, some might have mis-read it and gone halfway instead of tagging up, but he got it right. And on the wild pitch, he got a great jump off third, and needed it, as Ivan Rodriguez had a perfect flip back to the plate. That flip was for naught, though, as Vlad's great jump got him home before Todd Jones even made it to home plate. Nothing special, really, but good fundamental play to capitalize on an opponent's mistake.
Anyway, now our good friend Joe Maddon comes in to town, so it's a good chance for the Lads to string some wins together.
***
I just wanted to make sure everyone saw this item in the Times:
Closer Troy Percival did not throw a pitch for the Tigers in 2006, but the team still awarded the former Angels reliever a full playoff share.What a mensch.
Percival, who is now retired, reciprocated by spending $120,000 to lease an 18-seat luxury suite in Comerica Park for players' wives to use this season.
"I've never heard of anything like it," Detroit closer Todd Jones said. "It's the best gesture I've ever seen."
Labels: bullpen, Garret Anderson, Gary Matthews Jr, Kelvim Escobar, Troy Percival (mensch), Vladimir Guerrero
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
NOT GETTING BETTER
Our "team's" performance is simply making analysis redundant right now. We all know what happened last night -- Jered Weaver basically threw one bad pitch, that hanging slider to left -- but one bad pitch it two bad pitches too many in a lineup where Orlando Cabrera bats third. Add into the equation an outfield that can neither track nor catch flyballs, and it's a recipe for disaster.
The wind was bad last night, so I should give Gary Matthews Jr. a pass for misplaying the Eric Chavez double that preceded (by two batters) Bobby Crosby's home run, but the fact is I've noted Matthews taking the scenic route to flyballs before. It cost us a hit in Ervin's second start -- not that one hit really made a big difference the way he was pitching -- and it may cost us more in the future. It's too early to make any conclusions about his glove this year, of course, but despite a few good plays and a good sense of where the wall is, he hasn't really blown me away on that front.
At any rate, we have now gone five consecutive games without scoring more than two runs, which just won't get the job done. (See our top 50 streaks of games scoring two or less runs here). And until that changes, there's not much any of us can do or say.
Our "team's" performance is simply making analysis redundant right now. We all know what happened last night -- Jered Weaver basically threw one bad pitch, that hanging slider to left -- but one bad pitch it two bad pitches too many in a lineup where Orlando Cabrera bats third. Add into the equation an outfield that can neither track nor catch flyballs, and it's a recipe for disaster.
The wind was bad last night, so I should give Gary Matthews Jr. a pass for misplaying the Eric Chavez double that preceded (by two batters) Bobby Crosby's home run, but the fact is I've noted Matthews taking the scenic route to flyballs before. It cost us a hit in Ervin's second start -- not that one hit really made a big difference the way he was pitching -- and it may cost us more in the future. It's too early to make any conclusions about his glove this year, of course, but despite a few good plays and a good sense of where the wall is, he hasn't really blown me away on that front.
At any rate, we have now gone five consecutive games without scoring more than two runs, which just won't get the job done. (See our top 50 streaks of games scoring two or less runs here). And until that changes, there's not much any of us can do or say.
Labels: Ervin Santana, Gary Matthews Jr, hacktastic offense, Jered Weaver, offensive woes, Orlando Cabrera
Monday, April 16, 2007
THE OUTAGE
While our starting rotation is plagued by injury right now, the true cause of our recent malaise is substandard offense. We have only scored seven runs in our last four games, and are averaging a measly 3.42 runs per game over the season's first two weeks.
Though I hoped and believed that our offense would surpass last year's effort, mostly thanks to contributions from Casey Kotchman and Howie Kendrick (both of whom have delivered in the early going), I'm sure we all did realize that such run shortages would be in the cards. The fundamental problem of the offense remains unchanged: the lineup is built around one man, Vladimir Guerrero, and a lineup that leans so heavily on any one man will struggle to find consistency.
Vlad has managed to deliver this season, but thus far is the only bopper in our lineup. He has driven in 12 runs, twice as many as Maicer Izturis, who ranks second on the team in that category. Those 12 ribbies account for a shocking 29% of Angel runs in the early going. (And nothing against Ztu, but if he ends up the season second on the team in steaks, we're in some trouble.)
This is unsustainable, and won't be sustained; last year Vlad's RBIs accounted for roughly 15% of Halo scoring.
