SocraticGadfly: Major League Baseball
Showing posts with label Major League Baseball. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Major League Baseball. Show all posts

January 08, 2025

Top blogging of 2024

Just as in my monthly "best of" pieces, not all of these were written in 2024, but all were in the top 10 of 2024 readership.

Not blogged about, but seen by me at 98 percent totality? The April solar eclipse. And, since it's about sun, moon, calendar and related issues, we use it instead of a "2024" graphic.

With that, let's jump in.

As with the monthly, we start from the bottom and head upward.

At No. 10? No, Juan Soto is not a generational talent, I said last April at the start of the baseball season, and said he wasn't worth $500 million, let alone $600, and certainly not what the Mets wound up paying him, a bloated $765 million.

No. 9 is tied to No. 5 and No. 7. All came from December, and we'll start with No. 5.

That was Dustin Burrows' claim to have enough votes to become the new Tex-ass Speaker of the House, and how poorly that claim seemed to face reality.

No. 7 was my laughing thoughts on current (then) Speaker McDade Phelan bailing out on an effort for re-election.

No. 9 was whether or not the Texas Republican Party would officially censure anybody for voting for Burrows instead of David Cook, and whether or not the recently added bar of a two-year GOP primary ban would hold up in court.

At No. 8 was my callout of Genocide Joe Biden's lies about seeing pictures of dying babies in Gaza. My extension, it was a callout of Kamala is a Zionist Cop, too.

No. 6? Even though I'm not a duopoly voter, maybe there was a bit of wishful thinking that ran behind my 2024 election prediction blown claim.

No. 4? A blast from the past, from 2017 in particular, in part because I posted it a few times here and there on Elmo Musk's Shitter aka Twitter. Actual Flatticus aka Alan Smithee in real life Chris Chopin and my savage takedown of the legend of Flatty got hot again.

No. 3 was an Eastertime Texas Progressives Roundup whose header riffed on my post in the roundup about Gaza and my callout of Charles Kuffner, aka Off the Kuff, for not writing about this, not even the DPS' kettling of pro-Palestinian protestors here in Tex-ass in general and even in Houston in particular. See above, Kuff the duopolist, at No. 8.

No. 2? Because I pushed it all election season long, my detailed reporting on how Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein was an investments hypocrite, above all related to Israel and Gaza.

No. 1? Perhaps foreshadowing Luigi Mangione — dental care as heath care and the insurance thereof.

March 14, 2022

Texas Progressives talk oil and baseball

The Roundup was long enough, and I didn't really have a Monday blog piece, so I split it into two. With that, let's dig in.

With oil at and above $100 a barrel, the Monthly explains (most of which I already knew) why Wall Street isn't financing new drilling in the Permian. And, it probably won't be financing new drilling for a while. Paying shareholders will come first. This is MeriKKKa, and even the awl bidness is going to have to accept that. One interesting part is that many Wall Street investors are also trying to greenwash themselves, and that adds more complications.

Chevron has paid to settle Clean Air Act violations, speaking of oil.

With baseball back, SocraticGadfly looked at lockout winners and losers along with season speculation about the Cardinals and other things. I didn't put anything there, but I expect the stRangers will finish out of the money even with a 12-team playoffs. The Stros will finish in, even if they don't resign Correa, but that will make the difference between just making the playoffs and making a post-season run.

G. Elliott Morris explains why it's hard to measure opinions in autocratic regimes.

Texas Monthly notes an upswing at Texas lifestyle clubs.

The Dallas Observer defends Peggy Hill, as a person and as a parent.

The Texas Living Waters Project urges lawmakers to seize this historic opportunity to transform the state's fragile water infrastructure.

The Austin Chronicle eulogizes "Sister" Bobbie Nelson.

March 11, 2022

Who won the MLB standoff?

As I tweeted yesterday afternoon about ESPN's first analysis piece, IMO Jeff Passan is wrong and (sad as I am to say it) Buster Olney and others are right. The owners won more. The players, other than perhaps top tier ones, lost, relatively speaking.

And, we fans who don't want a DH in the National League, don't want AL-time 5-hour games, and know that Commissioner Corleone Rob Manfred's pitch clock, IF implemented, will be toothless, lost. (Sidebar: No, Phat Albert Pujols really should not be that DH for the Cardinals. No, John Mozeliak likely will not spend what he should to get somebody to be that DH, like Kyle Schwarber or Anthony Rizzo, or even Kyle Seager And, I've even got a poll for that on Twitter.

First, not having a salary floor for "small-market" teams (Tampa-St. Petersburg is as big as St. Louis, as I noted in a blog post calling bullshit on many Rays excuses, and Miami is as big as Atlanta, so it's probably just that South Florida ain't MLB territory — and yes, Tampa is South Florida by latitude) is a loss for players. That's especially without a significant competitive balance tax for not hitting that floor, like losing revenue sharing $$, which could maybe be added to that pre-arbitration pool. And, players never brought that up, AFAIK, and also never brought it up in the previous contract negotiations several years ago. Jesse Rogers is right on that one.

Second, players (and traditionalist fans) lost with adding two more teams to the playoffs. Baseball's attraction was, for a long time, precisely that it was NOT the NBA or NFL.

This won't prevent tanking, first of all. Teams can just pretend to be in the hunt a little longer. A draft lottery, being from a smaller pool than the NBA draft lottery, won't put a major dent in tanking, either.

