Games: Cleveland Indians, April 26: Judging the Royals with Lee Judge

Games » Cleveland Indians

Apr26

A winning streak

Before this game, pitching coach Dave Eiland asked Luis Mendoza what had changed since spring training. Luis pitched as well or better than anyone in Surprise, but has pitched poorly since breaking camp. Luis said he thought he had to be better to compete during a big league season. The result has been being “too fine” — trying to make perfect pitches on the corners. Dave Eiland told Luis to trust his stuff, pound the zone with low strikes and let hitters get themselves out.

Either Dave Eiland reads this site or I’ve been listening to a lot of pitching coaches for the past 20 years. (If I were you, I’d go with option No. 2.)

The top of the 5th

The count’s 3-0, Mike Moustakas is on third, Brayan Pena‘s on first and Mitch Maier‘s at the plate. Mitch swings at the 3-0 pitch and fouls it off. So what’s up with all the 3-0 green lights? Could be several answers: the 3-0 green light can be used to get a struggling hitter going. Let him take a whack at a “cookie” (fastball down the middle) and see if that jump-starts him.

It can be used with a hot hitter at the plate and runners in scoring position. The Royals had already scored three in the inning and Yost might’ve been trying to put the dagger in.

And it can be used when you’d rather the man at the plate didn’t walk. (Sorry, I know that concept just gave a gaggle of metric fans a heart attack, but it’s why pitchers “work around” hitters — the next guy has worse odds.) If the man on-deck is not going to be replaced by a pinch-hitter and the manager doesn’t like his chances of driving in a run, the manager may try to get his hot hitter a crack at a middle-middle fastball. I’ve got no clue what Ned thought of Alcides Ecobar’s chances (he struck out), but having the man at the plate put the ball in play is sometimes the better option.

The bottom of the 6th and 7th innings

Tim Collins comes in to pitch with nobody out, the bases loaded and the tying run on first base. The winning run is at the plate, represented by Travis Hafner. If Hafner hits a bomb, the Indians are ahead. Hafner is probably looking for a fastball, so Collins throws him one — at 89 MPH. Hafner swings through it and goes on to fly out. This subtle “adding and subtracting” of a few miles an hour is another way pitchers keep hitters off balance.

Collins throws two innings and pitches well. One inherited runner scores, he also gives up one hit, but retires every right-handed hitter he’s allowed to face. With the game on the line, if Tim had given up a three-run home run to Shelley Duncan — the hitter following Hafner — armchair managers would have gone ballistic over the managing incompetence of Ned Yost: “Why didn’t he bring in a right-handed reliever to face the right-handed hitter?”

Armchair managers would have said that because it’s one of the few things they know about pitching: most of the time, right-handers get right-handed hitters out at a higher rate. I do not know what Ned was thinking when he left Collins in the game — matchup numbers, wind, the ball not carrying on a foggy day — stuff like that gets factored in. But I can tell that in 20 years of talking to ballplayers, coaches and managers after a game, they knew something I didn’t know about 98 percent of the time. The other 2 percent they tell me they screwed up.

If Yost doesn’t follow the book and the move fails, he’ll get widely criticized. It’s only fair to note when a move succeeds.

The top of the 8th

Brayan Pena led off the inning with a double. The Royals were up 4-2 and decided to play for a tack-on run. Mitch Maier was at the plate and attempted a sacrifice bunt to move Brayan to third. Mitch got the bunt down, but Brayan did not advance. Once again, without talking to someone I can’t tell you why, but I can make an educated guess.

The last time this came up — Pena on second, nobody down, Maier attempting to bunt him over — Maier’s bunt was too close to the pitcher and Brayan was out at third. This time the bunt was once again out in front of the plate — a good one — but it did not force the third baseman to field the ball. After the last incident, I’m guessing Brayan was overly cautious about advancing. That cost the Royals a run when Alcides Escobar flew out to right field three pitches later.

As I wrote and I guess Ned Yost said, “Sometimes they’re cautious when they need to be aggressive, sometimes they’re aggressive when they need to be cautious.” When a team feels insecure, this is what happens — some people trying to make a big play and some people trying not to screw up. When a team feels good about itself they play the same kind of aggressive baseball all the time and live with the results.

(And it makes Chris Getz’ theory that the ball should be bunted on the first base side look better all the time.)

The bottom of the 8th

Aaron Crow comes to the mound in the 8th inning with a two-run lead. He starts fine, gets two outs and then Travis Hafner comes to the plate. Baseball players and coaches always track the tying and winning runs. Hafner can hit the ball into one of the Great Lakes and it won’t tie the game. At all costs, Crow needs to make Hafner swing the bat. If Hafner brains another sports bar patron, so be it — but a ball in play will give the Royals defense a chance.

Crow walks Hafner.

That brings Shelley Duncan to the plate. Duncan can tie the game, but he can’t win it. Crow walks Duncan. That brings Jack Hannahan to the plate and now, because of the two walks, Hannahan can plate the winning run with one swing. Hannahan flies out to Gordon. Crow has played with fire and gotten away with it.

The bottom of the 9th

Jonathan Broxton comes in to close the game — he still has a two-run lead. Jose Lopez leads off the inning by grounding out. Jason Kipnis singles, bringing Aaron Cunningham, representing the tying run, to the plate. Cunningham flies out, Michael Brantley steps in the box and Broxton walks him. The Royals have brought the winning run to the plate by walking people in both the 8th and the 9th. The walks have also allowed the Indians to get a good hitter, Asdrubal Cabrera to the plate with a chance to win the ball game. Cabrera flies out to end the game.