Vlad is hitting a mighty 429/526/643 with runners in scoring position this year; that is also likely to abate, though he's a good bet to hit around .325 in such situations. But even that outstanding level of production means that Vlad would only be converting one scoring opportunity in three, so he clearly needs assistance in picking up the slack.
Unfortunately, no one is doing that so far. The team, as a whole, is hitting 206/270/255 with runners in scoring position -- and this includes Vlad's outrageously good performance . Garret Anderson, who actually has one more plate appearance than Vlad in RISP situations (20 to 19 -- partially thanks to Vlad's being on base in 37% of his PA), is only 1-for-20 with 1 RBI in those situations. That's a lot of runner stranded, a lot of scoring opportunities wasted. Orlando Cabrera ranks third on the team with 14 plate appearances with RISP; he is 2-for-14 with 3 RBI.
Again, this will not continue. This is not a great offense, but they're not a bunch of .200 hitters, either. Garret Anderson is hitting .050 with RISP. That's just a fluke.
What is less of a fluke is the scarcity of run-scoring chances. The Angels have had 115 plate appearances this season with RISP, with a total of 170 runners on in those appearances. That's 9.6 such PA per game, and 14.17 runners per game (note that runners stranded for subsequent batters are double-counted). The Boston Red Sox, who have bashed us around for two days in Fenway, have 12 PA with RISP per game, with 20 runners per game.
And why don't we get runners into scoring position? Because we don't get runners on base, of course. I guess the fact that our .323 OBP ranks 7th in the AL thus far isn't terrible, but it's not too exciting, either, especially on the heels of a 10th-place finish in that category last season (our SLG thus far ranks an even worse 11th). And the runners we put on in front of the big gun, Vladi, aren't particularly good at reaching base.
Gary Matthews Jr.'s OBP thus far is .314; yes, it is obviously early and that means nothing in terms of evaluating him, but his performance last season marked only the second time in his career that he was able to sustain an OBP above the park-adjusted league average over a full season. Orlando Cabrera is actually off to a good start, but it's worth noting that last season was the first time he registered an OBP better than the park-adjusted league average, and even then he only did so by two points.
I worry that this is going to hurt us in the long run. If Matthews can't reprise last year's magic and The OC can't sustain his new-found on-base ability, RBI opportunities for Vlad (and Garret) won't mount up, and we already know we'll be lucky to convert one-third of the ones that do.
Is there a solution? My guess is that Kotch, Howie, and Ztu are all better candidates to set Vlad's table than Matthews and Cabrera are. But none of those guys are proven in such a role, so we are unlikely to see them get a shot there unless Matthews and Cabrera tank.
Our current #1 and #2 have shown, over their careers, that they can step up and create run-scoring opportunities. But they have also shown that they are unlikely to, and if that's the sad destiny they fulfill, and our younger players demonstrate such an aptitude, I hope our management will be willing to re-think the lineup and give Vlad and Garret some runners to actually clean up.
While our starting rotation is plagued by injury right now, the true cause of our recent malaise is substandard offense. We have only scored seven runs in our last four games, and are averaging a measly 3.42 runs per game over the season's first two weeks.
Though I hoped and believed that our offense would surpass last year's effort, mostly thanks to contributions from Casey Kotchman and Howie Kendrick (both of whom have delivered in the early going), I'm sure we all did realize that such run shortages would be in the cards. The fundamental problem of the offense remains unchanged: the lineup is built around one man, Vladimir Guerrero, and a lineup that leans so heavily on any one man will struggle to find consistency.
Vlad has managed to deliver this season, but thus far is the only bopper in our lineup. He has driven in 12 runs, twice as many as Maicer Izturis, who ranks second on the team in that category. Those 12 ribbies account for a shocking 29% of Angel runs in the early going. (And nothing against Ztu, but if he ends up the season second on the team in steaks, we're in some trouble.)
This is unsustainable, and won't be sustained; last year Vlad's RBIs accounted for roughly 15% of Halo scoring.
Vlad is hitting a mighty 429/526/643 with runners in scoring position this year; that is also likely to abate, though he's a good bet to hit around .325 in such situations. But even that outstanding level of production means that Vlad would only be converting one scoring opportunity in three, so he clearly needs assistance in picking up the slack.
Unfortunately, no one is doing that so far. The team, as a whole, is hitting 206/270/255 with runners in scoring position -- and this includes Vlad's outrageously good performance . Garret Anderson, who actually has one more plate appearance than Vlad in RISP situations (20 to 19 -- partially thanks to Vlad's being on base in 37% of his PA), is only 1-for-20 with 1 RBI in those situations. That's a lot of runner stranded, a lot of scoring opportunities wasted. Orlando Cabrera ranks third on the team with 14 plate appearances with RISP; he is 2-for-14 with 3 RBI.
