There has been some off-season discussion about teams looking to upgrade with patient batters who can work a count, and get on base. The "quality at-bat" may be a misnomer unless the at-bats leads to runs scored.
In 2011, the NL Central teams had the following statistics:
Team Runs Scored Plate Appearances
Reds 735 6328
Brewers 721 6113
Cards 762 6242
Pirates 610 6063
Astros 615 6148
Cubs 654 6128
How many plate appearances generated a run scored?
Team RS/ PA PA/RS
Reds 735/6328 8.61
Brewers 721/6113 8.48
Cards 762/6242 8.19
Pirates 610/6063 9.94
Astros 615/6148 9.99
Cubs 654/ 6128 9.37
But how "efficient" were teams in producing runs per plate appearance?
Which teams scored more runs per plate appearance?
Team RS/ PA RS/PA
Reds 735/6328 0.116
Brewers 721/6113 0.118
Cards 762/6242 0.122
Pirates 610/6063 0.100
Astros 615/6148 0.100
Cubs 654/ 6128 0.107
The Cardinals, who finished second with 90 wins, scored almost 20% more runs than the Pirates (72 wins) and the Astros (56 wins). The Cards were 3.4% more efficient in their team at-bats than the first place Brewers (96 wins) who were close to efficiency of the Reds (79 wins). To look at it another way, it took the Astros almost 2 more at-bats than the Cardinals to score a run. It took the Cubs almost 1.33 more at-bats than the Cardinals to score a run.
January 20, 2012
January 18, 2012
ARBITRATION
Major league general managers have this point of personal pride of not having players test their judgment or authority by going to a salary arbitration hearing. Former Cubs GM Jim Hendry was boastful about his signing record, until Ryan Theriot refused his offer and went to arbitration (and lost). Within the year, Theriot was traded by the Cubs, which some may not see as a "cause and effect" move while others will say the message was pretty clear. Hendry demanded loyalty.
New Cubs GM Theo Epstein has a record of never having a player go to an arbitration hearing. The Cubs had seven eligible players. The Cubs settled six of the seven before the deadline to submit salary figures. Starting pitcher Matt Garza was the lone Cub hold-out. Garza had been the center of attention in trade talks to the Tigers and Yankees. Then the Yankees made a blockbuster prospect deal with the Mariners to find a young stud starter, and then the Tigers shifted emphasis to acquiring a replacement bat for injured DH Victor Martinez. Garza, 28, is the Cubs #1 starter by a wide margin. And Garza and his agent expect to be paid like a top tier starter.
Which brings into play the illogical disconnect and inconsistency of arbitration demands and negotiated salaries. In the arbitration procedure, the player submits a sum for a one year deal, and the team submits its figure. The arbitrator hears evidence from both sides then picks which number is the best fit for based on that evidence. It is either the player's or the owner's number that wins out. It is the roll of the loaded dice. However, both sides can settle the case before an award is decided.
The baseball community was that Garza would get between $8 to $9 million in an arbitration. The consensus was $8.75 million. Garza made $5.95 million last season.
Garza has submitted a figure of $12.5 million, which is a 111.9 percent raise from 2011. The Cubs submitted a figure of $7.95 million, which is a 33.9 percent raise from 2011. No one will be sponsoring a tag day for Garza if he loses the arbitration, but the difference between the two valuations is quite wide. If the consensus is the fair market valuation for Garza, it is more probable he would not win the arbitration. However, veteran 4th starters commanded more than $10 million in free agency this off season.
By comparison, Epstein and Hoyer re-signed the other arbitration players (arbitration year) (consensus award amount) in this fashion:
* Jeff Baker (3rd year): $1.4m; signed for $1.375m (17% raise)
* Blake DeWitt (1st year): $1.2m; signed for $1.1m (139% raise)
* Matt Garza (3rd year): $8.7m NO DEAL
* Geovany Soto (2nd year): $4m; signed for $4.3m (43.33% raise)
* Ian Stewart (2nd year): $2.3m; signed for $2.237 (0.4% raise)
* Chris Volstad (1st year): $2.7m; signed for $2.655m (497% raise)
* Randy Wells (1st year): $2.2m signed for $2.705m (470% raise)
In the real world, none of these players would deserve a raise based upon their 2011 performance. But this is baseball, a fantasy league within itself.
