SB Nation - Eric Hinske

Sadly Bad Articles Will Continue to Doom Terrible Writers

Charlie — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:16:46 -0000

More photos » by Mark J. Terrill - AP

2 months ago: Los Angeles Dodgers' Doug Mientkiewicz, left, hits an RBI-single as Colorado Rockies catcher Chris Iannetta, lower right, and home plate umpire Brian Gorman look on during the first inning of a baseball game, Sunday, Oct. 4, 2009, in Los Angeles. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill)

Browse more photos »

Jeff Pearlman is writing about the Pirates again, this time about how they're going to sign Nomar Garciaparra, a player they have never been connected to and have no particular use for:

You are wondering if any team would be crazy enough to sign an unproductive, uncooperative utility infielder stripped of his range, his pop and his health.

Your question can be answered with a single word: Yes.

And yet, perhaps it won't be Nomar. Perhaps it will be Jermaine Dye or Rocco Baldelli; Melvin Mora or Orlando Cabrera; Carl Pavano or Miguel Olivo

Nobody, however, outdoes Pittsburgh. Seemingly year after year, the Pirates complete one boneheaded off-season move, then overhype it in an effort to hoodwink naive loyalists into thinking the organization is on the right track. Last year it was bringing in Eric Hinske, the long-ago AL Rookie of the Year who now evokes comparisons to a middle-aged Hensley Meulens. In 2008, it was the addition of Mientkiewicz (when it comes to bad teams, big Doug gets around). In 2007, it was the addition of Elmer Dessens. In 2006, it was the addition of Jeromy Burnitz, Sean Casey and Joe Randa (ie: The Holy Trinity of quintessential Pirate signees). The list goes on and on -- a Wayne Krenchicki Tribute Band brought to fruition.

What? I didn't care much about Mientkiewicz one way or the other, but how was signing him in any way "boneheaded"? Why was signing Hinske a dumb idea? And what does Elmer Dessens--who was signed to a minor league contract, never even played for the Pirates in 2007, and never presented even a small amount of risk to the Bucs--have to do with anything?

And, uh, why would signing Jermaine Dye, who hit 27 homers in 2009 and was a borderline MVP candidate in 2008, be boneheaded? Weird for the Pirates, sure, but boneheaded?

For those of you who have seen Pearlman's ridiculous, fact-challenged and inflammatory articles before, his apparent misunderstanding of the way baseball transactions work probably comes as no surprise. But just in case he happens to read this--he seems like the type who Googles himself daily--I'll spell it out: every team signs players to inexpensive contracts and minor-league deals to fill out its AAA roster and the back of its major-league squad. For example, the Yankees signed Angel Berroa before the 2009 season! In 2008, it was Chris Woodward (and Billy Crystal--talk about your inane, attention-hogging signings)! Before 2007, they signed Mientkiewicz! Whatever, I'm sure somehow it wasn't "crazy" or "boneheaded" when they did it.

The State of the Rockies: A Sane Free Agency Preview

Jabberwocky — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:18:36 -0000

Ladies and Gentlemen, the siren of the MLB free agency period once again beckons, luring unsuspecting baseball fans into wrecking their ships against the sharp jagged rocks--in this case dreams of big-ticket free agents for even the smallest markets, ill-conceived trade schemes, and long soliloquies about why the owner/GM/beat writer is a complete and utter moron. This column, my dear friends, is the beeswax to put in your ears to defend you from those beautiful seductresses (and their horrible ideas) as you look forward to the 2010 Rockies.

Yes, that's right. A few minutes ago, the floodgates officially opened for major league free agency. In addition, all MLB teams are required to set their 40 man rosters in advance of the December 8th Rule 5 draft. I've written about all three subjects in Purple Row Academy before, so for those of you who are curious about how those processes are carried out, check out these primers:

Free Agency (the dates listed therein are from last offseason)

40 Man Roster

Rule 5 Draft

All three of these articles have supporting links that clarify the issues even further.

In this installment of the State of the Rockies, I opine about the puzzling Garrett Atkins decision, revisit Rafael Betancourt's situation, examine the Rockies' current 40 man roster status, and look some free agent targets that I'd like the Rockies to consider (plus, how they would fit into the budget that I've outlined over the last two weeks).

Join me after the jump if you value your sanity.

Why didn't the Rockies non-tender Garrett Atkins before the 40 man roster had to be set?

Good question. There's one main reason for doing this, and that's to extend the window of time that the Rockies have to trade the underperforming third baseman for another few weeks--until the December 12th deadline for tendering contracts for players under team control. Unfortunately for Colorado and Dan O'Dowd, the chances of such a deal being consummated reside squarely between slim and none.

It's not that Atkins isn't drawing interest from other teams. Just three years ago he was a player worth 6.4 WAR, he can play both corner infield positions somewhat passably, and he is theoretically in his prime (he'll turn 30 on the date that the Rockies will probably non-tender him). The problem is, Atkins' value as a trade asset to the Rockies is basically nil. Because by rule Atkins' salary next year unless he is a free agent can be no less than 80% of last year's total ($7.05 million), teams that would trade for Garrett would at a minimum be paying $5.64 million for a player that was flat out awful in 2009. The point is that I can't fathom another team trading the Rockies anything (and I mean anything) for him when he'd come much more cheaply once he's been non-tendered.

However, since the Rockies have seven slots open on the 40 man roster as of today (more on that later), it appears that Colorado has enough room to protect the prospects they want from the Rule 5 draft without removing Atkins from it. I'm hoping against hope that O'Dowd can finagle a deal for Atkins, but let's just say that I'm not holding my breath.

What's up with Rafael Betancourt?

From the poll results of last week's column, it appears that the vast majority of you want Betancourt back next year, preferably on a multi-year deal with less of a hit on a per-annum basis. Since the Rockies did decline his option, which was the right call in my opinion, they face a further decision with the soon to be 35 year old reliever--whether to offer him salary arbitration or not by the December 8th deadline.

