skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Scott Olsen shocked the world last night by going 7 innings, allowing 2 runs on 6 hits while allowing no walks and striking out 7.
As we'd been told, his velocity was indeed up. According to Pitch FX, his four-seam fastball averaged 89.2 mph and topped out at 91.6. For the season, his 'heater' is averaging 87.4 mph. Last year he was at 87.8. So he's up almost 2 full ticks on the radar gun--that's enough to make a difference.
(The season-long numbers I'm citing are from Baseball Info Solutions, not Pitch FX, and it's possible there's a discrepancy in their metrics, but let's assume for now that there isn't).
However, for all the hoopla about Olsen's velocity being 'back,' he's still down considerably from where he was the last time he was any good. His rookie year 2006 was the only year that he's put up a fielding independent ERA under 5.00, and that year his fastball averaged 90.9, almost two more full ticks from where he was last night.
Still, he was pretty much lights out, right?
Yes, but let's not forget who he was facing. The Marlins have pummelled the Nationals, but they are in fact one of the hackiest, swing-from-the-heels-iest team of free-swingers in the league. This is the classic boom-or-bust offense full of guys who swing as hard as they can in case they hit something. The downside of that approach is that they chase a ton of bad pitches and strike out a ton. They hit a lot of homers, but when they slump, they really slump, because they don't string together hits or advance runners.
Here's the K-rates and walk rates of the line-up Olsen faced last night. Keep in mind, an average K-rate is usually around 16% and walk rate is usually 8%:
Coughlan: 20.6% / 12.7%
Bonifacio: 21.3% / 6.8%
Ramirez: 16.3% / 9.3%
Cantu: 14.9% / 5.2%
Uggla: 24.2% / 14.0%
Ross: 21.8% / 5.6%
Paulino: 22.3% / 9.0%
Carroll: 22.6% / 7.5%
When the hackarific Jorge Cantu is your best contact hitter, you've got a line-up that's going to make a lot of bad pitchers look good.
Please don't get me wrong. Olsen had a very nice outing, and I would love for it to be true that he's going to give the Nationals 7 innings and keep them in the game every 5 days from here on out.
But color me (still) a skeptic. I want to see him do it against a team that knows how to take a pitch once in a while.
Download the latest podcast here. Brian and I discuss the rotation shake-up, the outfield trade rumors, the latest draft signings, and make our weekly picks for heroes, goats, and signs of hope.
When you're over there, don't forget to subscribe on I-Tunes or your favorite podcatcher.
Obviously this isn't a trade that's going to ring out in the history books for either franchise, but it's a bit of a head-scratcher.
Rizzo's been sending every indication that this priority is upgrading the defense, especially in the outfield and bringing in more good "clubhouse guys." Based on that, Josh Willingham, Adam Dunn, Lastings Milledge and Elijah Dukes all seem like bad fits.
Meanwhile, Ryan Langerhans seems like a particularly good fit, at least as a fifth outfielder. He's a career +18.0 UZR/150 in LF and +25.8 in right. He's a patient hitter with good on base skills, evidenced by the .380 OBP he put up in 139 PAs last year and .371 in 242 plate appearances with Syracuse this year. We don't have room for him now, but if we're about to ship off a corner outfielder or three, Langerhans would be the best choice to bring up.
Morse on the other hand doesn't provide much if anything more than we already have in Kory Casto and Pete Orr. He doesn't have the glove for the middle infield anymore, and he doesn't have the bat to be an asset at the corners. He rarely walks (career MLB 7.1% walk rate) and has basically no power (career .097 ISO power).
I guess there's some value in depth, and we don't have much in the infield organizationally, but I doubt very much that Morse could provide even replacement-level value at any position on the diamond.
The rumors are that the Nationals are trying to swap Lastings Milledge for Nyjer Morgan. We wouldn't be fleecing the Pirates by any stretch, and I don't love the idea of trading a young player with upside at the bottom of his value, but I don't think this is a terrible idea.
The argument for Morgan is simple: the guy can flat-out play defense. Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR/150) says his glove is worth 25.4 runs above average per 150 games.
We all know how bad the Nationals defense has been, but centerfield has been particularly terrible. For the year, Nationals centerfielders have posted a ghastly -17.8 UZR/150. A 43.2 run swing at a single position is enormous. That's like the difference between 2008 Willy Taveras, the worst regular CF in baseball, and 2008 Josh Hamilton.
The glaring defensive ineptitude of the Nationals is really killing them right now. The bullpen can't get four outs, and the team won't risk making young arms go deep in games.
The knock on Morgan is that he really has no power at all. His OBP last season was a solid .345, but that came on the strength of an unsustainable .367 BABIP, so one would expect him to be back in the low-.300s in OBP this year. That's what most projection systems expected from him--CHONE had him at .326, and PECOTA had him way down at .300.
This year the BABIP is indeed down to .319, which for a guy with his wheels probably is sustainable, but his walk rate has nearly doubled, and his OBP remains right at .345. He still strikes out more than you'd like for a guy with his skill set, but overall he can keep this up if he keeps walking in 10% of his plate appearances.
Morgan's best role would be as a fourth outfielder defensive replacement and pinch runner, but for the Nationals, with their glaring weaknesses, he'd be a more than an adequate stop-gap if he's hitting .330 OBP. At .345 he's a legitimately average overall starting centerfielder.
And at 28, Morgan isn't young. But he started baseball relatively late. It's possible that he's still getting better.
Shipping Milledge away would be hard. He's still just 24, and he really did show steady improvement over his 2008 season.
But there's a big part of me that's felt for a while that Milledge won't be an above average player unless he can figure out how to make his glove play in center. He just won't have enough bat to be a premium corner outfielder. If Rizzo's judgment is that it's not going to happen (a judgment I'd be hard-pressed to provide evidence to counter), then I see Milledge as a fourth outfielder on a contender also.
Plus, Rizzo clearly doesn't like Milledge. Rizzo values defense, and Milledge isn't very good at it. Rizzo likes good clubhouse guys, and Milledge isn't one.
If the team could get more for Milledge, then obviously they should. But I'm not sure there'd be any takers. In fact, the coverage is that it's the Pirates that turned down the Milledge-for-Morgan deal, asking for Craig Stammen too. Two years ago, Milledge fetched Ryan Church and Brian Schneider. Since then, his stock has surely dropped at least some.
It's certainly possible that this would be a really bad idea. If Milledge clicks and becomes a plus defender in a corner outfield spot and his bat takes a leap forward, he could still be a much better player than Morgan for a lot longer. But he won't be a star. Fans still reminiscing about rumors of Lastings for Manny straight up are way, way out of touch with the current reality.
This is the kind of deal that's less about making a splash and more about building a team. That's probably what I like most about it. From the greater emphasis on defense to the groundball pitchers to the bias against raw tools guys in the draft, Rizzo is showing that he wants to build a basebal team rather than a collection of flashy names.
We're seeing a guy with an actual plan for constructing a roster and maximizing the value of assets available. I know it's unfamiliar for Nationals fans, but it's a welcome change.
Update: As noted in the comments, there's a report that the Nationals are pursuing Braves prospect Jordan Schaefer. This would be an exciting development, and the Braves are desperate for a corner outfield bat. I've thought they were a good possible trading option for a long time. But it's hard to imagine the Braves doing this for less than Adam Dunn.
Scott Olsen has completed three rehab starts and by all accounts he's ready to rejoin the Nationals rotation.
Here's the problem. He's not as good as the guys who have replaced him. His 5.50 fielding independent ERA is worse than Shairon Martis (5.25), John Lannan (5.09), Craig Stammen (4.28), Ross Detwiler (3.94), and Jordan Zimmermann (3.56).
In his rehab starts he hasn't been any better. In 12.6 innings with Syracuse, he's allowed 19 hits and 6 walks against just 9 strikeouts. His 5.25 fielding independent ERA in AAA translates to a major league-equivalent of 7.08, according to Minor League Splits.
In fact, if the team wants to promote someone from AAA, Olsen isn't even the best pitcher in Syracuse. Collin Balester's fielding independent ERA is 3.68. J.D. Martin's is a shiny 2.66. Marco Estrada, 3.73.