And, with not only "pitchers and catchers" but everybody being able to report to spring training voluntarily tomorrow, with mandatory on March 13, questions arise.

Can Shohei Ohtani actually prove me wrong and show that comparing him to Babe Ruth is not all hype? That ignores that Walter Johnson is being left out of the conversation.

Can the Cardinals, without Phat Albert, but just maybe with a Schwarber and definitely with a Paul Goldschmidt, Nolan Arenado, and Adam Wainwright and Yadier Molina in their [really, will this be it] final seasons, not only win a diminished playoff spot but the NL Central title? One betting house has the Cardinals behind the Brew Crew on NL Central World Series odds.

Can Mike Trout actually appear in the postseason with 12 teams qualifying? Per a wisecrack on Twitter, can Trout make his personality more exciting than meat loaf to help MLB market itself? Is it too late?

With the National League now having the DH, will an NL team with deep enough pockets (Giants, Dodgers out on the West Coast? Padres?) make Angels owner Arte Moreno an offer to take Ohtani off his hands?) And, because I like polls:

Will any team, not just the Cardinals, offer Phat Albert an actual contract and not just an invite to spring training? If so, will any of the offers be for more than the MLB minimum? If Pujols gets just an "invite," will he take it? If he gets a contract that's just the MLB min, will he sign it?

Per a question in a comment on a previous post of mine by Dave, on the possibility of early season injuries with shortened spring training? It appears that expanded early-season rosters will be allowed.

Will my interest in the season wane even more than my diminishing interest of past years?

All these questions and more await answers.

March 07, 2022

Yeah, about Pujols and that NL DH, and for the St. Louis Cardinals

On my blog post about "Quo Vadis Albert Pujols," Dave Minn asked about why I thought Phat Albert Pujols was at least one year older, if not two, than his officially stated age? I noted that if he were a year older, and tried going by his actual age, as has been explained in more depth elsewhere, he would have been ineligible for high school baseball. Without having graduated high school, he couldn't have immediately played for Osage Community College. So, he'd have had to have scrambled for a minor league contract. Thus, he had incentives.

That leads to this piece.

On that "Quo Vadis," I said "no" to Cards fans all schoolgirl giddy about the prospect of signing Pujols. In part for that reason.

Many of them are probably even more giddy now, picturing that picture at left happening again. (Update: Looking at that picture at left, vs the one above, Albert's neck is what, at least 1 full inch bigger in circumference. Probably 1.5-2 inches. Now that can happen in part from building up muscle due to more MLB-level weight training etc. [NOT roids; I'll kick you in the nads] but part of that is surely due to added weight over the years, and a non-insignificant amount of it.)

With Commissioner Corleone, Rob Manfred, reporting two and a half weeks ago that National League teams had signed off on a year-round DH, my fandom for MLB has taken another hit. A lockout extending into this season will increase that yet more. The NBA may indeed be ahead of MLB for me now. 

Now, to that issue, and to many better options for the Cardinals, even if they sign TWO free-agent batsmen.

As I said on the Quo Vadis piece, the Cards are lefty-light, not counting a couple of switchers. I had recommended Jonathan Villar, a switcher, as a much better upgrade than Pujols, and I stick by that even with the universal DH. As I noted, many teams today in the AL do NOT go the David Ortiz route. Rather, the DH spot is used to give position players a rest. Or, it's a mix; you have a lefty who sucks against lefties platooning there for 60-65 percent of the spot's at-bats, then you rotate position players in there for the rest of the time. Especially if Villar could learn a rudimentary 1B glove, along with the other three infield spots he already plays, that gives you time off to DH for both Paul Goldschmidt and Nolan Arenado. You can still add a regular "masher" type who might fit the lefty platoon angle, if one is relatively cheap, and sign that person (whoever it is) and Villar both.

As for those "regular mashers" who bat lefty? Kyle Schwarber's out there and would perfectly fit the bill. Anthony Rizzo might cost a bit more, but is another ex-Cubbie who'd fill the need, if Mozeliak could get DeWitt to break open DeWallet. And, in this case, Villar doesn't have to learn 1B. (Why nobody's tried to get Schwarber to do that, I don't know.) Kyle Seager would likely cost not much more than Schwarber and could probably be taught 1B as well as 3B plus DHing.

(With Schwarber and Rizzo both signed now, Seager is arguably the best lefty bat, especially among ones with at least bits of power, left available, per Spotrac.)

And, if you think the Cards are OK enough on middle infielders and speed not to sign Villar, one of the last three, as a single signing, is still better than Albert Pujols.

Add another name to the mix. Via MLBTR, Derrick Goold at the Post-Dispatch says as a part of a larger discussion that the Birds are interested in Colin Moran AND as both a utility guy and a DH.

Color me hugely underwhelmed, but not surprised. Comes off as a typical Mo cheap-ass move. Moran neither has the fielding flexibility of a Villar nor the masher ability at the plate of Schwarber et al.

==

As for Phat Albert in St. Louis? Just recently, owner Bill DeWitt himself pretty much kiboshed it. Mark Feinsand said on Twitter that three teams were interested ... but declined to say who they were. Sure. More troubling, per the first link, is DeWitt saying the lineup is pretty much set.

February 23, 2022

When will it be "pitchers and catchers" time?

On my blog post about "Quo Vadis Albert Pujols," Dave Minn (reinterpreting, I think it's Dave M in NJ) asks when I think the MLB season starts, among other things.