The Royals still have issues with walks. Bob McClure lost his job because of those issues and so far, Dave Eiland is dealing the same issues. Turning the lineup over, allowing a team that hasn’t earned it to bring the tying and winning runs to the plate, giving the heart of the order an extra at-bat is a recipe for disaster.

The Royals have won two in a row, but still have issues.

Comments

Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago

Lee -

Good stuff (although you seem to be tougher on the players than the coaches).

There are a lot of Ned Yost decisions that frustrate me, but his use of Collins, which you note might open him to criticism, does not.

Tim Collins doesn’t have enough innings yet for us to be sure, but throughout his career, he’s pitched lefties and righties about the same.

Lefties: 153BF, .213 AVG .355 SLG Righties: 183BF, .216 AVG .340 SLG

The only big difference is that he walks one out of every five lefties he’s faced (eek!) but only one out of every ten lefties, so to the extent he has a platoon split, it’s a reverse split: righties have done worse than lefties.

So the use of Collins is perfectly consistent with the stats. The use of Mijares (who has a big traditional platoon split and has already faced Miguel Cabrera and Asdrubal Cabrera late in close games) is the big bullpen mystery.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

Brendan: I didn’t know Collins match-up numbers off the top of my head, so thanks for providing them. I know Ned has said what you’ve confirmed: Collins does OK against righties.

My point was that if you only look at the surface, some things don’t make sense—when you get more information (like match-up numbers), then they do.

The use of Mijares may fall into that category: there’s probably something going on that makes Yost use him the way he has.

P.S. Interesting you think I’m tough on the players (although I’ll bet the coaches saw the same things I did and dealt with them privately). A lot of people accuse me of being soft on the players.

To me it’s simple: win or lose did they play the game right? Did they control what they should be able to control?

They have lost when they’ve played OK and now have won when they made some basic mistakes…but I’ll still take the winning.
Gaines Arnold
1 year ago

Have to comment on the rant about what some may say about the Collins decision. Actually, the numbers show that Collins is better against RHH than LHH. You need to actually look at the numbers before you make assumptions about what people would have said.
Larry Tindle
1 year ago

Brendan: I will admit that usually stat people annoy me but I like the way you present your information. It has been very informative and non confrontational. Guess it’s not the stat’s that bother me but maybe the way that side presents itself. Keep up the good work.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

Gaines: I think anyone who looked at the matchup numbers would agree with you—but how many people don’t go to the trouble?

I constantly hear from people with uninformed, knee-jerk responses. The people who come to this site are a little smarter—the comment wasn’t aimed at people like you, who try to inform themselves.

Listen to 610 Radio after the games and you’ll see what I mean.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

Larry: Totally agree with you about Brendan. He’s a keeper.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

OK, a little harsh on 610 Radio callers. A little easy on “Judging the Royals” readers. Many sports talk radio callers are fine, many aren’t.

I’m having a Rush Limbaugh moment: if you say enough things, some of them will be stupid.
Greg Tatro
1 year ago

Lee,

I still wonder what goes through a pitcher’s mind when they give up walks…if they have the talent to pitch in the strike zone whenever they want. The walks by Crow made absolutely no sense. It seems to me the pitcher are playing “not to lose” instead of attacking hitter to win the game.

Good hitters by all accounts hit what 25-30 HRs a year and hit .300. That still means 70% chance of getting them out and even less chance they hit a HR. Walks make even bad hitters into heroes. Trust your stuff and if the hitter beats you with a hit…they earned it.
Larry Tindle
1 year ago

Greg: I think you hit the nail on the head. They pitch not to lose instead of attacking. There is a big difference. Have seen it a lot in high school sports. Guess even pro’s have trouble with that once in a while. Most of the times it gets you beat. May work in a sport where you can run out the clock but in baseball you have to get 27 outs.
Steven A Hurst
1 year ago

Nice to see a few hits with RISP, but we left 9 (I think that’s the # I heard on the broadcast). 10 hits (I believe) but we need to be a little more clutch.

I’d say Wed was an “earned” win, Thur a “luck” win… but they both go in the win col.
Curtis Ruder
1 year ago

Well, to address why stats people are often confrontational about their conclusions, I present one of my favorite Douglas Adams quotes:

So what of this horse, then, that actually held opinions, and was sceptical about things? Unusual behaviour for a horse, wasn’t it? An unusual horse perhaps?

No. Although it was certainly a handsome and well-built example of its species, it was none the less a perfectly ordinary horse, such as convergent evolution has produced in many of the places that life is to be found. They have always understood a great deal more than they let on. It is difficult to be sat on all day, every day, by some other creature, without forming an opinion on them.

On the other hand, it is perfectly possible to sit all day, every day, on top of another creature and not have the slightest thought about them whatsoever.

I am glad that the Royals seem to be making some strides in using statistical analysis of the game. And the snippets I have heard from them are entirely encouraging. But it also must be said that the single greatest baseball thinker spent most of his adult life in Lawrence Kansas cheering for the Royals and completely ignored by the team, unable to get a job in baseball for a generation. Rob Neyer and Joe Posnanski are probably the two most statistically literate baseball journalists in America, and they are both Royals fans. And for years, baseball in general and the Royals in particular sat on that horse and ignored it to their detriment. Moneyball didn’t spring whole from Billy Beane’s mind: there is thirty years of work and development that made it possible.

