-Mark Buerhle has more home runs than: Dewayne Wise, Chris Getz, Wilson Betemit, Brent Lillibridge, and Gordan Beckham. FML.
-Scott Podsednik also has more HR than all of those guys. FML.
-Speaking of Scotty Pods, he has a better OBP (granted in a smaller sample size), than all White Six batters besides Jim Thome. FML.
-Dwayne Wise has a .133 BA, .170 OBP, and no XBH. He also is probably the best option the Sox currently have. He also batted FIFTH today! FIFTH! FML.
-Even though Jayson Nix is one of the best defensive second basemen and has a far better wOBA, Chris Getz is still starting. FML. (also, again, I will admit Nix has far less innings and ABs, but seriously, when a guy is playing THIS good and the starter is playing THIS bad, why does the shittier starter still have the job!?)
Why I Hate Reggie Bush
I was looking on ESPN.com and there is an article in the NFL section still praising Reggie Bush and staying we should stop calling him a bust. Their argument is because of the tandem back system, Bush's numbers are deflated and thus people are judging him wrong. First of all, the Tennessee combo of Smash and Dash did very well last. Derrick Ward and Brandon Jacobs both got over 1000 yards last season. Carolina's Double Trouble of rookie Jonathan Stewart and should-have-been MVP DeAngelo Williams were very successful splitting time. Hell, even AP loses SOME snaps to Chester Taylor and still manages to be awesome. So there's no reason a tandem back system can't be successful for one individual player.
Secondly, by comparing other Saints RBs, I will show that Reggie Bush just flat out sucks. I wrote this is a comment but I feel a post is necessary, REGGIE BUSH SUCKS. When you compare the numbers of Bush to his teammate Pierre Thomas, you can see just how bad Bush is. See, both Thomas and Bush have the same offensive line in front of them. Normally, when you compare RBs, it becomes an unfair comparison because one RB may have a better O-line and thus make a RB look better, But when two backs have the same O-line, that means the difference numbers as ALL running back talent.
Last year. Pierre Thomas was 11th overall in DYAR and 4th overall in DVOA. This means that overall, Thomas was the 11th best overall back, and PER PLAY, he was the fourth best. So if you had to run one play, there was only three NFL backs you would prefer to have over Thomas. Then compare him to Reggie Bush. Bush was 41st in both DVOA and DYAR, 9th to last of all RBs who had significant amount of carries. Here are some backs last year that were better than Reggie Bush: Edge, Run DMC, Earnest Graham, Maurice Morris, Warrick Dunn, and Mewelde Moore.
And this trend is not just last year but throughout both players careers. Thomas has a better YPC, TD/G, and fumble/G in his career than Bush. Bush has never had more than 6 rushing TDs in a single season. Thomas had 9 last year. Thomas has 4 less receiving TDs than Bush, but also 165 less receptions. And although Thomas has been thrown to much much less and caught much much less passes than Bush, his yards per catch in his career is better. Thomas had about 20 less receptions last year and still had a better yards per catch.
However, I will give Bush some credit, he is a better kick returner than Thomas.
Pierre Thomas was undrafted free agent from Illinois that was decent at best. Reggie Bush was one of the greatest college football RBs ever, if not college football players ever, and was the #2 pick in the draft. Yet for some reason, in essentially every facet of the game, Pierre Thomas has shown to be a better running back than Reggie Bush. And both are on the same team with essentially the same players throwing and blocking for them. There is absolutely no excuse for Bush's actions because essentially all other factors besides talent have been taken out of the equation. It's really hard to make the argument that straight up, Thomas has more ability and talent than Bush because there is no indicator to prove such a thing. Maybe the way Thomas played in college was more suited for the pro game, but Reggie's back up at USC, fatboy LenDale White, has also had proven success in the NFL.
So, I believe the only rational conclusion to come to, is that: Reggie Bush sucks he was way too over-hyped there are obvious flaws in the way NFL scouts draft if Bush went #2 overall the Houston Texans are now geniuses for passing over Bush and Pierre Thomas should start for the New Orleans Saints.
Oh, did I mention that Reggie Bush sucks?
Secondly, by comparing other Saints RBs, I will show that Reggie Bush just flat out sucks. I wrote this is a comment but I feel a post is necessary, REGGIE BUSH SUCKS. When you compare the numbers of Bush to his teammate Pierre Thomas, you can see just how bad Bush is. See, both Thomas and Bush have the same offensive line in front of them. Normally, when you compare RBs, it becomes an unfair comparison because one RB may have a better O-line and thus make a RB look better, But when two backs have the same O-line, that means the difference numbers as ALL running back talent.
Last year. Pierre Thomas was 11th overall in DYAR and 4th overall in DVOA. This means that overall, Thomas was the 11th best overall back, and PER PLAY, he was the fourth best. So if you had to run one play, there was only three NFL backs you would prefer to have over Thomas. Then compare him to Reggie Bush. Bush was 41st in both DVOA and DYAR, 9th to last of all RBs who had significant amount of carries. Here are some backs last year that were better than Reggie Bush: Edge, Run DMC, Earnest Graham, Maurice Morris, Warrick Dunn, and Mewelde Moore.
And this trend is not just last year but throughout both players careers. Thomas has a better YPC, TD/G, and fumble/G in his career than Bush. Bush has never had more than 6 rushing TDs in a single season. Thomas had 9 last year. Thomas has 4 less receiving TDs than Bush, but also 165 less receptions. And although Thomas has been thrown to much much less and caught much much less passes than Bush, his yards per catch in his career is better. Thomas had about 20 less receptions last year and still had a better yards per catch.
However, I will give Bush some credit, he is a better kick returner than Thomas.
Pierre Thomas was undrafted free agent from Illinois that was decent at best. Reggie Bush was one of the greatest college football RBs ever, if not college football players ever, and was the #2 pick in the draft. Yet for some reason, in essentially every facet of the game, Pierre Thomas has shown to be a better running back than Reggie Bush. And both are on the same team with essentially the same players throwing and blocking for them. There is absolutely no excuse for Bush's actions because essentially all other factors besides talent have been taken out of the equation. It's really hard to make the argument that straight up, Thomas has more ability and talent than Bush because there is no indicator to prove such a thing. Maybe the way Thomas played in college was more suited for the pro game, but Reggie's back up at USC, fatboy LenDale White, has also had proven success in the NFL.
So, I believe the only rational conclusion to come to, is that: Reggie Bush sucks he was way too over-hyped there are obvious flaws in the way NFL scouts draft if Bush went #2 overall the Houston Texans are now geniuses for passing over Bush and Pierre Thomas should start for the New Orleans Saints.
Oh, did I mention that Reggie Bush sucks?
What is wrong with Chien-Ming Wang?
In a nutshell, there are two primary problems: control and groundballs.
Chien-Ming Wang's career BB/9 is 2.60; this season, his BB/9 is 4.34. Since May of 1 of last season, Chien-Ming Wang's BB/9 has been 3.98. Prior to that point in time, it had never been higher than 2.66.
On the bright side, Wang is striking out more guys this season than he ever has before. Since his first full season in 2006, Wang's strikeout rate has increased every season while keeping his BB rate relatively constant (until recently). Take a look at his seasonal K/9 rates:
'06: 3.14
'07: 4.70
'08: 5.12
'09: 6.75
While the increased whiffing is nice, Wang's K/BB has remained relatively stable over this period of time as well:
'06: 1.46
'07: 1.76
'08: 1.54
'09: 1.56
With '07 being the exception, Wang's walk rate has increased with his strikeout rate.
This is a problem for the following reasons:
1) More baserunners make big problems for pitch-to-contact pitchers. More guys on base plus more balls in play equals more hits, which equal more total bases, which equal more runs scored. Recall how little control pitchers have over balls in play resulting in hits or outs (see this article). The three year average BABIP on groundballs is .278 and Wang, a groundball pitcher, doesn't exactly have the rangiest middle infield behind him.
2) Wang has been giving up less groundballs lately. Despite a consistently high GB/FB rate throughout his career, Wang's groundball rate has dipped each season since his debut. Take a look at Wang's GB%'s by year since 2006:
'05: 63.9% (2.91 GB/FB)
'06 :62.8% (3.09 GB/FB)
'07: 58.4% (2.51 GB/FB)
'08: 55.0% (2.43 GB/FB)
'09: 45.2% (1.83 GB/FB)
Granted, Wang hasn't exactly been "healthy" this season (whether health be defined physically or mentally), but the decreasing trend in GBs is nothing new (albeit exaggerated this season). Wang has been consistently giving up more and more FBs, which means more and more opportunity for longballs (normalized HR/FB is 11%), which means more and more runs scored as the BB/9 increases.
What is to blame for Wang's troubles and trends? In my summation, it is the increasing reliance on the fastball, which has gotten worse each season. Here is Wang's 4 year FB%/wFB (wFB is the run value of a pitcher's fastball per 100 pitches) trend:
'06: 75.5%/18.8
'07: 76.4%/13.0
'08: 77.0%/8.6
'09: 85.9%/-12.6
Clearly, Wang's "injuries" (again, they may be mental or physical or both) have exaggerated the trend this season, but Wang's fastball (which has lost vertical movement and almost 2 MPH since 2006) has been eroding in effectiveness but increasing in usage -- a recipe for failure. At the expense of the increased fastball usage, the splitfinger change up and slider -- sharp breaking pitches that allow a pitcher to get on top of the ball -- have fallen out of favor.
Right now, Wang is "broken" in the sense that he's over-utilizing the wrong pitches. The fastball is down in velocity (perhaps attributable to physical injury) and his control is way off (perhaps attributable to mental struggles). Unless he starts mixing in his offspeed pitches more, I do not see Wang reclaiming his title as the king of groundballers.
What do you think? Do you agree/disagree? What do you think is to blame for Chien-Ming Wang's struggles?
Chien-Ming Wang's career BB/9 is 2.60; this season, his BB/9 is 4.34. Since May of 1 of last season, Chien-Ming Wang's BB/9 has been 3.98. Prior to that point in time, it had never been higher than 2.66.
On the bright side, Wang is striking out more guys this season than he ever has before. Since his first full season in 2006, Wang's strikeout rate has increased every season while keeping his BB rate relatively constant (until recently). Take a look at his seasonal K/9 rates:
'06: 3.14
'07: 4.70
'08: 5.12
'09: 6.75
While the increased whiffing is nice, Wang's K/BB has remained relatively stable over this period of time as well:
'06: 1.46
'07: 1.76
'08: 1.54
'09: 1.56
With '07 being the exception, Wang's walk rate has increased with his strikeout rate.
