Outskirts of Red Sox Nation

Monday, January 22, 2007

First Past The Post

I knew it all along. The meritocracy is alive and well. If you do something and do it well, no matter what it is, people will notice and you will be recognized for it. Or, in my case, do something in a mediocre fashion but with an abandon that borders on obsession and people will notice.

Whichever is the case, this will be my final post from the Outskirts of Red Sox Nation. Effective later this week, my low-VORP baseball thoughts will be able to be found at the upstart juggernaut (can you be both?) web site Red Sox Times. Proprietor/founding member Tim Daloisio has been working on a banner and a space for me in his stable of writers. I'll be writing under the byline of "Past a Diving Jeter," which will remain, for my money, the sweetest four words in the english language. My focus will, at least in part, be on the goings on throughout the AL East and baseball in general with a eye on how it affects the Old Towne Team.

So thank you to the Norwich Bulletin, who provided the impetus and invitation to start this blog. Thank you to those who have occasionally swung by to visit here. I'd ask you to please change your links to the Red Sox Times, and be sure to check that out as often as you're able without making it too obvious that you're avoiding doing something productive. Thanks.

Friday, January 19, 2007

Christopher Nixon, Cleveland Outfielder

ESPN just reported that Christopher "Trot" Nixon agreed to a one-year, $3 million deal to play for the Cleveland Indians this year. Three million's no slap in the face, but the whole thing just makes me a little sad. Trot's played his whole career in the Sox system, was a fan favorite, and had some really huge moments for the Sox. My personal favorite is the two-run homer he hit off of Roger Clemens in the ninth inning of that great Pedro-Rocket pitcher's duel in 2000. I don't know what the final numbers say, but he always seemed to have Clemens' number- which I suppose makes sense, as he generally killed fastballs from righthanders.

It's not that I think Trot would have been good for the Sox as a full-time player going forward, and it's not that I wish him ill or want him to retire or anything. It just makes me sad. I'll miss him in the Sox uniform. He'll probably form the lesser half of a RF platoon with Casey Blake, who is a righty. I wish him well.

I'm Sorry, Mr. Gonzalez is Not Available To Answer Your Call

Much sought-after Pittsburgh closer Mike Gonzalez is now formerly-much-sought-after former-Pittsburgh closer Mike Gonzalez. The Braves announced that they had completed a trade for Gonzalez. The Braves gave up young first baseman Adam LaRoche, and picked up Gonzalez and minor league shortstop Brent Lillibridge.

The short-term, local news for the Red Sox is, of course, that Mike Gonzalez is pretty much not readily available as a last-minute pickup for the bullpen. Admittedly, though, the news and apparent crisis over what the Sox are going to do for a closer seems to have dulled a bit. This may have more to do with a certain football team continuing their season deep into January, but nevertheless, even the dedicated baseball journalists have stopped smacking themselves in the forehead, wondering if Joel Pineiro is going to work in a relief role. When the Patriots' season ends (hopefully not until early February), we may return to this subject and find that Mike Gonzalez would have been easier to acquire than we thought, but for now, it's a closed door that warrants barely a footnote. After all, Chad Cordero and Brad Lidge are still out there, aren't they?

Looking deeper into this transaction, though, it looks as if that old salt, John Schuerholz, has done it again. Adam LaRoche is a very solid player, probably a couple of notches above average for his position. Mike Gonzalez is probably at about the same level- and both players will fill important needs for their new teams. The kicker of this transaction is the third player. Brent Lillibridge could be the guy to make this a huge win for the Braves. Though scouts and projections vary a bit on his upside, he appears to have the tools and the talent to have an upside resembling that of Rafael Furcal. Adding a potential 6-win shortstop as a throw-in on a deal like this is what separates the decent general managers from the great ones. You taking notes, Theo?

Thursday, January 18, 2007

I'm No Role Model

Despite the demonstrated force of bloggers seen in the rise of Howard Dean and the brief rise of Ned Lamont, as well as the continued presence of Matt Drudge and Kos, I thought that we had a pretty clear understanding here. Bloggers exist largely to circulate wildly inappropriate and potentially libelous rumors. Print journalists exist largely to print boring, verifiable fact. Bloggers who work too hard on fact and cold, detached reporting have the wrong hobby, and journalists who engage in too much overt rumor-mongering look unprofessional. Being wacky, impertinent and off-the-cuff is MY job, damn it, not yours!

The most egregious example of this blurring of media lines comes from Murray Chass of the New York Times. The New York Times! In a recent column in which he noted the fact that despite reaching tentative agreements, neither J.D. Drew nor Barry Bonds are officially signed by the Red Sox and Giants, respectively. He goes on to say, "the thought arises..." that wouldn't it be interesting if the Sox decided to drop their offer to Drew and sign Barry Bonds instead. This way, he could play left field and Manny Ramirez could go back to his original position in right field.