A lot of us still feel like the horse. It is changing, though slowly. I, for one, like confrontational, though I hope for it always to be collegial. But for those who think us stats people are mostly confrontational jerks (a point I would agree with in general, mainly because I think most people are confrontational jerks when you get down to it), I have one request: consider the horse.
Joel Kallem
1 year ago

Lee, I think all are pretty much in agreement that the walk issue is a big one for the Royals to get past. Not sure how to get our pitchers to stop nibbling and throw strikes, but their chances of winning a game increase dramatically when we cut down the walks to a minimum. The game by Hoch (until he tired in the 7th) showed what can happen if our guys throw strikes. Free passes are worse than hits because we never have a chance to make an out on them (1.000BA) against having a .280 average at best (if league averages hold up)on batted balls. This mantra should be drummed into the pitchers’ heads every day. I’m sure the coaches preach this, but until the “lesson” sinks in, I’m afraid we will never develop into a consistent winner.
Larry Tindle
1 year ago

Curtis: I guess what I was trying to say is there be a better way for the horse to get my attention than bucking me off. Some people will respect the horse for that move and some will hate it. I agree no one should be ignored. As far as “jerks” go, there are plenty of those on both sides to go around.

As I tried to drill into my children, be very careful using the words “always” and “never”. As adults we know these are seldom the case. I am now realizing this is sometimes harder to do than I thought. Old preconceived ideas die hard. A lot of baseball moves, such as, lefty on lefty matchup has always been a stat related thing, even if it was not as formal as we now have access to. Stats also are proving out some of the old thinking.

Lee has broken the magic mirror and exposed that the Royals actually employ stat guys. The problem as I see it is if they think they are studying things that they think will give them an edge we will not hear what they are for years. This is because of comepetitive edge. In our need to know society we all get impatient. Teams sometimes have to hide things from there competition. This is why teams are not always forthcoming on injury reports. Fans would like to know but so would Cleveland.
Donald Wilson
1 year ago

I haven’t seen anyone comment on this so I’m wondering if I’m the stupid one. However, I don’t think so. I’m just about ready to think we didn’t make a very wise decision to hire our pitching coach. First of all, he doesn’t seem to have too much good observance as to what or why the pitcher in the game is doing bad things. There have been numerous times this year that he hasn’t even came to the mound to talk to the pitcher and point anything out that he may be doing wrong. Then there is the issue with all the walks. I know he isn’t throwing the ball but it is HIS job to figure this thing out - that’s one of the reason’s he got this job over our last pitching coach. Then – Oh my gosh, what is going on with all the bases being stole and the catcher not even having time to throw! Here again - this is HIS job to figure it out and I don’t think he has done a darn thing. How many times have we had 3rd base stole on us? It’s ridulous!!! I think I’ve said enough so I’ll sign off before I say something that I shouldn’t.
John Wilson
1 year ago

Donald, with regards to stolen bases, that could be a pitcher issue (I don’t watch the game with a stopwatch so I can’t be sure) or a catcher issue. One thing for sure, I hope Salvador Perez gets back to 100% sooner rather than later.
Jim Wilson
1 year ago

In general, people don’t suffer fools well. Making emphatic statements without any factual back-up makes a person look foolish to some. But even the biggest fools can learn, but it takes time, patience and the right approach. Rants just make people defensive. Baseball has become second string to football to the viewing public and young kids are playing lacrosse and other sports instead. Baseball needs its knowledgeable fans to sell it to the next generation. It’s a shame that we have such division among people who share the same passion for the same game.

I’ve certainly been guilty of being a jerk at times. Lee, there are a whole lot of ardent, intelligent Royals fans out there who think you’re a jerk. I don’t think you are a jerk and I suspect many of them probably are, but I hope you will try to set the example.

Throwing strikes in game situations is something some guys do and some guys don’t. (Easy to prove with numbers.) Sanchez has had trouble throwing strikes his entire career. (Again, easy to prove with numbers.) Lee states that it’s all mental and comes about as a player faces better and better competition. The problem is if you check the numbers of pitchers with control problems most of them have had the problem from the day they were drafted. How many times have you read about the great prospect who just needs to work on his control in the minors for awhile before he’s ready for the majors. Pitchers don’t suddenly have walk issues after they arrive in the major leagues — it’s dogged them in the minors as well (again, easy to prove from the numbers). Mental, physical, spiritual — who cares? Some guys throw strikes when they need to and some don’t. Maybe the guys who don’t “can” if they just had the right mental attitude but what matters is whether they actually do it or not. If you acquire or draft a player with control problems, guess what? They most likely are going to have control problems.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“Pitchers don’t suddenly have walk issues after they arrive in the major leagues”

Throwing strikes, according to history, can support either the view that Jon Sanchez has always walked a bunch or that Danny Duffy didn’t walk batters in AA or AAA, but does now, by his own admission because he tries to get too cute and nibble.

“Maybe the guys who don’t “can” if they just had the right mental attitude”

Attitude has little to do with it, beyond being willing to listen to coaches. Big problem for many high-walk pitchers is inability to repeat mechanics. Sanchez is something of an aberration, as his pitches are volatile with a lot of motion, even throws to 1st, he misses bats and the strike zone with regularity. I assume his attitude is great, because having a good year will make him a rich man in the FA market, while a poor year will cost him millions.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

As the season cranks up and I’m trying to do two jobs I’m finding less time to give individual responses to each reader. Sorry.

