Author: Jimmy Sullivan

Posted on

Some Thoughts on the Waterways of Rio De Janiero

Did I ever think that I would actually be writing about the quality of water in a South American country?  No, but that’s life, and that’s become sports, too, recently.

To catch you up on recent events (if you haven’t been following), the Associated Press published an investigation into the water that the athletes of the 2016 Rio Olympics will be swimming and rowing in next August.  Here’s an excerpt:

RIO DE JANEIRO (AP) — Athletes in next year’s Summer Olympics here will be swimming and boating in waters so contaminated with human feces that they risk becoming violently ill and unable to compete in the games, an Associated Press investigation has found.

An AP analysis of water quality revealed dangerously high levels of viruses and bacteria from human sewage in Olympic and Paralympic venues — results that alarmed international experts and dismayed competitors training in Rio, some of whom have already fallen ill with fevers, vomiting and diarrhea.

It is the first independent comprehensive testing for both viruses and bacteria at the Olympic sites.

Brazilian officials have assured that the water will be safe for the Olympic athletes and the medical director of the International Olympic Committee said all was on track for providing safe competing venues. But neither the government nor the IOC tests for viruses, relying on bacteria testing only.

Extreme water pollution is common in Brazil, where the majority of sewage is not treated. Raw waste runs through open-air ditches to streams and rivers that feed the Olympic water sites.

As a result, Olympic athletes are almost certain to come into contact with disease-causing viruses that in some tests measured up to 1.7 million times the level of what would be considered hazardous on a Southern California beach.

Despite decades of official pledges to clean up the mess, the stench of raw sewage still greets travelers touching down at Rio’s international airport. Prime beaches are deserted because the surf is thick with putrid sludge, and periodic die-offs leave the Olympic lake, Rodrigo de Freitas, littered with rotting fish.

That’s disgusting.  FIFA and Sepp Blatter look at that and say, “that’s despicable”.  But this is no laughing matter.  And lest you think it won’t get worse, it does.  Back to the report:

The AP also measured fecal coliform bacteria, single-celled organisms that live in the intestines of humans and animals. Fecal coliforms can suggest the presence of cholera, dysentery, hepatitis A and typhoid.

In 75 percent of the samples taken at the Olympic lake, the number of fecal coliforms exceeded Brazil’s legal limit for “secondary contact,” such as boating or rowing — in two samples spiking to over 10 times the accepted level. The Marina da Gloria venue exceeded the limit only once, while at Rio’s most popular tourist beach, Ipanema, fecal coliforms tested at three times the acceptable level in a single sample. At Copacabana, the AP tests found no violations of fecal coliform counts.

Fecal coliforms have long been used by most governments as a marker to determine whether bodies of water are polluted because they are relatively easy and cheap to test and find. Brazil uses only bacterial testing when determining water quality.

In Rio, the fecal coliform levels were not as astronomical as the viral numbers the AP found. That gap is at the heart of a global debate among water experts, many of whom are pushing governments to adopt viral as well as bacterial testing to determine if recreational waters are safe.

That’s because fecal coliform bacteria from sewage can survive only a short time in water, especially in the salty and sunny conditions around Rio. Human adenoviruses have been shown to last several months, with some studies even indicating they can last years.

That means that even if Rio magically collected and treated all its sewage tomorrow, its waters would stay polluted for a long time.

The diseases mentioned (cholera, dysentery, typhoid, and hepatitis A) are all bad, so bad that they all have death rates.  While these death rates are minimal, they increase dramatically when untreated.  A swimmer/rower coming down with this disease and not treating it is very plausible, the athletes may not be aware of the symptoms.  These athletes may also want to push through that pain, especially because of the absurd amount of training that goes into the Olympics.  Nonetheless, the risk of death exists for two reasons: the IOC and the Rio government.

The IOC stands for International Olympic Committee, and it essentially runs the Olympic games.  Most importantly, it’s a corrupt organization that has fallen under a multitude of controversies just in the last ten years.  So it shouldn’t come as a surprise when this was announced just yesterday:

RIO DE JANEIRO — The International Olympic Committee ruled out conducting viral tests of Rio de Janeiro’s sewage-laden waterways ahead of the 2016 games, a top official said Wednesday, despite an Associated Press study showing dangerously high levels of disease-causing viruses at all aquatic venues, with experts saying athletes are almost certain to be exposed to pathogens.

Speaking at a news conference dominated by questions about Rio’s sewage pollution problem, Olympic Games Executive Director Christophe Dubi said the IOC will be sticking to World Health Organization guidelines recommending only bacterial testing.

The AP’s independent analysis of water quality showed high levels of viruses and, in some cases, bacteria from human sewage in all of Rio’s Olympic and Paralympic water venues, including the Rodrigo de Freitas Lagoon, where rowing will take place, the Guanabara Bay, where the sailing competition are to be held, and at Copacabana Beach where distance swimming events will take place.

In two separate emailed statements following the AP’s July 30 publication about its study, the World Health Organization said it was advising the International Olympic Committee “to widen the scientific base of indicators to include viruses.”

However, in an emailed statement Monday, the organization backpedaled and said that “WHO has not and will not issue an ‘official recommendation’ on viral testing.”

So, the IOC’s reaction to human sewage, bacteria, and disease-causing viruses is, basically, “Yeah, whatever.”  You may have heard stories like the one that came out of Rio last week, in which thirteen of the forty rowers on the United States Rowing Team fell ill with stomach problems.  The team doctor believes that the sicknesses are due to impurity in the Rio waters that the team was training in, and she’s probably right.

But the IOC, in another episode of being the IOC, not only deemed the waters safe but also denied the doctor’s claims.  Nawal El Moutawakel, the leader of the inspection team in charge of checking the waterways that will be used in the Olympics, said this:

The IOC puts on the highest priority the athletes and our friends around this table are doing their upmost so that this issue of water quality is being heavily dealt with so the athletes can compete in secure and safe environments.

Yeah, sure you do.  I’ll take hypocrisy for $1,000, Alex.

Answer?  Daily Double.  Daily Double because she said that the athletes and the playing conditions are the two highest priorities, both taking precedent over special interests.  This is a double dose of BS from a company full of it.  Is there more?  Of course there’s more!

The city of Rio De Janeiro was awarded these Olympics in 2009, giving them seven years to prepare, and preparing for the games includes cleaning up the water.  Per the International Business Times, the Rio government didn’t exactly do that:

Rio’s Olympic officials vowed in 2009 to address 80 percent of the area’s water pollution before the 2016 games began. Earlier this year, city government officials said funding for cleanup efforts would be drawn from an $8.8 billion budget devoted to “legacy projects,” such as water pollution and transportation infrastructure, USA Today reported. But Andre Correa, Rio’s environment secetary, acknowledged an 80 percent cleanup was “not going to happen” and said it would cost about $3.8 billion to establish a sewer system capable of fully addressing Rio’s needs.

A monthslong Associated Press investigation found in July that all of Rio’s Olympic waterways were brimming with bacteria and viruses from human waste. In one case, the level of water pollution was more than one million times worse than an acceptable standard on a California beach, the AP reported.

Oh yeah.  The fun starts with the money being taken out of the “legacy projects”, which were supposedly being used to help the city’s infrastructure and pollution.  However, the goal of an 80 percent cleanup was obviously never going to happen, so why did the government promise to get it done?  It’s obvious that the city did not want to let the IOC down, but an 80 percent cleanup was still unrealistic.

And even this is on the IOC, too.  With the knowledge that the water was contaminated and even a total cleanup would still leave a good deal of the pollutants in the water, why did Rio get the games?  With swimming and rowing events occurring in these waters, how did the country with the most polluted water get the right to host them in the largest worldwide competition there is?

As you can imagine, these pieces of news, along with the handling of the situation by the IOC and the Rio government, have drawn complete outrage from many.  The loudest critic of the IOC recently has probably been ESPN’s Mike Greenberg, and he said this today on his radio show, Mike & Mike:

Interestingly enough, this question was actually asked to the IOC officials last week.  This is how that scenario went down, per CBS News:

Asked whether they themselves would swim in the bay to prove the water’s quality — as Rio’s state environmental secretary did on a television program earlier this year — the officials laughed jocularly and shifted in their seats.

“We will dive together,” said El Moutawakel with a giggle, pointing to other IOC officials she said would take the plunge with her.

But honestly, if you really think that the IOC officials are going to dive into the polluted water together, you are probably losing a grip on reality.  It’s not happening.

The IOC and the government of Rio have combined to make this the most dangerous Olympics in recent memory.  We have to get past the corruption and bribery of Olympics past, because this is worse. Human lives are now at risk.

There wasn’t any bribery with these Olympics (that we know of). There wasn’t much controversy until now.  But there may be some major illnesses for the athletes involved, which is the real shame in all of this.

Every athlete in the Olympics has pushed himself or herself to his or her maximum potential.  Making the games is a dream come true for everyone involved, and, as I said before, these games are a once in a lifetime opportunity.  And, for swimmers and rowers, that once in a lifetime may involve cholera, dysentery, or other ills that put these athletes in very real and serious danger.

Danger brought about by the Rio government and the IOC.

Posted on

The Toronto Blue Jays Turned the AL East on Its Head This Weekend… Or Did They?