This is a problem for the following reasons:
1) More baserunners make big problems for pitch-to-contact pitchers. More guys on base plus more balls in play equals more hits, which equal more total bases, which equal more runs scored. Recall how little control pitchers have over balls in play resulting in hits or outs (see this article). The three year average BABIP on groundballs is .278 and Wang, a groundball pitcher, doesn't exactly have the rangiest middle infield behind him.
2) Wang has been giving up less groundballs lately. Despite a consistently high GB/FB rate throughout his career, Wang's groundball rate has dipped each season since his debut. Take a look at Wang's GB%'s by year since 2006:
'05: 63.9% (2.91 GB/FB)
'06 :62.8% (3.09 GB/FB)
'07: 58.4% (2.51 GB/FB)
'08: 55.0% (2.43 GB/FB)
'09: 45.2% (1.83 GB/FB)
Granted, Wang hasn't exactly been "healthy" this season (whether health be defined physically or mentally), but the decreasing trend in GBs is nothing new (albeit exaggerated this season). Wang has been consistently giving up more and more FBs, which means more and more opportunity for longballs (normalized HR/FB is 11%), which means more and more runs scored as the BB/9 increases.
What is to blame for Wang's troubles and trends? In my summation, it is the increasing reliance on the fastball, which has gotten worse each season. Here is Wang's 4 year FB%/wFB (wFB is the run value of a pitcher's fastball per 100 pitches) trend:
'06: 75.5%/18.8
'07: 76.4%/13.0
'08: 77.0%/8.6
'09: 85.9%/-12.6
Clearly, Wang's "injuries" (again, they may be mental or physical or both) have exaggerated the trend this season, but Wang's fastball (which has lost vertical movement and almost 2 MPH since 2006) has been eroding in effectiveness but increasing in usage -- a recipe for failure. At the expense of the increased fastball usage, the splitfinger change up and slider -- sharp breaking pitches that allow a pitcher to get on top of the ball -- have fallen out of favor.
Right now, Wang is "broken" in the sense that he's over-utilizing the wrong pitches. The fastball is down in velocity (perhaps attributable to physical injury) and his control is way off (perhaps attributable to mental struggles). Unless he starts mixing in his offspeed pitches more, I do not see Wang reclaiming his title as the king of groundballers.
What do you think? Do you agree/disagree? What do you think is to blame for Chien-Ming Wang's struggles?
Corey Hart: I told you so
Thanks to the new metrics available at Fangraphs, I can finally and comprehensively explain and quantify why I hate Corey Hart as a fantasy asset and why I laughed so intensely at those who gave him an ADP of 58 on Mock Draft Central.
In 2007, I drafted Corey Hart and he paid off big time. With a .295 AVG, 24 HR and 23 SB (not to mention the 86 R/81 RBI), Hart entered the 2008 season high on my list of guys to target. Hart, however, would prove to me over the course of last season that he is not a guy with 30/30 potential (he only had 505 AB in 2007), but rather a player with poor basic skills to go with raw talent.
Corey Hart has never been a batter with a good eye. His career BB% is a below average 6.1%, but since his first full major league season, he has seen his already poor pitch recognition erode further. Last season, Hart posted a laughable 4.2 BB%, 15th worst among the 213 players who had a minimum of 400 PA's. This season, Hart has a deceptively "high" 8.8%, largely due to the 13 walks he drew in the month of April (Hart has only drawn double digit walks in a month of play one other time in his entire career -- 14 in June 1007). Since May 1, Hart has walked at a 5.2% clip.
Hart's power has also been in the decline since his first full season -- or perhaps it merely spiked in 2007. Hart's 2007 ISO (.244) is almost a full .100 points higher than this season's rate (.150). In 2007, he hit a HR every 21.1 ABs. In 2008, he hit a jack every 30.6 ABs. This season, Hart's home run power has regressed even further, as his HR rate has fallen to one per 34.4 ABs.
The sheer power of Corey Hart isn't the problem (his career home run distance average is over 400 FT, 418.5 FT this season), but rather the ability to make quality contact with pitches. With a swing% above the major league average and contact rate almost 10% below the league average, Corey Hart helps pitchers beat him.
Other aspects that have hurt Corey Hart's game have been decreasing speed (his speed score has gone from 7.6 to 6.2 to 4.5 since his debut), decreasing range (from positive defense to negative), a complete inability to hit sliders (his wSL (run value per 100 sliders) is -4.0 and pitchers have increasing throw sliders to him since 2007) and an increased groundball rate. All of these factors, combined with the waning/deceptively non-existent slugging power collectively conspired to make Hart incredibly overrated. The .380 wOBA player of 2007 set a bar that the .327 and .309 wOBA players of 2008 and 2009 have not and could not live up to.
In 2007, I drafted Corey Hart and he paid off big time. With a .295 AVG, 24 HR and 23 SB (not to mention the 86 R/81 RBI), Hart entered the 2008 season high on my list of guys to target. Hart, however, would prove to me over the course of last season that he is not a guy with 30/30 potential (he only had 505 AB in 2007), but rather a player with poor basic skills to go with raw talent.
Corey Hart has never been a batter with a good eye. His career BB% is a below average 6.1%, but since his first full major league season, he has seen his already poor pitch recognition erode further. Last season, Hart posted a laughable 4.2 BB%, 15th worst among the 213 players who had a minimum of 400 PA's. This season, Hart has a deceptively "high" 8.8%, largely due to the 13 walks he drew in the month of April (Hart has only drawn double digit walks in a month of play one other time in his entire career -- 14 in June 1007). Since May 1, Hart has walked at a 5.2% clip.
Hart's power has also been in the decline since his first full season -- or perhaps it merely spiked in 2007. Hart's 2007 ISO (.244) is almost a full .100 points higher than this season's rate (.150). In 2007, he hit a HR every 21.1 ABs. In 2008, he hit a jack every 30.6 ABs. This season, Hart's home run power has regressed even further, as his HR rate has fallen to one per 34.4 ABs.
The sheer power of Corey Hart isn't the problem (his career home run distance average is over 400 FT, 418.5 FT this season), but rather the ability to make quality contact with pitches. With a swing% above the major league average and contact rate almost 10% below the league average, Corey Hart helps pitchers beat him.
Other aspects that have hurt Corey Hart's game have been decreasing speed (his speed score has gone from 7.6 to 6.2 to 4.5 since his debut), decreasing range (from positive defense to negative), a complete inability to hit sliders (his wSL (run value per 100 sliders) is -4.0 and pitchers have increasing throw sliders to him since 2007) and an increased groundball rate. All of these factors, combined with the waning/deceptively non-existent slugging power collectively conspired to make Hart incredibly overrated. The .380 wOBA player of 2007 set a bar that the .327 and .309 wOBA players of 2008 and 2009 have not and could not live up to.
Wilson Betemit
I came a cross a stat that you dont see very often. Wilson Betemit amazingly has as many errors this season as he does assists for a fielding percentage of .500. Most third basemen are in the .930 range but not betemit. I guess that explains why he has currently been worth -3.1 million for the white sox. Even more reason to bring up Gordon Beckham before he is ready. I'm sure dirty 30 is a better player than Betemit but Kenny Williams knows what he's doing
Advance Aged Rays Pitchers (AARP)
Has anyone noticed the age of the Tampa Bay Ray bullpen? With recent signee Jorge Julio (30) to join the bunch, the following [elderly] players make up the relief core of the reigning AL Champions:
- Troy Percival (39, going on 40)
- Grant Balfour (32)
- Joe Nelson (34, going on 35)
- Dan Wheeler (32)
- Jason Isringhausen (36, going on 37)
- Brian Shouse (40, going on 41)
- Randy Choate (33, going on 34)
- Chad Bradford [DL] (34, going on 35)
- Lance Cormier (29)
- J.P. Howell (26)
- Al Reyes (37)
- Gary Glover (31)
- Trever Miller (35)
The Whale's Vagina Will Fail
San Diego State RHP Steven Strasburg was just drafted #1 in the 2009 MLB draft by the Washington Nationals. He touted as the best pitching prospect ever. He is considered able to start` for the Nationals today. Even Mark Prior spent a handful of starts in minors before started for the Cubbies, but WV is said to be THAT good that he doesn't even have to go to the minor leagues. On Around The Horn today, Woody Paige already anointed Strasburg into the Hall Of Fame (yes, it was from the mouth and mind of Woody Paige so that comment means nothing) and many many many people across the globe feel very similar sentiments about Strasburg. He might have the biggest weight on his shoulders now because he is so hyped right now. And I'm calling it now, he will fail.
Very few pitchers picked #1 in recent years have ever panned out. Mark Prior came close, but ask Cubs fans now what they think of him. Even Kerry Wood managed to come back and have success in the MLB. Besides David Price, here's a list of pitchers drafted #1 over the past 20 years: Luke Hochevar, Matt Anderson, Kris Benson, Paul Wilson, Brien Taylor, Ben McDonald, and Andy Benes. The only players I'm sure you've ever heard of from this list was either because a) they were touted as being amazing and failed or b) they have a really hot and crazy wife. But none of those player are either highly touted now nor did they ever pan out.
I wrote a previous post explaining my dislike for the hype surrounding the NFL draft, and I share the same sentiments now about this draft. I hope WV succeeds so I can continue typing and saying "Whale's Vagina" and because I don't wanna be a hater, but when THIS much hype is surrounding a kid, it just sounds like the foundation for failure. And I know WV's stats shows just how amazing he is, but the level of competition, even in rookie ball, is much harder and better than in teh college game. And even if he does have the "stuff" to compete in the majors, I think people are putting way too much hype and pressure and too big of expectations for this kid to succeed. Maybe if he, for some reason, was drafted outside of the first round or no one talked about him, then I think he could do fine. But because of all the buzz around him, I think he's headed for a downturn. Hell, even though Rickie Weeks walks and hits for decent power, Brewers fans (even those INSIDE the organization) think he's a disappointment, just because he was touted as a better 2B (excluding announcing abilities) than Joe Morgan. I can just imagine something like this happening with Strasburg, or worse, he just will flat out suck.