My plan is to drop in once in a while, let you know I’m seeing all the comments and respond when possible.

Let’s all agree on two things: we can all be jerks at times—life is better if we’re not. I’ll think of a funny response or line and then it comes across as snotty on the internet—one of the bad things about it—you can’t hear tone.

So let’s endeavor—starting with me—to make this a jerk-free zone…and if you don’t agree you’re a moron. (See what I mean about jokes?)

OK, back to the jerk-free me. Jim, I don’t think all pitchers can always throw strikes if they chose to—Rick Ankiel comes to mind.

But I think most pitchers, most of the time can throw strikes, but try to be too fine. They start by nibbling, miss and each succeeding pitch gets closer to the heart of the zone. Good pitchers are aggressive early, trust their stuff, get strike one and then each succeeding pitch moves farther away from the heart of the zone.

It’s why people went up hacking against Greg Maddux; strike one is about as good as it was going to get.

Dave Eiland is trying to convince these guys of this, be aggressive, don’t nibble..but clearly it’s a hard sell. Bob McClure couldn’t do it, they were hoping Dave could get the message across in a different way.

Guys decide they have to “better” and pitch too fine or overthrow. Sandy Koufax had the same reputation as Jonathan Sanchez; great stuff, can’t throw strikes.

He was in a back field spring training game, walked the first three batters and his catcher came out and pointed to the bullpen, there wasn’t much down there. The catcher told Sandy he had to take something off and let these guys hit the ball or they’d never get through the day.

Sandy did and threw something like a three-hitter. He says that was the day he learned to pitch.

I heard the same type of story from Dan Quisenberry, “I became a good pitcher when I decided to let the other guys play.”

Jeff Montgomery says much the same thing: he was pitching his way off the team when Bob Boone said you’ve got nothing to lose, throw it down the middle. Movement got Monty outs.

I’m not saying every pitcher is in the same boat, but a lot of them are. I’ve heard way too many stories like this to think it’s a coincidence.

BTW: I haven’t noticed any lack of Dave Eiland trips to the mound. As I said before, check MLB.com’s “Play by Play” and you’ll see the trips recorded there.

Also, on some of the catcher non-throws (if I recall correctly, scorebook’s at home), there were runners on first and second and the runner on first was the tying run.

With multiple runners, before the pitch is made, the catcher steps out and gives signals to the infield telling them where the throw will go.

The Royals did not want to throw the ball to third and allow the tying run into scoring position if they didn’t throw out the runner.

I’m assuming they would’ve thrown to second if that runner had been going, but they weren’t going to be decoyed into trying to cut down a meaningless run.

Of course I’m just assming that’s what happened, haven’t talked to anybody so I don’t know for sure.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

BTW: Larry hit another nail on the head: I thought it was unfair that critics were saying the Royals were uninterested in metrics when I knew they employed people who do just that. But even admitting their existence took some negotiating: what’s in it for them?

And if these guys reach different conclusions than the fans—and if they don’t, why do you need them?—what’s in it for them to tell you what those conclusions are? Why give that information away?

Some fans will degrade their work because of the team’s current record, but who’s to say the team wouldn’t be worse without their work?

I’m getting to know these guys better and they’re probably doing the same in reverse. Eventually, I’ll figure out what I can say that does not give away useful information.

Let’s start with this: they exist.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

Hmmm…I keep thinking of things to add: it’s inaccurate to say admitting the existence of Mike Groopman and John Williams took negotiating—they’re listed in the media guide.

What took a bit of negotiating was talking with them and then figuring out what I can say that’s accurate, but not overly revealing.

That process continues.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“I don’t think all pitchers can always throw strikes if they chose to—Rick Ankiel comes to mind.”

I know you’re being facetious, but for our loyal and long-suffering readers in the finest baseball fan community, Rick Ankiel’s BB rates were:

1999-3.82 in 33 IP 2000-4.63 in 175 IP (9.98 K, the proto-Sanchez) 2001-9.38 in 24 IP, 2004-0.90.

He didn’t play in the bigs in ‘02 and ‘03 due to injury. As we’ve seen with some other pitchers, a slowly developing injury can escalate walk rates.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago

Lee -

Have you seen the two interviews that Jeff Zimmerman at Royals Review did with Jin Wong (Mike and John’s boss) in the offseason? It might give you some idea about what you can talk about

http://www.royalsreview.com/2011/11/17/2570221/interview-with-jin-wong-director-of-baseball-administration-for-the

http://www.royalsreview.com/2011/11/20/2573754/interview-with-jin-wong-director-of-baseball-administration-for-the
Chris Campbell
1 year ago

Since we’re talking about bullpen use and management I thought I’d bring up something that has always bothered me. With ever pitching change you make, there’s a risk that the guy you bring in just doesn’t have it that day.

We see it happen all of the time. The pitcher that is on the mound is DOMINIATING the hitters, yet the change is made because the manager wants to set up the lefty-lefty matchup. The guy he brings in doesn’t have it that night. He walks the first batter, gives up a double to the next guy, another walk….you get the picture.

Sure, statics give you the splits: lefties get lefties out at a higher percentage than righties do, but at some point you’d think that leaving a pitcher that is DEALING in the game in favor of bringing in a guy that might not bring his ‘A’ game to the mound with him would yield better odds of winning. I’d be curious to know if the managers give this much thought or not. It doesn’t appear that they do.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

Main reasons that a dominant pitcher is pulled are either that he’s getting in trouble or that his pitch count is getting high, and often both. Get over a hundred pitches and give up a single and a walk and it’s time for a shower. As I recall, Hoch started struggling in the 7th the other day, so was yanked, and that’s where splits come in, especially easy with a couple of lefties in the ‘pen and Aaron Crow, who just crushes righties.

