SaberMets Blog

New Home

2004-01-22T00:11:00.000-05:00

SaberMets has officially moved to a new server. The actual address is sabermets.weblogs.us, but please update all links and bookmarks to point to www.sabermets.com, which will redirect you to the correct site. If you know anyone who is still using the old link, please be so kind as to advise them of the address change.

Thanks for your patience with this move and for your dedicated reading of my brain droppings.

Blog entries from December and January have already been moved to the new site. October and November will be moved shortly.

SaberMets Update

2004-01-16T00:06:00.000-05:00

SaberMets will be moving soon. I am in the process of getting set up on a Movable Type server, thanks to the selfless folks at weblogs.us. Please check out the new layout and let me know what you think. I will be posting to both sites until the move is complete.

You can check out the new site HERE!

Please let me know what you think. Advice, tips, and encouraging words are welcome and appreciated.

Also, anyone who is currently linking (or has a bookmark) pointing to sabermets.blogspot.com, please update your links to target http://www.sabermets.com. It is currently redirecting to this site (blog*spot), but will be switched over to point to the new MT site as soon as it is complete. www.sabermets.com will always point to the correct address, so please use it in all of your links from now on.

Thanks for your patience.

What's That I Smell? Ah, Yes ... Money Burning

2004-01-15T00:02:00.000-05:00

The Baltimore Orioles are undoubtedly frustrated by their sixth consecutive fourth place finish. In fact, every season since 1998 has ended with the American League East standings looking like this:

1) New York Yankees
2) Boston Red Sox
3) Toronto Blue Jays
4) Baltimore Orioles
5) Tampa Bay Devil Rays

And the future doesn't look much brighter, at least in terms of the standings changing. The Orioles have taken a number of steps this offseason to at least improve the product on the field, even if it doesn't really get them any closer to the playoffs. Despite losing out on Vladimir Guerrero (I wonder what that must feel like), the Orioles have upgraded at several key positions.

Last season the O's flirted with .500 around the All-Star break, and were as close as 57-59 after beating the Red Sox on August 10. They finished the season 71-91, a mere 30 games behind the Yankees. If you're an Oriole fan (and who isn't?), there are brighter days ahead, even though those days won't be falling in October.

2003 SHORTSTOPS

                  OBP   SLG   OPS   WS
Miguel Tejada    .336  .472  .807   25
Deivi Cruz       .269  .378  .647   10
                                    --
                                    15 = 5 games

2003 FIRST BASEMEN

                  OBP   SLG   OPS   WS
Rafael Palmeiro  .359  .508  .867   19
Jeff Conine      .338  .459  .797   16
                                    --
                                    3 = 1 game

2003 CATCHERS

                  OBP   SLG   OPS   WS
Javy Lopez       .378  .687 1.065   30
Brook Fordyce    .311  .371  .682    5
                                    --
                                    25 = 8.3 games

The Orioles have significantly upgraded, at least offensively, at shortstop and catcher, with a decent upgrade at first base as well. Based on production numbers from 2003, they could reasonably expect to be 14 games better than last year, which is a lot of games. Based on their record from last year, the O's would project to go 85-77 which, sadly, would still have put them in forth place last season, just a game behind third place Toronto, who, by the way, have also improved themselves since 2003 ended, particularly their starting rotation and bullpen.

Even if they finish in fourth again, those 14 games will mean a whole lot to the millions of fans attending the games and watching on tv. Even though, by the above measure, they would still be well out of playoff contention, you can't underestimate the value of those extra wins in terms of fan appreciation and team morale. These things can't be measured by mundane baseball statistics, but the subjective human element is a powerful one indeed.

And now to the burning money. On top of the three sluggers they've inked this offseason, they have also just locked up Sidney Ponson for three years at $7.5 million per year. That's an awful lot of money to pay a pitcher who, by all accounts, had no other serious suitors. The Orioles were essentially bidding against themselves, and they couldn't get a better deal than this? Ponson is not a terrible pitcher by any stretch, but he's a not that good either, and he's a little thick in the hip for my liking.

Here's what Ponson has done these past few years.

SIDNEY PONSON 2001-2003

        IP    K/9    BB/9   HR/9   ERA+
2001   138.1  5.47   2.41   1.37    85
2002   176.0  6.14   3.22   1.33   107
2003   216.0  5.58   2.54   0.67   115

His peripheral numbers are nothing to write home about, though he did a great job in 2003 keeping the ball in the yard after giving up his fair share the previous two seasons. His ERA+ (ERA relative to the league) has improved each of the past three years as his workload has increased. His strikeout and walk rates, while not great, have remained steady as he has pitched more innings.

Let's say that in 2003 he found his stroke, and he'll continue to post ERA+ marks of around 115, or 15% better than the league. In 2003, the average salary for starting pitchers was $3.3 million (msnbc.com). Hell, let's say that Ponson hits his stride next season and is 20% better than the league.

Let's see. That's $3.3 million x 1.20 = $3.96 million. Throw in an extra $40,000 for a personal trainer and dietician and you're at an even $4 million, which is pretty fair for someone of Ponson's talents. Over three years, that's $12 million, or $10.5 million less than the Orioles are actually going to pay him.

Clemens Joins the Astros ... Piazza Seen Polishing His Whooping Stick

2004-01-14T00:17:00.000-05:00

As everyone is aware by now, Roger Clemens has signed a one-year deal with Los Houston Astros. Personally, I've hated Clemens for a while. More specifically, since he joined the Yankees after the 1999 season in a trade for David Wells (plus Graeme Lloyd and Homer Bush).

Now that Clemens has signed with Houston (joining fellow Texan, workout buddy, devout Christian, and candidate for most overrated pitcher in baseball Andy Pettitte), I don't harbor such bad feelings for him. Much of the animosity stemmed from his multiple run-ins with Mets slugger and latent heterosexual Mike Piazza. Besides, as a baseball fan it's hard not to root for the best pitcher in the past forty years not named Tom Seaver.

Anyways, in the wake of Clemens' deal, ESPN.com's Sports Nation added a new poll asking readers which team they thought had the best rotation. Their choices look like this:

Houston Astros
Roy Oswalt (10-5, 2.97)
Andy Pettitte (21-8, 4.02)
Roger Clemens (17-9, 3.91)
Wade Miller (14-13, 4.13)
Jeriome Robertson (15-9, 5.10)

New York Yankees
Mike Mussina (17-8, 3.40)
Kevin Brown (14-9, 2.39)
Javier Vazquez (13-12, 3.12)
Jose Contreras (7-2, 3.30)
Jon Lieber (injured)

Oakland A's
Tim Hudson (16-7, 2.70)
Mark Mulder (15-9, 3.13)
Barry Zito (14-12, 3.30)
Mark Redman (14-9, 3.59)
Rich Harden (5-4, 4.46)

Boston Red Sox
Pedro Martinez (14-4, 2.22)
Curt Schilling (8-9, 2.95)
Derek Lowe (17-7, 4.47)
Tim Wakefield (11-7, 4.09)
Byung-Hyun Kim (9-10, 3.31)

Chicago Cubs
Mark Prior (18-6, 2.43)
Kerry Wood (14-11, 3.20)
Carlos Zambrano (13-11, 3.11)
Matt Clement (14-12, 4.11)
????

Florida Marlins
Josh Beckett (9-8, 3.04)
A.J. Burnett (injured)
Dontrelle Willis (14-6, 3.30)
Brad Penny (14-10, 4.13)
Carl Pavano (12-13, 4.30)

Of course, I wouldn't mind if my team sported any of these staffs. As of now, the poll results look like this:

23.7% Boston Red Sox
21.6% Oakland A's
20.2% Chicago Cubs
17.8% Houston Astros
11.4% New York Yankees
5.2% Florida Marlins

For the record, I voted for the Red Sox. For a very elementary comparison, I am going to use Bill James' Win Shares to come up with a value for each staff. I am only going to use the top four pitchers for a number of reasons. Firstly, I don't know how many win shares ???? recorded for the Cubs last year. Also, Jon Lieber didn't pitch at all last year and only pitched 141 innings in 2002. Since A.J. Burnett only pitched 23 innings last season I will use his win shares from 2002 (thanks to baseballtruth.com).

2003 PITCHING STAFF WIN SHARES

TEAM        WIN SHARES
A's         69 (Hudson 23; Mulder 17; Zito 18; Redman 11)
Cubs        68 (Prior 22; Wood 18; Zambrano 18; Clement 10)
Yankees     67 (Mussina 19; Kevin Brown 20; Javier Vazquez 21; Contreras 7)
Red Sox     61 (Martinez 20; Schilling 15; Lowe 12; Kim 14)
Astros      49 (Oswalt 10; Pettitte 15; Clemens 15; Miller 9)
Marlins     49 (Beckett 11; Burnett 14; Willis 14; Penny 10)

I'll admit that this comparison is crude and rudimentary. Curt Schilling, who averaged 24 win shares in 2001-2002 only earned 15 in 2003 due to injuries. Roy Oswalt and Wade Miller also missed time last season, but sported win share averages from 2001-2002 of 17 and 15, respectively.

