Upgrades That Won’t Cost An Arm Or A Leg
As we talked about last week, my perception of the roster as it stands is that the team lacks at least four solid Major League regulars – an outfielder, a third baseman, a catcher, and a starting pitcher. And, if they take my advice and dangle guys like Michael Pineda and Brandon League to get the Reds to entertain trading Joey Votto, they’ll need another starting pitcher and open up a hole in the bullpen.
Even the Yankees couldn’t fill all these holes in free agency, and the Mariners aren’t dealing with a New York sized budget, so they’ll have to bring in some players who can contribute without requiring substantial paychecks. No matter whether they end up spending on a guy like Votto, Fielder, or any other high profile star, the team needs more production from low cost guys in order to fill out the roster and keep the team from sinking due to having a few great players surrounded by a bunch of scrubs.
In this post, I’ll lay out suggestions for guys who I would target as potential acquisitions to fill needs on the roster who won’t command big paydays in 2012. They show up by order of preference, so I like the guys at the top more than at the bottom. Without further ado:
Chris Volstad, RHP, Florida
The owner of the quietest breakout season in recent memory, Volstad pulled a pretty nifty trick – in one season, he lowered his walk rate, upped his strikeout and groundball rates, and yet he still managed to see his ERA rise from where it was in 2010. The culprit – a crazy-high 25.5% HR/FB rate against left-handed batters. Volstad’s change-up is still a work in progress and he’ll always be better against RHBs than LHBs, but there’s a lot of positive regression likely to come his way in 2012, and with a bit better luck on keeping balls in the park, he could be a very useful innings eater in the middle of the rotation. He’s just 25-years-old and will be arbitration eligible for the first time, so the Mariners would control his rights for three years at discounted rates. The Marlins won’t give him away, but given that they had to watch all those home runs leave the park with their own eyes, he could probably be had for less than what he’s likely to be worth going forward.
Angel Pagan, OF, New York Mets
Perhaps one of the easiest buy-low opportunities in baseball, someone is going to get a steal with Pagan this winter. Most reports have the Mets looking to unload him and find a new center fielder, and given that he’ll likely make about $5 million in his final year of arbitration and is coming off an undoubtedly poor season, it’s not hard to see why. However, Pagan’s underlying offensive skills showed no real signs of decline, and his abysmal UZR looks like an outlier when viewed through the lens of the rest of his career. He’d be a fantastic option for the M’s, who could give him regular work in left and could use him to spell Gutierrez in center field, creating more roster flexibility by not having to carry another backup CF. He’s not a power bat kind of player, but he’s been a league average hitter over his MLB career, he’d likely be one of the league’s best defensive left fielders, and he’s a high-contact switch-hitter who could give the team a lot of flexibility in the line-up. Think of him as Randy Winn 2.0, just with a better arm. For roughly $5 million and whatever peanuts it takes to acquire him in trade, the team would be hard pressed to find a better option anywhere else.
Casey McGehee, 3B, Milwaukee
While everyone else is lusting after the Brewers first baseman, I’d take a run at the guy who plays third base instead. Or should I say played third base. McGehee’s poor season cost him his job, and he’s been displaced by Jerry Hairston in the playoffs, but like Pagan, he’s a pretty easy pick to bounce back in 2012. Nearly all of his struggles can be credited to a massive drop in his BABIP, which fell from .306 in 2010 to .249 this year. His small drop in power is slightly disconcerting, but there’s no reason to think that his ability to drive the ball just dried up at age 28. He’s not a star or anything close to it, but he’s a right-handed third baseman with some power and contact skills who could easily be a league average player in 2012, and given his poor season, won’t command a big paycheck in his first trip through arbitration. He’s also not the kind of guy who would stand in the way of future playing time for Kyle Seager or Alex Liddi if they show they’re ready for more regular playing time in the big leagues – McGehee could slide into a part-time 3B/1B/DH role without any issues. At the very least, he’d give them depth at the position so they had the option to let Seager and Liddi start 2012 back in Triple-A and evaluate further how the position will shake out long term, and they might just find that they picked up a decent third baseman for the next few years in the process.