An odd exception to that was Justin Verlander against the Royals, wobbled in the 9th, loaded the bases, yet was left in to face Alex, a leftie, whom he punched out with his 131st pitch. I was wondering if Trey Hillman had snuck in to Tigers’ dugout.
Chris Campbell
1 year ago

I understand that Jim. Allow me to clarify a little bit. What I was referring to is when the switch is made that the pitcher on the mound ISN’T tired and isn’t in trouble.

For example (note the players used are just an example. Ignore their stats, splits, etc): Let’s say that Greg Holland has pitched 1 inning (came in for the last out of the 6th inning, got first two outs of the 7th). He has struck out all three batters he’s faced. Plenty of gas in the tank, etc.

Next batter is left handed. Ned brings in Tim Collins (again IGNORE the splits for Collins, just an example) to face him because it’s a lefty-lefty matchup. Collins just doesn’t have it tonight. He can’t locate his fastball and his curve is flat. He walks the first batter he faces, then gives up a single, and a double after that. Two runs just scored because Tim just doesn’t have it tonight.

That’s what I’m talking about. We’ve all seen it before. Manager pulls guy that’s pitching well because he wants to set up the lefty-lefty (or righty-righty) matchup, and it blows up in his face.

Do managers consider the possibility that the next guy they bring in might not have it, and do they factor in those odds?
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“He has struck out all three batters he’s faced. Plenty of gas in the tank, etc.”

Had a disagreement with Lee on this subject a few months back and it was about Greg Holland, in fact. I held, and maybe still hold your view of riding the hot hand into the 9th, Holland was warm, knew what he had that was working, and had a feel for the mound and conditions. Lee’s point was that Holland had the mindset of being an 8th inning guy, so could go out and give it everything and that if he went out thinking maybe two innings he would hold back a little or alter his pitches. Another reason suggested was that using him for two would bench him the next day when he might be needed even more.

“Do managers consider the possibility that the next guy they bring in might not have it, and do they factor in those odds?”

I’m sure they do, but they have the bullpen catcher and coach to give them feedback on guys warming in the ‘pen, but it’s always a gamble. And then there are some guys who just stink at match-ups. Second half of last year Aaron Crow was getting lit up by lefties but dominating righties. Collins, oddly, had the same problem, did better against righties than lefties. Both seem to have made their adjustments this year.

Good post, thanks.
Jim Wilson
1 year ago

Jim F., my sentence

“Maybe the guys who don’t “can” if they just had the right mental attitude”

was a little dig at Lee who said all major league pitcher could throw strikes whenever they they wanted to. He said they didn’t because they had the wrong mental attitude.
Mike Powell
1 year ago

I wanted to throw something out there on the whole metrics issue. I know Lee doesn’t like to delve too deeply into lineup construction, but I thought I’d throw it out here.

A lot of the metrics guys get upset when the Royals sign somebody who, for example, doesn’t have a high OBP, because OBP better correlates with scoring than average. The correlation indisputable, but it’s actually missing the underlying point of Moneyball. Ideally, you’d have all high-OBP hitters, but the reality is that you’re dealing with an extremely limited market, and teams know now that high-OBP guys are valuable. The question is ultimately an economic one. Billy Beane was successful in Oakland because the market undervalued OBP as a characteristic, so he could pick up high OBP guys for cheap because nobody else was competing hard for them. Now, it’s more highly valued. The way to use metrics most effectively (unless you’re a big-market team who can afford to buy whatever players you want) is to figure out who’s undervalued, so you can get more quality for your money.

That’s why you see Dayton Moore picking up guys like Jose Guillen and Francouer - they’re not OBP guys, but they have other characteristics that may cause them to be undervalued. Obviously, it doesn’t always pay off (Oakland’s not a perennial contender, and Guillen was Guillen), but when it does, you get great play for a year or two on the (relative) cheap, like we did with Melky last year.

Throw in the added complication of year-to-year costs, and it really gets crazy - does it make sense to pay a decent chunk of change for a guy this year, even if he’s undervalued, when the rest of the team needs time to gel? Probably not. But a similar player may not be available next time.

Bottom line is, Dayton and the boys have complicated jobs, and maybe we should extend them a little more slack than we do sometimes.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

Couple things: I agree that any time you bring in a new pitcher you take a risk that it’s an off night for him. But Jim was right, if you use a guy for two innings you often lose him the next day. If you need a win bad enough—use him for two, but you might pay for it later.

And pitchers throw differently when they think they’re facing one batter or one inning. If they think they mave have to go more, they might dial back the effort a bit.

And Mike, you’re right on track with the OBP thing; the larger lesson was undervalued players are good for small market teams. If OBP isn’t undervalued any more, time to look at things differently.

A guy’s main attraction might be that you can afford him, or signing him frees up another move, or he’s willing to play in KC…the variety of factors goes on and on. You can’t just look at one number and say that’s the only thing that matters.

BTW: you guys are always free to conduct discussion and debates that don’t include me or my point of view.

So go ahead and contruct that lineup—I just may not join in.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“He said they didn’t because they had the wrong mental attitude.”

