SB Nation - Kevin Appier

Looking Back: Todd Zeile

Alex Nelson — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 20:03:42 -0000

After looking at Robin Ventura and Kevin Appier—two guys who, with a little better luck during their careers, might be solid Hall of Fame candidates—we'll next turn our attention to the guys I can't even pretend are realistic Hall candidates, starting with Todd Zeile.

Of all the Mets teams during my lifetime, the 1999 Mets were my favorite. With an infield of John Olerud, Edgardo Alfonzo, Robin Ventura, and Rey Ordonez, and Mike Piazza behind the plate, those Mets were a rare offensive-minded team in Flushing. After the season, I was crushed when the Mets failed to sign Olerud to the three-year contract he wanted—Steve Phillips sort of gave up when Olerud expressed his desire to go home to Seattle. Instead, Phillips turned to veteran third baseman Todd Zeile to fill in the gap at first, signing him to a three-year, $18-million contract.

I thought it was a huge mistake at first, one that the Mets, competing with a dominant team like the Braves, might not recover from. Take a look at these WAR totals:

Year	Olerud	Zeile
1997	5.2	2.2
1998	8.1	2.7
1999	5.3	1.4

Those are not comparable players, folks. Then, when you consider that Zeile was shifting from third to first, was three years older than Olerud, and signed essentially the same contract, it really didn't look like a very smart move to me. And it wasn't, because Olerud was still the better player, both in 2000 and going forward.

But you know what? It really didn't cost the Mets anything in 2000. Almost the same team from 1999 returned in 2000—the notable differences were no Johnny O. at first base and Roger Cedeno and Octavio Dotel were swapped for Mike Hampton—and despite some players letting down the team (Darryl Hamilton, Rickey Henderson, Ventura), the Mets made it to the World Series anyway. Olerud had something of a down year, hitting .285/.392/.439. Meanwhile, Zeile hit pretty well, producing a .268/.356/.467 line with 22 homers, 36 doubles, and 79 RBI in a lineup that otherwise struggled.

And the biggest surprise, to me at least, was how good a defender at first base Zeile was. He was pretty brutal at third, but he was a mobile first baseman with more polish than I expected from the guy who committed more errors in the 1990's than anyone. Total Zone has him at +12 for the 2000 season, which is actually a couple runs more than Olerud was worth with the glove. Olerud was still the better player, overall, but Zeile didn't represent enough of a drop-off to really cost the Mets anything, at least not in 2000.

2001 was another matter, unfortunately, when Zeile was pretty much done—his power vanished, although his on-base ability remained—and the Mets were forced to trade him for Jeromy Burnitz's bad contract in a three-team deal with the Brewers and Rockies. In the long run, Zeile was an error; however, the move was made with the short-term in mind first and foremost, and in the short-term it was close enough to a success for me.

The Mets, of course, brought him back for his final big-league season and even let the veteran return to his original position for a couple games: catcher. There was more than a little desperation involved, but it was also at Zeile's request. Manager Art Howe also took him out early in his final game, so that his final plate appearance could be a homerun.

Player	Career	Top 3	Top 5	Per 162
Todd Zeile	15.1	7.2	8.6	1.13

Nowhere near a Hall of Famer, but he did play well enough to enjoy a long career. Back in 2001, Bill James ranked him 81st among all third basemen, writing "A Brooks Robinson clone as a hitter, but more of a Larry Parrish at third base." Sounds about right.

Looking Back: Kevin Appier

Alex Nelson — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 10:00:20 -0000

Continuing my look back at Hall of Fame candidates who appeared on the Mets, Kevin Appier is next.

Like Robin Ventura, Appier is not a Hall of Famer but is probably much closer to being a worthy one than most people realize. He was without a doubt the most underrated pitcher of the 1990's. This will come as a shock to Mets fans who remember Appier in 2001 as a capable pitcher who was neither spectacular nor remarkable, save as being the bad contract traded for Mo Vaughn.

But while he was a Royal, he was silently one of baseball's very best pitchers. Nobody realized it because he was doing it in Kansas City. Consider this cumulative stat line from 1990 to 1997:

IP	K/9	BB/9	HR/9	ERA+	WAR
1643.2	7.4	3.0	0.6	140	44.2

That's an eight-year stretch where Kevin Appier was just about as good as any pitcher outside of Greg Maddux. Over those eight years, he averaged 216.5 innings a season (remembering to adjust for the strike) with a 3.22 ERA, while striking out 178 batters, walking 72, and allowing just 14 homeruns, all while pitching in one of the best hitters' parks in the American League.