Chris Snyder, C, Free Agent
If Snyder was left-handed, he’d be the exact opposite of Miguel Olivo. Where Miggy swings at every pitch thrown his way, Snyder brings a good approach to the plate. While Olivo is known for playing every day, Snyder has a long list of injury problems. Each are flawed players, but they’re differently flawed, and if given one job to share, it’s possible that the team could actually come up with a reasonably productive catcher platoon using them both. Snyder can’t be relied on as an everyday guy, but his offensive potential is something the line-up could really use, and Olivo’s reputation for being remarkably durable gives the team some security for those inevitable days when Snyder needs a day off. Back surgery and limited playing time will likely make all contract offers he gets very heavily incentive-laden, so there won’t be a big financial cost if he gets hurt again, but the upside is worth making him next year’s version of Erik Bedard.
There are a host of other guys who fit similar molds and would be able to fill gaps on the current roster without requiring too much of the team in terms of financial commitment or sacrifices of talent to acquire them, but these four are my favorites for the winter. By filling holes with low cost Major Leaguers who can provide significant upgrades over what the team has on hand internally, they can afford to make a push for one significant star that could improve the team dramatically. Like, say, Mr. Votto…
Comments
86 Responses to “Upgrades That Won’t Cost An Arm Or A Leg”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Sure, it depends to what extent the decision about Seager is based on what’s best for the roster as opposed to what’s best for Seager’s development. If he’s still your best utility player, do you send him down? Will playing every day in Tacoma help his development enough to make him a materially better player, maybe even remove doubts about whether he could be a regular starter at third? I understand the impulse to send him down, but I’m not sure it’s the right answer.
I know we reflexively find it objectionable when Wedge justifies playing somebody like Peguero with logic implying that the only way they can really learn what they need is on-the-job training in the major leagues. A better hitting approach can and should be coached in the minors, and if Peguero doesn’t show marked improvement, he should stay there. But if the big problem for Seager is hitting big-league lefthanders, then I’m skeptical that getting him lots of practice against the Bobby Livingstons and Anthony Vasquezes of the world is going to produce the necessary improvement. I think you have to get him experience against the genuine article, and if you’re not in a position to do that, then use him primarily as a platoon player, or trade him to a team with more capacity to absorb his growing pains. He’s already big-league caliber as a platoon player, so minor league development isn’t needed in that sense.
That 11 was a fluke. It accounts for over half of his total defensive value (over a 10 year career) all by itself. He’s never come close to that.
That’s right, that is why you have to look at both passed balls and wild pitches for a catcher. If a catcher handles some real wild pitchers you give them a break, but the Mariners don’t have any knuckleballers.
Valencia – Your clubhouse problems/examples point at bad Management, not an argument for/against veteran players. Also, I don’t see how ANY of us are in a position to cite Olivo as a positive influence or a clubhouse leader. Any “accounts” we get of his behavior in the clubhouse are going to be filtered, as few guys are going to want to call anyone out or air any dirty laundry… Hence my earlier comments about not being able to use “clubhouse” or “chemistry” factors – we simply lack factual and accurate information. So we should discount those items (or at MOST “weight” that very lightly, compared to other factors) when evaluating a player. Also, see Paul B’s comments about the +11 season.
I mostly agree with your evaluation of Seager, though. I would love to see him blossom; but he just doesn’t look like he’s about to break out. A season of AAA might be good, and if he still doesn’t appear like he’s going to become an above-average player maybe he becomes trade-bait or a utility player.
Well, pitchers blame themselves for wild pitches.
You’re distorting what I wrote with the “good veteran goodness” line. What I’m talking about is a catcher who knows how to pitch to batters, and basically being an on-field pitching coach with the younger guys.
I do think having a good game-caller behind the plate helps the long-term development of these pitchers, along with helping them get through trouble.
This isn’t to say that Olivo is great, or that he can’t be replaced — it’s just he does provide some value behind the plate, and it’s not like the Mariners have hitters lining up down the block wanting to hit in Safeco.
Not being able to quantify something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
First of all, it doesn’t matter whose fault it is – it’s the effect it has. If we magically acquire Hanley and he’s lazy, gets fat, doesn’t watch tape, but hits like he always does so we can’t bench him, it shows the kids you can do whatever you want if you’re talented enough. Veterans set examples.