This is a stupid thing to write- I'll deal with the merits in a second- but it's just incredible that Chass was this glib. Because it was in the Times and mentioned Red Sox players, it automatically showed up on dozens of web sites that scour the internet for Sox articles from legitimate publications and legitimate journalists. This article was a poor example of either of those. Chass should know the power of his position and the influence of the Times over the news world. The Times should know this as well, and try to stop their writers from being so stupid.

Even if it came from Joe Blogger at RedSoxRuleTheUniverse.com, it's a stupid thing to write. First of all, anyone who has any familiarity with both Manny Ramirez' defensive ability and Fenway Park's right field dimensions would be unable to recommend moving Manny over there as a sensible defensive shift. Secondly, the idea that the Sox would sign Bonds is, if not entirely laughable, quite nearly so. Bonds is nearly universally vilified in the baseball world; in fact, it's possible that San Francisco is the only place he is still applauded. Dumping him into one of the roughest media/fan markets in the nation is not a terribly winning strategy. The Sox ownership is nothing if not market-savvy. Bringing Bonds here is not likely to be high on Larry Lucchino or Theo Epstein's "to-do" list, especially with the latest revelations about amphetamine use. Third and most significantly, Barry Bonds hates Boston. He said so repeatedly. This opinion is mostly formulated based on his father's impressions of Boston, which he believed to be quite racist, but nevertheless, that opinion has passed down to Barry. He's said he'd never play here- though I'm sure that Murray Chass was unaware of that fact. He is only, after all, a baseball writer for the New York Times. Fourth, there's no indication from either side that the Drew contract won't be signed, and both sides are saying it's just about some specific legal language. Though this is probably slightly euphemistic, I've got no reason to believe the deal won't be finalized prior to Spring Training.

Ok. That's enough useless anger spent on Mr. Chass. Maybe he thought he was being wacky or clever, or stirring the pot. I just don't think it's funny. Or wacky. Or clever. It's just stupid. If Rush Limbaugh calls feminists "feminazis," it's one thing. If Dick Cheney starts saying the same thing, it's an entirely different matter. Wacky speculation and irresponsible journalism have their place. The New York Times just isn't that place.

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

A PECOTA Teaser

In what felt like Christmas morning for me, I checked in to Baseball Prospectus and found out that PECOTA has been released. For those of you who don't know, don't care, or just think I'm a hopeless dork (even without the benefit of one of the Lego-based "dork detetectors" that my daughter, wife and I built the other night), PECOTA is the baseball performance projection system developed for the BP website by Nate Silver and others. It has been proven to be somewhere between 65-75% accurate in predicting player performance. Actually, it does much better than that in some cases, and much worse, particularly for pitchers. I'm going to work up some future entries on this when I get some time to do it, but I thought I would just start with a quick teaser.

This one goes out to all of those "veteran leadership" guys who are pooh-poohing the apparent annointing of Dustin Pedroia as the second baseman of the future for the Sox. "Why didn't we re-sign Mark Loretta? He's an all-star!?" is the frequent refrain. I myself wouldn't have minded seeing the Sox sign Loretta as a backup, but agree that Pedroia is the way to go. PECOTA agrees with me. I can't do formatting very well in Blogger, but here are some comparative projections:

AVG/OBP/SLG:
Pedroia- .294/.360/.431
Loretta- .276/.341/.388

Some more advanced metrics
EqA/VORP
Pedroia- .277/22.2
Loretta- .252/12.7

and the defense:
Pedroia 130/+6
Loretta 114/-3

and now the key:
Age: Pedroia (23) Loretta (35)

In every facet of game performance, Pedroia projects (based on his actual performance, not scouting, etc.) to be significantly better than Mark Loretta. In fact, PECOTA sees Pedroia as being the 5th most productive second baseman in the AL next year by VORP (behind Cano, Kendrick, Kinsler, and Iguchi). He and Kendrick are the youngest, both 23. Now I'm not saying that Pedroia's the next coming of Jeff Kent or Joe Morgan, but he's going to be pretty good, I think. He'll be better than Loretta, better than most guys out there, and plenty good enough to earn his keep on this team.

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Patchwork Quilt

When the winter is cold (as it is apparently, finally going to be here in Connecticut) and when there are few scraps of material to do anything with, you simply need to do what resourceful yankees (that's yankees with a small "y") have done for centuries- you make a patchwork quilt to keep yourself warm.