It is my opinion that if he were offered arbitration, Betancourt would be crazy not to accept it. His status as a Type A free agent severely pollutes his value on the free agent market, chasing away a number of potentially interested teams that don't want to give the Rockies their first round pick for a solid set-up man. Considering Betancourt's age and the relatively high volatility of relief pitching performance, the risk for another team is particularly acute. I believe that as a result Betancourt would be very fortunate indeed to receive an offer that approaches what he would get in arbitration.

And what would that be? Let's look at some precedent--a tale of two relievers, if you will.

Last year two veteran relief pitchers (Darren Oliver and David Weathers) accepted arbitration from their clubs. Oliver was a Type A free agent while Weathers was a former closer who had once been perceived as being productive. Oliver was coming off of a 1.0 WAR season in which he was very effective, while Weathers had produced 0.2 WAR.

Oliver, who was going to be 38 in 2009, got his salary increased through arbitration from $2 million to $3.665 million, while Weathers, who was going to be 39, went up from $3.3 to $3.5 million. Those are 83.3% and 6% raises respectively, as would befit their recent performance levels. In 2009, Oliver continued to defy science and produced an even better, 1.5 WAR year at age 38, while Weathers was DFA'd and ended up with -0.8 WAR--while being paid $3.5 million. That's the risk inherent with offering arbitration--some decisions pan out and some fail.

Given that Betancourt is likely better than both of the pitchers above and a little younger (35 compared to 38-39), he’ll get a slightly higher raise, closer to Oliver's 83% raise and maybe larger. In 2009 Betacourt was making $3.5 million—which means that I’m estimating an increase of 2.9 million (or 83%) to $6.4 million—in other words, more than the option the Rockies just declined should he accept arbitration. Who knows though…arbitrators work in mysterious ways.

The draft picks should Betancourt not accept arbitration and sign with another team would be worth about $5 million, so the Rockies are gambling that they can either re-sign Betancourt for a lower price tag or that another team would be willing to offer him a crazy contract despite his free agency status. If it works, O'Dowd is a genius--but I just have serious doubts that everything will work out. Bottom line though, the worst case scenario is that the Rockies pay Betancourt well over $6 million next year--which is pretty palatable as far as worst case scenarios go.

Who is worth protecting from the Rule 5 draft?

As I mentioned above, the Rockies have only 33 spots filled on their 40 man roster, meaning that they technically have room to protect up to seven prospects from the Rule 5 draft. Of course, that's not really realistic. As I've outlined previously, the Rockies have holes on the major league roster that need to be filled--namely replacements for their ten free agents and Atkins--so in effect they can protect only a few players.

Hat tip to WolfMarauder on this, but going strictly by the Purple Row PuRP list, the Rockies have four prospects that would need to be protected from the draft: Michael McKenry (C), Cole Garner (OF), Chaz Roe (RHP), and Edgmer Escalona (RHP)--plus Alberto Alberquerque (RHP), who the Rockies received in exchange for Jeff Baker.

Now admittedly the minor league system isn't my area of expertise, but if I were to hazard a guess, the Rockies will likely protect McKenry, Garner, and Roe--leaving both Escalona and Alberquerque (among other lesser prospects) eligible for the draft. They simply won't be able to protect more than that--not if the Rockies plan to field a complete roster come Opening Day 2010. We'll see soon enough.

Who should the Rockies be looking at in free agency?

Given that, by my calculations, the Rockies currently have 23 players under contract for next year (22 if you allow that Buchholz will start on the DL), they will need to fill those holes. This might be through re-signing free agents such as Yorvit Torrealba at back-up catcher, Rafael Betancourt as a set-up man, and Joe Beimel as a lefty out of the pen. Or they could go by the cheap youth method, promoting McKenry to the big leagues come Opening Day while using Deduno and Chacin in the bullpen. Or they could make a foray into the free agent market. Finally, the Rockies could explore the trade market both as a buyer and a seller. To that end, Baseball Prospectus has a few tips for those interested in making up interesting trade rumors.

My prediction is that the Rockies will explore a little of each, signing at least one of their free agents (my guess is that they do get Betancourt back one way or another) and maybe two (Torrealba seems somewhat likely as well), while should Torrealba fall through McKenry seems to be the most cost-effective candidate. I think that the Rockies are likely to trade one of their outfielders (and I've recommended Hawpe many many times), maybe two--and O'Dowd could perform a miracle and trade Atkins. Either way, I think the Rockies will be looking for one of two things in free agency: a back-up corner infielder/veteran and a relief pitcher, preferably a lefty.

Given this and the fact that the Rockies' budget is undeniably tight, here are a few players that I would recommend at least kicking the tires on that are within the Rockies price range. By no means is this list exhaustive, but these players would fill a need for Colorado.

Free Agency Targets

Pedro Feliz: Yes, he's a pretty bad hitter and yes, he's old, but Feliz fields his position very well (he could likely play first base at a high level too) and has shown at least some power--two important characteristics for a NL bench player. He's sufficiently veteranny (he'll be 34 years old), he's right-handed, and would likely cost around $3-5 million to sign. Ultimately, he's injury insurance that gives the Rockies a lot of flexibility in later innings. Obviously, Feliz will be looking for a starting situation before he would choose to come to the Rockies, which is a big stumbling block.

Jamey Carroll: He has already been awesome for the Rockies before (3.1 WAR in 2006), plus he can play almost anywhere on the diamond (and do it well). The fans and players love him already, and he's willing to come off the bench. The problem is that the competition for the utilityman will be fierce this offseason, and he might be snapped up for close to $3 million.

Felipe Lopez: He represents an upgrade at second base, plus he has defensive versatility. His excellent year last year could price him out of Colorado's range, though in my opinion he is being severely undervalued by many. This is a pipe dream that RMN and I share.

Juan Uribe: He's another former Rockie, one who has excelled in this type of role already on the Giants. Unfortunately for Colorado, he may have performed too well for the Giants, who really want him back. My prediction is that San Francisco gets their man.