Now, I'm somewhat torn on this issue. As much as I don't like Olsen, I would like to see some of these young arms, especially Detwiler, get work outside the glare of MLB. He's had some success, and this would be an easy time to ease him back down without affecting his confidence.
Rizzo's plans to shut down Zimmermann, Martis and Detwiler before the end of the season means that we'll need most of those Syracuse arms for the last month or so of the season.
And there have been more reports that Olsen's velocity is back (although we hear this every month, so I'll believe it when I see it).
Still, it just seems like before the team just hands Olsen his old job back, he should have to show he can pitch at least as well as the guys they're farming out to make room.
Last week I checked in on Steven Shell and found that he'd been demoted to Class AA West Tennessee. That got me wondering about some other former Nationals:
- Jake Smolinski (traded with P.J. Dean and Emilio Bonifacio for Josh Willingham and Scott Olsen)
A second round pick in the 2007 draft, the 20-year-old Smolinski was an often-overlooked key piece of the Willingham-Olsen trade. Smolinski ranked as the Baseball America #25 prospect in the Marlins deep system and his ceiling is as a solid starting middle infielder with decent pop. This year, coming off reconstructive knee surgery, he's tearing up A-ball pitching to the tune of .274 / .384 / .484. His walk rate is up, his strikeouts are down, and his ISO power his jumped from .141 to .210. Long-term you figure his bat would play better at second, but the Marlins have had him splitting time between second and third. He has a long way to go, but the Marlins couldn't be happier about how his first year with them is going.
- Jhonny Nunez (traded to the Yankees for Alberto Gonzalez)
The live-armed right-handed reliever was flipped by the Yanks to the White Sox as part of the Nick Swisher trade. The 23-year-old Nunez has a 2.34 ERA in his first full year in AA pitching for the Birmingham Barons. His whiffing a whopping 11.27 per 9, though his walks are a bit high at 4.25 per 9.
- Armando Galarraga (traded to the Rangers with Brad Wilkerson and Terrmel Sledge for Alfonso Soriano)
After a 2008 in which Galarraga's ERA bested his fielding-independent ERA by more than a run, the fastball-slider righty has seen the luck dry-up in 2009. He's compiled a 5.65 ERA this year, as his walks are up and his strikeouts are down. He's been rumored to be on the verge of losing his rotation spot for a while.
- Juan Rivera (traded with Maicer Izturis for Jose Gullen)
Healthy and getting regular playing time for the first time since 2006, Rivera is having a great first half, hitting .306 / .351 / .504. He's also a very good fielder in LF, putting up a +25.1 UZR/150.
- Alfonso Soriano (signed with Cubs as free agent)
Soriano is off to his worst season as a major leaguer, hitting a miserable .227 / .291 / .426. He's never been a great on-base guy, but he's become a veritable out-machine. He has the fourth-worst wOBA of any LF in baseball 200 ABs, trailing the likes of Marlon Byrd and Randy Winn. And with his glove, he's giving the Cubs not even replacement-level value.
Just think, at 33 he's only in the third year of an eight-year back-loaded deal. They're on the hook for $18 million a year till 2014. If the Cubs had won the World Series with Soriano, the deal might have been worth it, but they may have already reached the albatross phase of their ASor experience.
- Bill Bray (traded with Royce Clayton, Daryl Thompson, Gary Majewski, and Brendan Harris for Austin Kearns and Felipe Lopez)
After a break-out 2008 when the lefty former #1 pick threw 47 innings with a 2.87 ERA and a K-rate over 10 per 9, Bray's fallen victim to arm problems and underwent Tommy John surgery last month.
Considered a dark-horse for the Reds rotation this year, Thompson didn't make the cut and then really struggled at AAA Louisville with a 6.57 ERA (though his fielding-independent ERA was just 4.70). He's on the DL with shoulder inflammation, which given a long history of injuries is a worry. (Some have said that Bowden knowingly concealed arm Thompson's problems from the Reds before the trade.)
- Luis Ayala (traded to the Mets for Anderson Hernandez)
Ayala signed with Minnesota in the off-season and was DFA-ed last week. Apparently he had demanded to be moved into the eighth inning role, despite the fact that his 4.18 ERA is the second-worst in the Twins' bullpen. He griped about his role here too. He'll get a job. Pittsburgh is said to be interested.
- Scott Downs (released November 2004)
Downs has continued his remarkable breakthrough as one of the very best lefty relievers in baseball. This year, given the chance to close, he's 8 for 9 in save opportunities with a 1.98 ERA. Credit the Blue Jays for seeing something in him that the Nationals didn't.
- Jonathan Albaladejo (traded to the Yankees for Tyler Clippard)
Albaladejo has pitched well in AAA but gotten hit hard in limited time in the majors. We'll finally see if Clippard's story is any different.
- Mike Hinckley (released April 2009)
In 23 innings at AAA Oklahoma City (Texas), Hinckley has a 4.93 fielding independent ERA (2.66 'real' ERA). If Texas, with their terrible bullpen, isn't using him, then that says something.
As anyone who's spent any time on this blog knows, I'm a big fan of Jason Bergmann. He's a fantastic guy, and while he'll never win any Cy Young awards, I think it's pretty much an embarrassment that he's spent a day in AAA over the last three years.
I see his short-comings as much as anyone--I just don't believe there's been a moment over that time that he wasn't as good or better than at least one pitcher in the rotation or bullpen. (At the moment, I'd surely take him over Kip Wells, for instance.)
Not long ago, while he was still in his rightful place on the Nationals' 25-man roster, Jason agreed to do an interview with FJB. Then, after just one (very) rough outing, he was sent down. I figured an interview with a blogger would be the last thing on his mind.
I was wrong. It says a lot about the guy's appreciation of the fans that even after getting once again bent over by the team (he's too classy to say that, but I'm not), he still did the interview. Enjoy.
First of all, tell us something we as fans might not know about what it's really like to be a major leaguer.
Hey, no problem. I actually enjoy speaking out to the fans via question and answers. I really think it helps the fan and player relate a little more.
To keep it short, I think people usually conclude that being a major league player is a piece of cake and that we just show up, play a game and then go out to clubs and party. Total misconception about our lives!
Many ballplayers arrive at the field between 1 and 2 pm and take extra everything (extra defense, hitting, video, etc.). We stretch, throw, run, take BP, have pitchers/hitters meetings and then fuel up with some food and head back onto the field to take on the other team. Most guys stick around after the game for a while and talk about at-bats or pitching sequences on certain hitters. Some guys wind up leaving the field at 11-12 pm. All in all it turns into a 10-11 hour day at the field.
Who are your best friends in the Nationals organization?
The Nationals organization is the only one I have known in my career. I am happy to say that there are many good people who play for this team. Many of the guys are very approachable and being such a young group, the guys stick together more. I feel that I have a connection with everyone on the team and that I wouldn't say any one player is a bad apple or sore thumb.
That being said most hitters hang with hitters and most pitchers stick around the other pitchers. I obviously am more in sync with the pitchers!
What coaches over your career have helped you the most?
I think a lot of coaches have been a help to me along the way. Reggie Jackson was a pitching coach in Savannah back in 2004. While I was on the disabled list with a broken toe, he helped me develop my slider. That was a great because it added another dimension to my pitching strategy.
Ricky Bones the following year kept pounding into my head that all I had to do to be successful was throw the ball down. He was the first coach that got through to me with that, and I believe I have heard it now from every other coach.
Steve McCatty has been a wonderful teacher and someone who I can rely upon to be perfectly honest and blunt when I ask a question. That quality helps Cat and I stay on the same page. I don't know how much I learn from him as much as he keeps me in line.
Randy St. Claire was my first MLB pitching coach. He put in long hours on the computer and in the bullpen keeping my mechanics correct. I think that his tireless work has definitely increased my major league career length.
Nationals and former Expos Scouting Director Dana Brown seems to have a particular affection for pitchers from the NY/NJ area. I'm thinking of you, John Lannan, Sean Black (who was a second round pick a few years ago who didn't sign), and there are several others, especially in later rounds. What makes you Jersey boy so tough?
