And, time for quick spin through the bullpen:
Francisco Cordero -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: D+
Unfortunately, the Reds are on the hook for big money to a closer who is heading in the wrong direction. When the Reds signed Coco away from division rival Brewers, they were acquiring the services of an elite, shutdown closer. In each of the three seasons prior to joining the Reds, Coco tossed at least 63 innings, posted K/9 marks of greater than 10.0, and posted BB/9 marks of less than 4.0.
The Reds have gotten a couple of good seasons from Coco, but his performance has undeniably been a notch below where it was before arriving in the Queen City. That wasn't much of a problem in 2008 and 2009, but in 2010 it was alarming.
Coco's strikeout rate has fallen from 12.22 in his final year with the Brewers to 9.98 in 2008 to 7.83 in 2009 and finally to 7.31 in 2010. Those rates are typically more than acceptable, unless they are paired with walk rates of greater than 4.0. If you are going to walk that many, then you need to strikeout hitters at a dominant rate. Since 2002 through 2007, Coco sported a K/BB ratio of 2.37 or higher, with the high water mark being 4.78 in 2007. However, starting in 2008 on forward, he has posted K/BB marks of 2.05, 1.93, and 1.64. Coco's 2010 contact rate also jumped all the way up to 79%, which matched the second worst rate of his career.
Interestingly enough, Coco's problems largely came on the fastball, which simply lost effectiveness. In 2009, Coco's fastball was 8.1 runs above average, but in 2010 Coco's fastball was a mere 0.7 runs above average. The slider was exactly as effective in 2010 as it was in 2009, clocking in at 5.1 runs above average in both years.
Additionally, Dusty was fairly conservative with Coco's usage. The Bill James Handbook includes a stat for relievers called the Leverage Index. In short, a mark of 1.0 is an average leverage index. The higher the index, the more times the reliever is working with the game on the line. The lower the index, the more times the reliever is working in mop-up duty. For 2010, Coco's leverage index was 2.1, which is pretty standard for closers.
However, it's clear that Dusty tried to protect Coco to a certain extent, as Coco only inherited 4 runners the entire season (perhaps not surprisingly, 3 of the those runners came around to score). In comparison, San Francisco Giant closer Brian Wilson was utilized much more aggressively by Bruce Bochy, as he inherited a whopping 30 baserunners and allowed a mere 4 of them to score.
On the season, Coco only had 1 "tough save" opportunity, which is defined as a situation where the reliever enters the game with the tying run on base. And, of course, Coco blew his only "tough save" opportunity. Again, for comparison sake, Brian Wilson had 9 tough save opportunities and converted on 7 of them.
Overall, this declining dominance is not unexpected, as Coco will be 36-years old in early 2011. Unfortunately, that means his days of blowing the doors off the competition in the late innings are likely over.
Nick Masset -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: C
Masset continues to be a very effective member of the Reds bullpen and his acquisition in the Ken Griffey Jr. deal was one of the more unheralded of recent memory. At the time, Griffey had little to no trade value, but GM Walt Jocketty still managed to extract a high leverage reliever from the White Sox for his services. It's a deal that has helped solidify the back end of the bullpen and provided much needed late inning stability.
In 2010, Masset was essentially the same pitcher he was in 2009. He tossed 76.2 innings and posted a 3.40 ERA, 1.27 WHIP, 3.9 BB/9, and 10.0 K/9. His walk rate and strikeout rate both increased, but the real difference in his performance came from a regression to the mean of his BABIP (from .250 in 2009 to .303 in 2010). Additionally, and not surprisingly in light of the increase in hit rate, his strand rate dropped from 80.5% in 2009 to 76.0% in 2010. Regardless, he was largely the same pitcher in 2010 as he was in 2009, as his FIP was 3.23 in 2009 and 3.38 in 2010.
On the season, his pitch mix was largely the same, except he threw the curveball 5% more often and the cutter 7.4% less often. Masset also worked heavily in key situations, as his Leverage Index was 1.3. He also inherited 32 runners, only 9 of whom came around to score, and posted an opponent OPS of .643.
In addition to the aforementioned increase in walk rate, Masset threw significantly fewer first pitch strikes (down to 48% in 2010 from 59% in 2009), so the command certainly did falter a bit in 2010.
Overall, Masset continues to post solid production that will ensure that Dusty leans heavily on him in the future high leverage situations. In fact, he could be next in line for the closer gig if Coco continues his slow fade.
Logan Ondrusek -- Expectations: Low , Grade: B+
Ondrusek quickly established that his breakthrough performance in the minors was no sample size fluke, as he carried his new found success and cutter to the bump in Great American Ballpark. He assumed a hefty workload and was a key member of the relief corps.
Logan tossed a 3.68 ERA and 1.18 WHIP over 58.2 innings. Not bad for a rookie. The strikeout (5.98 K/9) and walk (3.07 BB/9) rates aren't overly strong, but he actually did a nice job of missing bats (77.1% contact rate). The contact he did allow, however, was in the air more often than was expected by his minor league track record. On the season, Ondrusek actually had neutral groundball/flyball tendencies (0.99 GB/FB). His overall performance was aided by a lower than expected BABIP of .249. Overall, it was a nice season for Ondrusek, but he'll need to improve on his peripherals in 2011 if he wants to sustain his level of performance.
Ondrusek also did a very nice job stranding inherited runners. Of the 26 he inherited, only 7 came around to score. His 27% scoring clip was the second best on the team behind only ageless wonder, Arthur Rhodes, at 14%. Unlike Rhodes, however, Ondrusek was not used in high leverage innings (0.9 Leverage Index).
If Ondrusek can improve his peripherals, then he'll likely be spending time in more crucial, high leverage situations in 2011 and beyond. Ondrusek is a prime example of the improving depth and quality of the organization's farm system. As a general rule, the best arms in a farm system are developed as starting pitchers. In the past, the Reds had far fewer quality arms in the system, which resulted in prospects likely better suited to relieving being developed as starters. Given the miscasting of these prospects, the organization struggled to develop starters and relievers. The rebirth of the farm system has allowed the organization to bump quality arms like Ondrusek down into relief roles, where they can develop into assets for the Major League roster.
Arthur Rhodes -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: A
As remarkable as it sounds, Rhodes has posted a sub-3.00 ERA in each of the past three seasons. And, even more remarkably, the last two took place in the hitter's paradise known as Great American Ballpark. In 2010, he managed to be even better.
In 55.0 high leverage innings (1.4 Leverage Index), the 40-year old Rhodes posted a 2.29 ERA, 1.02 WHIP, and 50/18 K/BB ratio. Rhodes not only pitched well, but pitched well in crucial situations. He inherited 36 runners and stranded all but 5 of them. So, not only was his own ERA stellar, but he also bailed out other pitchers and helped keep their ERAs low.
Overall, Rhodes outperformed his peripherals, as his FIP of 3.24 was almost a full run higher than his actual ERA. Part of that discrepancy resulted from his .244 BABIP and 83.7% strand rate, which both could conceivably regress in the future.
Ultimately, Rhodes was the most valuable reliever on the roster in 2010. Unfortunately, the Reds let Rhodes get away to the Texas Rangers. After all the cries of poverty coming out of Cincinnati, one wonders if the $2M (possibly $3M if incentives are reached) they spent on Edgar Renteria would have been better used to bring Rhodes back in 2011. If Rhodes was still in the mix, then the Reds might be more willing to develop Aroldis Chapman in the minors as a starter. Art's departure created a hole in the bullpen that had to be filled. Chapman has been tabbed as just the player to do it. Aroldis dominated as a reliever, but the longer he stays in that role, the less likely he'll be moved back to the starting rotation.
The departure of Rhodes means not only the loss of his production, but perhaps also a change in long-term role for Aroldis Chapman. If true, Rhodes's departure could have a long lasting impact on the future of the organization.
Jordan Smith -- Expectations: Low, Grade: B
Smith joined Logan Ondrusek to give the Reds an unexpected tandem of homegrown, young relievers. Smith tossed 42.0 innings, posting 3.86 ERA, 1.33 WHIP, 2.36 BB/9, and 5.57 K/9. Similarly to Ondrusek, Smith outperformed his peripherals, as his 4.94 FIP was over a full run higher than his actual ERA. While his BABIP was a respectable .291, his strand rate was likely unsustainable at 83.0%.
Somewhat surprisingly, Smith's heavy groundball tendencies in the minors did not translate to the MLB level, as evidenced by his 1.06 GB/FB ratio. His defining characteristic as a pitcher is his groundball rate, as he has always been a pitch-to-contact type pitcher. And, it's tough to excel in a hitter's ballpark with that type of profile unless you are racking up the groundballs.
Smith inherited 17 runners and allowed 6 of them to come around to score. Smith was used largely in low leverage situations (0.7 Leverage Index) by Dusty Baker and will likely to continue as a long reliever or mop-up man in the future. His lack of overpowering stuff will likely prevent him from becoming a setup man or closer, but if he can rediscover his groundball touch, then he might be the type of pitcher you need in the bullpen to throw a key double-play ball.
Overall, Smith performed well out of the bullpen in 2010, but he'll likely struggle to maintain that success unless he rediscovers the heavy sink on his pitches.
Billy Bray -- Expectations: None, Grade: B
Bray continues to drive fans insane. He demonstrates flashes of brilliance in between very long stints on the disabled list. In 2010, Bray managed to stay on the field long enough to log 28.1 innings in which he posted a 4.13 ERA, 1.09 WHIP, 3.18 BB/9, and 9.53 K/9.
Unlike Smith and Ondrusek, Bray's peripherals were superior to his production. His FIP of 3.86 is lower than his ERA. Additionally, his strand rate is surprisingly low at 70.9%, which might regress to higher levels in 2011 if he can actually stay on the field long enough for it to happen.
He was used largely in non-key situations, as his Leverage Index was 0.7. Obviously, his inconsistent health has prevented the Reds from relying on him in any appreciable manner. A healthy Bray would somewhat offset the loss of Arthur Rhodes, but his track record indicates that a full season of production is rather unlikely.
Aroldis Chapman -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: A++
Incredible. Electric. Unbelievable.
The big question on Aroldis is whether the Reds will be able to convert him from mere spectacle into a big time MLB contributor.
Showing posts with label Season Review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Season Review. Show all posts
Friday, January 7, 2011
Friday, December 3, 2010
2010 Review: Starting Pitchers
On to the starting staff:
Bronson Arroyo -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: B-
Arroyo continues to grind out the 200+ inning seasons, topping the mark for an incredible 6th straight year in 2010. Arroyo is definitely not afraid of hard work and his tremendous durability continues to be his most valuable attribute. During his time in Cincy, almost without exception, Arroyo has taken the ball on his turn through the rotation.
However, the question remains whether he can continue to do so.
In 2010, Arroyo was almost exactly the same pitcher he was in 2009.
Year:_BB/9__K/9__GB/FB__ERA
2009:__ 2.7___5.2____1.22____3.84
2010: __2.5___5.1____1.08____3.88
I suppose that type of consistency should be comforting, but the decline in his strikeout rate during his time in Cincy is a concern (at least to me), but so far it hasn't slowed him down. Starting in 2006, his first season with the Reds, Arroyo has posted K/9 marks of 6.9, 6.7, 7.3, 5.2, and 5.1. I have concerns about whether Arroyo can continue to post a sub-4 ERA with these peripherals.
However, over the last two seasons, Bronson has significantly outperformed his FIP. His 3.84 ERA in 2009 went along with a FIP of 4.78 and a BABIP of .270, while his 3.88 ERA in 2010 when along with a FIP of 4.61 and a BABIP of .246. At first blush, it looks like he was hit lucky, but he also managed to decrease his Line Drive rate to 18.5% in 2009 and 16.3% in 2010.
Another interesting aspect of his performance is the percentage of his strikeouts that were called and his contact rate.
Year: Called K%_Contact%
2004:__28%______81%
2005:__22%______85%
2006:__20%______81%
2007:__21%______81%
2008:__19%______81%
2009:__23%______84%
2010:__17%______83%
Arroyo is allowing more and more pitches to be put in play and getting fewer called strikeouts, both of which would seem to indicate a decline in stuff. He's fooling fewer hitters and relying on his defense to a greater extent. Can he continue to succeed by, in essence, controlling the contact and relying on the defense?
A moment I found to be somewhat reassuring about Arroyo's 2010 season was his performance in the playoffs. You won't find many offenses better than the Phillies or many situations that are more high leverage than a postseason start. Regardless, Arroyo rose to the occasion and managed to keep the Phillies off-balance for most of the night. Ultimately, his outing was cut short when the defense let him down with back-to-back errors by Phillips and Rolen.
As with the regular season, the performance was more smoke-and-mirrors than dominating, as he allowed too many baserunners and walked more than he struck out. It was the same high-contact pitching style that he utilized during the season, but this time the defense let him down. Even so, he battled and came away with a solid performance, but I'm still not confident that Arroyo is the pitcher I want on the hill in a must win Game 7 situation.
Arroyo continues to be something of a contradiction. His peripherals are arguably getting worse, but his overall performance has gotten better. From where I sit, something has to give. I'm just not convinced that Arroyo can maintain his 2009 & 2010 performance level while allowing so much contact. The general thinking is that pitchers cannot control the outcome of balls in play. Additionally, high contact pitchers with neutral GB/FB tendencies in a bandbox like GABP seem like an inherently poor fit. Arroyo also benefited from the league wide decline in power, which made contact less harmful than in years past but may not continue in the 2011 season. Maybe Arroyo can continue to thrive with varied offspeed offerings, but I wouldn't be willing to extend him out past 2011. In fact, given our pitching surplus, I wouldn't hesitate to see what Arroyo would fetch on the trade market.
However, the Reds will have to hope that Arroyo can maintain his performance level by throwing the kitchen sink at opposing teams. Regardless of the performance level, the Reds can confidently pencil Arroyo in for 200+ innings in 2011.
Mike Leake -- Expectations: None, Grade: B
What Mike Leake managed to do in 2010 was nothing short of remarkable. His performance in spring training was so strong that he broke camp with the team and skipped the minors entirely, which you simply don't see all that often. And, probably for good reason.
It was an interesting decision due in no small part to the fact that Leake had never started every 5th day. In college, he started once a week, so it seemed likely and logical that Leake would start the year in the minors to acclimate to the heavier workload. But, the Reds deemed him MLB ready and it didn't take him long to prove that he was.
Leake tossed a rather stunning 138.1 innings with a 4.23 ERA, 1.50 WHIP, and 91/49 K/BB ratio. He managed to induce ground balls at a good clip (1.58 GB/FB ratio) and produced solid ratios (3.2 BB/9 and 5.9 K/9) for a rookie who bypassed the minors entirely. Not surprisingly, his early season performance was much stronger than his second half. He simply hit a wall and wasn't effective late in the season. It was likely a combination of fatigue and hitters learning the book on Leake.
His monthly splits reveal his hot start and subsequent fade:
April: 3.25 ERA in 27.2 IP
May: 1.88 ERA in 38.1 IP
June: 5.22 ERA in 29.1 IP
July: 4.56 ERA in 25.2 IP
August: 8.83 ERA in 17.1 IP
Looking at his mid/late season fade, it is easy to call the decision to start him off in the majors a questionable one. The Reds did effectively manage his pitch counts, as his highest game total was 106 pitches, but Leake simply hadn't been stretched out to handle the grind of a major league starting pitcher. His performance level was sufficient, but his endurance was not. However, he showed in his first few months that he was polished enough to succeed at the highest level right away, which made him essentially a no-risk draft pick.
Both Mike Leake and Mike Minor were polished college pitchers who have so far outperformed their projected draft positions. Minor has better stuff than was commonly believed and Leake moved much faster than thought possible. Not sure why the scouting was off the mark on these college pitchers, but polish may be somewhat underrated these days.
Overall, it was a surprising and strong rookie debut for Leake. Not surprisingly, he faded as his innings total mounted, but he gave the Reds some real big innings and some stability in the rotation at a time when it was definitely needed. The future is bright and having a pitcher in the rotation who understands how to pitch will provide some real stability for years to come.
Johnny Cueto -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: B+
Johnny has been in the majors for three seasons and has made incremental improvement each year. Despite his annual improvement, it's hard not to be somehow disappointed. Obviously, that isn't fair to Cueto, but he is a victim of his own success. In 2007, Cueto blazed through three minor league levels with a 3.07 ERA, 1.12 WHIP, 1.9 BB/9, and 9.5 K/9. That level of performance brought about notions of immediate MLB dominance. Instead, he has followed the more traditional path of incremental improvement.
In 2010, Cueto tossed 185.2 innings with a 3.64 ERA, 1.28 WHIP, and a 138/56 K/BB ratio. It was a nice combination of workload and performance level.
