Baltimore Orioles Round Table

Baltimore Sun O's Predictions

2011-04-01T12:05:00.003-04:00

The main Orioles writers at the Baltimore Sun put down some predictions for the team today, and I thought they were... interesting*.

* Just a little good-natured ribbing.

HR leader: Jones (Jeff Zrebiec); Guerrero (Dan Connolly); Reynolds (Pete Schmuck)
RBI leader: Markakis (Jeff); Lee (Dan); Guerrero (Pete)
Highest Avg.: Markakis (Jeff); Markakis (Dan); Guerrero (Pete)
Wins: Guthrie (Jeff); Britton (Dan); Arrieta (Pete)
Strikeout leader: Arrieta (Jeff); Matusz (Dan); Matusz (Pete)
Team wins: 75 (Jeff); 77 (Dan); 79 (Pete)
Lone All-Star: Jones (Jeff); Markakis (Dan); Matusz (Pete)
Markakis' average: .313 (Jeff); .322 (Dan); .309 (Pete)
Gregg's saves: 27 (Jeff); 24 (Dan); 29 (Pete)
Reynolds' strikeouts: 207 (Jeff); 211 (Dan); 178 (Pete)
Guerrero's homers: 25 (Jeff); 32 (Dan); 23 (Pete)
Wieters' average: .265 (Jeff); .278 (Dan); .290 (Pete)
Scott's homers: 24 (Jeff); 22 (Dan); 19 (Pete)
Guthrie's ERA: 4.23 (Jeff); 4.12 (Dan); 4.01 (Pete)
Fox's homers: 9 (Jeff); 12 (Dan); 5 (Pete)
Most Valuable Oriole: Markakis (Jeff); Markakis (Dan); Guerrero (Pete)

Expecting Adam Jones to out-homer Mark Reynolds is unexpected (Jeff).
Expecting Vlad to hit 32 home runs (Dan) is... I don't want to say "crazy", but he hasn't done it since 2006.
Everyone thinks Nick will set new career high in batting average, despite being below .300 the lat two years.
Dan think Zach Britton will lead the team in wins, which implies either (1) he's going to be the team's best pitcher by a fair bit (since he'll need to make up for lost time when he gets called up), or (2) he sees some more serious injuries to the starting five coming.
And not votes for Matusz to lead the team in wins?
I'm not sure how Nick is going to lead the team in RBI (Jeff) batting from the two-spot, but OK.
Pete has Reynolds leading the team in home runs (a fair bet), but that implies he'll amass a lot of plate appearances. And yet, he's going to strike out less than he has in any full season in his career?
Also (Pete), if Vlad only hits 23 home runs and Matt Wieters bats .290, it's very, very unlikely that the former will be the more valuable player by virtue of the huge disparity in defensive value (guess he's going with BA/RBI?).

Everything else looks reasonable enough, including their win totals.

Mine, for the record, are:

"HR leader: Reynolds
RBI leader: Guerrero
Highest Avg.: Markakis
Wins: Matusz
Strikeout leader: Matusz
Team wins: 76
Lone All-Star: Matusz
Markakis' average: .295
Gregg's saves: 26
Reynolds' strikeouts: 213
Guerrero's homers: 22
Wieters' average: .263
Scott's homers: 24
Guthrie's ERA: 4.15
Fox's homers: 9
Most Valuable Oriole: Matusz

You Say Connelly, I Say Connolly...

2011-03-24T09:00:00.001-04:00

Two Matt Palmer pieces in a row? I ran across this at PressBoxOnline.com:

I have great sympathy for typos because I make them all the time and they suck. But Palmer misspells "Connolly" three times in three paragraphs.

Outside of Peter Schmuck, is there a reporter in the market who has covered the Orioles longer than Dan Connolly? I guess I could forgive this a bit if he misspelled Matt Vensel's name, someone who was a bit newer to Baltimore readers. But you should know how to spell Dan Connolly's name. Two O's, two N's, two L's.

And if you didn't, it is easily checked. Big failure on Palmer's and his editor's part...

Mike Bordick is an Oriole Hall of Famer; Matt Palmer Doesn't Like It One Bit

2011-03-23T08:03:00.000-04:00

Mike Bordick was elected to the Orioles Hall of Fame last week. I was sketching out a post about Bordick and his Oriole career when I saw this article by CSN's Matt Palmer (h/t to Camden Chat for the link.)

When it came to 1990s defensive shortstops, few were better than Mike Bordick...

And, yet, when the Orioles announced he had been elected him to the team's Hall of Fame, more than a few eyebrows were raised. The committee that chooses the Hall of Fame inductees is made up of Oriole Advocate members, front office personnel, media members and members of the Orioles Hall of Fame. Those elected must get at least 60 percent of the votes cast. 

Knowing all the people that would be involved in such a vote, it's surprising Bordick was elected.

I don't know. I wasn't that shocked. There are no specific criteria published on the the Oriole Advocate website so we are left to examine the list of players who are already there and draw our own conclusions about what kind of player would merit selection into the Orioles Hall of Fame. Given the list of players who have been inducted, it is not exclusively a hall based on outstanding offensive numbers alone.

The list of players in the Orioles Hall of Fame ordered by WAR and compiled through the Baseball-Reference.com Play Index:

WAR
Cal Ripken, Jr. 89.9
Brooks Robinson 69.1
Jim Palmer 63.5
Eddie Murray 54.8
Boog Powell 35.9
Frank Robinson 34.4
Paul Blair 32.7
Mark Belanger  32.6
Bobby Grich 32.6
Brady Anderson 30.8
Ken Singleton 29.4
Chris Hoiles 23.4
Al Bumbry 22.3
Dave McNally  22.1
Doug DeCinces 21.3
Rick Dempsey 20.3
Mike Flanagan 20.2
Milt Pappas 19.9
Don Buford 19.0
Davey Johnson 17.6
Scott McGregor 17.5
B.J. Surhoff 16.7
Mike Boddicker 15.9
Mike Cuellar  15.9
Steve Barber  15.6
Jim Gentile 15.4
Hoyt Wilhelm  14.7
Luis Aparicio 14.5
Mike Bordick 13.1
Gregg Olson 12.8
Hal Brown 12.6
Gus Triandos 12.3
Stu Miller 9.4
Dick Hall 8.7
Harold Baines 8.5
Gene Woodling  8.4
Dennis Martinez 8.2
Tippy Martinez 6.3
Elrod Hendricks 6.2
Eddie Watt 5.1
Lee May         2.5
Billy Hunter   -1.4

Bordick is hardly the worst choice if you want to judge a player by his play on the field. And he is hardly lowering the standards. His bat was not great but he was a superior defender for several seasons.

Reportedly, Rafael Palmeiro and Roberto Alomar did not get enough votes, but both were on the ballot. Say what you will about Palmeiro's turbulent final year in Baltimore, but he contributed far more to the organization during his time than Bordick. Even though Alomar played just three seasons, the minimum number allowed to be eligible, he also contributed mightily offensively and defensively during his time with the Orioles, which included two postseason runs and the best Orioles teams since 1983.

Rafael Palmeiro belongs...but again, I really don't know the criteria. I am guessing that, like the regular Hall of Fame, Palmeiro is being punished on moral grounds surrounding his use (or perceived use) of steroids and lying (or perceived lying) to Congress about it. That's problematic for any team at this point and he will likely have to wait awhile.

Roberto Alomar would be a fine induction as well. But he did only spend three seasons as an Oriole and had that nasty spitting incident. He will probably also get in at some point but given his short time in Baltimore, I'm not that surprised. And wasn't Bordick on that '97 team with Alomar? How come Bordick doesn't get some credit for that too?

He batted .260 lifetime and with the Orioles. The one season in which he made an All-Star game wearing orange and black was 2000, when he batted .297 during the first 100 games of the season. He was then traded to the Mets, but returned to Baltimore the next season.  He clearly found a home in Maryland and an organization where he was comfortable. 

But he was never great beyond his fielding.

Well, yeah, that's true. But look at that list. Mark Belanger, Luis Aparicio, Elrod Hendricks, Gus Trianados, Rick Dempsey...there are a lot of guys in the OHoF who were great with the glove and light with the bat.

And the last time I checked, fielding still matters in baseball. Bordick had three of the greatest fielding seasons in Oriole history and was always very, very good. Harold Baines or Lee May were not penalized for being one-dimensional offensive players. Neither should Bordick be seen as sub par baseball player.

Palmer is really hung up on Bordick's bat but you have to know that his bat was never what made him great. If Bordick is considered OHoF worthy, it would absolutely have to be on the strength of his glove, not his offensive prowess. Palmer can't be surprised at that.

Rarely was he a player fans flocked to see. If they did notice him, they went home saying, "You know, that Bordick's a solid player." 

That really defines Bordick's career. Solid. That's not meant to diminish his incredible play at shortstop, a grueling position in a marathon sport.  But, as the team has struggled in recent years, players who had "pretty good" careers with the team are now next to greats such as Frank Robinson, Brooks Robinson, Cal Ripken, Jim Palmer, Earl Weaver and Eddie Murray. Granted, not every player is going to rise to that level.  But, it should be harder to get in the door.

And Palmer is really hung up on the notion that the OHoF is just for players who were the caliber of Ripken, Palmer and Murray. But it's not and never has been. Eddie Watt. Dennis Martinez. Lee May. B.J. Surhoff. Gene Woodling. Stu Miler. Scott McGregor. A bunch of guys are already there who could be described as "solid". You can feel that it should be harder to get in the door but you'd have to kick at least a few of these guys out.

As currently constructed, Bordick belongs in the OHoF. And if you don't think he does, well, you ARE diminishing his incredible play at short.

Actually, Palmer listed the six Oriole players who have their numbers retired by the club in that paragraph. Do you think he is confused? Do you think he believes they are retiring Bordick's number?

For more analysis, news and general musings about the Baltimore Orioles, visit Dempsey's Army...

BORT Triple Play: 3/18/11

2011-03-18T13:33:00.003-04:00

Highlighting three posts, articles or stories you should be reading this week...

1. Crawdaddy of Camden Depot continues to examine the effects of hGH and steroids in sports by, you know, checking studies done by doctors and scientists instead of sportswriters and congressional leaders. In other words, people who might actually know something.

Somewhat blind assumptions, halo effects, and mob mentality tend to shape an uninformed perspective more so than what experts say is likely or know to be true...a study that surprised me was a study that consisted of telling participants various surprising facts. These facts were differentiated in that some were attributed to "experts" and others were just given. Participants were more likely to accept surprising facts from non-expert sources. So . . . maybe there is a fourth effect, which is perhaps a societal suspicion of scientific literature, which I think would be largely due to a misunderstanding of the scientific method. People often want definitive answers and there are awfully few laws in science. Anyway, this is going on a tangent.

However, with all that being said . . . that players are using something to give them a competitive edge is a great reason to investigate on the efficacy of the treatment. Sometimes lacking a full comprehension of something does not prevent someone from discovering something new. What many baseball players have become are alchemists. Alchemy had its usefulness as it encouraged the works of many, such as Isaac Newton and Paracelsus. It also fostered some silly beliefs such as all things could be turned into gold. So, it may be that baseball players and others have actually hit gold on hGH.

Craw goes on to summarize and draw together some studies on the effectiveness of hGH and PED's and comes to a more informed conclusion than 99% of baseball writers, fans and sanators on this issue. If only people were more apt to resist the hysteria surrounding this issue, they might learn that hGH (at least) is not the bogeyman it's been made out to be.

2. Continuing to highlight BORT contributors, The Baltimore Sun's Matt Vensel did a Q&A with Dan from Camden Crazies about various Oriole subjects yesterday:

Baltimore is blessed with a bunch of talented sports bloggers who bring their unique perspective to the conversation. I often link up to these local writers in my morning Coffee Companion posts, but instead of just exchanging anti-social links with them, I have decided to be slightly less anti-social by exchanging emails with them in a somewhat regular feature called Blogger on Blogger.

Although I've seen bloggers highlighted by The Sun before, I can't recall a long form forum like this before. Vensel asks good questions and Dan, as he always does, gives thorough, thoughtful, informed answers. I like the format. I'm not sure it has legs in the long run but it's a good feature and one that I haven't seen in mainstream Oriole coverage before.

3. Andrew_G of Camden Chat wonders why the Orioles can't seem to get something going with their international scouting.

One of the criticisms of the Orioles off season this year has been that their increased spending efforts on the major league roster prohibits them from spending more money on amateur players. A lot of the regulars on this very website have scoffed at that notion, and with good cause. The $8 million that Peter Angelos is paying to Vlad Guerrero was obviously not being taken out of what he plans on paying for the newly drafted Orioles this summer. There is no reason to believe that the budget for the roster and the budget for the draft are directly related in the Orioles set-up...

Of course, Andy MacPhail will be the first person to tell you how important spending on the draft is and that the Baltimore Orioles, over the past three years, have spent more on draftees than all but three teams (which unfortunately includes the Boston Red Sox). It would be a huge surprise to see the Orioles spend even a penny less on the 2011 draft than they did in 2010...

There is, however, another story to tell about amateur spending that isn't nearly as kind to Andy MacPhail and the Baltimore Orioles...

It will be interesting to see how MacPhail's strategy plays out and Andrew delves into that quite a bit. He is spending in the draft and that may yet bear fruit but as I've said and as Crawdaddy has also shown this week, there can be merit in even moderate spending internationally, even if you don't want to jump into the high stakes bidding.

Fans Interested in Cheaters, Not Cheating

2011-03-16T07:31:00.001-04:00

Yesterday, ESPN published an article on how Americans view PEDs:

New research conducted for the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency finds that Americans rank the use of performance-enhancing drugs as the most serious problem facing sports today.

The USADA commissioned a study that surveyed about 9,000 Americans -- including adults, children, athletes, coaches and teachers -- to measure the impact sports has on values and culture in the U.S.

Strangely enough, of the last ten posts I published, my human growth hormone (hGH) post was by far the least viewed. It brings up an interesting point though. I think baseball fans are much more interested in being upset with pharmacological cheating than with the actual effects of pharmacological cheating. I find this disappointing because the conversations would be much more interesting than the silly teeth gnashing we currently endure.

In a pure ethical sense, I can understand demonizing all cheating. However, there is a difference between cheating and getting no advantage vs. cheating and getting an advantage. Maybe that difference is merely a practical one, but I think that needs to be acknowledged.

Orioles Line-Up With Platoon Splits

2011-03-15T18:31:00.004-04:00

With the roster projections more or less done, I thought I'd update the line-up post I did previously with platoon splits. This uses each player's career numbers and then regresses (with righties expected to have a slightly smaller split than lefties).

Player	Projected wOBA
Player	Overall	vs. LHP	vs. RHP
Matt Wieters	.324	.311	.330
Derrek Lee	.340	.358	.335
Brian Roberts	.335	.319	.342
Mark Reynolds	.342	.361	.335
JJ Hardy	.318	.337	.311
Luke Scott	.355	.332	.362
Adam Jones	.337	.343	.334
Nick Markakis	.361	.342	.370
Vlad Guerrero	.346	.363	.340

I don't have it weighted by plate appearances, but the overall marks for the team seem pretty even versus righties or lefties (~.340 for both).

Wieters and Roberts - despite being switch-hitters - have been more like lefties in their careers. Because of that, it's entirely possible that batting Roberts lead-off against south-paws isn't the right move, though the last couple years he has been better versus them than against righties. Adam Jones has a fairly large reverse split for his career (.300 wOBA vs. LHP, .338 wOBA vs. RHP), but regressing makes it go the other way slightly.

Assuming Roberts is locked into the one spot (and if Brian can't go, I agree with Heath that Cesar Izturis shouldn't be batting above 8th ever, if even that high), the line-ups could shake out like this:

Against right-handed pitchers:

Brian Roberts
Nick Markakis
Vlad Guerrero
Luke Scott
Derrek Lee
Adam Jones
Mark Reynolds
Matt Wieters
JJ Hardy

Guerrero, Lee, Jones, and Reynolds are all more or less interchangeable (and Wieters isn't that far off). Batting Reynolds third to leverage his home runs might be a plus, but I can't see Buck not having Vlad somewhere in the middle there. Roberts-Markakis-blank-Scott definitely looks like the correct alignment versus righties. Actually, putting Felix Pie in left-field (.319 wOBA overall, .325 versus righties) and moving Luke Scott to DH might not be a bad idea, as the difference in batting between Felix and Vlad versus right-handed pitchers is only ~8 runs over 600 PA, while the difference in defense between Pie and Scott in left is close to that.

Against left-handed pitchers:

Brian Roberts
Derrek Lee
Mark Reynolds
Vlad Guerrero
Nick Markakis
Adam Jones
JJ Hardy
Luke Scott
Matt Wieters

Though switching Markakis and Lee wouldn't be too awful, and would keep the top of the line-up more "normal" looking, it isn't necessarily optimal (despite many people think Nick handles lefties exceptionally well, his regressed platoon split is only a little better than average). Relievers show up in most games though, so not making huge changes is possibly for the best. And I can't see Hardy being above Scott in the line-up regardless, but with the difference between the two being small I assume Luke would be a spot or two higher.

With Brian Roberts in Limbo, A Way to Cushion the Blow

2011-03-15T11:24:00.000-04:00

With Brian Roberts in and out of the lineup this spring, you can't help but be concerned for the offensive prospects of the Orioles this season. There are plenty of mistakes to be made when considering who to bat leadoff should Roberts not be available for the regular season.

Unfortunately, many managers overvalue speed and base running ability when choosing a leadoff hitter. They seem to forget that none of that means much unless the leadoff man.