The long weekend has yielded but few little nuggets of news and analysis about the Red Sox, but we'll see if we can take them and stitch them together into something to keep the fires of the hot stove burning just a little longer:

-Pedro Martinez has a son? Pedro, even in the hot-to-trot media market of Boston, kept a very low personal profile. The only thing that I think I even heard about his personal life when he pitched in Boston was that he had a big, expensive condo where his mother stayed and various family members came and went. This weekend, we learned that not only does Pedro have a son, but this son is 19 years old! Pedro, I believe, is 35, which by my math means that...Pedro was a teenage stud. Here I believed all the stories of Pedro of this shy skinny kid sitting under the mango tree in San Pedro de Macoris, when meanwhile he's actually behind the mango tree gettin' busy with some Dominican doll...at any rate, his son (Pedro E. Martinez) is also a pitcher, who held up pretty well in the Dominican winter league. Hopefully young Pedro (the "E") can do a better job at following in his father's footsteps than some other high-profile, similarly-named legacies we've dealt with lately...

-Wily Mo Pena and Brandon Donnelly have both been offered arbitration by the Sox. This takes care of the only two (the only two?) arb-eligible players in the Sox roster, and, for the most part, starts to close out the money situation for the 2007 roster.

-...but not so fast. J.D. Drew is still a giant question mark. He of the 5-year, $70 million contract is still nowhere to be seen, and his contract has still not been signed, some 41 days after the preliminary deal was announced. I know this is maddening for Sox fans, and probably for Terry Francona as well, but from the front office's standpoint, there really isn't much hurry. If you're generally ok with the contract and the condition of Drew's health, waiting is a good thing. The longer the Sox wait, the less leverage that Boras and Drew have, because fewer and fewer teams will be trying to keep the window cracked open for Drew to slip through if possible. Of course, there's always the possiblity that the Drew deal doesn't get done, but that just means the Sox may have to go with a combination of Pena/Hinske/Nixon in right field next year which is both far from idea AND far from the end of the world as we know it.

-Mike Lowell did some interviews over the past couple of days in which he discussed how unsurprised and pleased he was that Manny wasn't actually traded, and also the state of amphetamines in baseball. The substance of the interview was less interesting to me than the tone and intelligence of Mike Lowell. He's a quality guy, a worthy successor in many was to Bill Mueller at third base. It also reminds me of Bill James' comments that third basemen are some of the nicest guys in baseball- Paul Molitor, Mike Schmidt, Brooks Robinson, Ron Santo, Bill Mueller, Mike Lowell- princes all. It's utterly unsurprising that Shea Hillenbrand couldn't hack it at third base for too long.

So there are some of the scraps we had to deal with. I wish I could say that I brought them together with some unifying principle that makes this an amish-quality pattern. Somehow I don't think my "Pedro's a stud and Shea Hillenbrand sucks" literary quilt will fetch top dollar at the Lancaster County Craft Fair...

Friday, January 12, 2007

Something Wicked This Way Comes

Looking at the baseball section of the Boston Herald today- the Boston Herald, mind you- there are major stories about how Andy Pettitte is all set to "pick up where he left off" in New York with the Yankees, as well as a story about how much the Yankees want Roger Clemens to rejoin their team. First of all, this isn't really news, is it? The Yankees want Clemens? I have a news flash also- Boston would really like to win another World Series. Stop the presses! Secondly, what the heck is the Herald doing wasting column-inches on a story like that? Isn't there any Red Sox news to talk about? Well...not much, really. We're still waiting for J.D. Drew's contract to be memorialized, as they say. We haven't signed any questionable reclaimation-project pitchers in the last few days. Curt Schilling hasn't shot his mouth off on WEEI lately either.

Taking the Boston Herald's lead, then, this seems like a pretty good time to announce that I'm expanding the sphere of my baseball punditry. Of course this announcement has a "tree falling in a forest" metaphysical feel to it, but it's an announcement all the same. Starting soon, I'll be writing a semi-regular column for the Red Sox Times website. My section will be called "Past a Diving Jeter," and will at least attempt to place the Red Sox in context of the entire league, and the AL East in particular. I'll try to look at moves that other teams are making, and assess their relevance to the Sox efforts.

For the time being, I'll keep blogging at this spot, but I'm excited about this new development. If you get a chance, check out the work that Tim Daloisio has done with Red Sox Times, and keep an eye out for my new stuff there.

Thursday, January 11, 2007

Rushing to Conclusions

Finding myself a bit pressed for time today, it seems like a good opportunity to clear out my post-it notes with the links and blog ideas. These articles and discussions are worth your while:

-Tim Daloisio and company at Red Sox Times are working over this Joel Pineiro/closer situation as if it were the partitioning of Berlin, but the results are illuminating. The bottom line on all of this, I think, is that we don't yet know what to expect from Pineiro or any of the other guys in the bullpen (Hansen, Delcarmen, Donnelly, Okajima, etc.) We've got all of Spring Training and the early part of the season to figure out what they've got and how effective they can be. The upside, for me, is that we've got a closer there somewhere. The downside is that we don't, but then again, we've got a huge variety of potential trading pieces to get someone more effective.