2008: 4.81 ERA, 1.41 WHIP, 3.5 BB/9, and 8.2 K/9 in 174.0 innings
2009: 4.41 ERA, 1.36 WHIP, 3.2 BB/9, and 6.9 K/9 in 171.1 innings
2010: 3.64 ERA, 1.28 WHIP, 2.7 BB/9, and 6.7 K/9 in 185.2 innings
He set a career high in innings pitched and improved across the board, with the exception of strikeouts which are in modest decline. Cueto is likely reining in his stuff in favor of improved command and control. As he has continued to evolve as a pitcher, Cueto has altered his pitch selection:
Year:__FB%__ SL%__CH%
2008:__61.1%__32.1%__6.7%
2009:__62.2%__29.7%__8.2%
2010:__55.2%__26.7%__10.0%
Perhaps it's the influence of roving instructor Mario Soto, who deserves a decent amount of credit for his work with our young pitchers, but whatever the reason Cueto has de-emphasized his slider in favor of his change-up. The change in pitch selection has likely brought about improved control and slightly fewer strikeouts. In short, Cueto is learning how to effectively utilize his arsenal for maximum benefit.
All in all, it was a nice season for Cueto, but one that didn't get a great deal of hype. To a certain extent, Cueto was overshadowed by Mike Leake, Travis Wood, and Aroldis Chapman. Those three each made a bigger splash, but Cueto's quiet improvement was just as impressive and certainly shouldn't be overshadowed. If Cueto makes yet another incremental improvement in 2011, then he'll be approaching some rather rarefied air.
Travis Wood -- Expectations: Low, Grade: A-
Yet another pitching surprise for the Reds and a good one at that. Wood has long been a favorite of mine due to his plus change-up and clean mechanics, but he arrived on the scene in 2010 with slightly better top-end velocity than was advertised.
Wood made quick work of the competition, flashing good stuff, great command, and a very good feel for pitching.
He stepped up to throw 102.2 innings with a 3.51 ERA, 1.08 WHIP, 2.3 BB/9, and 7.5 K/9. Wood featured a four pitch mix, including a fastball (64.1% of the time), changeup (10.1%), cutter (19.9%), and curveball (5.9%). He's got a very nice repertoire, which he used to keep the righthanders off balance and completely dominate the lefties.
On the season, Wood gave up absolutely nothing to lefties. He gave up a slash line of .136/.219/.227/.446. He also did a very nice job against righties to the tune of .240/.289/.363/.651. Overall, the addition of the cutter has really given Wood the ability to handle righthanded hitters. It allows him to keep them honest on the inner half of the plate, which improves the effectiveness of his fading changeup on the outer half.
Of course, Wood also provided one of the singular moments of the season for the Reds when he nearly tossed a perfect game against the defending NL champion Phillies in their home park. Wood threw 9 innings and gave up only 1 hit, no walks, and 8 strikeouts. His perfect game was foiled by a Carlos Ruiz double in the ninth inning and the Reds inability to score a run. The game ultimately went to extra innings where the Reds came out on the short end, but it was a national coming out party for Travis Wood.
The only potential red flag on Wood is his GB/FB ratio. He exhibited a heavy fly ball tendency, which isn't ideally suited for Great American Ballpark and may come back to bite him if hitters catch up to him as he gets around the league for a second and third time. At that point, it'll be up to Wood to adjust, which shouldn't be a problem given his feel for pitching.
Overall, it was an exciting and impressive debut for Wood and one that is very encouraging for 2011 and beyond. Wood and Leake are two pure pitchers. They may not have the best stuff on the staff, but they understand how to utilize it and how to attack the hitters. They should be consistent and reliable members of the rotation for years to come, which will provide a nice counterpart to the more volatile high ceiling/low floor starters on the staff (see below).
Homer Bailey -- Expectations: Low, Grade: C+
Homer continues to be the ultimate enigma, which may be what he is right down to his core (A pitcher who prefers to be called Homer?). I won't spend too much time parsing his numbers and analyzing his performance, as it won't really throw any additional light on the true Homer Bailey. We've seen him at his best and at his worst, but it's still impossible to tell which version will show up on any given day. He still seems to have all the potential in the world, but his performance simply never reflects it.
Here's a quick overview of Bailey in 2010. He pitched 109.0 innings at the beginning and ending of the movie with a long injury stint in between. When all was said and done, Homer had a 4.46 ERA, 1.37 WHIP, and 100/40 K/BB ratio. The biggest positives are his career best walk (3.3 BB/9) and strikeout (8.3 K/9) rates. His April and May were forgettable, at best, while his August and September were fairly impressive. He also acquitted himself well in a 2 inning postseason relief appearance against the Phillies. It does bear mentioning that Homer's numbers are somewhat skewed by his dominance against the lowly Pirates (16.0 innings, 0.56 ERA, 15/0 K/BB). Additionally, even in his good starts, I was struck by the number of times he badly missed the target. The catcher would set up on the corner only to have to reach all the way back across the plate to catch the pitch on the other corner. So, I'm not convinced that he truly turned the corner in the final two months. Once again, Homer was maddening, showing enough upside to be optimistic about his chances in 2011, but not enough to allow any certainty in that regard.
For me, the most telling thing about his season actually occurred off the field. In late May, Homer was shut down and DL'd due to shoulder stiffness. Homer was upset about the decision because he didn't feel the arm was that bad, going so far as to refuse a cortisone injection.
Two things are really striking about this situation. First, Homer seemed to have no understanding of the severity of the problem. He protested going on the DL because he didn't believe that he needed to miss even two weeks worth of games. In the end, he didn't return to the majors until August 15th. It seems a somewhat shocking lack of self-awareness about the health of his arm. Either he simply has no clue about the condition of his arm or he did and simply refused to acknowledge it due to his innate stubbornness. I'm not sure which would be the preferable explanation, but I'd certainly hope that a pitcher has a better feeling for the condition of his arm.
The second thing that jumped out at me was his refusal of the cortisone shot, which manages to seem impressive, stubborn, and disconcerting all at the same time. It's impressive in that a 20-something kid actually steps back to consider a team doctor's advice and ultimately goes against the organization's advice. If an organization had invested millions of dollars in me and had a doctor telling me what I needed to get healthy, I'd probably take the doctors advice on all but the most major procedures. However, Homer was stubborn because a cortisone shot is a minor medical matter, not a major surgery. This is an instance in which refusing the team's treatment seems rather odd and unnecessarily stubborn. The team doctor and organization simply want Bailey to get healthy and back on the mound, which (in theory at least) is what Homer wants as well. There was no divergence of interests between the player and the organization, as both want performance and health over the short and long haul.
Homer either lacks trust of any kind in the organization or he simply suffers from an over abundance of youthful arrogance that leads him to believe he always knows best. Whatever the reason, this seems to be par for the course in his development as a player, as he has butted heads with the Reds coaches throughout his time with the organization. I can't easily recall any young player having so many issues and conflicts with an organization on his way up the ladder. Developing Homer Bailey is no small task and these problems are likely the root cause of his struggles. He has all the tools, but seems to lack the mentality to put them to use.
Once again, the Reds head into 2011 with reasonably high hopes for Homer Bailey. It remains to be seen whether those hopes will again be derailed by Homer's frequently misguided actions and stubborn attitude.
Edinson Volquez -- Expectations: None, Grade: B+
Edinson's grade is based largely on the complete lack of expectations. After undergoing Tommy John surgery in early August of 2009, it was pretty remarkable for Edinson simply to get back to the majors in 2010. Not only did he return to the show, but he had flashes of brilliance.
On July 17, Volquez made his first start of the season. Facing the Rockies, he tossed 6.0 innings, allowing 3 hits, 1 run, and posting a 9/2 K/BB ratio. The other highlight of his season occurred on September 11th when he faced the Pirates. In that game, Edinson threw 7.0 innings allowing 1 hit, 0 runs, and posting a 10/1 K/BB ratio.
Unfortunately, there were also significant bumps in the road, the most notable of which occurred during Game 1 of the NLDS. Facing the Phillies, Edinson lasted a mere 1.2 innings in which he allowed 4 hits, 4 runs, 2 walks, and striking out no one. In arguably the biggest start of the season, Edinson couldn't have performed worse. That start set the tone for the entire series. It was a curious choice by the Reds brain-trust to start Edinson in Game 1, but there was some justification for it, as Volquez posted a 1.95 ERA in 27.2 September innings. So, the regrets about starting him in Game 1 are based largely on hindsight, as the decision made sense in foresight.
When all was said and done, Edinson pitched 62.2 regular season innings in which he posted a 4.31 ERA, 1.50 WHIP, and a 67/35 K/BB ratio. Overall, the strikeout rate was as impressive (9.6 K/9) as the walk rate was unimpressive (5.0 BB/9). While Edinson's command has never been his strong suit, it was worse than usual in 2010. Clearly, he had yet to regain his feel for pitching, but the power was back. In 2010, his fastball averaged 93.6 mph, which was almost exactly what it has been every year since 2006. So, the velocity is all the way back and hopefully the command improves in 2011. Pitchers are usually better in their second year back from Tommy John surgery, so the Reds have to hope that's the case with Volquez, especially since the player for whom he was traded led his team to the World Series.
Bronson Arroyo -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: B-
Arroyo continues to grind out the 200+ inning seasons, topping the mark for an incredible 6th straight year in 2010. Arroyo is definitely not afraid of hard work and his tremendous durability continues to be his most valuable attribute. During his time in Cincy, almost without exception, Arroyo has taken the ball on his turn through the rotation.
However, the question remains whether he can continue to do so.
In 2010, Arroyo was almost exactly the same pitcher he was in 2009.
Year:_BB/9__K/9__GB/FB__ERA
2009:__ 2.7___5.2____1.22____3.84
2010: __2.5___5.1____1.08____3.88
I suppose that type of consistency should be comforting, but the decline in his strikeout rate during his time in Cincy is a concern (at least to me), but so far it hasn't slowed him down. Starting in 2006, his first season with the Reds, Arroyo has posted K/9 marks of 6.9, 6.7, 7.3, 5.2, and 5.1. I have concerns about whether Arroyo can continue to post a sub-4 ERA with these peripherals.
However, over the last two seasons, Bronson has significantly outperformed his FIP. His 3.84 ERA in 2009 went along with a FIP of 4.78 and a BABIP of .270, while his 3.88 ERA in 2010 when along with a FIP of 4.61 and a BABIP of .246. At first blush, it looks like he was hit lucky, but he also managed to decrease his Line Drive rate to 18.5% in 2009 and 16.3% in 2010.
Another interesting aspect of his performance is the percentage of his strikeouts that were called and his contact rate.
Year: Called K%_Contact%
2004:__28%______81%
2005:__22%______85%
2006:__20%______81%
2007:__21%______81%
2008:__19%______81%
2009:__23%______84%
2010:__17%______83%
Arroyo is allowing more and more pitches to be put in play and getting fewer called strikeouts, both of which would seem to indicate a decline in stuff. He's fooling fewer hitters and relying on his defense to a greater extent. Can he continue to succeed by, in essence, controlling the contact and relying on the defense?
A moment I found to be somewhat reassuring about Arroyo's 2010 season was his performance in the playoffs. You won't find many offenses better than the Phillies or many situations that are more high leverage than a postseason start. Regardless, Arroyo rose to the occasion and managed to keep the Phillies off-balance for most of the night. Ultimately, his outing was cut short when the defense let him down with back-to-back errors by Phillips and Rolen.
As with the regular season, the performance was more smoke-and-mirrors than dominating, as he allowed too many baserunners and walked more than he struck out. It was the same high-contact pitching style that he utilized during the season, but this time the defense let him down. Even so, he battled and came away with a solid performance, but I'm still not confident that Arroyo is the pitcher I want on the hill in a must win Game 7 situation.
Arroyo continues to be something of a contradiction. His peripherals are arguably getting worse, but his overall performance has gotten better. From where I sit, something has to give. I'm just not convinced that Arroyo can maintain his 2009 & 2010 performance level while allowing so much contact. The general thinking is that pitchers cannot control the outcome of balls in play. Additionally, high contact pitchers with neutral GB/FB tendencies in a bandbox like GABP seem like an inherently poor fit. Arroyo also benefited from the league wide decline in power, which made contact less harmful than in years past but may not continue in the 2011 season. Maybe Arroyo can continue to thrive with varied offspeed offerings, but I wouldn't be willing to extend him out past 2011. In fact, given our pitching surplus, I wouldn't hesitate to see what Arroyo would fetch on the trade market.
However, the Reds will have to hope that Arroyo can maintain his performance level by throwing the kitchen sink at opposing teams. Regardless of the performance level, the Reds can confidently pencil Arroyo in for 200+ innings in 2011.
Mike Leake -- Expectations: None, Grade: B
What Mike Leake managed to do in 2010 was nothing short of remarkable. His performance in spring training was so strong that he broke camp with the team and skipped the minors entirely, which you simply don't see all that often. And, probably for good reason.
It was an interesting decision due in no small part to the fact that Leake had never started every 5th day. In college, he started once a week, so it seemed likely and logical that Leake would start the year in the minors to acclimate to the heavier workload. But, the Reds deemed him MLB ready and it didn't take him long to prove that he was.
Leake tossed a rather stunning 138.1 innings with a 4.23 ERA, 1.50 WHIP, and 91/49 K/BB ratio. He managed to induce ground balls at a good clip (1.58 GB/FB ratio) and produced solid ratios (3.2 BB/9 and 5.9 K/9) for a rookie who bypassed the minors entirely. Not surprisingly, his early season performance was much stronger than his second half. He simply hit a wall and wasn't effective late in the season. It was likely a combination of fatigue and hitters learning the book on Leake.
His monthly splits reveal his hot start and subsequent fade:
April: 3.25 ERA in 27.2 IP
May: 1.88 ERA in 38.1 IP
June: 5.22 ERA in 29.1 IP
July: 4.56 ERA in 25.2 IP
August: 8.83 ERA in 17.1 IP
Looking at his mid/late season fade, it is easy to call the decision to start him off in the majors a questionable one. The Reds did effectively manage his pitch counts, as his highest game total was 106 pitches, but Leake simply hadn't been stretched out to handle the grind of a major league starting pitcher. His performance level was sufficient, but his endurance was not. However, he showed in his first few months that he was polished enough to succeed at the highest level right away, which made him essentially a no-risk draft pick.
Both Mike Leake and Mike Minor were polished college pitchers who have so far outperformed their projected draft positions. Minor has better stuff than was commonly believed and Leake moved much faster than thought possible. Not sure why the scouting was off the mark on these college pitchers, but polish may be somewhat underrated these days.
Overall, it was a surprising and strong rookie debut for Leake. Not surprisingly, he faded as his innings total mounted, but he gave the Reds some real big innings and some stability in the rotation at a time when it was definitely needed. The future is bright and having a pitcher in the rotation who understands how to pitch will provide some real stability for years to come.
Johnny Cueto -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: B+
Johnny has been in the majors for three seasons and has made incremental improvement each year. Despite his annual improvement, it's hard not to be somehow disappointed. Obviously, that isn't fair to Cueto, but he is a victim of his own success. In 2007, Cueto blazed through three minor league levels with a 3.07 ERA, 1.12 WHIP, 1.9 BB/9, and 9.5 K/9. That level of performance brought about notions of immediate MLB dominance. Instead, he has followed the more traditional path of incremental improvement.
In 2010, Cueto tossed 185.2 innings with a 3.64 ERA, 1.28 WHIP, and a 138/56 K/BB ratio. It was a nice combination of workload and performance level.
2008: 4.81 ERA, 1.41 WHIP, 3.5 BB/9, and 8.2 K/9 in 174.0 innings
2009: 4.41 ERA, 1.36 WHIP, 3.2 BB/9, and 6.9 K/9 in 171.1 innings
2010: 3.64 ERA, 1.28 WHIP, 2.7 BB/9, and 6.7 K/9 in 185.2 innings
He set a career high in innings pitched and improved across the board, with the exception of strikeouts which are in modest decline. Cueto is likely reining in his stuff in favor of improved command and control. As he has continued to evolve as a pitcher, Cueto has altered his pitch selection:
Year:__FB%__ SL%__CH%
2008:__61.1%__32.1%__6.7%
2009:__62.2%__29.7%__8.2%
2010:__55.2%__26.7%__10.0%
Perhaps it's the influence of roving instructor Mario Soto, who deserves a decent amount of credit for his work with our young pitchers, but whatever the reason Cueto has de-emphasized his slider in favor of his change-up. The change in pitch selection has likely brought about improved control and slightly fewer strikeouts. In short, Cueto is learning how to effectively utilize his arsenal for maximum benefit.