 

The Toronto Blue Jays, bonkers trade deadline performance and all, still entered last weekend down 4.5 games to the AL East-leading Yankees.  But they had the chance to change that, with three games in the Bronx starting Friday.  And change that they did.

Friday saw a well-pitched game head into extra innings; starters R.A. Dickey and Nathan Eovaldi allowed one run each over seven and six and a third innings, respectively.  After nine, Yankees manager Joe Girardi turned to rookie reliever Branden Pinder, and Pinder rewarded his manager’s loyalty by promptly serving up a solo jack to Jose Bautista.  Toronto won.  3.5 back.

Saturday marked the second start in the Blue Jays career of David Price, acquired from the Tigers at the trade deadline.  He would be facing Ivan Nova, who had been dealing with arm fatigue in recent weeks.  The game was scoreless, until the sixth inning, that is, when Justin Smoak belted a grand slam to break the tie.

Two more Blue Jay runs would be added over the course of as many innnings, Price would pitch seven shutout innings, and the Blue Jays would win again.  2.5 back.

Sunday presented an opportunity for the Yankees to get some of their lead back, with consistent #2 pitcher Masahiro Tanaka hitting the mound.  The Blue Jays sent Marco Estrada to the hill.  Tanaka was plenty good enough to win, only allowing two runs on home runs to Bautista and Josh Donaldson.  But Estrada was better, going six and a third scoreless innings.  The combination of  LaTroy Hawkins, Aaron Sanchez, and Roberto Osuna would not allow a hit the rest of the way, and the Blue Jays completed the weekend sweep.  1.5 back.

Sunday afternoon’s game also featured this piece of abject stupidity, but whatever:

So the AL East looks drastically different today, the complexion of it flipped upside down.  One would assume.

While the Jays have trailed in the division for the majority of this season, numbers, and particularly win-loss records, can be very misleading.

This season, the team north of the border has had the best run differential in Major League Baseball, at +129.  That figure is even better than the one posted by baseball’s best squad, the St. Louis Cardinals.  The Cards are 71-40.  The Jays are 61-52.  Why?  One-run games.

While their run differential has been outstanding, their record in games decided by one run has been atrocious.  At 12-23, they have the second worst record in the sport in these games.  Something called expected win-loss record says the Blue Jays should have been 69-44, given their run differential.  That record would be second best in baseball, only behind St. Louis.  But their performance in one-run games has left them playing catch-up all year.

So what do we chalk the Blue Jays’ tough losses to this season? Straight, dumb luck.  The New York Times‘ Victor Mather explains:

Fans are often suspicious of such teams, contending that they lack “heart” or “clutchiness.” But records in one-run games are largely a matter of luck. Teams that fare poorly in close games are just as likely to fare well in them in the future. Teams that do well in blowouts are just good teams, period.

(There is a team worse than the Jays in one-run games this year: The Oakland A’s are 13-26. Though Oakland is an afterthought this season at 51-62, it has a respectable plus-35 run differential, better than the Rays, Rangers and Twins, all of whom are around .500.)
In their 11-1 run, the Jays have outscored their foes by 67-32, and their run differential now stands at 597 to 468, or plus 129, dwarfing the next best team in the league, the Astros, who are plus 78. The Yankees, who still lead the Jays by a game and a half, are plus 61.

Though they cannot match the Jays, the Yankees are having a much improved season in run differential. Over the last two seasons opponents outscored the Yankees. In 2014, the Yanks were 84-78 while posting a minus 31. In 2013, they were 85-77 and minus 21.

Manager Joe Girardi got a lot of credit for keeping an apparently underwhelming team in contention. Most notably, he managed the team to a 30-16 record in one-run games in 2013. But no such magic is needed this season; the Yankees have the numbers to back up their record.

For every team like the Jays whose true abilities were hidden by a poor record, there is a team that fashions a fine record despite a mediocre run differential.

This is exactly the point I’m trying to articulate: the Blue Jays’ “resurgence” really isn’t one; all there is to their recent success is their performing to their potential… and the trades they made.

At the time of Troy Tulowitzki’s first game with the team, Toronto was a mediocre 50-51.  They won their next two games, and on July 30, pulled their second blockbuster trade of the week, picking up David Price.  Today, they’re 61-52, and with the offense humming as usual and the rotation bolstered, the Jays are looking very, very dangerous.

And here’s the thing: Tulo hasn’t played that well for Toronto.  The career .298 hitter has batted just .244 for the Jays, albeit in a scarce 53 plate appearances; this shouldn’t be anything to worry about.  However, his addition has helped the other batters in Toronto’s ridiculous batting order, and this is partially the reason why the trade for him has been successful.  And Price, in just two starts, has allowed exactly one earned run and helped a pitching staff in desperate need of support.  He wasn’t a bad acquisition, either.

So what does all of this mean for the Yankees?  Jacob Shafer at Bleacher Report wrote about that yesterday:

Well, now it’s three games, but the point is taken. The Yankees, however, need to regroup in a hurry.

Beginning Tuesday, they embark on a six-game road trip that begins with a three-game series against the Cleveland Indians and concludes with a trio of contests north of the border against these same Blue Jays.

If Toronto sweeps, or even wins, that series, it’s probable we’ll have a new leader in the AL East. And the two clubs will meet for four more in New York beginning Sept. 10.

Any Yankees turnaround will begin with the offense, which ranks second in MLB in runs scored (yes, they trail Toronto).

But the starting rotation, which owns an ERA of 4.31, needs to pick up the slack. To that end, how huge would it have been for New York to grab Price from the Detroit Tigers at the deadline, adding him to its arsenal and keeping the stud southpaw away from Toronto?

So this is the one important question: are the Blue Jays the favorites in the AL East?

At this point in the season, I’d have to say yes.  They have enough pitching now, and when it gets combined with that crazy lineup of theirs, the Toronto Blue Jays may just be the scariest team in the American League.  They could make a deep run in October, and it is just about assured that their 22-year playoff drought is about to end.

But one thing is clear: their emergence shouldn’t be a surprise.

Posted on

The Top Five NFL Coaches on the Hot Seat

 

It’s that time of year again!  NFL training camp has fully begun for all 32 NFL teams, the first preseason game kicks off on Sunday night, Hard Knocks starts on Tuesday, and every fantasy football team in America is undefeated.  In other words, all the signs are there to indicate that football season is around the corner.  And what better way to kick off said football season than to talk about coaches who need to be taking looks over their shoulders for their replacement?

My word of warning with this: I am not doing this to celebrate the chance of a coach getting fired.  And I’m not jumping for joy over a coach, or coaches, doing poor jobs.  As Donald Trump said last night, “I would say he’s incompetent, but I don’t want to do that because that’s not nice.”  The Donald aside, let’s get down to business; here are top five coaches on the hot seat this season.

5. Chuck Pagano, Indianapolis Colts

This is probably a surprise for you.  It was for me, too.

To most observers, this would seem like the year for the Colts to put it all together.  They signed Andre Johnson and Frank Gore in free agency.  They bring back the third leading passer in total yards last season and the best young quarterback in football.  And best of all? No more Trent Richardson!  They’re going to win the Super Bowl, right?

Maybe.  But for coach Chuck Pagano, he has no other choice.  And while this is a surprise, ProFootballTalk’s Mike Florio covered it in March:

The problem may be that owner Jim Irsay wants more success before making a fresh commitment to Pagano.  Ditto, possibly, for G.M. Ryan Grigson, who also is entering the final year of his contract, who traded a first-round draft pick for Trent Richardson, and who possibly won’t be getting an extension, either.

Irsay had no qualms about firing Jim Mora after the 2001 season, after a 6-10 season followed a pair of playoff appearances with Peyton Manning.  Perhaps Irsay believes that, unless Grigson and Pagano can get more out of franchise quarterbackAndrew Luck, Irsay will find someone who will.

That’s his right, but it also will be Grigson’s and Pagano’s right to accept employment elsewhere, if they take the Colts to or close to the top of the NFL and attract interest elsewhere.

Unfair?  Very.  Ridiculous?  Even more so.  But it’s just the way the NFL works.  The “What have you done for me lately” industry may be claiming another victim next offseason.

4. Sean Payton, New Orleans Saints

Little-known fact: Drew Brees was tied for the NFL lead in passing yards last season.  Very well-known fact: Drew Brees is 36 years old.

Drew Brees is the quarterback of the New Orleans Saints, who were triumphant in Super Bowl XLIV, after the 2009 season.  The greatest hits of coach Sean Payton’s team since then?  Among others, the Earthquake Run, the Catch III, Bountygate, losing a quite winnable NFC South last season, and, most importantly, no trips to the conference title game since their ’09 title.

And if you don’t think think the pressure is squarely on Sean Payton this season, listen to what he said after last season, per Brent Sobleski of Bleacher Report:

Honestly, and I say this in a very humble way, I hope that none of us feel like the ‘13 season was one where we were ready to have a second Mardi Gras parade. Look, we made the postseason, we had a chance to win the division and we couldn’t finish at the end at Carolina. And we got a playoff win, I recognize that was a big deal. But our aspirations are higher than that.

Payton has set himself up for failure.  Anything less than his own expectations may very well get him fired.

3. Marvin Lewis, Cincinnati Bengals

This is a complicated one.  Some say Lewis has never been on the hot seat, others say he has been on it since 2005.  Confused yet?