If the Cubs end up signing Greg Maddux, this table wouldn't look much different because Maddux had only one more win share (11) than Matt Clement. However, Clement's 10 win shares are better than most #5 starters, which is what he would be on that staff. The A's, Cubs, and Yankees are the cream of the crop here, with the Red Sox very close given a full season of Shilling and Tim Wakefield's 12 win shares.

Ex-Met Signings

2004-01-13T10:30:00.000-05:00

A couple of familiar faces caught on with new teams today. Jay Payton signed a two-year deal with the San Diego Padres worth $5.5 million. He will earn $1.5 million in 2004 and $3.5 million in 2005, and the Pods have a $4 million team option for 2006. If Payton can stay healthy, Payton will provide decent production and defense in center field. Payton was no doubt helped by the friendly confines of Coors Field in Colorado last season. Some will point to the fact that he hit more homeruns on the road than at home (15 to 13), but he was markedly better in almost every other category at home.

JAY PAYTON'S 2003 HOME ROAD SPLITS

         AVG   OBP   SLG
HOME    .322  .377  .540
AWAY    .281  .330  .483

Payton ranked #32 in National League outfielders in Win Shares last season with 15, just behind Cliff Floyd who only played 108 games. Payton's signing will likely move Xavier Nady back to AAA, which will probably do him some good. He's still only 25, but still needs a lot of work at the plate if he wants to become a productive everyday outfielder in the big leagues. He had an OPS of 712 (.321 OBP, .391 SLG) which is only slightly better than one Roger Cedeno. He showed a little more pop in the minors, posting a SLG of .499 in three seasons.

Like Payton, Matt Franco signed a new contract today. Unlike Payton, Franco will be playing in another hemisphere. Franco signed a 1-year, $750,000 deal with the Chiba Lotte Marines of Japan. If that name rings a bell, it should because former Mets manager Bobby Valentine is the current manager of the Marines. This isn't a big surprise because Bobby V was always a big fan of Matty F. There were rumors a few weeks back that Bobby was trying to Turk Wendell overseas as well. In any event, this looks like a good deal for Franco. He wasn't likely to get a major league deal with any American club, and 750 bones is not bad for a year's "work".

Easy Come, Easy Go

2004-01-12T00:42:00.000-05:00

So the Mets didn't bag free agent stud Vladimir Guerrero. So the Mets still have a huge gaping hole in right field. Things could be a lot worse. Disappointment abounds, from Mets fans to players to the entire Mets organization. Even though we were braced from the outset that this was a longshot at best, it's hard not to get your hopes up.

The Mets have done a lot right this offseason. With a few key moves and zero A-List additions, the Mets have gone a long way to help alleviate the pain inflicted by the last two seasons of "baseball" in Queens.

For the latter half of the Steve Phillips era, the Mets made a number of "win now" moves in an effort to get the most out of a core group of players who were getting older and less competent every season. The Mets best season under the Phillips regime was 1999. Sure, they went to the 2000 World Series, but the 1999 team was the best one they sent out there in the past decade.

Once the Mets lost to the Braves in the NLCS and John Olerud took a reasonable deal to go home to Seattle, the hourglass had been flipped and time began ticking away on this ballclub.

Robin Ventura was coming off a career season, and the Mets management struggled to find a suitable replacement for Olerud, eventually setting for Todd Zeile, who had started a grand total of 62 games at first base to that point. He had a respectable first season with the Mets, but the team was the recipient of some good fortune en route to the franchise's first World Series appearance in 15 seasons. They dodged a bullet by not having to face their nemesis, the Braves, in the NL playoffs.

We all know too well where the story goes from here. Despite playing in back-to-back LCS, the Mets were a team and an organization on the decline. The Mets star players (Mike Piazza, Al Leiter, etc.) were already on the wrong side of thirty, with further regression of performance to be expected. Nevertheless, the Mets two-headed ownership demon (Nelson Doubleday and current owner Fred Wilpon) approved a series of moves that, at least in retrospect, ultimately led to the decimation of the franchise, leaving the team and its many many fans scratching their collective heads.

Aside from a handful of leftovers (Piazza, Leiter, John Franco), there remains little at Shea to remind us of those years of near-greatness. Mets general manager Jim Duquette is slowly but steadily rebuilding the foundation of this franchise. The Mets farm system, once completely bereft of talent, is now blossoming, with a number of young arms and quality position players making their way up the organizational ladder, projected to roam the fields of Shea within the next few seasons.

Additionally, management has thrown away the ideas that led to the recent decline, electing to focus on the elements that brought championships to Queens in 1969 and 1986. Pitching and defense win games, as they say. At the very least, they help to put your offense in the position to win those games.

So the Mets didn't sign Vlad Guerrero. I think they played it as well as they could have, though. They waited around long enough so that they actually had a fighting chance to sign the slugger on their own terms. There was a soft market for Guerrero, and the Mets almost landed him. Some may scoff at the Mets offer, calling $30 million guaranteed over three years a lowball pitch. The fact is, the Mets could not secure insurance on Guerrero's back and, based on his medical records and the advice of the Mets physicians, guaranteeing any more money than that would be foolhardy.

I would have been thrilled if Vlad had signed for three guaranteed years, with the potential for $70 million over five seasons if he could, *gasp*, stay healthy enough to clock in for 400 plate appearances per season. I would have been less thrilled if the Mets had assumed all of the risk (as teams seem to be expected to do) and given Guerrero five guaranteed years at $14 million per (as the Angels have apparently done). Let him go, he probably had no intention of playing in New York anyway.

Maybe next year the Mets can convince Carlos Beltran to play right field. Maybe they can lure Magglio Ordonez to the Big Apple. Who knows. I do know that the Mets will be better this year than they were last year, and will be better next year than they are this year. I also know that I like the direction things are going in, I like the plan Jim Duquette has put together and stuck to, and I like the chances that the Mets will be playing meaningful games by 2005.

I have no choice. I'm a Mets fan, and I take what I'm given.

Vlad Update & Mets Mini Camp

2004-01-09T14:30:00.000-05:00

According to ESPN.com's Buster Olney, the Orioles are considering making a new offer to Pudge Rodriguez, with the plan being for he and Javy Lopez to both split time between catcher and DH. Such an offer may indicate that the O's will take a pass on Vladimir Guerrero, electing to spend their money on an outfielder from the 2004 free agent class, such as Carlos Beltran or Magglio Ordonez.

* * * * * * * * * *
If you didn't already know, the Mets have been conducting their January Mini Camp in St. Lucie, Florida. NYFanSites.com has been reporting from Florida all week with news and photos of the Mets in action. Check out their daily reports from this week if you haven't already.

Monday: Mini Camp Opens
Tuesday: Braden Looper
Wednesday: Peterson Tinkers With Roberts & Wheeler
Thursday: Davidson Puts On A Show
Friday: Lastings Impression

Dream A Little Dream

2004-01-09T11:01:00.000-05:00

According to several sources, the Mets have made an offer to free-agent outfielder Vladimir Guerrero. Based on reports, the offer appears to be worth $30 million over three years, with incentives based on plate appearances that could bring the value closer to $40 million, or approximately the same $13 million annually that the Baltimore Orioles have offered. There is also speculation that the offer contains vesting options for a fourth and fifth season, similarly based on plate appearances.

If all incentives were met (which probably only requires that Guerrero not spend an inordinate amount of time on the disabled list), the total value of the contract would likely be between $65-$70 million over five years, which is almost identical to the terms of Baltimore's offer.

For all intents and purposes, acquiring Vladimir Guerrero amounts to little more than a pipe dream for the Mets (and me). Be that as it may, a pipe dream still requires that there be at least a modicum of hope that something can happen. The fact that Guerrero has not signed yet and that Spring Training is but a month away means that there is something keeping him from signing with Baltimore.

The player's union is no doubt encouraging (read: demanding) Guerrero's agents to take the largest guaranteed offer, which doesn't bode well for the Mets' chances. Regardless, I am, by nature, a hopeless optimist. An answer was originally expected from Guerrero within the next couple of days, but some think it could drag into next week, if not longer. We'll just have to wait and see how it plays out.

* * * * * * * * * *
If you missed any of this week's blogs, please check them out.

Monday: A Closer Look
Tuesday: Link-A-Dink
Wednesday: Things Are Not As Vlad As They Seem

Things Are Not As Vlad As They Seem

2004-01-07T12:02:00.000-05:00

You never know. I almost shat myself when I saw this at ESPN.com last night:

Report: Mets interested in signing Guerrero

The likelihood of the Mets signing Vladimir Guerrero is remote at best. He has an offer on the table from Baltimore for 5 years, $65 million, that has seemingly been out there since he became a free agent. The Dodgers and Marlins are allegedly interested, though my guess is that any deal with Florida would be contingent on a new stadium deal (a la the Mike Lowell deal).