All in all, it was a nice season for Cueto, but one that didn't get a great deal of hype. To a certain extent, Cueto was overshadowed by Mike Leake, Travis Wood, and Aroldis Chapman. Those three each made a bigger splash, but Cueto's quiet improvement was just as impressive and certainly shouldn't be overshadowed. If Cueto makes yet another incremental improvement in 2011, then he'll be approaching some rather rarefied air.
Travis Wood -- Expectations: Low, Grade: A-
Yet another pitching surprise for the Reds and a good one at that. Wood has long been a favorite of mine due to his plus change-up and clean mechanics, but he arrived on the scene in 2010 with slightly better top-end velocity than was advertised.
Wood made quick work of the competition, flashing good stuff, great command, and a very good feel for pitching.
He stepped up to throw 102.2 innings with a 3.51 ERA, 1.08 WHIP, 2.3 BB/9, and 7.5 K/9. Wood featured a four pitch mix, including a fastball (64.1% of the time), changeup (10.1%), cutter (19.9%), and curveball (5.9%). He's got a very nice repertoire, which he used to keep the righthanders off balance and completely dominate the lefties.
On the season, Wood gave up absolutely nothing to lefties. He gave up a slash line of .136/.219/.227/.446. He also did a very nice job against righties to the tune of .240/.289/.363/.651. Overall, the addition of the cutter has really given Wood the ability to handle righthanded hitters. It allows him to keep them honest on the inner half of the plate, which improves the effectiveness of his fading changeup on the outer half.
Of course, Wood also provided one of the singular moments of the season for the Reds when he nearly tossed a perfect game against the defending NL champion Phillies in their home park. Wood threw 9 innings and gave up only 1 hit, no walks, and 8 strikeouts. His perfect game was foiled by a Carlos Ruiz double in the ninth inning and the Reds inability to score a run. The game ultimately went to extra innings where the Reds came out on the short end, but it was a national coming out party for Travis Wood.
The only potential red flag on Wood is his GB/FB ratio. He exhibited a heavy fly ball tendency, which isn't ideally suited for Great American Ballpark and may come back to bite him if hitters catch up to him as he gets around the league for a second and third time. At that point, it'll be up to Wood to adjust, which shouldn't be a problem given his feel for pitching.
Overall, it was an exciting and impressive debut for Wood and one that is very encouraging for 2011 and beyond. Wood and Leake are two pure pitchers. They may not have the best stuff on the staff, but they understand how to utilize it and how to attack the hitters. They should be consistent and reliable members of the rotation for years to come, which will provide a nice counterpart to the more volatile high ceiling/low floor starters on the staff (see below).
Homer Bailey -- Expectations: Low, Grade: C+
Homer continues to be the ultimate enigma, which may be what he is right down to his core (A pitcher who prefers to be called Homer?). I won't spend too much time parsing his numbers and analyzing his performance, as it won't really throw any additional light on the true Homer Bailey. We've seen him at his best and at his worst, but it's still impossible to tell which version will show up on any given day. He still seems to have all the potential in the world, but his performance simply never reflects it.
Here's a quick overview of Bailey in 2010. He pitched 109.0 innings at the beginning and ending of the movie with a long injury stint in between. When all was said and done, Homer had a 4.46 ERA, 1.37 WHIP, and 100/40 K/BB ratio. The biggest positives are his career best walk (3.3 BB/9) and strikeout (8.3 K/9) rates. His April and May were forgettable, at best, while his August and September were fairly impressive. He also acquitted himself well in a 2 inning postseason relief appearance against the Phillies. It does bear mentioning that Homer's numbers are somewhat skewed by his dominance against the lowly Pirates (16.0 innings, 0.56 ERA, 15/0 K/BB). Additionally, even in his good starts, I was struck by the number of times he badly missed the target. The catcher would set up on the corner only to have to reach all the way back across the plate to catch the pitch on the other corner. So, I'm not convinced that he truly turned the corner in the final two months. Once again, Homer was maddening, showing enough upside to be optimistic about his chances in 2011, but not enough to allow any certainty in that regard.
For me, the most telling thing about his season actually occurred off the field. In late May, Homer was shut down and DL'd due to shoulder stiffness. Homer was upset about the decision because he didn't feel the arm was that bad, going so far as to refuse a cortisone injection.
Two things are really striking about this situation. First, Homer seemed to have no understanding of the severity of the problem. He protested going on the DL because he didn't believe that he needed to miss even two weeks worth of games. In the end, he didn't return to the majors until August 15th. It seems a somewhat shocking lack of self-awareness about the health of his arm. Either he simply has no clue about the condition of his arm or he did and simply refused to acknowledge it due to his innate stubbornness. I'm not sure which would be the preferable explanation, but I'd certainly hope that a pitcher has a better feeling for the condition of his arm.
The second thing that jumped out at me was his refusal of the cortisone shot, which manages to seem impressive, stubborn, and disconcerting all at the same time. It's impressive in that a 20-something kid actually steps back to consider a team doctor's advice and ultimately goes against the organization's advice. If an organization had invested millions of dollars in me and had a doctor telling me what I needed to get healthy, I'd probably take the doctors advice on all but the most major procedures. However, Homer was stubborn because a cortisone shot is a minor medical matter, not a major surgery. This is an instance in which refusing the team's treatment seems rather odd and unnecessarily stubborn. The team doctor and organization simply want Bailey to get healthy and back on the mound, which (in theory at least) is what Homer wants as well. There was no divergence of interests between the player and the organization, as both want performance and health over the short and long haul.
Homer either lacks trust of any kind in the organization or he simply suffers from an over abundance of youthful arrogance that leads him to believe he always knows best. Whatever the reason, this seems to be par for the course in his development as a player, as he has butted heads with the Reds coaches throughout his time with the organization. I can't easily recall any young player having so many issues and conflicts with an organization on his way up the ladder. Developing Homer Bailey is no small task and these problems are likely the root cause of his struggles. He has all the tools, but seems to lack the mentality to put them to use.
Once again, the Reds head into 2011 with reasonably high hopes for Homer Bailey. It remains to be seen whether those hopes will again be derailed by Homer's frequently misguided actions and stubborn attitude.
Edinson Volquez -- Expectations: None, Grade: B+
Edinson's grade is based largely on the complete lack of expectations. After undergoing Tommy John surgery in early August of 2009, it was pretty remarkable for Edinson simply to get back to the majors in 2010. Not only did he return to the show, but he had flashes of brilliance.
On July 17, Volquez made his first start of the season. Facing the Rockies, he tossed 6.0 innings, allowing 3 hits, 1 run, and posting a 9/2 K/BB ratio. The other highlight of his season occurred on September 11th when he faced the Pirates. In that game, Edinson threw 7.0 innings allowing 1 hit, 0 runs, and posting a 10/1 K/BB ratio.
Unfortunately, there were also significant bumps in the road, the most notable of which occurred during Game 1 of the NLDS. Facing the Phillies, Edinson lasted a mere 1.2 innings in which he allowed 4 hits, 4 runs, 2 walks, and striking out no one. In arguably the biggest start of the season, Edinson couldn't have performed worse. That start set the tone for the entire series. It was a curious choice by the Reds brain-trust to start Edinson in Game 1, but there was some justification for it, as Volquez posted a 1.95 ERA in 27.2 September innings. So, the regrets about starting him in Game 1 are based largely on hindsight, as the decision made sense in foresight.
When all was said and done, Edinson pitched 62.2 regular season innings in which he posted a 4.31 ERA, 1.50 WHIP, and a 67/35 K/BB ratio. Overall, the strikeout rate was as impressive (9.6 K/9) as the walk rate was unimpressive (5.0 BB/9). While Edinson's command has never been his strong suit, it was worse than usual in 2010. Clearly, he had yet to regain his feel for pitching, but the power was back. In 2010, his fastball averaged 93.6 mph, which was almost exactly what it has been every year since 2006. So, the velocity is all the way back and hopefully the command improves in 2011. Pitchers are usually better in their second year back from Tommy John surgery, so the Reds have to hope that's the case with Volquez, especially since the player for whom he was traded led his team to the World Series.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
2010 Review: Outfielders
Well, we tackled the infielders, so it's on to the outfielders:
Drew Stubbs -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: B-
In 2010, Drew Stubbs (he of the unrivaled opportunity cost) flashed the type of well-rounded game that first piqued the interest of Reds management and ultimately prompted his selection in the draft.
Heading into the season, Stubbs was coming off a respectable, albeit not impact level, slash line of .267/.323/.439 in 180 ABs. So, that coupled with his draft position meant he carried a decent set of expectations into the 2010 season. When all was said and done, his 2010 level of performance, .255/.329/.444, resembled what he posted in 2009. Of course, Stubbs had to travel many peaks and valleys to arrive at those final numbers.
His OPS by month was as follows:
April: .572
May: .864
June: .611
July: .657
August: .870
September: .984
October: 1.125
October consisted of only a handful of ABs, so basically Stubbs had 3 strong months and 3 weak months. It all evened out in the end, but going forward it would be easier for the team to rely on Stubbs if his production was more consistent.
The knock on Stubbs has long been his ability to make consistent contact, so it's not surprising that his AB/K rate worsened from 3.7 in 2009 to 3.1 in 2010. He struck out basically once every three ABs, which in part helps explain his long slumps. If you can't consistently put the ball in play, then the chances increase that you will struggle to produce, as swings-and-misses never produce positive outcomes.
The acquisition of Jim Edmonds notwithstanding, the Reds showed commendable patience with Drew Stubbs, giving him ample time to work through his struggles and put it together. Given Dusty's preference for veteran players, the Reds deserve quite a bit of credit for running Stubbs out there day after unproductive day. Ultimately, that patience was rewarded in a big way, as Stubbs blew up in August (.296/.363/.507/.870) and September (.311/.406/.578/.984).
On the defensive side, Stubbs didn't quite perform up to his reputation. Scouting reports have long stated that Stubbs was a Gold Glove caliber centerfielder, even while he was still a Longhorn. That reputation aside, Stubbs rated around league average under both UZR/150 (0.2) and the +/- metric (+5, ranked 14th overall). According to the +/- breakdown, Stubbs struggled significantly on shallow hit balls. He rated as a +10 on deep balls, +3 on medium balls, and -7 on shallow hit balls. What's interesting about that breakdown is that all the scouting reports on Stubbs in the minors stated that his only defensive flaw was his struggles going back on the deep ball. When you pair those two facts together, I have to wonder if Stubbs played a deeper centerfield to offset his struggles on the deep ball. That would account both for his impressive performance on deep balls and his struggles on shallow ones. Regardless, watching him effortlessly glide across the outfield turf makes it almost impossible to imagine Stubbs not becoming one of the very best defensive centerfielders in baseball.
Perhaps the most impressive component of his performance was also the least heralded: his baserunning. Not only did he swipe bases at a very impressive clip (30 of 36, 83%), but he excelled in taking the extra base. Stubbs performed as follows:
1st to 3rd: 13 Advances in 31 Opportunities
2nd to Home: 17 Advances in 21 Opportunities
1st to Home: 8 Advances in 10 Opportunities
All of which was good for a +17 mark, so Stubbs was 17 bases above average. When adding together his stellar basestealing totals and his strong baserunning, Stubbs was a real weapon on the bases. His dual success rate speaks both to his plus speed and his strong instincts on the bases, but also serves as additional evidence that Stubbs possesses both skills and tools. He doesn't simply have speed, but also the understanding of how to effectively utilize it.
Despite the inconsistencies and the disappointing defense, it's difficult not to be optimistic about Stubbs heading into 2011 based solely on his final 2+ months of play. If Stubbs can perform at that level over the course of an entire season, then his value will go through the roof. In the future, we may look back at 2010 as being a big stepping stone in the career of Drew Stubbs.
Jay Bruce -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: B+
After his 2010 season, it seems crystal clear that Jay Bruce is on the cusp of stardom. Bruce told the press that he would be open to a long term deal with the Reds and they would be foolish to not have him locked up long term prior to the first pitch of opening day.
In 2010, Bruce hit a rock solid .281/.353/.493 with 25 homers and a 136/58 K/BB ratio. After a substantial drop in line drive rate in 2009 (13.0%), Bruce fixed his swing and was again ripping line drives at a very good clip (20.1%). His walk rate has increased from 7.3% to 9.8% to 10.1% in his three years in the majors. He also performed better against southpaws (.899 OPS) than righthanders (.822 OPS) in 2010. That may be a sample size outcome, but at the very least he has improved against lefties. Over the last three seasons, Bruce's HR/FB has dropped from 20.2% to 16.8% to 15.3%. While the rate at which fly balls leave the yard is considered a skill largely within a hitter's control, it's not difficult to imagine a homerun surge in 2011, as all of his other skills seem to be trending up so it seems logical that the homeruns will almost inevitably follow.
Bruce's OPS by month was as follows:
April: .833
May: .827
June: .824
July: .508
August: 1.076
September: 1.025
October: 1.944
Unlike Stubbs, Bruce had only 1 bad month. He also had 3 pretty good months and 2 outstanding ones. As with Stubbs, if Bruce can maintain his final 2+ months of production in 2011, then he'll be on the verge of superstar status. And, of course, superstars are both incredibly valuable and incredibly expensive. (Subliminal message: Lock him up NOW!!!)
On the defensive side of the ball, regardless of the metric, Bruce graded out as one of the best rightfielders in the game. Under UZR/150, Bruce posted a robust 19.0. Under the +/- metric, he posted a stellar +25, which translates into 14 runs saved with the leather. That level of performance graded out as the best defensive rightfielder in baseball. Additionally, unlike Stubbs, Bruce excelled on all batted balls (+4 shallow, +6 medium, +15 deep), so there is little question that Bruce is already a legitimate impact talent on defense.
Bruce was also strong on the bases, albeit not in the stolen base department (5 stolen bases in 9 attempts). On the bases, Bruce grades out as a +9, so he was roughly 9 bases above average.
Bruce performed as follows:
1st to 3rd: 11 Advances in 25 Opportunities
2nd to Home: 15 Advances in 18 Opportunities
1st to Home: 6 Advances in 7 Opportunities
Overall, I'm more than a little bullish on Bruce going forward. He struggled in 2009, but showed his ability to deal with adversity by bouncing back strong in 2010. His peripherals are trending in the right direction and he already possesses an incredibly well-rounded game. Bruce has performed up to his considerable ceiling at times, now all he needs to do is maintain that level of performance over a full season.
Jonny Gomes -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: D-
On a certain level, I'm a fan of Jonny Gomes. I like his attitude and feel his skill set can create value if used properly, especially when his cost is low. Unfortunately, the cost is rising and the Reds failed to properly utilize Gomes. As a result, the "cost per unit of production" about which I was optimistic when he was first signed vanished in 2010. The production has been hindered by improper usage and the cost continues to escalate along with his service time.
Heading into the season, Gomes was coming off a strong slash line of .267/.338/.541 which raised expectations for 2010. Unfortunately, his production tailed off as he posted a slash line of .266/.327/.431/.758, which isn't terrible except when you factor in that his performance was skewed heavily by one very strong month.
Gomes's OPS by month was as follows:
April: .621
May: 1.056
June: .704
July: .673
August: .700
September: .768
October: .546
He basically had 1 Ruthian month, 1 decent month, and 4 really poor months. His offense simply needs to be significantly better than that to justify the Reds carrying his glove. In keeping with his career norms, he performed better against southpaws (.285/.378/.479) than he did against righthanders (.257/.301/.408). On defense, there's no kind way to put it, Gomes was atrocious. Under the UZR/150 mark, he posted an abysmal -19.1 mark. Under the +/- metric, he posted an awful -18, which translates into a -10 runs saved.
On the plus side, Gomes actually ran the bases fairly well. In 2010, he graded out at as a +7, so he was roughly 7 bases above average. Gomes performed as follows:
1st to 3rd: 14 Advances in 39 Opportunities
2nd to Home: 8 Advances in 21 Opportunities
1st to Home: 5 Advances in 9 Opportunities
In light of all the success the Reds are having running the bases, it may be time to give some credit to the base coaches. The Reds obviously have talent, but Billy Hatcher and Mark Berry seem to deserve a bit of credit as well.
Unfortunately, but not surprisingly given his struggles on offense and defense, Gomes actually graded out as below replacement level. His WAR (Wins Above Replacement) was a mere -0.1. By definition, that level of performance can be obtained from a minor league free agent or a AAAA caliber player.
I still believe Gomes can generate positive value, but he needs to be utilized in a fashion that minimizes his weaknesses and emphasizes his strengths. Namely, he needs to be a platoon outfielder or a source of power off the bench.
Lanyce Nix -- Expectations: Low, Grade: B
Nix posted a .239/.291/.476 line in 2009, so expectations for 2010 were rather muted. The slugging percentage was strong, but when two of the three slash line numbers fall below .300 there is cause for concern. Regardless, Nix took his performance up a notch in 2010 and provided a nice bit of production for minimal cost.