If you use the measure how management values its employees by how BIG a raise they grant, then by that measure, Epstein and Hoyer value Volstad, Wells and DeWitt more than Garza. The Cubs pretty much hit consensus marks on all their arbitration players except Wells, for whom they will pay 23% more than expected for a pitcher that may not even be the team's fifth starter (current rotation projection is Garza, Maholm, Dempster, T. Wood and Volstad). Of course, that changes if Garza is traded, which is now more likely based upon the gulf between the two arbitration figures. If Garza wins the arbitration, it makes him harder to trade.
New Cubs GM Theo Epstein has a record of never having a player go to an arbitration hearing. The Cubs had seven eligible players. The Cubs settled six of the seven before the deadline to submit salary figures. Starting pitcher Matt Garza was the lone Cub hold-out. Garza had been the center of attention in trade talks to the Tigers and Yankees. Then the Yankees made a blockbuster prospect deal with the Mariners to find a young stud starter, and then the Tigers shifted emphasis to acquiring a replacement bat for injured DH Victor Martinez. Garza, 28, is the Cubs #1 starter by a wide margin. And Garza and his agent expect to be paid like a top tier starter.
Which brings into play the illogical disconnect and inconsistency of arbitration demands and negotiated salaries. In the arbitration procedure, the player submits a sum for a one year deal, and the team submits its figure. The arbitrator hears evidence from both sides then picks which number is the best fit for based on that evidence. It is either the player's or the owner's number that wins out. It is the roll of the loaded dice. However, both sides can settle the case before an award is decided.
The baseball community was that Garza would get between $8 to $9 million in an arbitration. The consensus was $8.75 million. Garza made $5.95 million last season.
Garza has submitted a figure of $12.5 million, which is a 111.9 percent raise from 2011. The Cubs submitted a figure of $7.95 million, which is a 33.9 percent raise from 2011. No one will be sponsoring a tag day for Garza if he loses the arbitration, but the difference between the two valuations is quite wide. If the consensus is the fair market valuation for Garza, it is more probable he would not win the arbitration. However, veteran 4th starters commanded more than $10 million in free agency this off season.
By comparison, Epstein and Hoyer re-signed the other arbitration players (arbitration year) (consensus award amount) in this fashion:
* Jeff Baker (3rd year): $1.4m; signed for $1.375m (17% raise)
* Blake DeWitt (1st year): $1.2m; signed for $1.1m (139% raise)
* Matt Garza (3rd year): $8.7m NO DEAL
* Geovany Soto (2nd year): $4m; signed for $4.3m (43.33% raise)
* Ian Stewart (2nd year): $2.3m; signed for $2.237 (0.4% raise)
* Chris Volstad (1st year): $2.7m; signed for $2.655m (497% raise)
* Randy Wells (1st year): $2.2m signed for $2.705m (470% raise)
In the real world, none of these players would deserve a raise based upon their 2011 performance. But this is baseball, a fantasy league within itself.
If you use the measure how management values its employees by how BIG a raise they grant, then by that measure, Epstein and Hoyer value Volstad, Wells and DeWitt more than Garza. The Cubs pretty much hit consensus marks on all their arbitration players except Wells, for whom they will pay 23% more than expected for a pitcher that may not even be the team's fifth starter (current rotation projection is Garza, Maholm, Dempster, T. Wood and Volstad). Of course, that changes if Garza is traded, which is now more likely based upon the gulf between the two arbitration figures. If Garza wins the arbitration, it makes him harder to trade.
January 16, 2012
NEW OLD EMPHASIS
 |
| New Wrigley RF scoreboard bleacher project |
New owner Tom Ricketts is apparently falling into the same renovation trap, with the same old emphasis of creating more business revenue.