Can you imagine the team batting Cesar Izturis in the leadoff spot for a significant portion of the season and how damaging that would be to the offense? Before you start to think that batting Izturis leadoff is so ridiculous that no manager would do it, consider this breakdown of Izzy's career and where he and his career .296 OBP have hit in the lineup:

He has hit leadoff more than he has hit 9th or 8th individually. And he's batted 2nd quite a lot too. There are enough managers out there with big league jobs who looked at Izzy and said, "That's a guy I need at the top of my lineup." It has happened and can happen. When you lose a player who embodies the classic leadoff hitter like Roberts, there is an enormous opportunity to do something stupid.

And it can lead to disaster. To demonstrate, using the Lineup Analysis tool at Baseball Musings, I created a probable and pretty traditional lineup with Brian Roberts at the top of the order.

That lineup will score you 5.127 runs per game or 830 runs over the course of the season.

Now, place Cesar Izturis in the leadoff spot and you get 4.877 runs per game or 790 runs per season. In 2010, that difference would have been enough to drop your offense from second in the American League to sixth.

Here's a quick list of the internal "traditional" options and what happens when each of them bats leadoff:

R/G   Total Runs
Izturis   4.88      790
Andino    4.90      795
Hardy     4.92      797
Harris    4.95      801

(In the Hardy leadoff scenario, Izturis is also batting 9th...)

However, leave Izturis in the lineup (he is the most likely to play second base if Roberts can't, at least to start the season) but try a different configuration.

I have recently become more strident in my assertion that Nick Markakis has the skills to be a prototypical leadoff hitter. Let's give him a shot here. And instead of a guy in the 2 hole who "is a good bunter" or "can move the runner along", let's put a decent hitter there. A guy like Luke Scott who can get on base at a fair rate and actually drive in the leadoff man.

That lineup will get you 805 runs for the season. Even choosing the worst possible offensive option at second base, with Markakis and Scott at the top of the lineup, it beats every other option available.

The loss if Roberts will still hurt but it can be mitigated if you assess the skills of the players in your lineup correctly and construct your lineup accordingly...it doesn't have to be a disaster. Now we'll see if Buck can navigate his way through the pitfalls.

For more analysis, news and general musings about the Baltimore Orioles, visit Dempsey's Army...

BORT Triple Play: 3/11/11

2011-03-11T13:02:00.001-05:00

Highlighting three posts, articles or stories you should be reading this week...

1. Daniel Moroz of Camden Crazies had this post about developing plate discipline for Beyond the Boxscore:

I don't think it's an uncommon experience for a fan to wonder about a certain player on their favorite team, "man, that guy has a lot of tools... if only he'd develop some plate discipline!" I know I've had it (*cough* Adam Jones *cough*). How often do those young guys actually improve though? Off to Baseball-Reference's trusty play index for a quick look!

I won't spoil it for you but it does tell us what to realistically expect form Adam Jones. Oh crap, I think I gave it away...

2. Adam Sobsey of Durham-based Indy.com says farewell to former Oriole first baseman and all-time Durham Bulls home run leader Chris Richard, who is retiring from baseball:

"They say athletes die twice," Chris Richard says, near the end of a long, reflective interview. He pauses. That pause lasts just long enough for the listener to realize that he's been talking about death, in one way or another, the whole time...

But the sense is inescapable that if the Tampa Bay Rays called him tomorrow to ask him to come back to the Bulls, he'd do it. Richard, a San Diego native, lives in Durham year-round. He's in a stable relationship here with his girlfriend, Ashley Hester. He's in good shape. He works out nearly three hours a day. He stays sharp with the bat, using the Personal Pitcher machine his father designed for him years ago. He is coming off one of the best seasons of his career. He is, at 36, a welcome and steadying veteran presence in a minor-league clubhouse buzzing with callow prospects and occasionally aggrieved big-league failures: good-natured and professional, easygoing but exemplary in his competitive demeanor, intelligent and friendly, patient—watch his diligent, cerebral at-bats over a couple of years, and his agreeability with the media, and you see the breadth of his patience. He's the guy reporters want to go to for comment, because he tells you the truth and is willing to go into the details of what he does—batter's eyes, swing mechanics. He is the guy you want representing your team at Fanfest, because he isn't faking it. Sit down with him for an hour or so, it becomes clear that he is above all an honest, living, breathing human.

"Full many a flower is born to blush unseen, And waste its sweetness on the desert air." Thomas Gray. Or William Cullen Bryant. I don't know, I get them mixed up.

(h/t to Kevin Brotzman of Orioles Card "O" the Day for highlighting Richard or I would have missed this one completely...)

3. Congrats, You Found My Blog! has introduced a new idea: Salary+

Nothing bothers me more than when writers, bloggers, players, TV analysts and fans alike, compare player salaries from different years as if they were apples-to-apples, lay out an overly simplistic conclusion (Alex Rodriguez is overpaid!) without ever making an attempt to adjust the salaries for historical context. It occurs to me that there is a simple way to do this totally consistent with other metrics frequently relied upon...

...to put contracts into a historical context so we can compare players across time and take out the distorting effects of inflation. Just like the Sabermetric community uses OPS+ and ERA+, I suggest Salary+.

It's a work in progress but it's an interesting start to compare salaries across eras and he delves into stuff like MLB payrolls and how they relate to overall revenue. Good geeky stuff.

Oriole = Astros? Logic Fail.

2011-03-07T11:29:00.001-05:00

A response to this article by Austin Swafford on the Sweetspot Blog on ESPN:

There's certainly nothing wrong with trying to win right now if you have the right parts. But I have thought about the lesson that could be learned from the Astros as I have watched the Orioles since the end of last season. They closed 2010 on a good note. They hired Buck Showalter and, with him at the helm, went 34-23 to end the year.

The Orioles signed 35-year-old Derrek Lee, among other veterans, during the offseason.
So, naturally, they looked around at their very talented division and said, "No rush. We have a good manager, we're making good progress and we have young talent. We can be patient while that young talent develops." Right?

It'd be nice if that were the case, but instead of doing that, the Orioles got very involved in free agency, went out and got J.J. Hardy, Derrek Lee, Mark Reynolds, Vladimir Guerrero, Justin Duchscherer and Kevin Gregg. Average age: 31.8.

OK, let's start here.

There's the premise: The Orioles are making the same mistakes the Astros made 4 or 5 years ago by dealing away younger players with potential for veterans or signing veterans that block promising youngsters on the farm, all because they had a strong second half and think they are better than they are.

But after stating that the Oriole got very involved in free agency, he lists J.J. Hardy and Mark Reynolds who were acquired through trade. It's kind of a red flag for the points to come...he doesn't seem to have looked too closely at the situation.

Baltimore is in serious risk of getting mired in the same mud as the Astros since their surprising World Series run in 2005. The Astros haven't been bursting at the seams with young talent the last six years, but they spent four seasons taking what young talent they did have and dishing it to other teams to get veterans to try to compete now.

What young talent have the Orioles parted with this offseason? David Hernandez, a guy whose ultimate destiny is a relief pitcher, is the only player of consequence the Orioles surrendered this offseason. Jim Hoey, Kam Mickolio and Brett Jacobsen are, at best, marginal major league relievers who may or may not have figured in Baltimore's plans. Baltimore didn't package up Nick Markakis or Josh Bell to fill in the holes in the infield. It was a bunch of middling relief prospects.

They dealt Taylor Buchholz, Jason Hirsh and Willy Taveras to the Rockies for Jason Jennings. They shipped Luke Scott, Troy Patton and three others to the Orioles for Miguel Tejada. At the same time, they signed Carlos Lee as a free agent to the biggest contract in club history and patched together their rotation with guys like Woody Williams, Randy Wolf and Brian Moehler.

Wow. He used an example of the Astros blunders by using a trade they made...with Baltimore! Dealing the 5 players they did for Miguel Tejada before the 2008 season would have been like the Orioles trading Nolan Reimold, Garrett Olson, David Herenadez, Brandon Waring and Denis Sarfate (ironically) for J.J Hardy. Or Jason Bartlett. There's no real comparison to Tejada out there right now but a couple of years of control over a middling infielder. They didn't do that.

(As an aside, was that trade for Jason Jennings really so bad? They took a flyer on one year of Jennings, gave up guys who did very little elsewhere and had people on the farm that could take their places. That doesn't seem like a crazy trade for the Astros at the time nor in retrospect.)

Houston spent four years suppressing the development of young players under the delusion that these poorly constructed teams loaded with not-so-good veterans might actually compete. Much like the Orioles, the Astros would go on good second-half runs that convinced the front office that they were just a piece or two shy of competing. Of course, they never even came close.

I'm not sure that competing is what the Orioles had in mind. They had holes, big ones, and were looking for way to fill them and be mildly competitive, not to take the division. Think about it. There is no one in the Oriole system ready to play shortstop. Their best prospect, Manny Machado, is years away. Hardy is a free agent after 2011 and is blocking nobody.

At first, they picked up Derrek Lee on a one-year deal. Brandon Snyder is not exactly tearing it up in Norfolk. Joe Mahoney has half a season under his belt at AA Bowie. That's all the O's have right now for internal first basemen. Lee is blocking no one.

Mark Reynolds is at third and under team control for the next couple of years. The best third base prospect in the system, Josh Bell, showed that he is completely overmatched against major league pitching at this point (not with his 53/2 K to BB ratio he posted in his debut last season...). He needs to go back to Norfolk. And if he is knocking on the door later in the season, Reynolds can slide over to first base for 2012 (or Bell for that matter). Reynolds will block no one.

Justin Duchscherer was a low cost, one-year deal for pitching depth. If he blocks anybody, it will because Brad Bergesen, Chris Tillman, Jake Arrieta and Zach Britton are ALL pitching well. It's unlikely and it would be a great problem to have. In that case Duchscherer would be cut or traded. Duchscherer blocks no one.

Kevin Gregg blocks no one. There is not much in the Oriole system as far as top notch relief prospects go. Outside of the size of the contract and it being a two-year deal, that is not a move that is detrimental to any young talent. If fact, you can make the argument that it will help.

Vladimir Guerrero is the one move where the writer may have a point. The combination of Lee and Guerrero squeezes out Felix Pie and, more importantly, Nolan Reimold. Reimold needs to play and may very well end up in Baltimore for the majority of this season. But Guerrero's signing puts that in a bit of jeopardy.

The point is, the Oriole's are nothing like the Astros of a few years ago. Firstly, they have more young talent than the Astros had. Secondly, they have given up virtually none of it this offseason. Thirdly, any of the veterans signed (or acquired) have no more than a two year deal. In fact, only Gregg and Reynolds have that kind of obligation. Everyone else mentioned in this article is a one-year rental. And fourthly, they are not blocking any young talent, not in 2011.

If the Orioles had gone out last offseason and picked up Matt Holliday or Jason Bay, maybe he'd have a better point. But the Orioles have no Carlos Lee-sized blunder. Andy MacPhail, is anything, has been overly averse to giving veterans big multi-year deals.

Four out of five rotation spots (at least) are filled with products of the farm system or Jeremy Guthrie, a waiver wire claim who comes very cheap. Even after all the dealings to fill the infield holes this offseason, two of the five infield positions are filled with homegrown players. The entire outfield is filled with either homegrown talent or inexpensive young talent acquired in trade (or in Scott's case, he was youngish when they originally acquired him).

All in all, this looks nothing like the mid-aught Astros. Not a bit.

...the Orioles are in danger of falling into the same trap as the Astros. Let them serve as a cautionary tale that a good month and a half doesn't mean the team is a few overpriced veterans away from going to the World Series. Let them serve as a cautionary tale of what happens to a club when they refuse to develop young talent.

Yeah. I haven't heard any of the Oriole brass say that this team can compete for the division, let alone the World Series. I think they wanted to build a team that could compete a bit, be respectable and maybe win. But I don't think MacPhail's goal were that lofty.

Are the Orioles the Astros of 2008? Not even close.

For more analysis, news and general musings about the Baltimore Orioles, visit Dempsey's Army...

Markakis' Overlooked Skillset

2011-03-04T07:00:00.001-05:00

I wanted to highlight this post by Tim Anderson of Birds Watcher, not really for praise and certainly not for ridicule but to frame a larger concept I wanted to delve into: Nick Markakis, Leadoff Hitter.

Tim wrote an article when Brian Roberts was sidelined with neck spasms and wondered who would/could lead off in his absence. A very good question.

Last season the answer would have been easy – Corey Patterson. His speed and hot bat at the plate was ideal for the lead-off position.

While this would not have been true most of the time, Patterson, at least early in the season, did a decent job in that role. The Orioles called him up on May 12th and through the end of June was posting a line of .286/.337/.409. Considering the fact that Oriole leadoff hitters had only been getting on base at a sub-.300 clip before that, Patterson was a welcome surprise.

But considering the fact that Patterson has a career .292 OBP and that he finished the 2010 season with a .315 OBP, he's not normally suited for that role.

Pie would also have been a good option, batting lead-off in eight games for the O’s in 2010. However, with the acquisitions of Derrek Lee and Vladimir Guerrero, Felix Pie is sentenced to a bench role in 2011.

True, Pie will probably not be a full time player in 2011. But he's got a .305 career OBP and it's not about to get better. Why does Tim think he would be a good leadoff hitter? Why do I think he won't? Let's try to define the qualifications for a competent major league leadoff hitter.

Earl Weaver on leadoff hitters:

The leadoff hitter should be someone with a high on-base percentage, a guy who draws seventy or more walks and hits for a high average...The first inning is the only time a manager is given the chance to set up the batting order exactly the way he wants it. After that, it's rare for the leadoff hitter to start an inning. My goal is to have as many players on base as possible when the number-four hitter comes to bat...I like to get my best on-base men in the first three spots inthe order.

Bill James:

One player--a leadoff hitter, no less--said a few years ago that if he wanted to walk he'd have been a mailman. Common sense would suggest that the response considered appropriate to such a comment would be to yank the player aside and say, 'Look, you yoyo, you're not out there trying to prove to girls in the bleachers what a big strong hitter you are. We're trying to win ballgames here. You're expected to help.'

First and foremost, getting on base is the most important skill a leadoff hitter can possess and by a wide margin. All other skills are icing on the cake.

For me, a leadoff hitter should have the following attributes, in this order.

1) Good On Base Percentage - hits for average and walks regularly
2) Good Baserunner - speed is a plus but a smart baserunner can go from 1st to 3rd on a single more often than a dumb one with speed
3) Power - leading off a game with a double or homer can be a potent weapon
4) Good Basestealer - they can pile up the bases...but more importantly, don't often get caught.

So it starts with OBP and neither Patterson nor Pie have it.

Center fielder Adam Jones lead-off 15 games for the O’s in 2010 and struggled mightily. He hit .188 with a .443 OPS and only two extra base hits, both doubles.

This is true. Jones has some pop but is not a very good baserunner, not a good base stealer and then there's that .319 career OBP to contend with.

The only logical option for lead-off would be the man filling in for Roberts at second – Robert Andino. Andino played well in 16 games last season, collecting a .295 average, a .333 OBP, and driving in six runs. Andino is not the best hitter and that certainly hurts the Orioles offensively, but he is the best option for the team.

No. Not by a long shot.

Those 16 games from 2010 aside (actually, including them), Andino has a career .275 OBP in the majors. And only a .309 OBP in the minors. There would be fewer worse options on the roster than Andino. Anyone can be respectable for 16 games.

Who else is there?

Nick Markakis? Long shot.

We'll come back to Nick...

J.J. Hardy? Not quite.

Mark Reynolds? No.

A .323 and .334 career OBP respectively. Better options than Andino but not ideal.

Luke Scott? Absolutely not.

Why "absolutely not", I wonder? Scott has a career .354 OBP. He's not a base stealer but is a decent enough base runner. And he definitely has some power

The problem is, Tim never states exactly what he's looking for in a leadoff man. I would assume, given those who he favors and who he dismisses, he is looking for a speedy guy, preferably a guy who can steal bases and bunt for hits. But he is undervaluing OBP.

Now back to the "long shot". Markakis possesses a .368 career OBP. Check. He's a good base runner and the Bill James Handbook has backed that up. Check. While he has never developed the home run power that was hoped for, Nick has doubles power to the gap and double-digit homer power. Check. Not a great base stealer but does choose his spots well with a 72% success rate over his career. Half a check.

Markakis is so obvious a choice to move into the leadoff spot in Roberts' absence that it is amazing that his name never comes up in that capacity. He is still seen as more of a middle-of-the-order type of bat, so much so that everyone ignores his top-of-the-order skillset.

So if Roberts went down again, I would move Nick to the leadoff spot and probably slide Scott in at #2 ahead of Derrek Lee, Vlad Guerrero and Mark Reynolds.

And Nick would make a hell of a leadoff hitter. It's time to recognize his skills. After all, Brian Roberts won't be around forever.

The Crystal Ball 2011: Jake Arrieta and Chris Tillman

2011-03-01T12:00:00.001-05:00

With the signing of Justin Duchscherer, Chris Tillman and Jake Arrieta became linked for Spring Training 2011. With his addition Tillman and Arrieta are the most likely candidates to be sent down to Norfolk. (Although with this news, maybe not so much.)

Jeremy Guthrie, Duchscherer (if healthy) and Brian Matusz are locks for the rotation. Bergesen is probably staying...he's not great but fairly reliable. So Tillman and Arrieta are dueling for one spot.