There is a certain amount of that, but it’s a complex issue. Luis Mendoza was nearing the end in Omaha in early ‘10 and the pitching coach, whose name escapes me, tried to get him to modify a few things, but Luis didn’t buy in and concentrate on maintaining the adjustments. About halfway through a season in which he was getting shelled and looking at being released, he went back to the coach and essentially surrendered, trusted the coach, listened to him, took his suggestions, and turned his season around. In 2011 Luis Mendoza was the PCL Pitcher of the Year.

To that extent attitude does matter a great deal, the Royals went through attitude adjustments with Zack for some years, worked on Hochevar about pitching inside, are working with Duffy to get him to trust his stuff. This is a case where you both may be right, big league pitchers can hit the ‘zone but often are afraid to, instead trying to get hitters to chase pitches, being “too cute”.

Another attitude problem is pitchers refusing to lock in their mechanics, get in trouble and try to overthrow the fastball, which ends up being batting practice, or overthrow breaking stuff which misses the ‘zone. Luis Mendoza, per the article above, is dealing with some of those issues. Hochevar last year had trouble with trying to overthrow from the stretch and either walked hitters or got hammered. A good attitude for a player on the field is to stay calm and stay within himself.

“Bottom line is, Dayton and the boys have complicated jobs, and maybe we should extend them a little more slack than we do sometimes.”

Yep.
Darral VanGoethem
1 year ago

Lee, real quick. Just to add on the Tim Collins/righty vs lefty point you brought up. I was personally VERY happy that Yost didn’t go with “by the book” matchups in those situations b/c Collins was pitching very well. Making a move for the sake of making the move just b/c of a perceived matchup advantage is not always the way to go. As I have stated recently, I have been unhappy with how Yost has managed the bullpen to date. However, I feel like that in the last week or so he has been more inclined to ride the “hot hand” so to speak and allow them to keep pitching. I mean, after all, these are pros. So they should be able to get out batters from both sides of plate when needed every once in a while.
Jim Wilson
1 year ago

Mike, mentioning Jose Guillen in the same post in which you ask for slack on behalf of GMDM is probably not going to be very effective.

Whether the free agent market properly values OBP has little or nothing to do with using it to construct a line-up, choose the players on your active roster and promote players within your system, attempting to develop plate discipline in your young players, stressing it at the major league level and drafting players with plate discipline (since it’s been shown to be a difficult trait to develop).
Mike Powell
1 year ago

Jim, here is my point in mentioning Guillen: when you’re not the Yankees (or even the Cardinals), and you don’t have somebody waiting in the farm system, sometimes your only option is to take a gamble. Sometimes it works (Melky), sometimes it fails (Guillen). It wasn’t like the Royals were going to go out and blow a huge sum of money on an All-Star right fielder for a variety of reasons, the most significant of which is that we’re better off spending that money paying prospects. Was signing Jose Guillen a great decision? Obviously not, but it’s a lot easier to say that now than it was then.

Put most simply, here’s the dilemma: if not Guillen, then who?

As to the in-system prospects, is it really legitimate to criticize our farm system on the basis of OBP? I mean, this is the system that produced both Billy Butler and Alex Gordon (who’s an OBP-type player to a fault at times). If we could wave a wand and make all our various prospects MLB-ready at once, that’d be great, but we can’t, so we have to go pick some guys up in free agency, and sometimes you pick a low-OBP guy because he’s a bargain for another reason (Frenchy), or you take a guy with a terrible batting average because his OBP is spectacular (Treanor).

My point is that this isn’t like building a fantasy roster where you can pick whoever you want from the majors. When you’re building a major league roster, you can only do it with guys that are both available and affordable, and when you don’t have a ton of money to spend, you have to find ways to get players that are more affordable than they should be.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“Mike, mentioning Jose Guillen in the same post in which you ask for slack on behalf of GMDM is probably not going to be very effective.”

Jim, I have heard that the reasons we got Guillen and Meche were to show the fans that the front office was trying and because Meche and Guillen were willing to sign with a very bad club. Meche was a good deal, Guillen not, but those are the risks of trying to get an established player to come to a team that will be in last place for the length of the contract.

“stressing it at the major league level”

I’m not a huge OBP fan, simply because it’s not a particularly independent stat, as shown by Billy’s transition from .400 OBP in the 5-hole hitting ahead of Treanor to the 3-hole hitting ahead of Hosmer. Early last year Billy claimed that pitchers weren’t willing to throw strikes to him, this year they are as most pitchers are right-handed and unwilling to put a runner on ahead of Hoz. One thing I’ve noticed this year is the high walk guys are lefties; Alex, Hoz, Moose, and Maier.
Joel Kallem
1 year ago

Don’t have much to contribute right now, but wanted to commend everyone for expressing their points of view without the childish, vitriol attacks on personnel. As pointed out by someone above, this is not fantasy baseball where you can simply pick whoever you want based on your particular approach to the game. There are real world considerations that come into play from both the team and from the players you are seeking. It isn’t always easy or even possible to carry out an approach that you might want to take. That’s the difference between us and the guys who do this for a living.
Jim Wilson
1 year ago

Jim, I’ve heard the reasons too (and it doesn’t change my mind that Guillen was a bad one; the Royals were in the wrong place at that time to make a risky move like that). There are many positive things to say about GMDM, but Guillen isn’t one of them.

