Category: MLB

Posted on

What a Time to Be a Baseball Fan: ALCS/NLCS Preview

This year’s MLB Division Series were some of the most competitive in recent memory.  Three went to the maximum five games and one went to four games; there were no sweeps.  Perhaps most remarkable about the first round’s results, however, are the teams that are left remaining and their histories in the playoffs (or lack thereof); the four teams remaining (Blue Jays, Royals, Cubs, Mets) have a grand total of seven World Series titles between them, and the most recent championship from any one of those teams came when the Blue Jays went back to back in 1992 and 1993.  Joe Carter hit this walk-off home run in game 6 of the ’93 Fall Classic to secure the Jays’ second straight title.

Anyhow, those are, remarkably, baseball’s final four in 2015.

Below will be my predictions for both League Championship Series.  I will break down each team’s chances of winning their respective series.  I will limit the predictions to just the LCS and will not expand them to my hypothetical World Series; that might be a separate article once we reach that point.

Now, without further ado, let’s get things going and start by breaking down the ALCS.

ALCS: Blue Jays vs. Royals

As you can probably tell by the above photo, the Kansas City Royals and Toronto Blue Jays really don’t like each other.  They had a fun little bench-clearing brawl on August 2, and you can expect the mindsets of both teams to remain unchanged.

While the games may be more tightly legislated by the umpires and more chippy between the lines, the boiling emotions between the two teams really shouldn’t have an actual effect on the games themselves.

So how will those games play out?  To start, the Blue Jays led the league in both home runs and runs scored in the regular season. Their two, three, and four hitters (Josh Donaldson, Jose Bautista, Edwin Encarnacion) combined for 120 of the team’s 232 home runs, but home run threats exist throughout the lineup in the forms of Kevin Pillar, Russell Martin, Chris Colabello, and Troy Tulowitzki.  The team is the Golden State Warriors of baseball: never out of a game, no matter how out of hand it might seem.

But this is also of importance: they may potentially be playing four games in a stadium that just isn’t conducive to home run hitting. Kauffman Stadium ranks 25th in home runs in ESPN’s park factors, which makes the task of scoring runs off Kansas City’s talented pitching staff, and particularly their lights-out bullpen, that much more difficult.  Also, the K’s bigness has to directly benefit the Royals’ offense against a Blue Jay pitching staff that has the fourth lowest K/9 in the league (6.98).  The Royals’ lineup, on the other hand, strikes out at the least often rate in baseball (15.9%).

Statistics, and home field advantage, obviously favor the Royals. What favors the Blue Jays is… pure talent.  Having a threat at just about every position in the lineup is something that is very difficult to beat, even with the Royals’ own talent and prior experience.  Don’t underestimate the Jays’ pitching staff, either, as David Price, Marco Estrada, Marcus Stroman and R.A. Dickey aren’t too bad themselves. The Jays’ bullpen has improved as well, as set-up man Aaron Sanchez and 20-year-old phenom closer Roberto Osuna have both pitched very effectively; Sanchez appeared in every game of the Blue Jays’ five-game ALDS victory over the Texas Rangers.

This is a rather close series, one that I think may be decided by a handful of plays.  But, I give a slight advantage to the Blue Jays, mainly based on their talent. Bat flips not withstanding, obviously.

Prediction: Blue Jays in 6

NLCS: Cubs vs. Mets

This series, much like its American League counterpart, is all sorts of interesting.  Basically, how this series will be decided really is not rocket science at all: the matchup that will dictate the series will be the Cubs’ young hitting against the Mets’ young pitching.  The two teams played seven times in the regular season; the Cubs won all seven games.  In fairness, however, all of those games came before the Mets’ wild trade deadline, one that got them Yoenis Cespedes, Kelly Johnson, Tyler Clippard, and Juan Uribe, to name a few.

We know New York will be starting young guns Jacob deGrom, Noah Syndergaard, Matt Harvey, and Steven Matz.  We also know that the Cubs will be running out their young hitters, such as Kris Bryant, Kyle Schwarber and Jorge Soler.  They also have MVP candidate Anthony Rizzo and Starlin Castro (who should receive all the credit on the planet for his second half performance after being moved from shortstop to second base).  The reason Castro is playing second base, however, will not be playing.