Some point to Arrieta's September as proof that he has turned a corner and should be the front runner for the final spot in the rotation. But while the numbers are great (2-1, 2.60 ERA, 13 K, 2 BB) but it was only over 17 innings. But over the course of the season, he walked nearly as many as he struck out. Not a good recipe for a young pitcher to make a leap forward.

Speaking of the numbers...

              IP    K   BB   HR   ERA   FIP   WHIP
Arrieta     100.1  52   48    9  4.66  4.76  1.535
Tillman      53.2  31   31    9  5.87  5.89  1.528

Yeah...still doesn't look great for Tillman here.

But it seems to me that Tillman got more "swings and misses" with his stuff last season. So let's compare with the data from Fangraphs. O-Swing is swings outside the strike zone, Z-Swing is swings in the strike zone. Swing is total swing percentage, F-Strike is first pitch strikes and SWStr is swinging strikes.

           O-Swing%  Z-Swing%  Swing%  F-Strike%  SwStr%
Tillman     25.2%      66.0%   43.2%     50.0%     6.3%
Arrieta     29.0%      61.6%   43.6%     54.1%     5.7%

I thought Tillman would have had a bit more of an advantage here but they are pretty much even. Which is disappointing. I would have expected a bit more swinging strikes from Tillman's stuff than Arrieta's but up to this point, they are in a dead heat.

If I had to choose, I still like Tillman's upside better than Arrieta's but they are very similar at this point. This spring, I'd watch the strikeouts and walks for both of these guys very carefully. Homers will happen in Florida, ERAs and Wins will fluctuate with the defense but the walks and strikeouts will be the best bellwether for their competition in Sarasota. And it starts tomorrow when Tillman takes the mound against the Phillies.

For more general ramblings about the Baltimore Orioles, go check out Dempsey's Army...

Many Microscpes Examining the Yankee Rotation

2011-02-25T20:50:00.001-05:00

As spring training gets into full swing, you can expect there to be a serious focus on the Yankees. After all, they have the largest fan base, a rabid fan base that demands constant coverage, even when there isn't much to cover.

This season, there is little to settle on the Yankee roster in spring training. It's a veteran team and they are pretty much set at every position. Except their 4th and 5th starters. So there are a bunch of hurlers in camp. Thanks goodness...everyone looks great!

On the main field, it’s Freddy Garcia. On the back field, it’s Bartolo Colon. I chose the back field, if only out of curiosity. I had no idea what to expect, but I’ll say this.

I thought Colon looked pretty good.

Russel Martin took him deep to left, but Colon seemed to have legitimate zip on his fastball. When he missed, he seemed to miss low. That’s just an observation from the sideline, and I could be completely wrong, but I came away feeling like Colon was more legitimate than I originally thought.

*****

“(Freddy Garcia) looked pretty good to me,” Girardi said. “As I’ve said all along, Freddy knows how to pitch, and he knows how to compete. He knows what he has to do to get ready. He threw a lot of strikes and he mixed his pitches..."

*****

(Larry Rothschild) On Dellin Betances: “He’s got a real good changeup, he can spin the ball, and he’s a big kid that has a pretty good feel for delivery for that big a kid. It usually takes taller kids a little bit longer, but he’s pretty good. He’s got three pitches, it’s just a matter of being able to repeat a lot. He’s certainly got the makeup. I don’t think he scares. He’s got a look that’s pretty intense.”

I don't know what you can tell from the first week of camp from a bunch of guys throwing batting practice but I defy you to find a pitcher in Yankee camp that looked bad in the LoHud.com Yankee coverage. Although, I would say that anyone giving up a homer Russell Martin can't be pleased, no matter when it happens.

Seemingly, the further away you are from the big leagues, the more the beat writers want to create a sense that they are a dark horse candidate for a rotation spot.

From NJ.com:

The men who will determine his future watched closely from behind their sunglasses, though none of it seemed to bother Yankees pitching prospect Andrew Brackman as he threw a batting practice session today...

But Brackman, 25, pitched as if none of them were watching, displaying a much-refined delivery and improved command. The highly touted prospect, who is considered a longshot in the competition for a spot in the Yankees rotation, may have improved his odds with his well-timed performance.

More gravitas was never assigned to BP session in the history of baseball.

You would expect a little of this from the beat writers though. The fans are craving information and these guys have to dig up a story somewhere. It's odd and bit absurd but you can understand where it comes from.

But the national baseball media...

Et tu, Buster?

The international sign for good pitch is a catcher jabbing his glove hand toward the mound, and time and again on Sunday morning, a glove was aimed at Manuel Banuelos, a left-hander who is in the Yankees' camp as a non-roster invitee and had his turn at throwing batting practice to hitters.

Banuelos doesn't turn 20 for a few weeks, yet he already has a sharp breaking ball that can freeze left-handed hitters and a changeup that fades away from right-handers...

Which is important, because while the Yankees will look for solutions all over the place this summer -- whether Freddy Garcia or Bartolo Colon or Mark Prior, or from the yet-to-be identified veteran pitcher they will inevitably target -- they will also need some help from their farm system...

And when can Banuelos, who seems to have the stuff that would make him a good late-season reliever? Maybe Dellin Betances, regarded as the best of the Yankees' pitching prospects, will be able to help at some point, despite having never thrown a pitch above Class A....

So they don't need the No. 4 and No. 5 starters to be great; the Yankees just need them to be competitive, to hang in there, and to hold the fort for what should, again, be a very strong offense. They just don't know what names will be attached to the solutions -- perhaps someone like Manuel Banuelos.

Manny Banuelos. Has there ever been so much ink spilled in a national piece for an A-ball pitcher from Mexico? I mean...really? Banuelos for the 2011 Yankee rotation? That's quite a stretch.

I used to think the media scrutiny and pressure for Yankee players was overstated. I'm not sure I feel that way anymore...

Spring Training Moods

2011-02-22T20:24:00.000-05:00

Hats off to Karl Menton Ferron and the video team at The Baltimore Sun for the excellent video they are putting up at BaltimoreSun.com as they cover Spring Training for the Orioles. What makes it excellent? First, it looks great. It's video for sure but looks like it's shot on film and the colors are warm and lush...just beautifully shot and edited. Second, they are doing, for lack of a better term, "mood pieces" for Spring Trianing in addition to interviews and more informational video posts. They capture the sounds and feel of Spring Training so well as to make you forget the winter that still lurks outside your window. This is sports photojournalism (vid-journalism) done right. Bravo.

Check them out here. I've embedded three here to give you a feel.

For more general rambling about the Baltimore Orioles, go check out Dempsey's Army...

2011 Baltimore Oriole Projections - My Take (Kind Of)

2011-02-21T09:33:00.002-05:00

Now that spring training has started and the roster is a bit more projectable, I figured it was time to formulate a win projection for the 2011 version of the team. Well, I kind of formulated it. I'm using the WAR spreadsheet from Beyond the Boxscore.

Here's the work but before you look, the ground rules and caveats:

* I used Marcel Projections and I grabbed those from FanGraphs. I stuck to those pretty tightly.

* Playing time was adjusted a bit from Marcel, usually granting a bit more than less to fill in the gaps.

* I gave Felix Pie, Cesar Izturis, JJ Hardy and Matt Wieters some above average defensive value scores and a slight bump to Derrek Lee. Jake Fox, Brian Roberts and Josh Bell got defensive demerits. All others were neutral.

* Only Roberts got an adjustment for baserunning.

* I assigned all batters their exact Marcel projections with three exceptions. I selected Adam Jones as my breakthrough player for 2011. I bumped him up from a .333 to a .345 wOBA (bascially a .762 OPS to a .803 OPS). It a nice jump but not a crazy one. I bumped Nick Markakis from a .353 to a .356 wOBA (an .807 OPS to roughly an .820 OPS) and I knocked Brandon Snyder's .330 wOBA down the .300.

* I used FIP for the ERA projections.

* Since I used FIP, I adjusted Jeremy Guthrie's ERA projection down by a quarter run. All other pitchers kept their Marcel projections. Except...

* I put Jake Arrieta's name on Chris Tillman's projection and vice versa. Arrieta's projection was better but I still think Tillman can miss more bats than he showed last season. So I gave Tillman the better stats even though the combined projection remains the same.

All that gives us a Win Talent of 79.8 wins which we can round up to 80.

I don't think any of these numbers I plugged in are either crazy or overly optimistic. One thing I will say is that this team is pretty thin. Any significant injury to, say, Guthrie or Matusz on the pitching side or Markakis or Scott on the hitting side throws all of this out of whack and spiraling out of control.

But with a little luck and a couple of young guys taking steps forward (even if Jones doesn't), this team could (can't believe I'm going to say it) actually win this year. I am not alone. PECOTA has the Orioles winning 82 games in 2011.

And if the young guys keep getting their starts and at bats in the process, all the better.

For more general rambling about the Baltimore Orioles, go check out Dempsey's Army...

Nestor Aparicio Comments on the Radio Biz

2011-02-17T14:30:00.002-05:00

So WNST's Nestor Aparicio, unsurprisingly, weighed in on the Orioles switching their radio affiliation from CBS's 105.7 to WBAL. Also unsurprisingly, he somehow made it about himself.

On Tuesday night we learned what we’ve known for months – Peter G. Angelos and WBAL Radio are going back into business together once again for the 2011 Orioles season and beyond. The old man finally gets his eternal wish – to be the king of the AM band on summer nights on a dying radio station that no one listens to anymore but cadavers and people in his age demographic who still think a “smart phone” is one with an answering machine.

Let's address the "dying radio station that no one listens to but cadavers", etc. WBAL is a consistent top ten performer in Baltimore and is no stranger to the top five either (in people meter ratings for ages 12+). That's hardly a dying station. And I would guess that those numbers would have to include a significant percentage of people who are not card-carrying members of AARP.

Say what you will about the AM band but WBAL has put together a lineup of programs that get ratings and generate revenue.

It’s like jumping in and out of sleeping bags for both franchises and these two corporate monoliths as a formerly lucrative revenue stream – local radio rights – continues to dry up as sports fans go to places on the internet like WNST.net for an honest look at the news, issues and analysis revolving around the franchises and the big business that follows those logos and partnerships.

Well, it's not like Hearst (owners of WBAL) are in business to lose money. And it's not as if CBS didn't want to keep the Oriole radio rights. By all accounts, there were at least two suitors to be the flagship station of the Orioles Radio Network. And one was a station that already performs solidly in the market and didn't need to overpay for the Orioles to improve their brand or put themselves on the map. They evidently believe that they can sell the Orioles 162 nights a year and see that as a viable product, a product with an audience.

And really? Who really listens to baseball or football on the radio with any consistency circa 2011 when you can get a real-time scores, chatter and every situation from your mobile device on websites like WNST.net?

For football, I'll give Nestor a pass. He could be right about that. But baseball? Baseball is a game that lends itself fabulously to radio. I'll take listening leisurely to Fred Manfra and Joe Angel any day over clicking on any website from my smart phone. If I'm not at home to watch it, I'm listening. Guaranteed.

When will our friends (105.7 The Fan hosts) Scott and Bruce and Ed and Steve and Bob and Mark and Damon and Jeremy begin “Uncensored” gameday coverage of the Orioles now that Angelos will do his best to make sure they don’t see a dime of revenue regarding the baseball team?

Good question. WBAL did not have the right to Orioles radio for four seasons. I don't remember them suddenly launching an outrageous sports show to finally "tell it like it is" about the Baltimore Orioles. They were no longer beholden to Peter Angelos. Even if you believe that they would have an ax to grind, what's the upside?

In theory, the upside would be ratings and subsequently, cash.

WNST, as they say, "tells it like it is" about the Baltimore Orioles all the time. Where has that gotten them? Last place. Dead last, consistently, in the Baltimore people meter ratings. You can tell the truth all you want but it doesn't always make for compelling radio. At least not compelling enough to attract a decent audience.

The rest of the post just addresses Nestor's standard grievances with the team. I'd say you've heard them before but evidently, there aren't that many of you listening.

Tim Kurkjian Believes in the "Presence" of Vlad

2011-02-16T10:45:00.000-05:00

I was over on ESPN.com reading Tim Kurkjian's column where he asks one question of each of the 30 MLB teams as they head into Spring Training. For the Orioles: Is this the year they finish .500?

They scored the second-fewest runs in the American League last year, and didn't have anyone with as many as 77 RBIs. Guerrero drove in 115 runs last season, and he gives the Orioles a presence that they didn't have in 2010.

It's not as if Vladimir Guerrero will just show up with an extra 40 RBIs in his equipment bag. RBIs are useful, if at all, as a team stat only. And Kurkjian knows that. And there's that word "presence" again. What does that mean exactly? Is Vlad a ghostly spirit whose aura will mystically envelop the Orioles lineup? Seems like lazy shorthand for "proven hitter". I know this is just a quick hitter type of column but we expect better from you, Tim!

The rest of the Oriole section opines that with the addition of Vlad, Luke Scott or Felix Pie could be trade bait for another starting pitcher, that the team seemed to respond to Buck Showalter's message and that he believes a .500 season is possible.

However, when the only questions for our AL East rivals are related to bullpen (Red Sox and Rays), 4th and 5th starters (Yanks) and direction of the franchise (Blue Jays and they seem to be headed in the right direction), it's hard to see how Kurkjian could see a .500 season as probable.

What Cheer, Andrew Gibson?

2011-02-15T05:31:00.001-05:00

When I first started out writing a blog, I was largely unfocused and unsure why exactly I was writing a blog. It was shortly after I found out that there was a blog about the Orioles called Cookin' With Gas. It mingled my more in depth interest (and perhaps too strong devotion at the time) to utilizing statistics alternative to those frequently used by more traditional scribes. That is, why rely on problems with fielding percentage when you can use new things like total zone. As far as I could tell, it was an oasis in the statistics barren field of Oriole writing. What was disappointing to me was that the site had been recently defunct. So, I took to periodically writing in 2007 to fill the void. The hope was that my presence would somehow trigger others to write and then I could read them instead of writing my own work.

It is now 2010 and I think there are several bloggers out there who are interested in the numbers. Not merely what the numbers say, but how they are crafted, how they are calculated, and how effective they are. People that seem to share that joy of mine in sitting down and re-engineering statistics. Yet . . . I still blog.

Today, I would like to focus on a writer who has lately emerged and has written several interesting items. Andrew Gibson has been posting over at Camden Chat. He is someone to which I think you all should pay some attention. In today's BORT, I am going to go over his piece on the Orioles Defensive Efficiency right after the jump cut.

In baseball, defensive efficiency can be measured in many ways, but there is only one statistic called Defensive Efficiency. That is a good lesson to learn if one is green to the numbers game. A catchy title and an article do not necessarily mean that a statistic is a good one in that it says what it means to say and does it better than other available statistics. A good example of this would be the Save. The Save appears to be a metric that basically connotes that the last inning or three are the most important of the game. That is a weak situational argument. We often see in a one or two run game that the most important moment to save that game is when the starter gets in trouble in the 6th with guys on second and third. The manager will often bring in his third or fourth reliever to diffuse the situation. The rest of that game might be a breeze with no one getting on base, but the run expectancy of 2nd and 3rd with however many outs may surely be the most consequential moment for the bullpen in that game. The best that reliever can do though is the lowly Hold. Both Saves and Holds are faulty statistics.

Andrew uses Defensive Efficiency though, so what is that? It is an out efficiency metric that tells you how often a batted ball that does not leave the playing field (no homers) turns into an out. If we would multiply the number by a 100 and add a percent sign, you could call it out percentage. The equation is such:

1 - ((H + ROE - HR) / (PA - BB - SO - HBP - HR))

However, Andrew goes beyond this step. He wants to see how well the Orioles Defensive Efficiency has been over the past few years between the infield and outfield. So, he decides to use the Baseball Reference splits data to further divide this into ground ball and fly ball scenarios. Ground balls are essentially infield opportunities for outs and fly balls are largely outfield opportunities for outs. As an aside, you can approximate BABIP (Batting Average Balls in Play) by multiply a batter's hit types with almost universal coefficients. Line drives are basically defenseless. They need to be hit incredibly close to a fielder to turn into an out, so the batting average for line drives is about .700. Outfield flies are more easily caught, resulting in a .160 batting average. Infield flies are much more easily caught with a .018 hit rate. Ground balls come in at .230.

Getting back to Andrew's study (go and read it now if you have not yet), he shows that last year's O's had one of the worst years for ground ball defensive efficiency and the outfield its best over their last five years. He then comes up with these thoughts.

Sample size

Sample size is often a great consideration for a defensive metric. That is one problem I have with WAR. It uses batting and fielding runs over the same time span when their need for sample size differs. When batting, having four plate appearances over 130 games will result in a rather decent number to use. Fielding is more difficult to measure and has more dynamic categories than batting does. As such, you really need 250-400 games (depending on the position) to have as consistent of a result. It is a great point.

I do have an issue here though. I think that just because a defensive metric needs a couple years to define a player's defense accurately enough, it does not therefore mean that the metric needs the same amount of time to assess the entire defense. I think it is plausible (I have not tested it) that just as three seasons will cancel out the noise for an individual that a whole team can cancel out the noise of an individual. It really is a nature of sample size and evening out of unique occurrences/players within that sample.

That said . . . I still feel pretty shaky about how to assess whether or not defensive metrics are accurately portraying what they are attempting to portray. It certainly is less straight forward than batting metrics. The fact that many defensive systems seem to relate well to one another does not necessarily mean they are correct in what they are measuring. This is an exciting time.

Defense Efficiency is affected by the pitching tendencies of your staff.

This is a great point and should be recognized when thinking about defense. Ground ball and fly ball pitchers are dependent upon different sets of fielders on a team.