SIDENOTE: If you don't understand why I call Strasburg the Whale's Vagina, you need to listen to more Bill Simmons podcasts. And yes I do understand the irony in that
______________________________________________________
Buster Olney was just asked what major leaguer the #2 pick of the 2009 MLB draft North Carolina 1B/OF Dustin Ackley will be like. He picked Darrin Erstad?
Really!? Darrin Erstad!? Really!? If Darris Erstad is your ceiling, then you're fucked. You drafted a guy in which will probably become like Darrin Erstad, then your team is fucked. If a guy like Darrin Erstad in the 2nd best pick in the draft, then this will be the worst draft of all time.
Either that or Buster Olney's just retarded.
Very few pitchers picked #1 in recent years have ever panned out. Mark Prior came close, but ask Cubs fans now what they think of him. Even Kerry Wood managed to come back and have success in the MLB. Besides David Price, here's a list of pitchers drafted #1 over the past 20 years: Luke Hochevar, Matt Anderson, Kris Benson, Paul Wilson, Brien Taylor, Ben McDonald, and Andy Benes. The only players I'm sure you've ever heard of from this list was either because a) they were touted as being amazing and failed or b) they have a really hot and crazy wife. But none of those player are either highly touted now nor did they ever pan out.
I wrote a previous post explaining my dislike for the hype surrounding the NFL draft, and I share the same sentiments now about this draft. I hope WV succeeds so I can continue typing and saying "Whale's Vagina" and because I don't wanna be a hater, but when THIS much hype is surrounding a kid, it just sounds like the foundation for failure. And I know WV's stats shows just how amazing he is, but the level of competition, even in rookie ball, is much harder and better than in teh college game. And even if he does have the "stuff" to compete in the majors, I think people are putting way too much hype and pressure and too big of expectations for this kid to succeed. Maybe if he, for some reason, was drafted outside of the first round or no one talked about him, then I think he could do fine. But because of all the buzz around him, I think he's headed for a downturn. Hell, even though Rickie Weeks walks and hits for decent power, Brewers fans (even those INSIDE the organization) think he's a disappointment, just because he was touted as a better 2B (excluding announcing abilities) than Joe Morgan. I can just imagine something like this happening with Strasburg, or worse, he just will flat out suck.
SIDENOTE: If you don't understand why I call Strasburg the Whale's Vagina, you need to listen to more Bill Simmons podcasts. And yes I do understand the irony in that
______________________________________________________
Buster Olney was just asked what major leaguer the #2 pick of the 2009 MLB draft North Carolina 1B/OF Dustin Ackley will be like. He picked Darrin Erstad?
Really!? Darrin Erstad!? Really!? If Darris Erstad is your ceiling, then you're fucked. You drafted a guy in which will probably become like Darrin Erstad, then your team is fucked. If a guy like Darrin Erstad in the 2nd best pick in the draft, then this will be the worst draft of all time.
Either that or Buster Olney's just retarded.
Carlos Marmol
What is wrong with Carlos Marmol? He was an All-Star last year and has arguably been the most dominant set-up man in the baseball the past 2 seasons. He will never be confused with Maddux for his plate control, but he has made up for a 4.5 walk rate by striking out an average of 12 batters per 9 in those 2 years. You couple that with a .150 batting average against and you have a dominant pitcher.
The problems began on Sexy Rexy's birthday last year, where Carmol gave up like a million runs to the (Devil) Rays blowing the game. This year he has 27 walks in 27 innings. That is unspeakably bad for anyone. Even Adam Eaton and Sidney Ponson would be embarrased by those numbers. He's still as difficult to hit, but the walks will kill him. He currently has the highest walk rate in baseball. If you look at some of the other names on the list, Hayden Penn was DFAed, Jorge Julio was DFAed, Edwar Ramirez was sent to AAA, and Matt Lindstrom is about to lose his closers job. I recommend Marmol start throwing strikes or his fate will eventually be that of Fausto Carmona
What If Brett Favre Comes To The Vikings?
If you've been watching SportsCenter or ESPN at all this football off season, you know that it is rumored that Brett Favre will be a Minnesota Viking next year. With Favre undergoing arthroscopic surgery today, that rumor seems to be becoming more and more of a reality each day. While I personally find this humorous because the Packers did everything in their control when trading Favre, to make sure he didn't become a Viking, and now he will probably become one. But if Favre does play for Minnesota, what will that mean for the team? You hear people say that Minnesota is just a QB away from a Superbowl ring? Is that true? Well let's find out.
Luckily, the 2008 New York Jets and the 2009 Minnesota Vikings are very comparable. Both have seemingly below average receivers, an average offensive line, and a great running game. This means it is very easy to see what Brett Favre did last year and translate that to what we will probably be able to do this year.
Running Game: Now if I gave you a choice between Adrian Peterson and Thomas Jones, which RB would you pick? Of course. But in terms of actual production last year, both were very similar. Because of New York's improved O-line, Thomas Jones had a career year last year. In terms of football sabermetric statistics, TJ had a better year with a better DVOA and DYAR than AP. In fact, All Day was just average. But we're talking about the running game in terms of the quarterback. Last year, Minnesota was ranked 5th in YPG and yards(NYJ 9th) but 3rd in attempts (NYJ 19th). Both teams had a very good and effective running game.
Conclusion: If Brett goes to Minnesota, they will probably run the ball more meaning Favre will not have to throw it as much as he did in New York. However, New York was much more effective AT running the ball. So the running game will probably help Favre but in reality, Minnesota's running game is not THAT much of an upgrade.
Receivers: In New York, Favre's main targets were Jericho Cotchery and Lav Coles. Coles was ranked 27th in DVOA, 36th in DVOA, and had 71 catches for 858 yards. Cotchery was ranked 34 in DYAR, 48 in DVOA, and had 70 catches for 850 yards. If Brett comes to Minnesota his main targets will be Bernard Berrian and rookie Percy Harvin. Last year Berrian was 18th in both DYAR and DVOA and 48 catches for 964. While there are obviously no stats on Harvin to judge, I will compare him to Eddie Royal. Royal was probably the best rookie wide out last year so we're going under the assumption that Harvin will make an immediate impact. Harvin (Royal) in '08: 32 in DYAR, 47 in DVOA, with 91 catches for 980 yards.
Conclusion: Favre's #1 target in Minnesota will be better than his #1 in New York, but he's going to be throwing to an unproved rookie in '09. If Harvin works out, Favre's recievers will be superior to the ones he had last year. But I made a huge assumption about Harvin, especially considering most rookie wide outs are flops.
Offensive Line: Minnesota had a terrible passing offensive line last year ranked 5th to last in all of the NFL. The NYJ had an average line ranked 18th overall, but still ten spots better than Minnesota. Neither team really made huge positive offensive line moves, in fact, the Vikings LOST their center Matt Birk to free agency. And Birk was far inferior to Jets' Nick Mangold last year.
Conclusion: The offensive line is the essential factor to a QB. In fact, a team can have a great RB (especially one like AP that's good despite, not because, of the o-line) and good receivers and it won't matter if the QB is constantly getting rushed and sacked. But a QB can make a O-line as well. If a QB is good at throwing the ball accurately and early and eluding tackles, the the O-line looks better. So if Brett comes to play for Minnesota, that line will probably look a lot better; however, I see the ceiling no higher than what the Jets were last year. This means that Brett will still probably have a below average O-line, just like last year
Quarterbacks: In this discussion, we're not only talking about how Brett Favre would fare in the purple and black, but how much improvement would that make to Viks. Last year, Minnesota ranked 15th in YPA, 18th in passer rating, and 25th in YPG. This is actually worse than what Farve did. The New York Bretts were 7 spots lower in YPA, 1.3 points lower in passer rating (a 5 ranking drop), although nine spots higher in YPG. Tavaris Jackson was pretty bad last year ranking 25th in DYAR and 17th in DVOA. But Farve wasn't too far ahead ranking 20th in DYAR and actually ranked 9 spots lower than Jackson in DVOA.
Conclusion: Favre was only a little bit better in overall value than Jackson but actually worse on an average individual play. Favre may have posted better individual numbers than Jackson but did so very inefficiently. Although that shouldn't come as a surprise considering that's how come Farve holds the #1 in most categories like TDs and games won (along with INTs). Plus, if you just watched Brett in the second half of the season or looked at box scores, it was painfully obvious he was the sole reason the Jets did not make the playoffs last year.
So now that we have the statistics, what's the final overall conclusion? Although Favre had some nice talent at the RB and WR positions last year, the talent will only increase if he moves from New York to Minnesota. But that's only secondary help. Sure a QB needs other parts to help him out, but the primary factors are the line and the QB himself. And it is in these areas the Vikings are not really improving nor does Brett gain any improvements from last year. It is this that tells me that Brett really won't be a huge factor if and when he comes to the Vikings. And if Brett quits on the Vikings like he did in Minnesota, then that only bodes well for me as a Bears fan.
So for all you other Bears fans, or even bitter Packers fans, I think you need not worry that Brett Favre plays for the Minnesota Vikings.
Luckily, the 2008 New York Jets and the 2009 Minnesota Vikings are very comparable. Both have seemingly below average receivers, an average offensive line, and a great running game. This means it is very easy to see what Brett Favre did last year and translate that to what we will probably be able to do this year.
Running Game: Now if I gave you a choice between Adrian Peterson and Thomas Jones, which RB would you pick? Of course. But in terms of actual production last year, both were very similar. Because of New York's improved O-line, Thomas Jones had a career year last year. In terms of football sabermetric statistics, TJ had a better year with a better DVOA and DYAR than AP. In fact, All Day was just average. But we're talking about the running game in terms of the quarterback. Last year, Minnesota was ranked 5th in YPG and yards(NYJ 9th) but 3rd in attempts (NYJ 19th). Both teams had a very good and effective running game.
Conclusion: If Brett goes to Minnesota, they will probably run the ball more meaning Favre will not have to throw it as much as he did in New York. However, New York was much more effective AT running the ball. So the running game will probably help Favre but in reality, Minnesota's running game is not THAT much of an upgrade.
Receivers: In New York, Favre's main targets were Jericho Cotchery and Lav Coles. Coles was ranked 27th in DVOA, 36th in DVOA, and had 71 catches for 858 yards. Cotchery was ranked 34 in DYAR, 48 in DVOA, and had 70 catches for 850 yards. If Brett comes to Minnesota his main targets will be Bernard Berrian and rookie Percy Harvin. Last year Berrian was 18th in both DYAR and DVOA and 48 catches for 964. While there are obviously no stats on Harvin to judge, I will compare him to Eddie Royal. Royal was probably the best rookie wide out last year so we're going under the assumption that Harvin will make an immediate impact. Harvin (Royal) in '08: 32 in DYAR, 47 in DVOA, with 91 catches for 980 yards.
