Jump to content

Jeff6851

2013-14 Offseason Thread

Recommended Posts

Joe Nathan gave up a HR to Arod in Game 2 of the 2009 ALDS. I never want to see him again!

Justin Verlander gave up a HR to Napoli in Game 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The over arching point, that I have contested for a while, is that I think how a manager uses the bullpen plays a crucial role in how effective the reliever is. Leyland didn't know how to use relievers.

Collectively I think Ausmus will do a really good job. He is an analytical guy, someone with good insight. Leyland went on gut and it rarely worked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
See game 2, championship series. That's the last of Benoit I ever wanted to see.

But my main point was he is too slow. That's still true.

Mariano Rivera lost the Yankees a championship. If they were smart they would've never let him pitch another inning for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What if someone works fast and gives up a lot of home runs?

I can see how this is snowballing on me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does that include you? Do you think we should be using it more?

Ha well I'll let you decide the first part I guess. Yes though, I think it is very often underused here and just about everywhere. It always has to be taken into context, but I think most of the excuses given to not use it are silly. Is it perfect? No. Is it at times subjective? Yes. Is it ever useless or extremely out of touch with reality? Absolutely not.

Defense is definitely the biggest issue, but IMO you are talking about a margin of error and you should not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Most of that margin of error dissapears over multiple years and can be accounted for and balanced with other factors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People love baseball so much in Cuba. I really hope that in 20 years or so, relations between our countries normalize. I'd like to see MLB expand to more countries. If Mexico could ever conquer its drug cartels, Mexico City could support a team. Tokyo could probably support one right now if travel times wouldn't make things logistically impossible. Bring back the Concord jet? This talk of Montreal getting another team is intriguing.

Agree. I would love to see a team in Havana and another in Mexico City. And better Montreal than Tampa Bay at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know how you define "semi-premium reliever", but for his career as a reliever his HR/9 is 0.89 which is not bad at all.

All-Star caliber reliever that most teams would love to have as either their set-up or 9th inning guy. I wouldn't put him in the same category of Kimbrel or a healthy Nathan, but somewhere around a Valverde when Valverde was good.

If we're going to exclude the years where Benoit wasn't doing very well he still gives up more gophers than a Fernando Rodney, Todd Jones, or the non-horrible Valverde. And .89 isn't good at all. It's not horrible, but it isn't good.

Anyways, I like Benoit and wished we signed him. He isn't anywhere close to the 2012 guy when it comes to home runs, and he's probably a bit better than the .89 as well, but I think it's fair to say preventing homers isn't a strength of his. Playing in San Diego I wouldn't be surprised to see him put up sub .5 HR/9.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think relievers have a bigger impact than other players on whether teams do well in close games and extra inning games. That can throw the whole thing off because WAR is not designed to take into account a player's influence on those types of games and how a team does in those games affects how well wins matchup with expected wins. I don't believe anyone has yet designed a reliable way to evaluate a reliever's value.

I feel like this is accounted for in the article I posted, but maybe I am missing something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it's good for some things and bad for other things. I don't like it when it's used incorrectly. I also don't like it when it's used correctly, but is dismissed as a bad stat.

This is my issue basically. Its neither gospel or garbage. I think its probably the baseline you should start with though. From there, you want to look at how it was formed, other stats, potential reasons for an outlier etc.

A guy's WAR, from what I have seen in looking at stats over the years, is never going to off my more than 20% either way. That's completely unbacked by numbers though, just my educated opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I feel like this is accounted for in the article I posted, but maybe I am missing something.

One major issue not addressed in that article is that FIP doesn't necessarily work well with relievers b/c its been shown that its more likely for a reliever to have a lower BABIP or higher LOB% than a starter for a number of reasons and, thus, they should get some credit for not allowing runs rather than just assuming its all luck and/or defense. Joe Nathan is just one of many examples with a sustained lower BABIP and/or high LOB %. Joe Smith, who has been discussed in this thread, is another. Valverde was another, Rivera, etc. Its very common with loogy's too.

If one uses WAR for relievers, I'd use Baseball Reference's WAR. It's not perfect either and has its own flaws but I think its better than the Fangraphs one b/c it at least gives relievers credit for the runs they allow and attempts to account for the defensive component.

There's also an argument to be made that team's are signing guys like Nathan specifically to be the closer and have a leverage index of 1.8 or above. It's a specific role they are carving out for him so when evaluating that deal, that has to be taken into account rather than discounting the role he will have b/c if he's injured then the setup man will replace him. While that is true, it also works that way for position players. If Cabrera gets hurt at 1B, he'd probably be replaced at 1B by Martinez and then they'd probably set up a platoon at DH to replace Martinez's role there. Either way, the team isn't replacing Cabrera's production with a replacement level player as players would be moved around differently to accommodate for his absence and benches are littered with players who, theoretically, should be better than guys you could pluck from AAA. Obviously that will vary by team, but in theory, when a starter goes down, they are not likely to be replaced by a hypothetical replacement level player. It's probably a .5 to 1 win bench player who will get more playing time. Therefore, should we also subtract wins from position players like Fangraphs does for relievers to account for that? Maybe so. I don't really know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think relievers have a bigger impact than other players on whether teams do well in close games and extra inning games. That can throw the whole thing off because WAR is not designed to take into account a player's influence on those types of games and how a team does in those games affects how well wins matchup with expected wins. I don't believe anyone has yet designed a reliable way to evaluate a reliever's value.