And, here's an extended version of my answer there.

As I told him, MLB Trade Rumors had a "betting window" open, in early January if I recall. I picked March 29 as the date for a settlement.

That's as the owners have said a settlement must be made by the end of the month to avoid delays to a full spring training and start of the regular season. The start of spring training was already postponed last week, and any further postponement will mean a delayed regular season, if everybody wants a full regular season.

Update: Owners said this afternoon if there's no settlement by Monday, regular season games will be cancelled and NOT made up. Players say if that happens? No expanded playoffs, period.

Now, I'm wondering if that wasn't too early for Adam Wainwright and Yadier Molina to lead the pitchers and catchers, let alone position players like Paul Goldschmidt and Nolan Arenado.

On the issues? I think both sides have room for major compromise.

My tentative ideas for how it should be solved are that  the teams need to go higher on the lux tax, and ideally, ditch arbitration entirely. They also agree to greater revenue sharing.

In turn, the players agree to a salary scale at least vaguely similar to the NBA, or NFL, a real team salary floor as well as lux-tax ceiling and a couple of other things.  By what I mean on at least vaguely similar to the NBA or NFL, there's a rookie salary scale, then a second contract scale, then in the NBA, a third contract scale, etc. The NBA is less flexible in some ways, but also has guarantees for Rookie of the Year, MVP, etc., as shown with new contracts for players like Luka Doncic, Nikola Jokic and Joel Embiid. However, it's also got a cap. It would be hard to implement a full-on version of this in MLB. Ditto for the NFL. As the desert Cardinals and the threatening to revert to Mistake by the Lake Browns show with Kyler Murray and Baker Mayfield, especially, the dead weight of quarterback salaries makes the tiers beyond rookie contracts tough to negotiate at times, even without NBA-type baked-in guarantees.

Back to the calendar. If I am right on that date? We're talking about May 1 for start of season, even with abbreviating the season. ...

That will lead to other problems. The longer this goes on, there will be additional battles over how many games to squeeze in, who "eats" how much on games that are cut, the possibility of extending the season, the possibility of everybody eating all the missed games in exchange for another one-off eight-teams per league playoffs and more.

And, as for whether Phat Albert Pujols should be part of the team, whenever the season starts? That's the subject of another blog post.

January 10, 2022

Shohei Ohtani in post-2000 context

Now that we know Shohei Ohtani, with his two-way heroics, produced "exactly" 9.0 WAR this year, let's look at this in terms of not the best pitching ever, or the best batting ever, but by recent performances. And, by recent, I mean, the start of this century. I've already looked at just the VERY best post-WWII modern era performances and found him ... kind of wanting.

Who, in recent years, has done as well as him or better? And Baseball Reference is making it easy. Using its page for top single-season WAR, then hitting the "by year" column to put newest up top? BUT WAIT THAT'S NOT ALL as of Dec. 9, 2023.

To update info on Ohtani, he was at 9.6 in 2022 and 10.0 this last season, and he is now playing with Mookie Betts, who (see below) still has his top single season better than Ohtani's and in a virtual tie for second-best. And? He's stuck in a no opt-out contract that runs through his age 39 season, and that doesn't hit $35M, half of Ohtani's new deal, until 2028.

Oh, and contra somebody on Reddit who doesn't identify as a Yankees fan by flair but comes off as one? No, Betts' 2018 is not an extreme outlier, and no, not due to Alex Cora and possible cheating. His 9.5 WAR shows it wasn't an extreme outlier, as does his 8.3 here in 2023. That 9.5 was in 2016, before Cora got to Boston. Oh, not every Sox player had a career year in 2018. Jackie Bradley Jr. was much better in 2016, for example.

Alex Bregman, 9.0, 2019.

Mookie Betts, 10.7, 2018, and 104th best all time. That, of course, means that while Ohtani gave us the fun of two-way play, and had a very good year, well, it wasn't THAT good. Also 9.5, 2016.

Jacob deGrom 10.4, 2018.

Mike Trout, 10.5, 2012 and 2016, and above 9.0 other times.

Aaron Nola, 9.7, 2018.

Max Scherzer, 9.2, 2018.

Zack Greinke, 9.5, 2015, and 10.4, 2009.

Cliff Lee, 9.0, 2011.

Albert Pujols, 9.7, 2009, 9.2, 2008.

Adrian Beltre, 9.6, 2004.

Ichiro Suzuki, 9.2, 2004.

Randy Johnson, 10.7, 2002, 10.1, 2001.

Pedro Martinez, 11.7, 2000, and above 9.0 pre-2000.

I've omitted a big-headed Giants outfielder, a former Yankee, Ranger and Mariner friend of J-Lo, a bleached brunette Cub, and an A's first baseman who might be less obvious, for an obvious reason.

OK, so, even without them? Without known chemical enhancements?

Just since 2000, we've had 13 players with as good or better seasons than Ohtani. Six of them did it twice.

Update, Dec. 9, 2023: Even looking at his 10 WAR this year? Six have done better. And Johnson bested even that twice, as did Trout. Greinke's two best are also still equal or better to Ohtani's two best, like Betts.

This is part of why, on my previous post about Ohtani, I said, "let's see him do it again," before we put his name in too bright of lights.

Update, Dec. 9: 2023: And, yes, he did do it again, for a select pantheon. But, we know he won't do that in 2024, and I'm not holding my breath over 2025 or beyond.