We've known all long that Guerrero desires a new home with a significant Dominican population. Baltimore does not fit that bill. Florida does, but there are contract issues there that I am skeptical about. New York can definitely cash in here, as it sports a large Dominican contingency, as well as a general wealth of spanish-speaking individuals.

Guerrero's fear of the big stage spotlight appears to have been overblown, as his agent has testified to the contrary.

The hangup, as usual, is the money and contract length. Mets GM Jim Duquette has gone on record as saying that his organization has put a three-year cap on free agent contracts. This could actually work to Guerrero's advantage. Lets say the Mets ink him to a three-year deal worth $15-$16 annually, plus a couple of mutual options that could bring it up to five-years, $80 million. Guerrero could then go out there for the next three seasons and continue to tear apart National League pitching (he sports a career 978 OPS). After his three seasons, he'll still only be 30 years old. If the market opens up a bit for him, he will have proven that:

a) he can play in the big city
b) his back is fine
c) he's one of the five best players in baseball

If he wants out of the contract at that point, the Yankees could then sign him for four-or-five years at $16-$18 million per. If he can't get that kind of deal, he can stay with the Mets for another year or two at $16 million, and continue to test the waters after each subsequent season.

Plus, with the Mets he would actually have a chance to compete for something other than third place. Granted, the Mets are not in position to win anything in 2004 (though Guerrero could be enough to push them from a .500 team to a Marlins-esque underdog). However, they stand a very good chance of competing in 2005 and 2006, particularly with Scott Kazmir and David Wright making their way to big Shea.

If you want Vlad, you can now make your voice heard. Head on over to SignVlad.com, where you can sign an online petition or fill out a mail-in petition to send Mets owner Fred Wilpon and beseech him to sign Guerrero.

* * * * * * * * * *
Believe it or not, there are two new Mets blogs to check out on the sidebar. The first is East Coast Agony, a two-headed blog monster featuring two long-suffering baseball fans: Red Sox fan Big K and Mets fan Metropolitan Mike.

The second is The Baseball Blog of Oz, which discusses current Mets events, as well as other local professional sports.

Stop by both and say hi.

* * * * * * * * * *
SaberMets passed the 10,000 visitor mark yesterday, which is an honor to me and a testament to you, the readers. Given the large number of return visitors, I realize that many of you have eschewed better judgment by continuing to read the nonsensical digressions of an obsessed baseball fan, and for that I thank you.

Link-A-Dink

2004-01-06T00:09:00.000-05:00

I am so horribly lazy. That, compounded with the fact that there isn't a lot of real interesting baseball news going on (unless you consider a Scott Stewart trade interesting, Mrs. Stewart's opinion notwithstanding), has left me with little to write about and even less motivation to do so.

With that in mind, I present to you some recent links regarding the Mets top prospects.

BaseballAmerica.com: Top Ten Prospects: New York Mets

If you didn't already know, BaseballAmerica.com is the top dog in minor league coverage. This particular article whets your appetite with the Mets top stud, Scott Kazmir. You then must subscribe to their online service in order to view the rest of the top ten. You can also Pre-Order their 2004 Prospect Handbook like I did. Even if you don't, I will fill everyone in on the rest of the top ten when my copy arrives in March.

BaseballAmerica.com: Top Ten Prospects: Mets Chat

If you're into reading about Mets prospects and farmhands, look no further. Baseball America's J.J. Cooper sat down for three hours and chatted with one and all about the Mets farm system, prospects, etc. It's a long read, but you're bound to learn something new here.

The Minors First: Top 100 Minor League Prospects

A bit disappointingly, Scott Kazmir is only #14 on the list. Of course, he's only a little over a year out of high school. The Mets have a total of five players in the top 100, including David Wright, Matt Peterson, Justin Huber, and Victor Diaz. Some nice insight on each of the players.

ProspectReport.com: 2003 New York Mets

This list was actually compiled back in April 2003, so you'll see some names that aren't prospects anymore because they're with the big club. There should be a 2004 list up soon, so keep an eye out for that.

* * * * * * * * * *
Before I go, I'd like to pass along my deepest sympathies to the family and friends of Frank Edwin "Tug" McGraw Jr., who lost his battle with brain cancer today. He pitched for the Mets long before my time, but his words "You Gotta Believe" still ring true today.

I'd also like to give my thoughts and best wishes to my buddy Mike and his family, who put their six-year-old cocker spaniel Hunter to sleep on Sunday. Even though he wouldn't let me give him the Pedigree a few years back when I used to call him HHH, I hope he's at peace now.

A Closer Look

2004-01-05T00:01:00.000-05:00

Ah, the closer. Pretty standard, really. Usually a fireballer, summoned from the bowels of the bullpen to shut down the opposing team's hitters for one inning. Three outs is all he's asked to record. If he does so, and he does so well, he will be richly rewarded with praise, fortune, etc. Should he ever falter in this task, however, he shall rue the day. A fickle bunch, these closers. Untouchable one day, uncomfortable the next. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen, they say.

And so it was, the Mets, having pawned off "beleaguered" closer Armando Benitez last season and spent much of this offseason searching for his replacement, even if he were to be an interim one. You heard the names tossed around: Billy Koch, Ugeth Urbina, Keith Foulke.

Take a look at the following career lines:

CAREER
            ERA+   K/9    BB/9   HR/9   SV%
Player A    113    5.66   3.56   0.71   69%
Player B    144   11.77   4.84   1.03   85%

Even though Player B is more prone to the gopher ball, he is clearly the better closer. You must be saying to yourself, "Self? It's brutally obvious that Player A is the closer we dumped last year and Player B is the next big thing, our closer of the present, a player I would gladly give a two-year, $6.5 million deal with a team option for a third year at $5 million with a $250k buyout. Why, even somebody with as many textbook-case neurological disorders such as myself can tell that".

I'm sure you've already seen through my thinly-veiled rhetoric to come to the conclusion that Player A is new Met Braden Looper while Player B is Met castoff and new Marlins closer Armando Benitez.

Benitez had clearly worn out his welcome in New York. He will probably do for Florida what he has done for the Mets these past few seasons. Namely, save the majority of his games, strike out a batter-per-inning, and give up a few too many homeruns, particularly in important situations. That, if anything, is what has haunted Benitez throughout his career. Even before he was traded to the Mets (in what was one of the unheralded acts of ingenuity on Steve Phillips part, by netting Benitez and then-speedster Roger Cedeno for Todd Hundley), Benitez had post-season issues with the Orioles.

The two biggest games he blew, for me at least, were Game 6 of the NLCS in 1999 against the Braves and Game 1 of the World Series in 2000 against the Yankees. That's not to say there weren't other memorable heartaches, just that those hurt the most.

The big picture, much to the dismay of Benitez-haters, is that he has actually been one of the best closers in baseball over the past five seasons, and will continue to be one.

Looper is a fresh start, though. He's a former first-round pick of the Cardinals, and the Mets are obviously hoping that pitching coach Rick Peterson can do for him what he's done for Billy Koch and Keith Foulke these past two seasons. Unlike Benitez, Looper doesn't give up a lot of home runs, and actually does a very good job of keeping the ball on the ground.

CAREER GB/FB RATIO

Looper     1.91
Benitez    0.67

With the Mets now-solid up-the-middle defense, this will be a welcome addition. At the very least, the Mets are not paying too much over too long, and Looper will keep the spot warm for one of the Mets potential future closers.

Keiths In The Hall

2003-12-29T00:12:00.000-05:00

Keith Hernandez was one of the pillars of the mid-eighties' Mets resurgence that culminated in the 1986 World Series Championship. He had previously won the World Series in 1982 with the Cardinals before being sent to New York in a lopsided trade for pitchers Neil Allen and Rick Ownbey. With the upcoming Hall of Fame voting, Hernandez will appear on the ballot for the ninth time. Even if he is elected, he would likely be enshrined as a Cardinal, having played most of his career in St. Louis. That would leave Tom Seaver as the only player in the Hall actually wearing a Mets cap.

To this point, the arguments for Hernandez' candidacy have not been compelling enough to garner the 75% vote necessary for election. For my analysis, I am going to defer, as I usually do, to a method introduced by Bill James in his book The Politics of Glory.

This method involves a series of questions that James calls "The Ken Keltner List". The questions are somewhat subjective in nature, but can be considered objectively with a little help from statistics. So, without further adieu, The Ken Keltner List on Keith Hernandez.

Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?

No. He tied for first in voting for the 1979 MVP award with Willie Stargell, but received more first place votes (10-4), and had a significant lead in OBP (.417-.352). He also finished second in 1984 (Ryne Sandberg) and fourth in 1986 (Mike Schmidt). However, I doubt anyone ever considered him the best player in baseball, or even one of the five-or-ten best.

Was he the best player on his team?

Yes. Clearly in 1979 and 1984, and quite possibly 1986, though Darryl Strawberry was also very good that year.

Was he the best player in his league at his position?

Yes. Defensively, he won the Gold Glove 11 straight seasons from 1978-1988. Offensively, he was the best in 1979, 1980, 1986, and was close in 1984.

Was he the best player in baseball at his position?