And just because we can’t “measure” it we should discount it? That doesn’t make sense – it exists, and plays a factor, and we should measure it to the best of our ability, even if it’s not a “number.”
I never once said Olivo was good. He’s not great, his OBP is awful, but he was a bit unlucky. He’s a good defender, probably +2-3 is his real talent level. But he provides veteran leadership according to Wedge, Drayer, and people involved with the club, and his game calling is miles better than Adam Moore’s. Maybe Hanigan or Snyder can call a better game, maybe not, but we know Olivo can. And when we have Paxton/Hultzen penciled in to come up 2012, that’s an asset. Maybe Hanigan or Snyder can step up and be a clubhouse voice, maybe they can’t, but we know Olivo can. All I’m saying is there’s risk we’re not accounting for by replacing a guy with intangible assets and replacing him with an guy we don’t know.
Obviously, better hitters (which the M’s don’t have) not only get more hits – they get more HR’s. But it is worth noting that the top 7 AL teams in HR’s all played better than .500 ball (except for Baltimore) and all 4 playoff teams were among those 7. Of the worst 7 HR hitting teams none made the playoffs and only 1 (the Angels) finished over .500. I know many posters here disparage “dingers”, but when, especially at the start of the 2011 season, you put a team with next to no power at the four corner positions plus a no power DH, you are just asking for a 100 loss season. If the M’s are waiting around for nine Ichiro’s so they can get 20 or so singles a game and score 3 runs – it ain’t gonna happen.
Why not Endy Chavez, if he wants to come back to Seattle? 2011 .301/.323/.426 line is superior to Pagan’s and he has 1.5 WAR vs .9 for Pagan, and they are close to the same age.
There is a certain tendency to hyperbole that gets the best of us all at times.
RBIs aren’t actually a useless stat. All else equal, the hitter with more RBIs is in fact the better hitter. Driving runs in is useful. RBI expressed as a rate stat (RBI percentage?) would be more useful, but RBI as a counting stat has a small correlation to value, just as a 20-game winning pitcher will more often have had a better year than a 10-game winner.
Now, “dingers’ is a direct disparagement of the many folks who crazily overvalue home runs as a component of total offensive production. Hitting home runs is a really good idea. Accepting a 75% out rate in order to get 19 dingers is not, if you want to lose fewer than 90 games.
Dave,
I just don’t think you trade a 23 year old potential superstar stud pitcher under your control for almost no money, to get a first baseman you’ll have to pay $15 million and have under control for only two years…especially when you have two guys (Carp and Smoak) you think are on the verge of establishing themselves as big time hitters at the same position.
Great young cheap pitching is incredibly hard to find; if you are going to give it up, it seems to me you do it for a stud you will have under control for several years in a position where you have bigger question marks (left field, third base, catcher).
Here’s the other thing about HR’s…
They’re unpredictable….
In the short-run at least. We may be able to figure out who the HR hitters are and how many they’ll hit (roughly). Dan Uggla is a perennial 30 HR guy for instance.
The problem is that HR’s are volatile. Yes, they are by definition indefensible, but you can go 2 weeks without hitting one, then hit 5 in the next 7 games.
And if you’re building a team for the playoffs, I believe you can’t necessarily afford that type of volatility.
Instead, give me a team that can spray the ball all over the place. There’s only so far a defense can cover on the field. And there’s no defense for being base hit to death.
One can argue that that method is also volatile. Even if you put together a team predominantly of 0.280/0.350/* hitters, your batters are getting on base slightly better than one out of every 3 times. So it’s not automatic that you’re getting a run there either. It’s going to take a couple of events strung together to get a run in.
But take a look at it in this context. Our former 3B Adrian Beltre hit 32 HRs this past season. He did that in 525 PA’s. So on average 1 out of every 16 PA’s he hit a HR, or roughly 1 every 3-4 games. Like I said before though, that’s an average. I’d rather not have to depend on that to win a game.