I am not sure its a Jersey boy thing or not, but I know Dana is from the area and has a soft spot for it.
I am sure there is a notion amongst the scouts that while the southern states are able to play more baseball year round, the northern guys such as myself and Lannan are subject to shorter seasons due to weather. This, some may argue, might lead to less strain on the arm as a younger player. This may increase our career length on the back end. Who knows? I hope all those snowy and rainy days pay off!!
You've tended in the past to be a pitcher who's struggled with left-handed hitting. For fans who don't know as much about pitching, why do you tend to have so much more success getting right-handed hitters out.
That's a good question and one I am not sure I can fully answer. I believe a lot of it has to do with the simple fact that I walk more lefties and thus causing the overall at-bats against lefties to decrease. Also, right-handed batters are more common, and I have faced so many more over the years. I feel a little more comfortable with them.
The other night, you talked about not "staying on top" of your two-seam fastball. Again, for fans who aren't yet as familiar, tell us what that means.
Finger placement upon release. When fingers stay on top of the ball, it is easier to "power" down through the ball and attain some ball-action. When fingers are on the side of the ball, it can stay more flat and lose the desired movement. This philosophy is also applied to the slider and curveball. If fingers are on the side of breaking balls, they appear flat. We call those "cement-mixers"--pitches that spin but don't do anything.
You've also tended to be a pitcher who's had pretty strong flyball tendencies. Certainly back in RFK with its large dimensions that wasn't too much of a impediment to success, but in general it can lead to a lot of homers. Is that something you think about as a pitcher? And do you do things to try to develop more groundball stuff? Also, I can't remember ever reading that you threw a two-seamer before. Is that a new pitcher for you, or did I just miss that part of your repertoire?
Yeah, I just started primarily throwing a 2-seam "sinker" last month after being sent down. I had a long conversation with Steve McCatty and Spin Williams based upon how my extreme flyball pitcher status probably caused me to have a lot less success. Cat has tried to get me on a sinker for a while, but either through ignorance or ineffectiveness, I hadn't put full effort into it. I really try to throw it all the time--even in warm-up tosses to get the feel for it. I believe that I can change my extreme flyball status to average or groundball status. If able to do so I may have found an important tool to extending my career and success.
I've written on the blog many times that I think you've been treated somewhat unfairly by the team, getting yanked from the rotation and sent down to the minors several times after just one bad outing. You obviously aren't going to criticize your employer, and I don't want you to. But I wonder--do you think all the back and forth to AAA has affected your development as a pitcher?
I first want to point out that it flat out stinks getting sent down--under any circumstance.
I think that there are some instances where flip-flopping from starting and relieving helped a lot. Mostly the areas that were helped out were mental. The mindset starting versus relieving greatly differs, but I feel after doing both it just comes down to: pitching is pitching whether starting or relieving, balls over the plate are strikes, balls that are not are simply balls. That doesn't change from starting to relieving.
I would like to stay in one role and work on that as much as possible though.
Anyone who's met you or been around you knows what a nice guy you are. You spend time with fans and kids as much or more than anybody on the team, and always have. Is that something you learned from other veteran players, or is that just your personality?
I enjoy being around people and engaging them in conversation or helping them out along the way. I feel that I have a very outgoing personality and encourage kids and fans to ask questions about things they are uncertain or curious about. Any experiences I have had I like to share with people.
There are times when I forget that my job is a dream and that I take my place in peoples lives for granted. I come to the ballpark and absolutely love it, but it changes over the years from a long-shot to a reality--a reality with very hard work and little room for failure. I try to give back a little to the fans and the kids, whether it be a batting practice ball thrown into the stands or some field-stands interaction or especially a Q&A with an esteemed blogger!!
This year, the Nationals in spring training immediately declared you as a reliever, even though I think a lot of fans could see that you were performing as well or better than some of the starters who broke camp in the rotation and your performance in 2007 especially was outstanding as a starter. Do you see yourself as more of a starter or a reliever going forward?
As I said above, I am a pitcher. I have said this for a few years now. I want the ball. I have had success and failure. I get better with each. No one is perfect, but I want to be. In spring, I went up to Manny Acta and asked him what my role was going to be. I did this to not be confused and in order to apply myself to one role fully. I just want to pitch and pitch in the major leagues.
There are a lot of rumors about Manny Acta's job security right now. Tell us about your experiences with him as a manager.
Manny is quiet on the outside, but has a lot of fire and passion for the game. He is definitely a player's manager and treats everyone with respect. I'm not saying he is a pushover, just that he is fair.
How about Randy St. Clair? He was fired a couple weeks back as pitching coach, and for a long time he was the only MLB pitching coach you'd ever had.
Saint was indeed the very first pitching coach I had. Like I said before, he was a tireless worker who never gave up on anyone. I definitely believe another team will give him a shot once again to be a major league pitching coach. He deserved better than getting fired, but the bottom line is the pitching staff was not pitching well and that falls on the pitching coach.
Why do some pitchers jump over the first base or third base line on the way back to the dugout? I've always thought this was silly.
I have no idea. I walk or jog in and out never touching the lines, but certainly not hopping over it! I know everyone has their own superstitions and little idiosyncrasies and maybe that plays a part! I think the only little gimmick I have is always walking around the first base side of the mound. The third base side of the mound is like a foreign place for me!
If you could choose between pitching in the NL and getting to hit or pitching in the AL with the DH, which would you choose?
Either! Really they both have their ups and downs. Certainly the NL is more appealing because of the simple fact that there is another pitcher in the lineup instead of a designated hitter! The downside of the NL is of course being that pitcher and in tight games being pinch hit for. The AL allows you to go deeper into games based simply on the fact that no pinch hitter will be needed in the sixth to replace the pitcher. However, the DH brings an added offensive force that offsets it! Each league is fairly balanced though!
Red Sox President Larry Lucchino once famously called the Yankees the "evil empire" for outspending the opposition en route to championship after championship. With a fan base that carried itself with the self-important entitlement of a Hilton heir, the Yankees have forever been the team that all right-thinking fans loved to hate.
Today, Red Sox and the Yankees have melded into one axis of evil, each outspending the rest of the league and undermining the sense of fair competition.
(By the way, it's this sense that the game is rigged that really is the objectionable thing about all this. The appeal of sports is that it's a fair, honest competition, where the underdog can have his day and the big shots have to prove themselves day in and day out. By letting a few teams buy their way into contention every year, baseball feels corrupt and unfair. In other words, it's less fun.)
Sure, the Yankees at $201 million still spend significantly more than anyone else, but if you're a fan in Tampa or St. Paul or Pittsburgh, is it really that much more outrageous to see a team outspending you by three times rather than just double?
But here's the thing that really gets my goat about the Red Sox. Yankees fans know they're rooting for Darth Vader, Exxon-Mobil, and Ivan Drago all rolled into one. That's who they are, and they revel in it.
But when they lose, especially when they lose to the Nationals, they have to suffer all the embarrassment of losing despite their titanic advantages. The old saying goes--the bigger they are, the harder they fall. Well, the Yankees every year set themselves up for the biggest, hardest fall, and they take those lumps honestly.
Red Sox fans on the other hand try to have it both ways. They run their team like Darth Vader, but they still want you to believe they're Luke Skywalker. They act like they're still the sweet innocent white hat, and all the while they're stealing your lunch just like Darth Vader. (Sorry for the triple-mixed metaphors.)
So to all you DC-based Red Sox fans who will fill the stadium tonight--if you want to root for an underdog, it's time to don Nationals red. Otherwise, it's time to come clean. You're all Yankees fans now.
Check out the latest edition of "Natmosphere in your Ear."
This week Brian Oliver from Nationals Farm Authority joins me to discuss the draft.
The podcast is hosted at http://natmosphere.mypodcast.com, and you can listen there. Or, you can subscribe via I-Tunes, Google, and other podcatchers from that site (you won't find us yet at the I-Tunes store however).
If folks have comments on the podcast or ideas for future episodes, you can make them over on the podcast site. (And I'm still learning some of the tech side, so if anyone has a problem lemme know.)