Conclusion: Favre's #1 target in Minnesota will be better than his #1 in New York, but he's going to be throwing to an unproved rookie in '09. If Harvin works out, Favre's recievers will be superior to the ones he had last year. But I made a huge assumption about Harvin, especially considering most rookie wide outs are flops.
Offensive Line: Minnesota had a terrible passing offensive line last year ranked 5th to last in all of the NFL. The NYJ had an average line ranked 18th overall, but still ten spots better than Minnesota. Neither team really made huge positive offensive line moves, in fact, the Vikings LOST their center Matt Birk to free agency. And Birk was far inferior to Jets' Nick Mangold last year.
Conclusion: The offensive line is the essential factor to a QB. In fact, a team can have a great RB (especially one like AP that's good despite, not because, of the o-line) and good receivers and it won't matter if the QB is constantly getting rushed and sacked. But a QB can make a O-line as well. If a QB is good at throwing the ball accurately and early and eluding tackles, the the O-line looks better. So if Brett comes to play for Minnesota, that line will probably look a lot better; however, I see the ceiling no higher than what the Jets were last year. This means that Brett will still probably have a below average O-line, just like last year
Quarterbacks: In this discussion, we're not only talking about how Brett Favre would fare in the purple and black, but how much improvement would that make to Viks. Last year, Minnesota ranked 15th in YPA, 18th in passer rating, and 25th in YPG. This is actually worse than what Farve did. The New York Bretts were 7 spots lower in YPA, 1.3 points lower in passer rating (a 5 ranking drop), although nine spots higher in YPG. Tavaris Jackson was pretty bad last year ranking 25th in DYAR and 17th in DVOA. But Farve wasn't too far ahead ranking 20th in DYAR and actually ranked 9 spots lower than Jackson in DVOA.
Conclusion: Favre was only a little bit better in overall value than Jackson but actually worse on an average individual play. Favre may have posted better individual numbers than Jackson but did so very inefficiently. Although that shouldn't come as a surprise considering that's how come Farve holds the #1 in most categories like TDs and games won (along with INTs). Plus, if you just watched Brett in the second half of the season or looked at box scores, it was painfully obvious he was the sole reason the Jets did not make the playoffs last year.
So now that we have the statistics, what's the final overall conclusion? Although Favre had some nice talent at the RB and WR positions last year, the talent will only increase if he moves from New York to Minnesota. But that's only secondary help. Sure a QB needs other parts to help him out, but the primary factors are the line and the QB himself. And it is in these areas the Vikings are not really improving nor does Brett gain any improvements from last year. It is this that tells me that Brett really won't be a huge factor if and when he comes to the Vikings. And if Brett quits on the Vikings like he did in Minnesota, then that only bodes well for me as a Bears fan.
So for all you other Bears fans, or even bitter Packers fans, I think you need not worry that Brett Favre plays for the Minnesota Vikings.
Maybe Ross Ohlendorf Can Write For BP
Ohlendorf is a starting pitcher for the Pittsburgh Pirates, a Princeton grad, and probably the smartest player in baseball. Tim Kurkjian actually did something productive (for once) and wrote a great piece about Ohlendorf and his senior thesis about signing bonuses and the draft. This article was actually extremely informative and the conclusion Ohlendorf found: on average, a player brought into the major leagues and given a basic signing bonus was worth. Just go read the actual article.
Medium range jumpers
Most basketball fans have heard the saving "the lost art of the medium range jumper". Basically, what this statement implies is that with the implementation of the 3-point line in the 80's, players focused less on jump shots from 12-18 feet. Players tend to practice ethier the 3 point shot or low post moves, but rarely anything in between. I wanted to explore this issue and figure out if this was fact or fiction.
The best place to explore such issues if the main "sabermetric" basketball site 82games.com. Here we see detailed shooting stats from all regions of the court. If you simply look at the overall shooting percentage, you will find that all but 4 players shot below 40% from the field, ranging from Shaq at 61% all the way down to Baron Davis at 37%. However, big tall players have their percetage inflated due to the high frequency of dunks and layups. We all know shaq couldnt make a 15 foot jumper to save his life. So are NBA players proficient in the medium range shot and who are the best? Only 74 players shot above 40% on 2 point shots outside the paint, just over half of all eligible players with Jason Terry leading the league at 49%. Based on the large number of players shooting above 40% from these intermeidate shots I cant say that it is a "lost art", however many of the games elite players have shockingly low percentages. Lebron shot 37.5, Carmelo shot 37.9, McGrady shot 35, and Iguodala shot 34.8%.
As I have stated before, the skill level in the NBA is other worldly. A guy like tyrus thomas who was fairly dominant in his one year in college due to his freakish athletisims was 4th to last in 2 point shots. If you can't shoot, you really cant play in the NBA. The low percentages of guys like Lebron and Melo is partly due to their shortcomings in that department, but it is also a product of taking so many shots, many of which are bail-out shots at the end of the shot clock. Clearly they make up for it by scoring inside shots and more importantly take 10 free throws a game. Other stars like Bryant, Wade, and Nowitzki shoot in the mid to high 40% range.
The best place to explore such issues if the main "sabermetric" basketball site 82games.com. Here we see detailed shooting stats from all regions of the court. If you simply look at the overall shooting percentage, you will find that all but 4 players shot below 40% from the field, ranging from Shaq at 61% all the way down to Baron Davis at 37%. However, big tall players have their percetage inflated due to the high frequency of dunks and layups. We all know shaq couldnt make a 15 foot jumper to save his life. So are NBA players proficient in the medium range shot and who are the best? Only 74 players shot above 40% on 2 point shots outside the paint, just over half of all eligible players with Jason Terry leading the league at 49%. Based on the large number of players shooting above 40% from these intermeidate shots I cant say that it is a "lost art", however many of the games elite players have shockingly low percentages. Lebron shot 37.5, Carmelo shot 37.9, McGrady shot 35, and Iguodala shot 34.8%.
As I have stated before, the skill level in the NBA is other worldly. A guy like tyrus thomas who was fairly dominant in his one year in college due to his freakish athletisims was 4th to last in 2 point shots. If you can't shoot, you really cant play in the NBA. The low percentages of guys like Lebron and Melo is partly due to their shortcomings in that department, but it is also a product of taking so many shots, many of which are bail-out shots at the end of the shot clock. Clearly they make up for it by scoring inside shots and more importantly take 10 free throws a game. Other stars like Bryant, Wade, and Nowitzki shoot in the mid to high 40% range.
Why does Matthew Berry hate Dan Haren?
In his podcast Fantasy Focus, Matthew Berry has often stated that he has an extreme dislike of Dan Haren because he "can't pitch in the second half." I know that Haren had a comparatively bad second half last season, but as a Haren owner last season, I did not recall Haren ever being truly terrible in the second half. So I took a look at the numbers:
Dan Haren's First Half:
8 W, 2.72 ERA, 125.2 IP, 112 K (8.0 K/BB), 22 BB (1.58 BB/9), 5.09 K/BB, 10 HR (0.72 HR/9), 98 Hits, 0.96 WHIP
Dan Haren's Second Half:
8 W, 4.18 ERA, 90.1 IP, 94 K (9.4 K/9), 18 BB (1.79 BB/9), 5.22 K/BB, 9 HR (0.90 HR/9), 106 Hits, 1.37 WHIP
Yes, from a fantasy perspective, Haren was worse in 2 categories (ERA, WHIP) after the all-star break, but he also improved another category (Ks) and remained consistent in another (Ws). His ERA/WHIP were also very serviceable; a far cry from horrible by any means.
From a real life perspective, Dan Haren was almost as good in the second half as he was in the first half -- just less lucky. Haren's control improved and while the BBs and HRs per nine regressed a little, Haren's peripherals across the board were solid and consistent. If anything got worse, it was the hits rate per nine -- something that Voros McCracken and the minds at BP proved long ago that a pitcher has little, if any control over (although some pitchers -- mainly strikeout pitchers -- do seem to exert more "control" over hits per nine than others).
In fact, Dan Haren's real life career splits look like this:
1st Half
35 W, 3.23 ERA, 599.1 IP, 488 K (7.3 K/9), 134 BB (2.01 BB/9), 3.64 K/BB, 62 HR (0.93 HR/9), 516 Hits, 1.09 WHIP, 3.59 FIP
2nd Half:
34 W, 4.12 ERA, 476 IP, 402 K (7.6K/9), 108 BB (2.04 BB/9), 3.72 K/BB, 60 HR (1.13 HR/9), 524 Hits, 1.33 WHIP, 3.83 FIP
What does this data tell me? Haren is not a second half fizzle. The difference is FIP (0.24 runs per nine) is marginal. Haren gives up a few more HR/9 in the second half, but thats about it. The hits also increase in the second half, but Haren's been in front of some notoriously terrible defensive lineups in Oakland (surprisingly) and Arizona, so he can hardly be blamed for their fielding failures (check the comments for the UZR/150 data of Haren's teams).
Especially in recent years, Haren has been a premier pitching force. His control is Maddux-like and if it weren't for a terrible offense/defense behind him, he would be a perennial Cy Young winner. I think Matthew Berry needs to read this post and apologize.
Perhaps I'll just send this data to him.
Dan Haren's First Half:
8 W, 2.72 ERA, 125.2 IP, 112 K (8.0 K/BB), 22 BB (1.58 BB/9), 5.09 K/BB, 10 HR (0.72 HR/9), 98 Hits, 0.96 WHIP
Dan Haren's Second Half:
8 W, 4.18 ERA, 90.1 IP, 94 K (9.4 K/9), 18 BB (1.79 BB/9), 5.22 K/BB, 9 HR (0.90 HR/9), 106 Hits, 1.37 WHIP
Yes, from a fantasy perspective, Haren was worse in 2 categories (ERA, WHIP) after the all-star break, but he also improved another category (Ks) and remained consistent in another (Ws). His ERA/WHIP were also very serviceable; a far cry from horrible by any means.