Nix posted a line of .291/.350/.455 to go along with a 39/15 K/BB ratio. He managed to club 4 homeruns in the process. Unlike Gomes, the Reds utilized Nix properly, giving him 149 ABs against righties and only 16 against lefties. Interestingly enough, Nix received about half as many ABs in 2010 as he did in 2009. On the flip side, Gomes received about twice as many ABs in 2010 as he did in 2009. Can it be mere coincidence that the more these two play, the less impressive their numbers become? The larger the sample size, the worse the production.
On the defensive side, the metrics are all stellar, but the small sample size limits their utility. They are in line with his reputation on defense, which has long been solid. Still, Nix has long had decent tools, but struggled to effectively utilize them. That may be why he always seems to have untapped potential, which is why Dusty once lovingly called him a "monster."
Unlike the aforementioned on this list, Nix struggled on the bases. He posted a -5, so was roughly 5 bases below average. He also lacks basestealing ability, so he's largely a station-to-station type player.
Maybe it's simply a sample size issue, but Nix was a better value in 2010 than he was in 2009.
Chris Heisey -- Expectations: Low, Grade: B
Despite his strong performance in the minors, Heisey came into the season with minimal expectations. It simply wasn't clear that he would get the opportunity and, if he did, that he would be able to produce. All in all, he did rather well with the opportunity he received.
Heisey posted a respectable rookie slash line of .254/.324/.433/.757 with a somewhat lackluster 57/16 K/BB ratio and 8 homeruns. His walk rate isn't great, but he supplemented his OBP with 6 hit by pitches, which may or may not be sustainable. If it's not sustainable, then he'll need to improve his walk rate in the future. Additionally, he hit line drives at a solid 19.4% rate. Surprisingly, he struggled against southpaws (.545 OPS), but performed well against righties (.925 OPS).
On defense, Heisey split time between all three outfield spots. The sample size is too small for defensive metrics to mean much of anything, but he actually grades out as above average at all three spots under both UZR/150 and the +/- metric. I question his range in center, but he certainly was up to the task in 2010.
As with all the outfielders on this list save Nix, Heisey was very effective in running the bases. Impressively, Heisey was roughly 12 bases above average, which is very strong in light of his limited playing time.
Heisey performed as follows:
1st to 3rd: 7 Advances in 13 Opportunities
2nd to Home: 6 Advances in 8 Opportunities
1st to Home: 3 Advances in 3 Opportunities
Despite his limited playing time, Heisey managed to post a 1.3 WAR (Wins Above Replacement), which was significantly better than Gomes. Overall, it was a strong overall rookie season for Heisey and one that could have him in line for more playing time in 2011.
Drew Stubbs -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: B-
In 2010, Drew Stubbs (he of the unrivaled opportunity cost) flashed the type of well-rounded game that first piqued the interest of Reds management and ultimately prompted his selection in the draft.
Heading into the season, Stubbs was coming off a respectable, albeit not impact level, slash line of .267/.323/.439 in 180 ABs. So, that coupled with his draft position meant he carried a decent set of expectations into the 2010 season. When all was said and done, his 2010 level of performance, .255/.329/.444, resembled what he posted in 2009. Of course, Stubbs had to travel many peaks and valleys to arrive at those final numbers.
His OPS by month was as follows:
April: .572
May: .864
June: .611
July: .657
August: .870
September: .984
October: 1.125
October consisted of only a handful of ABs, so basically Stubbs had 3 strong months and 3 weak months. It all evened out in the end, but going forward it would be easier for the team to rely on Stubbs if his production was more consistent.
The knock on Stubbs has long been his ability to make consistent contact, so it's not surprising that his AB/K rate worsened from 3.7 in 2009 to 3.1 in 2010. He struck out basically once every three ABs, which in part helps explain his long slumps. If you can't consistently put the ball in play, then the chances increase that you will struggle to produce, as swings-and-misses never produce positive outcomes.
The acquisition of Jim Edmonds notwithstanding, the Reds showed commendable patience with Drew Stubbs, giving him ample time to work through his struggles and put it together. Given Dusty's preference for veteran players, the Reds deserve quite a bit of credit for running Stubbs out there day after unproductive day. Ultimately, that patience was rewarded in a big way, as Stubbs blew up in August (.296/.363/.507/.870) and September (.311/.406/.578/.984).
On the defensive side, Stubbs didn't quite perform up to his reputation. Scouting reports have long stated that Stubbs was a Gold Glove caliber centerfielder, even while he was still a Longhorn. That reputation aside, Stubbs rated around league average under both UZR/150 (0.2) and the +/- metric (+5, ranked 14th overall). According to the +/- breakdown, Stubbs struggled significantly on shallow hit balls. He rated as a +10 on deep balls, +3 on medium balls, and -7 on shallow hit balls. What's interesting about that breakdown is that all the scouting reports on Stubbs in the minors stated that his only defensive flaw was his struggles going back on the deep ball. When you pair those two facts together, I have to wonder if Stubbs played a deeper centerfield to offset his struggles on the deep ball. That would account both for his impressive performance on deep balls and his struggles on shallow ones. Regardless, watching him effortlessly glide across the outfield turf makes it almost impossible to imagine Stubbs not becoming one of the very best defensive centerfielders in baseball.
Perhaps the most impressive component of his performance was also the least heralded: his baserunning. Not only did he swipe bases at a very impressive clip (30 of 36, 83%), but he excelled in taking the extra base. Stubbs performed as follows:
1st to 3rd: 13 Advances in 31 Opportunities
2nd to Home: 17 Advances in 21 Opportunities
1st to Home: 8 Advances in 10 Opportunities
All of which was good for a +17 mark, so Stubbs was 17 bases above average. When adding together his stellar basestealing totals and his strong baserunning, Stubbs was a real weapon on the bases. His dual success rate speaks both to his plus speed and his strong instincts on the bases, but also serves as additional evidence that Stubbs possesses both skills and tools. He doesn't simply have speed, but also the understanding of how to effectively utilize it.
Despite the inconsistencies and the disappointing defense, it's difficult not to be optimistic about Stubbs heading into 2011 based solely on his final 2+ months of play. If Stubbs can perform at that level over the course of an entire season, then his value will go through the roof. In the future, we may look back at 2010 as being a big stepping stone in the career of Drew Stubbs.
Jay Bruce -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: B+
After his 2010 season, it seems crystal clear that Jay Bruce is on the cusp of stardom. Bruce told the press that he would be open to a long term deal with the Reds and they would be foolish to not have him locked up long term prior to the first pitch of opening day.
In 2010, Bruce hit a rock solid .281/.353/.493 with 25 homers and a 136/58 K/BB ratio. After a substantial drop in line drive rate in 2009 (13.0%), Bruce fixed his swing and was again ripping line drives at a very good clip (20.1%). His walk rate has increased from 7.3% to 9.8% to 10.1% in his three years in the majors. He also performed better against southpaws (.899 OPS) than righthanders (.822 OPS) in 2010. That may be a sample size outcome, but at the very least he has improved against lefties. Over the last three seasons, Bruce's HR/FB has dropped from 20.2% to 16.8% to 15.3%. While the rate at which fly balls leave the yard is considered a skill largely within a hitter's control, it's not difficult to imagine a homerun surge in 2011, as all of his other skills seem to be trending up so it seems logical that the homeruns will almost inevitably follow.
Bruce's OPS by month was as follows:
April: .833
May: .827
June: .824
July: .508
August: 1.076
September: 1.025
October: 1.944
Unlike Stubbs, Bruce had only 1 bad month. He also had 3 pretty good months and 2 outstanding ones. As with Stubbs, if Bruce can maintain his final 2+ months of production in 2011, then he'll be on the verge of superstar status. And, of course, superstars are both incredibly valuable and incredibly expensive. (Subliminal message: Lock him up NOW!!!)
On the defensive side of the ball, regardless of the metric, Bruce graded out as one of the best rightfielders in the game. Under UZR/150, Bruce posted a robust 19.0. Under the +/- metric, he posted a stellar +25, which translates into 14 runs saved with the leather. That level of performance graded out as the best defensive rightfielder in baseball. Additionally, unlike Stubbs, Bruce excelled on all batted balls (+4 shallow, +6 medium, +15 deep), so there is little question that Bruce is already a legitimate impact talent on defense.
Bruce was also strong on the bases, albeit not in the stolen base department (5 stolen bases in 9 attempts). On the bases, Bruce grades out as a +9, so he was roughly 9 bases above average.
Bruce performed as follows:
1st to 3rd: 11 Advances in 25 Opportunities
2nd to Home: 15 Advances in 18 Opportunities
1st to Home: 6 Advances in 7 Opportunities
Overall, I'm more than a little bullish on Bruce going forward. He struggled in 2009, but showed his ability to deal with adversity by bouncing back strong in 2010. His peripherals are trending in the right direction and he already possesses an incredibly well-rounded game. Bruce has performed up to his considerable ceiling at times, now all he needs to do is maintain that level of performance over a full season.
Jonny Gomes -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: D-
On a certain level, I'm a fan of Jonny Gomes. I like his attitude and feel his skill set can create value if used properly, especially when his cost is low. Unfortunately, the cost is rising and the Reds failed to properly utilize Gomes. As a result, the "cost per unit of production" about which I was optimistic when he was first signed vanished in 2010. The production has been hindered by improper usage and the cost continues to escalate along with his service time.
Heading into the season, Gomes was coming off a strong slash line of .267/.338/.541 which raised expectations for 2010. Unfortunately, his production tailed off as he posted a slash line of .266/.327/.431/.758, which isn't terrible except when you factor in that his performance was skewed heavily by one very strong month.
Gomes's OPS by month was as follows:
April: .621
May: 1.056
June: .704
July: .673
August: .700
September: .768
October: .546
He basically had 1 Ruthian month, 1 decent month, and 4 really poor months. His offense simply needs to be significantly better than that to justify the Reds carrying his glove. In keeping with his career norms, he performed better against southpaws (.285/.378/.479) than he did against righthanders (.257/.301/.408). On defense, there's no kind way to put it, Gomes was atrocious. Under the UZR/150 mark, he posted an abysmal -19.1 mark. Under the +/- metric, he posted an awful -18, which translates into a -10 runs saved.
On the plus side, Gomes actually ran the bases fairly well. In 2010, he graded out at as a +7, so he was roughly 7 bases above average. Gomes performed as follows:
1st to 3rd: 14 Advances in 39 Opportunities
2nd to Home: 8 Advances in 21 Opportunities
1st to Home: 5 Advances in 9 Opportunities
In light of all the success the Reds are having running the bases, it may be time to give some credit to the base coaches. The Reds obviously have talent, but Billy Hatcher and Mark Berry seem to deserve a bit of credit as well.
Unfortunately, but not surprisingly given his struggles on offense and defense, Gomes actually graded out as below replacement level. His WAR (Wins Above Replacement) was a mere -0.1. By definition, that level of performance can be obtained from a minor league free agent or a AAAA caliber player.
I still believe Gomes can generate positive value, but he needs to be utilized in a fashion that minimizes his weaknesses and emphasizes his strengths. Namely, he needs to be a platoon outfielder or a source of power off the bench.
Lanyce Nix -- Expectations: Low, Grade: B
Nix posted a .239/.291/.476 line in 2009, so expectations for 2010 were rather muted. The slugging percentage was strong, but when two of the three slash line numbers fall below .300 there is cause for concern. Regardless, Nix took his performance up a notch in 2010 and provided a nice bit of production for minimal cost.
Nix posted a line of .291/.350/.455 to go along with a 39/15 K/BB ratio. He managed to club 4 homeruns in the process. Unlike Gomes, the Reds utilized Nix properly, giving him 149 ABs against righties and only 16 against lefties. Interestingly enough, Nix received about half as many ABs in 2010 as he did in 2009. On the flip side, Gomes received about twice as many ABs in 2010 as he did in 2009. Can it be mere coincidence that the more these two play, the less impressive their numbers become? The larger the sample size, the worse the production.
On the defensive side, the metrics are all stellar, but the small sample size limits their utility. They are in line with his reputation on defense, which has long been solid. Still, Nix has long had decent tools, but struggled to effectively utilize them. That may be why he always seems to have untapped potential, which is why Dusty once lovingly called him a "monster."
Unlike the aforementioned on this list, Nix struggled on the bases. He posted a -5, so was roughly 5 bases below average. He also lacks basestealing ability, so he's largely a station-to-station type player.
Maybe it's simply a sample size issue, but Nix was a better value in 2010 than he was in 2009.
Chris Heisey -- Expectations: Low, Grade: B
Despite his strong performance in the minors, Heisey came into the season with minimal expectations. It simply wasn't clear that he would get the opportunity and, if he did, that he would be able to produce. All in all, he did rather well with the opportunity he received.
Heisey posted a respectable rookie slash line of .254/.324/.433/.757 with a somewhat lackluster 57/16 K/BB ratio and 8 homeruns. His walk rate isn't great, but he supplemented his OBP with 6 hit by pitches, which may or may not be sustainable. If it's not sustainable, then he'll need to improve his walk rate in the future. Additionally, he hit line drives at a solid 19.4% rate. Surprisingly, he struggled against southpaws (.545 OPS), but performed well against righties (.925 OPS).
On defense, Heisey split time between all three outfield spots. The sample size is too small for defensive metrics to mean much of anything, but he actually grades out as above average at all three spots under both UZR/150 and the +/- metric. I question his range in center, but he certainly was up to the task in 2010.
As with all the outfielders on this list save Nix, Heisey was very effective in running the bases. Impressively, Heisey was roughly 12 bases above average, which is very strong in light of his limited playing time.
Heisey performed as follows:
1st to 3rd: 7 Advances in 13 Opportunities
2nd to Home: 6 Advances in 8 Opportunities
1st to Home: 3 Advances in 3 Opportunities
Despite his limited playing time, Heisey managed to post a 1.3 WAR (Wins Above Replacement), which was significantly better than Gomes. Overall, it was a strong overall rookie season for Heisey and one that could have him in line for more playing time in 2011.
Friday, November 19, 2010
2010 Review: Infielders
Well, I'm boosting an idea from Rany Jazayerli who borrowed it from Jason Whitlock during his Kansas City Star days for my review of 2010 Reds season. A quick report card for our players based on performance in light of preseason expectations.
Ramon Hernandez -- Expectations: Low, Grade: C
Ramon arrived in Cincy with mild expectations, as he was carrying around three straight seasons of .715 or lower OPS. He simply hasn't been an impact hitter, rather just an inexpensive veteran backstop with mediocre expectations. On the plus side, Great American Ballpark is the fountain of youth for righthanded hitters, so Hernandez would have that working in his favor.
Not surprisingly, Hernandez had his best season in four years, posting a line of .297/.364/.428/.792 with an OPS of .818 at home and .763 on the road. Ultimately, Hernandez was a solid player in 2010, providing decent production behind the plate and his ability to speak Spanish to the young Spanish speaking pitchers on the staff could only have helped. All in all, Hernandez was a solid veteran presence behind the dish. After factoring in the friendly hitting environment, Hernandez performed pretty much right in line with expectations.
Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of Hernandez is his ability to elevate his hitting in key situations. I always have lingering doubt about a hitter's ability to consistently perform better in a specific spot in the lineup or in a specific situation. My thoughts run along the lines of "if he can elevate in certain spots, why wouldn't he elevate it all the time?" But, Ramon is just such a hitter. He seemingly DOES possess the ability to elevate his game in key situations.
In 2010, Hernandez hit .233/.285/.367/.652 with no runners on base, .318/.392/.447/.839 with runners on, and .327/.418/.451/.869 with runners in scoring position. The bigger the situation, the better the performance.
Additionally, over the course of his career, Hernandez has hit better in big situations.
Total Career: .265/.329/.418/.747
Career "High Leverage": .295/.360/.458/.818
Career "Medium Leverage": .264/.323/.397/.719
Career "Low Leverage": .251/.320/.416/.736
Both in 2010 and over the course of his career, Hernandez seemingly has had the knack for elevating his game when situation so requires. He seems to like the big moments and the chance for the big hit. Despite my skepticism of whether a player can consistently elevate his game in different situations, Hernandez seems to be able to do just that.
Hernandez was good enough that when paired with the next player in our list, he formed part of one of the most productive catching tandems in the majors.
Ryan Hanigan -- Expectations: Low, Grade: A-
The Reds signed Hanigan as an amateur free agent in 2002. After going undrafted and spending parts of 9 seasons in the minors, he finally broke through at the MLB level in 2010. Hanigan stepped up in a big way in 2010, posting a slash line of .300/.405/.429/.834. He didn't show much power, but made up for it with a stellar K/BB ratio of 21/33 and the second highest OBP among qualifying Reds hitters. Not too shabby.