Joe Crede: He's great with the leather and serviceable with the bat. The problem is that he's looking for a starting job and he's had three back surgeries already. Give him an incentive laden salary with a low base and he's your man--but Crede's probably not coming to Colorado in a part-time role (especially since he's a Boras client).

Eric Hinske: The last three years, the teams that Hinske has been on have made the World Series, winning it twice. How much more of a veteran winner can you be? Plus he's good with the bat and is versatile (though not particularly competent) defensively.

Jose Contreras: More than any other Rockies free agents, I want Contreras back next year as rotation insurance and as a swing man with excellent stuff in the bullpen--heck, I'd like to see the Rockies pay up to $3 million for his services. Whether that would be enough is another matter.

John Smoltz: If he'd deign to sign with the Rockies, Colorado would be glad to have his power arm in the bullpen or even in the fifth starter's role.

Rodrigo Lopez: He has found success in Colorado before and would serve as rotation depth.

Mark Hendrickson and Scott Eyre (Type B): Serviceable veteran left-handed relievers that would cost around $2-3 million each.

To that effect, there are many relievers or failed starters that O'Dowd could pick up cheaply off the scrap heap that would perform at a decent level for this team--I'm not really as worried about the bullpen.

The bottom line is that I think the Rockies should sign Feliz or a similar player to replace Atkins while inking a veteran starter/reliever for the bullpen. If Colorado does move Hawpe, they'll likely receive a bullpen arm in return that could fill the void as well. Either way, I'm expecting free agency to cost the Rockies around $8-10 million, bringing their ODP to around $87 million.

Should The Rays Trade Carlos Pena?

Tommy Rancel — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 11:00:16 -0000

One of the larger topics this offseason has centered on what to do with Carl Crawford. Now that the Rays have picked up his $10 million dollar option they are left with a couple scenarios: trading him now, trading him later, signing him to an extension, or let him walk and take the compensatory pick(s). While CC is and will remain the hot topic for the unforeseeable future, I have been wondering about the Rays other $10 million dollar man, Carlos Pena.

Honestly, I try and to not play favorites, but how can you not when it comes to Carlos Pena? Nevertheless, I've come to the realization that maybe in addition to Crawford, it's time to explore the possibility of a Pena move. Of course, one isn't really reliant on the other and both, one, or none of them could be traded anyway.

Obligatory disclaimer: This is merely speculation. The Rays haven't said they are actively shopping Pena.

First, let's look at the most important fact; Pena will make $10.25 million dollars in 2010. This makes him the team's highest paid player. However, in terms of WAR, he was narrowly the seventh best Rays player this past season. If you want to make the argument that his season was cut short due to injury, Pena was not cracking the top five for the Rays regardless of a full season. This doesn't mean he wasn't valuable; a 2.6 WAR is worth $11.9 million dollars and Pena made $8 million, but the Rays highest paid player shouldn't be their fifth, sixth or seventh best player on the team.

Pena's three-year WAR average has him at a 4.2. If he is able to produce that at $10 million dollars then that is a bargain, but that average is also heavily skewed by his 6.2 WAR in the 2007 season. After posting a 3.8 in 2008, Pena was again down to 2.6 in 2009.

Offensively, there is little doubt that Pena can, and will, still mash. The player friendly projection of Bill James has him slugging .498 in 2010 and I think that may be a bit on the low side. It's the other portions of Pena's game that had me worried. While the Power remains, his patience at the plate and his sharp batting eye have wandered slightly the past few seasons.

After posting a lovely 17.4% walk rate in 2007, Pena's BB% has declined in the past few seasons. Coinciding with the decline in walks is an increase in strikeouts, and not surprisingly an increase in swings on pitches out of the zone.

	BB%	K%	O-Swing%
2007	17.4	29	19.8
2008	16.4	33.9	20.8
2009	15.6	34.6	23.6

Walking 15% of the time is still pretty good, but the K's are at an all time high. Even though we know this is part of his game, it's still not a trend you want to see.

Defensively, Pena had a pretty rough season finishing with a UZR of -4.6. However, his three year average is ever so slightly above average at 0.4. Odds are he will be right at average or slightly below in the field next year, unless 2009 was just the beginning of a defensive avalanche.

Beyond the high salary and some production concerns, there are also the compensation issue. Trading Pena won't net the same type of return as Crawford and nobody should expect such a thing. However, for a team who's looking for power, can accept a few flaws, and afford the price tag, Pena is very attractive option even if it's for a one year rental. I'm not going to speculate on a return, but I'm guessing the Rays could do pretty well in any potential deal.

What I do want to look at is the return if Pena is retained and then walks at the end of the season. According to Eddie Bajek's Elias Projections, Carlos Pena is a type B free agent. Remember, this is based on his 2008 and 2009 seasons. When/if Pena hits the market next season, his compensation will be based on 2009 and 2010. Usually players who have declined over a three-year period while getting older don't improve from one season to the next, however, there are always exceptions. Nonetheless, a Type-A ranking for first basemen doesn't come easy; none of the 2009 free agent first basemen have Type-A status and only Mark Teixiera earned it in 2008.

I have no idea how the Elias rankings are created, but over the two years before he hit free agency, Teixeira averaged a slash line of .307/.406/.557 with nearly 32 home runs. Over the last two seasons, Pena has averaged .237/.367/.515 with 35 bombs. I'm going to assume that to obtain a Type-A status, Pena's going to need to regain his 2007 form and then some, which is unlikely. What's more than likely to happen is Pena will retain Type-B status and his former team will receive a supplemental pick instead of the potential two picks a Type-A would.

This raises another issue. Getting draft picks for potential free agents is not necessarily a good thing for the Rays. Sure, adding young talent is always welcomed, but even late first round picks cost money (see LeVon Washington). The Rays already have four high picks in next year's draft. If they aren't able to sign all four they will receive an addittional compensatory pick(s) in 2011. This will be in addition to their regular pick and any potential picks received from free agents with "type" status( Crawford, Pena, etc.). That could end up as a lot of money for unproven talent; or on a few picks not wasted, per se, but picks not maximized due to budget restrictions.