The big knock against Lewis with the Bengals is that he has actually never won a playoff game.  He’s been in January games the last four years, and before that, in 2005 and 2009.  However, the amount of time Lewis has in the Queen City is probably tied to quarterback Andy Dalton.  Dalton was tied for third in the league in interceptions last season and has a 3-2 touchdown to interception ratio for his career (that’s not very good).

Dalton’s playoff TD-INT ratio? 1-6.  That’s worse.  And it will have to get better if Lewis wants to keep his job past this season.

2. Joe Philbin, Miami Dolphins

Unlike the situation in Cincinnati, this one seems fairly obvious. Philbin (and quarterback Ryan Tannehill) are in their fourth season together and the first three have been… eh.

In 2012, the Fish were 7-9.  The last two years, they’ve been 8-8.  But their schedule this season provides the best chance yet to make the playoffs.  Their first six opponents (Redskins, Jaguars, Bills, Jets, Titans, Texans) all give the Fins opportunities for early wins.  The schedule gets tougher after that, but the Dolphins have a chance to be a playoff team this year.

Unless they do what they have done every year under Philbin’s reign. Here’s what ESPN’s Rich Cimini wrote about Philbin’s future, or lack thereof, on South Beach:

It has to be Philbin. All the warning signs are there: He has a mediocre record (23-25) and no playoff appearances in three years, a new boss (Tannenbaum) in charge of the football operation and an owner (Ross) who spent major bucks in the offseason and wants results now. It’s hard to imagine Philbin surviving another playoff-less season. Tannenbaum made a lot of changes to the roster in his first season, and he will bring in his own coach if Philbin stumbles again. How do you think Tannenbaum-Eric Mangini 2.0 will play in South Beach? Don’t laugh: It could happen if Philbin goes 0-for-4. It’s unusual in the NFL for a coach to get a fifth crack at the postseason. Philbin has a $96 million quarterback (Ryan Tannehill), a revamped receiving corps and Ndamukong Suh on defense. Get it done, Joe.

No playoffs, no Philbin.  It’s very cut and dry.

1. Chip Kelly

It seems like Kelly has all the power in Philly.  He made all the moves this offseason (I mean, all the moves) and the team now looks like maybe, possibly, a reflection of him.  So how could someone with all the power be deposed?

With a bad season, that is. This is what Brandon Lee Gowton of Bleeding Green Nation had to say about this subject:

After being on the hot seat every year since he took over, I think it’s fair to say it’s not Jason Garrett. (And I do think we all overstated how hot his seat actually was.) It’s easy to say Tom Coughlin or Jerry Reese with the Giants, too. But I’m going with Chip Kelly. The Eagles’ moves this offseason have been all about Kelly. The trade of LeSean McCoy was at first called a salary-cap move, but then the Eagles put big money into DeMarco Murray and solid money into Ryan Mathews. I’m not ready to say Kiko Alonso will be a star the way McCoy is a star. The trade for Sam Bradford is a huge risk considering the quarterback’s injury history. They have taken an interesting route with their receivers. If this doesn’t work out for the Eagles, then Kelly will have nobody to blame but himself.

Yeah, no one else is left to blame here.  It’s Kelly, himself, and him.  If this fails, we can’t look to blame anyone else.

If Kelly fails, he can easily go back to college.  It’s not as crazy as it sounds: if Jim Harbaugh could do it, why can’t he?

Agree or no?  Leave an opinion in the comments section.

(c) 2015

Posted on

Meet Your National League Rookie of the Year

 

To date, there has been much debate about who the National League Rookie of the Year is, and for good reason.  The Cubs’ Kris Bryant and the Dodgers’ Joc Pederson have each had outstanding freshman campaigns, so great that both were even named to the NL All-Star team.  The buzz has become about these two, the young guns of baseball, the future of the game.  This is true, but the Rookie of the Year award is about the present, and both are slumping as of right now.

But there’s one player no one is talking about, even though he’s worthy of high praise and lots of attention: Giants’ third baseman Matt Duffy.

Before you can say, “Wow, you’re crazy”, I’ll give you evidence.  Jacob Shafer at Bleacher Report wrote about this yesterday:

Unlike Bryant and Pederson, Duffy’s place in the everyday lineup was anything but assured.

San Francisco opened the season with veteran Casey McGehee installed at third base, replacing All-Star/panda-hat-seller Pablo Sandoval, who bolted via free agency to the Boston Red Sox.

Duffy made the team out of spring as a utility infielder, and by May, he began getting regular starts at the hot corner. On May 24, San Francisco designated McGehee for assignment, effectively handing Duffy the gig. It was a leap of faith, considering Duffy played almost exclusively shortstop in the minors, logging just three games at third in three MiLB seasons.

Duffy seized the opportunity, and by the end of June, he was hitting .297 with an .825 OPS.

In fact, it’s difficult to imagine where the Giants—who currently sit at 57-47 and in line for the NL’s second wild card—would be without their current No. 3 hitter.

There’s no telling where the Giants would be without him.  There’s also more to the pro-Duffy argument than just his value to the Giants. For the sake of this article, we’ll mostly stick to comparing Duffy to Pederson and Bryant.

Duffy leads all National League rookies in batting average (.301).  The only rookie in baseball whose batting average eclipses that of Duffy is Devon Travis at .304.  But Travis has had 238 at bats, and when that figure is compared to Duffy’s 358, we realize that Duffy has excelled with a larger sample size.  Bryant and Pederson?  .246 and .223, respectively.  It’s obvious; maybe Duffy is just a better hitter than Bryant and Pederson.

And lest you think there isn’t more, there is.  The strikeout rate of the Duffman, Silk, and Joc tells the most interesting story of all.  Duffy’s K% is 17.0, which, in the pool of qualified rookie hitters, is seventh-lowest.  This is a sharp contrast to Bryant and Pederson.  Why? Bryant strikes out 30.6% of the time, fourth among rookies.  Pederson is right behind him at 30.2%, which is sixth among first-year players. Ouch.

The one weakness of Duffy’s is that he does not walk nearly as much as the other players in the rookie field.  While Bryant has a walk rate of 13.3% and Pederson has one of 13.9%, Duffy’s is just 4.2%.  How does this translate to his on-base percentage?  It limits his OBP, but only to a very respectable .341.  Kris and Joc have an edge here, but only a slight one; theirs are .354 and .345, respectively.  While Duffy loses, he doesn’t lose by a lot.

There’s another factor at play here; the parks these players play in. While Pederson and Bryant are obviously better home run hitters than Duffy (they both competed in the Home Run Derby, with Pederson making the final), at least part of it has to be AT&T Park, which has the lowest home run factor in baseball, according to ESPN’s “Park Factors”.  Dodger Stadium (Pederson’s home stadium) and Wrigley Field (Bryant’s home field) rank 12th and 15th, respectively.

Despite said park factors, I was floored to find this piece of information: Duffy’s slugging percentage is higher than Pederson’s and Bryant’s.  That’s right; despite the elevated home run numbers of Joc Pederson and Kris Bryant, the highest slugging percentage of the three belongs to Matt Duffy.  This shows the value of not striking out and hitting for average, both of which Duffy does very well.  If Pederson or Bryant could consistently hit for average, their SLG% would be higher.  But they don’t, so this is a moot point.

I’ll leave my last point to ESPN’s David Schoenfield, because he already took the words right out of my mouth on July 29:

So who has been the best rookie in the National League?

Matt Duffy.

The unheralded San Francisco Giants infielder began the season as the team’s utility infielder but became the starting third baseman when veteran Casey McGehee flunked his opportunity. Entering Wednesday, Duffy is hitting .304/.345/.468, with nine home runs, 16 doubles, four triples and 46 RBIs.

In what has turned into a crowded race with several good candidates, Duffy leads all NL rookies in Wins Above Replacement:

Duffy, Giants: 3.4

Jung Ho Kang, Pittsburgh Pirates: 3.0

Bryant, Cubs: 2.6

Randal Grichuk, St. Louis Cardinals: 2.6

Pederson, Dodgers, 2.4

(Giants teammate Chris Heston has a 1.5 WAR, but his 11-5 record and 3.14 ERA makes him a strong contender as well.)

If you think Duffy’s edge in WAR is simply the result of some statistical mumbo-jumbo, think again. His OPS is .813, Pederson’s is .816 and Bryant’s is .806. Duffy has put up similar offensive numbers while playing in a pitcher’s park. Add in his solid defense at third base and he has been the most valuable rookie in the majors. In fact, the guy who hit three home runs last season at Double-A — and who just three years ago was drafted in the 18th round out of Long Beach State after hitting zero home runs in his college career — has been hitting third for the defending champs for the past month.

Right.  Matt Duffy is the most valuable rookie in the NL.

By writing this, I’m not trying to say that Duffy should definitely win Rookie of the Year; there is a lot of baseball yet to be played.  His sudden power surge may end and his numbers might just fall back down to earth.  However, if he keeps up his current pace, I definitely think he should win the award.  If he does, it will be the ultimate surprise in a season full of them.

And it will be a surprise because no one talks about him.

(c) 2015

 

Posted on

Winners and Losers: MLB Trade Deadline Edition

 

Johnny Cueto (pictured above), David Price, Troy Tulowitzki, and Yoenis Cespedes were all big names to change teams at trade deadline, just to name a few.  This year’s deadline saw an interesting trading climate, as teams that were expected to sell, like the Padres, didn’t, while teams that were not expected to sell did, like the Tigers. Interestingly enough, the main teams that were buyers on July 31 are all in the midst of long playoff droughts; the Blue Jays (since 1993), the Astros (since 2005), and the Mets (since 2006).