One of the biggest reasons for Hanigan's success is his plate approach, as he rarely chases pitches outside the zone. It's remarkable how much easier hitting becomes when you don't help the pitcher out by chasing bad pitches. Let those pitches go and tilt the probability of success in your favor. Hanigan does just that.
Year: O-Swing%
2007: 22.2%
2008: 15.8%
2009: 17.6%
2010: 18.9%
In 2010, only 18.9% of Hanigan's swings were on pitches outside the strikezone, which landed him among the league leaders in the category. He also saw quite a few pitches per plate appearance (4.08 #P/PA), which when coupled with his refusal to chase bad balls makes him something of a tough out for opposing pitchers. Hanigan forces the pitcher to beat him, rather than making it easy by helping the pitcher out.
Once Hanigan did get a pitch to his liking he made contact 92.5% of the time. And, when he made contact, it resulted in a line a robust 20.8% of the time. Hanigan doesn't have much power, but he seems an ideal hit-and-run candidate and one of the better table-setters on the roster. The fact that he spent a grand total of 1 AB in the top 5 spots in the batting order is a clear failure on the part of Dusty Baker. But, of course, Dusty has long favored speed over on-base skill in his table-setters, which remains his biggest flaw as a manager.
Hanigan also did his part to slow the opposition running game, as he threw out 13 of 41 basestealers (31.7%) and seemed to call a better game than Hernandez.
If he can maintain that performance level, then it wouldn't be at all surprising to see Hanigan take over the larger role of the catching tandem in 2011. Overall, Hanigan was a very pleasant surprise for the Reds and helped provide one of the most productive catching tandems in baseball.
Joey Votto -- Expectations: High, Grade: A+
.324/.424/.600/1.024. A truly amazing season which establishes Votto as one of the top 2 or 3 hitters in the National League. As impressive as it was, even more impressive is that it was supported by the peripherals. Votto ripped line drives at a 20% clip and surprisingly was more productive on the road. At home, he posted a .950 OPS, while on the road he had a 1.093 OPS, which forecloses any notion that Votto was merely a product of a hitter friendly environment.
In fact, in the long history of the team, Votto's 2010 season was tied for the 14th best offensive season (at least according to Offensive WAR). The list reads as follows:
1. Joe Morgan (1975) 10.3
2. Joe Morgan (1976) 9.9
3. Joe Morgan (1972) 9.2
4. Joe Morgan (1973) 8.9
5. Joe Morgan (1974) 8.5
6. Frank Robinson (1962) 8.0
7. Cy Seymour (1905) 7.8
t8. Barry Larkin (1996) 7.7
t8. Johnny Bench (1972) 7.7
10. Ted Kluszewski (1954) 7.5
11. Pete Rose (1969) 7.4
12. Eric Davis (1987) 7.3
13. Joe Morgan (1977) 7.1
t14. Joey Votto (2010) 6.9
t14. Frank Robinson (1961) 6.9
Votto exceeded all my expectations in 2010, which continues a theme. I have never been happier to be wrong on a player than I have been on Votto. I simply didn't see this type of upside as he climbed the ladder, but his level of performance continued to improve as the competition got tougher. All of this culminated in an MVP caliber season with more undoubtedly on the horizon for one of the two or three best hitters in the NL.
Brandon Phillips -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: C+
At this point, there is no less surprising player on the roster than Phillips, whose performance has a metronome like consistency. His performance baseline is well established as .750-.770 OPS on offense and Gold Glove caliber defense.
On the season, Phillips hit the usual .275/.332/.430/.762, but struggled mightily on the basepaths where he stole 16 bases and was nabbed 12 times. It was the first time in 5 seasons that Phillips failed to swipe over 20 bases. Obviously, that type of "success" rate is unacceptable, as Phillips simply gave away too many outs.
Overall, it was largely what we've come to expect from Phillips. His production was on pace to be a tick better than in years past, but a terrible September (caused in part by a hand injury) dragged his numbers back down to his career norms. Phillips logged 97 ABs in September and posted a lackluster .175/.266/.278/.544 slash line. The Reds were pushing for a postseason spot, but in hindsight it was clearly a questionable decision for Dusty Baker to keep running Phillips out there. Not only did it drag down his overall numbers, but most importantly his performance simply didn't help the Reds win ballgames.
Overall, for better or worse, Phillips is as consistent as a metronome. His most valuable attribute is and always has been his defense. As a 29-year old, Phillips should have a few more peak seasons left in him, but his decline phase isn't too far off. Until it arrives, we'll continue to know what to expect.
Scott Rolen -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: B+
I was in favor of the Scott Rolen experiment and he certainly didn't disappoint. For me, Rolen was a key component in the Reds breaking through and into the postseason in 2010.
In 2010, Rolen was a 5-win player, which was roughly a 3-win improvement over the production the Reds got out of third base in 2009. And, his presence seemed to extend beyond the playing field, as he seemed to be a stabilizing influence on a young Reds lineup. In addition, he gave the Reds much better L/R balance in the lineup (a legitimate problem in years past), and was a very steady glove who helped out the entire pitching staff with his ability to make plays. Rolen not only improved the Reds significantly at the hot corner, but also seemed to make those around him better.
Unfortunately, Rolen faded in the final two months of the season, especially in slugging percentage which fell down to .402 in August and .365 in September. It's becoming clear that this is a problem that is unlikely to go away, as his pre and post All Star splits over the past 3-years showed a marked decline Rolen's ability to drive the ball. Over the 2008-2010 seasons, Rolen has hit .293/.366/.484/.850 before the All Star break and .272/.347/.427/.774 after the break. His slugging percentage drops .057 after the break. Clearly, some combination of age and shoulder injury cause him to wear down, sapping his ability to drive the ball.
As a result, the Reds will be forced to address the question of how to get the most out of Rolen in 2011. Simply put, the team will need to find a respectable back-up, both to give Rolen a breather and fill in when injuries arise. Rolen was certainly a pleasant surprise, but going forward the Reds would be better served by finding an impact righthanded cleanup hitter. Doing so would allow them to shift Rolen down to a more complimentary spot in the lineup (i.e. 6th). Rolen remains a very good baseball player, but at this point it would be foolish to expect him to carry a team like he did during his peak seasons.
Paul Janish -- Expectations: Low, Grade: B
Paul Janish had the type of season I suspected was in there all along. I have long liked Janish's combination of short, quick, line-drive swing and disciplined approach at the plate. That combination of attributes should have been sufficient in light of his stellar defensive tools.
In 2010, Janish made the most of his opportunity. However, the Reds decision to sign Orlando Cabrera still leaves Janish with something of a question mark over his head. Janish performed rather well, but the sample size isn't quite large enough to state that Janish is a surefire starter. Unfortunately, that leaves the Reds on the horns of a dilemma for 2011, as they still don't know if they can rely on Janish to hold down the job fulltime.
Despite a solid .260/.338/.385/.723 slash line, Janish sported some rather strange splits. Despite Great American Ballpark being a hitter's Valhalla for righthanders, Janish actually performed significantly better on the road. At home, Janish hit .213/.307/.247/.554, while he was appreciably better on the road at .297/.363/.495/.858. He also performed significantly better during the day (.318/.389/.435/.824), than at night (.217/.300/.348/.648).
So, the question is whether the 2010 splits will normalize over a larger sample size or whether Janish was protected from his splits by the small sample size. The Reds will have to decide, but early rumblings indicate that they have no intention of handing the starting job over to Janish. At the very least, Janish has proven his value as a utility infielder who packs a steady glove. When the Reds were kicking the ball around the field in the postseason, Paul Janish was the only player I actually trusted to have a ball hit his way.
In short, Janish went from a borderline MLB player to potentially a legitimate starting shortstop. It's hard not to label that type of season a success.
Orlando Cabrera -- Expectations: Low, Grade: D+
When the Reds announced the signing of O-Cab, I was immediately against it. I thought Paul Janish offered comparable, if not superior, production at a much lower cost. The bang-for-the-buck easily favored Janish.
One thing I thought would actually work in O-Cab's favor was the boost he would get from Great American Ballpark. Unfortunately and surprisingly, the boost never arrived. In 2009, O-Cab hit .284/.316/.389 combined in Minnesota and Oakland, while in 2010 he hit only .263/.303/.354 for the Reds. He declined in batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage.
The one saving grace for O-Cab was that he actually exceeded expectations on defense. Under the UZR/150 metric, O-Cab was 5.3 runs above average, while under the John Dewan +/- metric O-Cab was a -2. Neither metric rates him as elite, but it's fair to say he was not the big liability with the leather that I expected him to be.
The Reds declined Cabrera's option, but remain interested in bringing him back at a reduced rate. However, given the strong performance of the Reds in 2010, it's probably time to completely embrace the younger talent. There is little to nothing to be gained from players like O-Cab, especially with the capable Paul Janish and Zack Cozart in the organization. Older players like O-Cab are nothing more than expensive security blankets for GMs, as they aren't going to provide legitimate upgrades in production, but the name recognition gives the appearance of improvement. For some reason, fans are placated by an acquisition like O-Cab and become less critical than they would be if the production was generated by an internal option lacking such name recognition (i.e. Paul Janish).
Overall, O-Cab disappointed on offense and surprised on defense. Regardless, the overall result was rather uninspiring. For an organization renowned for its shortstop play, O-Cab's 2010 season was hardly a memorable data point.
Ramon Hernandez -- Expectations: Low, Grade: C
Ramon arrived in Cincy with mild expectations, as he was carrying around three straight seasons of .715 or lower OPS. He simply hasn't been an impact hitter, rather just an inexpensive veteran backstop with mediocre expectations. On the plus side, Great American Ballpark is the fountain of youth for righthanded hitters, so Hernandez would have that working in his favor.
Not surprisingly, Hernandez had his best season in four years, posting a line of .297/.364/.428/.792 with an OPS of .818 at home and .763 on the road. Ultimately, Hernandez was a solid player in 2010, providing decent production behind the plate and his ability to speak Spanish to the young Spanish speaking pitchers on the staff could only have helped. All in all, Hernandez was a solid veteran presence behind the dish. After factoring in the friendly hitting environment, Hernandez performed pretty much right in line with expectations.
Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of Hernandez is his ability to elevate his hitting in key situations. I always have lingering doubt about a hitter's ability to consistently perform better in a specific spot in the lineup or in a specific situation. My thoughts run along the lines of "if he can elevate in certain spots, why wouldn't he elevate it all the time?" But, Ramon is just such a hitter. He seemingly DOES possess the ability to elevate his game in key situations.
In 2010, Hernandez hit .233/.285/.367/.652 with no runners on base, .318/.392/.447/.839 with runners on, and .327/.418/.451/.869 with runners in scoring position. The bigger the situation, the better the performance.
Additionally, over the course of his career, Hernandez has hit better in big situations.
Total Career: .265/.329/.418/.747
Career "High Leverage": .295/.360/.458/.818
Career "Medium Leverage": .264/.323/.397/.719
Career "Low Leverage": .251/.320/.416/.736
Both in 2010 and over the course of his career, Hernandez seemingly has had the knack for elevating his game when situation so requires. He seems to like the big moments and the chance for the big hit. Despite my skepticism of whether a player can consistently elevate his game in different situations, Hernandez seems to be able to do just that.
Hernandez was good enough that when paired with the next player in our list, he formed part of one of the most productive catching tandems in the majors.
Ryan Hanigan -- Expectations: Low, Grade: A-
The Reds signed Hanigan as an amateur free agent in 2002. After going undrafted and spending parts of 9 seasons in the minors, he finally broke through at the MLB level in 2010. Hanigan stepped up in a big way in 2010, posting a slash line of .300/.405/.429/.834. He didn't show much power, but made up for it with a stellar K/BB ratio of 21/33 and the second highest OBP among qualifying Reds hitters. Not too shabby.
One of the biggest reasons for Hanigan's success is his plate approach, as he rarely chases pitches outside the zone. It's remarkable how much easier hitting becomes when you don't help the pitcher out by chasing bad pitches. Let those pitches go and tilt the probability of success in your favor. Hanigan does just that.
Year: O-Swing%
2007: 22.2%
2008: 15.8%
2009: 17.6%
2010: 18.9%
In 2010, only 18.9% of Hanigan's swings were on pitches outside the strikezone, which landed him among the league leaders in the category. He also saw quite a few pitches per plate appearance (4.08 #P/PA), which when coupled with his refusal to chase bad balls makes him something of a tough out for opposing pitchers. Hanigan forces the pitcher to beat him, rather than making it easy by helping the pitcher out.
Once Hanigan did get a pitch to his liking he made contact 92.5% of the time. And, when he made contact, it resulted in a line a robust 20.8% of the time. Hanigan doesn't have much power, but he seems an ideal hit-and-run candidate and one of the better table-setters on the roster. The fact that he spent a grand total of 1 AB in the top 5 spots in the batting order is a clear failure on the part of Dusty Baker. But, of course, Dusty has long favored speed over on-base skill in his table-setters, which remains his biggest flaw as a manager.
Hanigan also did his part to slow the opposition running game, as he threw out 13 of 41 basestealers (31.7%) and seemed to call a better game than Hernandez.
If he can maintain that performance level, then it wouldn't be at all surprising to see Hanigan take over the larger role of the catching tandem in 2011. Overall, Hanigan was a very pleasant surprise for the Reds and helped provide one of the most productive catching tandems in baseball.
Joey Votto -- Expectations: High, Grade: A+
.324/.424/.600/1.024. A truly amazing season which establishes Votto as one of the top 2 or 3 hitters in the National League. As impressive as it was, even more impressive is that it was supported by the peripherals. Votto ripped line drives at a 20% clip and surprisingly was more productive on the road. At home, he posted a .950 OPS, while on the road he had a 1.093 OPS, which forecloses any notion that Votto was merely a product of a hitter friendly environment.
In fact, in the long history of the team, Votto's 2010 season was tied for the 14th best offensive season (at least according to Offensive WAR). The list reads as follows:
1. Joe Morgan (1975) 10.3
2. Joe Morgan (1976) 9.9
3. Joe Morgan (1972) 9.2
4. Joe Morgan (1973) 8.9
5. Joe Morgan (1974) 8.5
6. Frank Robinson (1962) 8.0
7. Cy Seymour (1905) 7.8
t8. Barry Larkin (1996) 7.7
t8. Johnny Bench (1972) 7.7
10. Ted Kluszewski (1954) 7.5
11. Pete Rose (1969) 7.4
12. Eric Davis (1987) 7.3
13. Joe Morgan (1977) 7.1
t14. Joey Votto (2010) 6.9
t14. Frank Robinson (1961) 6.9
Votto exceeded all my expectations in 2010, which continues a theme. I have never been happier to be wrong on a player than I have been on Votto. I simply didn't see this type of upside as he climbed the ladder, but his level of performance continued to improve as the competition got tougher. All of this culminated in an MVP caliber season with more undoubtedly on the horizon for one of the two or three best hitters in the NL.
Brandon Phillips -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: C+
At this point, there is no less surprising player on the roster than Phillips, whose performance has a metronome like consistency. His performance baseline is well established as .750-.770 OPS on offense and Gold Glove caliber defense.
On the season, Phillips hit the usual .275/.332/.430/.762, but struggled mightily on the basepaths where he stole 16 bases and was nabbed 12 times. It was the first time in 5 seasons that Phillips failed to swipe over 20 bases. Obviously, that type of "success" rate is unacceptable, as Phillips simply gave away too many outs.
Overall, it was largely what we've come to expect from Phillips. His production was on pace to be a tick better than in years past, but a terrible September (caused in part by a hand injury) dragged his numbers back down to his career norms. Phillips logged 97 ABs in September and posted a lackluster .175/.266/.278/.544 slash line. The Reds were pushing for a postseason spot, but in hindsight it was clearly a questionable decision for Dusty Baker to keep running Phillips out there. Not only did it drag down his overall numbers, but most importantly his performance simply didn't help the Reds win ballgames.
Overall, for better or worse, Phillips is as consistent as a metronome. His most valuable attribute is and always has been his defense. As a 29-year old, Phillips should have a few more peak seasons left in him, but his decline phase isn't too far off. Until it arrives, we'll continue to know what to expect.
Scott Rolen -- Expectations: Medium, Grade: B+
I was in favor of the Scott Rolen experiment and he certainly didn't disappoint. For me, Rolen was a key component in the Reds breaking through and into the postseason in 2010.