This kind of sounds like you are claiming that some relievers are more clutch than others.

That could be case.

WAR will not distinguish between a guy who pitches lights out in high leverage and poorly in low leverage vs a guy who pitches mediocre in all situations. But the lights out high leverage guy would win you more games.

Are there guys like that? Maybe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One major issue not addressed in that article is that FIP doesn't necessarily work well with relievers b/c its been shown that its more likely for a reliever to have a lower BABIP or higher LOB% than a starter for a number of reasons and, thus, they should get some credit for not allowing runs rather than just assuming its all luck and/or defense. Joe Nathan is just one of many examples with a sustained lower BABIP and/or high LOB %. Joe Smith, who has been discussed in this thread, is another. Valverde was another, Rivera, etc. Its very common with loogy's too.

If one uses WAR for relievers, I'd use Baseball Reference's WAR. It's not perfect either and has its own flaws but I think its better than the Fangraphs one b/c it at least gives relievers credit for the runs they allow and attempts to account for the defensive component.

There's also an argument to be made that team's are signing guys like Nathan specifically to be the closer and have a leverage index of 1.8 or above. It's a specific role they are carving out for him so when evaluating that deal, that has to be taken into account rather than discounting the role he will have b/c if he's injured then the setup man will replace him. While that is true, it also works that way for position players. If Cabrera gets hurt at 1B, he'd probably be replaced at 1B by Martinez and then they'd probably set up a platoon at DH to replace Martinez's role there. Either way, the team isn't replacing Cabrera's production with a replacement level player as players would be moved around differently to accommodate for his absence and benches are littered with players who, theoretically, should be better than guys you could pluck from AAA. Obviously that will vary by team, but in theory, when a starter goes down, they are not likely to be replaced by a hypothetical replacement level player. It's probably a .5 to 1 win bench player who will get more playing time. Therefore, should we also subtract wins from position players like Fangraphs does for relievers to account for that? o. I don't really know.

There's a newer article on the subject I'll try to find. I believe that FIP plays a pretty small part in reliever WAR. Basically what I remember is that HRs, Ks and BBs are what most of it is bult around, things they can control more.

Can't find the article, but here' s an article that describes chaining and leverage a bit more. I don't think its a direct comparison to position players in the manner that you try to use it here. Miguel Cabrera's plate appearances are not artificially altered at all by something like a leverage index.

Edited by Nastradamus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This kind of sounds like you are claiming that some relievers are more clutch than others.

That could be case.

WAR will not distinguish between a guy who pitches lights out in high leverage and poorly in low leverage vs a guy who pitches mediocre in all situations. But the lights out high leverage guy would win you more games.

Are there guys like that? Maybe.

I don't know whether relievers are more likely to be clutch than other types of players, but the consideration of clutch is more important for relievers because they are more situation dependent than any other player. You don't really have to worry about clutch that much with other players because the vast majority of their innings/ plate appearances are not clutch.

The other issue is that teams with good bullpens tend to do well in close and extra inning games and I don't think that impact is being captured by WAR. So, I think good bullpens are undervalued by WAR and bad ones overvalued.

Scottwood's point about FIP not being a good measure for relievers is also true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's a newer article on the subject I'll try to find. I believe that FIP plays a pretty small part in reliever WAR. Basically what I remember is that HRs, Ks and BBs are what most of it is bult around, things they can control more.

HR, K, BB are what FIP is though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's a newer article on the subject I'll try to find. I believe that FIP plays a pretty small part in reliever WAR. Basically what I remember is that HRs, Ks and BBs are what most of it is bult around, things they can control more.

Can't find the article, but here' s an article that describes chaining and leverage a bit more. I don't think its a direct comparison to position players in the manner that you try to use it here. Miguel Cabrera's plate appearances are not artificially altered at all by something like a leverage index.

For someone claiming that people should use WAR more, you apparently don't even know what WAR is

Nice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HR, K, BB are what FIP is though.

Yah, I messed that up. I took his complaint with this the opposite of how he meant it. My bad. So to correct, I think relievers should be judged on what they can actually control. You do have to watch out for "unexplained" consistencies though in things like BABIP as Scottwood mentioned before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I honestly believe we're saving money for Trout.

He'll be a FA when he's 26. The bidding on him will be crazy if he maintains his level of play. 10 years, $300 million+ easy. Harper will be a FA at a really young age too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love Cabrera, he's an all-time level hitting talent, but Trout has the opportunity to be even better. The big question in my mind is how long he can sustain having played full major-league seasons at a high and demanding level starting at such a young age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
See game 2, championship series. That's the last of Benoit I ever wanted to see.

But my main point was he is too slow. That's still true.

I agree 100%. And the stupid look on his face between pitches won't be missed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...