And while every year’s trade deadline has interesting deals and intrigue, the most fun part of analyzing the deals is figuring out who the winners and losers were.  So here it is, the MLB trade deadline, complete with winners and losers.

3. Winner: Kansas City Royals

The Royals made two separate deals in the week leading up to the deadline, acquiring pitcher Johnny Cueto from the Reds and second baseman Ben Zobrist from the A’s.  Kansas City and GM Dayton Moore are going all in this year, and no better indication exists of this fact than what they gave up to get Zobrist and Cueto.  Mike Axisa of CBS Sports explains:

In trading for Cueto and Zobrist, the Royals have given up two of their top three prospects (according to Baseball America). Kansas City has hung onto shortstop prospect Raul Mondesi Jr. Left-hander Sean Manaea is ranked by MLB.com as the No. 56 prospect in the majors. He’s had injury issues with his hip and abdomen (nothing with his arm!) and just reached Class AA after being drafted 34th overall in 2013. Standing 6-foot-5, he can reach the upper 90s with his fastball and showed improved command overall in high A-ball. At 23, reaching the majors sometime in 2016 seems possible. Brooks hasn’t shown much in brief stints with the Royals this season and in 2014, but has averaged 6.9 strikeouts and 1.8 walks over 639 minor-league innings. The A’s could pop him into their rotation now for an extended look.

But these acquisitions are about what the Royals get this year.  In Cueto, they get a dominant starting pitcher (they didn’t have one before) and a major innings eater.  Even with the Royals’ lockdown bullpen, getting to the sixth inning had been a challenge for their starters this season; it won’t be with Cueto.  It’s so important to have good to commanding starting pitching, and having a pitcher of Cueto’s ilk should significantly help the Royals’ chances at their first championship since 1985.  But let’s just hope this doesn’t happen again.

What do the Royals get with Ben Zobrist?  A career .264 hitter who they can play just about anywhere except pitcher and catcher. Zobrist hit second in the lineup yesterday and hit two home runs, helping the Royals to a 7-6 win over the Blue Jays (more on them later).  Another good thing to have come playoff time is the ability to score runs, and when the pitching falls short, being able to still win games.  The Royals did that yesterday, and it will be important to their World Series aspirations to continue scoring runs, runs that will help them continue to win games, a division title, and even a pennant or championship.

3. Loser: Colorado Rockies

This one is pretty simple.  The Rox dealt star shortstop Troy Tulowitzki on July 27, which seems fair enough, considering that they are a struggling team unwilling to spend money.  The return for Tulo? Three pitching prospects… and Jose Reyes.

Reyes has been injury prone throughout his career, and this is only the first reason the move made zero sense for Colorado.  The other reason?  Reyes is making more money than Tulowitzki for each of the next three seasons.  The acquisition of the pitching prospects, namely Castro, was good, but taking on Reyes’ contract was not.

And when the Rockies got Reyes, why didn’t they try to trade him for more prospects?  You may laugh at this assertion in light of the Tulo deal, but Colorado needs more pitching, in the worst way; exactly one pitcher (Boone Logan) on the MLB roster has an ERA under four this year.  Instead, the Rox kept Jose, and will be tied to his contract until 2017.

2. Winner: Toronto Blue Jays

You may not have expected to see the Blue Jays this early in the countdown, but here they are.  However, they are assuredly a winner at the deadline.  Grantland’s Michael Baumann even argues that they are the winners:

I’ve said for years that if the Blue Jays ever realized they’re a big-market team, it could irrevocably change the landscape of the game. The Jays play in an extremely cosmopolitan metro area of more than 5.6 million people (comparable to Houston, Philadelphia, or Washington) and considering that they have 30 million more Canadians to themselves, that Toronto-specific number understates their true commercial and economic reach. Plus, the Jays are owned by Canadian media giant Rogers Communications (think Jonathan Pryce’s character in Tomorrow Never Dies). They could conquer and subjugate Red Sox Nation if they wanted to.

And for once, it’s finally starting to show, as the Jays went out and got the two best players on the market: David Price and Troy Tulowitzki. Even before adding Tulo, Toronto’s offense was already the best in the game, by far, and now the Jays are only two games out of a wild-card spot despite underperforming their run differential by nine games. And it’s not like they only upgraded the top of the lineup and rotation: Mark Lowe and LaTroy Hawkins strengthen the bullpen, while Ben Revere, in addition to having a lovely smile, is a solid on-base guy to plug in left field, even if he has trouble identifying local food. This team is starting to remind me a lot of the 1993 Blue Jays.

Left-handed starter Daniel Norris, probably the best prospect to change hands at the deadline, is a lot of freight to pay for Price, particularly compared to what the Royals gave up for Johnny Cueto, but that’s offset by the degree to which the Blue Jays absolutely bamboozled Colorado for Tulowitzki. A lot of teams got better this week, but Toronto is the winner at the deadline.

They did get better.  You know what they did: they got the best hitter and the best pitcher on the market.  Other than that, they got Mariners reliever Mark Lowe and Phillies outfielder Ben Revere in separate deals.  This one is also easy; the Blue Jays are winners, going for it all this year and giving themselves a shot at their first postseason action in 22 years.

2. Loser: Cincinnati Reds

The Reds traded away Johnny Cueto and Mike Leake to contending teams this deadline (the Royals and the Giants, respectively) without getting too much back in return.  They acquired two prospects in the Cueto trade, and, namely, got Brandon Finnegan from Kansas City. Finnegan projects to be the best player the Reds got in the deal, as the other two prospects they acquired do not have great chances of panning out (one, a pitcher, had Tommy John surgery in 2011, is 25, and just getting back into form now, and the other is a 22-year old AA pitcher).

Then, they decided to deal pitcher Mike Leake to the Giants for prospects Adam Duvall and Keury Mella.  Duvall is almost 27 and has limited action in the majors.  He’s a power hitting first baseman who has hit 26 home runs for the Giants’ AAA team, the Sacramento River Cats, this season.  However, as a corner infielder, he is now stuck behind Todd Frazier and Joey Votto.  Mella is a hyped pitching prospect who, at just 21, has a good chance to be a solid big-league pitcher.

But here’s the issue; they could’ve dealt Aroldis Chapman and/or Jay Bruce, and they didn’t.  While they got five prospects from two different teams, there is a good chance only one or two of them pan out.  They could’ve gotten more by trading more major league talent, but they didn’t.  They lost the deadline.

1. Winner: Houston Astros

The Astros did everything right at this year’s deadline.  They got help where they needed it most, starting pitching, by acquiring Scott Kazmir from the A’s.  They weren’t done there, though, as they picked up outfielder Carlos Gomez and pitcher Mike Fiers from the Brewers for multiple prospects.  While Houston gave up quite a bit in the way of these prospects, they are able to allow themselves to part with them because of the depth they have accumulated on the farm.

Let Joon Lee of SB Nation explain:

The Astros lost and lost and lost for so many years to accumulate seemingly endless depth in the farm system. While a lot of that prospect depth is now finally culminating in major league success for players such as Dallas Keuchel and Carlos Correa, the team’s minor league depth gave the organization the personnel flexibility to acquire big assets to prime themselves for a competitive run at the playoffs. Even after the team’s trades for Gomez, Kazmir and Fiers, the Astros still possess 14 prospects graded 50 or better (on a 20-80 prospect scale) according to MLB.com. The Astros’ prospect depth allowed them to not only position themselves to succeed in the short term, but also to continue to build towards the future.

But Houston is not in the position to buy at the deadline without the team’s moves in the offseason: the signings of Luke Gregerson, Pat Neshek and Colby Rasmus, the trades for Evan Gattis and Hank Conger and the waiver claim of Will Harris. The moves allowed Luhnow to balance future financial flexibility while positioning the team to compete in 2015. While many did not recognize it at the time, the Houston Astros had one of the best offseasons in years.

He’s right: the Astros can give up prospects.  They’ll still have plenty more.

1. Loser: San Diego Padres

Duh; the Pods didn’t do anything.  They could have dealt either Justin or Melvin Upton; they didn’t.  They could’ve traded star closer Craig Kimbrel; they didn’t.  They could have moved starters Tyson Ross and/or James Shields and/or Andrew Cashner; they didn’t.  They could have re-stacked their farm system; they didn’t.

However, the most hilarious train of thought that any GM had at this year’s deadline came from theirs, A.J. Preller.  Ken Rosenthal reports:

Yes, he actually thinks that.  San Diego is 7 games back of the second Wild Card spot in the National League as of today, August 2.  They also happen to be 10.5 games ahead of the Phillies.  They aren’t making the playoffs.

Agree?  Disagree?  Let me know in the comments section.

(c) 2015

Posted on

The Mets Have Had a Disastrous 24 Hours

 

Last night, the New York Mets played a home game against the San Diego Padres.  They came into the night one game back of the division-leading Washington Nationals, and a win coupled with a Washington loss would put the Amazins in a tie for first place (the Nationals won).  However, the game would become so much more, as the result of a Mets trade attempt and its consequences.