From a real life perspective, Dan Haren was almost as good in the second half as he was in the first half -- just less lucky. Haren's control improved and while the BBs and HRs per nine regressed a little, Haren's peripherals across the board were solid and consistent. If anything got worse, it was the hits rate per nine -- something that Voros McCracken and the minds at BP proved long ago that a pitcher has little, if any control over (although some pitchers -- mainly strikeout pitchers -- do seem to exert more "control" over hits per nine than others).
In fact, Dan Haren's real life career splits look like this:
1st Half
35 W, 3.23 ERA, 599.1 IP, 488 K (7.3 K/9), 134 BB (2.01 BB/9), 3.64 K/BB, 62 HR (0.93 HR/9), 516 Hits, 1.09 WHIP, 3.59 FIP
2nd Half:
34 W, 4.12 ERA, 476 IP, 402 K (7.6K/9), 108 BB (2.04 BB/9), 3.72 K/BB, 60 HR (1.13 HR/9), 524 Hits, 1.33 WHIP, 3.83 FIP
What does this data tell me? Haren is not a second half fizzle. The difference is FIP (0.24 runs per nine) is marginal. Haren gives up a few more HR/9 in the second half, but thats about it. The hits also increase in the second half, but Haren's been in front of some notoriously terrible defensive lineups in Oakland (surprisingly) and Arizona, so he can hardly be blamed for their fielding failures (check the comments for the UZR/150 data of Haren's teams).
Especially in recent years, Haren has been a premier pitching force. His control is Maddux-like and if it weren't for a terrible offense/defense behind him, he would be a perennial Cy Young winner. I think Matthew Berry needs to read this post and apologize.
Perhaps I'll just send this data to him.
This Is Why Women Should Never Play Sports
Now I actually am a big proponent of women playing sports and if it wasn't one in the morning I'd write a longer post and explain the title is a joke but...
WNBA reigning ROY and MVP Candice Parker will miss the beginning of the season because she just had a baby.
When LeBron's baby mama was having one of his kids, he was like FUCK YOU, I'M PLAYING IN THE FINALS BITCH! Tom Brady missed the birth of his kid from Michelle Monaghan because his gf at the time and current wife Gisele Bundchen had a birthday that night.
Can you imagine if Peyton Manning said to the Colts, "You know, I mean a lot to this franchise and also to the NFL, but um, yeah give me like 6 weeks so I can lose weight and get into shape, because I just brought a life into this world" Seriously, I know athletes miss time due to injury, but does anyone find this a bit, almost, silly? I wonder if your mom ever asked her work if she could miss time because she sprained her ACL?
WNBA reigning ROY and MVP Candice Parker will miss the beginning of the season because she just had a baby.
When LeBron's baby mama was having one of his kids, he was like FUCK YOU, I'M PLAYING IN THE FINALS BITCH! Tom Brady missed the birth of his kid from Michelle Monaghan because his gf at the time and current wife Gisele Bundchen had a birthday that night.
Can you imagine if Peyton Manning said to the Colts, "You know, I mean a lot to this franchise and also to the NFL, but um, yeah give me like 6 weeks so I can lose weight and get into shape, because I just brought a life into this world" Seriously, I know athletes miss time due to injury, but does anyone find this a bit, almost, silly? I wonder if your mom ever asked her work if she could miss time because she sprained her ACL?
Joe Torre is fucking retarded
Pardon the language, but Joe Torre is fucking retarded. I do not care how many rings he has or postseason teams he has managed. He is a fucking moron.
You do not bat Matt Kemp, who is hitting .311 with a .376 OBP and .481 SLG (.383 wOBA) eighth. Or seventh for that matter.
Matt Kemp has the 3rd highest wOBA among not-suspended starters on the Dodgers. Only Orlando Hudson -- who is pretty good, but not this good -- and Juan Pierre -- who is playing way over his head with a career best .402 wOBA -- have higher wOBAs than Matt Kemp, whose career .360 wOBA and youthful upside makes him a more legitimate threat to continue his offensive production. If anyone not named Manny Ramirez should be batting somewhere in the 3-4-5 hole consistently, it is Matt Kemp, who, by the way, is batting .397 over the past 16 games.
Why is Matt Kemp a good hitter to put in the heart of the order? His prodigious line drive abilities (21.5 career LD%), above average power (.170 ISO, pre-2008 Youkilis-esque), ridiculous speed (7.2 speed score, 8th best in the majors) and increasingly improving pitch recognition (9.4 BB% in 2009) make him a legitimate all-around offensive threat at the plate and on the basepaths.
So why would anyone bat the rapidly declining Russell Martin (.321 wOBA, .050 ISO), the Manny-less Andre Ethier (.346 wOBA, .175 ISO), the laughably unintimidating James Loney (.321 wOBA, .093 ISO) or the abhorrent Rafael Furcal (.256 wOBA, .056 ISO) over Matt Kemp? Simple answer: they are fucking retarded.
Seriously. Joe Torre is a fucking moron.
You do not bat Matt Kemp, who is hitting .311 with a .376 OBP and .481 SLG (.383 wOBA) eighth. Or seventh for that matter.
Matt Kemp has the 3rd highest wOBA among not-suspended starters on the Dodgers. Only Orlando Hudson -- who is pretty good, but not this good -- and Juan Pierre -- who is playing way over his head with a career best .402 wOBA -- have higher wOBAs than Matt Kemp, whose career .360 wOBA and youthful upside makes him a more legitimate threat to continue his offensive production. If anyone not named Manny Ramirez should be batting somewhere in the 3-4-5 hole consistently, it is Matt Kemp, who, by the way, is batting .397 over the past 16 games.
Why is Matt Kemp a good hitter to put in the heart of the order? His prodigious line drive abilities (21.5 career LD%), above average power (.170 ISO, pre-2008 Youkilis-esque), ridiculous speed (7.2 speed score, 8th best in the majors) and increasingly improving pitch recognition (9.4 BB% in 2009) make him a legitimate all-around offensive threat at the plate and on the basepaths.
So why would anyone bat the rapidly declining Russell Martin (.321 wOBA, .050 ISO), the Manny-less Andre Ethier (.346 wOBA, .175 ISO), the laughably unintimidating James Loney (.321 wOBA, .093 ISO) or the abhorrent Rafael Furcal (.256 wOBA, .056 ISO) over Matt Kemp? Simple answer: they are fucking retarded.
Seriously. Joe Torre is a fucking moron.
Why Don't We Care About College Baseball? Part II
I was talking with my brother about this today because college softball was on TV today. He brought up a very good point. I wrote a post speculating why we don't care about college baseball, but he brought up a very good point that I hadn't considered.
The two main colleges sports we care about is football and basketball. But he said that's because those sports originated in the college game and then became professional sports. Football was originally created by the Ivy Leagues schools as an off shoot of rugby. Basketball was created by Dr. James Naismith based off of a childhood game that he perfected while he attended college and subsequently first caught on in college. But baseball did not start off in the college ranks. The MLB has a rich history dating back to the mid to late 1800s and then became a college game.
So throughout history, America has watched college football and basketball and only professional baseball. But because America likes professional more than amateur sports, we of course grew to like the NBA and the NFL (and its professional roots). But since baseball was already professional, America tended to ignore it when collegiate athletes played it. And why should they watch the college ranks, they were essentially already watching the best of the best anyway?
Now I like this theory a lot. But I also think mine theory of the minor league system and foreigners holds its weight as well. Since apparently Baseball Prospectus is losing all of its top talent anyway, maybe they could do a professional historical and sociological study to find the exact causal link. I am really curious about this issue and am open to all legitimate ideas.
Also Journalissimo, maybe if you actually wrote for this blog you could have written this piece, but now I call dibs on all copyright! Woo hoo!
The two main colleges sports we care about is football and basketball. But he said that's because those sports originated in the college game and then became professional sports. Football was originally created by the Ivy Leagues schools as an off shoot of rugby. Basketball was created by Dr. James Naismith based off of a childhood game that he perfected while he attended college and subsequently first caught on in college. But baseball did not start off in the college ranks. The MLB has a rich history dating back to the mid to late 1800s and then became a college game.
So throughout history, America has watched college football and basketball and only professional baseball. But because America likes professional more than amateur sports, we of course grew to like the NBA and the NFL (and its professional roots). But since baseball was already professional, America tended to ignore it when collegiate athletes played it. And why should they watch the college ranks, they were essentially already watching the best of the best anyway?
Now I like this theory a lot. But I also think mine theory of the minor league system and foreigners holds its weight as well. Since apparently Baseball Prospectus is losing all of its top talent anyway, maybe they could do a professional historical and sociological study to find the exact causal link. I am really curious about this issue and am open to all legitimate ideas.
Also Journalissimo, maybe if you actually wrote for this blog you could have written this piece, but now I call dibs on all copyright! Woo hoo!
Is Derrek Rose Smarter Than A Fifth Grader?
Recently reports came out that current NBA Rookie Of The Year and former Memphis star Derrek Rose had someone else take his SAT for him so he could academically qualify to go to school at Memphis. Another report came out today that another former Memphis basketball player Robert Dozier also had someone else take his SAT so he could play college ball. You know what I have to say to that? WHO CARES!
Have you ever had an athlete in one of your classes? Generally speaking, they don't care. It would normally at this time that I would make some claim for the sake of "good journalism" or being "politically correct" or something but no one reads this blog... and what I'm saying is true. I was in a Speech class last semester with a fairly talented and well known WR on the football speech. We had to write a handful of five minute speeches and create a corresponding PowerPoint presentation. This kid made up his speeches on the spot and obviously did his PowerPoints a few hours before he had to deliver his speech. He also did not have a grasp on the English language. He has six siblings. He was raised by a single mother. Now there are obviously many exception to cases like this; however, my description IS the majority.
Football and basketball players, especially those on scholarships or who are good, just don't care about their education. I can guarantee you that Derrek Rose did not care about his education. Derrek was only going to college for one year anyway and only went to college because the NBA told him he had to. Matt Leinart, in order to eligible to play his senior year at USC, only took one class- ballroom dancing with his girlfriend.
Every kid who has the chance to go to college or any institution of higher learning should take advantage of that. Even if you major in a "bullshit" major like art, psychology, communication, or political science, you are still taking courses to educate yourself. On average, people with a bachelor's degree make 2 million more in their lifetime than people who do not. But if any kid chooses not to take advantage of their opportunity while in college, that's their own fault. They are given a great chance, but that's all it is, a chance. No one is forcing these kids really to go to class or educate themselves. If they don't care about their classes, it is nobody's business to judge.