Last season, after Wily Mo Painful collapsed and Manny Acta tried everyone else from Paul Lo Duca to Felipe Lopez to Rob Mackowiak to Kory Casto to Ryan Langerhans (oh yes, all these guys started in LF for the 2008 Scats), he finally handed Willie Harris the every day job on July 25.
Super Willie took the job and never looked back. With a .251 / .344 / .417 batting line in 424 plate appearances and a 30.8 UZR/150 in 562 innings in left field (meaning his fielding prevented runs at a rate of 30.8 per 150 games, compared to an average fielder), Harris led the team with 3.2 wins above replacement (WAR). Despite sitting for most of the first half of the season, he was tied with Pat Burrell for sixth among National League left-fielders in WAR.
This year, the 2008 HR total is looking like a fluke (his 13 homers last season were almost double his career total to that point), but his overall offense is almost as good at .228 / .350 / .386. And with regular playing time he can be expected to do even better.
And his real value of course is with the glove. He isn't quite as far above average in center as he is in left, and with a small sample size the advanced metrics are a little all over the place. Still, for his career he's a +2.3 UZR/150 CF, and much like the situation last year in left, average centerfield defense would be a godsend compared to the alternative.
As I discussed last week, Elijah Dukes has shown that he's every bit as bad in center as Lastings Milledge--he's sitting on a disastrous -23.7 UZR/150 for the year. But he's a career +11.3 UZR/150 right fielder.
Of course the cost of installing Willie in center and moving Dukes to right is that you have to send Willingham and his .246 / .378 / .516 bat to the bench. Based on his career numbers he's not going to hit that well for the rest of the season, but it's a big drop-off from Willingham's bat to Willie's.
Of course you also get Hammer's below average glove out of the line-up. He's a -4.7 UZR/150 LF for his career, and he'd never played RF at all until last week.
Let's try to quantify all these trade-offs. ZIPs expects Willingham to hit .255 / .357 / .463 for the rest of the season. Harris's projection is .254 / .342 / .386. Then, we gain a whopping 35 UZR/150 by moving Dukes from center to right and 7.0 UZR/150 by replacing Willingham's outfield defense with Harris's. Probably that's a little bit of an overestimate of the difference between Dukes's CF and RF defense, but it's also probably and underestimate of the difference between Willie and Hammer.
Punch all that into my wins above replacement calculator, and we find that the Harris/Dukes combo is worth 2.97 WAR over half a season, compared to just 1.91 for the Dukes/Willingham combo. That's more than one additional win over half a season--a significant improvement that most fans wouldn't expect to see from swapping Willingham for Harris.
Plus, all the gain is on the fielding side, and with our young pitchers coming in, we ought to be prioritizing helping them get outs.
And if all that doesn't convince you, watch this and this and this and this and this.
I know ESPN doesn't really distinguish between covering MLB and covering the Yankees and Red Sox, but even for a jaded Scats fan used to being laughed at and dismissed, this is startling.
Click here and scroll ahead to 9:10.
First Pascarelli says something incredibly idiotic, mixing up Garrett Olson and Scott Olsen. Then Karabell attempts to correct him, only to reveal his own total absence of awareness of a league outside the AL East by claiming that Scott Olsen plays for Florida. They also have producer who if you listen to this show you know corrects them when they (often) get basic facts about MLB wrong. But he didn't even bother.
What a bunch of incompetents.
Seriously, if you were a left-fielder and you were this terrible at your job, you wouldn't even be Wily No Painful. If you were a GM and you were this ill-informed you'd be almost as awful as Jim Bowden.
During our blogger night at the ballpark, I'm sure you imagine that there was all kinds of talk about the relative merits of VORP and wOBA other deep baseball esoterica.
There was indeed some of that. But one of the most heated debate points was over this: who's hotter? Ryan Zimmerman or Craig Stammen? And by "hot," I do not mean, "who's doing well lately." I mean attractive.
Now, far be it from me to question the judgment of the We've Got Heart ladies or Cheryl from Nationals News Network, but I'm sorry. Stammen is clearly the best-looking Nationals player. In fact, he may be the most attractive man in all of Major League Baseball.
I mean seriously, look at him. He could play the male lead in any Hollywood romantic comedy. Hell, put a wig on him and he could play the female lead.
But to resolve the issue, I put it to you. Who's our hottest hottie? And for all the straight dudes on the site, don't be insecure. In NatsTown, it's ok for a dude to appreciate a nice-looking dude.
Here's what I learned from Blogger Day:
- The media food sucks. I mean, I'm not saying it's bad like it could be better. It's a significant step down from the worst college dorm food I've ever eaten. And they charge $10 per meal. I know the reporters don't pay out of pocket, but jeez.
- Charlie Slowes's contract is up after the 2010 season, and it's never too early to start clamoring for extending the voice of the franchise.
- Manny Acta has a powerful presence in person that doesn't come across on TV. What might seem like placid lifelessness on TV is something else in person. I'm not going to say it's a smoldering intensity exactly, but it's different. Hard to explain, but it's real.
- Watching Elijah Dukes run into outs from a press box is no less infuriating than it is from section 401.
- They tried to be nice, but the players think we bloggers are incredible nerds. (They're right of course.)
- Chesapeake Bay Foundation donated a "green roof" on the building behind the left field seats. I don't think this is publicly denoted anywhere. (But Exxon-Mobil sponsors the 7th inning. I'm sure you didn't miss that.) Anyway, show some love and kick a few bucks to the Save the Bay people.
- Mike Rizzo is upgrading his wardrobe. Every time I've seen him before today he looked like he was the bass player in Jimmy Buffett's band. But today he had some pretty stylin' jeans and nice shoes.
- Stan says Manny's not in trouble. But he's not here to stay necessarily. But the team definitely isn't letting him twist in the wind.
- The 1990 Atlanta Braves should never have been a last place team.
- Adam Dunn doesn't know what a blog is. "Is it like Facebook?"
- There really is no cheering in the press box. Even on a walk-off.
- "When there's only 5,000 people in the stadium, and 4,000 of them are rooting for the other team, it makes a difference."--Dunn
Seriously, though, we bloggers spend a lot of time busting chops in the front office--Stan in particular. Because, the way I see it, it's basically Stan's job to stand there and take it on the chin when the team's losing almost 75% of its games. (It'll be his job to just stand there and take credit when they win too, so don't feel too bad for him.)
But this was a super-cool thing for the team to do. Totally unnecessary in my view, and I honestly appreciate it. Thanks, Stan.
In case you missed it, like I did, former Scats reliever Steven Shell was demoted last Friday to the Class AA West Tennessee Diamond Jaxx (by the way, why does Seattle have a AA team in West Tennessee? Hell of a flight for FO guys).
Shell posted an impressive 2.16 ERA in 50 innings last year, but his 4.11 fielding independent ERA and .225 BABIP suggested more than a little luck was going on.
When the flyball pitcher-loathing Rizzo took over, the writing was on the wall for the righty with the 46.3% flyball rate. After only 5 innings and 3 earned runs, Shell was gone. It was probably the one move Rizzo made that's been most questioned, since Shell got such good results last year, and Rizzo pulled the plug so fast.
After being DFA-ed and refusing a minor league assignment, Shell signed with the Mariners and was assigned to AAA Tacoma. There, he gave up 12 earned runs, 20 hits, and 6 walks in 13.2 innings. Now he's playing in Jackson, TN, which is a hell of a long way from anywhere.
Seems like maybe Rizzo knew something those who panned the move maybe didn't?
The team is very graciously having bloggers to the stadium tomorrow and allowing us some time to chat with Stan, Manny, and Rizz. If you have any questions you want me to ask put them in the comments (but I'm not gonna be inappropriate, so hold the "Manny, why are you an idiot?" type questions).
Maybe more like a stink bomb, but still. Check out the crazy conspiracy stuff Boz put out there yesterday on the Manny Acta strory:
IMO, it's pretty clear now that the Manny's Job story was a rumor that somebody managed to get into the 24-hour loop. And, of course, once there, it doesn't go away. The leading rumor about the rumor -- and don't disproved rumors deserve to have their own rumors? -- is that Bowden was behind it in some way. Or Boras. Or Omar Minaya! Theory 1: Bowden may have felt that during the Dominican issues in February that Manny's connections worked against him, not for him. So, he got caught in the rumor mill and "resigned" in part because "the story wouldn't die." So, turns about is ... 2. Boras. Everything that upsets Natsville until August 17th with be attributed to him. I don't buy it, but.. 3. (You'll love this.) The Mets GM still wants Manny as his manager at some point, so why not help him out of the job now.