The announcement of the new 10 foot by 75 foot LED scoreboard in right field was clearly to increase advertising dollars at Wrigley Field. This park has the least amount of ad signage in the major leagues. After the brouhaha of the LF fence Toyota sign, the flood gates were open for more marketing prospects. Traditionalists will curse the conventions of advertising banners within the confines of their baseball cathedral.
This new RF building project falls under the domain of business operations maven, Crane Kenney. He is the one who announced it at the Cub convention. This is a revenue enhancement so he believes that he controls it. But this project will cost money that Ricketts claimed months ago he did not have (he asked the state and city for hundreds of millions of tax dollars for renovations for Wrigley and the Triangle parcel). This is on top of Ricketts family buying the McDonald's property across the street from Wrigley for approximately $23 million.
The new RF stands replaces the current 107 group box seats with 150 group seats and standing room party patio (sponsored, of course). No ticket prices were announced for this new area, but speculation is that it will be in the neighborhood of Red Sox Monster seats of $117.00. Ricketts obsession with the Red Sox is apparent in this out of character multilayered six to seven foot mini-wall seat tiers. (The artist rendering is so bad and amateurish it is hard to see the proper dimensions in perspective.)
The Wedge looks to have the following shape: the RF wall is approximately 16 ft. tall. The new scoreboard dimension are 10 ft tall by 75 ft. wide. On top of the scoreboard is the first section which is backed by an apparent 6 foot plus wall; on top of that wall is more seating backed by another 6 foot plus wall; which leads up 3 or 4 feet to a patio section. The artist's rendering shows this wedge at a vertigo incline of 45 degrees. If you add up these wedge segments, this new structure would rise minimally 42 to 45 feet about the field. That is putting up a 4.5 story building in the RF corner of Wrigley. What will be clear is that the eye-sore underside steel girders will be visible to the homeowners on Sheffield Avenue. All this construction to add 43 seats and standing room area?
The old RF box seats, even if using the overall average ticket price of $85, equated to $9,095.00 per game. However, this section was rarely sold out last season. If you have 150 new party seats at $117, you could command $17,550.00 per game. If you could sell out the new party patio for 162 games, the revenue increase would be $1.37 million. But who would pay more than the people in the bleachers in the right center field bleacher section, who would be at a more gradual eye level to the playing field? And how many years (decades?) will the increase in revenue pay off the construction costs?
It seems Ricketts is more focused in on adding Wrigley amenities or vending locations than sinking money in the actual ball club, i.e. player payroll. The current Cub payroll will be down from $140 million in 2011 to approximately $100 million for 2012. One can readily see that the payroll differential has been spent on new executives, land acquisition and Wrigley Field projects.
Most Cub fans at the team convention were hyped up by the new regime's "rebuilding" mantra to be lulled into another off-season of the rhetoric of hope and a competitive team.
January 14, 2012
CHOP WOOD, TIMBER!
Theo Epstein threw away his principles and long term blueprint last night
when he announced the return to the mass of delusional sentimental fans
of KId K. It had to be on Friday the 13th. It had to be at the Cub convention.
It had to give the attendees some warm and fuzzy overtones of their past idols.
What the hell?
Again, what the hell?
A 34 year old relief pitcher coming off another knee surgery gets $3 million
while the New Management has no qualms about trading away the best
left handed reliever in MLB (Sean Marshall)?
Kerry Wood got Marshall's money, simple as that. But Marshall is a better pitcher - - -
well, he does not have a 14 year old 20 strikeout performance against a hapless
overjuiced Astros lineup on the old short and tattered resume that is Kerry Wood.
So the Cubs are back to PR moves instead of baseball moves. This has the
smell of a Ricketts-Kenney-old Tribune marketing intervention in order to put
lipstick on a pig before the prom.
But what misplaced loyalty. This is another blindsided slap at Ryne Sandberg.
He never got the respect from ownership or new management. Epstein announced
before the managerial search began that Sandberg was not a candidate. Why?
He had only won 4 years straight in the minors, with two championships. He had
paid his dues. He was loyal to the Cubs organization. He is a Hall of Famer!