And these kids do not go to college to learn anyway. Sure they have the opportunity to do so, but they don't care about that. They just want to play sports. Right now Memphis is coming under fire because of the educational eligibility of their basketball athletes. But what did John Calipari's kids want to do or care about: basketball. All they wanted to do was win a championship, not learn about stupid things like square roots or the basics of the English language.
I don't think people should get so "worked up" about instances like the ones Memphis is going through. Now, don't get me wrong, I think every single kid should be encouraged to complete their education, but if they don't, don't worry about it.
Have you ever had an athlete in one of your classes? Generally speaking, they don't care. It would normally at this time that I would make some claim for the sake of "good journalism" or being "politically correct" or something but no one reads this blog... and what I'm saying is true. I was in a Speech class last semester with a fairly talented and well known WR on the football speech. We had to write a handful of five minute speeches and create a corresponding PowerPoint presentation. This kid made up his speeches on the spot and obviously did his PowerPoints a few hours before he had to deliver his speech. He also did not have a grasp on the English language. He has six siblings. He was raised by a single mother. Now there are obviously many exception to cases like this; however, my description IS the majority.
Football and basketball players, especially those on scholarships or who are good, just don't care about their education. I can guarantee you that Derrek Rose did not care about his education. Derrek was only going to college for one year anyway and only went to college because the NBA told him he had to. Matt Leinart, in order to eligible to play his senior year at USC, only took one class- ballroom dancing with his girlfriend.
Every kid who has the chance to go to college or any institution of higher learning should take advantage of that. Even if you major in a "bullshit" major like art, psychology, communication, or political science, you are still taking courses to educate yourself. On average, people with a bachelor's degree make 2 million more in their lifetime than people who do not. But if any kid chooses not to take advantage of their opportunity while in college, that's their own fault. They are given a great chance, but that's all it is, a chance. No one is forcing these kids really to go to class or educate themselves. If they don't care about their classes, it is nobody's business to judge.
And these kids do not go to college to learn anyway. Sure they have the opportunity to do so, but they don't care about that. They just want to play sports. Right now Memphis is coming under fire because of the educational eligibility of their basketball athletes. But what did John Calipari's kids want to do or care about: basketball. All they wanted to do was win a championship, not learn about stupid things like square roots or the basics of the English language.
I don't think people should get so "worked up" about instances like the ones Memphis is going through. Now, don't get me wrong, I think every single kid should be encouraged to complete their education, but if they don't, don't worry about it.
Why Am I Still Obsessed With Bill Simmons?
I think Bill Simmons along with fangraphs, anti-grindiness, anti-Yahoo! analysis, anti-ESPN/ baseball tonight, and anti-DME talking about his fantasy baseball teams are all pretty much inside jokes/ common likes among the authors of this blog. DME and mainly TBO have recently gotten me into Bill Simmons podcast The BS Report and now with my new soul crushing job, all I do is listen to podcasts. This means I have gotten all caught up on Mr. Simmons podcasts over the past two months or so. I try and listen to every recent podcast of his and I have come to realization, why do I care to be caught up on BS Reports?
Now obviously Simmons is one of the popular sports personalities and one of the most popular iTunes podcasters and many many many people listen to his podcasts like I have been doing of late. He has seen more movies than maybe even DME and DOES have a very warm and funny personality. But at what point does his content override all?
Especially of late, all Simmons does is talk about basketball. Basketball this and basketball that and he's talking to this basketball player and he's talking to this basketball coach and he's talking to this ESPN guys about basketball. And if he doesn't talk about basketball he's just talking to JackO about the Red Sox and Yankees. The few times he does mention Chicago, or really any midwestern sports team (so like the ONE time he did so), he doesn't really know what the hell he's talking about. You know, for a guy that hates ESPN, he essentially IS ESPN.
Now I understand WHY Simmons talks about basketball. BBall is just Simmons' sport. Everyone has their favorite sport, and basketball is his. He loves the game, watches every game he can, knows practically more than any coach or GM currently in the NBA, and wrote a gigantic ass book called "The Book Of Basketball". But for myself and DME and probably a vast majority of sports fans out there, we don't care about basketball. More people probably care about football, college football, baseball, and college basketball more than they do about the NBA. For TBO and Cubsfan4evr1 (once we get him into Simmons) I'm sure what Simmons' has to say is very interesting and enjoyable. But for myself and I'm millions out there who don't care about basketball, Simmons is actually becoming boring.
And as I briefly alluded to earlier, the other thing Bill Simmons always talks about is Boston. Now I am a HUGE Boston fan. I was born in Boston, my parents were born in Boston and all my family either lives in Boston or was born in Boston. So I have a history in Boston and want Boston to win after my Chi-Town teams. And I even I think Bill Simmons needs to shut the fuck up about Boston, and I've only listened to his podcasts for two months!
Now I think after the basketball and hockey season are over and football and baseball reign supreme, I will enjoy The BS Report again. Now like ESPN, as much as I publicly and privately dislike it, I'll still probably listen to Simmons everyday, but it's still frustrating to me, and right now, I am officially renouncing my Bill Simmons fandom.
For more on me ranting about Simmons, you can listen to my crappy podcast here
Now obviously Simmons is one of the popular sports personalities and one of the most popular iTunes podcasters and many many many people listen to his podcasts like I have been doing of late. He has seen more movies than maybe even DME and DOES have a very warm and funny personality. But at what point does his content override all?
Especially of late, all Simmons does is talk about basketball. Basketball this and basketball that and he's talking to this basketball player and he's talking to this basketball coach and he's talking to this ESPN guys about basketball. And if he doesn't talk about basketball he's just talking to JackO about the Red Sox and Yankees. The few times he does mention Chicago, or really any midwestern sports team (so like the ONE time he did so), he doesn't really know what the hell he's talking about. You know, for a guy that hates ESPN, he essentially IS ESPN.
Now I understand WHY Simmons talks about basketball. BBall is just Simmons' sport. Everyone has their favorite sport, and basketball is his. He loves the game, watches every game he can, knows practically more than any coach or GM currently in the NBA, and wrote a gigantic ass book called "The Book Of Basketball". But for myself and DME and probably a vast majority of sports fans out there, we don't care about basketball. More people probably care about football, college football, baseball, and college basketball more than they do about the NBA. For TBO and Cubsfan4evr1 (once we get him into Simmons) I'm sure what Simmons' has to say is very interesting and enjoyable. But for myself and I'm millions out there who don't care about basketball, Simmons is actually becoming boring.
And as I briefly alluded to earlier, the other thing Bill Simmons always talks about is Boston. Now I am a HUGE Boston fan. I was born in Boston, my parents were born in Boston and all my family either lives in Boston or was born in Boston. So I have a history in Boston and want Boston to win after my Chi-Town teams. And I even I think Bill Simmons needs to shut the fuck up about Boston, and I've only listened to his podcasts for two months!
Now I think after the basketball and hockey season are over and football and baseball reign supreme, I will enjoy The BS Report again. Now like ESPN, as much as I publicly and privately dislike it, I'll still probably listen to Simmons everyday, but it's still frustrating to me, and right now, I am officially renouncing my Bill Simmons fandom.
For more on me ranting about Simmons, you can listen to my crappy podcast here
Carlos Beltran murders daughter
CBS News has the information here.
....yes, yes, its a different Carlos Beltran...I just hadn't posted in a while and had nothing interesting to say today.
....yes, yes, its a different Carlos Beltran...I just hadn't posted in a while and had nothing interesting to say today.
Henry Chadwick would not approve
Just because I no longer write the box score tonight segment does not mean that I no longer study the box scores. Today I noticed something quirky about them. A new category was added to the ESPN box scores that I have never seen before, anywhere. It is #P, which I presume means the total number of pitches seen by every batter in the game. I understand the purpose behind it, players who see a lot of pitches tend to have higher OBP and wear down the pitcher quicker, but I absolutely do not to see this stat every single day. A day by day sample is nearly meaningless as a player could see 25 pitches on game and 5 the next. If I really care, I will simply look up the players P/PA and that will give me a much better understanding of a players plate discipline. In fact, o-swing and z-contact data gives me a much better vision of the players "eye". I truly hope ESPN notices how pointless and inconvenient this stat is and goes back to the original format.
Actually there are several modifications that I would like to see on the ESPN box. First and foremost, we do not need to know the inning, pitcher, count, baserunners of every homerun ever hit. Same goes for stolen bases. We dont need to know which bag was stolen, what catcher, what pitcher. Also, why are homeruns, steals, and RBIs constantly cumulated but runs are not. They need to tell us how many runs all these players have on a daily basis. I couldnt even tell you who leads the league in runs, I would guess Crawford, but I really have no clue. (Ibanez, Scutaro, Roberts are ties for 1st but how the fuck would I know that without looking up the leaderboard every single day). I know Longoria leads in RBIs cause I see it added up every day.
This reminds me of when ESPN added the +/- feature for basketball last season. The difference is that +/- is a very significant stat that actually has significant meaning for every game. I cant say the same about pitches seen. If they want to be super hip and add a new catagory, it should be wOBA
In case anyone is interested, Brandon Morrow leads the league in P/PA among pitchers and Jayson Werth leads in P/PA among hitters
Actually there are several modifications that I would like to see on the ESPN box. First and foremost, we do not need to know the inning, pitcher, count, baserunners of every homerun ever hit. Same goes for stolen bases. We dont need to know which bag was stolen, what catcher, what pitcher. Also, why are homeruns, steals, and RBIs constantly cumulated but runs are not. They need to tell us how many runs all these players have on a daily basis. I couldnt even tell you who leads the league in runs, I would guess Crawford, but I really have no clue. (Ibanez, Scutaro, Roberts are ties for 1st but how the fuck would I know that without looking up the leaderboard every single day). I know Longoria leads in RBIs cause I see it added up every day.
This reminds me of when ESPN added the +/- feature for basketball last season. The difference is that +/- is a very significant stat that actually has significant meaning for every game. I cant say the same about pitches seen. If they want to be super hip and add a new catagory, it should be wOBA
In case anyone is interested, Brandon Morrow leads the league in P/PA among pitchers and Jayson Werth leads in P/PA among hitters
Why Do White Sox Fans Like Scott Podsednik?