Ergo, contra Ben Lindbergh at The Ringer, he's not totally a singular talent.

Or, to put it another way? His year may have been emotionally special. Sabermetrically special it was not, at least not THAT special. And, David Schoenfield, Bradford Doolittle and the other largely Dum Fuq types at ESPN baseball (largely excepting Jeff Passan) can shut up otherwise.

This will also partially address a commenter on my previous "You're No Babe Ruth" post. That's true even with him winning the MVP. As Red Satan's story notes, nothing in 2020 indicated something like this would happen. And, even his combined 2018-19 didn't show this much on the batting side, while also having his TJ surgery on the pitching side. Call me back in 9 months, midseason 2022 or so. Until then, let's not be Liberty Valance and printing the legends.

Some of these people turned out to not be THAT good. Cliff Lee, once seen as having a shot at the Hall, kind of hit a wall of nagging injuries his last year and semi-voluntarily retired. I think we know that that was a clear one-off by Nola. DeGrom may wind up permanently injury-wracked; also, not entering MLB until age 26, he's behind the curve on total WAR and counting stats. 

But, of those doing it twice? Martinez and Johnson are in the Hall. Pujols and Trout will be. Greinke already has a puncher's shot, and if he doesn't retire, and picks up two or three 1.5 WAR years, will complete his shot. Betts is on the way.

Sidebar: Doesn't this also show that a lot of people still underrate Zack Greinke? Sidebar 2: Had you forgotten about Cliff Lee? (That said, there's a kind of asterisk on him. His pitching WAR was 8.5 that year, but he raked enough for an extra 0.5 WAR at the plate.)

January 05, 2022

The year in blogging 2021

Here's the 10 most read posts from the past year. Not all are from 2021, just the 10 most read. The biggest from this year were primarily baseball-related.

No. 1? My old 2014 post about the "debate" between Ken Ham and Bill Nye the Science Guy, aka Bill Nye the Attention Whore, took off midsummer last year and has trended since. With the photoshopping by moi, but of course!

No. 2 is my story about St. Louis Cardinals vice president John Mozeliak rat-fucking manager Mike Schildt for opening his mouth too much.

No. 3 is even older than No. 1. It's about a Google dustup with China, coming even before the rise of Xi Jinping Thought, which makes Google's "do no evil except capitalism" even more relevant today.

No. 4? Shohei Ohtani, indeed I said, until he has a second year of this, is no Babe Ruth.

No. 5? My COVID-related wondering, along with many other skeptical minds, of just what did happen to John Ionannidis.

No. 6? Me calling out the Cooperstown veterans committees for choosing the likes of Jim Kaat, Tony Oliva and Gil Hodges for the Hall.

No. 7? From 2019, how the Genetic Literacy Project doesn't always get it right, like with the relative UN-healthiness of the Impossible Burger.

No. 8? My thoughts on the retirement of Buster Posey and his shot (and that of Yadier Molina) at the Hall.

No. 9 is also an old one from 2010 — can a college discriminate against a religious group?

No. 10 is from 2018. It's my callout of Marcy Wheeler, aka Emptywheel, for drinking 190 proof Putingate and narcking on someone still unnamed.

October 29, 2021

More debate on just how special Shohei Ohtani's season has been

This is an updated post of one I did about this subject from the start of last month, and it's being done for several reasons.

First, now that we're at the end of a season, we can further peruse this debate, especially with debate gearing up for the playoffs and Shohei Ohtani lamenting that the Angels aren't there and broadly hinting they need to do more, though he later said he's perfectly open to signing a new contract with them.

Second, it's due to Baseball-Reference briefly being hinky or wonky, or seemingly so, when I made that last post.

My piece at the start of September didn't immediately show up on the pages of either Ohtani or Mike Trout, and since the piece was about the former, and built on a piece I did three years ago about the latter, that's ... er, problematic? It eventually did, but don't ask me more. An additional bit of perplexment that approaches frustration is that B-Ref sometimes changes on a daily basis, if not weekly, the exact form of the full HTML for the players involved, specifically where some of the "cruft" goes in relation to the URL for a player's page. That, in turn connects to B-Ref having a limit on how many linked players "work" in a piece, so someone doesn't spam the site with blog posts about 40 players.

To try to make sure that we don't hit that problem, I will do a couple of things that also make this a full update. Per David Schoenfield's stats guys at ESPN objecting that WAR, especially back pre-1920, greatly favored pitchers, and since Ohtani's biggest damage this year has been as a batter, we'll look only at batters, and only post-1945, that is, getting us into some version of the modern age.

With that, let's update.

Three years ago David Schoenfield tried to claim that Trout was on track for the best season ever. He was wrong and I thoroughly explained why.

But, Schoenfield has moved on. Now he's hinted that Ohtani might be among the best, and, once again, from what I can see before I hit the ESPN+ paywall he ignores Walter Johnson's GOAT 1913 season. (To be half fair, in 2018, it wasn't just Schoenfield; it was a whole set of ESPN clusterfuckheads.)

So, no, Schoenfield Ohtani's year, while it could have been in the 10-WAR range if he finished out strong, is NOT Babe Ruth. Or Barry Bonds. Or Mike Trout.  (And, of course, he didn't even finish in the 10-WAR range, which will be the subject of a FOURTH post in a couple of weeks.)

And certainly not Walter Johnson.