Once more, Pena is still a good player and even at $10 million dollars should still provide value, but for a Rays team looking to cut corners in places to improve others, a look in his direction is smart business. Replacing Pena wouldn't be easy, but it wouldn't be as hard as say, replacing a Carl Crawford.

For example, Russell Branyan is a free agent. Coming off a 2.8 WAR season, Branyan could give you similar production for probably half the cost. Branyan is also looking for a two-year deal, so he may not be ideal. The Rays could go the platoon route and find a dance partner for Willy Aybar. Another former Ray, Eric Hinske could work well with Aybar. Or the Rays could go the unconventional route and move Ben Zobrist to first allowing Sean Rodriguez to get the bulk of the time at second base. I could go on rosterbating, but you get the point.

There are the intangibles: leadership, smile%, pre-game dances, and between pitch mound meetings, but in terms of things we can measure, exploring a deal involving Pena seems prudent for a team that is constantly working around the big payroll elephant in the room.

Hinske or Guzman?

Travis G — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:00:39 -0000

More photos » by Bill Kostroun - AP

"I just saw these guys last year."

Browse more photos »

No word yet on who will get the last spot on the team, but I'd have to think it'll go to Eric Hinske. Freddy Guzman was barely used in the ALCS, and now with the pitcher hitting in at least two games, a good pinch-hitter is more valuable than a pinch-runner.

Or maybe Joe throws a curve and drops Frankie Cervelli in favor of Guzman and Hinske, but I doubt it. With Molina catching Burnett, the Yanks need a third catcher in case Posada (who will replace Molina mid-game) gets hurt, plus Cervelli is fast enough (not just for a catcher) that he could pinch-run if needed.

Guzman only got into two games in the LCS, didn't steal a base and got one PA (he struck out). In the regular season, he only got seven PA, but was successful four times in five attempted steals. Hinske hit .226/.316/.512 (in 98 PA) after coming to the Yankees in a mid-season trade with Pittsburgh. The answer seems pretty obvious (but watch: because I wrote that, the Yanks will desperately need a pinch-runner multiple times in the Series).

Poll

Who gets left OFF the roster?

Eric

103 votes

Freddy

611 votes

Cervelli

54 votes

768 votes | Poll has closed

The Scott Rolen Deal: No Thank You

Charlie — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 23:56:20 -0000

More photos » by Keith Srakocic - AP

3 months ago: Cincinnati Reds' Scott Rolen, center, is greeted by teammates in the dugout after he scored in the eighth inning of the baseball game against the Pittsburgh Pirates in Pittsburgh, Tuesday, Sept. 22, 2009. Rolen scored twice and drove in three runs as the Reds won 10-4. (AP Photo/Keith Srakocic)

Browse more photos »

Forgive me for being a bit late to comment on this article by Dejan Kovacevic, but I just saw it.

Ten Ways to Reboot the Pirates in 2010: 1. Spend.

Sign Rick Ankiel or any free agent -- Nick Johnson? Mark DeRosa? Xavier Nady for a second tour? -- who might bring some pop to the lineup.

Make a trade for a quality player, regardless of cost.

The Pirates' current $23 million roster -- which projects to $28 million with raises -- has to represent the low point. There is no rule that says a team building from within must be a catastrophe at the major league level until the prospects arrive. Provided that acquisitions do not block key players -- signing, say, a center fielder would be absurd -- the only reason not to fill other holes would be to create more leftover money.

When Cincinnati recently traded for Scott Rolen and his $11 million salary after being miles out of contention, many in baseball scoffed. But the Reds went 25-11 with Rolen, and their many youngsters might have their development aided by his presence.

I'm not opposed to spending a bit of money on a player like Nick Johnson. But, as ever, it amazes me how little people have learned from the Pirates' recent experience.

First: the idea that the Rolen trade represents a good model for the Pirates is just beyond belief. Rolen has had a great career and all, but he has now whined his way out of three of the four organizations he's played for. (In fairness, his manager in Philadelphia, Larry Bowa, was hated by everyone, but still.) The idea that he, of all people, would be the sort of veteran player whose mere "presence" aids the development of youngsters is stunning to me. The Reds' ERA did improve after he arrived, and his superior defense probably did help out with that somewhat, but that's hardly a reason to make crazy trades for veterans if you otherwise should be recharging.

If Kovacevic is simply saying that Rolen helped the Reds with his play on the field helped the Reds' young pitchers, that's one thing. But his use of the word "presence" suggests that that's not what he's saying, espec ially since he didn't mention the pitching staff.

Has there ever been any sort of empirical data that shows that the addition of veteran players helps young players? I don't know of one, and while I can't prove it isn't true, it's fair to note that every team has veterans, and so it's quite easy to credit a veteran for his "presence" every time a team plays surprisingly well.

The flipside is that, if you want to, you can blame them and their "presence" when things go wrong. Of course, that would seem mean-spirited and stupid, wouldn't it? Of course it would. And yet it's every bit as logical as suggesting that the mere "presence" of veterans helps.

The best we can do if we're looking at the effect a player has is to look at how he played on the field. Mere "presence" doesn't seem to matter much, and Pirates fans should know that as well as anybody. How many more wins did Matt Morris' "presence" bring? How about Doug Mientkiewicz's? Or Jose Mesa's? Or Jeromy Burnitz's? Or Joe Randa's? Or Eric Hinske's? Just the other day Kovacevic implied that Hinske was a part of the "awful atmosphere" that surrounded the Pirates in 2009. And yet he was one of the Bucs' biggest veteran additions the previous offseason.

To be fair, I'm sure Kovacevic doesn't believe we should acquire these veterans indiscriminately; perhaps he means that there are some veterans who add something with their presence, and others who don't. But then why focus on a well-known whiner like Rolen (who, after all, pretty much did exactly what Hinske did by begging out of Philadelphia, St. Louis, and Toronto) or an alleged PED user like Rick Ankiel? Or, for that matter, a guy like Nady who's probably a perfectly nice guy but who has already spent a considerable amount of time in PNC Park, apparently without dropping any of that magic veteran pixie dust on the place?