-If you're looking for a more effective reliever, it might be a good idea to ask yourself what type of pitcher they are. I love it that a bunch of these stats-heavy websites have started purchasing data from Baseball Info Solutions and other services. They know what to do with this information, and can get it to the rest of us in an interesting way. Baseball Analysts recently posted an article about "categorizing pitchers" by type- looking most specifically at groundball vs. strikeout guys. This is incredibly illuminating to me. Look at some of the names on that grid. J.J. Putz and Joe Nathan on the strikeout axis, and Brandon League and Cla Merideth (doh!) on the groundball axis. Cla seems to have some of the sink to his pitches that made Derek Lowe an effective closer for a while. The big a-ha for me on this chart was Brad Lidge. Despite his alleged problems, he's still getting strikeouts with over 30% of the batters he faced PLUS inducing groundballs on over 40%. Guys aren't getting a ton of good swings on him. If the existing bullpen candidates aren't looking too great, I'd go harder after Lidge than I would after Gonzalez or Cordero.

-I know that most readers won't be able to see this, but I thought I'd point out that the self-appointed geniuses at Baseball Prospectus have put together their analysis of the Sox top-ten prospects. I don't think non-subscribers can get a full analysis, but the sneak-preview is below:

Excellent Prospects
1. Clay Buchholz, rhp
Very Good Prospects
2. Jacoby Ellsbury, cf
3. Michael Bowden, rhp
Good Prospects
4. Jason Place, cf
5. Daniel Bard, rhp
6. Bryce Cox, rhp
Average Prospects
7. Dustin Pedroia, 2b
8. Craig Hansen, rhp
9. Kris Johnson, lhp
10. Justin Masterson, rhp

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Better Luck Next Year (by which I mean THIS year)

Events of 2006 were not terribly kind to two Boston Red Sox outfielders- one past, one present. I have reason to believe that 2007 will be better for both.

Yesterday, Jim Rice fell short again of his bid for induction to the Hall of Fame. While Cal Ripken, Jr. and Tony Gwynn were both elected with over 97% of the ballots, Jim Rice's name only showed up on 63.5%. This number is slightly down from last year, but Jim actually picked up seven or eight votes in a larger voting pool. A quick aside here- there were 545 ballots cast. Two of them were totally blank. I'm willing to attribute that to human error. That leaves 543 ballots with some marks on them. Cal Ripken, Jr. got 537 votes, meaning that six writers left him off the ballot, but didn't leave the ballot blank entirely. In other words, there are six writers out there, who have been gainfully employed as baseball writers for over ten years and presumably have some familiarity with the game of baseball, who cast a ballot for someone OTHER than Cal Ripken, Jr., and for some reason didn't consider Cal worthy of a vote. Who was more worthy on the ballot than Cal Freakin' Ripken? One of the top three best shortstops EVER. By all objective and subjective measures, an extraordinary man and an extraordinary player. Unless Ripken personally spit on the 8-year-old children of each and every one of those six writers, they do not deserve a ballot next year. They simply do not.

The good news for Jim Rice is that he's still hanging in there, and the 2007 class is a lot less impressive than the 2006 class. This means old Jim Ed looks more impressive by comparison. Helped, I think, by the induction of Bruce Sutter last year, Goose Gossage jumped all the way up to 71.2% of the vote. When I say "helped by the induction," I think a lot of writers realized that Gossage was a heck of a lot better than Sutter, and thereby meant to address that oversight/mistake. As for Jim Rice, the only new serious candidates he'll have to deal with are Dave Justice and Tim Raines. Raines deserves induction, I think, but neither of these guys is getting in next year, and they should both reinforce Rice's case for the Hall. Aside from Mark McGwire, the case that Jim Rice is the best position player NOT enshrined gets stronger. Next year could put him over the top. We don't want him to have to labor in the shadow of Rickey Henderson (2008 eligible).

The current Red Sox outfielder we're talking about today is one Covelli Loyce Crisp. A recent Baseball Prospectus "player profile" reviewed his history and development as a player. I was personally a bit surprised by his lack of power throughout his minor-league career, and had to confess I was perplexed at how he became so highly-regarded in the first place. That aside, BP released one of their "Unfiltered" posts yesterday with batted-ball charts from Coco's last few years. This post put some real meat onto the bones of the speculation that Coco had lost a lot of power to his finger injury last year. The second set of charts show a substantial dropoff of the number (percentage) of line drive Coco hit to right field last year. He's usually around 45% to right, and last year, he was just over 25%. With healthy hands, I think there's reason to believe he can drive the ball with more confidence and authority, and really crank up his SLG numbers for 2007. I think 40 doubles and 15 HR are not out of the question.