Also, as for the two-way claims? Well, not totally so fast. In his peak, Johnson appeared as a batter in 55 or so games for several years straight. (That said, most those years, he pitched 48 or more games.) Twice he was over 60 games. In 1914, one year after his peak, he had 160 PAs. In 1918, 167. Rounding up a 0.9 year, he had seven straight years of 1.0 or more WAR at the plate. (Johnson also in 1913 tied his career best in batting with a 109 OPS+. You can see more about Big Train at my post linked up top.

I now see that some dood from Yahoo Sports, Jack Baer, via MSN, has doubled down on Schoenfield's nuttery. And, he's wrong, as I discussed two weeks ago in what I decided needed to be a separate breakout post.

Now, on the 2018 piece, ESPN Stats and Info had one of their staff snootily tweet back to me when I tweeted this, that it was about position players only.

Well, Schoenfield never said that. (And, this year, he certainly hasn't. At least, he didn't before I hit the paywall screen.)

This dude said "it was implied."

I said "oh really"?

He then said that WAR favored pitchers, especially in the dead ball era.

But, with this, we're going to transition to batters and move beyond the previous piece. That's in large part because Ohtani earned 60 percent of his WAR as a batter this year, and it's how he's best known and why people hit the highlight clips.

We're going to look at batters only, and we're going to go Schoenfield et al one better, and do modern era only, as in, post-World War II, with night baseball, the start of integration, and then expansion. This will also partially address a commenter on my previous "You're No Babe Ruth" post.

First, and what surprised me? Carl Yastrzemski, 12.4 WAR in his 1967 Triple Crown year, is the only batter from semi-live ball or full live ball besides Ruth in the top 35 on B-Ref's single-season WAR list, and he's the ONLY modern era player in the top 45. Yep. Ahead of Bonds. Or Trout. THAT is how Dum a Fuq Schonefield is.
 
OK, others?
Bonds, 11.9 WAR, 2001.
Cal Ripken, 11.5 WAR, 1991.
Mickey Mantle, 11.3 WAR, 1957.
Stan Musial, 11.3 WAR, 1948.
Willie Mays, 11.2 WAR, 1962.
Mantle, 11.2, 1956.
Mays, 11.0, 1964.
 
If you let me go a bit lower?
Mookie Betts, 10.7, 2018.
Ted Williams, 10.7, 1946.
Bonds, Trout (twice), Yaz and Robin Yount at 10.5.
 
So, at 11 WAR, batters only, modern era only, we still have six batters way, way ahead of Ohtani. Dropping to 10.5, we've got nine. (If we went to the pre-modern era, whether live or not so live on the baseball, I'd have a couple more batters.

And, this is just one season. Bonds (asterisk, of course) Mantle and Mays (no, greenies aren't roiding), Yaz (forgot him at first!) and Trout all broke 10.5 WAR twice.

As far as surprises? 

After not realizing that Yaz was that good? Ripken would be second. He was 30, which yes, is well younger than Bonds, but ... unaided by chemicals, unlike as Bonds was, at a tough defensive position, and 1,500 or so games into his consecutive games streak. It's one of two 10-WAR seasons for him. (Flip side is that you get more dWAR, if you're good, at SS.)

Yount is the No. 2 surprise, as in a kind of under the radar deal.

There's also surprises as to who's not on the list, including one outfielder. One VERY well known outfielder.

But, if you want to talk about standouts? Playing the toughest position besides catcher, and two-thirds of the way into that consecutive games streak, with much of that first two-thirds involving the complete game of every game? Let's talk Ripken.
 
Yes, let's enjoy Ohtani. Let's even enjoy Red Satan pumping up a story of the inscrutable, Zen-like Ohtani that, on second thought, it sounds like it comes dangerously close to playing on a racial stereotype, and only three months after Stephen A. Smith stuck his foot in his mouth about Ohtani. I'm not saying Tim Keown had unconscious intent. But ...

==

And now that we know he ended his year at 9.0 WAR, I can do another story about this. And will. And, while he did this as a two-way player? 9.0 WAR, per the players above, ain't 10.5 WAR.

And, if you want to note the two-way? Besides Betts, but not listed here, two pitchers in this century alone both broke that 10.5 WAR hurdle as well, so just stop it. And, yes, that's the subject of another post on Shohei Ohtani, man vs legend, coming up in a couple more weeks.

November 04, 2019

The real single-season home run record holder is ???

If you're like me, you don't want to give it to either Barry Bonds or Mark McGwire before him cuz roids. Third in line is Sammy Sosa, and scratch him, too, of course.

So, Roger Maris?

First, for those of you who say "greenies" back then, I've said more than once that IMO they didn't have the same effect as steroids or HGH, especially when you compare a bowl of pills in a locker room vs Bonds' scientific support.

Second, I simply don't picture Maris doing that.

So, Maris? Asterisk of Ford Frick or not?

But, but, but ...

He, like Ruth before him, played on that short porch in Yankee Stadium's right field.

So ....

A sabermetric, drug-free home run record holder?

Let's change that to ... sabermetric, drug-free, expansion free.

Per a commenter below, and my own check on splits, not only in 1961, but basically not at all during his seven years in pinstripes, did Maris have any notable advantage, including not at all in 1961.

BUT? 1961 was an expansion year, and, as with later expansions, it benefited batters at pitchers' expense, in general.