Yes and No. Defensively, he was the class of baseball for a decade. Don Mattingly was the best first-baseman in the AL in the late eighties and early nineties, but that was mostly after Hernandez' best days were behind him. Offensively, 1979 was the only season where Keith was the best first-baseman in baseball.

Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?

In 1982 and 1986 for sure. He didn't contribute much to the Mets postseason run in 1988. Two is a number, isn't it? Yes.

Was he a good enough player that he could continue to play regularly after passing his prime?

Yes. Keith turned 30 after the 1983 season, and put up an average OPS+ of 131 over the next six seasons.

If he retired today, would he be the best player in baseball not in the Hall of Fame?

Maybe. He was probably better than Sandberg, though Jim Rice was probably better with the stick. He's definitely better than Andre Dawson, and maybe even Paul Molitor. I'm going to make this one a "No", but it's close.

Are most of the players who have comparable triple-crown stats in the Hall of Fame?

No. He always hit for a high average, but his HR and RBI are not going to get him elected.

If he retired today, would he be the best player at his position not in the Hall of Fame?

Donnie Baseball was very similar. They had comparable career OPS (.820 for Keith, .829 for Donnie), though Keith holds a slight edge in career GPA (.282-.279). Until Mark McGwire is eligible, I'll say Keith is the best first-baseman out there.

Are the player's totals of career approximate value and offensive wins and losses similar to those of other Hall of Famers?

Hernandez is 57th all-time in offensive winning percentage among players with at least 8,000 plate appearances. Of these players, around 10 are hall-eligible and not inducted. He only has 1265 runs created in his career, which does not compare well with others.

Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?

No, I wouldn't say so.

How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?

One award, four top-ten finishes.

How many All-Star type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most other players at his position who made the Hall of Fame play in a comparable amount of games or have a comparable amount of All-Star seasons?

He played in five All-Star games, in 1979, 1980, 1984, 1986, and 1987. Not bad, but not really HOF-caliber.

If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?

Iffy. While his leadership and glovework were top-notch, he wasn't really a big bopper, and would probably need some help. That being said, he was the best player on the Mets in 1986, and we know how that turned out.

Hernandez' candidacy is no doubt hurt by his lack of power. He only hit 162 homers in his career, though his career .384 OBP is very good. Ozzie Smith was elected on his first try mostly as a result of his ridiculous defense. Hernandez' defense wasn't as good, but his offense was definitely not as bad. He was excellent with the leather, was a very good hitter for a decade, and helped his teams to two World Championships. Longevity is also a factor here, though. Hernandez played in parts of 17 seasons, but he only had 10 seasons with 500+ at-bats.

That said, Hernandez is one of the two best first basemen (currently eligible) who are not in the Hall of Fame and, while he's not a slam-dunk, he is a borderline case for sure. I don't think he stands a good shot at being elected this year or any year by the BBWAA, though the Veteran's Committee could give him the nod sometime down the road. Once Mark McGwire becomes eligible, however, Hernandez' case will be weakened significantly.

Give Me A Break

2003-12-24T10:19:00.000-05:00

Writing five blogs a week is hard work. Well, not necessarily hard, but definitely tiring. That said, SaberMets is going to take a short holiday break, but will be back on Monday with fresh blogs. I'm going to try to get to some of your blog requests, too. So, if you have a topic you would like to see analyzed and/or written about on SaberMets, shoot me an e-mail.

Happy holidays everyone!

Javy Holidays

2003-12-22T23:52:00.000-05:00

I don't suppose that anyone ever prospered as much from a free agent walk year as Javy Lopez has. That's not to say that other players haven't seen bigger paydays when they hit the market, because they have. Had Lopez hit free agency a year earlier, he might have had trouble finding work.

In 2003, Lopez set the single-season record for homeruns by a catcher with 42, breaking Todd Hundley's record of 41. He had the second-highest OPS ever for a catcher at 1.065, trailing only Mike Piazza's 1.070 he put up in 1997. In terms of slugging percentage, Lopez obliterated Piazza's 1997 then-record mark of .638 by ripping pitchers to the tune of a .687 SLG. Lopez' previous career-high SLG? .540 in 1998.

After six moderately-to-very productive seasons at the plate from 1995-2000, Lopez fell off a cliff in 2001 and was clinically dead in 2002. He had the fifth best OPS among major league catchers from 1995-2000, and was just 20 points out of third. After averaging 26 homeruns from 1996-2000 (not counting 1999 when he played only 65 games), he dropped to 17 in 2001 and plummeted to 11 in 2002. His .671 OPS in 2002 was actually lower than his SLG in 2003.

He's never walked much, though his walk totals have been very consistent over the course of his career. Since 1996, he's had no more than 40 walks and no fewer than 26 walks in any full season (100+ games). He's fairly prone to the strikeout, though, averaging 102 whiffs per 162 games. There's also that whole thing about Greg Maddux not pitching to him, which no one has ever really explained to my satisfaction. It wasn't a huge deal, as most catchers typically sit once every five games or so. It was just a bit unsettling why one of this era's best pitchers wanted no part of Javy Lopez' catching abilities.

Beyond his horrific 2001 and 2002 and his otherworldly 2003, Lopez has been a solid hitter throughout his career:

per 162 games

HR RBI AVG OBP SLG OPS GPA
30 97 .287 .337 .502 .839 .277

Considering the dearth of productive catchers these days (or any days), this is probably a good signing for Baltimore. However, Lopez is already 33 years old, and catchers typically don't put up career years when they're his age. That said, the O's definitely needed to do something to keep up with the rest of the American League East, what with the Devil Rays trading for Geoff Blum and all.

Love Me Non-Tender

2003-12-22T00:31:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, 58 Major League Baseball players were not tendered contracts by their former teams, releasing them into the wild unknown of the free agent market. Non-tendered players can still negotiate with their old teams, but they are free to negotiate with the other 29 teams as well. There are a lot of warm bodies here, many of which are adept at one thing or another. Some of them are even pretty good at baseball. You just have to know what to look for.

Jay Payton: The Mets waited a long time for Payton to live up to his hype. He was drafted out of Georgia Tech, where he was roommates with Nomar Garciaparra. He had a promising rookie season in 2000 where he finished runner-up in the Rookie of the Year voting to Rafael Furcal, hit .291 and belted 17 homeruns. He also had went an unthinkable 5-for-16 in stolen bases (31% success rate). He's spent an exorbitant amount of time on the disabled list in his career in both the minors and majors. He put up a deplorable .298 OBP in 2001 in 361 AB, and was hitting .284 in 2002 before being shipped to the Rockies. In 47 games for the Rocks that year, Payton tore it up, going .335/.376/.606 with his new team. He wasn't able to keep up that torrid pace, but he did post very good numbers in 2003 with Colorado, posting a solid .866 OPS (.287 GPA) with 28 homers and 89 RBI. Sure, a lot of that was Coors field. But he actually hit more homers on the road (15-13), and posted a decent if not sparkling .813 OPS. He's a hacker, so he'll never walk much but will put the ball in play. He doesn't have a great bat for a corner outfielder, and he doesn't have much of an arm, but he always hustled when he was with the Mets, and he would make a decent third outfielder for a bad team or a good fourth outfielder for a good team.

Randall Simon: As far as hackers go, he might rival Kevin Mitnick for the world's biggest. He's averaged one walk every 22.5 at-bats over the course of his career. The upside is that he doesn't strike out much either -- only once every 11.3 at-bats. As a comparison, Whiffy McStrikeout walks once every 22.1 at-bats and K's once every 4.7 at-bats. The difference is that Soriano does a lot more damage when he makes contact than Simon does. Simon has a very good career batting average at .297. His .743 career OPS (.256 GPA), while not completely useless, has no business taking up 300+ at-bats in any major league lineup, particularly one with post-season aspirations. He's got enough pop and makes good enough contact to be fairly valuable as a primary pinch hitter for most teams. His defense is pretty bad, though he can whack a sausage with the best of them.

Danys Baez: This guy will find work. He made an absurd $5.125 million last season to close games for the Indians, but would be a good pickup for a bad team looking for a stopgap closer (*cough*) or a good team looking for a decent setup man. He had a very good 7.85 K/9 ratio last season with 2.87 K/BB. He gave up a few too many longballs, surrendering nine in only 75.2 innings. He somehow lost nine games coming out of the pen, while saving 25 in 35 chances (71% SvPct). He's not an ace reliever by any stretch, but he'll help some team out in 2003.

Braden Looper: He's picked up 41 saves over the past two seasons in 50 chances (82% SvPct), and fits into a similar category as Baez. His strikeout rate is okay (6.25 per nine innings last season), and he did a good job limiting homeruns, coughing up only four in 80.2 innings. His 29 years are three more than Baez, though both could go for around $1-$1.5 million to any number of teams. I'd consider taking a flyer on either of them.

A number of non-tenders will still resign with their old teams, they just might not have been able to come to terms on a deal in time for yesterday's deadline. There are no premier guys here, but certainly puzzle pieces that can fill in a team's holes. For a complete list of non-tenders, check out ESPN.com.