I like Defensive Efficiency and think it is a great stat to report and to look at. I do think that this statistic should be used on its way to a second objective. How many runs are being lost or saved? Using Baseball Reference's splits, you do not know how many ground balls up the middle and how many on the sides. Likewise, you do not know where the fly balls are being hit in the outfield. This can be relatively troubling to come to terms with because a ground ball at first or third is more likely to result in a double. A fly ball on the edge of each outfielder's range is more likely to be a double. These positions have effects on run expectancy of an event. This is a decent set of numbers to use.

Po. Runs/play
1B 0.798
2B 0.754
3B 0.800
SS 0.753
LF 0.831
CF 0.842
RF 0.843

Baseball Reference's data is a bit restrictive, so I often try to use weighted averages between positions to determine the cost of missed plays. You can turn that into runs gained or lost depending on your point of view and framework. I go through that and incorporate Defensive Runs Saved (DRS; John Dewan's system), Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR), and Total Zone (TZ) over at Camden Depot in a companion piece to this one on BORT.

I find Andrew's conclusion to be right on the money . . . the change in defense is just not going to matter much. Based on my own calculations, the Orioles defense was worth about -23 to -13 runs last year. That means at worst, the defense cost the Orioles about 2.6 wins in comparison to an average defensive team. I have the expected 2011 roster to improve defensively by about one game. My estimate would be a little kind if the team could push a few more ground balls out there. No one in the Orioles outfield now has decent range. Pie was the only one.

Now, I want to reiterate that Andrew's piece over at Camden Chat was a great post on defensive metrics. We need more of this in this Orioles blog community. This post provided explanation and some constructive criticism to shoulder Andrew's own piece as well as provide inspiration to write something of my own over at Camden Depot. We need more of these voices for Daniel, Heath, myself, and others to communicate with. No statistics are perfect and we can have a much better conversation about them if more of us get up to speed and learn what they mean. We no longer live in our parent's basement. Ideas about the futility of using RBIs or batting average as dependable statistics is fading. I hope BORT provides this forum for this type of communication. I greatly enjoy it and am wishing we get some interesting comments.

So, long live Andrew Gibson and long live the revolution!

The Crystal Ball 2011: Luke Scott

2011-02-14T06:00:00.001-05:00

It seems like anytime I sit down to write about Luke Scott, I feel compelled to defend him.

This is because the Oriole fan base still underestimates him and they fail to understand what a good hitter he is. The Vladimir Guerrero signing has highlighted this fact yet again. When debating the relative merits of the two players, I was told that I was "way overvaluing Luke Scott" (even though over the past 3 seasons, Scott and Guerrero have exactly the same .845 OPS and that Scott has a better park-adjusted OPS+, 122 vs 121, than Vlad) and that Luke did not "significantly outperform" Vlad in 2010 (even though Scott posted a .902 OPS while Guerrero put up an .841 OPS. I'd call that significant). Just when I thought it was impossible, Luke Scott is getting even less respect than he ever has, even after his best season to date. He's quickly becoming the Rodney Dangerfield of baseball.

I won't even address the assertion that signing Vladimir Guerrero "gives the O's a legitimate clean up hitter which the Orioles have NOT had since Palmeiro" (yes, these are all actual quotes) since I already have, a couple of times. Scott was one of the premier cleanup hitters in the American League last season. Period.

But since people are quick to dismiss 2010 as Scott's career year, a performance that he won't be able to repeat...fine. One year means nothing. Evidently, three years means little as well. So let's go back five seasons and see how Luke stacks up.

Looking at all qualified MLB batters over the past five seasons, Scott ranks 27th in slugging and 17th in Isolated Power. That puts him just on the cusp of all the elite power hitters in the game. And he has sustained it for five seasons.

I'm going to quote The Hardball Times' Steve Treder once again as he gives a wonderful definition of the cleanup hitter:

The role has been called "cleanup" since forever for a reason: See the runners soiling the pristine white bases out there? This guy's job is to clean them bases up, get them runners home.

Obviously it's great if a cleanup hitter hits for a high average and/or draws a lot of walks, but if he's doing either or both of those things without hitting for power, he isn't properly performing the cleanup function. Setting the table is a means to an end, not an end in itself; the purpose of getting on base is to come around and score. The cleanup hitter is there to convert baserunners into runs, to finish what the others have started. And that means hitting for power, and plenty of it.

Sounds like Luke Scott to me.

For the past 5 seasons:

                         AVG   OBP   SLG   OPS   OPS+   ISO   2B   HR
Luke Scott 2006-2010    .272  .357  .512  .869   126   .241  131  103

Pretty nice numbers, huh?

I think it's safe to say that Scott is a good bet to at least slug .500 and get on base at a .350 clip. That's a nice floor for a player who continues to be better than anyone will give him credit for.

So if you want to give Mr. Guerrero the label of "legitimate cleanup hitter", that just fine. But just know that now the Orioles have two of them.

Four Quotes about International Talent in the Dominican Republic

2011-02-13T10:01:00.000-05:00

A little more depth on these things can be found over at Camden Depot, but I thought this might be a conversation worth having over here. I should also have another post up here tonight or tomorrow.

Some administration news . . . I'm looking for reader submissions. If you want me to highlight a news item or you want to take your own take on it for me to throw it up here, email me at camdendepot at gmail. If can find a few writers with top notch skills, I'll grant access for them to post at will.

Onto the four quotes:

ESPN's story on the Dominican Prospect League where unsigned Dominican players take part in a 25 game schedule.

"Also, though most teams' scouts have shown up regularly for games, Mejia notes that some teams -- like the Chicago White Sox and the Baltimore Orioles -- still have not had a regular presence at games."

Roch chasing the story with an interview of International Scouting Director John Stockstill.

"We do have people reporting to us," Stockstill said.

Stockstill also pointed out that many of these players are showcased at other events. "And many of them have probably been at our facility and our camp," he said. "And that's not just Baltimore. That's probably a lot of other clubs, as well."

In other words, the Orioles aren't depending only on this prospect league to evaluate the talent over there. On any given day, you might have 20 workouts taking place at various complexes.

Brian Mejia's, founder of the Dominican Prospect League, response.

This whole DPL and O's presences was blown out of proportion. I was asked a question by ESPN reporter and gave a simple answer. It's not like the O's don't scout, evaluate and sign players in DR. The question was asked, "how many teams are consistently evaluating players at the DPL games". I gave him a simple answer.

The O's have many other things to worry about than being at all 25 DPL games. They do what they do and sign who they like... Budget, sign ability, need and roster spots all come into play when making signing decision in DR. The DR is small but players are everywhere, I'm sure they are doing their due diligence, I'm also sure everyone in BAL FO wants to win asap, any opportunity they have to sign the right guy they will do it.

A year later and this is a quote from Andy MacPhail.

They're not playing baseball anymore. What these guys prepare them to do is to come in all these complexes -- and now we have one of them -- and they'll do workouts. They're not playing the game anymore. They're guys who have been developed over three or four years to look good in a three or four day tryout. And there are those old fashioned amongst us who are concerned that's not really the look we need to make a good read on a 17-year-old kid out of the Dominican. We would much rather see them play games.

Do these quotes seem as peculiar to me as they do to you?

Camden Depot Articles on this.
Baltimore May Be Dropping the Easy Ones, Too... (January 6, 2010)
Roch Kobatko Chases Down Stockstill about the DPL (January 7, 2010)
The DPL Trilogy: The Agent/Co-founder Responds (January 9, 2010)
Revisiting the Orioles International Effort (February 13, 2011)

Re-BORTing with a Word on Steve Melewski

2011-02-11T08:18:00.002-05:00

BORT (aka Baltimore Orioles Round Table) was originally designed to be a forum for a few Orioles bloggers and preeminent posters from a smattering of message boards. As quickly as the solid gold idea was created, it came crashing down. The platform was just not very conducive to everyone who was interested in taking part. The interest probably was a bit too directed toward increasing traffic on our home pages as opposed to making genuinely interesting content on the BORT site. So, after a couple years . . . why do we, or maybe just I, wish to re-BORT.

For me, the idea arose one year ago and has been festering since. Then, an upstart and prominent Orioles prospect website was caught in a brew-ha-ha about blatantly plagiarizing professional prospect sites. It was a typical story of a teenager who wanted to have more pull than he had the ability to do so. Often with upstarts we see a craving to be important instead of organically growing. It truly does take a lot of effort and loads of criticism to be a decent writer (I do not consider myself a decent writer). Anyway, the aforementioned plagiatizing blogger repeatedly refused that he was doing such a thing when his site was completely borrowing from PG Crosschecker and other sites the would be unfamiliar to the common fan, but stick out like sore thumbs for many of us. He even was selling all of this borrowed information as a book. After a bit of a tedious runaround, he realized he had no avenue other than owning up and writing about how much he learned from the experience. Apologies mean nothing to me (well, almost nothing). What means something is how people change their behavior. I consider that blogger reformed. He now runs a relatively solid and popular website that is a great repository for information about Orioles prospects. He does very little analysis because he is not well trained for that, yet. He does provide lots of interview, focused information from Orioles prospects, pictures, and videos. It is a blog that was needed within our loose group of blogs. Again, though, it was tedious to get this change to occur. A few of us joke how much effort it took to get this guy to act responsibly and how the large sites, like Jonathan Mayo and PG Crosschecker, did not care. I thought then that a website that operated as a meta-filter reviewing and pointing toward other articles would have nipped this one in the bud.

However, a site just bent on a Puritan righteousness of how awful we are and our writing, but oh how we love our Orioles did not seem like a particularly fun concept. What does seem like a fun concept however is a site that not only questions what some people write, but also praises what others write. It is in this new incarnation that I suggest BORT now becomes a place where daily we try to highlight certain Oriole centric articles by bloggers ranging from Orioles Post to Baltimore Sports and Life to the School of Roch to Peter The Schmuck Stops Here. Our ideas may not be grand or interesting, but hopefully this little experiment will work out. Also, with great hope, we will hold our own articles on pillars and thrash them with equal measure. To add more, the goal here is really to add discussion and to be more engaging as a community. I hope this is not taken to be merely mean-spirited.

After the jump, a word on today's feature: Steve Melewski's Blog entry over as MASN.

As I was eating my lunch yesterday at work I read Steve Melewski's new blog post over at MASN. I found it to be an interesting piece. It was a simple interview structured in a way to accentuate the interviewee's statements. In other words, pure Melewski. That is not a complaint, but a description of style. It can be considered an older purer form of journalism. Not the pinnacle of letting the interviewee speak for him or herself, but just below that. Seperating the wheat from the chaffe and making some bread. However, one needs to recognize what part of the conversation is important and what is not. Meleski's article felt a bit off centered.

He was interviewing Keith Law about the Orioles and their moves this past off season. In no way do the quotes appear to be making Law say something that he is not saying. These feel genuine as his words from my perspective. What was interesting to me though was how blunt and clumsy the words were. In talking about the Orioles inking up Vladimir Guerrero and Derek Lee:

The Orioles are not a club right now that is adding young talent, they have added veteran players to the roster. I don't get it, they are not winning 85 games this year and even if they did, what is that going to buy them? A couple extra fans in the seats? It won't put them in the playoffs.

Melewski presents various other permutations of that argument from Law's statements. However, knowing Law and his tendency to explain things, something felt left out here. Something that actually runs against his general tone regarding one year contracts. He has in the past stated that for teams with money to burn, it makes sense to sign this type of player in order to leverage them for talent later. As I imagined, I think it was verfied during Law's ESPN chat yesterday:

Phil K (md) - You seemed harsher than most about the Orioles' offseason, but I can understand each criticism. Would you like it more if the 1 year contract guys like Vlad/Lee etc were flipped at the deadline for prospects?

KLaw - Yes, and I made that exact point at length in an answer that wasn't included in the article.

Maybe it is just me, but that is an incredibly important clause. It is an indication of a soft edge on the initial statement. Ignoring that when writing the article is not completely encompassing the idea being brought forth. Of course, not all articles can fully utilize entire interviews. (I remember an interview last year during the Gulf Oil Spill and from two hours of talking, five minutes emerged, and certainly not the five minutes I would have chosen.) However, I think it partially obscures the idea and changes the tone of Melewski's article by not acknowledging this.

The second piece was about Mark Reynolds. It too follows Law's logic. Veterans do not typically make young players better players. Even if they did, players with massive holes in their game or those that are incredibly unique in how they generate value are not the ones that teams should be making their players emulate. In the Melewski article it was boiled down as such:

The second thing is, Mark Reynolds strikes out 200 times a year and is a brutal defensive player. Is that really the guy you want teaching Matt Wieters? He shouldn't be leading anybody by example. If they had brought in Albert Pujols or Carl Crawford, I'm not going to argue with that. But we're not talking about that class of player. Mark Reynolds is not a very good baseball player.

Well, that is obviously missing something. I have a hard time thinking that Law did not provide some further clarification than going with a simple "200 strikeout" and "brutal defensive player" lines. It is too simple and bitter for him. His style is more long-winded and snarky--with a faint misting of bitterness. This is really the quote that I thought had to be lifted out of context. From Law's chat again, he replied:

BD - Keith, re the Orioles interview you mentioned earlier: I never you to be one who cared about batter strikeouts, but you are critical of Mark Reynolds? Is it his generalcontact rate that scares you, or what?

KLaw -
Again, the gist of the response was lost in the article. I don't care about strikeouts per se, but approach (bad) and contact rate (bad).

Again, it appears a lot is missing. I imagine that Melewski just did not understand the nuanced point of view Law was presenting or was purposefully posting a column that would result in a great deal of responses. Either way, he is getting page views and comments from many angry fans. He is defending Law in the comments as well. It makes sense for the fans to be touchy and Melewski to be defending against them . . . he seems to have done a poor job relaying the information presented to him.

So what do you all think? Am I right in thinking that the way the article is presented that it slightly skews important aspects of Keith Law's perspective? If it does, is there ever a time in which that is appropriate?

2010-03-01T18:34:00.001-05:00

Note:

BORT has been in hiatus for about a year now. Feel free to click on the blog links to the right. They are all regularly updated.

Thanks.

________________________________________________
This is where you can expand upon your intro. Click on the HTML tabs to make sure you do not disturb the expandable code.

________________________________________________

Hill Returns To The Big Leagues

2009-05-23T13:18:00.004-04:00

Rich Hill has made a couple of starts after being brought off the DL, and his results have been pretty good. A 1-0 record, with a 3.18 ERA in 11.1 IP, 10 H, 6 BB, 1 HR, 12 K. His FIP is a solid 3.78 and his stats make it seem like he's a lot more like the 2007 version (3.92 ERA with 183 K's in 195 IP) than the 2008 version (4.12 ERA but 18 walks in 19.2 IP). Does this mean the O's have themselves a #3 starter?

________________________________________________
(These are largely taken from write-ups done after each of Hill's starts.)

From his first start against the Royals (courtesy of FanGrpahs):

Hill pretty much just stuck with the fastball and curveball, as he has in the past. That one red dot - the slider - was I believe the pitch he dropped down on to strike Jacobs out (the release point confirmed that he really did drop down on that one pitch). His fastball doesn't tail in on lefties much at all, but the curveball has some big-time movement and a 17 mph difference in average velocity from the heater. If he could work his 81 mph change-up in more - he only threw a handful - then that might make both the fastball and the curve more effective.

From his second start against the Nationals (also courtesy of FanGrpahs):

I found it amusing that Hill dropped down again, once, to throw that "slider". It was to Adam Dunn, who fouled it off before drawing a walk. While it looks like his movement changed from his last start, the uniform difference of everything moving slightly to the left leads me to believe that it's an issue with the Pitch/FX system calibration on one of the two stadiums.

All six of his K's came on the curveball, with two looking and four swinging. Hill is still having a ton of problems with his fastball command, as only 37% of his pitches (overall) have been in the strike-zone (as opposed to around 50% as the league average) and lot of that is his fastball. The Pitch/FX didn't catch every pitch in his last start - and it's not exact - but it looks like he threw around a third of his fastballs in the strike zone and around 40% of his curveballs. The curve is a great pitch for him, but it will lose a lot of it's effectiveness if opposing batters know that Hill can't get his fastball over.

Statistically speaking, start #2 (5.2 IP, 3 H, 2 R, 4 BB, 6 K) looked a lot like start #1 (5.2 IP, 7 H, 2 R, 2 BB, 6 K). The walks were up partly as a result of a worse ball-strike ratio (46-53 after 34-54), but he also got more groundballs which allowed him to erase a runner via a double play.

I'm not a scout, but it seems like Hill still has some less than optimal things going on with his mechanics - possibly including that shoulder tilt (which may or may not be an actual problem), crooking his wrist as he takes the ball back out of his glove, and what appears to be a lag in his arm as he rotated his body towards the plate. Couldn't find any slowed down video to check, so I would love to hear what others have to say on the matter.

Despite his solid first couple of starts, Hill still has a lot to work on before he can be counted on as a long-term contributor to the rotation.

________________________________________________

Brad Bergesen at Toronto (Third Major League Start -- 5/2/2009)

2009-05-02T13:16:00.008-04:00

Pitch Chart #3 for Bradley Bergesen. Let's see if he can start flashing that change-up and and locate his fastballs...