No stat is perfect but OBP works very well and I think you overstate its problems. Billy certainly is not evidence of your point. So far this year, he has half as many at-bats in the 3-hole (25) as he has in the 4-hole (51) (batting after Hosmer). And Billy has a .346 OBP this year and has a career .359 OBP.

What are you a fan of?
Mike Powell
1 year ago

I’m not questioning the value of OBP. Indeed, allow me to quote myself: “OBP better correlates with scoring than average.” I’m saying that the reason picking high-OBP guys was such a genius move for Beane was because OBP at the time was seriously undervalued. That is no longer the case. So while it would be nice for the Royals as a small-market team with limited funds to go out and get guys with high OBP, it might be more cost-effective to get a guy that doesn’t draw a ton of walks, but hits for a fairly high average, especially in a situation where you’re just looking for a stopgap.

Billy is a bad example? Baseball Prospectus says that a .360 OBP is good, and it’s also worth taking into account that OBP is absolutely situational. A guy with a good eye who knows that no one else on his team is likely to advance him from first if he walks, or who knows that he’s a slow runner who’s likely to clog the basepaths, is more likely to swing at pitches than he would if he were batting ahead of Ted Williams or had Dyson’s speed. Both of those things are true of Billy Butler. Also, Baseball Prospectus says that .360 is a good OBP. Billy’s career line is .359. What are you not a fan of?
Jim Wilson
1 year ago

Mike, I was responding to Jim F.’s comment about OBP (and Billy), not yours. I love Billy!
Jim Wilson
1 year ago

Mike, I didn’t respond to your earlier post (until now). My only point is that OBP and its friend plate discipline are very important. Market efficiencies or inefficiencies don’t change that. I think you agree. I’m not criticizing the farm system — I like it. It’s very, very hard for me to reconcile how the brilliant guys that developed our farm system are the same guys that have done such an incredibly poor job of evaluating major league talent on other teams. My best guess? They used Lee’s points system. Just kidding!
Mike Powell
1 year ago

Ah, sorry for the confusion! Agreed on OBP and plate discipline, then.

As it goes, I think saying they’ve done an “incredibly poor” job is overstating it a bit. There have been some pretty high-profile failures, like the previously discussed Guillen, but until Hillman let Meche destroy himself, he was a good pickup, and it’s hard to argue that signing Melky was anything but a spectacular success (although it’d be more of a success if Sanchez could find the strike zone once in a while…but that’s neither here nor there).
Jim Wilson
1 year ago

Melky was a good pick-up, no doubt about it. But not a major, long-term deal. Meche turned out okay. They have come out on the right side of some relatively low cost gambles. But Guillen and Yuni (v.1) are tough to justify. Anyway, I will agree that my assessment on that point was overstating it a bit. A lot of what troubles me is what is said by the Royals at the time deals are done. Our approach and capital we bring to bear our outdated compared to other teams. We have invested in scouting but no so much in the research area. I know, I know … we have two guys. Go read the interview of Jin Wong, their boss, and then let me know how good you feel about the team’s investment in, and use of, research.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

Don’t have much to add myself, except to echo Joel’s comment: this is a serious discussion without naming-calling or sarcasm.

Heck, I’m learning from you guys. You’re making me think and that’s good. My contribution is usually going to be bringing the player or coaches’ point of view into the argument, but that doesn’t mean it’s right 100% of the time. It’s just a piece of the puzzle.

I get compliemnts all the time about the quality of comment on this site—today’s discussion shows why.
Jim Wilson
1 year ago

Lee, I’m guilty of some sarcasm … But no name calling!
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“as he has in the 4-hole (51) (batting after Hosmer). And Billy has a .346 OBP this year”

When batting 4, Billy is hitting ahead of Moustakas, who is hitting over .350 since his slow starting week. Less a specific of Billy and Hosmer than Billy and any hot lefty. As I recall, Billy hit ahead of Gordon some last year when he moved up to 3. What makes OBP contextual is that pitchers do work around good hitters if they are unlikely to pay a price and splits are a major factor. In that case, Billy saw a steady diet of low and away sliders. If he chased, fine, if he took them, Matt Treanor or Mike Aviles would come up with their .220 averages and a slow runner who was on first and no threat to steal. When Billy had his huge OBP, his runs scored and driven in divided by PAs, RSD, was around .200, same as Matt Treanor, which allows us to judge whether the high OBP translated to runs.

“They used Lee’s points system. Just kidding!

Lee’s points do cover much more than sabremetrics does at the moment. Bill James came up with “Scoops” last year in recognition of fangraphs’ inability to recognize an above average defensive play by a 1B. The new FieldFX will provide data that “sees” a lot of the things Ron Polk saw decades ago.

On Jose Guillen, in hindsight he was a mistake, at the time management needed to send the fans a signal that they were serious about trying to get legitimate talent.

“Go read the interview of Jin Wong, their boss, and then let me know how good you feel about the team’s investment in, and use of, research.

I read Zimmerman’s interview when first posted and my thoughts were that Jin Wong managed to reveal somewhere near zero actual information about what they were doing. It is my understanding that Lee will eventually get an interview or two with the Nerds, so might be an opportunity to think up a question or two for him. My question would be, “Is there any purely independent statistic possible in a team sport?”

“There have been some pretty high-profile failures, like the previously discussed Guillen”

Guillen and Coco Crisp are the two worst, Melky, Frenchy, and Chen the best recent.

“What are you a fan of?”

A stat I call “aSLG”, which is total bases plus walks plus HBP plus net steals, basically total self-generated bases divided by plate appearances. With OBP it’s necessary to subtract BA to get an isoOBP.

