Archive for March, 2010

Mar
04

The art of terrorizing pitchers

Posted by: | Comments (39)

Even before Moneyball helped make the importance of on-base percentage mainstream, the Yankees were building their lineups around patient hitters that worked deep counts and saw a ton of pitches. The idea was to wear down the opposing starter as quickly as possible, then go to town on the inferior relief pitchers. Then-GM Gene Michael acquired players like Paul O’Neill and Wade Boggs in the early-90′s for this very reason, for their ability to work the count and grind away during an at-bat.

The Yanks’ lineup is still very much designed this way, as GM Brian Cashman has imported patient hitters like Bobby Abreu, Nick Swisher and Nick Johnson in recent years. As a team, the Yankees hit .281-.352-.471 with a .365 wOBA against starting pitchers last season, but once the bullpen door opened, forget it. They hit .286-.377-.487 with a .374 wOBA against relievers in 2009, which essentially means the team turned into nine Victor Martinezes once the opposition’s relief corps came into play. It also helped that they had more plate appearances against relief pitchers than any other American League team last year (table on the right), a function of wearing down the starters.

But last year’s team is different than this year’s team. Johnny Damon and Hideki Matsui will not be in the lineup, and to a lesser extent the same could be said about Melky Cabrera. They’ll be replaced by Johnson, Curtis Granderson, and some mash-up of the Brett Gardner, Randy Winn, Marcus Thames, Jamie Hoffmann quartet. Damon and Matsui combined to see exactly four pitches per plate appearance in 2009, while Johnson and Granderson combined to see 4.42 pitches per plate appearance. The latter didn’t have the same kind of lineup support either.

Looking at the chart to the left, the Yankees’ eight projected regulars (not counting the unsettled LF situation) going into 2010 averaged just under four pitches seen per plate appearance last year, which quite frankly is a ton.  You’re talking about more than 35 pitches thrown to just the first eight batters each time through the order. Depending on who’s playing left on a given day, you could add another 3.75-4.00 pitches to that total. Now we’re talking about close to 39 pitches seen each time through the order. Simple math tells us that on average, the other team’s starting pitcher will have thrown about 117 pitches if he was lucky enough to make it through the order a third time

Seeing lots of pitches is nice, and it’s important to remember that the whole point of seeing all those pitches is to tire the other team’s starting pitcher. The more tired he is, the less effective and more prone to making mistakes he’ll be. The sooner that happens, the quicker the bullpen has to join in on the action. There’s a reason middle relievers are middle relievers, and that’s because they aren’t good enough to do anything else. Pounding away on the soft underbelly of the opposition has been the Yankees’ M.O. since before most of us were born.

Yesterday’s walk-off win in the exhibition opener reminded us just how wonderful the 2009 season was. You’ll need two hands and a foot to count the number of walk-off wins they had, and a lot of that had to do with the Yankees ability to wear down opposing starters and get into the bullpen much sooner than the other team would like. As good as Damon and Matsui were for the Yankees, Granderson and Johnson are an even better fit for the lineup. I’m not saying they’ll rip off 15 walk-off wins again, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they improved upon last year’s .295-.379-.511 batting line (.383 wOBA) and +116 run differential from the seventh inning on in 2010.

Photo Credit: Roberto Borea, AP

Categories : Analysis
Comments (39)

Update (2:20pm): Bryan Hoch says NJ caught a spike during BP and felt something, but he definitely would have played if it was a regular season game. No point in pushing it March 4th.

1:30pm: Via Ben Shpigel, Nick Johnson was scratched from today’s game against the Phillies with a stiff lower back. Jamie Hoffmann took his place at DH and in the two-hole. Most of the time this wouldn’t be news, but NJ’s injury history and previous back trouble (he spent 52 days on the disabled list with a lower back strain back in 2004) makes it worth a mention. More than likely, this is no big deal, and they’re just playing it safe.

Remember, Jorge Posada‘s shoulder was barking this time last spring (when he was coming off surgery), and he was fine in the end.