In 2010, Rolen was a 5-win player, which was roughly a 3-win improvement over the production the Reds got out of third base in 2009. And, his presence seemed to extend beyond the playing field, as he seemed to be a stabilizing influence on a young Reds lineup. In addition, he gave the Reds much better L/R balance in the lineup (a legitimate problem in years past), and was a very steady glove who helped out the entire pitching staff with his ability to make plays. Rolen not only improved the Reds significantly at the hot corner, but also seemed to make those around him better.
Unfortunately, Rolen faded in the final two months of the season, especially in slugging percentage which fell down to .402 in August and .365 in September. It's becoming clear that this is a problem that is unlikely to go away, as his pre and post All Star splits over the past 3-years showed a marked decline Rolen's ability to drive the ball. Over the 2008-2010 seasons, Rolen has hit .293/.366/.484/.850 before the All Star break and .272/.347/.427/.774 after the break. His slugging percentage drops .057 after the break. Clearly, some combination of age and shoulder injury cause him to wear down, sapping his ability to drive the ball.
As a result, the Reds will be forced to address the question of how to get the most out of Rolen in 2011. Simply put, the team will need to find a respectable back-up, both to give Rolen a breather and fill in when injuries arise. Rolen was certainly a pleasant surprise, but going forward the Reds would be better served by finding an impact righthanded cleanup hitter. Doing so would allow them to shift Rolen down to a more complimentary spot in the lineup (i.e. 6th). Rolen remains a very good baseball player, but at this point it would be foolish to expect him to carry a team like he did during his peak seasons.
Paul Janish -- Expectations: Low, Grade: B
Paul Janish had the type of season I suspected was in there all along. I have long liked Janish's combination of short, quick, line-drive swing and disciplined approach at the plate. That combination of attributes should have been sufficient in light of his stellar defensive tools.
In 2010, Janish made the most of his opportunity. However, the Reds decision to sign Orlando Cabrera still leaves Janish with something of a question mark over his head. Janish performed rather well, but the sample size isn't quite large enough to state that Janish is a surefire starter. Unfortunately, that leaves the Reds on the horns of a dilemma for 2011, as they still don't know if they can rely on Janish to hold down the job fulltime.
Despite a solid .260/.338/.385/.723 slash line, Janish sported some rather strange splits. Despite Great American Ballpark being a hitter's Valhalla for righthanders, Janish actually performed significantly better on the road. At home, Janish hit .213/.307/.247/.554, while he was appreciably better on the road at .297/.363/.495/.858. He also performed significantly better during the day (.318/.389/.435/.824), than at night (.217/.300/.348/.648).
So, the question is whether the 2010 splits will normalize over a larger sample size or whether Janish was protected from his splits by the small sample size. The Reds will have to decide, but early rumblings indicate that they have no intention of handing the starting job over to Janish. At the very least, Janish has proven his value as a utility infielder who packs a steady glove. When the Reds were kicking the ball around the field in the postseason, Paul Janish was the only player I actually trusted to have a ball hit his way.
In short, Janish went from a borderline MLB player to potentially a legitimate starting shortstop. It's hard not to label that type of season a success.
Orlando Cabrera -- Expectations: Low, Grade: D+
When the Reds announced the signing of O-Cab, I was immediately against it. I thought Paul Janish offered comparable, if not superior, production at a much lower cost. The bang-for-the-buck easily favored Janish.
One thing I thought would actually work in O-Cab's favor was the boost he would get from Great American Ballpark. Unfortunately and surprisingly, the boost never arrived. In 2009, O-Cab hit .284/.316/.389 combined in Minnesota and Oakland, while in 2010 he hit only .263/.303/.354 for the Reds. He declined in batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage.
The one saving grace for O-Cab was that he actually exceeded expectations on defense. Under the UZR/150 metric, O-Cab was 5.3 runs above average, while under the John Dewan +/- metric O-Cab was a -2. Neither metric rates him as elite, but it's fair to say he was not the big liability with the leather that I expected him to be.
The Reds declined Cabrera's option, but remain interested in bringing him back at a reduced rate. However, given the strong performance of the Reds in 2010, it's probably time to completely embrace the younger talent. There is little to nothing to be gained from players like O-Cab, especially with the capable Paul Janish and Zack Cozart in the organization. Older players like O-Cab are nothing more than expensive security blankets for GMs, as they aren't going to provide legitimate upgrades in production, but the name recognition gives the appearance of improvement. For some reason, fans are placated by an acquisition like O-Cab and become less critical than they would be if the production was generated by an internal option lacking such name recognition (i.e. Paul Janish).
Overall, O-Cab disappointed on offense and surprised on defense. Regardless, the overall result was rather uninspiring. For an organization renowned for its shortstop play, O-Cab's 2010 season was hardly a memorable data point.
Friday, November 14, 2008
2008 Season Review: Bullpen
The Reds bullpen was a bit of a pleasant surprise in 2008. Of the many problem areas of this team, the bullpen wasn't really among them. In 2008, the Reds relievers put up an 8th ranked 3.81 ERA , but a 21st ranked 1.45 WHIP and a 24th ranked .342 opponents OBP. Here is what the preseason projection looked like.
Francisco Cordero
2008 Projections
Bill James: IP: 61.0, ERA: 3.69, WHIP: 1.33, K/BB: 66/24, SVs: 33
ZIPS: IP: 70.0, ERA: 3.34, WHIP: 1.26, K/BB: 80/27, SVs: n/a
Actual 2008: IP: 70.1, ERA: 3.33, WHIP: 1.41, K/BB: 78/38, SVs: 34
Former GM Wayne Krivksy's big free agent signing was effective, but really didn't do much to alter the fortunes of the Reds.
Closer is an interesting position and one I find difficult to properly value. Their limited workload reduces their opportunity to impact the game, but when they actually are used in high leverage situations their value is beyond measure. However, managers don't always use the closer in the high leverage situations, choosing instead to utilize their best reliever in situations where the team has a 3 run lead and nobody on base.
However, it's undeniable that an ineffective closer can destroy the confidence of a team and cost the team victories in the Win/Loss column.
Rany from "Rany on the Royals" wrote an interesting blurb (which I've quoted below) about Nate Silver's keys to postseason success.
While Silver's findings comport with my belief in the importance of defense, they also reveal the importance of a good closer to postseason success. However, Billy Beane has had substantial success with his "Trading the Closer" philosophy, which basically entails selling his closer when the cost gets too high and replacing him with a less expensive, but equally effective reliever. It worked in large part because the marketplace overvalued the "save" statistic, rather than looking to the underlying performance.
So, what is value of a closer? Is it an overvalued position that can be filled easily without resorting to throwing big money at a free agent? Or, is it a key factor for team confidence and postseason success?
To be honest, I'm not sure anymore. I will say that I think the value of the closer would be higher if managers were more willing to use them in high leverage situations, rather than just the traditional 9th inning role. Why waste your best reliever in a low leverage situation like the 9th inning with no runners on and a 3 run lead?
Setup: David Weathers
2008 Projections
Bill James: IP: 75.0, ERA: 3.84, WHIP: 1.35, K/BB: 54/31
ZIPS: IP: 68.0, ERA: 3.84, WHIP: 1.35, K/BB: 46/26
Actual 2008: IP: 69.1, ERA: 3.25, WHIP: 1.53, K/BB: 46/30
Weathers is pretty extraordinary. I have been doubting his ability to maintain a quality level of production since he was 36, but at age 38 he continues to prove me wrong. How does he do it?
Well in 2008, Weathers changed his approach. His pitch mix was as follows: 59.5% fastballs, 32.9% sliders, and 7.6% change-ups. This is a significantly different mix than he used in 2007, when he used more fastballs (74.8%), fewer sliders (23.0%), and fewer change-ups (2.2%).
Weathers seems to be able to adapt his game to the situation and continue to pile up quality innings. However, in keeping with my tradition, I'll say that the Reds should part ways with Mr. Weathers. If they keep him another year, then they will have ridden his value into the ground. This may be the last chance the Reds will have to exchange the value of David Weathers and apply it to a younger asset.
Still, Weathers will probably pitch until he's 50 just to spite me.
7th Inning Guy: Jared Burton
2008 Projections
Bill James: IP: 40.0, ERA: 4.28, WHIP: 1.48, K/BB: 33/19
ZIPS: IP: 67.0, ERA: 4.16, WHIP: 1.45, K/BB: 54/32
Actual 2008: IP: 58.2, ERA: 3.22, WHIP: 1.38, K/BB: 58/25
Jared Burton is flat out nasty and that's all there is to it. The Reds really did their homework when they nabbed him as a Rule V selection from the A's. I'm still surprised that the A's left him unprotected so that they could grab Jay Marshall in the Rule V draft. Marshall is another reliever with a funky arm slot and the A's are believers in those guys, but I'd imagine they'd like a mulligan on this one.
He struck out almost a batter an inning and was probably the Reds most effective reliever. Burton features a Splitter (93.03 MPH), Cutter (88.73 MPH), and a Slider (87.22 MPH). Everything he throws is hard and really moving.
All that's left for him to do is improve his walk rate and workload. He logged 43.0 innings in 2007 and 58.2 innings in 2008, so it would be very beneficial to the Reds if they could get his workload up to ~75.0 innings. Outside of that, the Reds are very lucky to have Burton in the mix.
Middle Relief: Jeremy Affeldt
2008 Projections
Bill James: IP: 200.0, ERA: 4.46, WHIP: 1.46, K/BB: 150/97
ZIPS: IP: 72.0, ERA: 4.75, WHIP: 1.54, K/BB: 48/39
Actual 2008: IP: 78.1, ERA: 3.33, WHIP: 1.31, K/BB: 80/25
Before the season, I had Jeremy Affeldt pegged as a breakthrough candidate or a bust. Thankfully, he broke through. In addition, I really liked the signing because it was a good way to troll for compensatory picks.
Affeldt threw a lot of quality innings for the Reds in 2008 and is now exploring the free agent market. He's earned a hefty payday, so probably won't be back with the Reds. He struck out more than a batter an inning and racked up 121 groundballs and only 60 flyballs.
From a production standpoint, Affeldt would be a nice guy to keep around, but his cost and ability to bring back a draft pick makes it better to let him walk.
Middle Relief: Todd Coffey
2008 Projections
Bill James: IP: 50.0, ERA: 4.86, WHIP: 1.46, K/BB: 36/15
ZIPS: IP: 75.0, ERA: 4.92, WHIP: 1.52, K/BB: 50/25
Lefty Specialist: Kent Mercker
2008 Projections
Bill James: N/A
ZIPS: N/A
Both Mercker and Coffey imploded almost before the season got underway. They combined to log a paltry 23 innings and that was the end of it. Despite possessing good stuff, Coffey was once again undone by the mental good side of pitching.
As for Mercker, his career ended with a whimper, not a bang. Injuries caught up with him, but he had a very nice career and should enjoy his retirement.
Middle Relief: Mike Lincoln
2008 Projections
Bill James: N/A
ZIPS: N/A
Actual 2008: IP: 70.1, ERA: 4.48, WHIP: 1.28, K/BB: 57/24
I owe Mike Lincoln a mea culpa. I honestly didn't get the signing and couldn't imagine what the Reds saw in him. However, Lincoln was fairly effective and he certainly exceded my expectations. Health was likely all he needed to be a reasonably effective MLB reliever.
Perhaps the most impressive thing about his season was his heavy groundball tendencies. He posted a stellar 1.70 GB/FB ratio, which is always a plus in Great American Ballpark.
Given the volatility of relievers, Lincoln probably won't be able to maintain his success into 2009, so perhaps it isn't surprising that the Reds seem to have little interest in bringing him back.
Lincoln does bring up an interesting observation about Walt Jocketty. One thing that is hard to overlook about Walt Jocketty is his preference for groundball pitchers. It was a built-in philosophy for the Cardinals. Jocketty acquired them, Dave Duncan groomed them, and Tony LaRussa put them in the best position to succeed. It seems like every starting pitcher they had was a groundballer and Anthony Reyes couldn't succeed in that organization because he wasn't a guy who would get groundballs.
Perhaps Mike Lincoln is the first sign of the groundball trend being carried over to the Reds organization, which would be a good thing given the reduced pull of gravity that seems to exist in Great American Ballpark.
Francisco Cordero
2008 Projections
Bill James: IP: 61.0, ERA: 3.69, WHIP: 1.33, K/BB: 66/24, SVs: 33
ZIPS: IP: 70.0, ERA: 3.34, WHIP: 1.26, K/BB: 80/27, SVs: n/a
Actual 2008: IP: 70.1, ERA: 3.33, WHIP: 1.41, K/BB: 78/38, SVs: 34
Former GM Wayne Krivksy's big free agent signing was effective, but really didn't do much to alter the fortunes of the Reds.
Closer is an interesting position and one I find difficult to properly value. Their limited workload reduces their opportunity to impact the game, but when they actually are used in high leverage situations their value is beyond measure. However, managers don't always use the closer in the high leverage situations, choosing instead to utilize their best reliever in situations where the team has a 3 run lead and nobody on base.
However, it's undeniable that an ineffective closer can destroy the confidence of a team and cost the team victories in the Win/Loss column.
Rany from "Rany on the Royals" wrote an interesting blurb (which I've quoted below) about Nate Silver's keys to postseason success.
"Before my friend Nate Silver became the world’s most famous pollster, he used to write about baseball. One of his most-cited articles, in “Baseball Between The Numbers”, was an analysis of which teams are likeliest to win the crapshoot that we call the baseball playoffs. What Nate found was that there were three things that were most correlated with a team’s ability to win in the playoffs. Those three things are: 1) Team defense, as measured by Fielding Runs Above Average (FRAA); 2) The strikeout rate of the team’s pitching staff; 3) The quality of the team’s closer, as measured by WXRL. To rephrase this: over the last 40 years (i.e. the divisional era), it is in fact true that good pitching beats good hitting in October. And the best way to beat good hitting in the playoffs is to keep your opponent’s batting average down. The way you do that is to prevent them from making contact (K rate), and when they do make contact, prevent them from getting a hit on balls in play (FRAA). If good pitching beats good hitting, one pitcher matters above all: your closer. With more at stake in each game, managers are inclined to use their closers more aggressively, and all the extra off-days make it easier to run your closer out there. Plus, since every team is a playoff team, blowouts are rare and close games the norm, and the cool October weather also dampens scoring and increases the likelihood of a tie game. Mariano Rivera has never appeared in more than 74 games in a season, and his career high in innings as a closer is 80.2 (he did throw 107.2 innings as a set-up man for John Wetteland in 1996). But since joining the Yankees in 1995, the team has played a total of 128 postseason games, and in just 128 games he’s made 76 appearances and thrown 117.1 innings. Game for game, Rivera has had twice as much impact in the postseason as he's made in the regular season. These three aspects of a team are known as the Secret Sauce.”
While Silver's findings comport with my belief in the importance of defense, they also reveal the importance of a good closer to postseason success. However, Billy Beane has had substantial success with his "Trading the Closer" philosophy, which basically entails selling his closer when the cost gets too high and replacing him with a less expensive, but equally effective reliever. It worked in large part because the marketplace overvalued the "save" statistic, rather than looking to the underlying performance.
So, what is value of a closer? Is it an overvalued position that can be filled easily without resorting to throwing big money at a free agent? Or, is it a key factor for team confidence and postseason success?
To be honest, I'm not sure anymore. I will say that I think the value of the closer would be higher if managers were more willing to use them in high leverage situations, rather than just the traditional 9th inning role. Why waste your best reliever in a low leverage situation like the 9th inning with no runners on and a 3 run lead?
Setup: David Weathers
2008 Projections
Bill James: IP: 75.0, ERA: 3.84, WHIP: 1.35, K/BB: 54/31
ZIPS: IP: 68.0, ERA: 3.84, WHIP: 1.35, K/BB: 46/26
Actual 2008: IP: 69.1, ERA: 3.25, WHIP: 1.53, K/BB: 46/30
Weathers is pretty extraordinary. I have been doubting his ability to maintain a quality level of production since he was 36, but at age 38 he continues to prove me wrong. How does he do it?
Well in 2008, Weathers changed his approach. His pitch mix was as follows: 59.5% fastballs, 32.9% sliders, and 7.6% change-ups. This is a significantly different mix than he used in 2007, when he used more fastballs (74.8%), fewer sliders (23.0%), and fewer change-ups (2.2%).
Weathers seems to be able to adapt his game to the situation and continue to pile up quality innings. However, in keeping with my tradition, I'll say that the Reds should part ways with Mr. Weathers. If they keep him another year, then they will have ridden his value into the ground. This may be the last chance the Reds will have to exchange the value of David Weathers and apply it to a younger asset.
Still, Weathers will probably pitch until he's 50 just to spite me.