Well the answer to this is easy, he's batting (right now because he just got out) .287. Two days ago he was batting .297. Him batting close to .300 is the reason Sox fan love Scotty Pods right now (that and his boyish good looks)
People are still stupid and look at batting average and immediately assuming he's a good player. This upsets so me much! Well not really, but it is still is a bit frustrating to hear people raving about Scotty Pods right now. His career BA is about .270 so that BA is going to go down. But batting average is a meaningless stat, OBP is the one that matters. Scotty Pods' right now is .333. That's terrible, especially for a lead off hitter. Now Pods has never had a good OBP, yet people loved him in the past and that still boggles my mind.
To add insult to injury, the other "skill" Pods has in base stealing. He has a career 71% success rate in stealing bases which is decently good, but that dropped a bit when he came to Chicago. This year he has four stolen bases. But he has been caught three times. That's a 57% SB% this year.
This year Scotty Pods is stealing too much which is hurting the team, his OBP is pretty low (especially for a lead off hitter), and had a OPS+ of 79. Those are terrible terrible numbers, yet White Sox fan still like Scotty Pods.
However, he still is valuable to the team. First of all, Pods has actually been above average defensively posting a 9.6 and 13.2 UZR/150 at LF and CF respectively (although he does have a -3.2 UZR/150 at RF but he only started at right twice and once as a defensive replacement). Secondly, he's better than the other outfielders the Sox have. He's not better than Jermaine Dye and a healthy Carlos Quentin, but he is better than Dewayne Wise and Brian Anderson. So as I previously stated, he may not be good, but he's the best player the ChiSox have right now. And that fact is very disheartening to a White Sox fan such as myself.
So I can see why fans in Chicago are buzzing about Pods during his stint on this 2009 team, but I think these fans need to take what Podsednik is doing right now with a grain of salt.
People are still stupid and look at batting average and immediately assuming he's a good player. This upsets so me much! Well not really, but it is still is a bit frustrating to hear people raving about Scotty Pods right now. His career BA is about .270 so that BA is going to go down. But batting average is a meaningless stat, OBP is the one that matters. Scotty Pods' right now is .333. That's terrible, especially for a lead off hitter. Now Pods has never had a good OBP, yet people loved him in the past and that still boggles my mind.
To add insult to injury, the other "skill" Pods has in base stealing. He has a career 71% success rate in stealing bases which is decently good, but that dropped a bit when he came to Chicago. This year he has four stolen bases. But he has been caught three times. That's a 57% SB% this year.
This year Scotty Pods is stealing too much which is hurting the team, his OBP is pretty low (especially for a lead off hitter), and had a OPS+ of 79. Those are terrible terrible numbers, yet White Sox fan still like Scotty Pods.
However, he still is valuable to the team. First of all, Pods has actually been above average defensively posting a 9.6 and 13.2 UZR/150 at LF and CF respectively (although he does have a -3.2 UZR/150 at RF but he only started at right twice and once as a defensive replacement). Secondly, he's better than the other outfielders the Sox have. He's not better than Jermaine Dye and a healthy Carlos Quentin, but he is better than Dewayne Wise and Brian Anderson. So as I previously stated, he may not be good, but he's the best player the ChiSox have right now. And that fact is very disheartening to a White Sox fan such as myself.
So I can see why fans in Chicago are buzzing about Pods during his stint on this 2009 team, but I think these fans need to take what Podsednik is doing right now with a grain of salt.
The Actual All-Star Team
I'm expecting at least one argument from DME, but if the All-Star game was tomorrow and there wasn't the rule where a member from every team had to have a representative, here's how my team would look like:
AL:
C- V-Mart
1B- Kevin Youkilis
2B- Ian Kinsler
SS- Jason Bartlett
3B- Russel Branyan (yes, over Longoria)
OF- Jason Bay
OF- Adam Jones
OF- Carl Crawford
SP- Zach Grienke
SP- Justin Verlander
SP- Edwin Jackson
RP- Frank Fransisco
RP- Papelbon
RP- Matt Thorton (without my ChSox bias- Fernando Rodney)
P- Erik Bedard
P- Jered Weaver
P- Roy Halladay
P- Mark Buerhle
NL:
C- Pudge
1B- Pujols
2B- Chase Utley
3B- Ryan Zimmerman
SS- HanRam
OF- Raul Ibanez
OF- Carlos Beltran
OF- Brad Hawpe
SP- W-Rod
SP- Johan Santana
SP- Dan Haren
RP- Fransisco Cordero
RP- K-Rod
RP- Trevor Hoffman
P- Johnny Cueto
P- Tim Linececum
P- Javy Vazquez
P- The Buzzsaw
AL:
C- V-Mart
1B- Kevin Youkilis
2B- Ian Kinsler
SS- Jason Bartlett
3B- Russel Branyan (yes, over Longoria)
OF- Jason Bay
OF- Adam Jones
OF- Carl Crawford
SP- Zach Grienke
SP- Justin Verlander
SP- Edwin Jackson
RP- Frank Fransisco
RP- Papelbon
RP- Matt Thorton (without my ChSox bias- Fernando Rodney)
P- Erik Bedard
P- Jered Weaver
P- Roy Halladay
P- Mark Buerhle
NL:
C- Pudge
1B- Pujols
2B- Chase Utley
3B- Ryan Zimmerman
SS- HanRam
OF- Raul Ibanez
OF- Carlos Beltran
OF- Brad Hawpe
SP- W-Rod
SP- Johan Santana
SP- Dan Haren
RP- Fransisco Cordero
RP- K-Rod
RP- Trevor Hoffman
P- Johnny Cueto
P- Tim Linececum
P- Javy Vazquez
P- The Buzzsaw
My reverse all-star team
Using the format and rules of Fantasyland 2 (the pay league), I've created the exact opposite of a good team. It's so terrible that it couldn't possibly be any worse. Go ahead, make suggestions!
C-Jason Kendall
1B-Travis Ishikawa
2B-Jose Lopez
SS-Orlando Cabrera
3B-Adrian Beltre
OF-Chris Young
OF-Delmon Young
OF-Jeff Francoeur
UTIL-David Ortiz
SP-Manny Parra
SP-Oliver Perez
SP-Carlos Silva
RP-Kevin Gregg
RP-Joel Hanrahan
P-Bronson Arroyo
P-Fausto Carmona
P-Ian Snell
P-Manny Corpas
BN-Jamie Moyer
BN-Brandon Morrow
BN-Kip Wells
BN-Josh Fields
BN-Troy Tulowitzki
C-Jason Kendall
1B-Travis Ishikawa
2B-Jose Lopez
SS-Orlando Cabrera
3B-Adrian Beltre
OF-Chris Young
OF-Delmon Young
OF-Jeff Francoeur
UTIL-David Ortiz
SP-Manny Parra
SP-Oliver Perez
SP-Carlos Silva
RP-Kevin Gregg
RP-Joel Hanrahan
P-Bronson Arroyo
P-Fausto Carmona
P-Ian Snell
P-Manny Corpas
BN-Jamie Moyer
BN-Brandon Morrow
BN-Kip Wells
BN-Josh Fields
BN-Troy Tulowitzki
Interesting BP article about catchers
I was reading some old baseball links I bookmarked over the past two years and came across this analysis of catchers and thought it would be interesting to share.
BP concluded that
This data just reinforces why Russell Martin, who caught 151+ games each of the past two seasons, has seen his ISO fall from .176 to .116 to .052 and his speed score drop from 5.2 to 4.0 to 3.6 since 2007.
BP concluded that
"...we should abandon the idea of catchers developing more slowly, and recognize that the physical demands of the position will tend to reduce both the length of their peaks and the length of their careers"
This data just reinforces why Russell Martin, who caught 151+ games each of the past two seasons, has seen his ISO fall from .176 to .116 to .052 and his speed score drop from 5.2 to 4.0 to 3.6 since 2007.
Sometimes right, sometimes wrong
The season is now two months over and its reflection time. Here is a look at 10 things I got right and 10 things I got miserably wrong during the pre-season:
Things I got right:
10 - Javier Vazquez returns to dominance following the league switch, change of scenery and defensive upgrade
09 - Erik Bedard has a healthy, effective season
08 - Nelson Cruz is a .275, 35 HR, 20 SB hitter (he's on pace for 42 HR, 27 SB)
07 - Roy Oswalt is overrated and on the decline (look at the three year trend in homers)
06 - Denard Span wins the third OF job and dominates (that Santana trade looks worse every day)
05 - DO NOT OVERPAY FOR SAVES (earlier round guys like BJ Ryan, Jose Valverde and Joakim Soria have all gone on the DL (and/or lost their closer jobs), while late round guys like Brian Wilson, Matt Lindstrom and Heath Bell all have double digits saves and plenty of job security)
04 - Gavin Floyd is not very good (his 9.5% HR/FB rate on the season is 1.5% below last year's mark and the league average)
03 - Dan Haren is the best value pitcher on draft day (the Ws have been slow to come, but who can argue against a 7.89 K/BB, 9 K/9 and 2.54 ERA? Answer: Matthew Berry)
02 - Matt Kemp hits like gangbusters (Joe Torre is a fucking moron for batting Kemp in the 7/8 holes. With a 19.5 LD%, 7.3 speed score, Kemp can sustain the .387 BABIP. His 20/35 power/speed combo is matched by very few)
01 - Justin Verlander is deadly (the day I wrote this post is the day Justin Verlander turned his whole season around. In May, he posted a 1.52 ERA, 5 Ws and 5.09 K/BB (56 Ks) in 41.1 IP. That's Greinke-like)
Things I got horribly wrong:
10 - Do not believe in Edwin Jackson (I sold him for Scott Baker three starts in to the season, woe is me)
09 - Dan Uggla will hit 30 HR and no worse than .265 (he's on pace for the homers, but the BA is wicked terrible)
08 - Chone Figgins is not very good anymore (.296 BA, 20 SB this season)
07 - Ortiz in round 5 is VALUE (I'm so glad someone valued him as a 4th round pick, or I'd be the idiot with Papi Lite)
06 - Brandon Morrow as a guaranteed closer/starter (Not a starter, not a closer, still throws 100 though)
05 - Manny Parra is a top tier sleeper (Fuck the Ks and GBs. The BBs are evil. He burned me so bad that I dropped him. Then he had five great starts in a row and someone else in the league picked him up. He has a 9.5 ERA in his last 10 IP)
04 - Jason Motte will close (who would have thunk Ryan Franklin could strike so many guys out with his six below average pitches)
03 - Joe Mauer is a waste of my time (he's hitting .400+ with 11 home runs. I don't think he hits more than 25 this season, but man is he on fire. Who could have predicted this kind of production from an injury concern who has never hit more than 13 homers in a season and sports a .153 career ISO?)