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

T-Shirt Hall of Fame

I grew up in Milwaukee, primarily a Brewers fan. There's something about being eight years old in 1982 and having your team in the World Series that solidifies you as a baseball fan. Of course, the Brew Crew got hosed by the Cardinals that year, and haven't returned to the Series since, but nevertheless, it made an impression.

The funny thing is, I don't ever recall having a Brewers baseball jersey growing up. The only baseball t-shirt I remember wearing in my youth was a navy-blue Jim Rice t-shirt. I wore it so often in the early 80's that one of my neighbors down the street called me "Jim" well into my 20's. My name's not Jim, by the way. Even from that distance, and even not becoming an real fan of the Boston Red Sox until the late 1990's, I've had a fondness for Jim Rice. I think that today (2 p.m. Eastern is the announcement) he ought to be enshrined in the Hall of Fame, and sincerely hope that he will be.

I have to say in my formative years as an adult baseball fan, I was sort of down on Jim Rice's candidacy. As I read Bill James and Rob Neyer, I was too swayed by the opinion that he was too one-dimensional and lacked the extended peak that true hall-of-famers have. It was also pretty clear that Bill James, ever the moralist, thought Jim Rice was something of a jerk, which doesn't help his argument. There are lots of websites and lots of people more devoted to this than I am, but I would just point a couple of things out. If you check Jim's page on Baseball-Reference.com and scroll down toward the bottom, there are a couple of things that stand out. Bill James invented lots of fun baseball stats stuff, but a few of them are the "Hall of Fame Monitor" scores and the "Similarity Scores." His grey and black ink for Hall of Fame worthiness all exceed the average HOFer by a comfortable margin. He falls a little short on "Hall of Fame Standards," but that has more to with his shorter career (lack of big counting stats) than his worthiness. If you look at Sandy Koufax's page, his HOF Standard number is 46. A short attenuation to your career should not minimize greatness.

Bill James also created what he calls the "Keltner List" of Hall of Fame worthiness. These are fifteen questions used to sort through candidates. Obviously, if you accept these questions, you're accepting Bill James' own assumptions about what makes someone worthy, but I'm willing to take that leap. I'm not going to answer them all for Jim Rice, but I'll post them below and be comfortable in saying that I think that objective answers to questions on the list actually treat Jim Rice pretty fairly.

The last thing I'll say is that I sincerely hope that the trend toward increasing support every year continues. It would be ludicrous to think that someone would appear on a writer's ballot one year and then drop off in future years. It is much much more sensible to believe that a player is understood to be a Hall of Famer as time gives you better context of their careers. Only slam-dunks are enshrined immediately (congratulations in advance, Cal and Tony), but other guys like Jim Rice and Bert Blyleven need to build over time as people can see, from a distance, how truly dominant they were in their time, and in their context.

THE KELTNER LIST
1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?

2. Was he the best player on his team?

3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position?

4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?

5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?

6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?

7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?

8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?

10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?

11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?

12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?

14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?

15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?

Monday, January 08, 2007

U-N-I-T-Bye

It seems somewhat official this morning that Randy Johnson is now done as a member of the Yankees. He seems to be returning to the Diamondbacks for two years and $26 million, which is about ten dollars per year he's been alive. In exchange, the Yankees are picking up Luis Vizcaino and a couple of minor leaguers. Vizcaino should be servicable out of the bullpen, and the Yankees can safely say that the did some major restocking of their upper-eschelons of minor league talent this off-season. Getting rid of Sheffield, Jaret Wright, and Johnson for a boatload of prospects seems anathema to the Yankee approach for the last half-decade. They're getting rid of established, "name" players and taking on prospects? Madness. Madness.

Actually, this is probably good for both the Yankees AND the Red Sox. In the short term- the window of this year and probably next year, this is good for the Sox. Randy Johnson, despite a sub-standard 2006 and an ongoing surly attitude in NYC, was due for a major bounceback year. I haven't read anyone (any reliable projection system, that is) that thinks the Yankees have a pitcher that would have been better than the Unit in 2007. Not Mussina. Not Wang. Not Philip Hughes. Not Pavano. As far as the Sox are concerned, the Yankees traded away their ace. And that, my friends, is good news for Curt Schilling and the Sox as they go into his final year.