Joel Sherman of the New York Post first reported the story, and later gave us the full details of the deal, pending medicals:

Wheeler is a highly touted pitcher who has only tossed the equivalent of a season and a half at the big league level.  You may remember that he was acquired by the Mets in 2011 in a trade that sent Carlos Beltran to the San Francisco Giants.  Flores is in his ninth year in the Mets organization and his third year in the bigs.  This season, he’s started at both shortstop and second base and hit .249 with ten home runs in the process  He was also the starting shortstop in last night’s game.  Both would have been heading to Milwaukee in the trade. Would have.

News of the trade broke around 9:00 Eastern Time last night.  The Met-Padre game was going long, with starter Bartolo Colon getting shelled for six runs and ten hits in just 2.1 innings.  As best I remember, the news must have broke in the fifth or sixth inning. (True story: I was at the game.  It has nothing to do with this post, but it was a truly bizarre event to attend.)  But back to the story.

For whatever reason, Flores was not pulled from the game when the trade became news.  Common practice in a situation like this is to pull the player(s) involved.  This is done to ensure that said player(s) do(es) not get injured, which would lead to a flunked physical and a called-off deal.  In any event, Flores was left in the game and became visibly emotional in the field.  Still, I feel the need to defend Flores here: the Mets have been the only organization he has ever known (he was drafted by them as a 16-year-old) and he’s been with them, and stayed loyal to them, through the ups and downs that being a player in the post-2006 Met organization brings.

However, he would get an at bat in the bottom of the 7th.  Word of the deal had filtered through the ballpark by that point, and the thinned out gathering at Citi Field gave him an elongated standing ovation as he stepped to the dish.

At that point, it appeared as though Flores would be finally removed from the game.  This would not be the case, however, as Wilmer would be sent back out to the field for the final two innings.  He would have had the chance to bat in the bottom of the ninth, but then, and only then, was he taken out of the game.  So far, you can guess that this story has been very weird.  Warning: it’s about to get weirder.

First, we’ll go to Fox Sports’ Ken Rosenthal for an explanation as to why Flores was not pulled earlier:

This would at least partially explain Flores’ staying in the game.  But although he had not been traded, he somehow found out he was about to be.  And in my view, even though he was still officially a New York Met through the entirety of the game, he should have been removed.  There are two reasons for my having this train of thought. The first is that he was risking obvious injury by staying in the contest.  Even though he hadn’t been traded yet, he could’ve sustained an injury in the game, which would have destroyed any hope for the trade.  The other reason is that he could not have served the Mets any good in the emotional state he was in.  While he wasn’t wrong for being emotional, he wasn’t helpful to the Mets, either.

Now the story is about to take another wild turn.  After the game, word got around among reporters that the deal may be off.  Sure enough, General Manager Sandy Alderson spoke with the assembled media after the game and said this:

The general thought at this point was that the calling off of the trade had to do with Wheeler.  He had Tommy John surgery on March 25 and is expected to be out until next July-August, at the earliest. Common sense told those who follow (and cover) the game that Wheeler had an issue with his physical, or that he did not perform well in his medical reports.  This had to be the reason for the trade not happening, right?  Wrong.

An explanation of the failure to complete the trade came from Rosenthal, just after midnight this morning:

So, to recap: the Mets trade for a power bat in the middle of the lineup, give up their shortstop and one of their prized young pitchers, leave said shortstop in the game, and after all that?  The deal falls through.  Yikes.

Now, I don’t think the deal would have been overly beneficial to the Mets in the short or long term, but that was the article I would have written today if the trade was completed.

Here’s another opinion of mine: the reporters did almost nothing wrong.  They reported what was essentially a done deal, and in a business where being the first to report something is critical, they wanted to be prompt with their information, too.  However, the only mistake of theirs was not stressing that the deal still needed the blessing of medicals to be completed.  Other than this, though, the only thing these reporters did was their job.

Rosenthal agrees with me:

Not all reports included a reference to “pending medicals.” Even the ones that did left the impression that the deal was fait accompli. Many followers interpreted the deal as done, if only because such deals almost always get done.

Well, this deal did not get done, and the enduring image of the night was of Flores in tears at shortstop, thinking he had been traded.

The Mets looked heartless for allowing Flores to remain in the game; players involved in pending deals generally are removed to ensure that they avoid injury.

The media, too, looked heartless, at least in the view of some on Twitter; we reported a trade before it technically was completed, and created a mess.

But that was last night, and this was today.

With an early 12:10 start, the team looked to the consistent Jon Niese to right the ship.  And it looked like he had, as they were leading 7-1 after six innings.  However, reliever Bobby Parnell loaded the bases in the 7th, retiring but one batter.  Hansel Robles was brought in to stop the bleeding, but what he did instead was allow a grand slam to Derek Norris.  The score was 7-5, and it would stay that way until the 9th.

Closer Jeurys Familia entered the game to finish the deal and end the disastrous string of events that had befallen the Mets over, at that point, the past 18 hours.  He got the first two outs of the inning, but in the ultimate twist of fate, a downpour came with no balls and one strike on Norris.  When the game resumed, Familia was questionably left in, and allowed hits to Norris and Melvin Upton Jr.  And then the dagger came; a three-run home run surrendered to Melvin’s brother Justin.  The damage was done.

After a second delay pushed the conclusion of the game back to 6:25, the Mets went down 1-2-3 in the final frame.  The nightmare continued, leaving the team looking for answers.

This is easily one of the worst 24 hour periods the franchise has ever endured.  It’s no Midnight Massacre, but it’s still really bad.  The issue?  The schedule is not getting easier.  The team has a crucial three-game set this weekend against the Nationals, who they are now three games behind in the divisional race, thanks to the results of the last two days.

Reports have linked the Mets to potential outfielders like the Tigers’ Yoenis Cespedes and the Reds’ Jay Bruce.  However, neither of these can play center field, which is a need for the team at the moment. Even if they do acquire an outfielder, it will require the capitulation of significant assets, most likely prospects.  These are assets that the Mets simply may not be willing to give up, especially after swinging and missing on the Gomez trade.

The #LOLMETS jokes are back.  The organization, and in particular, manager Terry Collins, is under fire for their handling of the entire situation.  “Meet the Mets” has sounded more like “Meet the Mess” over the past 24 hours.

The team may get Cespedes, Bruce, or other major league talent, but they are going to miss out on Gomez; he’s been traded to the Astros. And no deal can hide away the cold hard truth about the Mets.

The last 24 hours have been brutal for them.

(c) 2015

Posted on

How Much Can Troy Tulowitzki Really Help the Blue Jays?

Late last night, the Toronto Blue Jays pulled off the blockbuster of the trade season by acquiring Troy Tulowitzki, as first reported by Fox Sports’ Ken Rosenthal:

Later, Rosenthal also reported the full terms of the deal, including who the Rockies would be acquiring in the agreement:

Those three prospects were right-handed pitchers Miguel Castro, Jeff Hoffman, and Jesus Tinoco.

Tulowitzki has had a very solid season for the Rockies, hitting .300 and making the National League All-Star team.  The Rockies had been looking to trade him for the last couple of seasons, but they were unable to find the value they wanted.  They also wanted to trade Tulo to a team he wanted to play for; this explains, at least partially, why he was never traded to a team like the Mets.  However, according to Yahoo!’s Jeff Passan, the Rockies notified Tulowitzki (and his teammates) of the trade in a rather dishonorable fashion:

There was always an agreement between Colorado Rockies owner Dick Monfort and his star shortstop, Troy Tulowitzki, spoken out loud so as to be abundantly clear: If the Rockies were to trade Tulowitzki, they were going to ask for his blessing first. Then came the blockbuster deal that sent him to the Toronto Blue Jays late Monday night, and Tulowitzki, according to sources inside the Rockies’ clubhouse, found out not via a phone call but when teary-eyed manager Walt Weiss yanked him from their game in the ninth inning.

The story of how Tulowitzki was treated, relayed by people aggrieved with his departure and how the Rockies broke their word to the longtime face of their franchise, is actually a fitting end to a multiyear trade-him-or-don’t saga that wound up with Tulowitzki fetching his passport and heading to Canada along with LaTroy Hawkins for shortstop Jose Reyes and a trio of right-handed pitching prospects: Jeff Hoffman, Miguel Castro and Jesus Tinoco.

Fearful Tulowitzki requesting a trade publicly would make the Rockies look weak, the team asked him to play good soldier, which he obliged, according to club sources. The organization’s dysfunction, from the power struggles between former co-GMs Dan O’Dowd and Bill Geivett to a hands-on owner in Monfort whose public comments about players often rubbed them the wrong way, was all too evident, not just to Tulowitzki but the team’s young core of Nolan Arenado, Charlie Blackmon, D.J. Lemahieu and Corey Dickerson.

The stunned silence of players early Tuesday morning, when word of the trade came down, spoke to the disappointment of losing Tulowitzki. As the Rockies stashed him in Weiss’ office to keep him from addressing a deal that early Tuesday remained unconfirmed by either team, the truth of Tulowitzki’s exit filtered into the clubhouse and left the players even more gobsmacked, according to sources.

So what can Tulowitzki do for the Blue Jays that Jose Reyes couldn’t?  Let’s find out.