The Future

2003-12-19T01:00:00.000-05:00

For the past three years we had heard the rumblings about a wiry kid from the Dominican Republic who was going to change the face of the New York Mets. They said he had a cannon for an arm. They said he was lightning on the bases. He taught himself to switch hit just a couple of years earlier. He was the most promising Met prospect since Darryl Strawberry. His name was Jose Reyes, and he was the future.

In Spring Training of 2002, an 18 year old Reyes said he would be taking Rey Ordonez' shortstop job. Rey-Rey heard the footsteps ... we all heard the footsteps. As the Mets struggled mightily through that 2002 season, the footsteps were getting louder. The Mets were terrible, a last place team with a first place payroll. They were old, they were underachieving, they were history. There was a glimmering of hope, they said, because the future was on its way.

On June 10, 2003, the future finally arrived. A day before his 20th birthday, Reyes made his big-league debut, going 2-4 with a double and two runs scored. The success was short-lived, though, as he went one-for-his-next-sixteen. The future had hit a bump in the road. He finished June batting .205 with one walk and an OPS of .553. This wasn't the way it was supposed to play out. It wasn't supposed to be like this.

The first chance I had I went to see the kid play at Shea. As the souvenir vendor retrieved my #7 t-shirt from the shelf, he asked, "Why does everybody like this guy? He's hitting .220." My response, all I could think of as it had been etched into my brain, was, "He's the future, as they say."

And so he is. Before an ankle injury ended his season on my birthday (August 31st), Reyes had put together a very solid rookie season. He had a 17-game hitting streak, scored 47 runs in only 69 games, and stole 13 bases in 16 attempts, an 81.3% success rating. His .769 OPS should impress you. It doesn't, you say? How many 20-year old shortstops have put up an OPS that high? Try three.

                  Year    OPS
Alex Rodriguez    1996  1.045
John McGraw       1893   .866
Arky Vaughan      1932   .787
Jose Reyes        2003   .769
Edgar Renteria    1996   .757
Travis Jackson    1924   .754
Tony Kubek        1957   .716
Travis Jackson    1923   .712
Woody English     1927   .690
Garry Templeton   1976   .675

In only 69 games this season, Jose Reyes compiled 12 win shares, which is equal to 4 team wins. Extrapolate those win shares over 162 games and you've got 28. 28! He's 20 years old! 20 win shares is considered an all-star season, while 30 win shares is considered an MVP-caliber season. Here's what the rest of the league's premier shortstops and second-basemen (he's playing second now) did in 2003, pro-rated over 162 games.

                     WS
Alex Rodriguez       32
Marcus Giles         31
Bret Boone           31
Jose Reyes           28
Alfonso Soriano      28
Edgar Renteria       26
Nomar Garciaparra    26
Derek Jeter          25
Jeff Kent            25
Miguel Tejada        25
Jose Vidro           21

Reyes was actually percentage points ahead of Alfonso Soriano. And he's only going to get better folks ... much better. He may never hit 40 homeruns, but he'll hit 20, steal 40 bases, win gold gloves, wreak delicious havoc. The future is now, his name is Jose Reyes. Learn it.

* * * * * * * * * *

If you missed any of this week's blogs, please check them out.

Monday: Catching The Ball ... And Other Great Mysteries Of Life
Tuesday: Rule V Grab Bag
Wednesday: Closing The Deal
Thursday: Johnny Be Good

Johnny Be Good

2003-12-18T00:54:00.000-05:00

Sorry MLB Alumni Association, you're going to have to wait another year for John Franco. It's equal parts class and foolishness that led the Mets to bring Franco back for his 14th season in New York and 20th overall. With my rose-colored glasses safely locked away in their case, I can say with all honesty that John didn't look like he had much left in the tank in 2003. Granted, he had just come back after more than a year out of action recovering from Tommy John surgery. That he made it back at his age is a marvel of science and longevity. However, for the first time, he really looked his age out on the mound.

I'm a John Franco fan. He's never been my favorite player, probably not even close. But I have a lot of respect for the man who has really been a soldier for the Mets. He arrived in New York in 1990 in a swap of two of the elite closers at the time. In exchange for Randy Myers, the Reds sent eastward a 30-year old Brooklynite name John Franco. That year, the Mets were still in decent shape from their late-80's run. The fun didn't last long, though, as the Mets fell apart very quickly thereafter.

Franco was here for the lean years (1991-1992), where the Mets went 142-174, a .449 winning percentage. After that, he was here for the really lean years (1993-1996), where the Mets went 254-326, a .438 winning percentage. He was here for the late-nineties mini-renaissance (1997-2000), where the Mets went 367-282, a .565 winning percentage. And, of course, we'll never forget the downward spiral that followed and continues to this day. Franco has been here through it all and, believe it or not, was a very good pitcher for most of it.

Over the course of his 20 years in baseball, Franco has averaged more than seven strikeouts per nine innings. He sports a career ERA of 2.74 and is second on the all-time saves list with 424 (Lee Smith is the leader with 486). He has a career save percentage of 92%, which is astounding. To put it into perspective a bit, here are some of today's top closers along with their career save percentage:

Player                Sv    BS    Sv%
Rod Beck             286    55   83.9
Jason Isringhausen   130    24   84.4
Ugeth Urbina         206    37   84.8
Armando Benitez      197    35   85.0
Jose Mesa            249    43   85.0
Robb Nen             315    54   85.3
Kaz Sasaki           129    22   85.4
Keith Foulke         143    24   85.6
Billy Wagner         225    38   85.6
Troy Percival        283    45   86.3
Mariano Rivera       283    44   86.5
Trevor Hoffman       352    44   88.9
John Franco          424    37   92.0
John Smoltz          110     9   92.4
Eric Gagne           107     4   96.4

Eric Gagne is off the charts, but Smoltz is considered by many (including myself) to be right behind Gagne in terms of the best in the game right now. Both of these pitchers have been closing games for two seasons (2+ for Smoltz, who saved 10 games in 2001 after, believe it or not, Tommy John surgery), while John Franco has been a closer for two decades. As good as Smoltz has been, he would need to maintain the level of success he's achieved thus far for another 18 seasons in order to equal Franco's feat.

While he was on the disabled list in 2000, his interim replacement Armando Benitez flat-out dominated National League batters. So much so that when Franco returned from the DL he was informed that he wouldn't be getting his job back as he had anticipated (and been told). As usual, Franco handled the demotion with professionalism and dignity that too many of today's players seem to be lacking (think: Jose Guillen). That year and the next (2001), Franco, who was already 40, posted two of the best K/9 of his entire career (9.05 and 8.44, respectively), while picking up 37 holds as the primary setup man for Benitez.

In addition to his impressive career strikeout rate, he has limited opposing batters to 0.57 homeruns per nine innings. As if his pitching wasn't enough to hang his hat on, Franco's altruism is seemingly endless. He works tirelessly for a number of charities, including assisting New York City firefighters since 9/11, and was named honorary "Fireman of the Year" in 2003 by Engine Company 10. He's been a great ballplayer and a better person, and if the Mets want to let him leave this old ball game on his own terms, I don't have any problems with that.

Closing The Deal

2003-12-17T00:32:00.000-05:00

As reported yesterday (espn.com), the Rockies will make Shawn Chaconthe defacto ace of their 2003 staff, their closer in 2004. The Rockies will follow a growing baseball trend made famous most recently by the dominating success of the Braves' John Smoltz and the Dodgers' Eric Gagne.

Smoltz, as you'll recall, was a terrific starting pitcher before arm injuries and necessity led him to the bullpen. He won the NL Cy Young in 1996, the last of six consecutive Cy Youngs awarded to Braves (Tom Glavine won in 1991, with Greg Maddux taking home the hardware from 1992-1995). As a precursor to his conversion to closer, Smoltz pitched in relief of Kevin Millwood in Game 6 of the 1999 NLCS against the Mets. With the Mets trailing by three runs in the top of the 7th, Mike Piazza launched a three-run, opposite-field bomb that tied the game at the time. The Mets went on to blow two leads after that before finally succumbing on a bases loaded walk by Kenny Rogers in the 11th.

While Smoltz made the successful transition from great starting pitcher to great closer, Gagne took a different road. Not that he didn't turn into a great closer, which he did, as his 2003 Cy Young award might attest to. As a starting pitcher, however, he was quite bad. He posted ERAs of 5.15 and 4.75 in 2000-2001 while pitching in one of the best ballparks for pitchers. His two biggest problems as a starter were walks and the longball. He gave up around four walks per nine innings, which will get you into a lot of trouble when you consider his propensity for taters. In 253 innings in 2001-2002, Gagne gave up 44 homeruns, which comes out to more than 1.5 per nine innings.

Gagne the closer and Gagne the starter were almost polar opposites in regard to these two categories. Gagne the closer handed out less than two walks per nine innings, around half of his alternate-universe counterpart. That, however, pales in comparison to his home run differential. As a closer the past two seasons, Gagne has surrendered 8 homeruns in 164.2 innings, or 0.43 ding-dongs per nine innings. Gagne the starter gave up almost four times that amount!