Again, this will not continue. This is not a great offense, but they're not a bunch of .200 hitters, either. Garret Anderson is hitting .050 with RISP. That's just a fluke.
What is less of a fluke is the scarcity of run-scoring chances. The Angels have had 115 plate appearances this season with RISP, with a total of 170 runners on in those appearances. That's 9.6 such PA per game, and 14.17 runners per game (note that runners stranded for subsequent batters are double-counted). The Boston Red Sox, who have bashed us around for two days in Fenway, have 12 PA with RISP per game, with 20 runners per game.
And why don't we get runners into scoring position? Because we don't get runners on base, of course. I guess the fact that our .323 OBP ranks 7th in the AL thus far isn't terrible, but it's not too exciting, either, especially on the heels of a 10th-place finish in that category last season (our SLG thus far ranks an even worse 11th). And the runners we put on in front of the big gun, Vladi, aren't particularly good at reaching base.
Gary Matthews Jr.'s OBP thus far is .314; yes, it is obviously early and that means nothing in terms of evaluating him, but his performance last season marked only the second time in his career that he was able to sustain an OBP above the park-adjusted league average over a full season. Orlando Cabrera is actually off to a good start, but it's worth noting that last season was the first time he registered an OBP better than the park-adjusted league average, and even then he only did so by two points.
I worry that this is going to hurt us in the long run. If Matthews can't reprise last year's magic and The OC can't sustain his new-found on-base ability, RBI opportunities for Vlad (and Garret) won't mount up, and we already know we'll be lucky to convert one-third of the ones that do.
Is there a solution? My guess is that Kotch, Howie, and Ztu are all better candidates to set Vlad's table than Matthews and Cabrera are. But none of those guys are proven in such a role, so we are unlikely to see them get a shot there unless Matthews and Cabrera tank.
Our current #1 and #2 have shown, over their careers, that they can step up and create run-scoring opportunities. But they have also shown that they are unlikely to, and if that's the sad destiny they fulfill, and our younger players demonstrate such an aptitude, I hope our management will be willing to re-think the lineup and give Vlad and Garret some runners to actually clean up.
Labels: Casey Kotchman, Garret Anderson, Gary Matthews Jr, hacktastic offense, Howie Kendrick, Maicer Izturis, offensive woes, Orlando Cabrera, Vladimir Guerrero
Thursday, March 01, 2007
BAD NEWS POSSIBLY GETS LESS BAD
SI.com is reporting that, in August of 2004, Gary Matthews Jr. was sent human growth hormone in care of a friend and former minor league teammate. (That is the current extent of the allegations -- not that he used, but it was sent to him -- though as a practical matter it's hard to imagine someone ordering human growth hormone and not using it, even assuming these allegations have basis in fact.)
How is this possibly less bad?
Well, in 2004, human growth hormone was not banned by Major League Baseball; the ban began in 2005.
IF Matthews took HGH in 2004 only, he would not have been in violation of any major league rules. We have yet to hear reports that he may have been sent any such substances in subsequent seasons. What's more, the notion that his career year in 2006 might have been fueled by PED would lose traction IF we were to find out that any usage on his part was also taking place over his two prior seasons.
There is still vastly more about this story we don't know than we do know, of course, and I do not wish to jump to any sort of conclusions at this juncture. I'm just examining possibilities based on the allegations put forward in the media.
SI.com is reporting that, in August of 2004, Gary Matthews Jr. was sent human growth hormone in care of a friend and former minor league teammate. (That is the current extent of the allegations -- not that he used, but it was sent to him -- though as a practical matter it's hard to imagine someone ordering human growth hormone and not using it, even assuming these allegations have basis in fact.)
How is this possibly less bad?
Well, in 2004, human growth hormone was not banned by Major League Baseball; the ban began in 2005.
IF Matthews took HGH in 2004 only, he would not have been in violation of any major league rules. We have yet to hear reports that he may have been sent any such substances in subsequent seasons. What's more, the notion that his career year in 2006 might have been fueled by PED would lose traction IF we were to find out that any usage on his part was also taking place over his two prior seasons.
There is still vastly more about this story we don't know than we do know, of course, and I do not wish to jump to any sort of conclusions at this juncture. I'm just examining possibilities based on the allegations put forward in the media.