Invariably, the first aspect of this trade that arises given the players involved is health.  Interestingly enough, in each player’s full seasons, Reyes has averaged more games played (121) than Tulowitzki (114). Also, Tulo hasn’t played the last three seasons on artificial turf, like Reyes has in Toronto.  Moreover, Tulowitzki has had multiple lower-body related injuries in the past, such as a torn quadriceps tendon in 2008 and a left hip injury in 2014.  The artificial turf north of the border won’t help matters.

However, Tulowitzki adds yet another home run hitting presence to the already stacked Blue Jays lineup.  I’ve put together a projected lineup for the Blue Jays, with the addition of Tulowitzki and the subtraction of Reyes.  Here it is:

  1. Kevin Pillar- 7 HR
  2. Josh Donaldson- 24 HR
  3. Troy Tulowitzki- 12 HR
  4. Jose Bautista- 21 HR
  5. Edwin Encarnacion- 19 HR
  6. Justin Smoak- 9 HR
  7. Russell Martin- 14 HR
  8. Ezequiel Carrera- 3 HR
  9. Devon Travis- 7 HR

So, except for the 8-hole, there is at least a decent home run threat at every spot in the lineup.  And the Blue Jays even have the option of taking Carrera, their starting left fielder, out and putting Chris Colabello into that spot; Colabello has hit nine home runs this season. While Tulowitzki has spent his career in the ultimate home run hitter’s ballpark (Coors Field), Rogers Centre should not be much, if any, of a deterrent; only six less home runs have been hit there than at Coors.

However, they will lose the stolen base threat of Reyes.  Other than Kevin Pillar, Jose was the only threat the Blue Jays had to swipe a bag. The Blue Jays will miss this, but losing him does not mean the team will stop scoring runs; the opposite is the case.  As of July 28, Toronto led all of baseball with 528 runs scored, a whole 72 more than the second place team, the Yankees.  They will most likely expand upon this margin with Tulowitzki, provided he stays healthy and in the lineup.

I still don’t think this was a great move.  Why?  The Blue Jays simply do not need hitting.  They need pitching, as their staff ERA is the eighth highest in baseball.  NBC HardballTalk’s Matthew Pouliot agrees with me:

And if the Blue Jays did go get a bat, it figured to be an outfielder. Preferably one who hits left-handed. 111 of the Jays’ 130 homers this year have come from right-handed hitters, and while they’ve gotten solid production from every spot, the positions on the team with the lowest OPSs to date are left field and center field.

Then there are the Rockies. The Rockies always need pitching. Their most effective starter this year has been 28-year-old Chris Rusin, a Cubs castoff with a 3-4 record and a 4.13 ERA in 65 1/3 innings. Overall, their starters have a 5.12 ERA, which ranks 29th in MLB ahead of only the Phillies. They’re dead last with a 1.52 WHIP and a 1.8 K:BB ratio.

The other thing the Rockies always seem to need to do is to get cheaper. They don’t really like spending money. They’re not very good at it when they do.

None of this would seem to be a likely recipe for a Troy Tulowitzki-for-Jose Reyes trade. To say this one came out of nowhere would be an understatement. No one would have guessed the Blue Jays were in the market for a shortstop. And no one would have imagined that when the Rockies finally traded Tulo, it would be for a player who has a higher annual salary.

While I completely agree with this viewpoint, we must be fair to the other players in the deal.  While the Blue Jays gave up three pitching prospects, they did get Rockies’ reliever LaTroy Hawkins in the deal. Hawkins has had experience closing out games, as he did in stints with the 2013 Mets and last year’s Colorado team.  And he will probably be the closer, as the Blue Jays have had many this season (one of their closers this year was Miguel Castro; he plays for the Rockies now).  Roberto Osuna has been the 9th inning man of late and has performed capably, but Hawkins has been effective over a longer period of time. He should get the nod to finish games.

So what does this all mean?  We won’t know until the Blue Jays are done dealing.  The Tulo move probably means that they will also look to get a starting pitcher, as they have already fortified their bullpen and lineup.  Trading for the best hitting shortstop in the game makes an already-stacked starting lineup that much more difficult to face. It’s a “rich get richer” type of move, and it’s one that will probably lead to other moves as well.

Finally, let’s not forget another, more far-fetched possibility: the Blue Jays trading Tulowitzki.  It’s not completely out of the question, and while it’s unlikely, it isn’t impossible.  The Rockies are thinking of flipping him to get other assets (probably minor leaguers), and the Blue Jays could do the same with Tulo.  But if they don’t, they get one of the best hitters in the game, in his prime, in a home run hitting ball park.

If he can stay healthy, that is.

 

 

Posted on

How To Fix the Baseball Hall of Fame’s Voting Problem

It’s that time of year; the time where we pay homage to baseball’s best all-time players with a Hall of Fame ceremony.  Sunday will mark the 80th Hall of Fame class in the establishment’s history, and the second year in a row in which there were at least three player inductees. This season, the honorees will include all-time greats Pedro Martinez, Randy Johnson, Craig Biggio, and John Smoltz.  Each year, the BBWAA’s (Baseball Writers Association of America) 549 voting members vote on the ballot, and while they get it right more often than they don’t, that doesn’t mean that the voting process is necessarily effective.

For those who are unaware, here are some of the rules for Baseball Hall of Fame voting.  The 549 members of the BBWAA are allowed to vote for 10 former players per year for the Hall of Fame, and those players need to have played in Major League Baseball for at least 10 years and been retired for at least five years.  If a former player has been deceased for at least six months, he can also be eligible for induction.  Players need 75% of the BBWAA vote for induction, and those who receive less than 5% of the vote are eliminated from induction.

If a player is not disqualified but does not receive the 75% necessary for enshrinement after ten years on the ballot, he can be considered by something that was called the Veterans Committee every third year.  Notable former players inducted by the Veterans Committee include Ron Santo (2012), Orlando Cepeda (1999) and Jim Bunning (1996).  The Veterans Committee can also elect managers, umpires and executives, as it did with Joe Torre, Tony La Russa, and Bobby Cox last year.  However, this committee was broken into three committees in 2010: the pre-Integration Era Committee (1876-1946), the Golden Era Committee (1947-1972) and the Expansion Era Committee (1973-present).

But this process doesn’t work.  You may have heard the stories about how a sizable portion of the voters simply do not follow the game, and have not followed the game for a long period of time.  Here’s an example I found: ESPN’s Dan Graziano.  Graziano reached his 10-year requirement by covering the then-Florida Marlins from 1996-1999 for The Palm Beach Post and the Yankees from 2000-2008 for The Star-Ledger.  After that, he spent two years as an NFL writer for AOL Fan House and, since 2011, has been ESPN.com’s NFC East Blogger.

He hasn’t covered the game in seven years.

In light of this story, here are some proposals to fix the issues with the Hall of Fame voting in baseball.

1. Let the Writers Do What They Want with Their Ballots

I thought of this in light of something that happened last year.  ESPN’s Dan Le Batard, who had a Hall of Fame vote in 2014, did not decide to use it himself.  Instead, he gave it to Deadspin, a site that has had many a tussle with ESPN over the years.  Deadspin then let its readers vote yes or no for a player to be in the Hall of Fame, with the top 10 vote-getters being submitted on Le Batard’s, and Deadspin’s, ballot.

The BBWAA responded by suspending him for one year and forever revoking his Hall of Fame voting privileges.  But Le Batard should be able to do what he wants to do with his ballot.  The sanctity of the voting process is incredibly overblown, and there is no better example than last year’s voting. As SI.com’s Cliff Corcoran wrote, one voter decided not to vote for Greg Maddux for an incredibly dumb reason:

No player has ever been elected unanimously to the Hall of Fame and four-time Cy Young winner Greg Maddux, the most obvious of the many deserving candidates on this year’s ballot, won’t be the first. We now know that for sure thanks to MLB.com’s commendable tradition of posting its writers’ ballots the day before the results are announced. There are 17 MLB.com writers who have been members of the Baseball Writers Association of America for 10 or more years and thus are eligible to vote for the Hall of Fame. Sixteen of them voted for Maddux. Dodgers beat reporter Ken Gurnick did not.

Why not? Gurnick wrote that he won’t vote for any player who “played during the period of PED use.” Not one. So who was on his ballot? Just Jack Morris. That’s the exact same ballot, and the same explanation, almost verbatim, that Gurnick submitted last year. Before you credit Gurnick for consistency, he had Lee Smith on his ballot in 2012 and dropped him last year without explanation, and in 2011 he did not vote for Morris.

Those irregularities merely reveal the internal hypocrisy of Gurnick’s votes. His reasoning is far more problematic, and not simply because he has decided to eliminate an entire generation of ballplayers from his ballot. One need not even wade into those waters to point out that Gurnick’s definition of “the period of PED use” is woefully lacking. Assuming one even could establish a starting point for such a period, it would have come comfortably within the playing days of Morris, Smith and Bert Blyleven, whom Gurnick also voted for in 2011.

That’s ridiculous.  How is a writer simply deciding against voting for Maddux because he played in a certain era not worse than Le Batard letting the readers of a website vote on his ballot?  Worst of all, this is the ballot that the Deadspin readers came up with.  Tell me with a straight face this isn’t better than Gurnick’s ballot.:

  1. Greg Maddux
  2. Frank Thomas
  3. Tom Glavine
  4. Mike Piazza
  5. Craig Biggio
  6. Edgar Martinez
  7. Jeff Bagwell
  8. Roger Clemens
  9. Barry Bonds
  10. Curt Schilling

Deadspin’s readers did not do badly at all.  You could make a case for any of the 10 they voted for to make the Hall.  While I disagree with allowing players who were suspected of taking steroids to be enshrined, the reasoning behind voting for those players (Bonds and Clemens) is certainly understandable.