For the Yankees, this moves makes them younger and cheaper with greater upside in the future. Now, I don't really know what relevance "getting cheaper" is to the Yankees. They're opening their new stadium in 2008 or 2009, complete with the machine that prints $10,000 bills with Steinbrenner's face on it up in the owner's box behind home plate. I know it must suck having to pay the luxury tax, paying other teams for the privelege of crushing them in the regular season. But honestly, even with these moves, money is not, and will not be, an issue. My guess is that Cashman just wants to prove to the other GMs that he can be as smart as they are without spending double, triple or quadruple what they're spending.

While we're speculating on the motives of strangers, let me say that I'm pretty tired of the Roger Clemens speculation. All the New York papers, and several others, are saying that now that the Unit is gone, the Yankees have the inside track on signing Roger for all or part of 2007. After all, he loved playing for Joe Torre, and heck, Andy Pettitte is back in pinstripes, why not Roger? The Sox, of course, believe that because Clemens started out in Boston and is currently tied with Cy Young at the top of the all-time Sox wins list, he'd like to come back, have some closure, and take the crown from Cy Young. The Astros, meanwhile, think that Roger will ultimately decide to stay home again and pitch Sundays for Houston. After all, his son is a lousy prospect in the Astros' low minors! I grow weary.

My point is: nobody knows nothin'. We don't know what is in Roger's head, or the head of his wife, or all of his K-children. We do know that he's got an open invitation to join ANY of these teams, and money is not really a concern with any of them, or with him. I'd be very surprised if it came down to some sort of financial bidding war between the Yankees and the Sox. Roger doesn't need the money, and both of the teams have too much dignity to engage that. Even Pettitte, who is supposed to be Clemens' best friend, has no idea what he's going to do. So enough with these speculative articles handicapping his ultimate location. Sure, it would be nice if he ended up here (though our rotation is looking pretty solid even without him), or even in Houston for one more go. It would sort of suck if he ended up back with the Yankees, because that would make them a bit better, at least for the couple of months he's there. But it's not like coming to Boston or NYC would guarantee either Roger or the team one last title. It's just so much silliness.

So here's my prediction: Even going into the season, nobody will know where Clemens will be playing come June. When he finally decides, one team will be happy, though 40% of that team's fan base will think the team is overpaying him; one team will be upset that they didn't try harder to get him; and the third team, like the rest of the world, will sigh and say "Whatever. Let's move on, shall we?"

Let's move on, shall we?

Friday, January 05, 2007

Contract Questions

In all of the hubbub over the Joel Pineiro contract (well, if by hubbub you mean my obsessively checking about three websites over and over...) something is still a bit unclear to me. It's been widely reported as a $4 million deal for one year. I've also heard from numerous places that there is a $2 million incentive in place, based on "games finished." Obviously this tips the hand of the Sox that they made this signing with the intent on making Pineiero at least a solid candidate for closer. My question is- is it a $2 million deal plus $2 million in incentives or a $4 million contract with another $2 million in incentives. That makes a bit of a difference to how I see this.

If it's a $2 million base with the other 2 in incentives, that's a really savvy acquisition. Given this pitching market, $2 million to take a chance on an arm like Pineiero's is a very good pickup. If nothing else, he can be bundled and flipped to another team starving for pitching. If he flops in the bullpen, he'll never reach the games finished incentive level anyway, and the Sox are out $2 million TOPS. If he succeeds and becomes a good closer, then $4 million is a very reasonable price to pay for a major league closer. If the base is $4 million and could jump to six, well that's not quite as good. Still, if that last $2 million kicks in, it must mean that Pineiro is doing something right. I'd just like some clarification on this, so that I can know how happy or perplexed to be.

In somewhat related news, Keith Foulke signed on with the Indians yesterday. Well, I know that he wanted to get closer to his home in Arizona, and technically Cleveland IS closer than Boston to Phoenix...but this guy must have really hated playing for Boston. He's making $5 million base in Cleveland, with some incentives, I understand. With arbitration, he could probably have made about $6 or $6.5 in Boston. It's obviously not about the money. To my mind, it's probably about 35% that he hated pitching in Boston and about 65% that he is more likely to get to be the closer in Cleveland. Even with Papelbon returning to the rotation, it was no slam-dunk that Foulke would have regained his chair at the end of the bullpen. Cleveland may give him that chance.

Finally, another former Red Sox player signed elsewhere yesterday. Mark Loretta agreed to a one-year, $2.5 million deal with the Astros. The contract also includes a million in incentives. This one is a little sad to me. I don't know if there would have been a place for him on the Sox bench. I agree that it's time for the Dustin Pedroia era to begin, so he wouldn't have been the starter at second. The Sox did just give Alex Cora $4 million over two years to be the utility guy, and Loretta gives you about 60% more offensive production than Cora (well, that's not ACTUALLY based on statistics, but you get the point). And yes, Cora can play basically anywhere on the field but catcher, and Loretta's probably a 2B or 1B only. I guess I understand him not being in Boston this year, but geez. Only a one year deal? Only $2.5 million for a guy who was an all-star twice in the last four years? It's a weird market. Trot's still unemployed, too.