Addison Russell will be out for the NLCS with a hamstring injury. This may seem like a big blow considering how Russell has played this season, especially defensively.  Of course, it really isn’t, if Javy Baez’s brief performance against the Cardinals in the NLDS is any indication.  Over two games, Baez went 4-5 with a home run and three RBI.  He obviously won’t keep that up, but if he can continue to be productive, the rest of the Cubs’ already potent lineup will benefit from it.

As for the matchup of Cubs pitching versus Met hitting, well, that’s difficult to call as well.  The Mets like to hit home runs; even with their early season offensive atrociousness, they still somehow rank eighth in the league in homers.  And how will the Cubs counter that, you ask?  Simple: Jake Arrieta.  Arrieta may win the Cy Young this season and carried the pitching staff when Jon Lester and others struggled.  If the Cubs win the series, he’ll be one of the main reasons, most likely, serving as a reminder of just how important pitching is this time of year.

Of course, the Mets have pitching, too.  Completely opposite of the Royals’ approach, the Cubbies strike out.  And strike out.  And strike out some more.  Their hitting leads the league in strikeout percentage (24.5%), and the Mets pitching is a solid ninth in K/9 (8.23); it should be mentioned that this number was weighed down by regular starters Jon Niese and Bartolo Colon, both of whom nurse a rather low strikeout rate.

Who wins out?  It’s difficult to guess.  Both teams have their aces, but I like the Cubs’ lineup just a bit better and, of course, they have Jake Arrieta (and a very good bullpen, by the way).  It’s a tough series to call, but I’ll go with the Cubs by a very slight margin.

Prediction: Cubs in 7

Posted on

Wild and Crazy: Predicting the MLB Wild Card Games

And then there were ten.  It’s that time again, the time for us baseball fans to sit back and enjoy some October baseball.  It’s also the time for us to pick those games correctly… or at least try to.

Last year’s playoffs gave us two Wild Card teams, the Royals and Giants, playing in the World Series.  Only one team (the Orioles) that had home-field advantage in the Division Series moved on to the LCS, and no series went more than five games until the World Series, which went seven.  To be completely forthright, until the Fall Classic, the postseason was a real clunker, and if it weren’t for that legendary Giants-Royals series, well, the postseason of 2014 would have lived on as one of the least competitive of recent memory.

However, it did have its moments.  This one, in my opinion, was its best, the Travis Ishikawa, modern-day “Giants Win the Pennant” home run:

But that was a year ago, and this is now.  Only four of the ten teams in last year’s playoffs are back this year (Cardinals, Royals, Pirates, Dodgers).  Those teams will be accompanied by six new ones (Blue Jays, Rangers, Astros, Yankees, Mets, Cubs).  This year’s playoffs are wide open, one of the most interesting Octobers in recent memory. When I called these predictions wild guesses, well, you know, they are.  But I’ll try to get them right anyway.

So here they are.  I’ll pick both Wild card games as well as every series, and each prediction will be accompanied by a brief explanation.  I may get all or none of these right because your guess is as good as mine when it comes to this year’s postseason.

Let’s get to it; we’ll start on the AL side and then work our way to the National League.

AL Wild Card Game: Astros at Yankees

Little known fact: Brett Anderson of the Dodgers leads baseball in ground ball percentage this season (66.3%).  Take a guess who’s second.

It’s the Astros’ Dallas Keuchel.

Keuchel just so happens to be pitching against the Yankees in the AL Wild Card game, and his ground ball-inducing tendencies just may be perfect for a one-game playoff in the ultimate hitters’ park, Yankee Stadium.

Both lineups do pose threats to Keuchel and the Yankees’ starter, Masahiro Tanaka.  Both teams cleared the 200 home run mark this season and are never really out of a game.  But if this one does end up being a shootout, favor Houston: the Yankees are without arguably their best home run hitter in Mark Teixiera.  Greg Bird has filled in admirably (even well) at first base but he is both a batting and fielding downgrade.  The Yanks will likely miss Tex here.

This game will likely be a decent to high-scoring affair; Tanaka has struggled recently and Keuchel has never pitched on three days’ rest. While the Yankees undoubtedly have a better bullpen, they be behind and unable to get the game to Dellin Betances and Andrew Miller.

I’m taking Houston to come into Yankee Stadium, take the Wild Card game, and be on to Kansas City Thursday.

Prediction: Astros 7, Yankees 5

NL Wild Card Game: Cubs at Pirates

This is actually what the Wild Card game was made for.  This game will, I believe, be the best Wild Card Game since its inception in 2012. It’s mainly because of the two teams in it and the pitchers they’re sending out to the hill to start the game.