Discuss amongst yourselves.
"Fans" of Jim Bowden, such as there were, would invariably praise his ability to find diamonds in the rough. In Cincinnati, he got Pete Schourek on waivers, and he finished second in the Cy Young voting in 1995. He took a flier on damaged goods Ron Gant in 1995 and got an all-star season out of him. Same deal a year later with Eric Davis.
Here in DC, Jim's scrap heap finds were a little less charmed. Instead of all-stars and Cy Young candidates, we got Tim Redding and Odalis Perez. Technically Dmitri Young appeared in an all-star game, but only because no one else was any good on Bowden's third team in DC. Still, with few resources he found a few guys here and there who were worth the time.
Since Mike Rizzo's taken over, he's had more than a fair chance to show his own dumpster-diving skills, having inherited a disastrous roster--especially the bullshitpen.
So how's he doing? Pretty good, I'd say. Here are the tRA* numbers (subtract 0.40 and think of this as "deserved ERA") on the Rizzo scraps:
Kip Wells: 4.51
Mike MacDougal: 4.37
Ron Villone: 4.51
Julian Tavarez: 3.97
Logan Kensing: 7.31
OK, so Kensing was a bit of a clunker, although he has a respectable 4.16 tRA* going in AAA. And it's not like any of these guys are going to make people forget about Jim's legendary waiver-wire home runs during his salad days in Cincy.
Still, grabbing 4 out of 5 above replacement-level guys for basically nothing ain't easy. The sample sizes are small, but so far Rizzo's showing a bit of a nose for free talent.
Now that it appears Manny Acta is probably not on his way out at least for the moment, I figure it's fair game to start nit-picking his moves again.
Sunday we saw one of the more inexplicable Manny decisions of the season. Facing the Rays in Tampa for a day game following a night game, Manny decided to start an outfield left-to-right of Adam Dunn, Elijah Dukes, and Corey Patterson.
Dukes, as we saw in brutal fashion last night, is a pretty terrible centerfielder. On the season, he's a -19.2 UZR/150 centerfielder, meaning that over the course of a full season his defense would allow 19.2 runs more than an average centerfielder. That'd make him the fifth worst fielder at any position in all of baseball (and basically no better or worse than Lastings Milledge). For his career, he's even worse: -24.6.
In right, on the other hand, Dukes is quite a good rightfielder, posting a +10.7 UZR/150 for his career. In other words, moving Dukes from right to center costs you at least 30 runs over the course of a season.
Patterson isn't the defensive whiz that he was earlier in his career. UZR has him as essentially an average centerfielder over the last two seasons in Baltimore and Cincy.
On the other hand, before Sunday, he'd made one appearance in right field ever. Ever. So we really have no idea whether he's a good or bad right fielder, but his arm is just ok for a centerfielder and is probably below-average in right. Though his range would certainly be above average there. Factor in the unfamiliarity with the position, and let's assume it's a wash and he's an average right.
What that means is that this one decision, extended over the course of a full season, would cost the team a net 30 runs, which is nearly 3 whole wins. It's uncommon for all the in-game decisions a manager makes all year to add up to three full wins or losses, so this is a huge difference. And a mind-numbingly bad one. It's really very hard to imagine what Manny was thinking here.
It's an all-time low for fan optimism in ScatsTown. Just 33% say the team is headed in the right direction. It's not quite down to Bush administration second-term levels of historic, apocalyptic, suicidal hopelessness, but it's getting there.
A new poll is up and will be live till mid-July.
With tonight's really, truly embarrassingly awful loss to the Yankees (chrissake can't anybody play this game??), the Nationals now have a .258 winning percentage. That puts us on pace for the 7th worst record in the 140-year history of Major League Baseball.
By the end of this series in the Bronx, we could reach #4, tied with the 1962 New York Mets. By the end of interleague play, we could catch the 1916 Philadelphia A's, the second-worst team ever.
Thankfully, we'd still be several weeks of non-stop losing before we catch the worst team ever, the 1899 Cleveland Spiders. Oh, thank god for the Spiders.
Today I'm super-psyched to announce the launch of a brand new podcast, the "Natmosphere in your Ear."
In the inaugural episode Brian Oliver from Nationals Farm Authority joins me to discuss the future (or non-future) of Nationals manager Manny Acta. Brian as usual had some great insights, and it was a really fun conversation that hopefully you all will enjoy as well.
The podcast is hosted at http://natmosphere.mypodcast.com, and you can listen there. Or, you can subscribe via I-Tunes, Google, and other podcatchers from that site (you won't find us yet at the I-Tunes store however).
If folks have comments on the podcast or ideas for future episodes, you can make them over on the podcast site. (And I'm still learning some of the tech side, so if anyone has a problem lemme know.)
The Scats signed Horacio Ramirez to a minor league contract and assigned him to Triple-A Syracuse. Ramirez was designated for assignment by the Royals earlier this month after posting a 5.96 ERA in 19 appearances.
He's a classic Rizzo dumpster-dive. The lefty has a 49.4% career groundball rate, but he stinks. He can't miss bats at all, and he doesn't get lefties out any better than he does righties.
Mostly, this is barely worth a post. But still, something about grabbing a Royals cast-off feels like one of those moments that marks a new low. Like when we gave up a homer to Joe Thurston.
Word is that Manny's in his final hours as manager of the Washington Nationals. It's a perfectly understandable move for a team working on one of the worst two-year runs in baseball history. Something has to be done to shake things up, and it's hard to imagine any manager being able to suffer this much losing and not lose the confidence of the team.
But let's be clear: Manny could be the best manager humanity's ever known, and the Nationals would still be awful. I've criticized plenty of Manny's decisions over the years.
On the day it was reported that he would be fired, he once again cost the Nationals any chance at victory with his absurdly quick hook, pulling Jordan Zimmermann after just five innings in which he threw 92 pitches and allowed just four hits, one run, and two walks against six strikeouts. Boy, I'm tired of that.
Still, Manny really never had a chance.
The most unfortunate thing to me isn't just that Manny's never had a good team--he's never had a young team. Remember, that was the whole idea hiring him in the first place. Manny had a ton of experience in the minors as a player, scout, coach, and manager. He's still just 40 and can relate easily to young players from various backgrounds.
Yeah, he's had the occasional Milledge, Flores, Dukes, or Lannan. This year the rotation's gotten suddenly very young, very fast. But for most of his time here, he's written line-up cards full of names like Belliard, Kearns, Harris, Lo Duca, Lopez, Guzman and Young.
It's just another sign of the team's schizophrenic dysfunction that while building a coaching staff designed to help young players crack into the majors, they built rosters full of fading veterans and journeymen.
One other thing that's bothering me. Like they did with Jim Bowden when he was pushed out, the team is letting Manny twist in the wind with reports in the media that he's about to be fired. Why do they do this? Just fire Manny and get it over with.
Once Stan Kasten doesn't deny the report that the firing is imminent, what are they waiting for? This kind of indecisiveness is just bad for morale and makes management look every bit as incompetent as the team's performance on the field.
I wish Manny good luck. Whatever his next job is, it can't be worse.
Nick Johnson Friday night dropped an easy pop foul that would have ended the eighth inning with the Nationals tied against the Rays 3-3. On the next pitch Ron Villone gave up the game-winning homer to Gabe Kapler.
In the Post gamer today, Chico Harlan laments the irony that Johnson, the team's "best fielder," would commit the error that cost the team yet another loss.
But Nick Johnson has been anything but our best fielder this year. Let's start with the basic, pre-millennial stats. Nick going into tonight's game was tied for absolute dead last in MLB first-basemen with a .989 fielding percentage.
Tonight, he committed another error in the first inning, giving him seven on the season, more than any batting title-qualified first-baseman in baseball.