Labels: Applied Pharmacy, Gary Matthews Jr, Signature Pharmacy, steroids
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
STEROIDS?
Well, a few weeks ago, I was planning to do a piece on whether or not we could expect Gary Matthews, Jr. to repeat the unprecedented offensive success he experienced last season. That's a piece I still intend to do, but it appears I may have been scooped by the district attorney of Albany County, New York.
As I'm sure you have heard, Matthews is listed as a client of a Florida pharmacy accused of distributing steroids and other PED. Matthews is issuing highly comforting statements like "Until we get more information, I just can't comment on it" and "I will address [my name being on the client list] at [the] appropriate time".
What does this mean, if anything? Who knows. Though it's natural that suspicion would fall on a 31-year-old having a career year in this day and age, at this point we don't really have any real evidence linking Matthews to PED use, and even if it were proved that he had used in the past, the actual effects of such usage on quality of play are somewhat nebulous.
Depending on the legs of the story, it could, however, provide as unneeded distraction and side circus for our team, which isn't optimal. But for now, we should wait and see, and hold out hope that Matthews' involvement with this pharmacy, if any, was legit.
Well, a few weeks ago, I was planning to do a piece on whether or not we could expect Gary Matthews, Jr. to repeat the unprecedented offensive success he experienced last season. That's a piece I still intend to do, but it appears I may have been scooped by the district attorney of Albany County, New York.
As I'm sure you have heard, Matthews is listed as a client of a Florida pharmacy accused of distributing steroids and other PED. Matthews is issuing highly comforting statements like "Until we get more information, I just can't comment on it" and "I will address [my name being on the client list] at [the] appropriate time".
What does this mean, if anything? Who knows. Though it's natural that suspicion would fall on a 31-year-old having a career year in this day and age, at this point we don't really have any real evidence linking Matthews to PED use, and even if it were proved that he had used in the past, the actual effects of such usage on quality of play are somewhat nebulous.
Depending on the legs of the story, it could, however, provide as unneeded distraction and side circus for our team, which isn't optimal. But for now, we should wait and see, and hold out hope that Matthews' involvement with this pharmacy, if any, was legit.
Labels: Gary Matthews Jr, Signature Pharmacy, steroids
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
HAPPY THANKSGIVING
Just so it doesn't get buried by all the defense stuff, here's my reaction to the alleged Gary Matthews, Jr. signing.
Only in re-reading the article did I learn that we're apparently going to bat him leadoff, which is just a great idea, as he's only managed an above-average OBP in two of his seasons. Rock on.
Anyway, unless something huge happens over the weekend, I'm out, so have a great holiday, Halosphere. My gift to you in my absence is this Justin Speier interview with Mike DiGiovanna in the LA Times, in which he comes across as a thoughtful and cool guy.
Just so it doesn't get buried by all the defense stuff, here's my reaction to the alleged Gary Matthews, Jr. signing.
Only in re-reading the article did I learn that we're apparently going to bat him leadoff, which is just a great idea, as he's only managed an above-average OBP in two of his seasons. Rock on.
Anyway, unless something huge happens over the weekend, I'm out, so have a great holiday, Halosphere. My gift to you in my absence is this Justin Speier interview with Mike DiGiovanna in the LA Times, in which he comes across as a thoughtful and cool guy.
Labels: Gary Matthews Jr, Justin Speier
WE ARE IDIOTS, DEFINITELY
Per Ken Rosenthal, we have signed Gary Matthews, Jr., a 32-year-old center fielder coming off a career year, but who over his career has been a slightly below-average major league hitter, to a five-year deal worth $50M.
Matthews also came to the forefront with some highlight-level catches last year, but PMR said he was just below average and zone rating had him a bit worse, so perhaps his circus catches were on balls most other guys would have been standing around and waiting for.
Look, I guess it's possible a 31-year-old veteran finally learned how to hit, but does that sound likely to you? And does he sound like a good bet to sustain that ability through 2011? 2011! The year 2011! The year after 2010!!! THAT'S HOW LONG WE HAVE THIS GUY UNDER CONTRACT.
Good Lord, are we idiots.
Per Ken Rosenthal, we have signed Gary Matthews, Jr., a 32-year-old center fielder coming off a career year, but who over his career has been a slightly below-average major league hitter, to a five-year deal worth $50M.