The Pirates will be making the safe choice and starting their ace, Gerrit Cole.  This is a no-brainer; Cole has had an excellent year and is ninth in the game among pitchers in WAR.  He leads a very good, 98-win Buccos team into battle against the Cubs on Wednesday night.

As for the Cubs, they’ll be starting the man who is currently the best pitcher in the game: Jake Arrieta.

ESPN Stats and Info put together a recap of Arrieta’s second half to date, and it has been historic:

Jake Arrieta has a 0.41 ERA in 12 starts since the start of August. From ELIAS: That’s by far the lowest ERA from August on in a season since earned runs became official in 1913 (minimum 10 starts).

Arrieta’s 236 strikeouts were a big part to the Chicago Cubs setting a new record for most strikeouts in a single season by National League team’s pitchers, breaking the 2003 Cubs record of 1,404 strikeouts. Including their win against the Brewers Friday, Cubs pitchers have struck out 1,414 batters.

That’s insane.

Arrieta has gone out of his mind since the All-Star break and been a big reason for the Cubs’ second half surge and 97-win season.  There isn’t much more to say about his performance that hasn’t already been said, and the prospect of him starting in a one game playoff should have the Pirates very concerned, even with their potent lineup.

This game could have easily been the NLCS; it at least should have been a first-round series.  Instead, we’ll only get one game of this.

That being said, this will be a game for the ages.  While you never know what will happen in a one-game playoff, this is why it exists. Both aces will be starting, and this one won’t disappoint.

As for a prediction, well, it’s difficult.  While I chose the Pirates to come out of the NL in April, with Jake Arrieta’s recent dominance, it’s hard to think the Bucs’ lineup will be able to do serious damage against him.  In a close one and an all-time classic, the Cubs win in extras.

Prediction: Cubs 2, Pirates 1

What’s right?  What’s wrong?  Let me know in the comments section and, more importantly, enjoy the baseball this month!

Posted on

The MLB Awards, At (Near) the End of the Season, Part I

Call them the Sully Awards.  Call them the SullyOnSports awards. Actually, call them whatever you want because I really don’t care.

These are my thoughts on the MLB awards for the 2015 season.  These players (and managers; they’re people too) have separated themselves from the rest this year, having seasons for the ages and leading their teams to the playoffs.  Of course, what I would do with my ballot is not necessarily in alignment with popular thought, and my choices don’t really reflect what will actually happen with the awards.  But it’s been a really fun, competitive season in baseball, and a lot of the award races are the same way.

I’ll do the MVP and Cy Young awards in this post.  The Rookie of the Year and Manager of the Year winners for both leagues will be a separate post.  So let’s get down to business.

AL MVP: Josh Donaldson, Toronto Blue Jays

This one is much closer than you think.  Donaldson leads the American League in runs scored, RBI, and most significantly, WAR. His heroics led the Blue Jays through a mediocre 50-51 showing in the season’s first 101 games.  The team’s season changed, however, on July 28, when the Jays landed star shortstop Troy Tulowitzki.  Two days later, they acquired pitcher David Price and were well on their way.

However, there is another MVP candidate that should be discussed, and it’s Mike Trout.  Trout, the AL MVP from last season, may be having his best season yet, setting career highs in home runs and slugging percentage.  He is second to Donaldson in WAR, but the difference is minuscule (8.2 to 8.1).

And as Rob Arthur of FiveThirtyEight writes, that stat may not even tell us all we need to know:

However, like all statistical estimates, WAR calculations come with uncertainty. Here’s where things get pretty statsy, so bear with me: You’re about to get a crash course in confidence intervals. The true value of a player varies from what you find on the leaderboard — but we’re not sure by how much. That’s because of sample size. Although a whole season of baseball seems like a lot, it still doesn’t provide enough data to allow us to be completely sure of each player’s value. So Harper’s 8 WAR could be 6 or it could be 10, but the number on the leaderboard represents our best guess.

When the uncertainty about a player is small, we can be more sure that the player who looks like the best really is the best. If the uncertainty increases, though, we become less able to distinguish his performance from those of his competitors. Trying to determine the magnitude of this uncertainty is tricky, but it’s an important part of good statistical practice.