There may, of course, be times that veteran "presence" does help. But even if that's true, no one ever seems to know what they are beforehand. The gift of veteran "presence" is one that only seems to appear after the fact, and then it appears completely randomly, such that a perpetual malcontent like Rolen all of a sudden becomes a savior for no other reasons than that 1) his new team happened to play well following a trade and 2) he's old. In Pittsburgh, we've had veteran after veteran, and none of them have brought anything extra to the team other than what they've done on the field. At least nothing we've seen. So why should we make this same mistake again?

The Rolen trade, in particular, was insane. The Reds traded a very good starting pitching prospect (Zach Stewart), a potentially functional young reliever (Josh Roenicke) and a very talented, if extremely frustrating, young third baseman (Edwin Encarnacion) to get him. In terms of value, this would be a little like if the Pirates traded Rudy Owens, Eric Hacker and Lastings Milledge--for a player who's old and expensive and will be gone after 2010. A potential crowd-pleaser, perhaps, but utterly bonkers in terms of the goals of the franchise.

So when someone says that the Pirates, who are two years from contending in the best of circumstances, should "trade for a quality player, regardless of cost" and points to the Scott Rolen deal as an example of what the Bucs should do, I have to ask: Really?

Kovacevic does have a point that there's no reason the Pirates shouldn't sign a veteran or two this offseason--if the right opportunity presents itself. But jeez, let's at least agree on some some basic tenets here. The point of having youngsters on a 62-win team is not to trade for aging free-agents-to-be. And veteran "presence" isn't going to matter without talent to back it up--just ask the 2007 Pirates. Or the 2006 Pirates. Or the 2004 Pirates. And so on.

Playoff Teams Defense Analysis - How They Got There and What to Expect - American League Edition

Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 16:32:12 -0000

More photos » by Chris Carlson - AP

2 months ago: Los Angeles Angels center fielder Gary Matthews Jr. catches a fly ball in front of a mural honoring Los Angeles Angels rookie pitcher Nick Adenhart, Tuesday, Oct. 6, 2009, during practice in preparation for the team's upcoming playoff baseball game in Anaheim, Calif. Adenhart died in a car accident last April. (AP Photo/Chris Carlson)

Browse more photos »

A couple days ago I publish the look at the defensive stats of the teams that made the playoffs in the National League. Now it is time for the American League. For this analysis, I will be using UZR data from from Fangraphs.com. I computed the numbers a few days ago and waited for the season to end. Fangraphs updates their numbers on Monday so these UZR are not from this Monday but the Monday before that.

First, here are the totals of all the AL teams in the playoffs:

As it can be seen, the Angel's defense this season was the best of the four teams with them saving about 30 more runs than the Yankees and Red Sox and about 45 more runs than the Twins.

Besides the team totals, the UZR can be broken down to individual positions. Here is a comparison of each of the 4 teams by position totals.

None of these team were great in the field and shows by the variations from position to position.

Even though these graphs show how a team did during the season, it doesn't show what to except in the post season. For example, the Angels missed Tori Hunter for a while due to injury and the players that replaced him might explain the low ranking in CF for the Angels (actually Tori had a pretty bad year in CF). For each team, I went ahead and calculated the true UZR value of each player projected to start in the playoffs.

For those that need to know, it was a 5-4-3-2 weighted average of seasonally regressed values to 125 games with no final age adjustment. For example, Derek Jeter had a 6.4 UZR for 2009, but taking into account his previous seasons his true talent level is near -1.7 UZR.

So here is a look at each team's 2009 numbers and the true talent level of the players expected to play during the post season (I will add more as needed - when injuries happen or if I happened to miss someone).

Minnesota Twins (2009 UZR Results and True Current UZR Seasonal Talent Levels)

Pos	Name	UZR
1B	Justin Morneau	0.67
1B	Michael Cuddyer	-0.13
2B	Nick Punto	0.81
2B	Alexi Casilla	-2.73
3B	Matt Tolbert	-0.03
3B	Joe Crede	7.44
3B	Brendan Harris	-1.2
SS	Nick Punto	2.59
SS	Orlando Cabrera	-0.11
LF	Delmon Young	-10.2
LF	Denard Span	2.12
CF	Carlos Gomez	7.6
CF	Denard Span	-0.72
RF	Jason Kubel	-1.39
RF	Michael Cuddyer	-7
RF	Denard Span	1.82

LA Angels (2009 UZR Results and True Current UZR Seasonal Talent Levels)

Pos	Name	UZR
1B	Kendry Morales	3.0
2B	Howie Kendrick	1.8
2B	Maicer Izturis	1.5
3B	Chone Figgins	6.6
SS	Erick Aybar	3.7
SS	Maicer Izturis	1.0
LF	Juan Rivera	5.9
CF	Gary Matthews Jr.	-5.4
CF	Torii Hunter	-6.0
RF	Bobby Abreu	-11.3
RF	Gary Matthews Jr.	-1.0

New York Yankees (2009 UZR Results and True Current UZR Seasonal Talent Levels)

Pos	Name	UZR
1B	Mark Teixeira	1.5
2B	Robinson Cano	-1.9
3B	Alex Rodriguez	-3.7
SS	Derek Jeter	-1.7
LF	Johnny Damon	-2.4
CF	Melky Cabrera	-1.5
CF	Brett Gardner	3.2
RF	Nick Swisher	2.1
RF	Eric Hinske	0.6
RF	Melky Cabrera	-0.3

Boston Red Sox (2009 UZR Results and True Current UZR Seasonal Talent Levels)

Pos	Name	UZR
1B	Victor Martinez	-0.1
1B	Kevin Youkilis	3.2
1B	Casey Kotchman	4.5
2B	Dustin Pedroia	6.9
3B	Mike Lowell	2.3
3B	Kevin Youkilis	-0.1
SS	Alex Gonzalez	4.5
SS	Nick Green	-2.0
SS	Jed Lowrie	4.2
LF	Jason Bay	-9.6
CF	Jacoby Ellsbury	-6.7
RF	Rocco Baldelli	-0.6
RF	J.D. Drew	4.6

--------------------------------------------------------------------

First, thanks to Justin for supplying the graphics and let me know if any players might be seeing playing time in the first 2 rounds. I am not going to go through all possible lineups once the DH is added and removed in the World Series until two teams qualify.