So, to me while HRs are a guaranteed run, I’d much rather see a team get on base and make the opposing team slowly suffer. Any HRs I get are just a bonus. (It’s the reason why I would yell at games to just get on base when they were slightly behind, and that trying to work a walk wasn’t a bad thing). It’s not sexy, but I think it works.
Apart from Volstad, I’m not seeing how these are upgrades.
Replacing Seager, projected to be a league average player, with someone who should be a league average player… importing a left fielder with no power when we badly need power and have a glut of generic outfielders already… a huge injury risk at catcher who, even if healthy and only played a couple times a week, doesn’t have much upside.
Volstad in Safeco should be an upgrade, even with the homerun problem. The M’s don’t need a premium player for the rotation. But for the position players, well… Votto, or his caliber, is a real upgrade. Players brought in this winter should be about that level, or just don’t bother. Skip the bargain basement shopping and save the money and prospects for impact players.
(Note that I’m not doing the “one or two bats away” argument. This roster isn’t one or two players away. But just as they’re not going to be magically saved by a Fielder or a Pujols, they’re also not going to be made better by plugging in a few blue light specials.)
I like Mathball’s question above. What’s the WAR of the roster right now? At a given position, if you can’t significantly improve on Wells / Guti / Ichi / Smoak / Ackley / Ryan / Seager / Carp / Olivo, on the order of a couple WAR or more at a position, it’s not worth it.
Yes, but if you can’t quantify it, you won’t be able to figure out how much emphasis to put on it and how much to sacrifice in production to get it.
If the unquantifiable only adds a smidge to the bottom line, then I’m really not certain it’s worth it to go seek it out.
The fundamental problem is that “all else is NOT equal”. Why use a stat that is dependent on the performance of others, when there are readily available, uncomplicated stats that also quantify what RBI purports to measure?
It’s very easy to find out how well – or poorly – a player hit with runners on base or in scoring position. Olivo’s overall average was .223 this year; his average with men on base was .226, and with men in scoring position it was .225. He quite obviously didn’t hit any better under those circumstances – why obfuscate that by saying “he drove in 62 runs” and pretending that actually tells us something it doesn’t?
Ok, sorry, I retract my previous concern.
Unless multiple players can realistically improve more than 2 or 3 WAR from one season to the next, and/or this year’s WAR values are seriously affected by health or playing time, perhaps some cheap upgrades are in order. This year was more dire than I thought.
Looking up 2011 WAR on Fangraphs:
Name WAR
Dustin Ackley 2.7
Brendan Ryan 2.6
F.Gutierrez 1.1
Miguel Olivo 0.9
Casper Wells 0.6
Mike Carp 0.5
Kyle Seager 0.5
Justin Smoak 0.5
Ichiro Suzuki 0.2
My god. Just getting some 1.5 / 2 WAR players in a few of those spots really helps.
In fairness though, a lot of those players didn’t play a whole season, and would have presumably produced more WAR had they had more chances.
puppyfoot wrote:
The many posters here who “disparage ‘dingers'” do so because of the focus on HRs without an appropriate level of attention also given to things like OBP, outs made, contact/K rate, and other more advanced metrics that directly measure how often and how hard players hit the ball. Hitting talent, not just the ability to hit home runs.
Clearly, hitting home runs is a good thing. But the success you described for playoff teams is less correlated with hitting home runs, I am sure, than it is with OBP and contact rates. Production (whether in the form of home runs or not) comes with the territory of making good, solid contact, more regularly, so look for those guys. Just as you might struggle with a team of nine clones of Ichiro (at least 2011 Ichiro), you would struggle far more with nine clones of Dave Kingman.
The other thing I would note is, obviously contact alone isn’t everything, and power (SLG) is important. But home runs aren’t the only way to be a productive power guy. Give me the high OBP/doubles machine that Edgar was any day over a 30 HR/45 XBH, 150 K guy who grounds into 25 double plays every year, even if that guy does lead the team in dingers and RBI.
And to Chris_From_Bothell: I’m glad you’ve re-thought your position against making any incremental improvements in favor of making only splashier moves, but I’m not sure that just looking at 2011 WAR from a 2012-projected line-up that, for the most part, played less than full seasons is a good way to reach that conclusion. I think you need to look at WAR projected to 650 or 700 PA, or something close to that, and compare THAT to a similar projection for a an outside guy you’re looking at (and discount for injury-proneness or other PT issues on both sides if you need to).