All right, I think we get it.  It’s very close, but I’ll take Donaldson, because being the best player on what will probably be the best team going into October does bear some weight in this discussion.  While I don’t think of that as the be-all-end-all, with such a small difference between these two players, we’ll use it as the tiebreaker.  And Donaldson will win the award, for one simple, stupid reason: voter fatigue.

Top 5

  1. Josh Donaldson
  2. Mike Trout (Angels)
  3. Chris Davis (Orioles)
  4. Edwin Encarnacion (Blue Jays)
  5. Nelson Cruz (Mariners)

NL MVP: Bryce Harper, Washington Nationals

I wrote back in July that I thought Paul Goldschmidt should be the National League’s MVP.  This is what I wrote back then (edited, because I repeated the same line twice in the span of a few lines):

Anyway, this discussion, as you can already tell, is extremely complicated.  Harper’s team has done better this season, record-wise (three games up on the Mets in the woeful NL East) , but it’s hard to argue that the Diamondbacks would be where they are right now (42-42) without Goldschmidt.  While Harper’s slugging percentage, OPS, and on-base percentage are better than Goldschmidt’s, I’m giving Goldschmidt the advantage.  The advantage for all of the above listed reasons, as well as a very simple one: the acronym MVP stands for “Most Valuable Player”.  If the award was for “Most Outstanding Player”, Harper would be the clear-cut winner.  But Goldschmidt has been more valuable for his team this season, and the stats demonstrate that.

Goldschmidt has the edge here.

Well, what can I say?  I didn’t necessarily say that Goldschmidt was going to hold on to the award, I just said that he was in the lead on July 10.  And since then, the debate has gone from “complicated” to “duh”.

Harper leads Goldschmidt in every major category except for stolen bases and RBI.  However, Harper has less ABs than Goldy, and would likely pass him in RBI (he has no chance of catching him in steals; he’s down 21-6) had he gotten 43 more plate appearances, which is the difference between the two.

This, unlike the AL award, is as clear-cut as it gets.  Harper’s team losing is simply not his fault, and if it weren’t for him, there is no telling where the Nationals would be.  For that, he’s the obvious MVP.

Top 5

  1. Bryce Harper
  2. Paul Goldschmidt (Diamondbacks)
  3. Andrew McCutchen (Pirates)
  4. Joey Votto (Reds)
  5. Yoenis Cespedes (Mets)

AL Cy Young: David Price, Toronto Blue Jays

The Canadian flavor continues here as David Price is my choice for the Cy Young.  Price was always in the running for this award, but he has really separated himself recently, as Jayson Stark points out:

That’s the kicker here: recency bias.  And I’m completely guilty of it, but Price has been the best pitcher in the AL of late, and probably the best pitcher for the season, as well.

Also, Price has gotten better as the season has gone along, unlike some of his competitors for the award.  Anthony Witrado of Bleacher Report wrote about this yesterday:

The main one is Houston Astros ace Dallas Keuchel, who has earned that ace title over his last two seasons and pitched to a 2.51 ERA, 2.90FIP and 1.023 WHIP this year. He is also 18-8 with a chance to win 20 games, and even though wins as a stat have been mostly discredited in this era, we still celebrate that milestone as a high level of excellence.

It is also possible that Keuchel’s stumble last week will cost him the Cy Young Award. In a start against the Texas Rangers in the Astros’ most critical series of the season, he lasted just 4.2 innings and was torched for nine runs, six of them in the first inning to sink his team before the Rangers even made three outs.

Price has also guided his team to the verge of a division crown, and at worst, an assured playoff berth.  That should be more than enough to win him the award, even if he’s only played with the Blue Jays for two months.

Top 5

  1. David Price
  2. Dallas Keuchel (Astros)
  3. Sonny Gray (Athletics)
  4. Chris Sale (White Sox)
  5. Chris Archer (Rays)

NL Cy Young: Jake Arrieta, Chicago Cubs

Recency bias strikes again here, and again, I think it’s right to go with the guy who has pitched the best down the stretch of this season: Jake Arrieta.

Arrieta has been the best pitcher in baseball for the last month, and the combination of him and Jon Lester in the playoffs is making the Cubbies look more and more dangerous by the day.  While Lester is still an outstanding pitcher, he’s had somewhat of a rough season this year (whatever this is not withstanding.)