Thursday, January 04, 2007

Still I Look To Find A Reason To Believe

Here's a pitching trendline for you. The data is presented in year-ERA-K/BB format:
2002 - 3.24 - 2.52
2003 - 3.78 - 1.99
2004 - 4.67 - 2.58
2005 - 5.62 - 1.91
2006 - 6.36 - 1.36
...and one final number - $4 million. And no, that last number is not the Publisher's Clearing House prize for rapid decent into suckiness.

The Sox are apparently close to finalizing a one-year deal with former Seattle righty Joel Pineiro. The speculation is that the Sox will try out Pineiro in the bullpen, with an eye on making him a candidate for closer. I've always been in the camp of those who believe that "proven closers" are just good pitchers who happen to pitch last in the game. A good reliever can usually be a good closer. Look at Eddie Guardado, K-Rod, Keith Foulke, even Mariano Rivera. They were all either converted starters or bullpen/setup guys. They moved to the last chair in the bullpen, and were fine.

I'm all for thinking out of the box, as well. If there's no Chad Cordero or Mike Gonzalez (or Keith Foulke or Eric Gagne) immediately available, the front office has to get creative. But I'm a little stumped by this one. Taking a flier (flyer?) on an arm with potential is all well and good, but dishing out $4 million for a guy who has been in freefall for the last couple of seasons is stretching even my homerism. I have two theories on this- let's call this John's attempt to restore his faith in Theo and bring order back to his Red Sox universe.

Theory #1: Pineiro has showed flashes of potential as a reliever. As my new friend Tim Daloisio points out, Piniero has pitched to 295 batters in his career as a reliever, he has had some success holding batters to a .205 batting average and a .610 OPS. Rotoworld agrees that having him focus on one inning at a time may get him back on track. Tim goes on to talk about Pineiro's mechanics, which have been inconsistent (you think?) and declining. It will be up to new pitching coach John Farrell to rebuild them. But by any measure, this is a huge crapshoot. Sure, he could turn it around, find the stuff he had in 2002/2003 and pitch as well out of the 'pen as he has in the past. He could also continue to disappear into the black hole of crappiness that has started to engulf him. $4 million is alot to gamble on that.

Theory #2: Leverage. Or rather, the appearance of leverage. Everybody knows the Sox need a closer. Everybody knows that Foulke, Gagne, Lidge, etc. are not options. Everybody knows the dice are loaded. Everbody rolls with their fingers crossed. Sorry- I shouldn't be mixing music into the middle of the post- song lyrics belong in the title. The point is that the Nationals and the Pirates know that Theo is over a barrel and needs a closer, giving them much more power in negotiations. The Nats were asking for two or three top young arms for Cordero- Hansen and Clay Buchholz and someone else, I believe. The Sox wouldn't give that up. So we needed to do something else. If we can convince the baseball world that we're serious about making Pineiro the closer, our leverage changes- we don't "need" Cordero or Gonzalez quite as desperately. Wink. Wink. Oh, sure, Jim Bowdoin, we'll still talk to you about Cordero. We'll still be interested if the price is a bit lower, but you see, we've got a good closer option. We know we can fix Pineiro's mechanics. He'll be good. Sure, you want Hansen for Cordero? We can do that. But we don't need to, mind you. This is just another option, you know.

I like the possibility that Theory #2 might be correct, but again, $4 million is alot to spend to play that particular gambit. Hey, fingers crossed- maybe Pineiro will surprise us all. Until then, I'll be sitting here, rocking quickly back and forth with my knees pulled up to my chest, hoping that Theo's just being crazy like a fox. We need that fox.

Wednesday, January 03, 2007

I Think It's Still Pronounced "Shawn"

I'm always humbled by guys who can do this stuff. One likes to feel special, like one occupies a special and irreplaceable niche in the world, but then again, one is always reminded that there are hundreds or thousands of others out there that can do all of the different things you can do, except better. In other words- you're precious, unique and special- just like everyone else.

There's a dude out there named Chone Smith who happens to be a big Angels fan. This strikes me as a bit of an improbability. Improbable because his unusual first name is the same as the unusual first name of his favorite player on the Anaheim Angels of Orange County Just Outside Los Angeles County But Still Within The Greater Los Angeles Metropolitan Area Such That Having Los Angeles In The Team Name Is Somewhat Accurate But Mostly A Marketing Conceit is also Chone. Chone Figgins, the world's most versatile utility guy, pronounces his name "Shawn." I'd guess that the blogger is pronounced the same way.