If you do that, those players’ WAR/700 PA looks more like:
Ackley 3.9
Ryan 3.4
Guti 1.7
Olivo 1.6
Wells 1.1*
Carp 0.8
Seager 0.9
Smoak 0.7
Ichiro 0.2
* If you project based on Wells’ 2011 totals of 1.5 WAR over 241 PA instead of his 0.6 over 116 PA just with Seattle, which you should, he projects to a 2.5 WAR player over 700 PA.
This is still an offense in dire need of upgrades, but it isn’t quite as dire as your chart painted it. And, there are reasons to think some players (Guti, Wells, Smoak) vastly underperformed their expected WAR because of injury, others (Ichiro) vastly underperformed a long body of work at higher levels and, even accounting for age/decline, should progress to a higher mean, and the vast bulk should improve simply by virtue of where they are on the development curve and age relative to peak.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/thehotstoneleague/2016464680_reds_gm_says_hes_not_trading_j.html
One more thing that people tend to ignore when talking about hitting talent: Someone who’s good at hitting in general (has good ABs, makes contact, doesn’t swing at pitches outside the zone) makes the opposing pitcher work harder and get to a higher pitch-count more quickly.
Bullpens are inevitably more volatile than SPs, and so the more often you can get to the opponent’s bullpen before the 7th/8th inning, the better your chances of being able to knock a bullpen pitcher around and put up a crooked number in a single inning.
This “crooked number” is what I think a lot of dinger-proponents want, and admittedly home-runs can score you a lot of runs in only a few pitches – but you can’t rely on home runs coming at the right time every game. Teams that hit a lot of doubles and home-runs also tend to be teams with a lot of hitting talent in general, not just a couple of power bats.
In any case, there are generally 2 ways to get a starting pitcher out of the game: Drive his pitch-count up or hit several doubles & homers off of him in quick succession. Which do you think is easier to achieve and more likely to happen?
Edgar’s career slugging percentage was .508, with an OBP of .418 – AND 309 career homers. What an awesome stud! A team of Edgars would score a boatload of runs… of course, they’d probably allow a boatload too, what with the bad knees and all. Watching Edgar attempt to field center would not be pretty. 😀
Out of curiosity, if you actually could send out a team of 9 Dave Kingmans (who somehow were able to field their positions), wouldn’t that at least be a better offense than Seattle’s? A team of 35 HR Dave Kingmans would hit around 315 home runs, easily besting the 97 M’s mark of 264, and would provide 2 home runs per game on average. Dave Kingman had a career OB% of around .305, wouldn’t a team of Dave Kingmans likely best the 2011 Mariners 3.43 runs per game, and finish above the bottom 1/3 for offense? 19 HR and a .250 OB% from Olivo is a far cry from Dave Kingman’s near .478 career slugging %. I think a team of guys hitting 35 HR with a .300 OB% might not be as terrible as you think.
Mariner68: Yes, I think 9 Kingmans would do better than the 2011 Mariners, but that kind of misses the point. Nobody is arguing that the 2011 Mariners “as is” is an adequate offense. We’re talking about what kind of hitters you target to maximize offense, and just because Kingman would be better than the 2011 Mariners doesn’t mean his is a model for the kind of player you want to pursue to accomplish that.
I used Dave Kingman, because he was the first prototypical high HR, high K guy I thought of, but in many ways he is a poor proxy for the purposes of this argument (which is rooted in arguments between pro-Olivo and anti-Olivo camps in this thread) because he was also a moderately patient hitter. He had a career OBP-BA difference of .066. In contrast, both Olivo and Ichiro are at least 20 points worse than that (Olivo .036; Ichiro .044). It would be fairer to use somebody – I don’t know who this would be – who hit more home runs than Olivo did, but didn’t walk as much as Kingman did (closer to what Olivo himself does).