2. Change Up the Type of People Who Vote

The fact that all of the people who vote belong to the BBWAA is ridiculous.  There are very few differing perspectives on the legacies of former players and that is simply because of the nature of the voting process.  Changing the people who vote, however, could change that.  Since there were 549 ballots cast this year, we’ll make the 550 the number of voters, as 550 is a round number.  So here is my proposal to change Hall of Fame voting:

  1. 200 BBWAA writers (must be currently covering a beat or the game)
  2. 200 Broadcasters (Play-by-play, color analysts, studio analysts, with a 10-year requirement of covering the game)
  3. All 30 MLB Managers
  4. All 30 MLB GMs
  5. All 30 Team Presidents
  6. 10 Scouts chosen based on tenure and service to the game
  7. 50 sabermetricians

I feel that this is a fair way to conduct the voting process.  While no proposal to fix the voting process is perfect, this is most likely the best way to change things up in Cooperstown.  I still feel that writers and broadcasters are the most qualified people to vote on the Hall of Fame.  After that, allowing the current GMs, managers, and team presidents voting privileges gives more currency and perspective to the ballot; however, only allowing these people to vote for 10 may allow for bias in voting (we’ll get back to this later).  Allowing the ten longest tenured scouts to vote gives more reasoning to the voting committee because their tenure in the game shows that they are pretty darn good at evaluating talent, which is crucial in voting for the Hall.

And finally, I’m letting 50 sabermetricians into the voting process because of the role advanced stats plays in the modern game’s decision making.  If you don’t think advanced stats is an important part of the game, you probably haven’t been following the game, kind of like some of the BBWAA writers.

3. Don’t Limit the Hall of Fame Ballots to Just 10 Names

Allowing our new voters to vote for more than 10 players will allow voters to vote for as many qualified players as they want.  Related to this, I don’t feel that it is necessary to change the 5% rule or the 10 years on the ballot rule.  However, some of the current front office members and scouts may have an inherent bias toward certain players because of experience and working with certain teams. Allowing the voters to put more than just ten on their ballots can neutralize some of this bias.

4. Keep the 75% Rule, But 3 Players Must Get In Every Year

This is what we need to do; make the Hall of Fame more inclusive. Because the word “museum” in in the official name of the Hall, we must allow more former players to get in, and this is how we do it.  If there are less than three players enshrined in our new system, the three aforementioned committees must automatically make up the difference and add the necessary number of players to get to the magic number of three.  Because these committees vote on different eras, they can combine their votes.  The player that gets the most combined votes gets enshrined.  These committees can still elect umpires, managers, and executives, but this is where they are most critical.  Allowing three players in each year will ensure continuity and avoid a disaster like 2013, where no players got in.

This is not a perfect way to fix the Hall of Fame’s issues.  No proposal will be perfect, but this one is fair in my view.  The important people in the game get a say on who gets in, three players get in every year, and the voters have the freedom to do what they want with their ballot.  It’s not perfect.  No proposal is.

But it’s a huge improvement from what we have now.

Posted on

Why Aces Aren’t Worth the Assets: A History Lesson and an Explanation

As you’ve heard, the trading market for pitchers, especially of the starting variety, is going to be very active at this year’s trading deadline.  The most frequently mentioned names (among others) have been Cole Hamels, Johnny Cueto, David Price, and Jeff Samardzija.  Contending teams such as the Blue Jays, Yankees, and Astros, all of which are in need of starting pitching, will certainly take long, hard looks at all of the pitchers listed above.  However, there are a multitude of starting pitchers who, even though they aren’t aces, could really help teams, especially in October.

To be clear, I believe that the problem with trading in baseball is that teams look at certain players as must-have commodities.  Look at what the Oakland A’s surrendered to acquire Jon Lester on deadline day last season.  They gave the Red Sox Yoenis Cespedes and a draft pick in the 2015 Draft’s Competitive Balance Round B.  The Red Sox then capitulated that pick to the Dodgers when they signed Hanley Ramirez this past season.  The A’s got Lester and Jonny Gomes, a power-hitting left fielder with a career .242 batting average.  While Lester performed admirably in the last two months of the season, he went to the Cubs in the winter.  Gomes fled for Atlanta.  Both are out of Oakland after a fleeting two months with the organization.

While Cespedes was dealt by the Red Sox to the Tigers in December, the trade freed up the Bo-Sox enough to get Ramirez.  The Red Sox are the team that got the better of the deal, even if neither team kept any of their assets.

My point is, front offices shouldn’t make deals because they think they absolutely have to get somebody.  This feeling of necessity burned the A’s because they didn’t need pitching; they needed offense.  So the way they tried to fix the problem was to deal Cespedes, their best offensive player.  They didn’t need the pitching because in addition to already having solid starting pitching in the form of Sonny Gray, Scott Kazmir, and Jesse Chavez, they had traded for former Cubs Jason Hammel and Jeff Samardzija on July 5.

About that trade: the A’s gave up much more in that deal than in the Lester trade.  The main piece the Cubs acquired in that trade was second baseman Addison Russell, who, even though he is hitting only .231 in his first season in the majors, is an amazing defensive infielder.  He is also a starter on a Cubs team that is currently in the second Wild Card spot in the National League.  Russell just so happens to be 21 years old with a lot of room to improve.

Oakland also gave up Dan Straily in that trade.  Straily, a starting pitcher, was sent to AAA by the Cubs.  In January, he was traded to the Astros for Dexter Fowler, who is now the Cubbies’ starting center fielder.  Billy McKinney, a AA outfielder, was also in the deal.  Now, take a guess: where is Samardzija now?  On the South Side of Chicago, pitching for the White Sox.  And Hammel?  Back with the Cubs, and having the best year of his career in the process.

Another outcome of the carnage resulting from the deals: someone had to be sent down to AAA.  That someone was Tommy Milone, and he was traded to the Twins for Sam Fuld on July 31.  Fuld is still with the A’s, but has hit .210 and .207 the last two seasons, respectively. Milone is also having the best season of his career, helping the Twins into position to potentially make the playoffs for the first time since 2010.

Did I mention that Oakland was 54-33, the best record in baseball, when they traded for Samardzija and Hammel?  And that on July 31, they were 66-41 which, at that time, was… the best record in baseball? Finally, did I forget to bring up the fact that, after July 31, the Oakland Athletics went 22-33, finishing the season 88-74 and locked up in the Wild Card game in Kansas City against the Royals?

In that game, Oakland was up 7-3 going to the bottom of the eighth, and, in a cruel twist of irony, Lester ran out of gas, a la Pedro Martinez in Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS.  The lead was down to 7-6 with one innings to play.  In the bottom of the ninth, closer Sean Doolittle gave up the one-run lead on a Nori Aoki sacrifice fly.  The game went to 12 innings, and, with the A’s up (again) 8-7, Dan Otero was brought on to close it out.

In more irony, with one out and no one on base, Eric Hosmer hit a line drive that got past Gomes.  A single became a triple, and Hosmer scored the tying run on a Christian Colon single.  Otero would be replaced by Abad, and after getting Alex Gordon to pop out, was relieved by Hammel.  Colon stole second, and, with the winning run 180 feet away, Salvador Perez hit a ground ball down the third base line that got past Josh Donaldson and stayed fair.  The A’s were gone.

So, to recap: they traded their future shortstop (Russell) for two pitchers (Samardzija and Hammel, neither of whom are on the team anymore), dealt their best hitter (Cespedes) for a pitcher and utility outfielder (Lester and Gomes), and dealt the odd-man-out starter who is turning out to be a real weapon for a postseason-contending team (Milone) for a mendoza-line hitting defensive outfielder (Fuld).  This is the cautionary tale, and certain teams in the history of baseball have had the deadline down pat (See: late 90s Yankees).  But this is what happens when front office executives sharpen their focus on one, two, or even three players; they move heaven and earth to get those guys and once they do, the acquired players don’t stay with the team.  And, to boot, the A’s helped lay the groundwork for the very successful 2015 Cubs’ season.

So that was our history lesson.  Now, let’s bring it back to this season.

Yesterday, Jeff Sullivan of Fangraphs wrote a very interesting article about teams that traded for aces.  It prompted me to write this one, and you can read all of it here, but this is the most interesting excerpt from it:

Through this method, I found 22 trades that were made by 21 teams. If that’s a little confusing, it’s because last year’s Oakland Athletics added front-line starters in two separate deals — adding Jeff Samardzija and then Jon Lester. I don’t want to bias by double-counting. Of the 21 teams that added good starters, 17 advanced beyond the end of the regular season. Two were eliminated in single-game eliminations. Nine were eliminated in the division series. Four were eliminated in the championship series. Two lost the World Series. Which means that none of the teams actually won the World Series.

It’s not that World Series-winning teams haven’t added starting pitchers. Last year’s Giants swung a midseason trade for Jake Peavy. But Peavy wound up with a below-average FIP and an average ERA. When championship teams have added starters, they’ve been of the second- and third-tier varieties. The teams adding the big guys have made some noise, but of late they haven’t hoisted a trophy.