And he is a fan favorite. But somehow, all these good works makes Sandberg
unqualified to be a manager. But somehow, Wood's total career of major disappointments,
blown expectations, injury plagued seasons is more important public relations
hiring a former manager who has shown clear success in winning to manage the Cubs.
This also puts Garza on the next plane out of town, for Maholm's $4.75 million plus
Wood's $3 million equals Garza's 2012 projected salary. In a zero sum game that the
Cubs payroll is going to be, PR wins out over performance, again.
when he announced the return to the mass of delusional sentimental fans
of KId K. It had to be on Friday the 13th. It had to be at the Cub convention.
It had to give the attendees some warm and fuzzy overtones of their past idols.
What the hell?
Again, what the hell?
A 34 year old relief pitcher coming off another knee surgery gets $3 million
while the New Management has no qualms about trading away the best
left handed reliever in MLB (Sean Marshall)?
Kerry Wood got Marshall's money, simple as that. But Marshall is a better pitcher - - -
well, he does not have a 14 year old 20 strikeout performance against a hapless
overjuiced Astros lineup on the old short and tattered resume that is Kerry Wood.
So the Cubs are back to PR moves instead of baseball moves. This has the
smell of a Ricketts-Kenney-old Tribune marketing intervention in order to put
lipstick on a pig before the prom.
But what misplaced loyalty. This is another blindsided slap at Ryne Sandberg.
He never got the respect from ownership or new management. Epstein announced
before the managerial search began that Sandberg was not a candidate. Why?
He had only won 4 years straight in the minors, with two championships. He had
paid his dues. He was loyal to the Cubs organization. He is a Hall of Famer!
And he is a fan favorite. But somehow, all these good works makes Sandberg
unqualified to be a manager. But somehow, Wood's total career of major disappointments,
blown expectations, injury plagued seasons is more important public relations
hiring a former manager who has shown clear success in winning to manage the Cubs.
This also puts Garza on the next plane out of town, for Maholm's $4.75 million plus
Wood's $3 million equals Garza's 2012 projected salary. In a zero sum game that the
Cubs payroll is going to be, PR wins out over performance, again.
This also puts more pressure on James Russell in the bullpen. As the only projected
left handed reliever, he must suddenly turn into the Next Sean Marshall. In a hurry.
Russell appeared in 64 games, 1-6 record, 4.12 ERA in 67.2 IP. He gave up 37 runs,
had a WHIP of 1.330, with 43 K and 14 BB.
Marshall appeared in 78 games, 6-6 record with 5 saves, 2.26 ERA in 75.2 IP. Marshall
gave up 21 runs, had a stellar WHIP of 1.097, with 79 K and 17 BB.
Russell needs to pitch 21% more innings at the same time cut down on runs allowed by
43% in order to come close to Marshall's performance.
January 13, 2012
CHOP WOOD
There is so much media and fan torch and pitchfork yelling about the Cubs not re-signing Kerry Wood for 2012. Whatever the side deal Wood had with Jim Hendry to return at a discount for 2011 is water under the bridge. New management. New Day. New payroll budget which is shaping up to be dramatically less than 2011. Epstein and Hoyer have already turned over 25% of the Cubs end season 40 man roster. The dead wood is being burned quickly as everyone can see that 2012 is going to be a Lost Season.
It is reported that Wood wanted a multi-year deal at $4 million per season. The Cubs have said they have made him an offer with a "substantial raise." It must not be substantial enough for the current "Mr. Cub" in some fan's eyes. But if one takes off the rose colored glasses, is Wood taking a roster spot at $3-$4 million a long term step to improve the club or just short term fan service? To sign Wood now would mean the Cubs bullpen would have only one lefty reliever (Russell) instead of the projected two (Maine). The idea of blocking a young pitcher's development for the sake of some alleged intangible "clubhouse leadership" Wood brings to the locker room is just bad business. Wood, as a leader in 2011, led the team to a woeful 71 victory campaign. Wood is not an ace starter nor a premier closer. He is a 34 year old injury prone journeyman relief pitcher.