In any event, the real question I posed was whether you would be better off offensively with a team full of high-contact, little power, no walk guys like Ichiro, or a guy like Kingman? Or the Edgar type I think is the ideal? RC/G attempts to answer that, and it isn’t particularly close:
PLAYER RC/G
Kingman 4.8
Ichiro 6.3
Olivo 3.8
Edgar 8.3
Obviously, the do-everything guy like Edgar, who was really known most for hard contact, walks and doubles, is the best. The more you take OBP out of the equation, the worse off you are, unless you add back in just a sh*tload of power (more than Kingman), and all things being equal, a guy who doesn’t walk but hits for average will be a better choice than a guy who doesn’t walk or hit for average, but hits for power. That is the power of OBP.
Dave picking guys like Chris Snyder as potential upgrades is why I like this blog – he seems like a great fit and his name never would have crossed my mind.
I am interested to see if Philly might be willing to part with one or two cheap players for upgrades elsewhere. Specifically, John Mayberry, Jr. and Vance Worley. Worley might be cost prohibitive, but Mayberry has pop, is on ok defender according to UZR, and is right-handed. Some deal involving one or both for Brandon League, Erasmo Ramirez, and one of our outfielders (Casper Wells?) might do it. Would be interesting, anyway.
stevie, I don’t think that’s possible. Cliff Lee’s contract is going up by $10M next year, and they have a few players heading into FA during the off-season. If they plan on letting players walk, they prolly need to keep their low-cost players to fill in gaps.
Agreed Pete. Edgar was my favorite player for all the reasons you mentioned, and a typical Ichiro year bests a all or nothing slugger. I do feel that the randomness of power from a low BA Russell Branyan type does have some value, more than a team of .340OB%, .390SLG% kind of players, but it has to be 30+ HR with slugging around .500 to be of much use, I don’t think guys like Steve Balboni, Rob Deer, Gorman Thomas etc. were net positives – other than their best seasons. A season like Olivo had is really of little use, a .250 OB% guy who only hits 20-25 HR is likely getting them in garbage time with no men on base, not off of elite pitchers in key situtations.
Good point, Pete. Your revised estimates still make me more comfortable with going out and getting incremental upgrades than I thought at the end of the season.
Well, if one thinks that cheap yet reliable 1.5 – 2.0 WAR players are available at 2 or 3 positions – 3b, LF and DH especially… and that a solid #4 starter is available… and that at least one impact player is acquired somehow, pretty much at name-any-position-that-isn’t-2b.
We’ve just seemed to be so burned by blue-light-special shopping in recent years, that it’s hard to imagine what actual, reliable, just-above-replacement-level players look like.
Kamina: League might be a low-cost option for them at closer, compared to what it would cost them to bring in a free agent (including their own guy), which is why the deal would be appealing for the Phillies on the budget side. Plus, Mayberry can’t be seen as long for Philadelphia with Domonic Brown waiting to take the third spot in the Pence/Victorino OF. That said, Worley is more of a pipe dream, especially if they let Oswalt go.
Remember that while Branyan’s batting average was down somewhat near the “Olivo zone”, he was/is a career .329 OBP guy – quite a bit better than Miguel.
And with the 2009 Mariners, Russell the Muscle put up a .251/.347/.520 line. If Miguel could perform like that, we’d all be loving him to death. I mean basically we’re talking about getting Miguel getting on base 1/4 of the time, while Branyan does so 1/3 of the time. That’d be significant even if Branyan didn’t have superior power. Over the course of a season that’s significantly fewer outs being made.
Not a single hitter has fit that description in the last fifty years. You can’t GDP 25 times and K 150 times because you don’t put enough balls into play. One of the benefits of Adam Dunn type hitters is that they don’t GDP. (On the whole, guys like that have high RE24, which tends to show that they mitigate their GDPs through other skills.)
But this is all beside the point I want to make, which is that you should look at stats like wOBA or even OPS rather than a selection of counting stats that give an incomplete picture of a hitter. There’s no reason to talk about “types” of hitters (doubles OBP guys versus TTO sluggers) when you have a stat that commensurates these kinds of value.
The only reason to talk about types of hitters is because maybe you think a particular type will be hurt by Safeco, so that his past performance won’t accurately predict him in a new environment (e.g., pull-power RHB with contact skills but lacking zone judgement is not a good safeco fit.)