________________________________________________

Toronto
Scutaro, SS, .280
Hill, 2B, .376
Rios, RF, .248
Wells, CF, .282
Lind, DH, .320
Bautista, 3B, .310
Overbay, 1B, .250
Chavez, C, .273
Snider, LF, .258

First Inning
Scutaro
P1 - 2S, low, ball
P2 - 2S, low, ball
P3 - 2S, low-in, strike (looking)
P4 - 2S, middle-out, foul (back)
P5 - 2S, low, 6-3

Hill
P1 - 2S, low, strike (looking)
P2 - 2S, low-out, foul (1B)
P3 - 2S, out, 5-3

Rios
P1 - 2S, low-out, ball
P2 - 2S, in, 5-3

Inning Summary: All 2-seamers and three ground balls. Good first inning and good location on his pitches. Toronto was a little eager at the plate, which Bergesen exploited to the tune of a 10-pitch inning.

Inning: 10 pitches/7 strikes, 0 BB, 0 H, 0 SO, 0 ER
Total: 10 pitches/7 strikes, 0 BB, 0 H, 0 SO, 0 ER

Second Inning
Wells
P1 - SL, in, 2B (CF, E9)

Lind
P1 - 2S, low-out, ball
P2 - 2S, low-out, ball
P3 - 2S, low-out, ball (looked squeezed)
P4 - 2S, low, 4-3

Bautista
P1 - 2S, low-out, strike (looking)
P2 - SL, low-out, ball
P3 - 2S, low-out, strike (looking)
P4 - SL, low-out, ball
P5 - 2S, low, foul (1B)
P6 - 2S, up, 1B (RF)

Overbay
P1 - 2S, out, ball
P2 - 2S, low-out, ball (looked squeezed, again; not getting that pitch)
P3 - 2S, in, ball
P4 - 2S, low-in, ball

Chavez
P1 - 2S, low-in, strike (looked like the same spot called balls for lefties)
P2 - CH, low-out, foul (1B)
P3 - 2S, low-in, foul (back)
P4 - SL, low-out, ball (good waste)
P5 - 2S, middle, 1B (RF)

Snider
P1 - SL, out, ball
P2 - 2S, out, ball
P3 - 2S, low-out, ball
P4 - 2S, up-in, strike (looking; good location)
P5 - 2S, low-out, 4-6

Scutaro
P1 - SL, out, ball
P2 - CH, low-in, 1B (LF; not enough velo differential but good spot and depth)

Hill
P1 - 2S, low-out, strike (looking)
P2 - SL, low-out, ball
P3 - SL, low-out, ball (good approach, just not executing)
P4 - 2S, low-in, foul (3B)
P5 - SL, low-out, 6-3

Inning Summary: I actually like Bergesen's approach today, but he isn't executing on his pitches. Too many fastballs catching the fat 1/3 of the plate and getting behind too often. It's nice to see the slider, but he has to set it up a little better, since the depth and bite are average. Better execution and he should see more success. His quick first inning is a big bonus, as he threw a lot of pitches in inning two.

Inning: 32 pitches/16 strikes, 1 BB, 4 H, 0 SO, 3 ER
Total: 42 pitcher/23 strikes, 1 BB, 4 H, 0 SO, 3 ER

Third Inning
Rios
P1 - 2S, out, strike (looking)
P2 - 2S, low, 1B (CF)

Wells
P1 - 2S, middle, strike (looking)
P2 - 2S, in, strike (looking)
P3 - 2S, middle, 1B (LF; bad spot up 0-2)

Lind
P1 - 2S, up-out, ball
P2 - CH, low-in, ball
P3 - 2S, out, ball
P4 - 2S, low-out, strike (looking)
P5 - 2S, low, 3-6-3

Bautista
P1 - 2S, in, ball
P2 - SL, low-out, ball (target low-in)
P3 - 2S, low-in, ball (fifth 3-0 count!)
P4 - 2S, low-out, ball

Overbay
P1 - 2S, in, strike (looking)
P2 - 2S, out, strike (looking)
P3 - 2S, up-out, foul tip (caught)

Inning Summary: Bergesen just isn't commanding his stuff. Again, falling behind and missing his spots with his fastball (and slider). Looks like "one of those days" where his pitches aren't there for him. It's worth noting how he handles it -- which hasn't been bad -- but there isn't enough margin in his pure stuff for it to be really effective when it isn't on. At least his 2-seamer gives him the opportunity to get out of trouble via the double-play.

Inning: 17 pitches/10 strikes, 1 BB, 2 H, 1 SO, 0 ER
Total: 59 pitches/33 strikes, 2 BB, 6 H, 1 SO, 3 ER

Fourth Inning
Chavez
P1 - strike (missed pitch)
P2 - SL, in, ball
P3 - 2S, low-in, ball
P4 - 4S, up-in, foul (back)
P5 - 2S, middle, 4-3

Snider
P1 - 4S, out, strike (looking)
P2 - CH, middle, F8 (good velo differential allowed him to miss up a bit)

Scutaro
P1 - SL, up-in, strike (looking)
P2 - 2S, low-out, ball
P3 - SL, low, 1-3

Inning Summary: Very good inning. Still isn't really hitting his spots, but he mixed his pitches well. He kept his pitch count down and should get through the fifth -- an accomplishment given his third inning.

Inning: 10 pitches/7 strikes, 0 BB, 0 H, 0 SO, 0 ER
Total: 69 pitches/40 strikes, 2 BB, 6 H, 1 SO, 3 ER

Fifth Inning
Hill
P1 - SL, in, ball
P2 - 2S, in, ball
P3 - 4S, low, F8

Rios
P1 - SL, low-out, ball
P2 - SL, low-out, ball (missed badly)
P3 - 2S, low-in, strike (looking)
P4 - 2S, low-out, strike (looking)
P5 - SL, low-out, ball
P6 - SL, in, F9

Wells
P1 - 2S, middle, foul (1B)
P2 - SL, low, foul (back)
P3 - 4S, out, 1-3

Inning Summary: Another solid inning, and another inning where Bergesen isn't really executing, but is mixing well. Fell behind to first two hitters, again (both 2-0). Another relatively short inning might by him a sixth trip to the mound. We'll see...

Inning: 12 pitches/7 strikes, 0 BB, 0 H, 0 SO, 0 ER
Total: 81 pitches/47 strikes, 2 BB, 6 H, 1 SO, 3 ER

Sixth Inning
Lind
P1 - 2S, out, ball
P2 - SL, out, ball (spinner, maybe CH?)
P3 - 2S, low-in, strike
P4 - SL, out, ball
P5 - 2S, out, strike (looking; got some help)
P6 - 2S, low-in, ball

Bautista
P1 - 2S, no location (wide shot), F8

Overbay
P1 - 2S, low-out, strike (looking; wasn't getting that earlier)
P2 - CH, low-out, 6-3

Inning Summary: A third straight solid inning. Bergesen still wasn't sharp with his stuff, but it looks like he's managing an off day as well as can be expected. He isn't hanging his stuff over the plate any more, and he's putting himself in position to get soft contact, even if his pitches aren't as crisp as he'd like. 7th?

Inning: 9 pitches/5 strikes, 1 BB, 0 H, 0 SO, 0 ER
Total: 90 pitches/52 strikes, 3 BB, 6 H, 1 SO, 3 ER

Seventh Inning - Bergesen pulled; Baez in

Game Summery: Bergesen did not command his stuff and his slider was less consistent than usual. Still, he managed to battle through, allowing a respectable 3 earned runs over six innings pitched. He did a better job mixing in his change-up (I counted five) and generally had a better pitch-mix throughout the game. I'd like to see him keep this approach through his next start and hopefully just execute his pitches a little better. Could have been much worse; hats off to Bergesen for battling through.

Final Line: 6 IP, 3 BB, 6 H, 3 ER, 1 SO
90 pitches/52 strikes

________________________________________________

Chris Tillman Start (5/1/2009 at Scranton)

2009-05-01T19:01:00.009-04:00

Taking a look at Tillman against AAA Yankees. Observations on positional prospects will be written up separately. Pitch charting follows...

________________________________________________
Yankees Lineup:
Nunez, SS
Rodriguez, DH
Linden, LF
S. Duncan, RF
Miranda, 1B
Jackson, CF
E. Duncan, 3B
Malec, 2B
Plittere, C

First Inning
Nunez, SS
P1 - FB, low, strike (looking)
P2 - FB, low-out, strike (looking)
P3 - FB, low-in, foul tip (caught)

Rodriguez, DH
P1 - FB, out, ball (good run)
P2 - FB, low-in, ball
P3 - FB, low-out, ball
P4 - FB, out, strike (looking)
P5 - FB, up-in, foul (back)
P6 - FB, low-out, ball

Linden, LF
P1 - FB, low-in, ball (good pick by Wieters)
P2 - FB, out, strike (looking)
P3 - FB, in, foul (back)
P4 - FB, low-out, 4-6

S. Duncan
P1 - FB, up-in, strike (looking)
P2 - FB, up-in, foul (LF)
P3 - FB, up-out, 2B (CF)

Miranda
P1 - CB, up-out, ball
P2 - CH, low-in, strike (swinging; nice depth on pitch and solid arm speed)
P3 - FB, up-in, ball
P4 - CH, out, F8

Inning Summary: Tillman worked to establish his fastball, struggling a bit with command. He was around his spots but not necessarily hitting them. One thing that was nice was his use of secondary stuff against Miranda, setting-up his second change-up with a solid high fastball. Stadium gun has him in the 90-92 range with his fastball.

20 pitches/13 strikes, 1BB, 1 SO, 1 H, 1 ER

Second Inning
Jackson
P1 - FB, low-out, strike (looking)
P2 - CB, out, ball (very good depth)
P3 - FB, low, foul (RF)
P4 - FB, in, foul (1B)
P5 - FB, low-in, F9

E. Duncan
P1 - CB, out, ball (good shape/depth, again)
P2 - FB, low, foul (back)
P3 - CB, low, strike (looking; plus depth and bite)
P4 - CH, in, foul (back)
P5 - FB, low-out, foul (3B)
P6 - FB, out, foul (back)
P7 - CB, in, foul (1B)
P8 - CH, low-in, strike (swinging; good depth and arm speed)

Malec
P1 - FB, low-out, strike (looking)
P2 - FB, in, ball
P3 - FB, low-in, foul (back)
P4 - FB, out, ball (good waste and change where Malec's looking)
P5 - FB, low-in, foul (back)
P6 - CB, up-in, ball
P7 - FB, low-in, L4 (Malec squared-up but right at 4)

Inning Summary: Much better mix of secondary stuff. Tillman is snapping off a plus CB bordering on plus-plus, getting very good depth and hard bite. A couple were a little soft (shape wasn't as tight) but overall the pitch looks good. His changeup has some nice depth and looks like it could definitely be an average to above-average pitch if he keeps working. I hope to see him pitch off his curve a bit the second time through the order.

Inning: 20 pitches/15 strikes, O BB, 1 SO, O H, O ER
Total: 40 pitches/28 strikes, 1 BB, 2 SO, 1 H, 1 ER

Third Inning
Pilittere
P1 - FB, low-out, strike (looking)
P2 - CB, up, 1B (CF)

Nunez
P1 - FB, middle, foul (RF)
P2 - FB, low-in, F3 (foul)

Rodriguez
P1 - CB, low-out, ball
P2 - FB, low-out, ball
P3 - FB, low-out, 4-6

Linden
P1 - FB, out, foul (LF)
P2 - FB, out, foul (LF)
P3 - FB, low-out, ball
P4 - FB, out, foul (LF; seems like a good spot for offspeed)
P5 - CB, out, strike (looking)

Inning Summary: Tillman looked pretty comfortable and had his most economical inning. I'd like to see the change-up more, if only because it's supposedly something he's to be working on and has looked pretty good the handful of times he's used it tonight. Overall, solid inning and much needed to keep the pitch count down a bit.

Inning: 12 pitches/9 strikes, O BB, 1 SO, 1 H, O ER
Total: 52 pitches/37 strikes, 1 BB, 3 SO, 2 H, 1 ER

Fourth Inning
S. Duncan
P1 - FB, low, ball (bounced in -- hey, it's been a long wait)
P2 - FB, out, ball
P3 - FB, out, ball
P4 - FB, out, strike
P5 - FB, in, foul (back)
P6 - FB, low-in, ball

Mendoza (PH for Miranda)
P1 - FB, out, ball
[Wieters/Tillman conference]
P2 - FB, out, strike (looking)
P3 - FB, out, strike (looking; framed)
P4 - CB, low, strike (looking; snapped a good one)

Jackson
P1 - CB, low-out, ball (softer shape, came around it a bit)
P2 - FB, in, foul (back)
P3 - FB, low-out, strike (looking)
P4 - FB, low-out, ball
P5 - FB, in, 1B (RF; not a bad pitch but Jackson stayed inside of it)

E. Duncan
P1 - FB, out, ball
P2 - FB, low-out, strike (swinging)
P3 - FB, out, ball
P4 - FB, low, F7 (nice tracking by Reimold, back and to the line)

Malec
P1 - FB, up, ball (good to see him elevate it to start the AB)
P2 - FB, out, 2B (LF; belt-high and over the outer-half; missed inside target)

[Mike Griffin to mound w/Wieters and Tillman]

Pilittere
P1 - FB, up-in, F7

Inning Summary: I know this is about Tillman, but Wieters is really a solid receiver. He's quiet behind the plate and really absorbs the ball well -- the third pitch to Mendoza looked about three inches out, but Wieters took it in with minimal movement in framing and no movement at all in his body. Back to Tillman, it's hard to judge to harshly after the long layover in the top half of the inning, but he didn't look sharp. He wasn't hitting his spots and ended up around the belt way too often. Still would like to see him pitch off the curve a little more to change the hitter's eye-level, and of course the change-up would be nice.

Inning: 21 pitches/11 strikes, 1 BB, 1 SO, 2 H, 2 ER
Total: 73 pitches, 48 strikez, 2 BB, 4 SO, 4 H, 3 ER

Fifth Inning
Nunez
P1 - FB, out, ball
P2 - FB, low, strike (looking)
P3 - CB, up-in, strike (looking; great bite)
P4 - FB, out, 4-3

Rodriguez
P1 - CB, out, ball
P2 - FB, out, strike (swinging; way late, good job pitching off CB!)
P3 - CB, low, strike (swinging)
P4 - CH, low, strike (swinging; excellent pitch sequence had Rodriguez looking FB on P4)

Linden
P1 - CB, low-out, strike (looking; is he reading this? Again, way to pitch off the CB!)
P2 - FB, low-out, strike (swinging; again way behind after CB set-up)
P3 - CB, low-in, strike (swinging)

Inning Summary: Outstanding inning. Great job pitching off the secondary stuff and keeping the hitters guessing after being forced to the FB the previous inning. Should earn another trip to the mound in the sixth -- it'd be nice to see him get through six after laboring a bit with his pitch count early.

Inning: 11 pitches/9 strikes, O BB, 2 SO, O H, O ER
Total: 84 pitches/57 strikes, 2 BB, 6 SO, 4 H, 3 ER

Tillman pulled; Albers in

Game Summary: Tillman put together a nice little start after showing some inconsistent command early. His last inning was by far his best, and it would have been nice to see him out for one more (particularly to face Duncan and Jackson again). It's clear what Tillman needs to continue to work on -- command in the zone, curveball command and using his changeup. He'll also need to build up some more in-game endurance, though some of that will come as he continues to fill out and build his overall durability. His curveball flashed plus-plus today, though it generally sat around plus, with average command. His change-up was a very good pitch the few times he threw it. Hopefully he'll continue to integrate it into his arsenal. Another nice start; still not Major League ready, but he's clearly working his way there.

Final Line : 5 IP, 2 BB, 4 H, 6 SO, 3 ER, 84 pitches/57 strikes

________________________________________________

Zaun is Unlucky?

2009-04-29T16:31:00.002-04:00

From Roch Kubatko's blog:

Trembley noted that Zaun has hit "in some tough luck."

"I think for a guy who has played as long as Zaun has, you've got to look at the track record and see what he is, and that's basically a .250 hitter, and I think that's what he would be," Trembley said.

Is Dave Trembley correct in his assessment of Gregg Zaun this season?

________________________________________________
A quick way to find out is PrOPS.

Zaun's Actual Line: .111/.238/.185
Zaun's PrOPS Line: .241/.347/.303

It does appear that Zaun has been unlucky early this season. And if you take his expected line through PrOPS, he is much closer to the .250 hitter that Dave Trembley is expecting.

So should Chad Moeller get more playing time at this point?

Moeller's Actual Line: .250/.318/.450
Moeller's PrOPS Line: .316/.373/.538

Probably. Based on Moeller's hot bat and Zaun's cold one it probably wouldn't hurt things to split the time equally at least.

________________________________________________

Is there any room for Pie in Left Field?

2009-04-27T18:29:00.002-04:00

We are probably painfully aware at this point that Nolan Reimold is beating up on pitchers in AAA. This has included two launched balls off of David Price, the esteemed No. 2 in BA's top prospects. He is batting 417/486/750 and is on pace to slug 50 home runs in a full season of AAA. His MLE OPS is 1027. This makes it difficult on Felix Pie. So far he has not performed with a line of 167/259/229. That is bad. Added to this, part of his charm was bringing above average defense to left field. He has just recently achieved average defensive value and it is arguable whether he will advance beyond that.

Now . . . your head might explode here. Pie has been unlucky. More after the jump.

________________________________________________

There are some basic rules of thumb you can apply to batted ball data. You look at a line and you will find that 0% of infield flies result in a hit, 22% of fly balls land for a hit, 28% of groundballs find holes through the infield, and 74% of line drives find a home in the outfield grass. Now, Felix has registered 2 infield flies, 13 fly balls, 12 grounders, and 8 line drives.