For context, Dmitri Young in 2007 had just 10 errors all year and finished with a .990 fielding percentage. Ouch.
Let's look at the more advanced metrics. Johnson's Ultimate Zone Rating is -3.7, meaning that he's allowed 3.7 more runs than the average fielder would allow in the same playing time this season. He's on pace to allow 9.1 runs more than average for the season (measured by UZR/150). Only Prince Fielder's -9.7 and Justin Morneaus's -12.8 UZR/150 is worse.
UZR finds that although his errors have hurt, his range has been worse. UZR breaks out a first-baseman's defensive contributions by range, errors, and double plays turned. While Nick is at -0.9 runs for the year because of his errors, he's at -2.9 for his range.
What's going on? It's true that Johnson was a good fielder in the past. Even with this season included he's a +4.9 UZR fielder for his career. He hasn't had a below average year since 2003, when he was still in New York.
Some of it I'm sure is rust from the nearly two full seasons lost to injury since his disastrous collision with Austin Kearns in September 2006. But it may also be a loss of athleticism, as the injuries have accumulated and he's just gotten older. He might also be a little gunshy going back on balls since that injury. The pop fly in Tampa is one of a number similar plays I seem to remember this year, where he had an easy play on the ball in foul territory and just lost it. Is he afraid of the wall? Or another collision?
Who knows, but we're past the point where this can be written off as small sample size or a slump. Nick's playing a terrible first base, and it's giving back far too much of the value he offers at the plate.
From Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus:
With the draft comes never ending radio hits, many of the surprise variety when they call and want you on right then and there. When one talks about the draft on the radio with a national perspective, nearly all of the discussion revolves around Stephen Strasburg, and now that he’s been selected, all of the talk revolves around money. I’m sticking with my prediction of a $8-10 million bonus as part of a total package worth $20-30 million, and when I bring that up, hosts, listeners and others tend to just absolutely lose their mind, as if that’s the most insane thing they’ve ever heard. Yes, it’s two or three times the biggest bonus in draft history, but something changed in my mind yesterday about how much that really is, when taken into context.
Just so you know, I don’t really do other sports, especially football. I can name maybe 20 NFL players. I watch the Super Bowl, mostly for the ads, I couldn’t name the last three Super Bowl winners if my life depended on it, and I have no idea who this year’s National Champion was. But I’m watching baseball highlights on ESPN the other day and on the ticker at the bottom, it flashes that the New York Jets have signed their first-round pick to a $50 million deal, of which $28 million is guaranteed. Talking to somebody who follows the game, I learn that this guy is not the first pick in the draft, or even the first guy at his position selected this year, yet anything close to anything someone would describe as historical.
And yet, nobody blinks an eye.
Look, let’s say something weird happened over the next 72 hours, and Strasburg was found to be not a U.S. citizen but from Sweden or something, and therefore an international player and a free agent. Start the bidding . . . where do you think it ends? If you’re below $100 million, you’re nuts. What he’ll eventually sign for is a ton of money in relation to previous draft bonuses ONLY. In reality, it’s a bargain, in terms of both baseball itself and in relation to what incoming talent costs in other sports.
Sometimes the truth just sneaks up on you. From Chico Harlan's interview with Manny today:
What was your take on Josh Willingham in right field?
I thought he did well. He had some good at bats.
Recently, the excellent stats-oriented baseball site Fangraphs added a feature to its player pages: pitch type values. With this cool new stat, we can see exactly who on the team has the best fastball, curveball, slider, etc.
Using data from Baseball Info Solutions, they break out every pitcher's pitches by type (fastball, slider, etc.), sum the outcomes of each pitch thrown, and count the total runs allowed above and below average by pitch type. A fastball of perfectly average effectiveness rates a 0.00 pitch value. An above average fastball would result in fewer runs allowed, however, and pitch type values tell us exactly how many runs that pitch is worth. The stat is calculated both as a counting stat--total runs allowed for the season--and as a rate stat--average runs allowed per 100 pitches thrown.
I will caution that there's some real potential for small sample size errors here. And the BIS data on pitch types isn't perfect--change-ups and fastballs get mixed up, as do sliders and curves. Still, it's pretty good data,
So enough of the sausage-making. Who's got the best stuff on the staff?
Among current Nationals, the best fastball belongs to that fireballer Ron Villone, at 3.34 runs above average per 100 pitches (R/100). Just goes to show what location can do. Scott Olsen has the worst fastball at -3.24 R/100. Among starters, only Shairon Martis has an above-average fastball at +0.11 R/100.
Looking at breaking pitches, Ross Detwiler's Uncle Charlie is the best pitch in the rotation at 4.50 R/100. Jordan Zimmerman's slider is the second best at 1.57 R/100. Martis's curve is a terrible -6.35 R/100, and Zimmermann's isn't very good either, at -1.33.
Zimmermann also has the best change-up, at 3.11 R/100, followed by Lannan's at 1.53. Detwiler's change-up is a disastrous -8.69 R/100--that's the pitch that he needs to work on at AAA.
Again, take all this with a large dose of small sample size salt, but I'll be interested to see how these numbers evolve over the season.
On the first day of the draft, the Nationals made the choice that everyone knew they'd make with the top pick, and then appear to have gone right for signability picks down the line.
At #10, they took Stanford closer Drew Storen. The pick isn't a huge reach, but relief pitchers have limited value and therefore limited upside. Storen would be foolish to try to drive a hard bargain on the signing bonus. His best bet is clearly to get to DC fast and start that arb clock ticking.
At #50, they took UC-Berkeley second baseman Jeffery Kobernus. We're told he's a solid defender without overwhelming tools or a particularly big bat. He's compared to Mark Grudzielanek. Again, not a huge reach, but a safe pick, and with limited upside one would think he's an easy signing. He also fills a short-term need and has a chance to start his arbritration clock soon.
Finally, at #81, the Nationals took University of Georgia righty Trevor Holder. Baseball America expected him to last much longer, and he's projected at best as an innings-eating mid-rotation guy, if that. This is the pick that is getting panned as a pure reach.
Let me be clear that I'm no scout. I haven't seen any of these guys, and even if I had, I sure as shootin' know that I'm in no position to match scouting chops with Mike Rizzo and Dana Brown (Bowden, maybe).
The argument against these picks is that, if the blurbs on MLB.com and Baseball America are right, these guys just don't have much upside. They're fungible. Aside from the rare really special closer, relief pitchers aren't that hard to come by. Middling hitters who can turn a double play at the keystone are a dime-a-dozen. Ditto, innings eating righties. Why bother drafting the next Mark Grudzielanek and Braden Looper when you can get the original versions cheaply with less risk anytime?
All that said, if the Lerners told Rizzo, "look, you can spend what it takes to get Strasburg, but we don't want to hear a sales pitch on anyone else," then I appreciate that at least the team seems on the same page.
Last year, you had an owner committed to signing for slot and little more with the top pick, and Dana Brown took a known signability risk. The team could have (and I believe would have) taken Justin Smoak at #9 last year if it had been clear up and down the organization that the bonus for #1 was capped at $3.3 million.
One other thing, there was a little part of me that thought the Nationals might just do the unmentionable and pass on Strasburg in the end, so there was a little bit of relief there.
Still, I'm now to the point where I consider it a 50-50 proposition at best whether they get him signed. Stan Kasten's statement in GQ reminds everyone that Kasten is at least as focused on making a statement about the "system" as helping the Nationals win:
We know what #1 picks get; we expect to sign our guy. The system isn’t going to change for any one circumstance, for any one situation. We know how players get drafted, how they get paid, how long it takes them to develop, what steps are necessary.
A year ago at this time, I would have dismissed such talk as mere posturing, a distasteful but probably inevitable public negotiating tactic. After the Aaron Crow experience, I asked Kasten directly (phrasing the question about 5 different ways) why he would do something that clearly hurts his team on the field and also from a business perspective. He never denied that his refusal to sign Crow over a few hundred thousand dollars hurt the Nationals. His argument has always been about protecting the system and the power of the owners over the players.