Those fortunate enough to watch the Royals on a regular basis knew how great Appier was. He had this herky jerkey pitching motion where he would tilt his whole body backward as he brought his legs high before pitching himself forward and releasing the ball. He was all arms and legs until the ball was out of his hand, and hitters had a damned hard time picking it up. Once during spring training, Jeff Bagwell struck out looking on three straight pitches, never once taking the bat of his shoulder. In the dugout he admitted to not having seen the ball once. Appier had a moving, low-90's fastball to go with two outstanding offspeed pitches: a forkball and a slider. Hitters often didn't know which pitch they had swung and missed at. He was a fierce competitor on the mound—a bulldog, grizzled coaches and scouts would say—and one of baseball's nicest off it, taking home two Roberto Clemente Awards.

He was almost certainly the best pitcher in the American League in 1993, winning the pitchers' WAR crown with a mark of 8.4—only Mark Langston and David Cone were within 2.0 wins of that number. The only reason he didn't win the Cy Young was because Jack McDowell won 22 games while Appier won only 18 pitching for a weaker team. Appier took home one first-place vote and finished third, behind Randy Johnson.

And you know what? He was almost the deserving Cy Young Award winner in 1992, too, when he finished with a WAR of 7.6. Roger Clemens was just barely more valuable, but Dennis Eckersley won the award. Appier only won 15 games that season, however, and failed to get a vote. Considering his durability and the length of that stretch, it's every bit a good enough peak to warrant a Hall of Fame vote.

His problem was his near total lack of a decline phase. 88% of his career value came during that eight-year stretch. The relatively high work load over those years and the odd mechanics caught up to him, and it was discovered in March of 1998 that he had a torn labrum. He just wasn't the same pitcher again. But he did enjoy his best post-surgery season with the Mets when he went 11-10 with a 3.57 ERA in 2001. He left on a high note. Over his last 12 starts with the team, Appier went 6-0 with a 2.91 ERA, including a 1.87 ERA in September.

Player	Career	Top 3	Top 5	Per 34 GS
Kevin Appier	50.4	22.2	30.9	4.19

(Ths chart shows Appier's career WAR, his WAR in his three best seasons, his WAR in his best set of five consecutive seasons, and his WAR per 34 games started.)

Appier's WAR total places him ahead of 19 Hall of Fame pitchers. Many of these selections are some of the worst players in the Hall of Fame (guys like Bruce Sutter, Rollie Fingers, Catfish Hunter, Rube Marquard, Jesse Haines, and Jack Chesbro). Even without looking at a stat line, my first thought about Appier was that he had a Rube Waddell-like shape to his career, that being a shorter career defined by a very good peak performance over a somewhat prolonged period of time. It pleased me immensely to see Waddell just below him on the WAR list at 50.2.

Looking Back: Robin Ventura

Alex Nelson — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 11:00:33 -0000

Whenever the Hall of Fame vote comes around, I can't help but feel sorry for the guys who appear on the ballot but really don't have a chance at sticking around. Sometimes these guys really are barely worth a thought; other times I think players are written off as being barely worth a thought when they deserve at least a little celebration for what they were able to accomplish over their careers. For instance: why does somebody like Tony Fernandez disappear with nary a vote while Dave Concepcion—a very comparable player—sticks around for 15 years? I don't believe either one deserves the honor, but I wish people would at least talk about Fernandez a little more.

This year, there's a handful of former Mets on the ballot, and I thought it might be fun to focus on a few guys who will otherwise go unnoticed. Roberto Alomar is the most attractive new candidate on the ballot, so he'll generate plenty of discussion. As for everyone else? I doubt they'll get more than one sentence written about them anywhere, unless you count Todd Zeile's fact sheet. But I wish somebody really would think about, say, Andres Galarraga's career, because it was a unique, wonderful career, even if it wasn't one begging entry into Cooperstown. We'll start with Robin Ventura and catch up to the others (Kevin Appier, David Segui, Todd Zeile, and maybe Robbie Alomar) later on in the week.