Last season, Wood appeared in 55 games, and threw only 51 innings. He had a 3-5 record, 3.35 ERA, 57 Ks, 21 BB, 1.294 WHIP.
In 2010, in the American League, Wood appeared in 47 games, and threw only 46 innings. He had a 3-4 record, 3.13 ERA, 49 Ks, 29 BB, 1.329 WHIP.
As stated in an older post, in constructing a bullpen, you want your set up man to have an ERA under 3.00 and pitch 60 innings. Wood does not meet that criteria for the past two seasons. In the same article, we stated that your middle reliever needs to throw 75 2/3 innings and have an ERA of under 2.85 to have a competitive team in the NL Central. Again, Wood does not meet that criteria.
Even if the Cubs had a spare $4 million to spend (which is doubtful they way the transactions have been going so far), it would be far more productive to spend that money upgrading second base, buying insurance at third if Stewart flops, or finding a power hitter off the bench.
Wood is not productive enough to make a difference for the Cubs, especially when the team is in nuclear winter re-build mode. The Cubs should not re-sign Wood for 2012.
It is reported that Wood wanted a multi-year deal at $4 million per season. The Cubs have said they have made him an offer with a "substantial raise." It must not be substantial enough for the current "Mr. Cub" in some fan's eyes. But if one takes off the rose colored glasses, is Wood taking a roster spot at $3-$4 million a long term step to improve the club or just short term fan service? To sign Wood now would mean the Cubs bullpen would have only one lefty reliever (Russell) instead of the projected two (Maine). The idea of blocking a young pitcher's development for the sake of some alleged intangible "clubhouse leadership" Wood brings to the locker room is just bad business. Wood, as a leader in 2011, led the team to a woeful 71 victory campaign. Wood is not an ace starter nor a premier closer. He is a 34 year old injury prone journeyman relief pitcher.
Last season, Wood appeared in 55 games, and threw only 51 innings. He had a 3-5 record, 3.35 ERA, 57 Ks, 21 BB, 1.294 WHIP.
In 2010, in the American League, Wood appeared in 47 games, and threw only 46 innings. He had a 3-4 record, 3.13 ERA, 49 Ks, 29 BB, 1.329 WHIP.
As stated in an older post, in constructing a bullpen, you want your set up man to have an ERA under 3.00 and pitch 60 innings. Wood does not meet that criteria for the past two seasons. In the same article, we stated that your middle reliever needs to throw 75 2/3 innings and have an ERA of under 2.85 to have a competitive team in the NL Central. Again, Wood does not meet that criteria.
Even if the Cubs had a spare $4 million to spend (which is doubtful they way the transactions have been going so far), it would be far more productive to spend that money upgrading second base, buying insurance at third if Stewart flops, or finding a power hitter off the bench.
Wood is not productive enough to make a difference for the Cubs, especially when the team is in nuclear winter re-build mode. The Cubs should not re-sign Wood for 2012.
January 12, 2012
CY YOUNG DIET
Professional athletes regard their bodies as sports temples. A pro's livelihood depends on staying in peak physical condition. They take great concern on what is ingested into their bodies (and that is why ignorance is no defense in any steroid/PED testing rules). Teams hire sabermetic analysts, athletic trainers, physicians and nutritionists to make sure their players stay on course to good health. But again, baseball players have some strange superstitions.
Cy Young winning Detroit ace pitcher Justin Verlander told Conan O'Brien is pre-game routine the night before every start: a special diet. From Yahoo! Sports report on the interview:
Cy Young winning Detroit ace pitcher Justin Verlander told Conan O'Brien is pre-game routine the night before every start: a special diet. From Yahoo! Sports report on the interview:
Verlander: "The night before, as you can tell from my amazing physique, I eat Taco Bell."
Conan: "You eat Taco Bell the night before you pitch, every time?"
Verlander: (looks toward camera) "Yes, the night before every start. You're welcome, Taco Bell."
Conan: "It also results in your gameday diarrhea tradition."
Verlander: (laughing) "Right?"
Conan: (looks and points toward camera) "You're welcome, Taco Bell ... I'm curious, do you get a specific food at Taco Bell?"