His hit rate so far has been 0% for infield flies, 15% for flies, 0% for ground balls, and 75% for line drives. See something off here? None of his grounders have found holes. He should have 4 ground ball hits. This would raise his batting average to .250 . . . his OBP to .327 . . . his slugging to .313. His OPS would be a whopping 640 as opposed to 488. Yeah, that is still pretty bad, but not as bad as we thought. Well, unless someone can come up with a good idea why his grounders do not make it through the infield? A line drive hitter typically hits hard grounders.

So, how much more rope do you all think he should have?

________________________________________________

Brad Bergesen: Second Start (April 26, 2009)

2009-04-26T12:52:00.010-04:00

Charting Brad's second start -- this time against a tough Texas lineup. Let's see if he utilizes his slider and his changeup a little more effectively...

________________________________________________

First Inning
Kinsler
P1 - 2S, inside, long foul LF line
P2 - SL, outside, soft foul back
P3 - SL, low-outside, strike (swing, Kinsler fooled badly)

Murphy
P1 - 4S, low-out, strike, looking
P2 - 2S, low, ball
P3 - 2S, outside, ball
P4 - 2S, outside, strike (looking)
P5 - SL, low-in, ball (great location)
P6 - 2S, low-outside, foul back
P7 - 2S, outside, foul back
P8 - SL, low-in, foul soft back (needed a little more in, but good spot)
P9 - 2S, low, 4-3 (soft grounder, rolled over)

Young
P1 - SL, low, foul back
P2 - 2S, up-in, foul back
P3 - SL, low, strike (swinging)

Inning Summary: Very strong first inning. Bergesen did a nice job of setting-up his slider and getting good placement with his fastball. It looks like his 2S and SL are tough to differentiate out of his hand and arm slot, which should help both play up. Kinsler was looking FB and just missed a homer on the first pitch (Bergesen leaving it a bit up from the target. Overall, a strong start.

Second Inning
Blalock
P1 - 4S, inside, strike (looking)
P2 - CH, low-out, strike (swinging)
P3 - SL, low-in, ball
P4 - SL, low-out, F8 (end of the bat, reaching)

Byrd
P1 - 2S, outside, strike (looking)
P2 - 2S, inside, foul (3B side)
P3 - SL, low-out, ball
P4 - 2S, inside, ball
P5 - SL, outside, ball
P6 - 2S, up-in, 2B (not a bad spot, Byrd just stayed inside of it and dumped it down the line)

Cruz
P1 - 2S, low-out, strike (looking)
P2 - SL, low-out, ball
P3 - SL, low-out, foul
P4 - SL, low-out, strike (swinging; good tilt)

Davis
P1 - SL, low, ball
P2 - 2S, outside, strike (looking)
P3 - SL, low, HR (straight away CF; SL was a spinner that caught too much of the plate)

Saltalamacchia
P1 - SL, low-in, ball
P2 - 2S, in, foul back
P3 - 2S, in, strike (looking)
P4 - SL, low-in, 1B (RF corner; again, SL spinning a bit and catching too much of the plate)

Andrus
P1 - SL, out, strike (swinging -- camera late coming back))
P2 - SL, in, foul back (camera late again)
P3 - 2S, middle, F9 (hit hard to right/center gap)

Inning Summary: 24 pich inning, 39 total. Bergesen was effective when he was hitting his spots, and ineffective when he wasn't. As we touched on in his first start, his pure stuff doesn't allow him to be imprecise. I'd like to see him mix in some more changeups the second time through the order -- I may have missed one or two due to the camera being late getting back to the pitch.

Third Inning
Kinsler
P1 - SL, middle, strike (looking)
P2 - 2S, inside, foul (back)
P3 - 4S, low-out, ball
P4 - 2S, middle, 4-3

Murphy
P1 - 2S, low, ball
P2 - 4S, low, ball
P3 - 2S, low, foul (1B)
P4 - 2S, out, foul (back)
P5 - 2S, out, ball
P6 - 4S, in, ball

Young
P1 - SL, low, ball
P2 - 2S, up, foul (back)
P3 - SL, low, E6

Blalock
P1 - 2S, outside, ball
P2 - 2S, outside, ball (not finishing; aiming outside)
P3 - 2S, low-out, 3-6

Byrd
P1 - 2S, inside, foul (back)
P2 - 2S, outside, 5-4

Inning Summary: Better inning for Bergesen, though he went back to relying primarily on his 2S to try and induce groundballs. Again, I'd like to see the change mixed in a bit. He doesn't look particularly confident in his slider today, so something to change pace would be good. Also, while he needs to work down to be successful, it would be good to change the hitter's eye-level and throw a 4S up a couple of times when he's ahead.

Fourth Inning
Cruz (I'd like to see him work in with the 2S)
P1 - SL, up-in, strike (looking)
P2 - 4S, low-out, ball
P3 - 2S, out, 4-3 (soft groundball; did a good job working inside-out to get the roll-over)

Davis
P1 - 4S, low-in, ball
P2 - 2S, low-out, ball
P3 - 2S, low, foul (back)
P4 - 2S, out, F7

Saltalamacchia (I'd like to see him work down-out with the CH)
P1 - 2S, out, strike (looking)
P2 - 2S, low-out, single (CF)

Andrus
P1 - SL, low-out, ball
P2 - 2S, low-in, foul (3B)
P3 - 2S, low-in, foul (back; 4S up-in would be nice)
P4 - 2S, in, foul (3B; SL in would be nice)
P5 - SL, low-out, ball
P6 - 4S, low-in, foul
P7 - 4S, up, single (CF; caught way too much of plate)

Kinsler
P1 - 2S, in, 5-4

Inning Summary: Bergy didn't look like he wanted to throw anything off-speed to Davis. Fortunately, he kept the ball down and got soft contact. It would have been nice to put Andrus away a little earlier, as the pitch count is rising. I'll keep saying he needs to show a different look (changeup down or slider in to righties, changeup away 4S up-in to lefties). I have him at 74 pitches through four.

Fifth Inning
Murphy
P1 - 2S, low-out, strike (looking)
P2 - 2S, inside, ball
P3 - 2S, middle-down, HR (CF)

Young
P1 - 2S, in, 2B (LF/CF; and this is what happens when you aren't feeling your breaking ball and can't/won't go to a changeup)

Blalock
P1 - 4S, low-in, ball (velocity dropping on 4S)
P2 - SL, low-in, ball
P3 - CH, middle, foul (LF, linedrive)
P4 - 2S, low, ball
P5 - 2S, low-out, 1B (CF; too much of plate)

Byrd
P1 - SL, low-out, strike (looking)
P2 - SL, low, strike (swinging)
P3 - SL, low, 1B (3B)

Cruz
P1 - SL, low-out, ball
P2 - 2S, low, 1B (3B; ball hit hard down the line, Wigginton stops but can't make the play)

Bergesen pulled.

Inning Summary: Stuff out over the plate and very little velocity differential. Bergesen looked measured by the Texas hitters.

Impressions from Start #2: Again, no real surprises. When he's spotting his pitches, he can be difficult to square-up on, but without that changeup and without an ability to change the hitter's eye-level, I just don't see him making it through Major League lineups two and three times. It certainly isn't enough to say he isn't ready to be up with the big club, but he needs to get that changeup working, and he needs to have more confidence up in the zone with his four-seamer. Hitters are just way too comfortable by their second at bat.

Final Line:
4 IP, 5 ER, 10 H, 3 SO, 1 BB, 3 HR
88 pitches / 59 Strikes

________________________________________________

First Start for Brad Bergesen (April 21, 2009 vs. Chicago)

2009-04-21T20:54:00.007-04:00

Taking a break from a full article to do some live blogging! Since we were foiled in our attempt to follow Wieters/Price, I'm gonna hop on and give some live commentary on Brad Bergesen in his first ML start against the White Sox. Just got home, so we'll pick up the action in the second inning...

________________________________________________

Second Inning

Thome - soft groundout to Roberts

Dye - Four-pitch walk; Bergesen working outside and was unwilling to give in once he fell behind.

Konerko - Started out with a fastball outside, good placement; 2-seamer started on the black and ran inside, solid second pitch after FB away; way up an in with his 4-seamer, took off on him a bit; good 2-seamer with late life at the knees (swing and miss); 2-seamer started off on inner-third and ran in (weak foul ball 3B side); 2-seamer middle-down (GB to third, 5-4-3), caught too much of the plate but had enough run/depth to produce the grounder

Inning summary - Bergesen worked quickly and stayed around the zone. He's establishing his fastball and finding a rhythem. As he works through the order a second time, he'll need to mix in more offspeed/breaking stuff as Konerko had him pretty well measured. I think we'll move to a more traditional charting of his pitches next inning and see how that goes. We'll use this summary form: Pitch number, location, result (note, if any).

Third Inning

Pierzynski
P1 - 2S, low-out, strike

P2 - 2S, low, ball (might be CH -- interviewing his dad so delayed coverage of pitch)

P3 - 2S, low, 4-3

Ramirez

P1 - 2S, low-out, 5-3 (still interviewing dad so they aren't showing the full pitch)

Anderson

P1 - 2S, low-out, ball (opened early -- overthrew a bit)

P2 - 2S , low-out, strike (good run, stayed closed in hips; pitch started outside of the zone and came back)

P3 - SL, low-out, ball

P4 - 2S, low, foul (good timing)

P5 - 2S, low-in, strikeout looking

Inning summary - Strong inning from Bergesen. Again, he worked quickly and attacked the zone with his fastball. Since MASN was interviewing his father, I only caught part of the pitch for a few pitches (you can check against gamecast to see what, if anything, I missed). Again, look for him to mix in more offspeed the second time through, but so far he has been impressive. He certainly isn't intimidated, and he's maintaining the same pace and approach that has made him successful in the minors. It's also worth noting that he isn't overthrowing -- he knows his game plan and is sticking to it (props to Zaun in this department; the two are working well).

Fourth Inning

Getz

P1 - 2S, low-out, ball

P2 - 2S, low-out, ball

P3 - 4S, inside, ball

P4 - 2S, low-out, strike (looking)

P5 - 2S, up-out, ball (walk)

Fields

P1 - 2S, low-in, bunt foul

P2 - 2S, low, bunt foul

P3 - SL, low-out, ball

P4 - (good delay in stretch to disrupt batter timing) SL, low-out, ball

P5 - 2S, low-in, swinging strike (terrific placement, good compliment to looking strike in same location previous inning)

Quentin

P1 - (good delay in stretch almost leads to pick-off of Getz) 2S, low, swing and miss (good depth)

P2 - 2S, low, ball

P3 - 2S, middle, foul back (missed his spot but enough movement to prevent Quentin from squaring-up)

P4 - 4S, up, ball

P5 - 2S, inside, E5 (good pitch should have been DP, but Quentin hit it hard)

Thome

P1 - 2S, outside, foul left field (Thome had it measured but good life prevented squaring)

P2 - 2S, low-out, ball

P3 - 4S, up, ball (pretty clearly a strike)

P4 - 2S, out, foul 3B side (should follow with offspeed down-in)

P5 - 2S, in, strikeout looking (set up well by working out and up prior four pitches)

Dye

P1 - CH, low, ball

P2 - 2S, low, foul

P3 - CH, low-out, ball

P4 - 2S, out, single CF

Konerko

P1 - 2S, low, single RF

Inning Summary - As warned against, Bergesen was better timed by the White Sox hitters this time through. He didn't mix in his slider enough in the middle of the order, and Dye/Konerko were ready for his 2-seamer the second time around. We'll see how he bounces back next inning. So far, the outing has to be considered a success, but there aren't any surprises as far as how Bergy's stuff is playing against a veterean ML lineup.

Fifth Inning

Pierzynski

P1 - 2S, low, ball

P2 - 2S, low-in, ball

P3 - 2S, low-in, ball

P4 - 4S, low-out, strike

P5 - 4S, in, foul 3B side

P6 - 4S, out, single RF

Ramirez

P1 - 2S, low, strike (looking)

P2 - SL, low-out, strike (swinging)

P3 - SL, low-out, ball

P4 - SL, low-out, ball

P5 - 4S, in, foul

P6 - 2S, up-in, single LF (missed up in the zone - target in)

Anderson

P1 - 2S, low, 6-4

Getz

P1 - 2S, low-away, strike (looking)

P2 - 2S, inside, strike (looking)

P3 - SL, low, foul 1B

P4 - SL, low-in, hit-by-pitch

Fields

P1 - SL, low, F9

Quentin

P1 - 2S, middle-in, strike (looking)

P2 - SL, low-out, 6-4

Inning Summary - All-in-all, not a bad inning from Bergesen. Chicago is, again, much more patient this time through the order -- as expected, Bergesen's margin for error is minimal. He didn't miss over the plate, and when he fell behind he was around where he wanted to be. Our book on him based on his MiL performances is right on with how he looks tonight. He has a chance to be successful when he's spotting his 2-seamer, but there just isn't any room to miss. His slider is an okay change-of-pace pitch, but the velocity differential isn't really there to throw-off hitters. He did a better job mixing the breaking ball this inning, but he needs to throw it for a strike more often to help his 2-seamer play multiple times through the order.

Sixth Inning

Thome

P1 - 2S, away, foul back

P2 - 2S, low, foul 1B

P3 - SL, out, ball (Zaun set up in -- great call but missed)

P4 - SL, low-in, ball (this was supposed to be the pitch before; executed this time)

P5 - 2S, out, ball

P6 - 4S, out, F8 (Thome didn't miss it by much, ball to warning track)

Dye

P1 - 2S, middle, strike (looking)

P2 - SL, low-middle, foul (back)

P3 - 2S, in, ball

P4 - SL, out, 6-3 (AVG depth on SL but set it up well; without previous pitch, Dye probably gets better wood)

Bergesen pulled.

Inning Summary - Bergesen executed his pitches well against Thome and Dye with the exception of P3 to Thome. His slider isn't a plus pitch, which means he needs to set it up for it to be effective. We see this in the Dye at bat, and likewise we see that Thome wasn't fooled in P4 after seeing the SL on P3.

Overall Impression - Good outing for Bergesen. This offseason, at CamdenDepot.com, we had Bergesen pegged as a leading candidate to be the first called-up and a decent bet to produce back-end quality outings. His first start fits right into that projection. There is lots to be excited about, including a terrific pace, generally good pitch location and a fine execution of a game plan. Things I'd like to see next time around? More sliders for strikes and changeups. It could be that some of his 4-seamers were changeups, but honestly it looked like he pretty much steered clear of that offering for the evening.

One last note, on a couple of occasions, Bergesen delayed in the stretch. One time, this was clearly to try and throw off the batter; the other led Getz to jump in his lead, almost creating a pick-off. Bergesen was poised and in reasonably in command of his arsenal. Baltimore fans should be pleased.

Final line: 5.2 IP, 4 SO, 3 R, 1 ER, 4 H, 2 BB, 95 pitches

________________________________________________

Keep Zaunie In There

2009-04-16T21:16:00.002-04:00

Here's a short one, but I thought it was mildly interesting and may lead to a bit of discussion. It regards the strange pattern of O's games thus far, which many people seem to have noticed.

________________________________________________
With Gregg Zaun behind the plate, the O's are 6-0 with 45 runs scored (though ZAUN! is hitting just .136/.269/.273) and 28 runs allowed (4.67 per game).

With Chad Moeller behind the plate, the O's are 0-3 with 11 runs scored (Moeller is hitting .364/.364/.727) and 41 runs allowed (13.67 per game).

Incredibly small sample size, but it at least merits keeping an eye one. (Not really, but it's kind of interesting.)
________________________________________________

Wieters vs. Price -- Norfolk at Durham, 4/10/2008 (7:05pm)

2009-04-10T11:20:00.004-04:00

The top two prospects in baseball will square-off tonight in Durham. Provided I'm home in time, I'll be posting here throughout the game and watching via live stream. Pre-game reading available after the jump.

________________________________________________
Here is some pre-game reading:

Durham Press Release

BaseballAmerica blogs from the game last night, focusing on Wieters (they'll be at it again tonight, so check in with them if I'm not able to log on).

MiLB.com profile on David Price for their Top 50 Prospects series.

MiLB.com profile on Matt Wieters for their Top 50 Prospects series.
________________________________________________

No Game Yesterday, so We Get a Weird Article

2009-04-08T10:01:00.002-04:00

Rick Maese wrote a column today.

The two major points that he has from the players' perspective is that they have no clue who he is and they want to know him. Basically, the way it is related is that the players are orphans. So what does this mean to you?

________________________________________________

Some more interesting points from the article:

1. Before opening day, only Mora and Roberts had met Angelos.
2. Trembley and MacPhail want him around more often.
3. Players fish in his pond.
4. He picks up dinner tabs.
5. Adam Jones had a rock star reaction to him.
6. Maese believes all of the players want him around.

Personally, I understand why Angelos has basically disappeared over the past decade. One, he is busy. Two, he is pretty much universally hated by the Baltimore fan. He made a series of completely awful management moves and plied his hand in the overall workings of the club, which occasionally resulted in rather awful results. That said, I don't care if he shows his mug around or not. I'm not sure why it matters to the players so much. I have honestly never cared about the guy who signs my checks. I care about my work. If he can walk around and act like an old sweet Grandpa with individually wrapped hard candy in his pocket . . . I do not mind him developing elaborate fist bumps with Brian Roberts and Cesar Izturis. Perhaps the only concern I would have is that Angelos might develop friendships and loyalty to some of the guys. That typically is not good for business in baseball where turnover is somewhat required to have success. Otherwise, we'll wind up with Mora playing third until he is 45.