Maybe Hank Greenberg and his 58 in 1938. Briggs (Tiger) Stadium back then, as until it was torn down early this century, was a barn. I couldn't find park factors back quite that far, but Baseball Prospectus goes back to 1950. (If you're a stathead, bookmark that.) And, it consistently shows it was a barn, and though not going just on homeruns, but presumably connected to that, has 1B, 2B and 3B factors. Remember Greenberg was a rightly. 3B factors generally are the worst looking, as far as the batter side of the equation, in old Tiger.

Add in the rumor, at least, that Greenberg got a lot of intentional walks late in the year because of racism, as in nobody wanted "that Jew" breaking Ruth's record, even as Hitler was expanding his power and virulence.

And a tidbit: Jimmie Foxx with a higher BA led Greenberg on OPS and OPS+.

It's worth remembering there that Greenberg actually enlisted in 1941, and missed all of three years plus most of a fourth. Ted Williams, of course, missed five years from two wars, and Bob Feller missed three-plus, almost as much as Greenberg. Had Hank gotten all his years in, he surely would have been in the top 10 in 1B JAWS. I'm sure he'd be behind Lou Gehrig and Albert Pujols, and probably Foxx, but, oh, right about at Cap Anson and above Jeff Bagwell? Yes.

A-Rod, of course, also had 58 one year with the Mariners, but see above.

On the other hand, Briggs was NOT a barn for Greenberg. Check my comment below.

So, is it Giancarlo Stanton?

First, I think he's clean, so no Bonds-type asterisks. Second, 2017 Miami's Marlins Park was almost as much a barn as Tiger Stadium. Third, unlike Greenberg, Stanton played in the post-integration era, plus (and this swings both ways) night baseball, and coast-to--coast travel (which probably affects position players more than pitchers).

And, 59 homers tops 58, setting aside Greenberg's intentional walks.

On the other hand? In both 2017 and his second best year, 2014, he, like Greenberg, hit more at home despite being in a pitcher-friendly park.

Note on that: MLB didn't track intentional walks at that time. That said, Greenberg had a career high of 119 total walks. Stanton had 13 IBBs and 98 total in 2017.

January 17, 2019

Bryce Harper remains unsigned — how much longer?
And ditto on Manny Machado

So, the Bryce Harper free agency derby carries on, presuming agent Scott Boras is still hunting something like 10/$350 and either one or two opt-outs.

See the poll at upper right or click the link to vote on when you think he signs a deal. Note that we've already gone past the first cut-off point I mentioned.

Do you look at the guy with the 10-WAR year and say, yeah, we hope we get even close to that?

Or do you look at the guy with the THREE sub-2 WAR years (and only one of those due primarily to injury) and say "Too much risk factor"?

Per the third slide in this round-up by Derrick Goold, I presume the Cardinals, John Mozeliak and Mike Girsch have already decided to do the latter.

Let's compare Harper to a big contract the Cards were willing to take on in trade just 12 months ago, namely, Giancarlo Stanton, as I've already done this on Twitter in exchange with Bill James.

The 10 years left on his contract, at $285 million, are actually "just" $28.5 million AAV. (Take away his option year, and 9/$260 is approximately $29M AAV.) But, you'd pay him 10/$350 if Bryce is getting that, right? Even if Bryce is 3 years younger?

So, let's look at WAR.

Harper, seven years, 27.4 WAR is 3.9 per year. Stanton, nine years at 39.2, is 4.35 per year.

Let's throw out best and worst years of both and check that.

Harper? 16.3/5=3.26. Stanton? 27/7=3.85.  You've still got that one-half WAR per year difference. Another way of putting this is, if you throw out the best year of both, Stanton still has four 4-WAR seasons and Harper two. (If you want to round up Harper's 3.7 year, we get to do that with Stanton's 3.8.)

In addition, other than when he got hit in the face by a pitch, Stanton was a much better health risk.

Add in that Harper has, in the past, been valued more highly on defense than Stanton and B-Ref putting him at -3.0 on dWAR in 2018 should be of some concern.

Looking beyond the Cards, remember that Boras doesn't always win, even when he waits and waits and waits. Just last year, he did get a win with J.D. Martinez, but not with Jake Arrieta. Or Mike Moustakas. (Who sits and waits again this year after his one-year contract a year ago.) Or Greg Holland.

What if, per Yasmani Grandal reportedly turning down a solid deal from the Mets, and eventually having to eat a bit of crow on a one-year deal with the Brew Crew, that Washington's original offer to Harper was the best Harper and Boras have seen and the best they will see?

As noted, Boras has had his share of "losses" before. Just never one potentially this big.

What if he and Harper start seeing things crossways from one another, whether it's Harper wanting to capitulate first or Boras?

"That's a clown question bro."

Maybe, maybe not.

Some of this may be at the edges of collusion. I'll likely tackle that in a blog post after this year's free agency class clears the field.

Some of it is the Billyball and analytics revolution — which Boras was trading on a decade ago — hitting enough front offices that it's now been flipped against him. Cards owner Bill DeWitt, and more straightforwardly, his son, Bill DeWitt III, just said this.

Speaking of, let's take a briefer look at Manny Machado, with the same ideas as above, in part because he's represented by Dan Lozano, the biggest agent competitor to Boras. In his case, I am going to throw out a partial rookie season as well as his worst full season.

Manny is at almost 6 WAR per year. The only slight eyebrow raisers are a subpar for him 2017 and bREF ranking him negatively on defense in his Orioles first half of 2018.