Categories : Asides, Injuries
Comments (149)

Catching is hell on the knees. For over 120 pitches in most games the catcher squats behind the plate, receiving pitches with varying speed and break and coming in at all different locations. That’s over an hour a game in the squat position. Life then becomes harder with runners on base, when the catcher has to put himself in a position to throw out a would-be base stealer and block a potential ball in the dirt. It’s no wonder that many catchers see their production decline by their early- to mid-thirties, and that most are out of the game by the time they’re Jorge Posada‘s age. Yet the 38-year-old catcher posted one of his finest seasons in 2009, though he did catch only 100 games. Can he hold up again in 2010?


Photo credit: Kathy Willens/AP

Since 1901, only 11 catchers reach 400 plate appearances at age 37. Only 16 got into 100 or more games. At age 38 that dropped off even more, with only three reaching the 400 PA plateau, and eight getting into 100 or more games. Even worse, the catchers who did survive over 100 games in their age-38 season did not play because of their offensive contributions. Of the 21 age-38 catchers with more than 200 PA, only seven posted an OPS over .700 — and five of those did it before 1950. None posted an OPS of .800.

At age-37, however, some catchers still played often and hit big. Of the 11 with more than 400 plate appearances, four posted an OPS over .800 and another two were above .750. Only Ernie Lombardi played his age-38 season before 1950. The rest played in 1985 or later. None of the .800 OPS catchers came to bat even 300 times the following season (though Posada is one of the four), and among the .750 OPS players only Benito Santiago continued playing and hitting in his age-38 season. The odds, then, seem to be against Posada posting a repeat of his 2009 campaign.

Both Carlton Fisk and Mike Piazza hit well in their age-37 seasons. Fisk came to bat 620 times that year, 1985, and hit .238/.320/.488, which translates to a .345 wOBA and a 115 OPS+. Of the 153 games he played, 130 were at catcher. Yet in his age-38 season he saw start drop-offs in production and catching time. He did play in 125 games that year, but only 71 as a catcher. Even if he had made the age-38 list, he wouldn’t have fared well, as his numbers dropped to .221/.263/.337, a .264 wOBA and a 60 OPS+. While it appeared at the time that Fisk was finished, he did come back to post five more average or better seasons, including two stellar years, 1989 and 1990, at ages 41 and 42.

Piazza realized a resurgence of sorts in 2006, his age-37 season, after he signed with the Padres. After hitting .251/.326/.452 in his final season for the Mets, Piazza rebounded to hit .283/.342/.501, despite accumulating about half of his plate appearances at PETCO Park. He did play his age-38 season, though the stint with Oakland did not go too well. He didn’t catch a single inning and posted a meager .275/.313/.414 line in a season shortened by injury. Unlike Fisk, there would be no late-career revival for Piazza. He hasn’t played since his final game with Oakland in 2007.

The stories of Fisk and Piazza might appear to bode poorly for Posada, but as with any player-to-player comparison it never tells the whole story. All three catchers traveled different paths to their age-38 seasons. Fisk was a highly touted prospect, the No. 4 overall pick of the 1967 draft, who came up in 1972, at age 24, and hit right out of the gate. While Piazza broke out at the same age, he was not nearly as highly regarded. The Dodgers took him in the 62nd round, apparently as a favor to Tommy Lasorda. Yet he killed the ball when the Dodgers handed him the starting gig at age-24.

Posada, however, did not break into the league until age 25, and at that point he was a part-time player. Over the next two seasons he saw more playing time, but it wasn’t until 2000 that he truly took over as the full-time catcher, at age 28. He also didn’t convert to catcher until age 20, when he played behind the plate for just 41 games. Entering his age-38 season he has started 1,793 games behind the plate between the majors and minors. Piazza had 1,898 at that age, though Fisk, because he caught under 100 games in four different seasons, had 1,782.

Through his age-37 season, Posada has defied age. His .885 OPS in 2009 ranks best for catchers with more than 200 PA in their age-37 seasons. Even if he does decline drastically and produces only 80 percent of that, .702, for the 2010 season, he’d still rank among the top catchers at age-38. The Yankees, however, are not so much concerned with how Posada stacks up with his historical comparables as they are how he fits into the lineup. While the .702 OPS might stand out in the former sense, it would be a huge burden in the latter.