02 - Rich Harden gets 250 Ks this season (surprise surprise, Harden's back on the DL. At least it's not his elbow/shoulder)
01 - Evan Longoria and Kevin Youkilis are overrated (Longoria leads the league in R+RBI and Youkilis, who never posted a .180+ ISO before 2009, now leads the majors in wOBA)
I also totally called that Richie Sexon sucks and will continue to suck his way out of baseball, but I technically called that one long, long ago...
Things I got right:
10 - Javier Vazquez returns to dominance following the league switch, change of scenery and defensive upgrade
09 - Erik Bedard has a healthy, effective season
08 - Nelson Cruz is a .275, 35 HR, 20 SB hitter (he's on pace for 42 HR, 27 SB)
07 - Roy Oswalt is overrated and on the decline (look at the three year trend in homers)
06 - Denard Span wins the third OF job and dominates (that Santana trade looks worse every day)
05 - DO NOT OVERPAY FOR SAVES (earlier round guys like BJ Ryan, Jose Valverde and Joakim Soria have all gone on the DL (and/or lost their closer jobs), while late round guys like Brian Wilson, Matt Lindstrom and Heath Bell all have double digits saves and plenty of job security)
04 - Gavin Floyd is not very good (his 9.5% HR/FB rate on the season is 1.5% below last year's mark and the league average)
03 - Dan Haren is the best value pitcher on draft day (the Ws have been slow to come, but who can argue against a 7.89 K/BB, 9 K/9 and 2.54 ERA? Answer: Matthew Berry)
02 - Matt Kemp hits like gangbusters (Joe Torre is a fucking moron for batting Kemp in the 7/8 holes. With a 19.5 LD%, 7.3 speed score, Kemp can sustain the .387 BABIP. His 20/35 power/speed combo is matched by very few)
01 - Justin Verlander is deadly (the day I wrote this post is the day Justin Verlander turned his whole season around. In May, he posted a 1.52 ERA, 5 Ws and 5.09 K/BB (56 Ks) in 41.1 IP. That's Greinke-like)
Things I got horribly wrong:
10 - Do not believe in Edwin Jackson (I sold him for Scott Baker three starts in to the season, woe is me)
09 - Dan Uggla will hit 30 HR and no worse than .265 (he's on pace for the homers, but the BA is wicked terrible)
08 - Chone Figgins is not very good anymore (.296 BA, 20 SB this season)
07 - Ortiz in round 5 is VALUE (I'm so glad someone valued him as a 4th round pick, or I'd be the idiot with Papi Lite)
06 - Brandon Morrow as a guaranteed closer/starter (Not a starter, not a closer, still throws 100 though)
05 - Manny Parra is a top tier sleeper (Fuck the Ks and GBs. The BBs are evil. He burned me so bad that I dropped him. Then he had five great starts in a row and someone else in the league picked him up. He has a 9.5 ERA in his last 10 IP)
04 - Jason Motte will close (who would have thunk Ryan Franklin could strike so many guys out with his six below average pitches)
03 - Joe Mauer is a waste of my time (he's hitting .400+ with 11 home runs. I don't think he hits more than 25 this season, but man is he on fire. Who could have predicted this kind of production from an injury concern who has never hit more than 13 homers in a season and sports a .153 career ISO?)
02 - Rich Harden gets 250 Ks this season (surprise surprise, Harden's back on the DL. At least it's not his elbow/shoulder)
01 - Evan Longoria and Kevin Youkilis are overrated (Longoria leads the league in R+RBI and Youkilis, who never posted a .180+ ISO before 2009, now leads the majors in wOBA)
I also totally called that Richie Sexon sucks and will continue to suck his way out of baseball, but I technically called that one long, long ago...
Is Randy Johnson done?
One win shy of the 300 mark, many people are asking the question of questions: is Randy Johnson done? With regards to the big unit, is there any remaining or relevant value to either fantasy and real baseball teams alike? The minds over at Fangraphs think so.
So far this season, Johnson has posted career lows in ERA (5.71), FIP (4.68) and HR/9 (1.73). His BB/9 (3.27) is the worst its been in over a decade. Since his breakout season in 2003, Big Unit has only thrice posted a K/BB below 3 -- in 1994, with the Yankees (he previous career worst season) in 2006 and now this season. Furthermore, Johnson's BABIP of .321, though slightly unlucky (Career .302 BABIP), and 83% LOB (very lucky -- league average is 72%) is no sign of relief and better waters to come for those expecting a bounce back in Randy Johnson's numbers.
Even below the surface, the 45 year old strikeout pitcher, who is chasing his milestone mark in wins this season, seems to be on a rapid decline and on the quick train to retirement by the end of the season. All hope for recovery is lost and you should drop/salvage any value you can for Randy Johnson, right?
WRONG.
The Big Unit's slider may be down 1.5 MPH from two seasons ago, but the rest of his repetition is still in fine shape. Johnson's K/9 (9.35) has improved compared to last season (8.46 mark in 2008) and it is the second highest its been since 2004. The walks rate for the season may look "ugly" (if 3.29 BB/9 can truly be called ugly), but 13 of Johnson's 19 free passes this season came in the 19 innings (6.16 BB/9) he threw during the month of April. Since, the beginning of May, Johnson has walked just 6 in 33 IP (1.67 BB/9) and posted an unsustainably unlucky .394 BABIP (Big Unit's xBABIP for the season is .306). In fact, Big Unit's K/BB for the month of May has been a robust 5.5, nothing to sneer at.
But what about the home runs? Sure as rain, the long ball has been Randy Johnson's biggest enemy this season. With a HR/9 of 1.73, only a handful of pitchers (10 to be exact) have given up more homers per nine than Big Unit (and among them, we find the likes of Brett Myers (2.40) and Scott Baker (2.39)). However, Randy Johnson isn't exactly a flyball pitcher. In his long and illustrious career, 8 seasons of which he spent in the Arizona desert, Randy Johnson has never (before this season) given up more than 1.28 HR/9. Even in the home run inflating heat and humidity of Chase Field, Johnson's HR/9 rate remained within reason at an even 1.0 HR/9 (163 HR over 1630 IP on the Dbacks).
This season, Big Unit's GB/FB rate is up a full 33% (1.36, the highest since 2002), but the balls are still flying out of the yard with more frequency -- despite the move from hitter friendly Chase Field to the significantly more neutral AT&T park. This, combined with a 20% HR/FB rate (league average is 11%) screams one thing: Randy Johnson is getting ridiculously unlucky and is incredibly undervalued. The 4.68 FIP may be scary, but the 3.47 xFIP (which normalizes HR rates) is not.
Unlike Ricky Nolasco (4.3 xFIP), whom fantasy owners and fantasy analysts still believe in (thanks to a 3+ K/BB and .400 BABIP) and value (believe me, I've tried aggressively to acquire him), Randy Johnson is getting no confidence from anyone (including ZiPS, who predicts a 4.63 ERA and 1.43 HR/9 rate going forward).
If there's anyone in baseball whose bound to get better and can be had at a deep discount, it's Randy Johnson.
So far this season, Johnson has posted career lows in ERA (5.71), FIP (4.68) and HR/9 (1.73). His BB/9 (3.27) is the worst its been in over a decade. Since his breakout season in 2003, Big Unit has only thrice posted a K/BB below 3 -- in 1994, with the Yankees (he previous career worst season) in 2006 and now this season. Furthermore, Johnson's BABIP of .321, though slightly unlucky (Career .302 BABIP), and 83% LOB (very lucky -- league average is 72%) is no sign of relief and better waters to come for those expecting a bounce back in Randy Johnson's numbers.
Even below the surface, the 45 year old strikeout pitcher, who is chasing his milestone mark in wins this season, seems to be on a rapid decline and on the quick train to retirement by the end of the season. All hope for recovery is lost and you should drop/salvage any value you can for Randy Johnson, right?
WRONG.
The Big Unit's slider may be down 1.5 MPH from two seasons ago, but the rest of his repetition is still in fine shape. Johnson's K/9 (9.35) has improved compared to last season (8.46 mark in 2008) and it is the second highest its been since 2004. The walks rate for the season may look "ugly" (if 3.29 BB/9 can truly be called ugly), but 13 of Johnson's 19 free passes this season came in the 19 innings (6.16 BB/9) he threw during the month of April. Since, the beginning of May, Johnson has walked just 6 in 33 IP (1.67 BB/9) and posted an unsustainably unlucky .394 BABIP (Big Unit's xBABIP for the season is .306). In fact, Big Unit's K/BB for the month of May has been a robust 5.5, nothing to sneer at.
But what about the home runs? Sure as rain, the long ball has been Randy Johnson's biggest enemy this season. With a HR/9 of 1.73, only a handful of pitchers (10 to be exact) have given up more homers per nine than Big Unit (and among them, we find the likes of Brett Myers (2.40) and Scott Baker (2.39)). However, Randy Johnson isn't exactly a flyball pitcher. In his long and illustrious career, 8 seasons of which he spent in the Arizona desert, Randy Johnson has never (before this season) given up more than 1.28 HR/9. Even in the home run inflating heat and humidity of Chase Field, Johnson's HR/9 rate remained within reason at an even 1.0 HR/9 (163 HR over 1630 IP on the Dbacks).
This season, Big Unit's GB/FB rate is up a full 33% (1.36, the highest since 2002), but the balls are still flying out of the yard with more frequency -- despite the move from hitter friendly Chase Field to the significantly more neutral AT&T park. This, combined with a 20% HR/FB rate (league average is 11%) screams one thing: Randy Johnson is getting ridiculously unlucky and is incredibly undervalued. The 4.68 FIP may be scary, but the 3.47 xFIP (which normalizes HR rates) is not.
Unlike Ricky Nolasco (4.3 xFIP), whom fantasy owners and fantasy analysts still believe in (thanks to a 3+ K/BB and .400 BABIP) and value (believe me, I've tried aggressively to acquire him), Randy Johnson is getting no confidence from anyone (including ZiPS, who predicts a 4.63 ERA and 1.43 HR/9 rate going forward).
If there's anyone in baseball whose bound to get better and can be had at a deep discount, it's Randy Johnson.