If a WAR is worth $7M, and you knock him down to "just" 5 WAR a year, Machado is in today's baseball world easily worth $35M/year for 8 years, or more. In short, he's worth the Bryce Harper contract that Scott Boras is peddling for Harper.

Where are we at?

On Harper, we've not heard any indication that anybody has made a better offer than what the Nats did in-season last year. What if the market dries up enough they pull back in their original offer themselves, knowing they're still ahead of everybody else? Like 9/$260 instead of 10/$300, while throwing in an opt-out year they didn't originally offer.

On Machado, yesterday, MLB Trade Rumors said the White Sox offer was 7/$175. Later yesterday, though, Lozano said that report is totally untrue. Maybe so, maybe not. We know Lozano fell short of his agent grand slam hopes with Albert Pujols, and occasionally manipulated the media in his chase of attempting to pass Alex Rodriguez for biggest contract ever.

And, in a follow-up, there IS at least one "mystery team," because Machado met with one.

Meanwhile, hit the poll on Harper.

October 18, 2018

Cowboy Joe West not first ump
to blow postseason interference call



Rightly, baseball fans in general as well as Houston Astros fans, are ragging on Cowboy Joe West for taking away a two-run homer from Jose Altuve last night and instead calling him out on fan interference committed against Red Sox outfielder Mookie Betts.



Per ESPN, the MLB rule is clear. One the ball goes over the wall, you cannot call interference. A fan has a right to that ball. And per replay, the ball was clearly over the wall. So was Betts' glove. Whether Cowboy Joe is more blind, re replay, or more an idiot, re the rule, I don't know. But the only interference was him interfering with the game of baseball.

But he's not the first. The two other most egregious interference blown calls in the postseason were about player interference, though.

I still remember the throwing error by Carlton Fisk when Ed Armbrister dropped a bunt to advance Cesar Geronimo, and home plate ump Larry Barnett did NOT call interference when Armbrister got in Fisk's way, because he claimed it was not "intentional." Intent is not part of the interference rules because you can't divine intent.



On the other hand, intent was pretty obvious when Reggie Jackson used his hip, non-running from first to second, to block Bill Russell's throw to first to double-play Lou Pinella.



True that Rule 7.09F requires player intentionality in some subsections. But, per subsection (d), Reggie was "gather(ed) around any base." And subsection (e) doesn't require intentionality.

And, Cowboy Joe didn't even have the worst blown call on fan interference. That would be Rich Garcia blowing the Jeffrey Maier call and giving Derek Jeter a home run as Tony Tarasco waited to catch it.



Oh, Sawks fans? In 2013, that WAS interference, or technically, obstruction by Will Middlebrooks against Allen Craig. Not blown. Because, again, intent isn't part of the rule, and Middlebrooks wasn't making a play on Craig.

October 23, 2017

MLB realignment? Manfred is half right

Supposedly, Major League Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred wants to expand from 30 to 32 teams, with Montreal and Portland being the targets.

So far, so good. For scheduling reasons, the league needs to either add two teams or lose two, if it’s not going to go back to the old 16-team National League and 14-team American League, in my opinion. Montreal is prepped for the return of baseball, and Portland is probably the best option for a second team. For more on the "which cities" issue, see this old blog post.

After that?

Manfred also wants to junk the AL and NL, merge them into one combined league and foist (yes, that’s the word) the designated hitter on all 32 teams.

Sorry, Rob, but you lost me there. Yes, I know many other leagues internationally, as well as US minor leagues, use the DH. Yes, I know that DH ideas were broached nearly a century ago, so appeals to the pitcher batting as “traditional” aren’t all-powerful.

But, I can also say that I’m sure the DH is part of why AL games are longer than NL ones, another matter of concern on Manfred’s plate.

Manfred supposedly wants to add yet another playoff team in each half of a combined league, or whatever, for 12 total.

I’ll pass on that one, too. I have no desire for baseball to become yet more like the NFL, let alone the possibility of the NBA or NHL in a watered-down playoff system.

So, let’s take the top part of his idea and stop there.

Let’s add one team each to the current AL and NL and go from there.

Here's how this plays out in terms of alignment and scheduling.

We could have either four four-team divisions per league, or two eight-team divisions.

I have four playoff teams either way, with allowing both wild cards to come from the same division with eight-team divisions. That actually tightens things up a bit from the current.

Here's how the scheduling would work.

Eight-team divisions:
1. Three games against each team in one division from the other league = 24 games.
2. Eight games against each team in the other division in your league = 64 games.
3. Eleven games against four teams in your division and ten games against the other three = 74 games and you're at 162.

Four-team divisions, option 1:
1. Three games against each team in two divisions from the other league = 24 games.
2. Eight games against each team in the other three divisions in your league = 96 games.
3. Fourteen games against the teams in your division = 42 games and you're at 162.

Four-team divisions, option 2:
1. Three games against each team in two divisions from the other league = 24 games.
2. Eight games against eight teams in the other divisions in your league and nine against four teams = 102 games.
3. Twelve games against the teams in your division = 36 games and you're at 162.

In any of these cases, two 12-game sets of interleague games, say mid-May and end of July, takes care of that. The rest of the season is in-league baseball, with scheduling somewhat slanted toward one division, but not overly so.

Manfred has also supposedly talked about a shorter schedule and a day off every week. Well, baseball already has more days off than 20 years ago. Add yet more and a 12-team playoff set, even with a shorter schedule, and we’ll likely have a November World Series about every other year.