These represent five of the freely available projection systems. After mashing them together, they think that Jorge will see only five percent fewer plate appearances than in 2009, though ZiPS accounts for most of the drop-off. All the others expect right around the same playing time, while Bill James is overly optimistic — though his article on players declining is a bit more pessimistic. In terms of production the systems forecast a 2.5 percent reduction in OBP, modest enough, but a nearly 14 percent reduction in power. Perhaps the short porch at the Stadium would inflate those projections.

While all aging catchers warrant concern, Posada presents an interesting case. He’s had an odd career path, switching to catcher in the minors and not taking a full-time role until age-28. The following 10 years were excellent, though, as Jorge became one of the game’s premier catchers, and perhaps the best hitting catcher over the past decade. He enters his age-38 season with few comparables, and unfavorable ones among those that exist. Still, Jorge has given us little reason to expect a drastic drop-off.

Categories : Players
Comments (66)


AP Photo/Kathy Willens

Bernie Williams hasn’t played in a regular season game for the Yankees since Oct. 1, 2006. He went 1 for 1 as a pinch hitter in Game 162, and then played in just one game during the ALDS. He knew he was nearing the end of his career, but he couldn’t convince the Yanks to give him a guaranteed deal. The team offered to invite him to Spring Training, and Bernie went home to nurse his wounded pride instead.

Now, three full seasons removed from his last game as a Major Leaguer, Bernie still feels the itch, and when he showed up at George M. Steinbrenner Field yesterday, he spoke with reporters about coming to grips with his forced retirement. “Someone said it takes a player three to five years to get used to not playing,” Williams said. “I’m in my fourth year now, so I’m right between there. I miss it, but I like what I’m doing.”

Bernie is 41, but he still thinks about coming back. “I think mentally I try not to really think about that too much,” he said. “I go through periods of time within the past couple of years in which I go back and forth, and this doesn’t help, being here and saying hi to the guys. It obviously brings a lot of the old feelings back, but I know that I’m doing something worthwhile in another field. Any way that I look at it, I can’t lose. If I come back, that would be great. But if I don’t, it’s just a great opportunity to do something different and try to excel at it.”

As much as he may want to rejoin the Majors, Bernie’s time has passed. I hated seeing Bernie go fading away as he did, and it still pains me to hear my one-time favorite talk about wanting to come back. He tried that during the WBC in 2009 and ended up with a quad injury. It was an ignoble end, to say the least.

But what’s done is done. Instead of dwelling on Bernie’s tortured present, let’s look at his distant past. As a top Yankee prospect in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Bernie was subject of more trade rumors than we could count. Scouts knew he would be good, but they couldn’t foresee his peak from 1997-2001 when he hit .325/.411/.548 and led the Yanks to four World Series berths. And so into the Wayback Machine we go.

Would you, in 1989, have traded Bernie Williams for Jeff Blauser? That’s what the Braves wanted to do. Blauser, then a highly-coveted 22-year-old, had just made his Major League debut and would go on to put up serviceable career numbers. He hit .262/.354/.406 and twice made the All-Star team. A deal was nearly in place that may or may not have involved Bernie.

Here’s a more intriguing rumor: What about Barry Bonds and Bobby Bonilla for Bernie Williams, Kevin Maas, Roberto Kelly Jesse Barfield and a pitcher? It’s a bit tougher to say “no” to Bonds. The Yanks maybe could have landed Bonds and Bonilla in a deal with Gerald Williams instead of Bernie. A Bonds/Bernie outfield would have been a sight to see in the late 1990s.

Perhaps something a little more recent would give us a taste of life almost without Bernie. The Yanks and Bernie nearly split up in 1998 when the team moved on Albert Belle after Bernie’s contract demands grew too rich for their tastes, but that almost-divorce, rescued on Thanksgiving Eve, had its origins in the 1997 off-season. With Bernie nearing free agency and the Yanks not in love with their enigmatic almost-superstar, the team looked to trade him that winter and nearly did so to the Tigers. The deal would have sent Roberto Duran and Mike Drumright, Detroit’s number one pick in 1995, to the Bronx for Bernie.