32 Seasons of zMLE

TheJay — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 18:00:17 -0000

At Baseball Think Factory, Dan Szymborski has made available for download three decades of minor league to major league translations (he calls them zMLE). You may recognize his name as the brains behind the ZiPS projection system. You can find the spreadsheets and a discussion of his number crunching here.

It's pretty fun to go through and look at the numbers of Brewers minor leaguers who never got a shot in the big leagues.

Steve Scarborough was an organizational shortstop for seven years in the system and somehow managed to quit playing without stumbling into a hitting coach job. I only knew of him because I saw a player with a really long name listening intently to Ned Yost during a spring training special a few years back. Now I can see just how his stats would have translated into the majors:

Year	Team	Level	AVG/OBP/SLG	zMLE
1999	Helena Ogden	R R	.303/.402/.507	None
2000	Beloit	A	.241/.323/.316	.227/.289/.281
2001	High Desert	A+	.255/.335/.412	.219/.282/.306
2002	Huntsville Indianapolis	AA AAA	.265/.358/.418	.227/.303/.370
2003	Indianapolis	AAA	.241/.290/.388	.214/.264/.352
2004	Indianapolis	AAA	.246/.342/.383	.224/.319/.349
2005	Nashville	AAA	.255/.323/.413	.237/.293/.368

Okay, so I guess there's a reason he never made it to the big leagues. But still, how cool is it that this sort of thing is out there?

Some other players of interest are after the jump.

Tony Zuniga was a career minor leaguer when the Brewers picked him up in 2005. He started the season in Huntsville and wasn't particularly impressive in the first two months of the season, hitting only .258/.321/.342 in just over 200 plate appearances. He was promoted to Nashville when veteran Kevin Orie was released. Zuniga took off, hitting .323/.376/.472 in 255 plate appearances. As you might expect, his zMLEs were night and day as well:

AA zMLE: .247/.299/.335 --- AAA zMLE: .285/.329/.410

Odd years were Zuniga's favorite seasons, I guess, as he had even more impressive campaigns in AAA in 2001 and 2003:

2001 AAA: .271/.363/.504 ---> .258/.342/.403
2003 AAA: .295/.362/.510 ---> .270/.334/.464

In 2001, he was behind the 3B triumvirate of Russ Davis, Ramon Martinez, and Pedro Feliz in San Francisco. In 2003, he was behind a sophomore-slumping Eric Hinske. The 2005 Brewers had Russell Branyan, Bill Hall, and Jeff Cirillo manning the hot corner. It's kind of disappointing that Zuniga couldn't get a cup of coffee in one of those seasons. He played in the Mexican League in 2006 and then disappeared, having never appeared in the majors.

Derek Hacopian was an offensive force both in college and in the low minors. After three seasons hitting home runs in the Indians chain, injury limited him to only 79 plate appearances in 1994. Already 25 and having never appeared above A ball, he was roster filler for the Beloit Snappers in 2005. He hit 23 home runs and generally made Midwest League pitchers miserable that year, hitting only .324/.407/.552. His zMLE for that year was .279/.341/.441 - pretty good for someone in A ball, even if he was old for the league. His reward was being traded to the Tigers for reliever Kevin Wickander. Unfortunately for Hacopian, the Florida State League dampened his numbers and he was done in the minors after 1996.

Have you ever heard of a guy named Cheol-Sun Bak? How about Chel-Soon Park or Chel Sun Park? He was the first South Korean signed by a major league team - your very own Milwaukee Brewers. They signed him following a 1979 Korean-American baseball tournament and Park spent two seasons in the Milwaukee system before returning to Korea and having a crazy 24-4, 1.84 ERA season in the Korean Baseball Organization. Hampered by injuries, he never again came close to those numbers but pitched until 1996.

He threw only 32 1/3 innings in A ball in 1980, so there's not much to go on, but he still had a nice zMLE for a guy crossing an ocean: 3.03 ERA with 32 hits allowed, 9 walks, and 16 strikeouts. In 1981, he struggled as a starter at both Class A Stockton and Class AA El Paso and the Brewers let him go at the age of 25. It's interesting to think about what could have been if the Brewers had spent more time developing him, but you can't argue with their results in those years. Despite Jeff Sackmann's best efforts, the Brewers have yet to have a Korean player appear in a major league game (unless you count Tommy Phelps, born in Seoul).

Obviously there are many, many, many things you can do with a spreadsheet like this. These are just a few names that caught my eye right off the bat. I encourage you to download the info, peruse it yourself, and see if you can find anything interesting.

The Juggernaut Double Digest Edition: Yanks sweep Labor Day, 4-1 and 11-1

CrazyYankeeChick — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 03:59:53 -0000

Nom nom nom.

View full size photo »

Were the New York Yankees, in fact, laboring on this holiday twin bill? Because from where I was sitting, it looked more like they were slicing through the Rays like a hot knife in butter.

With their double-win over Tampa Bay, the Yanks looked like the juggernauts they are, increasing their lead in the AL East to 9 and all but securing their spot in history as one of the best teams the franchise has put on the field. Yeah, I said it. They are. Don't believe me? Let's review what happened at 161st street today:

GAME 1, 1:05: 4-1 W

Brett Gardner rejoins our lives again, and I don't think anyone celebrated his value more than John Sterling today, after our speedy OF made a catch that was almost cartoonish in its unbelievablility. I thought my sparks were going to start flying out my radio from Sterling's explosive reaction to this: "And I'll just say it, Suzyn. In all my years of watching the Yankees, I have never seen an outfield as good as this."