When you’re selling a front-line starter, you’re selling the idea that said starter could carry a team through October. Look at what Madison Bumgarner just did. It’s an appealing thought, and it’s founded in truth. But you can look at last season for counter-evidence. Neither Samardzija nor Lester could save the A’s, which lost a one-game playoff in which Lester got the ball. After the Tigers added David Price, they went on to get swept in the first round. Go back further: The Angels missed the playoffs entirely despite picking up Zack Greinke. Two years in a row, Cliff Lee joined a series-bound team and lost. Maybe the ultimate addition was Randy Johnson to the Houston Astros, in 1998. Houston lost the NLDS, 3-1.

Okay, so if trading for aces is historically a move that doesn’t work, why do teams always fall into this trap?  Again, it goes back to teams thinking that they have to get a certain player; they don’t.  They just delude themselves into thinking that they do.

This season, there will be at least one team that overpays for Hamels, Cueto, or Price.  Every village has its idiot, and baseball is no different.  However, some of the other available pitchers on the market could really help teams, maybe even more than the so-called “aces”.

Some of these less heralded pitchers are Mat Latos, Dan Haren, Yovani Gallardo, and Tyson Ross, just to name a few.  Let’s start with Latos.

Even though he is 4-6 with a 4.48 ERA this season, some of the other numbers tell a different story with Mat Latos.  His FIP (fielding-independent pitching) is 3.32, which is more than a point lower than his ERA.  He’s pitched for the Marlins for the first half of this season, and that surely has not helped.  The defense played behind him could not have helped his ERA, either.  However, according to at least one insider, he may not be worth the trouble:

So even though Latos may be a headache in the clubhouse, he is definitely worth it on the field.  A change of scenery may be something that helps his pitching, as the Marlins have been a losing team all season.  Going to a winner may change the game for him, and if history is any indication, he can get it done.  In back to back years (2012 and 2013), he hurled over 200 innings for the Reds, and in both of those years, they made the playoffs.  If he goes to a contender, he could muster a similar performance.

The next, somewhat underrated pitcher who will probably be moved this late July is Dan Haren.  He’s on his fifth team in as many years, and he’s most likely about to be on his sixth.  While he has never been an ace, he’s a pitcher that can give a team a chance to win every time he steps on the mound.  While his FIP (4.31) is noticeably higher than his ERA (3.46) this season, he can be a stabilizing force for a starting rotation in need of consistency, like the Astros or Blue Jays.

Tyson Ross of the Padres is another pitcher on a losing team that can help a winner get over the edge.  This report came across from ESPN’s Buster Olney yesterday:

Even if Ross doesn’t go to a winning team, he can still provide great value at the front of a starting rotation.  While it may not appear that he’s having as good a year as he did in his breakout campaign last year, the numbers beg to differ.  While his BB/9 is up along with is ERA, his FIP, K/9, and HR/9 are all improved from last year.  His BABIP against him is .332, up 31 points from last season.  While it may not look like he is having as good of a season as he did in 2014, he is. Luck just hasn’t been on his side, at all.

Finally, the non-ace pitcher who may be most tantalizing for teams is the Rangers’ Yovani Gallardo.  He is having the best season of his career, and while luck has been on his side (his FIP is 78 points higher than his ERA), he will still be very valuable for teams looking for a front-line starter.  Unlike the other, underrated pitchers, a team overpaying for Gallardo based on this year alone is likely.  However, that doesn’t mean he won’t do really well in a new environment.

All told, the only ace on the trade market worth mortgaging the future for is the Tigers’ David Price.  Cueto may be worth it, but his FIP has been higher than his ERA in every year of his MLB career.  Hamels’ career numbers are remarkably similar to those of Latos, and yet he will be valued more by desperate teams looking for an ace. Samrdzija’s numbers are not very good this season (ERA over 4), but he’ll be coveted on the market, even though I’d value him about the same as I would value Haren.

Even though the “aces” aren’t much better than their less heralded counterparts, desperate teams will give up their future prospects and other talent just for one pitcher.  However, none of the teams that do this will win the World Series.  Why?

Because aces just aren’t worth the assets.

Posted on

Making Sense of Zack Greinke

 

Zack Greinke made his first start coming out of the All-Star break on Sunday against the Nationals.  Coming into his most recent start, he had not allowed a run in 35 2/3 innings, drawing comparisons to the scoreless streaks of Dodger greats Don Drysdale and Orel Hershiser. However, Greinke would be facing the toughest test of his run, as the Nationals rank the highest in baseball in runs scored out of the teams he has faced during the streak.  So how would Greinke respond?

By tossing eight scoreless innings, allowing just three hits, and not letting a runner get into scoring position all day.

With the results of Sunday’s start, Greinke’s scoreless spell stretched to 43 2/3 innings.  And while he has to pitch another 15 1/3 scoreless innings to tie the record set by Hershiser in 1988, he has already made history, via ESPN Stats and Info:

So, thinking this way, I did some comparisons between Greinke and Hershiser.  I didn’t compare Greinke to Don Drysdale for one simple reason: Drysdale pitched his scoreless streak in 1968 on the 15-foot high pitcher’s mound, while Greinke has pitched his on one that is only 10 feet off the ground.

This is (I think) the most interesting tidbit I found about Hershiser’s 1988: he gave up 73 walks.  This means that in 34 starts, Hershiser allowed over two walks per game.  During the streak, Hershiser walked eleven batters over the course of his 59 innings, as opposed to his walking 73 over the course of a whopping 267 innings that season. Here is a table I made of Hershiser’s stats during the streak (Note: the August 30 game vs the Expos is the last four innings of his start.  He allowed two runs in the first five innings of that game.)

Date/Opponent IP H BB K
August 30, 1988 vs Expos 4 1 2 4
September 5, 1988 vs Braves 9 4 1 8
September 10, 1988 vs Reds 9 7 3 8
September 14, 1988 vs Braves 9 6 2 8
September 19, 1988 vs Astros 9 4 0 5
September 23, 1988 vs Giants 9 5 2 2
September 28, 1988 vs Padres 10 4 1 3
TOTAL 59 31 11 38

Now, here is a look at Greinke’s streak on a start-by-start basis:

Date/Opponent IP  H BB K
June 18, 2015 vs Rangers 7 4 0 8
June 23, 2015 vs Cubs 6 3 2 5
June 28, 2015 vs Marlins 7.2 4 1 6
July 4, 2015 vs Mets 7 4 0 4
July 9, 2015 vs Phillies 8 1 0 8
July 20, 2015 vs Nationals 8 3 1 11
TOTAL 43.2 19 4 42

On the surface, it looks like Greinke’s numbers are more impressive than Orel’s.  However, there are a couple of things to pay attention to when comparing the two.

The first thing I noticed when comparing the two is the distance that both pitchers went in their respective games during their streaks. While Greinke has not thrown any complete games over his last six scoreless starts, Hershiser went nine (or more) in every start during his streak.  Sure, the game has changed quite a lot since 1988, but Hershiser never needed the help of his bullpen to finish games; he completed them himself.

Here’s another thing: Greinke’s numbers may appear more impressive than Hershiser’s, but this is not necessarily the case.  The “Zack Attack” is on pace to allow less hits and walks than the Bulldog did, and Greinke has already passed Hershiser’s strikeout total. However, Hershiser is still more impressive in this regard because he had more baserunners, and subsequently jams, to navigate his way out of.  While Orel’s streak reaching 59 innings may have been partially a figure of luck, Greinke allowing so few baserunners over the last 43 2/3 innings has to be because of luck, too.

Greinke has had lots and lots of luck during his run.  Jeff Sullivan at FanGraphs wrote about this yesterday:

Sorry, but, duh. It’s always there. Zack Greinke’s true talent isn’t a 0.00 ERA. It is a very low ERA, but it is not the lowest possible ERA. Consider that Greinke has allowed just 19 hits, facing 152 batters. Not a single fly ball has left the yard. When there have been runners in scoring position, hits have been further suppressed. Luck doesn’t always look like a line drive being snared at full extension — sometimes luck is just a batter taking a worse swing than usual at a hittable pitch. Luck is always present, in all forms. Greinke’s been the recipient of more good than bad.

One particular manifestation: the opponents. Greinke just shut down the Nationals, who’ve been hurt pretty bad by injuries. The start before that, he faced the Phillies, and the start before that, he faced the Mets. Going back still, there were the Marlins, without Giancarlo Stanton. And there were the Cubs, and it all started against the Rangers, but against the Rangers in a National League ballpark, so they didn’t play Prince Fielder. They didn’t have Adrian Beltre or Josh Hamilton. It’s been a kind slate. This isn’t to take anything away from the achievement — it’s just, the stars have been aligned, so to speak.

The stars have been aligned.  While Greinke’s run has been incredible and we haven’t seen anything like it in a long time, it couldn’t have happened without luck playing a big role.  Between the schedule, the stadiums he’s pitched in, and the lineups he’s faced, a scoreless streak was there for the taking, if Greinke was up to it.  And he has been.

Everything being said, I’m not trying to take away from what Greinke has done.  He’s been absolutely dominant over his last six starts, and there’s no question who the best pitcher in baseball is this season. But until he reaches 59 scoreless innings, there will always be one streak eclipsing Greinke’s in dominance.  That streak belongs to Orel Hershiser.

Take that, Zack.