Verlander: "Same thing every time. Three crunchy taco supremes, no tomato. Cheesy gordita crunch. And a Mexican pizza, no tomato."
January 11, 2012
PROJECTED CUB RECORD
If the Cubs make no further moves, we can speculate on the 2012 major league roster and attempt to forecast the team's final win-loss record based upon the basic elements of the game, runs allowed and runs scored (see earlier post).
The starting rotation (pitcher/runs allowed/IP):
Garza 90/198
Maholm 72/162
Dempster 111/202
T. Wood 57/106
Volstad 96/166
Bullpen:
Marmol 33/74
Samardzija 35/88
Russell 37/168
Corpas 33/62 (2010 stats)
Sonnanstine 22/36
S. Maine 8/7
The pitching staff history projects 594 runs allowed over 1169 IP. We calculated earlier that a team needs to pitch 1458 innings in a season. Based on the available information, the team ERA projects to 4.57.
The roster (with runs scored) breaks down with an extra hitter than in past years because scoring is going to be an issue:
Soto 46, Castillo (38 AAA), Baker 20, Barney 66, Castro 91, Bianchi (63 AA), LaHair 9 (91 AAA), Stewart 14 (29 AAA), Byrd 51, Soriano 50, DeJesus 60, R. Johnson 33, Sappelt 14 (40 AAA) and DeWitt 21. (Update: Bianchi was waived by the Cubs to make roster room for Maholm. Bianchi was then claimed by the Brewers. We had him as the 25th man on the roster, adding 38 Rs to team projected total. It seems Hoyer is not wed to players he acquires to fill gaps. Campana may be a roster choice now, with similar reserve results).
Taking into account minor league numbers at 60% (discounted for major league pitching), and not taking into consideration the "comeback seasons" management is praying for on most of the roster, the Cubs are projected to to score approximately 631 runs in 2012. The runs per game average is 3.90.
The differential between RPG and ERA is (0.67).
In the NL Central last year, such a RPG/ERA differential would put you near the bottom.
The Cubs had a (0.30) for 71 wins and the Astros had a (0.78) for 56 wins.
Based on these ratios, the Cubs project to a 60 wins, 102 losses, 2012 season.
The starting rotation (pitcher/runs allowed/IP):
Garza 90/198
Maholm 72/162
Dempster 111/202
T. Wood 57/106
Volstad 96/166
Bullpen:
Marmol 33/74
Samardzija 35/88
Russell 37/168
Corpas 33/62 (2010 stats)
Sonnanstine 22/36
S. Maine 8/7
The pitching staff history projects 594 runs allowed over 1169 IP. We calculated earlier that a team needs to pitch 1458 innings in a season. Based on the available information, the team ERA projects to 4.57.
The roster (with runs scored) breaks down with an extra hitter than in past years because scoring is going to be an issue:
Soto 46, Castillo (38 AAA), Baker 20, Barney 66, Castro 91, Bianchi (63 AA), LaHair 9 (91 AAA), Stewart 14 (29 AAA), Byrd 51, Soriano 50, DeJesus 60, R. Johnson 33, Sappelt 14 (40 AAA) and DeWitt 21. (Update: Bianchi was waived by the Cubs to make roster room for Maholm. Bianchi was then claimed by the Brewers. We had him as the 25th man on the roster, adding 38 Rs to team projected total. It seems Hoyer is not wed to players he acquires to fill gaps. Campana may be a roster choice now, with similar reserve results).
Taking into account minor league numbers at 60% (discounted for major league pitching), and not taking into consideration the "comeback seasons" management is praying for on most of the roster, the Cubs are projected to to score approximately 631 runs in 2012. The runs per game average is 3.90.
The differential between RPG and ERA is (0.67).
In the NL Central last year, such a RPG/ERA differential would put you near the bottom.
The Cubs had a (0.30) for 71 wins and the Astros had a (0.78) for 56 wins.
Based on these ratios, the Cubs project to a 60 wins, 102 losses, 2012 season.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)