And the race between Arrieta and the two Dodgers in this race (Zack Greinke and Clayton Kershaw) has become really close recently, a fact that Sports Illustrated’s Cliff Corcoran attests to:

Arrieta is pitching so well that Greinke isn’t even guaranteed to finish the year with the league’s best ERA, a distinction which provides the bulk of the argument for his winning this award. If Greinke allows three earned runs in seven innings in each of his final two starts, he’ll finish with a 1.79 ERA, a mark Arrieta would match by allowing just one earned run in 15 innings in his last two starts. That might sound like a lot to ask from Arrieta if not for the fact that he allowed just one earned run in 17 innings over his last two starts and two earned runs in 54 innings over his last seven (0.33 ERA).

I still expect Greinke to finish with the league’s best ERA, but Arrieta could make things close enough that the ERA crown won’t be enough to bring Greinke the award. Meanwhile, Kershaw has three chances to make his own case, which will be based on his likely innings lead and his significant advantages in strikeout rate and strikeout-to-walk ratio. Speaking of which: With 272 strikeouts on the season and three starts remaining, Kershaw has an outside chance to become the first pitcher to whiff 300 men in a season since Randy Johnson in 2002. As it stands, he need just six strikeouts to reach the highest total since Johnson’s 290 in 2004.

This race is very, very close, and it may even hinge on the very end of the season for each team.  However, Arrieta has a slight edge because of how dominant he has been over the most important stretch of the season.

Top 5

  1. Jake Arrieta
  2. Clayton Kershaw (Dodgers)
  3. Zack Greinke (Dodgers)
  4. Gerrit Cole (Pirates)
  5. Madison Bumgarner (Giants)

What did I get right and what did I get wrong?  Please let me know in the comments section.  Also, the second half of this post (Rookie of the Year, Manager of the Year) will be out soon, most likely on Monday. Thanks for reading!

Posted on

Chris Coghlan’s Slide on Jung Ho Kang Was Legal, but Should It Be?

Yesterday afternoon, the Cubs and Pirates concluded their critical four-game series in Pittsburgh.  The Cubs would ultimately win the game 9-6 and the series 3-1, but the real story came in the first inning, before the Cubs even recorded an out.

The North Siders loaded up the bases against Pirates’ starter Charlie Morton.  They sent MVP candidate Anthony Rizzo to the plate and he hit a double play ball to second baseman Neil Walker.  Walker threw to shortstop Jung Ho Kang and Kang, like many middle infielders before him, was slid into by the Cubs’ Chris Coghlan.  Only, unlike said middle infielders, Kang wasn’t able to get up and shake off the dirt after the play.

Here is the video, in case you missed it: (WARNING: Video may be disturbing to some.)

Kang suffered a broken leg on the play and is out for the rest of this season and very well could miss the beginning of next season.  His loss affects the Pirates’ playoff chances directly, as he could play every position effectively and hit for average and decent power.  But this discussion can be put to the back burner for a while; let’s talk about the play.

And here’s the caveat that should come with it while it looks ridiculously dirty, it’s actually a perfectly “clean” play, according to the rule book.  Here is the definitive proof (or lack thereof), in MLB rule 7.09:

(f) If, in the judgment of the umpire, a batter-runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball, with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead; the umpire shall call the batter-runner out for interference and shall also call out the runner who had advanced closest to the home plate regardless where the double play might have been possible. In no event shall bases be run because of such interference.

But there is nothing there that addresses a runner sliding into a shortstop or second baseman to try to break up a double play.  This practice has been in place for decades, but it is pretty rare to see someone actually get hurt on the play.  Of course, just because players don’t usually sustain injury on a play like this one doesn’t mean that said play is not dangerous.

That applies here; the tactic that Coghlan used to get Kang off-balance is so commonly used that most fans don’t even react when it happens. This is something that ESPN’s Jesse Rogers addressed yesterday:

Neither the Pittsburgh Pirates nor Jung Ho Kang, through his agent, have indicated a belief Chicago Cubs outfielder Chris Coghlan’s slide into second base, which ended Kang’s season on Thursday afternoon, was dirty.

Anyone who believes it was dirty must also believe every takeout slide has the potential to be dirty. If the infielder isn’t going to jump or move out of the way, then a collision is inevitable.

That’s not to blame the victim here. The blame is on the situation. It came on a double play that developed later than normal on a ball hit by Anthony Rizzo in the first inning of the Cubs’ 9-6 win. Kang bravely stood his ground as second baseman Neil Walker flipped him the ball while Coghlan came at him with a hard-but-legal slide. It’s a slide you see several times in every game — a little off the base but within striking distance of it.