Why the deal was scuttled remains a mystery. Murray Chass speculated that (1) George quashed a deal then-GM Bob Watson negotiated on his own; (2) other baseball advisers didn’t feel the Yanks were getting enough back from the Tigers; or (3) it was a negotiating ploy to get Bernie to lower his demands on the Yankees. No matter the reason, it would have been a disastrous trade for the Yanks. Drumright never reached the majors and today works in construction in Wichita, Kansas.

So Bernie remained that ever-elusive Yankee for Life®. He’s trying to give up the sport, but it just keeps sucking him in. Even if his words make me wince today, I, for one, am quite relieved the Yanks never traded him as they often considered doing.

Categories : Days of Yore
Comments (148)

In discussing the merits of a No. 2 hitter, I hit on the value of setting the table. Because Nick Johnson gets on base at a better clip than the other candidates, he’ll create more opportunities for Mark Teixeira and Alex Rodriguez to hit with men on base. But, while getting on base factors prominently into the quality of a No. 2 hitter, other issues can change the situation. For instance, what if the No. 2 hitter, who gets on base at a high clip, also grounds into a lot of double plays? Wouldn’t that sap his value?

About a year ago, while he was working with Team USA, I made a further argument for Derek Jeter the leadoff hitter. Beyond the reasons we’d heard a thousand times — Jeter got on base more than Damon while Damon had more power than Jeter — I thought another factor played prominently. In 2008 Jeter hit into 24 double plays, the highest number of his career. Many times, I’m sure, these double plays came after Damon reached safely. Damon, though, is historically good at avoiding double plays. Flipping the two, then, seemed obvious.

Just a few days after that post, Joe Girardi announced that he would make that very flip. The results, as we saw, reflected the projection. Jeter hit into fewer double plays. Damon hit into more, but that’s going to happen when the guy in front of you gets on base 40 percent of the time. This raises an interesting point. We don’t learn much from raw GIDP numbers, because they’re not placed in any context. What we seek is some kind of rate for GIDP — how many times the player hit into a double play when presented the opportunity. That seems like relevant information for a No.2 hitter.

Thankfully, Baseball Reference does have information about double play opportunities (under More Stats, then Situational Hitting).* So, among Johnson, Curtis Granderson, and Robinson Cano, who has hit into the most double plays per opportunity? We’ll add in Damon for comparison.

*When I originally wrote this article, I had no idea this existed. Thanks to B-R founder Sean Forman for pointing me in the right direction. This table is totally accurate.


Player GDP Opp Pct.
Johnson 72 594 12.1
Granderson 18 410 4.4
Cano 94 670 14.0
Damon 84 1591 5.3

Does Johnson’s GIDP propensity offset his better on-base skills? Sound like a good idea for another follow-up article.

Categories : Offense
Comments (56)
Mar
03

Yankees sign Myron Leslie

Posted by: | Comments (15)

Via The Winnipeg Free Press, the Yankees have signed first baseman Myron Leslie out of the independent Can-Am League to a minor league pact. The 27-year-old hit .272-.410-.494 with 18 homers in 92 games for the New Jersey Jackals last season, and prior to that he spent five years in Oakland’s farm system. Leslie has spent the majority of his career at third base, though he’s also played first, second, and the outfield corners. This is just a depth signing, a veteran guy to have around in the Double-A Trenton clubhouse.

Categories : Asides, Minors
Comments (15)

It hasn’t been the best of weeks for David Paterson, New York’s beleaguered governor. Under siege for his role in a domestic abuse cover-up, Paterson has now been charged with an ethics violation by the state’s Commission on Public Integrity. The claim: Paterson asked for and received free tickets to Game One of the World Series from the Yankees. He may also have testified falsely under oath that he had said he would pay for the tickets when he had no intention of doing so. The Attorney General the Albany district attorney will continue this investigation.