CC Sabathia's very CC like performance was troubling for me to watch. His 7IP of 10K ball would have been a phenomenal way for my fantasy team to start Week 1 of the playoffs...if I had remembered to set my roster for today. Instead, my bench line score for the day is beautifully immaterial.

Which wasn't the only way my fantasy team took a hit. With 3 Rays on my lineup, I'm avoiding checking StatTracker to see the O-fers diluting my BA. Carlos Pena's HBP in Game 1 really encapsulated the day for the Rays' offense: 2 broken fingers after getting hit with a pitch in the 1st. But to make matters worse, he swung so he didn't even get to take a base. "You don't take a 95 mph fastball on the finger and live to tell about it -- or the finger live to tell about it."

Evan Longoria might have the only production for my team actually, with his solo blast in the 2nd. Carl Crawford, my all-time favorite fantasy mainstay, went 0 for 3, with 2 strikeouts, and even got caught stealing 2nd in the 8th, on a brilliant pitchout from Jorge Posada. You're useless, Crawford.

Derek Jeter was hitless for the day, but still met another landmark by tying Yogi Berra in the 3rd place spot for most games played. Meh. I don't get any real charge out of this stat. But being the Yankee with the most hits EVER? Unassailably, indisputably awe-inspiring. And we get to be around to witness it. This team never fails to give me goosebumps.

The game broke open from the 1-1 tie on account of a 3-run 8th. If I were Tampa Bay, I'd petition to have the games they play against the Yankees end squarely in the 7th. Or at least get some kind of hired gun for the 8th innings against NY.

Elias Sports Bureau tells us that New York is 15-0 when tied after seven innings -- the longest such streak at the start of a season in major league history. That's amazing, and I can't decide whether this is on account of our bullpen, or our offense's refusal to go down without a fight. Either way.

Speaking of bullpen, concerns over Mariano RIvera's sore groin were significantly alleviated today after he followed up Phil Hughes' scoreless 8th with a perfect inning of his own, striking out 2 to end the 3-hit game and hand the W over to Hughes (who's getting himself a nice potpouri of pitching accolades. For a set-up man, he's got a pretty decent assortment of Ws and Saves.) Douglas Adams pretty much nailed it when he avered the ultimate answer to life and the universe.
12 straight bullpen wins. Franchise record. When was the last time we were proud of our bullpen? I love this team.

Was this the same defense that the Rays trotted out last year in the World Series? They were abyssmal. What is Joe Maddon putting in his coffee these days that he's let the talent on the team fester away this season to this degree? It's like watching the beginning of Mighty Ducks 2, when Coach Bombay is all resting on his laurels after last year's championship, and he doesn't take the time to address the team's needs. Bad Maddon. Baddon.

Game 2, 7:05: 11-1 W

Jeter goes hitless again. 0-8 with a walk on a day. Three hits to tie Lou Gehrig. 4 to become leader. He's soooo overrated.

24 hits in 2 games, outscored the Rays 15-2. This team used to have our number, remember? It's nice how things have changed. Which is another reason why I think we shouldn't worry about the Angels. Very little about this Yankees team is typical this year. All bets are off, we're playing with a new deck.

Speaking of Angels, the Yanks moved 6 and a half up on them for best record in the AL. This may be the first year I've really assigned any level of import to homefield advantage. While I usually subscribe to the I-guess-it-helps-but-a-good-team's-a-good-team mentality, Greatness's New Home is kind to our team. I want to see as much of that offensive brothel as possible.

Other concerns milling about the Yankee fanbase have been around AJ Burnett and his softening domination. Today he pitched a 1-run game in 6IP: 4 hits, 3 BBS, 8Ks. "Any time you get to pitch behind that big man, you know, you want to put up his numbers. You just get inspired." Once again, default to the advice from "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy."

While Andy Sonnanstine didn't exactly give the performance of his career (8 runs, 8 hits, 3 hits in 2 and two-thirds innings, which inflated his ERA to 7.23), I think he may need to put things in perspective just a little: "Definitely today was probably one of the worst days of my life."

Teixeira has three multihomer games this season, 24 overall. His swing is climbing the charts for one of the most aesthetically pleasing and effective in all of major league baseball.

Jose Molina(three hits, two walks in Game 2) reached base five times in a game for the first time in his career.

9-19 with RISP. I'll take it.

There were so many substitutions toward the end of Game 2 that I was getting flashbacks of CYO basketball. In addition to the starting 9, the Yankees gave some playing time to Ramiro Pena, Eric Hinske, SHELLEY DUNCAN, and Francisco Cervelli. Remember when Cody Ransom would have been among those names? Despite the fact Pena was the only one to actually get on base of those 4, I love the fact that those are the B-listers on this team, because it says something about how otherwordly our A-listers are.

And A-listers they are. After a brain fart of a game last night, the Yankees bounced back to take both games from the Rays. They're playing like they should be. Like they're not only focused on winning each individual game, but like they realize that a W means nothing if it doesn't support our momentum. That's what they've been doing for the last 2 months: crafting new and incisive ways to buoy their lead and nourish their adrenaline.

Keep your eyes on the prize, Yanks. Eye on the prize.

-CYC

The AL MVP is....

Tommy Rancel — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 00:37:38 -0000

Many pundits and experts are starting to rev up the Derek Jeter for American League MVP hype machine. Well they are wrong about the player, however they are right about one thing; the AL MVP is a New York Yankee. On June 30^th, the Yankees were 44-32. They were 2.5 games out of first place in the AL East; then the MVP arrived. While it may have seemed like a "small" move at the time, the Yankees acquired Eric Hinske from the Pittsburgh Pirates for two minor leaguers. Call it a small move, but since that day the Yankees have gone 44-18 and hold an 8.5 game lead over the Red Sox.