Matthews also came to the forefront with some highlight-level catches last year, but PMR said he was just below average and zone rating had him a bit worse, so perhaps his circus catches were on balls most other guys would have been standing around and waiting for.
Look, I guess it's possible a 31-year-old veteran finally learned how to hit, but does that sound likely to you? And does he sound like a good bet to sustain that ability through 2011? 2011! The year 2011! The year after 2010!!! THAT'S HOW LONG WE HAVE THIS GUY UNDER CONTRACT.
Good Lord, are we idiots.
Labels: extreme reactions, Gary Matthews Jr, hysteria
Monday, November 13, 2006
YES, WE HAVE NO ARAMIS
Aramis Ramirez has re-signed with the Cubs, inking a five-year, $73M deal.
I'm somewhat okay with this; I don't think there's any chance Ramirez will really be worth nearly $15M per year over the next five years. Sure, he's a hell of a hitter, but he's a bad defender who will be spending more of his contract on the wrong side of 30 than the right side. (Incidentally, Aramis is the first player younger than me to debut in the major leagues.)
However, I would likely preferred to overpay for Aramis in dollars than overpay for someone like Tejada or A-Rod in players. And, per Mike DiGiovanna's write-up in the Times today, we might end up getting the worst of both worlds.
One scenario has the Angels either shelling out millions and millions of dollars for Japanese phenom Daisuke Matsuzaka or millions for Barry Zito, and then making one of the Ervin-Jered-Saunders troika the centerpiece of a trade for Tejada, A-Rod, or Vernon Wells. Such a move could provide a marginal improvement in the short term, but it would cost a lot more in money and would also mortgage our future for immediate gains. Both Ervin and Jered are likely to have more future remaining value than Zito, for instance, and while Joe Saunders doesn't quite have their upside, he's important insurance against an injury to a rotation starter.
Other pondered moves would include going after Alfonso Soriano, who will be 31 next season, is coming off of his best year ever and will likely be overpaid as a result, and hasn't ever played center field, or Gary Matthews Jr., who's even older and never had a good year until last season. I would guess his chances of repeating his 2006 performance are rather slim.
I still Vernon Wells is the best match of anyone we're talking about; sure, adding a guy like Tejada or A-Rod would be great for the offense, but it would cost us a lot in money and pitching depth. Wells is a lesser hitter, but an excellent defender, and the youngest position player discussed in this post. He would probably cost less than the other guys in terms of who we would have to give up, and provide us benefits on both sides of the ball, so to speak
Aramis Ramirez has re-signed with the Cubs, inking a five-year, $73M deal.
I'm somewhat okay with this; I don't think there's any chance Ramirez will really be worth nearly $15M per year over the next five years. Sure, he's a hell of a hitter, but he's a bad defender who will be spending more of his contract on the wrong side of 30 than the right side. (Incidentally, Aramis is the first player younger than me to debut in the major leagues.)
However, I would likely preferred to overpay for Aramis in dollars than overpay for someone like Tejada or A-Rod in players. And, per Mike DiGiovanna's write-up in the Times today, we might end up getting the worst of both worlds.
One scenario has the Angels either shelling out millions and millions of dollars for Japanese phenom Daisuke Matsuzaka or millions for Barry Zito, and then making one of the Ervin-Jered-Saunders troika the centerpiece of a trade for Tejada, A-Rod, or Vernon Wells. Such a move could provide a marginal improvement in the short term, but it would cost a lot more in money and would also mortgage our future for immediate gains. Both Ervin and Jered are likely to have more future remaining value than Zito, for instance, and while Joe Saunders doesn't quite have their upside, he's important insurance against an injury to a rotation starter.
Other pondered moves would include going after Alfonso Soriano, who will be 31 next season, is coming off of his best year ever and will likely be overpaid as a result, and hasn't ever played center field, or Gary Matthews Jr., who's even older and never had a good year until last season. I would guess his chances of repeating his 2006 performance are rather slim.
I still Vernon Wells is the best match of anyone we're talking about; sure, adding a guy like Tejada or A-Rod would be great for the offense, but it would cost us a lot in money and pitching depth. Wells is a lesser hitter, but an excellent defender, and the youngest position player discussed in this post. He would probably cost less than the other guys in terms of who we would have to give up, and provide us benefits on both sides of the ball, so to speak
Labels: Alex Rodriguez, Alfonso Soriano, Aramis Ramirez, Barry Zito, Ervin Santana, Gary Matthews Jr, Jered Weaver, Joe Saunders, Miguel Tejada, Vernon Wells