Good post, Mr. Wilson.
Curtis Ruder
1 year ago

The one thing I haven’t heard in discussion Jose Guillen is that he got the highest per season contract in franchise history. It was a predictable disaster, and DMGM deserves the scorn he has received for that one. I am not a fan of several other moves, but at least they didn’t cost the team tens of millions of dollars.

I also would suggest waiting on Francouer before putting him in the positive side of the ledger. He has been poor this season, and while I hope he rebounds nicely, his history is not great.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“He has been poor this season, and while I hope he rebounds nicely, his history is not great.”

That’s been said about Melky and Alex and Master Chen, et al. Frenchy has been working on the same stuff Alex has, going the opposite way with outside pitches.

“It was a predictable disaster, and DMGM deserves the scorn he has received for that one.”

I remember the time, the same folks who were screaming for Roy Oswalt and Edwin Jackson to be signed, no matter the cost, wanted a big free agent back then. Guillen’s old school line was .290/23/99 and a .353 OBP. His first year with the Royals was .264/20/97. In hindsight it wasn’t a good signing, but at the time the results weren’t predictable and he was about the only power hitter anyone had ever heard of willing to sign with the Royals. And the Royals had no prospects, not like David Lough was in Omaha or Wil Myers in Springdale at the time or even Mitch Maier on the bench.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago

Jim F -

There’s a certain irony that the inventor of the “scoops” metric that was published last year is not Bill James, but John Dewan. Dewan’s company, Baseball Information Solutions, charts every defensive play in baseball and provides the data that underlie the defensive metrics (found at Fangraphs and elsewhere) you criticized in your comment.

If you look up defensive metrics on the Fangraphs player pages, DRS is Dewan Runs Saved, which now incorporates scoops. However, as the article introducing it pointed out, it has little overall effect. The very best 1B at fielding throw from their fielders save about 2 runs a year.

Article introducing scoops: http://www.billjamesonline.com/firstbasemanscoops/

(as always, copy and paste into your address bar and then delete everything beginning with readmore)
Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago

Jim F -

Re: Butler in batting order.

Billy has hit 4th in 14 games this year (including tonight). In none of those games has Moustakas been directly behind him in the batting order. In 12 of the games, he has been followed by Francouer, who has been our worst hitter so far this year. The other two games, he hit ahead of Alex Gordon, when Gordon was in the depths of his slump and got moved down the lineup.

If you’re saying Billy’s getting fewer walks because pitchers are afraid to face the batter after him, I don’t see how the facts can support that.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/KCR/2012-batting-orders.shtml
Jim Wilson
1 year ago

Jin Wong didn’t reveal anything and I got the feeling he didn’t have much to reveal even if he was so inclined. For a team that is criticized by a considerable number of its fans for its perceived lack of use of advanced metrics, you would think the Royals would make an attempt to dissuade people of that opinion.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“not Bill James, but John Dewan”

My bad, going on memory from a Jo Po article last year.

“http://www.billjamesonline.com/firstbasemanscoops/”

That may have been what I remembered. I think Joe gave the link.

“The very best 1B at fielding throw from their fielders save about 2 runs a year.”

So it is still very much an inadequate metric, as the eyeballs tell us that’s a fairly normal week for Hosmer corralling 95 mph throws in the dirt from Escobar and Moustakas.

“you criticized in your comment”

As I recall, fangraphs had Hosmer as about the worst 1B in the game last year. UZR’s pie slices don’t account for placement of fielders, which is why teams have had to spend so much money on FieldFX equipment. Tonight’s game would cost Escobar due to the batter beating a shift because Teaford missed his spot. Prince Fielder’s single against a shift last week also went through the SS hole because Mijares threw an outside fastball rather than breaking stuff that Fielder might roll over on. FieldFX should allow the creation of PIF, pircher independent fielding to account for such things, pitchers missing the spots that the fielders are placed for makes fielders look bad.

From fangraphs on DRS:

“DRS uses Baseball Info Solutions (BIS) data in calculating its results. It’s important to note that this data is compiled by human scorers, which means that it likely includes some human error. Until FIELDF/x data gets released to the public, we are never going to have wholly accurate defensive data; human error is impossible to avoid when recording fielding locations by hand, no matter how meticulous the scorers. That said, BIS data is still the best, most accurate defensive data available at this time, so just be careful not to overstate claims of a player’s defensive prowess based solely on defensive stats.”

http://www.fangraphs.com/library/index.php/defense/drs/

I expect FieldFX to be a major breakthrough, but doubt we’ll ever see real-time data from the stream, although the Royal Nerds do have it and the proprietary software to make millions of lines of code useful.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago

Jim F -

I just want to correct the record on UZR, which does incorporate fielder placement to a degree and would not be affected by Escobar or Fielder’s hits beating the shift:

“Other Infield Positioning

Left-handed and right-handed batters are treated separately since infielders and outfielders are positioned differently for each. Infield ground balls are also handled separately for two categories of batters: Above-average speed and below-average speed. All batters are put into one or the other category, using a Bill James type of speed score. It is assumed that infielders must play a little shallower and are more hurried in general with a faster runner at the plate. Also, the data includes whether a shift (a generic one, in the opinion of the “stringer” – the person recording the data) was on, and whether the shift likely affected the play at all. If it did – again, according to the “stringer”- then the play is ignored.”

The whole thing is worth a read.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-fangraphs-uzr-primer/