Or, they could just stop drafting pitchers with those high draft picks and get some offense.
@akampfer
2009 Draft
#2 – Dustin Ackley (2B)
#27 – Nick Franklin (SS)
#33 – Steve Baron (C)
#51 – Rich Poythress (1B)
#82 – Kyle Seager (2B)
#113 – James Jones (LF)
2010 Draft
#43 – Taijuan Walker (P)
#67 – Marcus Littlewood (SS)
#99 – Ryne Stanek (P) – Went to Arkansas
#132 – James Paxton (P)
They don’t draft on need, they draft on best available. You get best available then if necessary trade for need.
Or, they could just stop drafting pitchers with those high draft picks and get some offense.
If you were to trade them, a good pitcher usually gets more in return then a position player
KaminaAyato made the real point that needed to be made in response to @akampfer but there’s one more (secondary) point to be made: You have 5 Starting Pitchers and a 5-7 man bullpen. That’s about HALF of your 25-man roster! So of course you’re going to see a lot of Pitchers drafted. You need a lot of pitchers. If you fielded teams with 12 Shortstops instead, you’d see a lot more guys with “SS” after their name during the draft, too.
Hey dave what about Victor Martinez? Not sure if he fits in the budget or the freely available players, but he seems to have become Detroit’s primary DH. Not sure how much he can actually play behind the plate anymore, but that’s where Olivo comes in. If we filled those holes on the cheap with Volstad/Pagan types could we afford a Martinez along with a Votto?
Kinda. When you look at the draft, you generally do not draft for a reliever. The saying that relievers are failed starters is for the most part true. Plus, relievers have been shown to generally be (a) fungible, and (b) volatile – really you’re drafting for SP.
But because you’re looking for 5 starters and obviously not every SP drafted makes it, AND good young SP generally garners a premium in trades, that’s why you see P drafted.
(But thanks for backing up my other point!)
philosofool wrote:
“Not a single hitter has fit that description in the last fifty years. You can’t GDP 25 times and K 150 times because you don’t put enough balls into play.”
The statistical example used was an extreme, used for illustrative purposes to make a point. I was reacting to those defending Olivo on the basis of HR and RBI, and saying you are going to win a lot more with guys who hit less HR but make more contact and get on base more frequently.
BUT, there are guys that come pretty close to that kind of hitter. In 1997, Jay Buhner struck out 175 times and grounded into 23 double plays. The Bone was a productive hitter because he hit a lot more than 30 HR (40, to be precise), and he walked a lot (119 times), so even though he was a low contact .243 hitter, he was still a .889 OPS/.388 wOBA guy. Richie Sexson, in 2001, stuck out 178 times and grounded into 20 double plays, though also hit 45 home runs and even though he walked at only about half the rate 1997 Buhner did, he hit enough more doubles (+6) and triples (+1) than Buhner did that he also posted a .889 OPS and was a productive .370 wOBA guy (and the difference in their wOBA numbers speaks to the relatively higher value of OBP over SLG). Dick Stuart, in 1963, grounded into 24 double plays and struck out 144 times, with only 44 walks (though hit 42 HR and had 25 doubles and 4 triples, and was good for a .833 OPS and a .366 wOBA)
Guys like this are rare, and probably aren’t given full time jobs unless they do at least one (probably power) if not two (power, walks) things well, but it is possible to strike out as many times and ground into double plays at or nearly at the rate I mentioned. But they are valued by some in baseball, and apparently some in this thread.
So, while you are technically right, you missed the point of my example, and there clearly are players in the last 50 years who come close enough to the description to make you wrong, too.
But I agree with your main point – wOBA, wRC+ and other advanced metrics do a much better job of describing whether a hitter (of whatever “type” as judged by more traditional component stats) is good enough at enough things to be a productive player. The only reason I didn’t use those stats was because (a) that had already been pointed out, and (b) the pro-Olivo crowd is not inclined to be moved by those stats – hence, the discussion of the “disparagement” of “dingers.” For the purpose of this discussion, I thought it best to stay on their turf, and the extreme example I used was designed to illustrate my point.