Anyone care to expand or contradict these comments?
________________________________________________

Opening Day

2009-04-06T13:28:00.000-04:00

All thoughts and comments about Opening Day . . . let the conversation whirl at its own pace.

Using ZIPS and the run projector tool, pitching adjusted score:

Orioles 3.557
Yankees 4.975

Lineups behind the jump.

________________________________________________

Runs/G for Lineup: 5.082
Adjusted for CC: 3.557

Brian Roberts - 2B
Adam Jones - CF
Nick Markakis - RF
Melvin Mora - 3B
Aubrey Huff - 1B
Ty Wigginton - DH
Luke Scott - LF
Gregg Zaun - C
Cesar Izturis - SS

Jeremy Guthrie - P

vs

Runs/G for Lineup: 5.408
Adjusted for Guthrie: 4.975

Derek Jeter - SS
Johnny Damon - LF
Mark Teixeira -1B
Hideki Matsui - DH
Jorge Posada - C
Robinson Cano - 2B
Xavier Nady - RF
Cody Ransom - 3B
Brett Gardner - CF

CC Sabathia - P

________________________________________________

Final-ish WAR Projections

2009-04-01T20:26:00.003-04:00

With the roster more or less finalized, I've done likewise for the projections for the BeyondTheBoxScore WAR project (though final touches are of course a possibility). My spreadsheet is here, and the underlying stats are below.

________________________________________________
Offense:

Matt Wieters:
300 PA, .289/.359/.482, 10 HR, .365 wOBA

Gregg Zaun:
300 PA, .241/.340/.374, 5 HR, .320 wOBA

Aubrey Huff:
600 PA, .280/.344/.472, 22 HR, .357 wOBA

Brian Roberts:
625 PA, .285/.365/.425, 9 HR, .358 wOBA

Cesar Izturis:
550 PA, .260/.311/.327, 3 HR, .290 wOBA

Melvin Mora:
550 PA, .271/.333/.418, 16 HR, .334 wOBA

Felix Pie:
500 PA, .267/.322/.409, 10 HR, .323 wOBA

Adam Jones:
575 PA, .273/.325/.425, 15 HR, .331 wOBA

Nick Markakis:
650 PA, .301/.401/.493, 20 HR, .395 wOBA

Luke Scott:
575 PA, .262/.343/.476, 23 HR, .355 wOBA

Ty Wigginton:
475 PA, .271/.334/.469, 20 HR, .350 wOBA

Chad Moeller:
75 PA, .229/.281/.344, 1 HR, .286 wOBA

Ryan Freel:
300 PA, .254/.327/.353, 3 HR, .321 wOBA

Robert Andino:
100 PA, .235/.281/.342, 1 HR, .292 wOBA

Luis Montanez:
75 PA, .274/.326/.432, 2 HR, .333 wOBA

Total offense: .272/.342/.429, 160 HR, .338 wOBA

In 2008, the O's hit .269/.333/.429, 172 HR, .340 wOBA so things don't look all that different. Huff and Mora probably won't repeat their '08 seasons, but the additions of Wigginton and Wieters help. A bit above average again, while putting a plus defense on the field (especially in the outfield).

Starting pitching:

Pitcher	IP	ERA
Jeremy Guthrie	180	4.15
Koji Uehara	150	4.70
Rich Hill	100	5.00
Matt Hendrickson	80	5.13
Adam Eaton	70	5.30
Alfredo Simon	70	5.43
Brad Bergesen	75	5.18
Chris Waters	65	5.51
David Pauley	55	5.40
Danys Baez	35	5.47
Matt Albers	30	4.74
Radhames Liz	25	5.52
Total	935	4.95

Relief pitching:

Pitcher	IP	ERA
George Sherrill	55	3.79
Jim Johnson	60	3.85
Chris Ray	50	4.10
Dennis Sarfate	55	4.37
Jamie Walker	35	4.72
Danys Baez	40	4.70
Kam Mickolio	35	4.24
Brian Bass	45	4.58
Brad Hennessey	40	4.52
Matt Albers	35	4.38
Matt Hendrickson	25	4.32
Radhames Liz	35	4.73
Total	510	4.31

Pitching total: 4.73 ERA

Last year it was 5.15 so that's a big improvement. It's not really "better" though, as it's really hard to pitch that poorly (5.14 FIP too) two years in a row. Only two guys in the rotation with ERA's under 5 (Guthrie and Uehara) would make games hard to watch most days, so hopefully they can stay healthy all year. And there's a decent chance that someone (anyone, please) actually lucks into a pretty good season. Alternately, it's likely that one or two guys put up an ERA above 6. The idea is that those guys get replaced quickly (if the ERA is deserved) by someone who is less bad.

Overall, that team has about 78 wins worth of talent based on Wins Above Replacement. Given that they play in the AL East I would personally be inclined to knock another win or two off of that number, but a 75-77 win season is what I'm looking at. And no September collapse would be nice.
________________________________________________

O's MiL System in the top tier . . . how about next year?

2009-03-29T11:46:00.002-04:00

The Orioles minor league system has come pretty far in the last few years. Today, it stands as an organizational that is listed in the top three farm systems according to Baseball America (9th), Baseball Prospects (7th), and a quantitative method using Victor Wang's prospect worth analysis (6th). A typical response from some of the critics of the Orioles minor league system is that their recent upswing in quality is almost completely connected to Matt Wieters' worth. This is a fairly astute observation as Wieters does account for about a 35% of the MiL worth according to Victor Wang influenced calculations. With Wieters in the mix, the system is worth $112.1MM. You remove Wieters and that number drops to $79.9MM, which would slot us in 18th between the Mets and Reds. Other options would put us at $86.4MM (16th overall, Ross Detwiler), $100.7MM (10th overall, Matt LaPorta), or $88.6MM (16th overall, Philippe Aumont). Word at the time was that the Orioles did not expect Wieters to be there and, even if he was, was more likely to go with Detwiler or Aumont. Matt LaPorta was reported as a possible alternative. That said Joe Jordan has never mentioned who else he may have considered.

With that said, what does this mean for the rankings coming out in February of 2010?

________________________________________________

I'll be focusing on the Wang-related rankings as it makes up for generically ID'ing players with a more quantitative focus.

We can expect Wieters, Montanez, Reimold, and Bergesen to lose their rookie status (Reimold is probably the most arguable of the four to lose it). This would result in a system loss of about $39MM. This would reduce the overall worth of the system to $73MM. It appears as if Arrieta and Matusz will probably keep their value as top 25 pitchers. They both looked good this Spring and do not have shaky command issues, which is a typically value drop from one year to the next. That said, I do not think Matusz' value could increase and I think Arrieta's value is as likely to increase as Tillman's is likely to decrease. So, for the top three, I would probably just call it a push.

Going beyond that, Erbe, Snyder, Hoes, and Drake probably represent the best upside players. I would expect 1 or 2 to make it into BA's top 100 prospects. I think Erbe will sneak into BA's top 100 as he is already in there for other publications. This adds the team worth to $76.8MM. Assuming one of the other three makes it (let's saw Hoes), the value is raised by $10.5MM to $87.1MM. I doubt much else will change.

The draft will also be a contributor to next year's value. Conservatively estimating our selection as rating between the 25th and 50th ranked prospect in baseball and assuming the following picks with not be top 100 players . . . the Orioles are probably looking at an increase in value of $14-20MM. This places their final MiL value at $101.1-107.1MM.

We are probably looking at a loss of 9.7%.

How do you all feel about those assumptions?

Ideally, one would want a system that is operating with at worst a net zero loss in value each year. Losing a top ten player makes that rather difficult.

________________________________________________

Fun with Graphs: Ripken, Tejada, Jeter, Trammell

2009-03-25T08:22:00.007-04:00

This is basically another idea stolen from Beyond the Box Score. We do that well here, but at least we cite accordingly. Anyway, after the jump is a comparison of Cal Ripken Jr., Miguel Tejada, Derek Jeter, and Alan Trammell by graphically illustrating their seperate seasons' WARP from greatest to least.

Quick response: Man, Cal was so much better than any of them and Jeter is the second coming of Trammell . . . WARP-wise.

__

Ripken's peak was higher than Jeter or Trammell and his second tier seasons were about a half game higher. Miguel looks like a distant fourth. One thing to remember though about these graphs is that even though they are linked with a line . . . the data points are not directly related to the points on either side. It just looks prettier.

So discussion . . . hmmm, probably Jeter vs. Trammell is a good one to have. That might not be Oriole enough. I think one thing that we often miss was just how good Cal was. We tend to over look his first few years in the league, which were dominating. We also tend to view a lot of his numbers with a post '93 perspective. In reality, he was far better than many realize. I find it strange when on different boards how some will put forth the silly claim that Ripken is in the Hall because of the Streak. Really, his Streak happened because he was a dominant player who insisted on doing things his way.

________________________________________________

A Quick Excercise In Lineup Optimization...

2009-03-24T12:51:00.004-04:00

A quick look at lineup optimization and how it could be used on the projected 2009 Oriole lineup.

________________________________________________
I'm stealing this idea from Beyond the Boxscore but I don't think they are in any hurry to do this exercise with the Orioles so I'll do it here.

It's all about optimizing lineups, getting the most bang for your buck out of the players that you have. I think batting order is very overrated when it comes to run production (I think Sky at BtB has said the same thing) but it is interesting to see how unorthodox a lineup can look and, theoretically, score more runs per game.

Like BtB, I'll be using the standards found in The Book: Playing The Percentages in Baseball as well as David Pinto's lineup tool found at Baseball Musings.

Here are the main players for the Oriole lineup and their CHONE projections for OBA and SLG for 2009:


                OBA   SLG
B. Roberts     .359  .423
M. Mora        .328  .414
N. Markakis    .376  .474
A. Huff        .354  .466
L. Scott       .352  .462
A. Jones       .337  .444
G. Zaun        .313  .355
F. Pie         .320  .407
C. Izturis     .287  .326

Using the rules, the first step is to identify the top three hitters on the team. For the Orioles, that projects to be Brian Roberts, Nick Markakis and Aubrey Huff. These guys will take up the top three spots in the lineup.

For leadoff, OBP is king. You also want the batter with the least power among those three elite hitters on the team. Speed is icing on the cake. Hello, Brian Roberts.

In the two hole, it's the best hitter between Huff and Markakis. This hitter comes to bat in more big situations than any other hitter in the lineup. #2 belongs to Nick.

Cleanup should be one of the best hitters on the team and the guy with power. This would be Huff. You could quibble that Markakis may have more raw power next season and you could swap the two without much argument from me. But Huff is #4 for now.

The next two best hitters on the team are Adam Jones and Luke Scott. More value is gained in the 5 slot with a batter who hits singles, doubles and triples rather than living and dying with the home run. Scott doesn't live and die with the homer but Jones is probably a more well-rounded hitter is this regard. Scott goes to #3 and Jones is #5.

Melvin Mora, Gregg Zaun, Felix Pie and Cesar Izturis are left. From here, the order goes from best hitter to worst with a caveat that if you have someone who can steal bases, they add some value in the 6 hole. Only Izturis is a fair stolen base threat at this point in his career but the bat is so bad that I don't think he will leverage that skill too often. Mora is the best of what's left, followed by Pie, Zaun and Izturis.

Your "optimized" 2009 Orioles lineup:

1 Roberts
2 Markakis
3 Scott
4 Huff
5 Jones
6 Mora
7 Pie
8 Zaun
9 Izturis

Plugging this information into the Lineup Optimization Tool, this lineup is estimated to score 4.885 runs per game. If you swap Huff and Markakis, the total is 4.879 so I was barely correct with Markakis in the 2 hole.

Pinto's best lineup? It scores 4.898 runs per game.

1 Roberts
2 Markakis
3 Jones
4 Huff
5 Scott
6 Pie
7 Zaun
8 Mora
9 Izturis

Mora and Pie, as well as Scott and Huff are interchangeable with the same production.

One wrinkle: what if we add Matt Wieters? Wieters' CHONE: .349 OBA and .439 SLG.

Wieters would fit in at the 5 slot and bump everybody down:

1. Roberts
2. Markakis
3. Scott
4. Huff
5. Wieters
6. Jones
7. Mora
8. Pie
9. Izturis

Just the addition of Wieters...brings the runs per game up to 5.031

Pinto adds this lineup for a runs per game of 5.041 moves Wieters to number three.

How about the run production for a "traditional" lineup?

1. Roberts
2. Mora
3. Markakis
4. Huff
5. Scott
6. Zaun
7. Jones
8. Pie
9. Izturis

This configuration gives you a runs per game of 4.857.

Swap Wieters in for Zaun in the 6 spot? That gets you 4.999 runs per game.

Difference in runs per game using The Book rules vs. the traditional approach: .028

The Book vs Pinto? Pinto wins by .013

The Book vs The Book with Wieters? Wieters improves the rate by .146 runs per game.

Traditional vs. Traditional with Wieters? Wieters adds .142 runs per game.

Conclusion? I would love to see a team try one of these non-traditional lineups sometime but as you can see, it matters little. I suppose it might let you win a game or two over the course of a season which could be a facotr in a close race

But adding a better catcher? It improves jumps by at least a factor of 5.

So improving the actual members of the lineup means far more than the shuffling of said lineup. Go figure...

________________________________________________

Why I prefer Angelos to Ripken as the Orioles Owner

2009-03-23T08:50:00.003-04:00

Ok Guys, it just might be time to have a more full-throttle conversation. BORT has definitely gotten off to a slow start, but with the season soon approaching and this site being a place where some of us will post game time chats and recaps . . . much is to be looked forward to.

Over the past few years there has been a rumble about Angelos' intentions with selling the team. This past off season it was rumored that he was not aggressively seeking Mark Teixeira, A.J. Burnett, and others (not sure really what the O's had to do to be more aggressive in signing a very good 1B who did not want to come here and a perpetually somewhat injured Jekyll/Hyde starting pitcher, but eh) was to consolidate the salary structure and present it ready to be sold after this current season. This hopeful argument was then finished with the glee that Cal Ripken will ride throughout the kingdom on his white steed collecting offerings to generate enough cash to buy the team and restore us to our old glory, the Oriole Way.

Well . . . I'm not sure this is what Angelos is doing. I do not think he is consolidating payroll. I think there were good reasons not to dedicate the money to those players we lost out on. I actually advocated against signing either Burnett or Teixeira to megacontracts. All that is well and good for another discussion, but I will bring it back to why I do not want Cal Ripken to be the owner of the Orioles behind the jump.

________________________________________________

Ego and good intentions paved the way to 11 losing seasons and counting. That was Peter's human faility. He took over ownership of the Orioles in the early nineties and proceeded to spend a good deal of money to bring a championship to the Orioles. He also refused to allow Pat Gillick the freedom to make deals as he saw fit. Angelos' spending and his hesitancy to let Pat trade away quality players (i.e. Bobby Bonilla, Jeffrey Hammonds) let the Orioles into the playoffs in 1996 and a return trip in 1997. This success went to his head. Angelos may have been right contradicting Gillick's intentions, but it was not because he had a better head for baseball. Sometimes even the most brilliant baseball minds are wrong.

After '97, Angelos was certain he knew baseball well. He succeeded at law and now was succeeding at baseball. He then tossed Davey Johnson and Pat Gillick to the curb by not allowing them to do their own jobs. The next decade was spent with the team acting like the guyin your office in the corner cubicle who perpetually loses the fantasy baseball league you are in. The guy who does not know who the good young under the wire players are and who still thinks that Mike Piazza is still capable of playing ball. Angelos wants to win. I am sure of that. He wants to win as much as that guy in the corner cubicle in your office failing at fantasy baseball. They both just have no idea how to do it. Angelos wound up listening to Syd Thrift. The guy in the cube listens to Steve Phillips and Joe Morgan.

It seems now though that regional hatred and a decade of losing has humbled the old man. Angelos seems to think now that he does not know what he was doing and has left the team in the hands of a competent, maybe above average, GM in Andy MacPhail. MacPhail, so far, has been doing well collecting talent and avoiding large expenditures on free agents that have little use to us. Angelos may revert back to his previous form by signing the Albert Belles and demanding that we draft a Rice pitcher, but that does not seem to be what he believes these days. His ego has given way and his good intentions have led him to isolating himself from the baseball side of the operation.

This is what concerns me with Cal Ripken. He is a Hall of Fame player. He is a Baltimore Oriole. He is regarded by some to be capable of nearly anything. That is a problem. If anyone knows about his traveling habits, his basketball pickup games, and his general demeanor . . . he has an ego. That is fine. Ego is what let him become such a great baseball player. His skill set was amplified by his sheer determination. His playing days are worthy of awe and celebration. Just like Angelos' adeptness at being a trial lawyer should be worthy of awe and celebration. Likewise, the abilities and skills required for playing baseball well are not the same as the abilities and skills required for running a baseball operation. Ripken, I am sure, will have good intentions, but I question how he will handle his ego. Will he recognize that he has little to offer during the offseason or draft day? Will he try to minimalize the GM? Will he use an internal bully pulpit to have the Orioles operate as he sees fits? Would Ripken be a Billy Beane or a Matt Millen?

What says you, BORT? Am I off base? Should Angelos sell? What would be the ideal owner (specifically a name)?

________________________________________________

Guthrie Leading A Motley Crew

2009-03-17T19:43:00.003-04:00

The last post on outfield defense devolved into a discussion of the O's pitching staff construction, so maybe a more direct look at that is warranted.

________________________________________________
I don't think anyone is under the illusion that the Orioles are going to have a very good pitching staff - 2009 is a transition year before the Big Three (who still need a better nickname) and the other assorted minor-league starters begin to make their mark on the big club.