The governor is legally barred from accepting gifts from the Yankees because the team is registered as a state lobbyist, as The Times put it, “in connection with financing for their stadium.” Our friends over at YFSF don’t view this is a big deal but the law is the law. For his part, Paterson has denied these allegations, suddenly a common theme from his administration.

Categories : Asides, News
Comments (32)

For the 2010 Yankees, Spring Training started with a familiar feel to it. While A.J. Burnett wasn’t around to pie Colin Curtis, the 25-year-old’s walk-off three-run home run in the bottom of the 9th gave the Yanks a 6-3 win over the Pirates in their Grapefruit League debut.

For the Yankees, though, the day was about getting work in than anything else. Chad Gaudin, Sergio Mitre and Alfredo Aceves, all supposed fifth starter candidates, threw two innings apiece. Each struck out one, and Gaudin was the only hurler to surrender a hit. Royce Ring, Jason Hirsh and Amaury Sanit each got some work in while the Pirates’ three runs came off of Jonathan Albaladejo.

Offensively, Ramiro Peña’s solo shot off of Steven Jackson put the Yanks on the board. Nick Johnson added an RBI double, and Curtis capped off the day with his three-run shot. The Yanks play Roy Halladay and the Phillies tomorrow afternoon. Kei Igawa and Boone Logan will both take the hill for the Bombers.

Anyway, this is your open thread for the evening. You know the drill; be good to each other. After the jump and before the comments, I’ve posted some pictures from around Spring Training of some old Yankee friends donning their new uniforms. Enjoy.

Read More→

Comments (357)

Even though Derek Jeter doesn’t plan to address his contract status until the end of the 2010 baseball season, it’s become quite the hot topic around the game. He’s becoming a free agent at age 36 and mans a position that few his age have played with much success. At the same time, he’s the face of a franchise and has been since 1996.

Over the last few weeks, as we’ve discussed Jeter, the general consensus has been that he’ll sign a deal for four years for somewhere between $20-$25 million a year. The Yankees probably won’t get that value from him on the field, but the good will and Jeter’s popularity should help mitigate the expense. What if Derek wants more though?

That’s the question Jon Heyman ponders today, and his sources indicate that Jeter may ask for as much as six years. His argument relies on putting down A-Rod.

The Yankees generally have treated their own big stars very well. But six years for a shortstop who’s 35 now is seen as a stretch, even by the execs who say they expect that to be the asking price. “Casey Close is a good agent. You don’t get if you don’t ask,” one executive said. Close declined comment.

Six years may seem extreme. But there is logic to it. Jeter saw his famous frenemy Alex Rodriguez get a 10-year, $275-million deal from the Yankees two winters ago that will take him to age 42. Jeter will be 36 by the end of the year, so six more years would take him to 42, same as A-Rod.

After seeing A-Rod get a contract taking him until he’s 42, why wouldn’t Jeter want the same? A case could be made that Rodriguez is a more natural fit as the DH, so playing into his 40s might be easier. But both are hard workers, extremely fit and without injury history. And Jeter’s the one who’s a Yankees legend.

Interestingly, Heyman also notes that the Yanks and Jeter nearly had a $118.5 million contract in place in early 2000, one year before he signed his big $189 million deal, but George Steinbrenner “nixed” that one. No word on how many years that would have covered.

That last historical tidbit is neither here nor there, but Heyman’s speculation on a six-year ask is worth considering. After all, the worst the Yanks can do is reject the proposal. I wouldn’t feel too comfortable giving Jeter six years, and it shouldn’t take that much to keep him around.

Above: Derek Jeter attempts to balance the World Series trophy on top of an unsuspecting Yogi Berra. (AP Photo/Kathy Willens)

Comments (130)

The following guest post comes to us from baseball historian Daniel R. Levitt. He is the author of Ed Barrow: The Bulldog Who Built the Yankees’ First Dynasty, a book I reviewed in 2008 which is now available in paperback. It was one of three finalists for the 2009 Seymour Medal, an award honoring the best book of baseball history or biography published during the preceding year.