Closers have a huge advantage over starters for two main reasons, both of which are related to the amount of time they spend on the mound. When you're a starting pitcher, a baseball game is much like a marathon for runners (or a love-making session for Sting). They are not afforded the luxury of blowing their proverbial wad right away, as they are expected to pitch 6 innings or more. A pitcher whose fastball may top out in the mid-nineties may be forced to throw most fastballs in the low-nineties to preserve energy and arm strength for his entire start. Breaking balls that might typically have more bite or cut may flatten out more often because of overuse. Closers, on the other hand, are the baseball-equivalent of the two-pump chump. They're in, they go full-throttle for an inning, and then they hit the showers. They are at a significantly lower risk of wearing out because they pitch for such a short period of time each game.

The other natural advantage that closers have is that, since they typically only pitch an inning per game (particularly nowadays), batters have much fewer opportunities to get accustomed to them. In an average game, each batter will see the starting pitcher around three times, which gives them time to study their delivery, their tendencies, and get their timing down. When it comes to facing a team's closer, the batter has no such luck. Particularly with the unbalanced schedule, teams in other divisions or the other league will likely only see a particular closer once or twice per season. Plus, a good closer may only see 3 or 4 batters per appearance, so there's certainly no guarantee that a batter will even get to face that pitcher.

Pitchers with good stuff who struggle as starters stand a good chance of becoming decent relievers or, in some cases, great closers. What does all this mean for Shawn Chacon? Well, much like Gagne, Chacon has been a pretty mediocre starting pitcher. He got a lot of press early in 2003 because he went 11-4 before the All-Star break. Of course, he had a 4.27 ERA in those starts and walked 40 batters in just over 105 innings. He went 0-4 with a 5.68 ERA after the break, and people stopped talking about him. True, he pitched his home games in the third-worst park for pitchers (that's right, Kauffman Stadium and Olympic Stadium were actually worse). Unbelievably, Chacon was a good deal better in Coors Field than he was on the road. His ERA was almost half a run better at home (4.38 to 4.86). One of the main reasons for his mild success this season was that he kept homeruns to a minimum, after giving them out like candy the past two seasons. What makes this turn of events more ridiculous is that he actually had a lower ground ball to fly ball ratio this season than in the previous two. That is to say that he gave up more fly balls but was probably lucky enough that not too many of them cleared the wall.

For his career, Chacon has a lofty 5.10 ERA, a K/BB ratio of 1.43 (not good), and a HR/9 of 1.36. He is only 25 years old, and could show improvement. That being said, I don't think this is a terrible move by the Rockies. If he completely tanks as a closer, he certainly won't be the first. However, if the Rockies end up with a 9th-inning stud on their hands, there will be plenty of nay-sayers eating crow.

Rule 5 Grab Bag

2003-12-16T02:06:00.000-05:00

Every winter, Major League Baseball holds its annual Rule 5 Draft, where teams have an opportunity to select players from other organizations who are left unprotected from their respective 40-man rosters. The rules governing a player drafted in this manner are as follows:

* The drafting team pays the plundered team $50,000 for a player drafted
* Any player drafted must remain on the drafting team's major league club all season
* If the team fails to do this, they must offer the player back to his original team for $25,000

The last two rules only apply to the Major League Phase of the draft. There is also a minor league phase which consists of a draft of Triple-A players and a subsequent draft of Double-A players.

Not every team has to participate in the drafting, but every team is allowed to be drafted from. The biggest success story in the recent history of the draft is Jay Gibbons of the Orioles, who has hit 51 homeruns and driven in 169 runs over the past two seasons.

The Mets were more active than most teams this year, drafting a total of four players while surrendering two players. Here is a quick analysis of the more prominent picks:

Mets Got

Major League Draft: Round 1 - Frank Brooks, LHP, Pittsburgh
In a pre-arranged deal, the Mets traded Brooks to Oakland for a player to be named later. This has to be someone from Oakland's 40-man roster. There's a good chance it might be a former Met, either Marco Scutaro or Matt Watson, who were both claimed by the A's after the season ended.

Brooks was originally a starter in the Phillies organization. He was drafted out of Florida State in the 13th round in 1999. He was moved to the bullpen in 2002, and has done a pretty good job there. In 157.1 innings has a reliever, Brooks has struck out 153 batters while walking 63. His homerun rate was terrific, giving up only 11 over that span, good for a 0.63 HR/9 rate. He's already 25, but he seems like the kind of bargain-basement guy Billy Beane likes coming out of the bullpen. He could provide league-average relief for league-minimum dollars.

Here's hoping the PTBNL is Marco Scutaro.

Triple-A Draft: Round 1 - Eric Valent, OF, Cincinnati
Another guy who was originally drafted by the Phillies, Valent was a 1st round pick in 1998 out of UCLA. He's 26 already, and it'd be a stretch to call him a prospect at this point. He posted a pitiful .308 OBP in 2003 for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre of the International League (AAA) to go along with a not-so-hot .367 SLG. He showed some pop in the lower-level minor leagues, hitting 20, 22, and 21 homers from 1999-2001. It looks like AAA pitching has done him in, as he's really fallen off a cliff in the last two seasons. He has 47 games of Major League experience, notching a razor-thin .403 OPS. Jim Duquette says that Valent will compete for a bench spot in Spring Training. He can't possibly mean with the big club.

Additional Picks
Lance Caraccioli, LHP, Cleveland
Bryan Edwards, RHP, Milwaukee

Mets Lost

Major League Draft: Round 1 - David Mattox, RHP, Cincinnati
Mattox was drafted by the Mets out of Anderson College. An 11th round pick in 2001, Mattox is 23 and pitched last season for Binghamton of the Eastern League (AA). Baseball America said the following regarding his selection:

A converted infielder in college, Mattox didn't have much mileage on his arm when the Mets originally drafted him out of Anderson (S.C.) College in the 11th round in 2001. He looks like a polished pitcher, though, as he operates with four quality pitches, including a low-90s fastball and a plus changeup, and command. "His arm works good, he has a good delivery and four pitches," Mets scouting director Jack Bowen said. "On the right night, he has four average to above major league pitches and an outstanding change."

He doesn't give up many homeruns (7 in 113.1 innings last year). His K/9 rate is good (6.83), and is K/BB is pretty good (2.15). He was dominant at times in the lower minors and has always done a good job keeping the ball in the park, but it'll be a tough jump for him from AA to the big show. The Reds will certainly give him a shot, but he's in a tough division there, so I don't expect him to fair very well.

Major League Draft: Round 1 - Lenny DiNardo, LHP, Boston
This one stings a bit. DiNardo is a bit of a queer egg. He was actually drafted by the Red Sox out of Stetson University in the 3rd round of the 2001 draft. He allegedly used to hit 90 whilst in college, though his fastball couldn't touch 90 nowadays if it were driving a Porsche. Baseball America had this to say:

DiNardo's impressive AFL campaign certainly didn't hurt his chances of being selected this year. While he allowed 22 hits in 18 innings, he mowed down hitters by keeping them off balance and he struck out 27 and walked just three. He faces a significant challenge in sticking on the Red Sox roster, however, because his fastball is timed at just 83-87 mph with good cutting movement. DiNardo touched 90 mph regularly in college, but scouts believe he became so reliant upon his cutter that it cost him velocity and arm strength.

He has good control and somehow manages to strike guys out. He has a career minor league K/BB rate of 2.72 and a K/9 of 9.34 to go with a ridiculous 0.24 HR/9 ratio. He's the kind of guy a smart organization would pick up, but he is a good bet to be coming back to the Mets sometime this season. With the Red Sox in the thick of a pennant race, it may be difficult to keep DiNardo on the Major League roster all season.

Additional Picks
Ender Chavez, OF, Montreal
John Wilson, C, Montreal

Catching The Ball ... And Other Great Mysteries Of Life

2003-12-15T00:03:00.000-05:00

Back in October, I wrote none too favorably about Mike Cameron. With the Mets having signed Cameron on Saturday to a three-year, $19.5 million deal (backloaded, with an option for a fourth year at $6.5 million), I decided to revisit my analysis of him.

The mistake I made a couple of months ago was that I only considered Cameron's offensive contributions, which are below average for an outfielder. In particular, Cameron's strikeout rate is as high as Grant Roberts. The flaw in my evaluation of Cameron was that I neglected to consider his defensive contributions to a game, which are considerable.

There are a number of metrics that sabermetricians use to evaluate defense: Many are useful, none are perfect. ESPN.com uses Range Factor (RF) and Zone Rating (ZR). RF is the total numbers of outs that a player contributes (putouts plus assists) per nine innings. ZR is the percentage of balls that a player gets to within his defensive zone, as defined by Stats, Inc.