7th Inning Guy: Jared Burton
2008 Projections
Bill James: IP: 40.0, ERA: 4.28, WHIP: 1.48, K/BB: 33/19
ZIPS: IP: 67.0, ERA: 4.16, WHIP: 1.45, K/BB: 54/32
Actual 2008: IP: 58.2, ERA: 3.22, WHIP: 1.38, K/BB: 58/25
Jared Burton is flat out nasty and that's all there is to it. The Reds really did their homework when they nabbed him as a Rule V selection from the A's. I'm still surprised that the A's left him unprotected so that they could grab Jay Marshall in the Rule V draft. Marshall is another reliever with a funky arm slot and the A's are believers in those guys, but I'd imagine they'd like a mulligan on this one.
He struck out almost a batter an inning and was probably the Reds most effective reliever. Burton features a Splitter (93.03 MPH), Cutter (88.73 MPH), and a Slider (87.22 MPH). Everything he throws is hard and really moving.
All that's left for him to do is improve his walk rate and workload. He logged 43.0 innings in 2007 and 58.2 innings in 2008, so it would be very beneficial to the Reds if they could get his workload up to ~75.0 innings. Outside of that, the Reds are very lucky to have Burton in the mix.
Middle Relief: Jeremy Affeldt
2008 Projections
Bill James: IP: 200.0, ERA: 4.46, WHIP: 1.46, K/BB: 150/97
ZIPS: IP: 72.0, ERA: 4.75, WHIP: 1.54, K/BB: 48/39
Actual 2008: IP: 78.1, ERA: 3.33, WHIP: 1.31, K/BB: 80/25
Before the season, I had Jeremy Affeldt pegged as a breakthrough candidate or a bust. Thankfully, he broke through. In addition, I really liked the signing because it was a good way to troll for compensatory picks.
Affeldt threw a lot of quality innings for the Reds in 2008 and is now exploring the free agent market. He's earned a hefty payday, so probably won't be back with the Reds. He struck out more than a batter an inning and racked up 121 groundballs and only 60 flyballs.
From a production standpoint, Affeldt would be a nice guy to keep around, but his cost and ability to bring back a draft pick makes it better to let him walk.
Middle Relief: Todd Coffey
2008 Projections
Bill James: IP: 50.0, ERA: 4.86, WHIP: 1.46, K/BB: 36/15
ZIPS: IP: 75.0, ERA: 4.92, WHIP: 1.52, K/BB: 50/25
Lefty Specialist: Kent Mercker
2008 Projections
Bill James: N/A
ZIPS: N/A
Both Mercker and Coffey imploded almost before the season got underway. They combined to log a paltry 23 innings and that was the end of it. Despite possessing good stuff, Coffey was once again undone by the mental good side of pitching.
As for Mercker, his career ended with a whimper, not a bang. Injuries caught up with him, but he had a very nice career and should enjoy his retirement.
Middle Relief: Mike Lincoln
2008 Projections
Bill James: N/A
ZIPS: N/A
Actual 2008: IP: 70.1, ERA: 4.48, WHIP: 1.28, K/BB: 57/24
I owe Mike Lincoln a mea culpa. I honestly didn't get the signing and couldn't imagine what the Reds saw in him. However, Lincoln was fairly effective and he certainly exceded my expectations. Health was likely all he needed to be a reasonably effective MLB reliever.
Perhaps the most impressive thing about his season was his heavy groundball tendencies. He posted a stellar 1.70 GB/FB ratio, which is always a plus in Great American Ballpark.
Given the volatility of relievers, Lincoln probably won't be able to maintain his success into 2009, so perhaps it isn't surprising that the Reds seem to have little interest in bringing him back.
Lincoln does bring up an interesting observation about Walt Jocketty. One thing that is hard to overlook about Walt Jocketty is his preference for groundball pitchers. It was a built-in philosophy for the Cardinals. Jocketty acquired them, Dave Duncan groomed them, and Tony LaRussa put them in the best position to succeed. It seems like every starting pitcher they had was a groundballer and Anthony Reyes couldn't succeed in that organization because he wasn't a guy who would get groundballs.
Perhaps Mike Lincoln is the first sign of the groundball trend being carried over to the Reds organization, which would be a good thing given the reduced pull of gravity that seems to exist in Great American Ballpark.
Friday, October 17, 2008
2008 Season Review: Outfield
It was a season of significant turnover in the Cincinnati outfield. The Dunn and Griffey era came to an unceremonious end when both were dealt away by Walt Jocketty. The Reds waited until Jr. hit his 600th homer, which is certainly a momentus achievement.
Thankfully, the Reds should be in good shape in 2009 with the emergence of uber-prospect Jay Bruce and the potential arrival of Chris Dickerson. In addition, solid prospect Drew Stubbs isn't far away.
However, the beginning of 2008 saw the old standby of Dunn and Griffey with an uhealthy dose of Corey Patterson added in for good measure. Things should be improved in 2009, but here is what the 2008 projection looked like. And, now here is the review with the benefit of hindsight.
LF: Adam Dunn
2008 Projections
Bill James: .251/.386/.537/.923 in 566 ABs with 43 HRs, 107 Runs, and 103 RBIs.
ZIPS: .239/.366/.498/.864 in 524 ABs with 36 HRs, 94 Runs, and 103 RBIs.
2008 Actual Reds: .233/.373/.528/.901 in 373 ABs with 32 HRs, 58 Runs, and 74 RBIs.
2008 Actual Total: .236/.386/.513/.899 in 517 ABs with 40 HRs, 79 Runs, and 100 RBIs.
I still believe that your view of Dunn reveals something about your larger view of baseball, but he's no longer a "problem" for Reds fans. Walt Jocketty dealt him to the Diamondbacks for Micah Owings, Dallas Buck, and Wilkin Castillo.
During his time in Cincy and Arizona, Dunn continued to be Dunn. Whether you love him or hate him, he's one of the most reliable and consistent producers in baseball. You can debate the value of that production, but it's impossible to dispute the consistency.
Dunn continues to stay a step ahead of his potential "old player skills" decline and once again reached 100+ walks, 40 homers, and 100 RBI. The most surprising thing about his season is that he only scored 79 runs. However, that seems to be more of a function of his spot in the lineup. The Reds hit him 2nd for 28 Plate Appearances, 3rd for 26 PAs, 4th for 197 PAs, 5th for 341 PAs, 6th for 37 PAs, 7th for 20 PAs, and 9th for 2 PAs.
Dunn should hit really hit third in the lineup. His blend of table setting and table clearing ability makes him a logical fit in the 3rd slot. However, the Reds hit him 5th or lower for the majority of the time. As a team, the Reds put up the following batting order spot production (omitting pitchers):
1-2: .263/.316/.391/.707 in 1500 Plate Appearances
3-6: .253/.340/.461/.801 in 2768 Plate Appearances
7-9: .249/.324/.385/.709 in 1594 Plate Appearances
I guess it's not suprising that if you hit 5th, you aren't going to score as many runs. By and large, you'd be left to be driven in by the 7-9 spots in the batting order and their .709 OPS.
Another not too surprising observation, your offense is going to stink when your top two spots in the lineup crank out a .316 OBP. Seriously, a .316 OBP??? The 7-9 non-pitchers PAs created a higher OBP at .324. Maybe, just maybe, that's something that needs to be rectified for 2009. Still, how easy is it going to be to raise the team OBP when you cut ties with your two best OBP players (Hatteberg + Dunn)?
Corey Patterson
2008 Projections
Bill James: .267/.309/.424/.733 in 439 ABs with 13 HRs, 63 Runs, and 47 RBIs.
ZIPS: .257/.295/.402/.697 in 495 ABs with 14 HRs, 70 Runs, and 65 RBIs.
2008 Actual: .205/.238/.344/.582 in 366 ABs with 10 HRs, 46 Runs, and 34 RBIs.
There just isn't much left to say about Patterson and frankly I'd rather turn the page and relegate Patterson to the depths of my memory. He played good defense, but was a HUGE detriment to the offense.
RF: Ken Griffey, Jr.
2008 Projections
Bill James: .263/.353/.487/.840 in 495 ABs with 29 HRs, 72 Runs, and 84 RBIs.
ZIPS: .272/.346/.480/.826 in 427 ABs with 23 HRs, 62 Runs, and 81 RBIs.
2008 Actual Reds: .245/.355/.432/.787 in 359 ABs with 15 HRs, 51 Runs, and 53 RBIs.
2008 Actual Total: .249/.353/.424/.777 in 490 ABs with 18 HRs, 67 Runs, and 71 RBIs.
Griffey deserves better. It's difficult to see it any other way. He
has always been a class act. He never took any short cuts and never succumbed to the IPED temptation. Unfortunately, his career is on the verge of ending with a whimper, instead of a bang.
It's difficult to see the greats of all-time fade away, but it's inevitable for just about all of them.
Unfortunately, during his early 30s when he still had the skills to be productive, he couldn't be healthy. In his late 30s, he finally stayed reasonably healthy, but his skills seemed to have eroded to the point that he no longer could be a productive player.
Maybe things would have been different if Griffey had been moved out of center sooner, but that's not the way it happened. At this point, Griffey is a huge liability on defense (-17 in only 763 in rightfield) and his offense no longer justifies his status as a starter. I'm hopeful that an offseason can rehabilitate his swing and he can finish up his career in style with an AL squad.
However, he seems to have lost the ability to drive the ball with authority and his batting average has fallen. Scouts have reported that his bat speed is down and that he can only succeed by guessing right on breaking balls.
Jocketty cut a deal with the White Sox bringing in Nick Masset and Danny Richar. Griffey struggled with the ChiSox, but interesting news came out this week. Griffey had his left knee scoped, as he played in pain all season and had his knee drained 3 times during the season.
So, maybe Griffey can get healthy this offseason and have a bit of a resurgence in 2009. A player of his status deserves a better fairwell than he is currently in line to receive.
OF: Norris Hopper
2008 Projections
Bill James: .309/.353/.350/.703 in 220 ABs with 0 HRs, 29 Runs, and 16 RBIs.
ZIPS: .291/.330/.340/.670 in 382 ABs with 1 HRs, 51 Runs, and 30 RBIs.
2008 Actual: .200/.286/.200/.486 in 50 ABs with 0 HRs, 3 Runs, and 1 RBI.
Hopper's season was over almost before it began. He suffered a torn elbow ligament and underwent Tommy John surgery. Hopper is a great story and a fan favorite. I've been skeptical about him in the past because of his approach to the game, but he gets the absolute most out of his ability and it's impossible not to respect him that him.
I'd be intrigued about Hopper as a potential leadoff hitter, but his opportunity has probably passed in the Reds organization. It's difficult to fathom how much of a player's career can come down to timing and opportunity. I'm sure countless quality careers have been lost due to a lack of opportunity.
Hopefully, 2009 brings about renewed health and opportunity for Hopper.
Thankfully, the Reds should be in good shape in 2009 with the emergence of uber-prospect Jay Bruce and the potential arrival of Chris Dickerson. In addition, solid prospect Drew Stubbs isn't far away.
However, the beginning of 2008 saw the old standby of Dunn and Griffey with an uhealthy dose of Corey Patterson added in for good measure. Things should be improved in 2009, but here is what the 2008 projection looked like. And, now here is the review with the benefit of hindsight.
LF: Adam Dunn
2008 Projections
Bill James: .251/.386/.537/.923 in 566 ABs with 43 HRs, 107 Runs, and 103 RBIs.
ZIPS: .239/.366/.498/.864 in 524 ABs with 36 HRs, 94 Runs, and 103 RBIs.
2008 Actual Reds: .233/.373/.528/.901 in 373 ABs with 32 HRs, 58 Runs, and 74 RBIs.
2008 Actual Total: .236/.386/.513/.899 in 517 ABs with 40 HRs, 79 Runs, and 100 RBIs.
I still believe that your view of Dunn reveals something about your larger view of baseball, but he's no longer a "problem" for Reds fans. Walt Jocketty dealt him to the Diamondbacks for Micah Owings, Dallas Buck, and Wilkin Castillo.During his time in Cincy and Arizona, Dunn continued to be Dunn. Whether you love him or hate him, he's one of the most reliable and consistent producers in baseball. You can debate the value of that production, but it's impossible to dispute the consistency.
Dunn continues to stay a step ahead of his potential "old player skills" decline and once again reached 100+ walks, 40 homers, and 100 RBI. The most surprising thing about his season is that he only scored 79 runs. However, that seems to be more of a function of his spot in the lineup. The Reds hit him 2nd for 28 Plate Appearances, 3rd for 26 PAs, 4th for 197 PAs, 5th for 341 PAs, 6th for 37 PAs, 7th for 20 PAs, and 9th for 2 PAs.
Dunn should hit really hit third in the lineup. His blend of table setting and table clearing ability makes him a logical fit in the 3rd slot. However, the Reds hit him 5th or lower for the majority of the time. As a team, the Reds put up the following batting order spot production (omitting pitchers):
1-2: .263/.316/.391/.707 in 1500 Plate Appearances
3-6: .253/.340/.461/.801 in 2768 Plate Appearances
7-9: .249/.324/.385/.709 in 1594 Plate Appearances
I guess it's not suprising that if you hit 5th, you aren't going to score as many runs. By and large, you'd be left to be driven in by the 7-9 spots in the batting order and their .709 OPS.
Another not too surprising observation, your offense is going to stink when your top two spots in the lineup crank out a .316 OBP. Seriously, a .316 OBP??? The 7-9 non-pitchers PAs created a higher OBP at .324. Maybe, just maybe, that's something that needs to be rectified for 2009. Still, how easy is it going to be to raise the team OBP when you cut ties with your two best OBP players (Hatteberg + Dunn)?
Corey Patterson
2008 Projections
Bill James: .267/.309/.424/.733 in 439 ABs with 13 HRs, 63 Runs, and 47 RBIs.
ZIPS: .257/.295/.402/.697 in 495 ABs with 14 HRs, 70 Runs, and 65 RBIs.
2008 Actual: .205/.238/.344/.582 in 366 ABs with 10 HRs, 46 Runs, and 34 RBIs.
There just isn't much left to say about Patterson and frankly I'd rather turn the page and relegate Patterson to the depths of my memory. He played good defense, but was a HUGE detriment to the offense.
RF: Ken Griffey, Jr.
2008 Projections
Bill James: .263/.353/.487/.840 in 495 ABs with 29 HRs, 72 Runs, and 84 RBIs.
ZIPS: .272/.346/.480/.826 in 427 ABs with 23 HRs, 62 Runs, and 81 RBIs.
2008 Actual Reds: .245/.355/.432/.787 in 359 ABs with 15 HRs, 51 Runs, and 53 RBIs.
2008 Actual Total: .249/.353/.424/.777 in 490 ABs with 18 HRs, 67 Runs, and 71 RBIs.
Griffey deserves better. It's difficult to see it any other way. He
has always been a class act. He never took any short cuts and never succumbed to the IPED temptation. Unfortunately, his career is on the verge of ending with a whimper, instead of a bang.It's difficult to see the greats of all-time fade away, but it's inevitable for just about all of them.
Unfortunately, during his early 30s when he still had the skills to be productive, he couldn't be healthy. In his late 30s, he finally stayed reasonably healthy, but his skills seemed to have eroded to the point that he no longer could be a productive player.
Maybe things would have been different if Griffey had been moved out of center sooner, but that's not the way it happened. At this point, Griffey is a huge liability on defense (-17 in only 763 in rightfield) and his offense no longer justifies his status as a starter. I'm hopeful that an offseason can rehabilitate his swing and he can finish up his career in style with an AL squad.
However, he seems to have lost the ability to drive the ball with authority and his batting average has fallen. Scouts have reported that his bat speed is down and that he can only succeed by guessing right on breaking balls.
Jocketty cut a deal with the White Sox bringing in Nick Masset and Danny Richar. Griffey struggled with the ChiSox, but interesting news came out this week. Griffey had his left knee scoped, as he played in pain all season and had his knee drained 3 times during the season.
So, maybe Griffey can get healthy this offseason and have a bit of a resurgence in 2009. A player of his status deserves a better fairwell than he is currently in line to receive.
OF: Norris Hopper
2008 Projections
Bill James: .309/.353/.350/.703 in 220 ABs with 0 HRs, 29 Runs, and 16 RBIs.
ZIPS: .291/.330/.340/.670 in 382 ABs with 1 HRs, 51 Runs, and 30 RBIs.
2008 Actual: .200/.286/.200/.486 in 50 ABs with 0 HRs, 3 Runs, and 1 RBI.
Hopper's season was over almost before it began. He suffered a torn elbow ligament and underwent Tommy John surgery. Hopper is a great story and a fan favorite. I've been skeptical about him in the past because of his approach to the game, but he gets the absolute most out of his ability and it's impossible not to respect him that him.