Baseball, like all businesses, responds and adapts to its economic environment. The greater the disruption, the more profound the adjustment. The economic disorder of the Great Depression shocked the baseball owners: total profits of major league baseball collapsed from $1,335,742 in 1929 to a loss of $1,651,530 in 1933. Some of the less well capitalized owners were forced to sell their best players to raise capital. This expedient reached its apex in 1934 when Washington sold future Hall of Fame shortstop Joe Cronin to the Red Sox for $250,000, an amount greater than the entire 1933 player payroll of 14 of the 16 teams.

But the most lasting effect of the Great Depression on baseball was the realignment of the major and minor leagues. Like today, teams were limited to a 25-man roster of players during most of the season and a 40-man roster overall. The 15 players not on the 25-man roster were typically on option to minor league teams for continued development. Today, of course, teams control many, many more than 40 players though their farm systems. Prior to the Depression, however, this was not generally possible; all players on minor league teams controlled by a major league club counted against the 40-man roster. Some of the smoother operators, such as St. Louis’s Branch Rickey managed to skirt the edge of these rules, but on the whole having a farm system offered few advantages.

The economic imperatives of the Depression led to rules that allowed for the modern farm system. The major leagues had always resented being limited to the control of only 15 minor leaguers, but the minors liked it. The setup allowed minor league owners to control most of the best prospects and sell them to the major leagues for large prices once they were ready. The Depression, however, decimated minor league baseball–the number of leagues went from 25 to just 16 between 1929 and 1933–and the minors came to major leagues looking for financial relief. The major league owners agreed to invest in and help recapitalize minor league teams. In return, however, the major league owners demanded a rule change so that players on a minor league team controlled by a major league club no longer counted against the 40-man roster. Although the specific structure of the player control rules took several years to fully evolve, the new arrangement encouraged the development of the farm system as we know it today.

The Yankees were uniquely positioned to take advantage of this new environment. Like all capitalists, owner Jacob Ruppert saw his wealth severely curtailed in the economic downturn. But Ruppert had one unique advantage; he was a brewer, and with the repeal of prohibition in 1933, Rupert had an expanded and valuable source of income outside of his baseball franchise. Furthermore, unlike most other owners, Ruppert did not take distributions from his team’s profits; he reinvested them into the team.

Today the Yankee run from 1921 though 1964 is often remembered as one long dynasty. In realty it consisted of several distinct phases; one of the greatest began in the later years the Depression. Ruppert and general manager Ed Barrow quickly recognized the far-reaching impact of the new rules on minor league ownership and player control, and with Ruppert’s money built the best farm system in the American League. Supplemented with purchases of top minor league talent from many of the still independent minor league teams, the Yankees built one of the greatest sports dynasties of all-time. In the eight years from 1936 though 1943 New York won seven pennants and six World Series Championships and laid the groundwork for continued post-war success.

So what might the current economic downturn bring? Most obviously player salaries will stabilize or fall slightly as revenue falls off. So far, though, overall revenues have not declined. According to Forbes’ estimates, total baseball revenues actually increased from $5.5 billion in 2007 to $5.7 billion in 2008. Of course, the recession hit hardest in 2009, and those revenue figures are not yet available. Even if revenues fall slightly, however, it will not be enough to materially impact the structure of the game.

The largest impact may prove to be at the ownership level. Although team values have held up, the total wealth of many owners has been significantly reduced due plunging asset and hedge fund values. The baseball franchise itself, therefore, has become a greater proportion of the overall net worth of these owners. As their outside resources decline, they will have less financial flexibility to smooth out seasonal ups and downs in their team’s operational cash flow.

While baseball has always been subject to a diversity of wealth at the ownership level, the difference with this economic crisis is two fold: in the volatility of the relative wealth of the owners and in that market size will no longer be as important as ownership solvency. We have already begun to see this with Tom Hicks’ financial troubles in Texas and the Tribune Company’s bankruptcy in Chicago. The finances of both the Dodgers and Padres were recently thrown into confusion by the divorce proceedings of their principal owners. The fate of teams, and their willingness to spend on players, scouting, and marketing, is no longer as dependent on the fortunes of the team and its market size as on the changing economic circumstances of the owner.

Categories : Guest Columns
Comments (10)