A third stat that I like to use is Win Shares. Win Shares is a system developed by Bill James who, as it turns out, developed many of the statistics that I and other sabermetrically-inclined individuals use on a daily basis. For a great review and synopsis of Win Shares, check out this article by Rob Neyer. The gist of Win Shares is that, by using James' extremely complex methodology, one can divide a team's actual wins into thirds. So the 2003 Mets, who won 66 games, had a total of 198 win shares. The cumulative total of offensive and defensive contributions by all players on the 2003 Mets will add up to these 198 "thirds" of wins.

Last season, Mets outfielders posted the following win shares:

Player          2003 Defensive Win Shares
Roger Cedeno              1.79
Jeff Duncan               1.57
Timo Perez                1.47
Cliff Floyd               1.26
Raul Gonzalez             1.22
Tsuyoshi Shinjo           1.19
Joe McEwing               0.20
Prentice Redman           0.12
Matt Watson               0.05
Tony Clark                0.01
                          ----
Total                     8.88

Mike Cameron had 7.73 win shares in 2003 ... by himself! That's roughly one fewer win share than the entire Mets revolving door outfield. He had more defensive win shares than any outfielder in baseball. Torii Hunter? 6.14 win shares. Carlos Beltran? 6.50 win shares. Andruw Jones? 6.04. No outfielder contributes as much defensively as Mike Cameron.

Plus, there's reason to believe that he'll be even more valuable to the Mets. Last year, Cameron was flanked by Ichiro and Randy Winn, who both finished in the top ten in the AL in defensive win shares. The Mets ... well, they were the Mets. No offense to Cliff Floyd and whomever will be patrolling right field (Brian Jordan?), but Cameron playing centerfield will be like parking a Ferrari between two Hyundais.

What makes me feel even better about this signing is that Billy Beane wanted him bad. Regarding his unsuccessful pursuit of the gold-glove outfielder, Beane said that Cameron:

"... in terms of value and how much he impacts a defense, is the best player out there. I could show you how many runs Mike saves a year, and what he means to a team. He'd be great for the Mets. That's why I don't want them to get him. With that ballpark, and that [fly-ball] pitching staff, Mike would be perfect."

The Mets put together an offseason plan that focused on making the team more athletic with improved defense up-the-middle. With last week's signing of Kazuo Matsui and this weekend's haul of Mike Cameron, they've done a great job executing that plan while maintaining payroll flexibility and restricting contract lengths to three years or less. Jim Duquette has also done a great job of not mortgaging the future by not sacrificing draft picks for either of his two signings (Cameron was non-tendered and Matsui was a Japanese free agent). The Mets may not be contending for a playoff spot this year, but they will be much improved over last season and will provide plenty of hope for the future of this organization.

Pass The Pepto

2003-12-12T01:09:00.000-05:00

With the announcement yesterday that Andy Pettitte had signed with the Astros, you would have thought someone had shot the President. As I listened to ESPN Radio, Yankee fan after Yankee fan called in with over-the-top melodrama such as:

"I feel sick to my stomach."
"This is a dark day for the New York Yankees."
"The Yankees as we know it are over."

I've never seen such remorse over the loss of a number-three starter. I mean, for a guy with a career ERA that approaches 4.00, Yankee fans were reacting as if all of George Steinbrenner's millions blew away and took the Yankees' 26 World Championships along with them. I talked about how overvalued Andy Pettitte is yesterday, and Rob Neyer has written an excellent piece on it as well. He argues, quite convincingly I might add, that the recent addition of Javier Vazquez and the impending addition of Kevin Brown will give the Yankees a much more formidable staff than the one comprised of Roger Clemens and Pettitte.

... if Brown and Vazquez are healthy in 2004, they'll represent a significant upgrade from Clemens and Pettitte, whose impressive won-lost records benefited from the Yankees' potent lineup.

Could a Yankees rotation that includes Brown stack up with the Red Sox's new Schilling-ful squad? You'd better believe it.

The Yankees rotation next season will sport three pitchers who were staff aces last season, plus the best pitcher Cuba had to offer in Jose Contreras. That's four pitchers who are each better than anyone starting for the Mets this season.

* * * * * * * * * *
ESPN.com: Vina, Tigers agree to $6 million deal

Un-be-freaking-lievable. Better them than us, that's what I say. There were rumors over the past few weeks that the Mets were interested in Fernando Vina to play second base at Shea. If Vina is worth $3 million (which he's not), the $6.7 million Kaz Matsui is getting looks like the deal of the century. You've gotta love the enthusiasm of new teammate Dmitri Young:

"I'm excited, to tell you the truth. I played against him in the National League, and he's going to really help us in the leadoff spot because he'll walk, bunt and hit the other way. And his great defense speaks for itself."

I'll bite. Let's break down this statement into it's quantifiable parts...

Great defense

He did win back-to-back gold gloves in 2001 and 2002. However, he wasn't even as good in those seasons as the Tigers' second basemen were in 2003.

                      RF     ZR
Fernando Vina '01    4.84   .849
Fernando Vina '02    4.72   .810
Warren Morris '03    5.55   .839
Ramon Santiago '03   5.04   .736
Shane Halter '03     5.23   .840

RF: Range Factor ((PO + A) * 9 divided by innings)
ZR: Zone rating. The percentage of balls fielded by a player in his typical defensive "zone," as measured by STATS, Inc.

Unless we also consider the triumverate of Warren Morris, Ramon Santiago, and Shane Halter great defensive second-basemen, this one is a bust.

He'll Walk

Taking this to its logical extreme, it's difficult to argue its truthfulness. He does indeed walk. But does he walk a lot? Hardly. His career high was 54 walks in 1998 with Milwaukee. Since then, his walk totals are: 14 (37 games), 36, 32, 44, and 11 (61 games). Hardly Nick Johnson. Certainly not the type of discipline numbers you'd like to see from your leadoff hitter, particularly if you are paying him $3 million a year.

So he doesn't walk and he doesn't play particularly great defense. He must hit well, right? If only he did.

        OPS    GPA
1999   .670   .235
2000   .778   .271
2001   .775   .265
2002   .671   .234
2003   .691   .235

Tigers president Dave Dombrowski had the following to say:

"There's no question we're in a mode that we can be very active and aggressive in our conversations with agents and other teams. It's great. It's an exciting time for our organization. We're looking to upgrade at second base, shortstop, outfield, starting pitching."

In my estimation, it looks like they still need an upgrade at second base, shortstop, outfield, and starting pitching.

Much Ado About Nothing Much

2003-12-11T00:08:00.000-05:00

With reports flying suggesting that Andy Pettitte is close to signing a three-year deal with the Astros, all I keep reading and hearing from New York media outlets is how it would be an atrocity for the Yankees to let Pettitte go. The word from those in the know is that George Steinbrenner has lost his mind, and is engineering most of the Yankees' offseason moves in direct conflict with the opinions of GM Brian Cashman and manager Joe Torre.

I've never really understood what all of the hub-bub is about Andy Pettitte. He's a nice pitcher, don't get me wrong. But he's on the verge of signing a contract worth $10 million per year or more and, despite his wonderful balk move and devout catholicism, I'm not exactly convinced that he's worth eight figures. I'm a life-long Mets fan and, as such, a life-long Yankee hater. Be that as it may, I won't let it stand in my way of an objective analysis of Mr. Pettitte.

The following are regular seasons stats for two American League pitchers from 1999-2003.

             WL%   ERA   K/9   K/BB   HR/9
Player A    .626   3.97  6.70  2.06   1.01
Player B    .656   4.12  6.58  2.35   0.75

These two players have posted very similar stats over the past five seasons. Player A has the edge in ERA and K/9, while Player B has an edge in K/BB (better control) and HR/9. Let's check out what batters have done against these two over that same span.

         Player A      Player B
         OPS  GPA      OPS  GPA
1999    .741 .254     .808 .274
2000    .733 .249     .738 .252
2001    .625 .212     .713 .241
2002    .729 .244     .681 .233
2003    .751 .253     .713 .240

Pretty similar here too. Player A was better from 1999-2001, while Player B was a little better for 2002-2003. Player A made $6.875 million last season and his team, despite being in the thick of the pennant race, tried to trade him at the deadline last season. Player B made $11.5 million last season, pitched in the World Series, and has a cleft chin.

If you haven't already guessed, Player B is Andy Pettitte. Player A is none other than Rock look-alike Freddy Garcia. Pettitte's next contract will be in the $11-13 million dollar range, while Garcia will be lucky to see Kelvim Escobar money ($6.25 million annually). Why would Pettitte be likely to command so much more money? My two best explanations are:

a) his post-season performance
b) he's a lefty

Many applaud Pettitte's success in the numerous Yankee post-seasons he has pitched in, and how he really "steps it up" in the big games. But has he?

                 ERA   WHIP   K/9   K/BB   HR/9
Regular Season   3.94  1.38   6.40  2.20   0.72
Post-season      4.49  1.33   4.96  2.05   1.03

Granted, the post-season is against the best teams in the league and, in most cases, the best hitters in the league as well. That notwithstanding, you'd have a tough time convincing me that he was better in October (and November) than in all other months. In fact, by almost any measure, he was easily worse in the playoffs than during the regular season, even after considering the strength of competition.