I've been trying to project the pitchers for the coming season, but the level of uncertainty is pretty staggering - question-marks abound.

Guthrie: Clearly the team's best starter, but can he keep putting up good ERAs despite merely OK peripherals? Other pitchers have managed it, but will Guts?

Uehara: Even though other teams didn't even see him as a starter, he's the O's #2. How well will he transition to the US, and especially the AL East?

Hill: Health? Control?

A whole host of other guys, including Hayden Penn (not much success since his call-up to the majors at a young age), Chris Waters (#5 starter, maybe), Radhames Liz (who's already been demoted to the pen), David Pauley (knocked around in Spring Training), Danys Baez (bad last time he was in the majors, as a reliever), Matt Albers (recovering from labrum injury), Troy Patton (recovering from labrum injury, and maybe not major league ready), Matt Hendrickson (not very good - better role is swing-man), Adam Eaton (not particularly good in recent years), Brad Bergesen (hasn't pitched at AAA and doesn't have the best stuff), Brian Bass (can't go deep in games).

I'm not even really asking about the quality of the innings - I'm just curious who's going to provide them.

________________________________________________

The Orioles' Outfield Defense...The Best In Baseball?

2009-03-16T09:28:00.002-04:00

This week, I'll pick up the banner for defense...

The Baltimore Orioles will possibly field one of the best outfield defenses in baseball in 2009. Adam Jones and Nick Markakis already have good track records as superior defenders and Felix Pie, a centerfielder in Chicago, should be a superior fielder in left. On a team that is likely to lose more than is wins for the 12th straight season, watching those three run down flies and gun down runners at the plate should be one of the bright spots of 2009.

________________________________________________
How good will they be? I figured I'd look at some of the best defensive trios of the last few years and see where they stack up. I used UZR/150 ratings from FanGraphs.com so I oculd only look at the last 8 seasons. I had two requirements for selecting the trios; 1) Each fielder has to play at least 800 innings in the field and 2) Each fielder had to have a positive UZR/150. I didn't want to have outfields composed of two superior fielders and one plodding slugger. Not the aim of this post.

I included the top 6, for reasons that will become obvious...

6. 2008 Baltimore Orioles


               UZR/150
N. Markakis      9.3
A. Jones        12.2
L. Scott         6.6
Total           28.1

That's right, even with the much-maligned glove of Luke Scott in left, the 2008 version of the Orioles outfiled is one of the top 6 in baseball in the last few years. Scott may not look pretty in left but he gets the job done. Markakis adds a superior arm and Jones' arm is well above average too.

5. 2004 Tampa Bay Devil Rays



               UZR/150
C. Crawford     22.1
J. Cruz, Jr.     6.9
R. Baldelli      3.6
Total           32.6

Most of this score is provided by Crawford and his amazing range but Cruz was no slouch in center and Baldelli's arm provided good value in right.

4. 2006 Atlanta Braves



               UZR/150
R. Langerhans   15.4
And. Jones      14.6
J. Francouer     5.8
Total           35.8

All very well-rounded fielders but only Francouer displaied a plus arm. All are now clinging to the major leaque carrers nearly three years later. I saw this outfield in person several times that season and they were pretty impressive and a lot of fun to watch.

3. 2003 Philadelphia Phillies



           UZR/150
P. Burrell   6.5
M. Byrd     13.5
B. Abreu    16.1
Total       36.1

Yes, only five years ago, Pat Burrell and Bobby Abreu were plus defenders. Burrell was not too rangy but did not embarrass himself. Byrd and Abreu were both good all-around fielders.

2. 2006 Toronto Blue Jays



             UZR/150
R. Johnson    23.9
A. Rios       12.8
V. Wells       7.2
Total         43.9

Thus trio was the only one to appear multiple times, each posting above-average UZR/150's from 2004-2006. The best defensive outfield of the new century so far.

1. 2004 Chicago Cubs



              UZR/150
C. Patterson   33.8
S. Sosa        11.1
M. Alou         4.6
Total          49.5

A young, rangy Corey Patterson, Sammy Sosa in his prime and an aging Moises Alou made for an unlikely candidate for the top of this list. But here they are, buoyed by Patterson's amazing range in center and the surprising range of Sosa and Alou.

Can this year's trio of Markakis, Pie and Jones rank among the great outfields of this decade? A lot will depend on Pie's learning curve in left and Jones' health in center. If Pie masters left and Jones stays healthy, they could certainly do so.

________________________________________________

Off-season Moves Not Made

2009-03-12T10:15:00.003-04:00

Quick hit this morning. We've talked a bit about the major and minor moves this off-season. What about the moves that weren't made?

________________________________________________
So far as I can tell, the two most talked about free agents for Baltimore to potentially go after were Teixeira and Burnett. There was talk about potentially trading for a SS like Hardy, or moving Roberts, Huff or Sherrill for some prospects.

What moves, if any, do you think Baltimore should have made? Do you think any opportunities were missed?

________________________________________________

The Offseason and The Minor Moves

2009-03-11T12:14:00.002-04:00

I'll throw out a thesis here for discussion. The moves the Orioles made this offseason are more important for who they allowed Baltimore to leave off the roster than the players they actually added. At least for 2009.

________________________________________________
Let's start with Felix Pie..

I'll focus on the bats. The addition of Pie allows Luke Scott to do a lot of DHing which in turn allows Aubrey Huff to play primarily at first base.

So we add Pie's WAR projection to the team (1.9) and subtract Millar's WAR projection (.4) for a net gain of 1.5 WAR.

The addition of Ryan Freel (WAR Projection: 1.8) allows players like Jay Payton/Freddie Bynum to be unnecessary (estimated platoon WAR Projection: -.4) for net of 2.2.

My point here is that I'm not sure the offseason acquisitions are that great but they do allow the O's to shed some players (or those types) who were pretty abysmal for Baltimore in 2008.

Am I off my rocker? Can we really evaluate the team this way?

________________________________________________

The Off-Season and Six Years of Markakis

2009-03-09T18:47:00.004-04:00

Keeping with the theme from this morning, I'd like to look at the other big contract the O's handed out this off-season; the 6 year, $66 M deal given to Nick Markakis.

________________________________________________
I copied most of this from my post at the time of the signing:

"I've lost count of the number of times I've suggested that the Orioles need to sign Nick Markakis long-term. With Nick going into his first year of arbitration, the O's have locked him up to a six year $66.1 M deal, including some incentives and a limited no-trade clause. No word of any team options, but I won't be too nit-picky.

Right now I've got Nick worth a monster 5.5 Wins Above Replacement next year (3.65 with the bat, 0.50 with the glove, 2.50 for the replacement level, -0.75 for the position adjustment, and pro-rated to 650 PA). And, though it's not close to being finalized yet, the feedback I've gotten on my initial projection of .301/.401/.493 is that it's too low. Assuming we don't project him to be even more awesome, Nick should be worth about $25.1 M next year (on the free agent market).

For arbitration, players tend to get 40%, 60%, and 80% of the free market value in successive years. That means the team "should" pay him about $161 M for those six years, assuming he stays at those 5.5 WAR every year and there's 10% salary inflation annually.

That's why I've said that no matter what contract Nick would be signed to, he'd still be a bargain. The difference between $64 M and $66 M (or whatever) isn't nearly as important as actually getting the deal done. The guy is a championship caliber player.

Needless to say, I'm really really happy about this."

Most of the professional projection systems don't have Nick rated as highly for 2009.

CHONE - .299/.382/.474
Marcel - .299/.378/.473
Oliver - .292/.364/.368
ZiPS - .294/.382/.497
PECOTA - .286/.368/.466

A year more the like the one above would drop about a full win from Markakis' value. Then if one assumes that he won't continue at that level and will miss playing time in the future, this takes away even more value. Even given these factors (which it seems are the general consensus, to the point that the contract discussions on non-Oriole sites project Nick to be worth slightly less in 2009 than he was in 2007 and only about $65-70 M for the six years), it would take a Ben Grieve like fall-off for the O's to not come out ahead.

Count me on the side that says Nick will be the cornerstone of Orioles teams for the next six years.
________________________________________________

The Off-season and Five Years of Roberts

2009-03-09T05:24:00.008-04:00

Jon's tied-up on "real world" matters, so I'm stepping in to moderate our first week here at the Round Table. Since we're all kicking things off at BORT, the Minor Leaguers will be shuffling off to MiL camp shortly, and the off-season is rapidly regressing into the rearview, Week 1 will loosely focus on the off-season. As always, any topics are welcome, but I'm curious what everyone thinks about that past few months of happenings. I'll start off with Jon's piece from Feb. 21 analyzing the Roberts deal...

________________________________________________
From Camden Depot, February 21, 2009:

This past week, the Orioles signed Brian Roberts to a 4 year, 40MM extension. Add this on to the current contract which pays him 8MM for 2009. I think it would be unfair to think of this as a 5 year, 48MM dollar deal as I would regard this year as a sunk cost that we would have been unable to relinquish given the current trade market. This post will focus on projecting Roberts' performance over the life of the extension and trying to determine whether this was a good deal to make.

Methods

Predicting Offensive Performance
The offensive projections for Brian Roberts were taken from the CHONE projections. I believe that this is an optimistic system to use given Roberts age and position. CHONE is quite useful for short-term projections, but is not really geared to predict long-term performance. PECOTA may be slightly better determining long term performance as it makes predictions based on similarity scores. I will be using the CHONE numbers though as they are publicly available and allow for a bit more transparency in this exercise. Performance is converted into LW runs and related to replacement level value after accounting for projected playing time. For second basemen, replacement level was considered 62 runs while average production was considered as 85 runs.

Predicting Defensive Performance
Last year, Roberts was rated as below average at 2B by UZR/150. We actually rated him slightly above average. We think over the course of the next 5 years, he will probably miss about 5-8 plays more with each following season. That might seem aggressive, but that follows the path of typical players at this position. With this in mind, it was simply assumed that he will give up an extra 4 runs each season. This makes him a slightly below average fielder this year (-5 FRAA) and a poor one in 2013 (-21 FRAA). It should also be acknowledged that in this work average fielding ability is considered on par with replacement fielding ability. There are arguments for and against this approach, but we feel it is a pretty accurate description of what is truly available at the replacement level.

Predicting the Value of a Win
Offensive and defensive production expressed as runs above replacement value were than added. The total runs value was then divided by 10 to determine WARP, which was then multiplied by assumed market value. It is generally accepted that a win over replacement production is worth about 4.5MM. There is growing sentiment that the economic crisis may put that in doubt, but I think a correction will occur and it will remain at about that level. That being so, I have attached the 4.5MM value to 2009 and increased the value by 10% each year. In 2013, the value of a win is projected to reach 6.6MM.

Results
In the table below, I have listed Roberts' offensive production over the four years of the extension as well as his total production.

What you will notice is that over the course of the four year extension, he rates above average for two of those seasons and below average for two of those seasons. His lowest mark with regard to replacement value is being worth 0.9 WARP in 2013. Overall, he produces 7.7 WARP over the course of the extension. This could also be expressed as 0.5 wins above average. This potentially becomes problematic as the second half of his contract has his as -0.9 wins above average. Particularly in his final season, it may serve the team best if Roberts is on the bench.

The following table shows Roberts' actual contract against his projected worth over the course of the extension.

The projected value of his performance is worth 42.5MM with 63% of that worth coming in the first two seasons. Overall, the Orioles pay below the predicted going rate of cost per win. Although in the final two seasons they pay above.

Conclusion
The contract is fair, but may not be in sync with the Orioles development plan. Roberts' career path is not in line with the young arms in AA and AAA that this team is relying on to make it competitive. If the team is viable in the playoff race in 2013, it will most likely see Roberts losing time to L.J. Hoes or another second baseman. At this point, we assume that the Orioles should be able to stow away a moderately poor contract this year. In the end, the open question is whether or not the 40MM spent here could have been better applied on future free agents, international talent, or the draft?

Personally, I would not have extended such a deal, but it is understandable why Andy MacPhail chose to do so. Actually, a reason why I would offer Roberts an extension is if I was not planning to depend heavily on the young arms for plus performance. He is probably the best option we can obtain to bat lead off and he is a fine player for the next few years. If this is the plan, then I would expect major acquisitions in the next offseason cycle. The holes the Orioles will need to fill are most likely 1B, 3B, DH, and a top tier starting pitcher.

Although I doubt Ty Wigginton will actually produce well for the Orioles, he is an option at first base (his defense at third is incredibly bad). Next year's market is awfully thin at first and he is projected to hit 268/338/466. Though, he probably should be protected against excellent right handed pitchers. This might mean that this would be a good role for Luke Scott to platoon part time at first. A more expensive option would be to extend Aubrey Huff's contract. He most likely will not repeat last season's amazing performance, so he might be an option. Outside the organization, they could sign Nick Johnson and have him face all right handers and Wigginton play against lefties and backup other positions. It may be a situation where we look to find a left handed platoon player at first. Again, Luke Scott might be that guy.

As mentioned earlier, third base should not be left for Wigginton. They could resign Melvin Mora to a one year deal, but I think that would not be ideal. His defense is dipping to below average, he has trouble charging the ball, and he is at an age where batting performance could evaporate and be left way below average. In fact, the two seasons prior to last year were not good and it will be unlikely that he will play a solid third in 2010. The FA market will offer Troy Glaus and Adrian Beltre. Glaus projects as a fine hitter and a decent glove at third base. His age (33) and his previous back issues make him a dicey acquisition. I view Adrian Beltre as a better choice. He is 2 years younger than Glaus and will probably offer a level of play that is not commensurate with his actual performance. Many underestimate Beltre's glove and SafeCo's effect on his offensive performance. He will never be an offensive star, but, if he continues to provide a win to a win and a half with the glove, he is easily worth a four or five year deal at 13MM. He is someone the Orioles should target.

DH is another position with in house options. Those include Aubrey Huff, Luke Scott, Luis Montanez, Ty Wigginton, and Nolan Reimold. Outside the organization, the list includes Jason Bay, Vladimir Guerrero, Bobby Abreu, and Hideki Matsui. If they do not expect Huff to play 1B for them, then they should probably play the market. This past year saw player value plunge for DH type outfielders. With the market so limited to AL only teams and with many teams already filled at the DH slot, it may make sense to roll the dice and see what is out there. At worst, the in house options should perform at a high enough level to provide average production.

Finally, a starting pitcher would have to be acquired. I think it is doubtful that the inevitable parade though the middle and lower rotation this year will produce much in terms of dependable pitching. In reality, we will probably have Guthrie (a solid middle order pitcher on a competitive team) and two lower order guys emerging from this season. Next year, we can probably slot one of the young guys (i.e., Matusz) at the five slot. This leaves us with a front line pitcher. Next year's market may potentially carry John Lackey, Eric Bedard, and Rich Harden. Signing one of these guys will make the team far more competitive.

A potential lineup would look like this:
2B Brian Roberts
CF Adam Jones
RF Nick Markakis
1B Aubrey Huff
C Matt Wieters
3B Adrian Beltre
DH Luke Scott/Ty Wigginton
LF Felix Pie
SS Cesar Izturis

To go along with a top tier starter and a collection of third and fourth pitchers. This team rates in a highly competitive division as a 91 win team. Adding Beltre and a pitcher like Harden or Lackey is all that is needed in this scenario. If ways can be found to upgrade other positions, it should make the team more capable of reaching that level. I guess we will know a year from now.

________________________________________________

Introduction to BORT

2009-03-08T00:57:00.003-05:00

Welcome to the Baltimore Orioles Round Table.

This is a forum consisting of several individuals who follow the Orioles. The present incarnation of the forum includes individuals from a wide-ranging spectrum in order to provide differing perspectives and seed potentially interesting conversation and analysis. Our goals are to challenge each other with aspects of transient issues pertaining to the club as well as providing a venue to share our own work with each other. With this forum, we hope to become better at doing what we do, which is to provide local and, sometimes, unique assessment.

The rules here are rather basic. This is a closed forum. The members of this forum are the only ones able to post and comment. Feel free to email any of us with comments if you so choose. If we find them applicable and interesting . . . we'll post them for you with proper attribution. If you have a topic or a link you would like us to discuss, we encourage you to contact us. We will also be steering the rudder in our own way. Each week, one of us will take a turn at moderating the conversation. A topic is chosen and we will sometimes keep to it. Expect a few posts each day and maybe some lively interaction.

Without further delay, here are the founding members of BORT:
Heath Bintliff - Brew Afficionado and Southern Fried Oriole Fan who operates Dempsey's Army;
Paul Bugala - Founder of the Bowie Baysox Blog;
Phil Finch, Novelist, Journalist, former BBWA member, and an intense Orioles fan since 1981;
Nick James - Raw, but toolsy, scouting at Camden Depot and daylights in law;
Lucky Jim - BORT's Poet Laureate and our second lawyer;
Daniel Moroz - Provides Frost King Baseball with statistical assessment and projection;
Jon Shepherd - Environmental Toxicologist and Jack-if-All-Trades over at Camden Depot; and
Jay Trucker - BORT's self-proclaimed witticist and a columnist for the Baltimore Examiner.

Thanks again to all the contributors and lets make this a fun year.

Regards,
Jon Shepherd
Camden Depot
BORT Founding Member

Round Table Coming Soon

2009-03-02T15:14:00.003-05:00

For those who have come across this site, we will open up on March 9th when I formally introduce the round table and open up the discussion. This will be a closed forum for the participants, but all are invited to follow along and email any of us. On the right hand side, you can see who is currently part of the group and we will shortly have five or six more to round it out.

Thanks,
Jon
Camden Depot