I'd be intrigued about Hopper as a potential leadoff hitter, but his opportunity has probably passed in the Reds organization. It's difficult to fathom how much of a player's career can come down to timing and opportunity. I'm sure countless quality careers have been lost due to a lack of opportunity.
Hopefully, 2009 brings about renewed health and opportunity for Hopper.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
2008 Season Review: Infield
Well, in the beginning you project and in the end you review. We've already projected for the infield, so it's time to look back on what was.
So, it's time to look back at what was a most disappointing season for the Reds in 2008. Right off the bat, it's obvious that things didn't go as expected. Alex Gonzalez and David Ross were presumptive starters when I did my season preview, but clearly things changed in a hurry. Ross was bumped by the mighty Paul Bako and A-Gon missed the entire season. Unfortunately, the only player who lived up to expectations was Joey Votto.
C: David Ross
Here is what the ZIPS and Bill James projections looked like for David Ross.
2008 Projections
Bill James: .233/.311/.458/.768 in 330 ABs with 19 HRs, 50 RBI, and 38 Runs.
ZIPS: .203/.275/.369/.644 in 187 ABs with 8 HRs, 24 RBI, and 18 Runs.
Actual 2008: .231/.381/.366/.747 in 134 ABs with 3 HRs, 13 RBI, and 17.
So, it's time to look back at what was a most disappointing season for the Reds in 2008.
Even in hindsight, it's difficult to know what to make of David Ross, as he remains an enigma even with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.
Looking ahead to 2008, I expected Ross split the difference between his 2007 and 2008 seasons. His 2007 BABIP was a paltry .228, so I expected his batting average to rebound to the .225-.230 range. He managed to hit .231 for the Reds, but I won't break my arm patting myself on the back, because I also expected him to sustain his power production, which clearly didn't happen. His AB/HR dropped from 18.3 in 2007 all the way to 44.7 in 2008.
While his power vanished, his on base skills took a big jump forward. His BB/PA increased from .087 in 2007 to an absurdly good .190 in 2008.
Ultimately, Ross never fit in with the new regime in Cincinnati and the Reds cut ties with him in August. Thankfully, I won't have to try to figure him out for 2009.
1b: Joey Votto
2008 Projections
Bill James: .307/.388/.533/.920 in 460 ABs with 24 HRs, 71 Runs, and 81 RBIs.
ZIPS: .281/.357/.466/.823 in 556 ABs with 23 HRs, 55 Runs, and 88 RBIs.
Actual 2008: .297/.368/.506/.874 in 526 ABs with 24 HRs, 69 Runs, and 84 RBIs.
Bill James was pretty solid with his projection for Votto, though he overstated his slash line a bit.
The big question with Joey Votto heading into 2008 was whether the Reds would actually give him the job. Scott Hatteberg was the consumate professional hitter and had years of experience on his side, which Dusty Baker had always favored during his managerial career. Even so, the Reds did the right thing and gave Votto the bulk of the playing time, ultimately parting ways with Scott Hatteberg in early June.
Votto rewarded their confidence with a stellar rookie season. In 2009, the Reds should expect to see better a better on base percentage from Votto unless Dusty Baker really is trying to make him a more aggressive hitter. However, there is some evidence that Votto was more aggressive in 2008.
In 2007, he swung at the 1st pitch 33% of the time, while in 2008 he swung at the 1st pitch 38% of the time. In 2007, he saw 3.81 pitches per plate appearance, but in 2008 he saw 3.70 pitches per plate appearance. In 2007 the percentage of Plate Appearances that resulted in 3-0 counts was 7%, but in 2008 it was down to 5%.
It'll be interesting to see what approach Votto brings to the table in 2009. It's possible that the Reds wanted him to get more aggressive in 2008 or it's possible that his 2007 approach was the result of a small sample size. Still, Votto's minor league numbers indicate better plate discipline to come. If it doesn't happen, then maybe you have to look at the coaching staff.
However, it's hard to be at all disappointed with what Votto did in 2008 and better days should be on the horizon. Votto should continue to improve his on both his on base percentage and his homerun rate, as power is often the last tool to develop.
The Reds did "set it and forget it" with Votto and they were rewarded.
2b: Brandon Phillips
2008 Projections
Bill James: .268/.316/.438/.754 in 630 ABs with 23 HRs, 90 Runs, and 79 RBI.
ZIPS: .271/.325/.435/.760 in 568 ABs with 21 HRs, 87 Runs, and 79 RBI.
Actual 2008: .261/.312/.442/.754 in 559 ABs with 21 HRs, 80 Runs, and 78 RBI.
In 2008, Phillips took a step backward that I expected, especially the significant decline in on base percentage. To me, Phillips was overrated offensively after his 30/30 season in 2007 and he struck me as a very strong sell-high candidate. While Phillips did some nice things in 2007, his most impressive feats were largely driven by playing time. By and large, he achieved his 30/30 season because he rarely walked. Personally, I'd rather trade some homers for a more disciplined approach and a bump in walk rate. In 2008, Phillips' slash line really wasn't very impressive, as his on base percentage was driven by batting average and hit by pitches, and his OPS was only .816.
Phillips' defense was stellar as usual, but it'll be interesting to see what Phillips brings to the table offensively in 2009. He clearly needs to make some adjustments, as pitchers took advantage of his aggressive approach last year.
3b: Edwin Encarnacion
2008 Projections
Bill James: .287/.355/.476/.831 in 494 ABs with 19 HRs, 66 Runs, and 79 RBIs.
ZIPS: .291/.361/.460/.821 in 506 ABs with 18 HRs, 70 Runs, and 78 RBIs.
Actual 2008: .251/.340/.466/.806 in 506 ABs with 26 HRs, 75 Runs, and 68 RBIs.
This offseason, my perspective on Edwin changed. As he came up through the minors, I thought he might be our version of David Wright. For me, after several seasons of waiting on Edwin, the presumption on him flipped. No longer was I expecting him to be a quality player until he proved otherwise, now I am expecting him to be a mediocre, inconsistent player until he proves otherwise.
Unfortunately, Edwin seems to be what I presumed him to be. He has yet to put it together for a full season and maybe next year will AGAIN be the year. But, I'm done waiting on him. For me, he is what he appears to be. A solid hitter with an iron glove.
SS: Alex Gonzalez
2008 Projections
Bill James: .254/.308/.416/.724 in 425 ABs with 13 HRs, 51 Runs, and 55 RBIs.
ZIPS: .257/.317/.417/.734 in 432 ABs with 14 HRs, 57 Runs, and 58 RBIs.
Actual 2008: --None--
The only thing that can be said about A-Gon's 2008 season is that we may need to take a serious look at our medical staff. I've been unimpressed in the past with our team's injury track record, but it just doesn't seem reasonable for Gonzalez to have never set foot on the field because of a compression fracture in his knee. It just doesn't seem like the type of injury that should sideline a player for an entire season.
Inf: Jeff Keppinger
2008 Projections
Bill James: .321/.380/.430/.810 in 365 ABs with 5 HRs, 49 Runs, and 36 RBIs.
ZIPS: .307/.360/.408/.768 in 449 ABs with 6 HRs, 60 Runs, and 48 RBIs.
Actual 2008: .266/.310/.346/.656 in 459 ABs with 3 HRs, 45 Runs, and 43 RBIs.
Keppinger was one of the real surprises in 2008 and not in a good way. Keppinger's offensive game is driven by his batting average and if his batting average is down then he just doesn't bring much to the table.
Keppinger's component stats in 2008 weren't far off from his 2007 season, which makes his fall off the cliff a bit unusual.
Line Drive%: 2007 (21.3%) 2008 (21.0%)
Groundball%: 2007 (46.5%) 2008 (51.0%)
Flyball%: 2007 (32.2%) 2008 (28.0%)
HR/FB: 2007 (6.8%) 2008 (2.4%)
AB/HR: 2007 (48.2) 2008 (153.0)
Contact%: 2007 (93.57%) 2008 (93.48%)
BABIP: 2007 (.335) 2008 ( .275)
The clear difference is he traded in some flyballs for some groundballs, which also helps explain why his homerun rate fell. Still, Keppinger managed to walk (30) more than he struck out (24), which is impressive, but needs to be combined with more production. I'd expect a rebound in 2009, as his stellar linedrive rate and below average BABIP points to a substantially higher batting average next year. He needs to get the ball in the air a bit more, but he'd be hard pressed to have such an astonishingly low percentage of his flyballs stay in the park.
Unfortunately, Keppinger may have revealed himself to be more of a utility player. One of the unfortunate aspects of professional baseball is that players often get unfairly labeled early on and aren't able to shake off that label to get the opportunity they deserve. For Keppinger, 2008 may have been his best chance at claiming a starting job.
So, it's time to look back at what was a most disappointing season for the Reds in 2008. Right off the bat, it's obvious that things didn't go as expected. Alex Gonzalez and David Ross were presumptive starters when I did my season preview, but clearly things changed in a hurry. Ross was bumped by the mighty Paul Bako and A-Gon missed the entire season. Unfortunately, the only player who lived up to expectations was Joey Votto.
C: David Ross
Here is what the ZIPS and Bill James projections looked like for David Ross.
2008 Projections
Bill James: .233/.311/.458/.768 in 330 ABs with 19 HRs, 50 RBI, and 38 Runs.
ZIPS: .203/.275/.369/.644 in 187 ABs with 8 HRs, 24 RBI, and 18 Runs.
Actual 2008: .231/.381/.366/.747 in 134 ABs with 3 HRs, 13 RBI, and 17.
So, it's time to look back at what was a most disappointing season for the Reds in 2008.
Even in hindsight, it's difficult to know what to make of David Ross, as he remains an enigma even with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.
Looking ahead to 2008, I expected Ross split the difference between his 2007 and 2008 seasons. His 2007 BABIP was a paltry .228, so I expected his batting average to rebound to the .225-.230 range. He managed to hit .231 for the Reds, but I won't break my arm patting myself on the back, because I also expected him to sustain his power production, which clearly didn't happen. His AB/HR dropped from 18.3 in 2007 all the way to 44.7 in 2008.
While his power vanished, his on base skills took a big jump forward. His BB/PA increased from .087 in 2007 to an absurdly good .190 in 2008.
Ultimately, Ross never fit in with the new regime in Cincinnati and the Reds cut ties with him in August. Thankfully, I won't have to try to figure him out for 2009.
1b: Joey Votto
2008 Projections
Bill James: .307/.388/.533/.920 in 460 ABs with 24 HRs, 71 Runs, and 81 RBIs.
ZIPS: .281/.357/.466/.823 in 556 ABs with 23 HRs, 55 Runs, and 88 RBIs.
Actual 2008: .297/.368/.506/.874 in 526 ABs with 24 HRs, 69 Runs, and 84 RBIs.
Bill James was pretty solid with his projection for Votto, though he overstated his slash line a bit.
The big question with Joey Votto heading into 2008 was whether the Reds would actually give him the job. Scott Hatteberg was the consumate professional hitter and had years of experience on his side, which Dusty Baker had always favored during his managerial career. Even so, the Reds did the right thing and gave Votto the bulk of the playing time, ultimately parting ways with Scott Hatteberg in early June.
Votto rewarded their confidence with a stellar rookie season. In 2009, the Reds should expect to see better a better on base percentage from Votto unless Dusty Baker really is trying to make him a more aggressive hitter. However, there is some evidence that Votto was more aggressive in 2008.
In 2007, he swung at the 1st pitch 33% of the time, while in 2008 he swung at the 1st pitch 38% of the time. In 2007, he saw 3.81 pitches per plate appearance, but in 2008 he saw 3.70 pitches per plate appearance. In 2007 the percentage of Plate Appearances that resulted in 3-0 counts was 7%, but in 2008 it was down to 5%.
It'll be interesting to see what approach Votto brings to the table in 2009. It's possible that the Reds wanted him to get more aggressive in 2008 or it's possible that his 2007 approach was the result of a small sample size. Still, Votto's minor league numbers indicate better plate discipline to come. If it doesn't happen, then maybe you have to look at the coaching staff.
However, it's hard to be at all disappointed with what Votto did in 2008 and better days should be on the horizon. Votto should continue to improve his on both his on base percentage and his homerun rate, as power is often the last tool to develop.
The Reds did "set it and forget it" with Votto and they were rewarded.
2b: Brandon Phillips
2008 Projections
Bill James: .268/.316/.438/.754 in 630 ABs with 23 HRs, 90 Runs, and 79 RBI.
ZIPS: .271/.325/.435/.760 in 568 ABs with 21 HRs, 87 Runs, and 79 RBI.
Actual 2008: .261/.312/.442/.754 in 559 ABs with 21 HRs, 80 Runs, and 78 RBI.
In 2008, Phillips took a step backward that I expected, especially the significant decline in on base percentage. To me, Phillips was overrated offensively after his 30/30 season in 2007 and he struck me as a very strong sell-high candidate. While Phillips did some nice things in 2007, his most impressive feats were largely driven by playing time. By and large, he achieved his 30/30 season because he rarely walked. Personally, I'd rather trade some homers for a more disciplined approach and a bump in walk rate. In 2008, Phillips' slash line really wasn't very impressive, as his on base percentage was driven by batting average and hit by pitches, and his OPS was only .816.
Phillips' defense was stellar as usual, but it'll be interesting to see what Phillips brings to the table offensively in 2009. He clearly needs to make some adjustments, as pitchers took advantage of his aggressive approach last year.
3b: Edwin Encarnacion
2008 Projections
Bill James: .287/.355/.476/.831 in 494 ABs with 19 HRs, 66 Runs, and 79 RBIs.
ZIPS: .291/.361/.460/.821 in 506 ABs with 18 HRs, 70 Runs, and 78 RBIs.
Actual 2008: .251/.340/.466/.806 in 506 ABs with 26 HRs, 75 Runs, and 68 RBIs.
This offseason, my perspective on Edwin changed. As he came up through the minors, I thought he might be our version of David Wright. For me, after several seasons of waiting on Edwin, the presumption on him flipped. No longer was I expecting him to be a quality player until he proved otherwise, now I am expecting him to be a mediocre, inconsistent player until he proves otherwise.
Unfortunately, Edwin seems to be what I presumed him to be. He has yet to put it together for a full season and maybe next year will AGAIN be the year. But, I'm done waiting on him. For me, he is what he appears to be. A solid hitter with an iron glove.
SS: Alex Gonzalez
2008 Projections
Bill James: .254/.308/.416/.724 in 425 ABs with 13 HRs, 51 Runs, and 55 RBIs.
ZIPS: .257/.317/.417/.734 in 432 ABs with 14 HRs, 57 Runs, and 58 RBIs.
Actual 2008: --None--
The only thing that can be said about A-Gon's 2008 season is that we may need to take a serious look at our medical staff. I've been unimpressed in the past with our team's injury track record, but it just doesn't seem reasonable for Gonzalez to have never set foot on the field because of a compression fracture in his knee. It just doesn't seem like the type of injury that should sideline a player for an entire season.
Inf: Jeff Keppinger
2008 Projections
Bill James: .321/.380/.430/.810 in 365 ABs with 5 HRs, 49 Runs, and 36 RBIs.
ZIPS: .307/.360/.408/.768 in 449 ABs with 6 HRs, 60 Runs, and 48 RBIs.
Actual 2008: .266/.310/.346/.656 in 459 ABs with 3 HRs, 45 Runs, and 43 RBIs.
Keppinger was one of the real surprises in 2008 and not in a good way. Keppinger's offensive game is driven by his batting average and if his batting average is down then he just doesn't bring much to the table.
Keppinger's component stats in 2008 weren't far off from his 2007 season, which makes his fall off the cliff a bit unusual.
Line Drive%: 2007 (21.3%) 2008 (21.0%)
Groundball%: 2007 (46.5%) 2008 (51.0%)
Flyball%: 2007 (32.2%) 2008 (28.0%)
HR/FB: 2007 (6.8%) 2008 (2.4%)
AB/HR: 2007 (48.2) 2008 (153.0)
Contact%: 2007 (93.57%) 2008 (93.48%)
BABIP: 2007 (.335) 2008 ( .275)
The clear difference is he traded in some flyballs for some groundballs, which also helps explain why his homerun rate fell. Still, Keppinger managed to walk (30) more than he struck out (24), which is impressive, but needs to be combined with more production. I'd expect a rebound in 2009, as his stellar linedrive rate and below average BABIP points to a substantially higher batting average next year. He needs to get the ball in the air a bit more, but he'd be hard pressed to have such an astonishingly low percentage of his flyballs stay in the park.
Unfortunately, Keppinger may have revealed himself to be more of a utility player. One of the unfortunate aspects of professional baseball is that players often get unfairly labeled early on and aren't able to shake off that label to get the opportunity they deserve. For Keppinger, 2008 may have been his best chance at claiming a starting job.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)