Living in Tampa Bay, I know what makes an MVP. Jason Bartlett was the Rays MVP last year despite a WAR of 1.8. You know why? The team won games when he was in the lineup. Now I know people are going to say well Hinske has only played in 26 games since his arrival. Throw those numbers out the window when we are talking about the Ske-man.

History lesson.

In 2007 the Boston Red Sox won the AL East, the AL pennant and the World Series. Who was on that team? Eric Hinske. Foolishly after 2007, the Sox let Hinske go to rival Tampa Bay. What happened in 2008? They lost to the Rays in the ALCS, and a team that had never won anything ended up AL East Champions, won the AL pennant and only lost the World Series thanks to B.J. Upton (when in doubt always blame B.J. Upton). Not learning from Theo Esptein's mistake, Andrew Friedman let Hinske walk after the season. Obviously, trying to exploit another market inefficiency, Friedman signed Pat Burrell from the defending world champion Phillies, however Pat Burrell is not Eric Hinske.

Hinske had an OPS of .741 with the Pirates. Hinske is a man. He needs a challenge. He is not an old starting pitcher who can't handle the AL East. Hinske NEEDS the AL East. Since joining the Yankees his OPS is .949 with seven home runs in 65 at-bats. If you give him 600 at-bats he would hit 65 home runs at this current pace; baller.

Not only is Hinske better in the East, but he makes his teammates better. Remember the so-called MVP candidate, Derek Jeter? He has definitely benefited from having Hinske around. Before his arrival, Jeter was hitting .307/.381/.451. Since then, Captain Clutch is hitting .365/.424/.506. Hinske'd

Men lie, women lie, numbers don't. If you want to win the AL East and more importantly go to the World Series, you need Eric Hinske. Not only is Hinske the MVP of this year, but probably should be given honorable MVP awards for the last two seasons. If I'm the Toronto Blue Jays (who could've had multiple championships had they kept Hinske) or the Baltimore Orioles, I'm throwing a truck load of money toward him this offseason. </sarcasm>

Richard Griffin Bugs Me....

Tom Dakers — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:45:17 -0000

Today in the Star, Richard Griffin has a little piece on Eric Hinske. Eric, as you all know, is a former Jay who the Rookie of the Year award 2002, signed a 5 year contract and then never really became the player we hoped he'd be. Anyway Richard jumps through hoops trying to make it all a 'fire J.P.' story.

When Eric Hinske joined the Yankees from the Pirates on June 30, they were in second place, trailing the Red Sox by 3 1/2 games in the AL East.

Since that date, the Bronx Bombers have gone 43-16, assuming command of the division by 7 1/2 games. Hinske is a role player, but consider that if the Yanks reach the World Series this fall, it will be Hinske's third straight trip to the Fall Classic with three different teams. But he wasn't good enough for the Jays when they dumped him in August '06 to Boston for a player to be named later.

Yeah Richard, Eric's 56 at bats is what has turned the season around for the Yankees. I mean, yeah it's been a pretty good 56 at bats. He's hit .250, but does have 7 homers. He knows how to get a ball up in that breeze to right field at Yankee Stadium. He did play in 15 games in August, some in the outfield, more as a pinch hitter or pinch runner or defensive replacement. I can understand how he's turned things around for the Yankees.

Did he feel they gave up on him?

"No, I never lived up to my first year," Hinske said prior to last night's game. "They had a chance to bring in Corey Koskie and they lost (Carlos) Delgado, so I just moved to first (base).

"They gave me a chance. I have no hard feelings towards Toronto or (general manager) J.P. (Ricciardi). They gave me a chance, let me play, gave me a five-year contract, started my career.

Eric seems to understand what happened in Toronto. Nice to see a player that self aware.

As for any feelings that the Jays had given up on him, he denies it.

"You've always got to believe you're capable of performing," Hinske said. "I never, ever doubted myself.

"I'd like to play every day, but I like playing for the Yankees too. I think I fit well in this team as a bench guy.

Second time he has to tell us that Eric doesn't feel the Jays gave up in him in a 500 word piece. I can just see it. "But Eric, did they give up on you?" "Didn't you ask that a minute ago". "Come on base JP for me".

And yeah of course they gave up on him, he didn't become the player they thought he'd be so they got in other players and traded him away. That's baseball.

Here is the money line:

"Right now I have eight years in and it's all about service time, just hanging around, so I'll do whatever they ask."

So Eric the Yankee is saying he's hanging around to get the pension. I can understand it, why wouldn't you 'hang around', you can earn a pretty good living even as a bench player in the major leagues. It is not a bad life.

Now remember, Eric Hinske, the Yankee player, said he is hanging around to get the service time. Here is how Griffin sums up the piece:

Perhaps in the big picture, that's what's been wrong with the Jays' clubhouse under Ricciardi.

Perhaps the feeling has been too much "about service time, just hanging around" and not enough about winning a World Series.

Richard, at the top of the piece you told us how Eric Hinske and his 56 at bats have turned the season around for the Yankees. You complain that JP gave up on him. And then you tell us that the players just 'hanging around' is the problem with the Jays. Even though the player saying that JP 'give up on' and is now going to the playoffs with the Yankees.

Now I can't believe that Griffin doesn't know what he did there. He's not a fool. But then he knows his readers. He knows as along as he bashes JP, they won't notice any leap of logic. And yes, in the comments he has folks saying 'yeah that's the problem with the Jays'. 'No wonder Doc wants to leave' the guy the Jays traded years ago who said he is now hanging around for service time with the Yankees is the reason Doc wants to leave.

There are lots of reasons why JP should go. Getting rid of Hinske isn't one of them. That Hinske said he was hanging around should stand as a reason to send him away, if you really think Eric meant that. More likely it was a poorly formed thought. If a Jay player said that, Griffin would be all over JP saying 'this is the kind of player he keeps'. Unfortunately he could only get a former Jay to say it but he still tries his best to tar JP with it.

So which is it Richard, is JP a fool for giving up on Eric or is he smart for getting rid of a player that only wants service time?