So I expect the team to engage in the Strasburg negotiation with the same mixed motivations: sure, they want to help the Nationals win, but they also want to make a point about the need for a hard cap on salaries and draft bonuses. Which do they care about more? We'll see.
The last week saw the beginning of what will undoubtedly be several weeks of heated discourse about the economics of Major League Baseball. People will say the Lerners are cheap, and probably far more people will say that Stephen Strasburg is greedy and almost everyone will say that Scott Boras is evil.
To try to make this conversation as informative and informed as possible, I thought it would be worth presenting some basic facts about the economics of the baseball draft.
1. Drafted players have very, very little negotiating leverage.
A drafted player can only negotiate with one team, and the player must either accept whatever the team offers him or wait a year, risking injury and sacrificing a year of prime earning, to take his chances on the same rigged system the next year. The reason it's so rare for a draft pick to go unsigned is because the players have so few options.
2. Players would make more money in a free market. Some, a lot more.
If draftees were allowed to peddle their services to the employers (read: teams) of their choice, they would make far more money. Those at the top of the draft would earn many times more money. Daisuke Matsuzaka's contract gives us some idea of the market value of a very highly touted prospect. The Red Sox spent $103.11 ($51.11 million posting fee, plus a six-year, $52 million contract) to get him as a 26-year-old rookie free agent out of Japan. There's no cheaper way to acquire premium talent than the draft.
3. Teams can pay players whatever they want for three full MLB seasons after they are drafted.
The major league minimum is about $400,000. Minor league players make much less than that. Therefore, whatever draft bonus a player gets, it's fair to assume that it'll be at least 4-5 years before he sees any more big money. In the case of high school players, it could be more like 7-8 years or more to arbitration. If a player gets hurt during that time, they're SOL. So when a player gets a signing bonus of $X million, think of that as a salary spread over 4-8 years, and it won't seem like quite so much.
4. MLB player salaries account for a little more than half of the total revenue in baseball.
Personally, I think that sounds like a perfectly reasonable share of the spoils. Prior to free agency, player salaries were only about 25%-30% of league revenue, depending on the year. Those who believe the players should earn less should explain why they think the owners deserve more. In a rigged monopoly where they face no risk whatsoever, what value do they add? Investors in a free market face risk. In baseball, fat cats angle for the opportunity to invest, because big profits are a lead pipe cinch.
5. The player's union doesn't represent amateur draftees.
In fact, the interests of current players are in conflict with draftees. At some level, player salaries are zero sum. If draftees get bigger bonuses, there's less money left for the current players represented by the union.
6. Players are entitled to competent representation.
If you go to court, you hire a lawyer. If you're going to invest in the stock market, it's a good idea to get a broker to advise you. If you're selling or buying a house, you probably are going to hire a realtor. Likewise, if you were drafted by a major league baseball team, you'd get an agent. And if you want to hire a hardball badass, that's your prerogative as well.
7. Scott Boras is good at his job.
Jerry Reinsdorf and Bud Selig got caught colluding illegally to rig the free agent market, cheating the players out of $280 million. Scouts have been caught stealing thousands from young Dominicans and teams by skimming bonuses. Scott Boras has never even been accused of anything like this. He's guilty of nothing more than representing his clients effectively, which of course is what he's paid to do.
8. Potenial has value.
You hear all the time during draft time that it's ridiculous that so-and-so wants so much money when he hasn't even played a single inning. This is a particularly uninformed rant. In every market in our economy, potential has value, often a lot of value. If I think, based on geological formations, that there's oil under your land, then your land will be worth more. There are entire markets--futures markets--all about betting on the future value of commodities.
9. The slot system was unilaterally imposed by owners and has never been supported by the players--neither the pros nor the amateurs.
If the owners got together and decided that all free agents would get one year deals worth $5 million, no more, that'd be collusion. Similar coordination with amateur draftees is called the "slot system."
10. Teams that refuse to pay for premium talent in the draft do so at their own risk.
Daniel Moskos over Matt Wieters. Matt Bush over Justin Verlander. Brian Bullington over B.J. Upton. Almost every year brings another cautionary tale. Good players cost a little more. Bad teams don't pay.
There's been a lot of talk since Randy St. Claire was replaced by Steve McCatty as pitching coach about the "good old days" when teams didn't worry about pitch counts and pitchers expected to go nine every time out.
Rob Dibble in particular has been vocal about how pitchers today are babied and waxing nostalgic about the 1980 Oakland A's starting rotation of McCatty, Matt Keough, Mike Norris, Rick Langford and Brian Kingman. They were five young stars, and together they graced the cover of Sports Illustrated on April 27, 1981 with a headline, "The Amazing A's and their Five Aces."
Here are the ages and key stats for the five in 1980:
- McCatty (26): 221.6 IP, 3.38 ERA
- Norris (25): 284.3 IP, 2.54 ERA
- Langford (28): 290 IP, 3.26 ERA
- Keough (24): 250 IP, 2.92 ERA
- Kingman (25): 211.3 IP, 3.83 ERA
Together, the groups pitched 94 complete games that year. Four times, an A's starter pitched a 14-inning complete game. Langford started one game that season on two days rest and at one point threw 22 complete games in a row. Norris said of manager Billy Martin, "He made you feel as if you had feminine tendencies if you wanted to come out."
To listen to Dibble, you'd think this was all just the way it should be, and that McCatty will hopefully lead the team to a throwback era where men were men and pitchers finished what they started.
Well, if you've been paying any attention to the last 40 years of sports medicine, you know where this is going. All five of the A's aces were done as effective major league pitchers within three years of that SI cover.
Norris declined for two seasons, had shoulder surgery after the 1983 season, and, but for a brief comeback at age 35 in 1990, he was done at age 28.
Langford pitched through pain (not very well) in 1982, had elbow surgery in 1983, and was done as a starting pitcher at age 30.
Keough started feeling shoulder pain in May of 1981 when he slipped on a wet mound in the middle of his throwing motion. He gutted out that season, but his ERA jumped to 5.72 in '82, and he was out of baseball at age 30.
Kingman didn't get hurt, but Martin, showing that he was as dumb about stats as he was about pitcher health, blamed Kingman for losing 20 games in 1981. He had a 3.83 ERA that year but got a minuscule 2.87 runs per game of support, and, of course, Martin made him pitch deep into every game, so he always got the decision. He apparently didn't get along with Martin (can't imagine why) and eventually got himself sent to the minors and then traded. He was out of baseball at age 29.
For McCatty, the shoulder pain started in '82. Here's how he described it to SI in 1983: "Nineteen eighty-two and-three were the most miserable years I've ever been a part of. I pitched when it felt like my arm was going to come right out of the socket. I'd have tears in my eyes, and in my mind I'd say to the guy at the plate, 'Hit this one, for God's sake, so I don't have to throw another.'" Still, he pitched. The injuries eroded his effectiveness quickly, and he was out of baseball by 1986 at age 31.
Now, it's certainly possible and in fact likely that none of this reflects on McCatty the pitching coach. When it comes to pitcher abuse, he played in the dark ages, and we've come a long way. If anything, I would guess his experience taught him just how dangerous it can be to pitch tired.
But when you hear Dibble and others complain about how wimpy pitchers are and how big player salaries have made teams too cautious, remember Oakland's amazing five aces. Talent is a terrible thing to waste, and I for one am glad that those "good old days" are long gone.
As they say, stuff rolls downhill.
The Nationals are the worst organization in the majors because of dyfunctional management starting with Mark Lerner, Stan Kasten, and Jim Bowden. But when things get ugly, it's the middle relievers, bench coaches, and now Randy St. Claire who take the fall.
Remember, Bowden was never fired. He was allowed to resign, with a teary-eyed speech about how he's about the name on the front of the jersey, not the back. And that was after four-plus years of some of the worst GM-ing the world's ever seen.
The Nationals aren't the first organization where accoutability functioned in inverse proportion to authority. Legions of GM workers got their walking papers before Rick Wagoner finally had to face the music. Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld signed off on torture and invaded Iraq without a plan, and it's Lynndie England who takes the fall.
Of course, it doesn't have to be this way. There are healthy, functioning organizations out there where the buck stops at the top in a meaningful way. Scapegoating down is often a sign of a poorly run operation, and the Nationals have it down cold.