But what of his ability to succeed under the bright lights of New York where others have failed? True, not every player is cut out to play in the big city. If I could put a dollar value on that, however, I might also be able to quantify all of Derek Jeter's intangibles in hopes of explaining the logic behind paying a poor defensive shortstop with some pop $19 million per season.

On The Move ... For Better Or For Worse

2003-12-10T18:18:00.000-05:00

With the deadline to offer players arbitration having passed on Sunday, a lot of pieces are starting to fall into place ... for some teams anyway. Yesterday's frenzy included no less than six free agent pitchers changing teams. How do the deals look?

Team: Atlanta Braves
Player: John Thomson
Terms: Two years, $7 million

The Mets acquired Thomson at the trade deadline in 2002 for perennial underachiever Jay Payton, pothead Mark Corey, and Robert Stratton, who has hit 165 minor league homeruns in 2,371 at-bats with -- are you sitting down? -- 982 strikeouts! He's shown some patience, walking 255 times, but he's a straight-up hacker in the mold of Dave Kingman.

He pitched okay down the stretch for the Mets, and signed a one-year deal with the Rangers in 2003. Here's how he's done the past two seasons relative to the league he pitched in:

                       ERA    WHIP  K/9   K/BB   HR/9
John Thomson '03       4.85   1.30  5.64  2.78   1.12
American League '03    4.52   1.39  6.11  1.93   1.11

John Thomson '02       4.71   1.30  5.30  2.43   1.39
National League '02    4.10   1.37  6.76  1.94   1.01

Thomson has shown pretty good control, keeping his walk rate better than the league. However, by almost any other measure, he has been worse than his respective league over the past two seasons. He has played in two of the best hitters parks in baseball in Coors Field (2002) and Arlington Stadium (2003), so let's say that pushes his numbers closer to the league average. You can never underestimate Leo Mazzone's impact on mediocre pitchers, but Thomson isn't going to be a worldbeater for the Braves.

$3.5 million per year is hardly breaking the bank, though it may be a bit much for a league average pitcher in today's buyer's market. He'll likely be the fifth starter for the Braves, who don't have a number one and, I would argue, don't even have a number two. Of course, they didn't have an ace last year and still ran away with the NL East.

The Lost Art Of Platooning

2003-12-09T10:46:00.000-05:00

In the late nineties and early aughts, baseball teams threw around top dollar and multi-year deals to any Joe Shmoe or Todd Zeile who came along. However, that practice has changed alongside baseball's economic landscape. Teams are busy trying to undo the mistakes made by prior administrations and, short of inventing the baseball equivalent of , have to trim payroll wherever they can. Thus the now-ubiquitous event known as the non-tender.

When a team decides not to tender a contract to a player, it is usually because they fear that the potential arbitration settlement is too high. Typically, players who have completed three years of service in the major leagues are eligible for salary arbitration. The exception are those known as "super-two" players. According to the 2003-2006 MLB Collective Bargaining Agreement, this is:

a Player with at least two but less than three years of
Major League service shall be eligible for salary arbitration if: (a)
he has accumulated at least 86 days of service during the immediately
preceding season; and (b) he ranks in the top seventeen percent
(17%) (rounded to the nearest whole number) in total service in the
class of Players who have at least two but less than three years of
Major League service, however accumulated, but with at least 86
days of service accumulated during the immediately preceding season.
If two or more Players are tied in ranking, ties shall be broken
consecutively based on the number of days of service accumulated
in each of the immediately preceding seasons. If the Players remain
tied, the final tie breaker will be by lot.

After three years of service (or super-two), a player has three arbitration years. A team can offer arbitration to such a player, and the player is required to accept. This results in a one-year contract with a salary to be determined in an arbitration hearing. After those three seasons, the player no longer has to accept salary arbitration and can become an unrestricted free agent.

Until recently, a team would seemingly always offer arbitration to their arbitration-eligible players (between 3 and 6 years of service). However, with the pursestrings tightened, more and more players are given their unconditional release and sent off to find work elsewhere. While many of these players are crummy, it is certainly possible to find some affordable production in the non-tender bargain bin. Which brings us to...

The Platoon. The idea behind platooning is to take two complementary players who, while not very impressive individually, actually combine to be a pretty useful if not very productive player. With a modicum of cash to spend, one can put together some decent platoon positions among the many warm bodies on the non-tender bonfire. For a semi-complete list of non-tenders, check out this post at Batter's Box.

Player            AB    AVG   OBP   SLG  HR   RBI
Reggie Sanders    136  .301  .368  .647  12   33    (vs LHP)
Matt Stairs       273  .304  .402  .582  18   53    (vs RHP)

The 136 at-bats for Sanders against left-handed pitching this past season is a small sample, I'll admit. But he's posted a .970 OPS (.314 GPA) since 2001 in 386 at-bats). Sanders would probably cost $1.5 million for one season, with Stairs probably getting around $1 million. So that's $2.5 million for a player who could put up a .950 OPS, 35 HR and 100 RBI.

There are a number of other players who would provide productive platoon splits. The following non-tenders have put up very productive numbers over the past three seasons against lefties or righties:

Player            AB    AVG   OBP   SLG  HR   RBI
Andres Galarraga  291  .289  .356  .495  14    49   (vs LHP)
Tony Graffanino   304  .293  .367  .497  11    37   (vs LHP)
Brian Jordan      280  .318  .381  .582  18    71   (vs LHP)
Eric Karros       307  .316  .389  .515  12    44   (vs LHP)
Carl Everett     1309  .290  .367  .509  47   170   (vs RHP)
Fred McGriff      950  .297  .380  .532  56   175   (vs RHP)

All of these players can be had for a reasonably small contract, and can provide good production against one type of pitcher. It's an inexpensive way to maximize production out of a particular position.

It's A Maddux Maddux Maddux Maddux World

2003-12-08T09:33:00.000-05:00

Before I get into the main topic, ESPN.com's Peter Gammons is reporting that the Mets and Kazuo Matsui have agreed to a three-year deal worth $6.7 million annually. There have been reports and articles all weekend to this effect, but now it seems almost official. If this is the case, I will break down what the Mets can reasonably expect out of Matsui later this week.

* * * * * * * * * *

The Atlanta Braves have cut ties to their second-longest-tenured player, Greg Maddux (John Smoltz has the longest current tenure). With the arbitration deadline passing last night, Maddux's eleven-year run as (usually) the ace of the Braves staff will be coming to an end. Maddux's dominance has diminished as he has gotten on in years, but he is still a productive pitcher and will undoubtedly help whomever he signs with this offseason (The Padres are the early favorites to secure his services).

From 1992-1995, Maddux put together one of the most dominant streaks in baseball history, taking home four consecutive Cy Young Awards, a feat matched only by The Big Unit from 1999-2002. During those four seasons, Maddux had an average ERA of 1.98, posting individual ERAs of 2.18, 2.36, 1.56, and 1.63. The last two of those seasons were downright silly. He surrendered a grand total of 12 homeruns in 411.2 innings in 1994 and 1995, going 35-8 over that span.

From 1992-1995 he averaged 7.6 innings per start, and averaged a dead-ball-era-esque eight innings per start in 1994. In 2003, that average fell to fewer than six innings per start. The one thing that has accelerated Maddux's decline more than anything else has been his strikeout rate.

Year   IP     K/9    K/BB   HR/9
2000  249.1   6.86   4.52   0.67
2001  233.0   6.68   6.41   0.77
2002  199.1   5.33   2.62   0.63
2003  218.1   5.11   3.76   0.99

His strikeouts per nine innings have decreased in each of the past three seasons, which is fairly common among pitchers as they careen towards retirement. Maddux has never had an overpowering fastball, but his movement and command have been so impeccable that he has actually racked up a fair amount of strikeouts over the years. In fact, in 1994 he averaged 7.77 K's per nine innings, the best of his career.

For most pitchers, when the strikeout rate goes so does success. Maddux has been able to keep the wheels from falling off entirely by limiting the number of walks and homeruns he has given up. He gave up only 33 walks this season, averaging one per 6.6 innings, a terrific rate. However, his homerun rate, while still decent at just under one-per-nine, was the highest of his career. His ERA (3.96), OPS against (.715) and GPA against (.238) were all higher than any season since his rookie year in 1987 (5.61 ERA, .822 OPS, .267 GPA).

You can't really blame the Braves for declining to offer Greg Maddux arbitration. They offered it to him last season and were burned. Thinking it would give them more time to negotiate with him, the Braves ended up holding their junk when Maddux was awarded the largest single-season arbitration settlement of $14.75 million. As a result, the Braves were way over-budget and were forced to trade Kevin Millwood to the Phillies.

Maddux will be sure to catch on with somebody, probably for one or two seasons with a vesting option for an additional year. I wouldn't expect him to get much more than $6-7 million per. That's a far cry from the nigh $15 million he netted this season, but as Curt Schilling pointed out prior to his negotiations with the Red Sox, that's still money on top of money he'll never spend.