So this blogger came up with a projection system which he calls...um...CHONE. Something tells me this guy would be really easy to hack, but I have to give some respect to his system. His hitting projections are right up there with PECOTA, ZIPS, and the Bill James/BIS guys, with an accuracy between 65% and 70% or so.

His projections are sort of a good news/bad news scenario for the Sox. On the good news side, he sees really solid years from Daisuke Matsuzaka and Jonathan Papelbon. Matsuzaka projects to a 3.46 ERA over 187 innings with a 171/52 K/BB ratio. That's a year like Mike Mussina had last year, and with the Sox offense could mean 18 wins for our new pitcher. Papelbon projects to a 3.63 ERA, but his innings are only at 139, probably because it's difficult to project innings from a converted closer. The bad news is that CHONE sees further decline from Curt Schilling, checking in with a 4.25 ERA, though still with a strong K/BB ratio. Wakefield comes in with a 4.76 ERA and rather disappointing strikeout numbers. In between these is Josh Beckett. He projects at an ERA of 4.30 over 186 innings and a K/BB of 152/65. He's projected at 25 homers, which is a great improvement, and would probably explain the lower ERA number. That's better than last year, obviously, but I still find it disappointing. I can't help maintaining high hopes for an ace-like breakout from Beckett.

On the Yankees' side of the spreadsheet, CHONE agrees with PECOTA and ZIPS- seeing Randy Johnson as the probable ace of the Yankees' staff in 2007. Declines are seen from Wang and Mussina. Mediocrity (4.33 ERA) is projected for Andy Pettitte and for Kei Igawa (4.44) and Carl Pavano (4.45). This is just one more reason to hope that the Yankees can finish off the trade to the Diamondbacks. Heck, with the expected bounceback year from the Big Unit, combined with a return to the pitching-friendly NL West? He could be in line for another Cy Young.

All things considered, then, I would take the Sox pitching over the Yankees pitching easily for the 2007 season. The hitting is another issue. That's what is going to make this season close in the AL East. I'll have to look at those numbers more closely.

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

The First Thing I Checked

I narrowed down my baseball-website-subscription wish list. I went through the stages of grieving on this a while ago. When BP and ESPN went mostly pay-to-see for their good content, I was outraged. Well, maybe outraged is a little strong. I was sort of annoyed/pissed off. I wanted to read Rob Neyer and Chris(tina?) Kahrl and Derek Zumsteg without having to pay for the pleasure.

I think I skipped a couple of the stages of grief after that and just paid the subscription for Baseball Prospectus. It was, for the most part, the only game in town for me. That lasted two years, I think. During that time, other websites like Baseball Analysts and Hardball Times cropped up, providing decent (if significantly reduced) content for free. That satisfied me for a while, but I'm itching again.

Under the auspices of a birthday gift, I resubscribed to BP this morning. I figure it's really no more nuts than subscribing to a magazine or the Sporting News or something like that. I was going to wait until my actual birthday (this Saturday, for you last-minute shoppers), but something happened this morning to push up the subscription date. I read an article in the Hardball Times about DIPS (defense-independent pitching), which normalizes pitching performance and accounts for bad or good defense, relying heavily on peripheral statistics. There was also a new stat called LIPS, which accounts for bad/good luck. There was also I noticed a couple of intriguing things. First, Chien-Mien Wang was probably the luckiest pitcher in the majors last year. Posting an ERA below 4, when it could easily have been in the mid-5's. Barry Zito was similarly lucky. There seems to be a recognition that ground-ball pitchers with very low strikeout rates are awfully dependent on just where those balls are hit. Wang may have gotten a bunch of balls to Cano, when different swings could have sent them...wait for it...past a diving Jeter. Wang could be due for a down year in 2007, especially with Jeter and A-Rod another year older, and some uncertainty at first base.

The more significant thing I noticed was the MOST unlucky pitcher in baseball last year, according to home runs allowed vs. expected, was none other than Josh Beckett. We all know that he gave up a bunch of homers- 36 to be exact. His expected HRs should have been closer to around 25. Does this augur a good year, a bounceback year for Beckett? I wanted to know more. I needed PECOTA!

That brings me back to my subscription. I couldn't find any good pitching projections for Beckett on the internet (for free, anyway) so I knew the time had come. I just got my confirmation email- with the closing "Love, Baseball Prospectus"-and am ready to roll. I'm ready to find out what the geniuses at BP are predicting from Josh Beckett for 2007. And the answer is...

PECOTA projections for 2007 are not fully rolled out yet. Damn it.