After all, if you were going to lay the blame at one person's feet, who would it be? Kasten? Well, he didn't want Bowden in the first place, so you can't hardly blame him for the mess he wrought. Rizzo? Dude just got here. Bowden? Yeah, that's clearly the person I think is most at fault, but even he didn't get to hire his own people. Rizzo was imposed on him, he inherited Dana Brown, and he didn't have Kasten's support.
And of course, Manny inherited St. Claire. Bowden kept him on. Would Acta have picked him if he'd had a chance to hire his own coaches? Who knows? And then yesterday we were told that Rizzo fired St. Claire, not Manny.
The only solution here is to clean house. Put someone in charge of everything, and get out of the way. Either that's Stan or someone else (you can't fire an owner, but he could lose his management authority if Lerner wanted him out). Then that person hires a GM (permanent), who hires a manager, who hires coaches. And then you'll at least know who's in charge of what, and whom to fire when firing time comes.
After yesterday's incredibly negative rant about the Nationals we despise most, I'm taking up commenter Will's challenge to rank the top 5 Nationals I'm enjoying most despite this lost season. And since I'm such a positive spirit, I'll give you six. (Sadly, Jason Bergmann didn't quite make the cut.)
6. Jesus Flores
The sample size is still a bit small, but with 103 plate appearances in the book, Flores has dramatically improved his approach at the plate. And boy did he need it. After a solid start to the season last year, he went into a prolonged skid, hitting .232 / .262 / .354 after June 1. It seemed that perhaps his development might never recover from the full year he spent in the majors in 2006 after he was taken by the Nationals in the rule 5 draft and then being pressed into service again in 2007 when Paul Lo Duca and Johnny Estrada both failed.
This year, his walk rate has more than doubled from 4.7% to 10.9%. His BABIP is an unsustainable .400, but with a .311 / .382 / .522 line, he can have a lot of regression and still be a solid offensive catcher. For a guy who looked totally overmatched a year ago, that's great news for Nationals fans.
5. Adam Dunn
I'm sure Big Donkey would rate higher on many people's list, but I just personally care too much about fielding to feel all that much love for the big galoot. Still, he's got himself 16 dingers, 39 walks, and an OBP just below .400. Beats the heck out of Wily Mo Painful.
4. Jordan Zimmermann
Forget the ERA over 6. He's got the league's worst defense behind him, leading to a very high .362 BABIP and low 65.4% strand rate. He's whiffing 9.20 per 9 and walking just 2.74. He's still getting too much of the plate with has fastball and curve, and he probably could stand to occasionally throw a fewer strikes and make guys chase a little. Regardless, his fielding independent ERA of 4.21 tells the real story. Flash Jordan is doing just fine in his first tour through the bigs.
3. Ross Detwiler
Detwiler ranks above Zimmermann only because he's been a bigger surprise. A year ago at this time, he was walking over 5 batters per 9 in A ball. Now, he's got 15 innings under his belt with a strikeout to walk ratio of 2.40 and a fielding independent ERA of 3.63. With his big, mid-90s fastball and slow bender, the lefty is showing why he was such a high pick in the first place. He's got plenty to work on at AAA, but given where we were with this guy just a couple months ago who could complain? The only problem I've had is that I can't decide whether we call him Rottwiler, or Rosswiler or Ross Rottweiler or what.
2. Nick Johnson
Nothing is more frustrating to me as a Nationals fan than listening to the legions of fans dumping on our best player because of his bad luck with injuries, as if it's somehow his fault. His power still hasn't quite fully shown up yet and his defense hasn't been what we've come to expect, but he's fifth in MLB with a .436 OBP. We're so much better with him in the line-up. It's too bad the team seems to have decided that he has no future here. Till we trade him for some fungible middle reliever, I'm going to cherish every last take.
1. Ryan Zimmerman
Who'd you expect, Wil Nieves? Zimmerman's officially taken the leap, and what a leap it is. He's raking to the tune of .319 / .386 / .546, and he turns in a fielding gem almost every game. And, miracle of miracles, we resigned him long term. (I didn't dream that, did I?)
Distinguished Senators had a post yesterday which kicks off what I think will be an emerging narrative over the coming months and possibly years. Will Nationals fans, many of whom for several decades migrated north to root for the Orioles, start to drift back to Birdland?
Baltimore is generating a lot of buzz these days with an exciting core of young stars led by Adam Jones, Matt Wieters, and Nick Markakis, and a rising posse of impressive pitching talent including Chris Tillman, Brian Matusz, and Jake Arrieta. Building around solid veterans like Brian Roberts and Jeremy Guthrie, it's not terribly difficult to imagine this Orioles team emerging as a contender in the tough AL East in the next couple years.
The Orioles have essentially done what the Nationals have only talked about. They got Wieters and Arrieta by investing in the draft and paying premium bonuses for premium players who slipped because of signability. They got Jones, Tillman, and a whole bunch of other useful parts by flipping declining veterans while they still had significant value. They got Koji Uehara by spending internationally. They executed "The Plan."
If the Orioles do make the leap into contention, is there anything the Nationals can do, short of fielding a true contender of their own, to keep NatsTown from becoming a complete ghost town? Would anyone, even the obsessives, really keep spending time and money on a mostly hopeless Nationals team if the Orioles are in the playoffs?
And if you assume that the Nationals are at the very most optimistic 2-3 years away from fielding a contender, what will it do to those plans if in the meantime season tickets fall under 10,000 (or 8,000? 5,000? how low could it go? we may find out...). It's a brutal downward cycle.
This is not a post dedicated to detailed statistical analysis. This is a rant. This is my list of the absolute worst players on this miserable team.
Now, I could use metrics like wins above replacement or win shares or VORP to tell us who are the worst players on this historically awful excuse for a baseball team. But no, in this post I'm following my gut to create my list, as a fan, of the players I most hate to look at in a Washington Nationals uniform.
Let the countdown begin:
5. Cristian Guzman
Yeah, yeah, he was our affirmative action all-star last year, and he hits over .300. Whatever. Three walks in 169 plate appearances is mind-blowingly dumb baseball, and he brings so little power that his overall offensive production is below average at best. His fielding range has been in steep decline, and he's now reached nearly Vidro-esque levels of immobility. Even floating on a ridiculous .377 BABIP, he's barely better than replacement. And, this is a guy who will by the end of next year have been paid $32 million dollars by this team, more than any other player in Nationals history and 45 times more than the difference between Aaron Crow's final offer and the team's. And we gave up a draft pick to sign him back in 2004, a pick that became Brian Duensing, who's looking like another serviceable (if totally vanilla) Minnesota pitcher. Cristian Guzman stinks.
4. Dmitri Young
For the love of Pete, what on earth is that whale still doing on a major league roster? You know he's still getting $5 million a year from this team? Even in his one affirmative action all-star season, he gave back nearly half his value at the plate with his trained black bear-like agility at first base. Remember when we thought he was going to be the team leader who would help coach young guys like Elijah Dukes? What a joke. Arguably the worst single example of delusional excess of the ex-Red-loving, DH-stock-piling Bowden years.
3. Julian Tavarez
I'm keeping it to one relief pitcher only, and it's Tavarez. Like most of our bullsh*tpen, he can't find the strikezone with a map, he's slow on the mound, and he gives up runs by the bushel. He's also a jerk. No beer goggles can make this guy watchable.
2. Scott Olsen
I've gone on at length about Olsen, so I'll just hit the high points. When he's not getting decked by teammates, tasered by cops, or lighting up a cigarette in the clubhouse, all he does is get rocked.
1. Anderson Hernandez
Given that we gave up next to nothing of value to get him and his near league-minimum salary, it's taken some doing for ol' AHern to earn his way into this position. He can't hit, but he bats lead-off. He was supposed to be a good fielder, but he's constantly in brain lock, whether he's forgetting to cover second base on a steal, forgetting to cover first on a bunt, covering first but letting the throw sail past him inexplicably, failing to even attempt a throw on a critical double play, booting a lazy roller... all plays that cost the team runs. On a team of bad news bears, Anderson Hernandez is the baddest news of them all.