I can understand and even agree with this point of view; while the end result was horrible, slides like the one Coghlan performed are 1) legal and 2) effective.  While Coghlan’s slide didn’t break up the double play, there have been too many slides that have to count.  That being said, the rule may be in line for slight modification; the game can be made safer without completely removing the play from the sport.

Here is another example to demonstrate why I don’t think much of this “controversy”: many slides, as Rogers mentioned, wander slightly outside of the base.  Take, for instance, an aggressive slide into home, one where the runner himself does not actually slide over the base, but one part of his body does: his left hand.  The catcher isn’t in the way on the play, so no one really thinks anything of it.  But seriously, how could a person look at this slide and think it isn’t designed to avoid the tag?

This is completely beside the point, but Holliday was so out on that play that it wasn’t even funny.  Anyway, let’s get back to yesterday’s business.

The best comparison for the second base takeout slide is likely the since-outlawed practice of running over a catcher at home plate.  In 2014, Major League Baseball took preventative steps to curtail dangerous, concussion-inducing activity at home plate by implementing rules that prevented catchers from blocking the plate and runners from running outside the baseline.

However (and this is important), the changes weren’t as earth-shattering as they were made out to be.  This is what Fangraphs’ Craig Edwards wrote on the two subjects today:

It is important to note that MLB did not actually outlaw collisions at home plate. They addressed the principal causes of collisions, instructed teams on the same, and while the rule did cause some confusion in its first year, the rule appears to be by and large successful.

Unfortunately for our concern regarding the takeout slide, the same factors at home plate do not exist at a force at second base. Where the catcher can get in front of the plate once he has the ball, at second base, almost all takeout slides occur after the fielder has the ball. This makes the second option, arguably the more important and successful of the rules, untenable for takeout slides.

Of course, the rules were clarified last September in fear of the possibility of a Rule 7.13 World Series, one that gets decided by a home plate collision.  However, Edwards’ point is absolutely crucial; baseball didn’t actually ban home plate collisions, they just made the rules such that these plays were strongly discouraged and much more rare.

And that is what baseball should do in this case, as well. Commissioner Manfred can make a rule that states that a runner cannot go outside of the baseline to make contact with a fielder trying to complete a double play.  The play wouldn’t be removed from the game; rather, it would be made more difficult to pull off and less likely to occur.  If a fielder is on the base, then, and only then, can a runner take him out.  That seems fair enough to me.

To be perfectly clear, the slide and result were not Chris Coghlan’s fault.  He made the right play in that situation and, especially in a game of that magnitude with the Cubs hurtling toward October baseball, gave a complete effort on that play when he could have easily stopped running.

But he didn’t, and now Jung Ho Kang’s season is over.

An outcome that should be avoided at all costs in the future.

Posted on

The MLB Playoff System Is a Problem, but Its Solution Is Simple

If you follow baseball, you’re probably at least decently aware that both the American and National leagues have three divisions each; this has been the way of baseball since 1994.  And winning the division has always meant a ticket into the playoffs.  But, inevitably, as is the case with the NFL and just about every other major sport, some divisions are evidently better than others.

This year, the best division in the majors has been, by a wide margin, the NL Central.  It’s about to field three playoff teams (Cardinals, Pirates, Cubs) and each one of those three teams is at least 20 games over .500.  The three playoff teams in the Central also happen to be the three best teams in the NL.  However, with the way the playoff structure works, the Pirates and Cubs will be subjected to a one-game playoff to decide which one advances to the division series.  The worst part?  The winner of this game is going to have to play the Cardinals, the best team in the game and a potential 100-game winner.

So even though the Pirates and Cubbies are the second and third best teams in the NL by record, one of them will be left out of the senior circuit’s final four.  But two of the teams that will be one of the last four standing in the NL will be the NL West champ (either the Dodgers or Giants) and the NL East winner (most likely the Mets). Both teams currently sit at 67-56, a whole 4.5 games worse than the Cubs.

Hypothetically, let’s just say that the Pirates win the Wild Card game. In this case, the Buccos would be forced to play the Cardinals in a match-up of the NL’s two best teams record-wise.  One of them would be eliminated in this series.  The winner would then play the winner of the Mets-Dodgers series (that’s what we’ll call it for the sake of this discussion).