With eight-team divisions, I can get his desired 156 games AND kill interleague play entirely. Play each team in your division 12 times and the other division nine times. Or with four-team divisions, play each team in your division 12 times and 10 times for the rest of the league. Keep a four-team playoff for each league and we're set.

Pay me $50K for a consulting fee and we're good to go, Rob!



May 01, 2017

Jurickson Profar is REALLY sucking if his replacement is Pete Kozma

The Rangers infielder Jurickson Profar has been optioned to the minors to be replaced by Yankees castoff and, before that, Cardinals non-standout Pete Kozma. The Pete Kozma for whom I invented the Kozma Line, the sabermetric version of the Mendoza Line named after Mario Mendoza.

THAT Pete Kozma. (Who was himself sent by the Cards down to Memphis when he fell below the Kozma Line.) The Pete Kozma who didn't even play in the majors in 2016.

Weirdly from the Rangers' POV, Profar is hitting better than Kozma, relatively speaking, this year, and the two of them are washes for each other in fielding stats.

MLB Trade Rumors has more on their possible reasoning. Basically, the stRangers still have hopes for Profar and don't want him to gather rust and butt-splinters on the bench, whereas Pete Kozma is already ... Pete Kozma, and at the baseball-old age of 29, unlikely to ever be anything but Pete Kozma.

March 18, 2016

Cubano béisbol players coming direct to America?

Yasiel Puig and Aroldis Chapman
So, with a Treasury Department announcement from Wednesday, are we finally past the point of the likes of Aroldis Chapman and Yasiel Puig not having to engage in dangerous escapes from Cuba in order to play béisbol in America?

Well, we could be closer to that, but there's going to be a number of factors involved before we're THAT close to that.

So, let's start by taking a look at what the Treasury Department, which oversees sanctions against Cuba, had to say on Wednesday.

Here's the key points from that:
Cuban nationals in the United States in a non-immigrant status or pursuant to other non-immigrant travel authorization will be authorized to earn a salary or compensation, consistent with the terms of the particular visa, provided that the recipient is not subject to any special tax assessments in Cuba.  U.S. companies will be authorized to engage in transactions related to the sponsorship or hiring of Cuban nationals to work or perform in the United States similar to nationals from other countries, provided that no additional payments are made to the Cuban government in connection with such sponsorship or hiring.
Note the items in bold.

Commenter Historophiliac, at a group baseball blog where I also contribute, notes that Cuba signed a deal in 2014 with the KBO to let Cubans play in Korea in exchange for getting a cut of Cuban salaries. But, that's clearly cash, and wouldn't cut the mustard unless put into a shell company.

MLB, in requesting early in March that the Treasury Department make such changes, envisioned a nonprofit shell company as a workaround, though:
Under the proposed plan, according to M.L.B.’s top lawyer, Dan Halem, an entity made up of Cuban entrepreneurs and officials from baseball and its players’ union would be created. A percentage of salaries paid to Cuban players would go to the new body, which would function like a nonprofit organization and support youth baseball, education and the improvement of sports facilities in Cuba. 
The proposed body could satisfy the terms of the embargo, M.L.B. contends, because no money would go directly to the Cuban government.
Well, let's look at how this might play out, then. 

First, this won't affect the current season, whatever happens or will happen. We're too far into spring training for Cuban players to crack MLB or even AAA squads this year.

Second, per what I highlighted on the Treasury Dept. release, what does "payments" mean? Is it cash only, or is it any capitalist-based financial considerations?

Because, to channel my inner classicist a bit, MLB will have to steer between the Scylla of the letter of the Treasury Department and the Charybdis of what Cuba wants.

If "payments" is cash only, let's say one of Raul Castro's minions pitches something like the following to one of Commissioner Corleone's minions.

We like that you had a single spring training game here in 2016. We'd really like teams to agree to play a couple dozen.

And, you'll surely want to build an MLB-level spring training complex here, probably in Havana. Maybe a second in Santiago or something. (And feel free to add enough grandstands to that field, or those fields, to seat the typical Serie National crowd.)

¿Oh, and you know, Señor Commissioner? I'm sure enough Yanqui fans will want to see béisbol here that they might want to do so in the comfort of a new, American-class hotel.

We can name the whole complex after one of the best Yanqui writers, one who emblemed the manhood of béisbol and is beloved in both countries, Señor Ernesto Hemingway.

No cash trades hands. The whole complex is owned by a shell nonprofit which just happens to let Raul and/or Fidel appoint the majority of the board of directors.


Cubans get thousands of construction jobs for building all of this.

Now, how realistic would it be? That would not be cash payments; it would be in line with what I envision. And, from the MLBPA's union point of view, rather than being a cut of salaries, it would come on top of that. Plus, besides youth baseball, it would create jobs and promote tourism in Cuba, the latter bringing further Yanqui dollars to the island.

How realistic is that?

Well, we have this thing in the U.S. called a "presidential election."

Bernie Sanders isn't getting the Democratic nomination, and Jill Stein or whomever the Greens nominate isn't winning the election, so it's going to be Hillary Clinton vs. some Republican, either Donald Trump or Ted Cruz in all likelihood.

Clinton would surely be OK with a fairly loose reading of the Treasury statement, on the spirit rather than the letter. A GOP president would be a different kettle of fish.

So, hold on Cards fans before you start looking for the next Aledmys Diaz.