So, here’s what would happen under the current format: two of the three best teams in the NL would be out before the League Championship Series.  Does this sound like a fair way to decide a champion?  I don’t think so.  We could be left with a very interesting LCS matchup (the Mets and Dodgers are two of the most dangerous teams in baseball if they make the playoffs) but the system won’t reward the most successful regular season teams.

So I came up with a very simple way to fix the big issue plaguing the MLB playoffs, the one in which the best teams knock each other out early in October.  Here is my solution so that problem.

The Win-Loss Record, Stupid

 

I’m not calling anyone stupid; I just wanted to inject a little James Carville into this article to make it a tad more interesting.  Anyway, let’s get back on track.

The way to fix this simple issue has everything to do with rewarding the teams with the best records in baseball.  In my playoff format, I would disregard division winners and not automatically reward them with a reprieve from the Wild Card game.  I would treat divisions as a way to geographically separate the teams as well as a process to solve tiebreakers.  For example, if two teams had the same record, the first tiebreaker would be in-division records.  I feel that it is a fair enough way to hash things out if two teams with the same record either get into the playoffs or are fighting for the last ticket to the dance.

So how would this seeding work?  This is how.

  1. Best record
  2. Second-best record
  3. Third-best record
  4. Fourth-best record
  5. Fifth-best record

Not that much would really change from the format we have now. The only difference would be that seeding would be determined by record, not winning the division.  Tiebreaker would be the aforementioned in-division record.  And the four and five seeds would play in a one-game playoff, just like in the current system.  It’s not perfect, but I believe that this is definitely better than having two of the three best teams knocked out of the postseason before the Championship Series.

So how would the playoff picture actually shake out using this method?  Here are the playoff seedings for both leagues, sorted by win-loss record.

AL

  1. Kansas City Royals- 75-48
  2. Toronto Blue Jays- 69-55
  3. New York Yankees- 68-55
  4. Houston Astros- 69-56
  5. Texas Rangers- 64-59

NL

  1. St. Louis Cardinals- 78-45
  2. Pittsburgh Pirates- 74-48
  3. Chicago Cubs- 71-51
  4. New York Mets- 67-56
  5. Los Angeles Dodgers- 67-56

*Note: Mets win in-division record tiebreaker.

If you look closely at the teams in my playoffs, you’ll notice something: the teams that would make the postseason if the regular season ended today are the exact same teams that would make it in with the current system.  I’m just rearranging the deck chairs, if you will, to reward the teams with better records.

And, this is just a personal aside, but I think the match-ups in this version of the playoffs would be more scintillating than they would be in real life.  A one-game playoff between the Dodgers and Mets, along with a potential clash of Jacob deGrom and Zack Greinke, the two best pitchers in the game by ERA?  Yes, please.  An in-division meeting of the Yankees and Blue Jays?  I’ll take that.  And the potential of either another Dodgers-Cardinals meeting or a bout between the two best pitching staffs in baseball?  That would be good. The possibilities are endless.

One More Note on How This Would Work

 

In my baseball, home-field advantage would not be decided by the All-Star game.  I would decide my World Series home-field by regular season performance, but that leaves one small ambiguity to clear up. Hypothetically, let’s say the Cubs (the NL’s three-seed) and the Blue Jays (the AL’s two-seed) meet in the World Series.  While the Blue Jays have the better seed, the Cubs have the better record (this is a general theme; the NL is better than the AL this year).  This would leave a conundrum as to who would get home-field.  Here is the answer, if I ruled baseball (imagine that for just a second):

The Chicago Cubs.

This is the fair way to conduct the World Series, and this is how home-field advantage would be decided; not by seeding or meaningless exhibition game, but by win-loss record.  It’s consistent with the way the rest of these playoffs work: rewarding winners, regardless of what division they play in.

So, other than re-seeding, I’d keep the exact same playoff format.  The Wild Card game is great, especially considering its urgency and random nature.  It’s given us awesome:

And, at worst, talked about:

And the winner of my Wild Card game would play the one-seed, just like in the current format.  Not much really changes.

So, making one little change to the way the Playoffs work would make a world of difference, in my opinion.  It’s not some huge, earth-shattering change like getting rid of divisions all together, and because we are keeping the divisions, we can still have the same wild and crazy in-division rivalries that we do now.

So all this is is a very minor change to the system; some may argue otherwise, but I don’t think it’s a big deal.  It rewards regular season performance while still giving an incentive to win inside the division. It’s the little change that can go a long way to fixing the problem with the MLB playoffs.

It’s the win-loss record, stupid.

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

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

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.