Many Met fans have fond memories of Robin Ventura. Most would probably say he has no business in the Hall of Fame. But you could fashion an argument that he belongs. It's not a good one, but it is an argument. By my count, there are ten career third basemen in the Hall of Fame, plus Paul Molitor who played more games at third base than any other position. I've compiled those players below along with their career WAR, their WAR in their top three seasons, their WAR in their best set of five consecutive seasons, and their average WAR per 162 games (this is essentially the same method Bill James used to rank players with Win Shares). Here's how Ventura fits in:

Player	Career	Top 3	Top 5	Per 162
Mike Schmidt	108.0	29.2	41.8	7.28
Eddie Mathews	98.2	25.5	38.2	6.65
Wade Boggs	89.0	26.4	43.1	5.91
George Brett	84.9	25.9	39.0	5.08
Paul Molitor	74.9	18.1	26.8	4.52
Brooks Robinson	69.2	22.4	31.7	3.86
Home Run Baker	63.7	27.7	39.2	6.55
Robin Ventura	55.1	18.6	24.1	4.29
Jimmy Collins	52.9	21.0	22.3	4.97
Pie Traynor	37.0	12.9	15.8	3.09
George Kell	33.5	13.6	14.9	3.02
Freddy Lindstrom	29.1	16.7	18.9	3.28

As you can see, Ventura accumulated more career value than Collins, Traynor, Kell, and Lindstrom, at least according to WAR. He was more valuable on a per game basis and had a more valuable peak than each of the last three, and he's at least comparable to Collins despite a longer career. So, if you remove Molitor, who played only about 29% of his career games at third base, Ventura was responsible for more wins than 40% of the third basemen currently in the Hall of Fame. Considering there are obviously too few third basemen compared to other positions, you have an argument for Robin's enshrinement.

There are, of course, two obvious problems with this line of thinking. First, while he's comparable or better than the bottom four third baseman on the list, he's really not comparable to anyone above him. All were significantly better players. Sure, he was more valuable per game than Brooks Robinson, and his peak was very comparable to Molitor's, but he had neither player's longevity.

Second, Traynor, Kell, and Lindstrom are three of the least deserving players in the Hall of Fame. If you were to start adding every third baseman better than those three, you'd have to make room for Ron Santo, Darrell Evans, Graig Nettles, Sal Bando, Buddy Bell, Ken Boyer, Stan Hack, Ron Cey, Bob Elliott, Tommy Leach, Toby Harrah, Heinie Groh, Lave Cross, Larry Gardner, Doug DeCinces, Gary Gaetti, Eddie Yost, Tim Wallach, Al Rosen, and maybe even guys like Bill Madlock, Harlond Clift, Carney Lansford, Bobby Bonilla, Denny Lyons, Ken Caminiti, Bill Bradley, Billy Nash, Ken Keltner, and Heinie Zimmerman. In other words, you'll be there all day.

So what's the real standard where the Hall begins? And how far away is Ventura from that boundary? Let's take a look at some non-Hall third sackers. Again, we'll use WAR, mainly because it's available, comprehensive, and easy. Using the same format as the previous graph, here's how Robin compares to other Hall-eligibles:

Player	Career	Top 3	Top 5	Per 162
Ron Santo	66.4	26.4	39.7	4.80
Graig Nettles	61.3	19.8	27.0	3.68
Buddy Bell	60.7	19.2	28.5	4.09
Sal Bando	60.5	22.5	33.6	4.85
Ken Boyer	58.3	20.2	30.4	4.64
Darrell Evans	57.0	20.7	23.6	3.44
Robin Ventura	55.1	18.6	24.1	4.29
Stan Hack	54.8	18.7	19.6	4.58
Bob Elliott	52.2	16.5	22.5	4.28
Ron Cey	51.8	18.1	21.7	4.05
Tommy Leach	51.0	17.5	18.1	3.83
Toby Harrah	47.0	17.5	16.1	3.53
Heinie Groh	46.4	17.8	18.8	4.48

And here the problem with Ventura as a Hall candidate is perfectly illustrated. All these men got a raw deal during the voting. Santo—an obvious Hall of Famer in my opinion—went 15 years without election. Boyer stuck around for a while, too, but the others got barely a nibble, for the most part. Furthermore, it's also clear that Ventura isn't really at the top of the list of eligible third basemen (even ignoring Santo). Where exactly would I put him? Personally, I'd put him in after Santo, Boyer, Nettles, Evans, Hack, and Bando, but probably ahead of the others with the possible exception of Heinie Groh, who was better than Robin but who enjoyed a very short career (plus his name was Heinie).

While there is a severe lack of third basemen in the Hall—and, as a result, another half dozen or so deserve the honor—the actual line is probably just beyond Ventura's reach, at least in terms of merit. In reality, he has no chance at staying on the ballot for another year; he may be lucky to get five votes. What I can definitely say about him is this: his career deserves a much longer look than most will be willing to give.

Bert Blyleven on Cooperstown Ballot Again

Rev Halofan — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:01:26 -0000

Who Should Make the Hall of Fame?

LOOK AT THE BALLOT AND ADD YOUR PICKS AND PANS IN THE COMMENTS SECTION...

In my perfect "Small Hall" Blyleven, Raines and Trammell get the call.

In facing the reality that some real turkeys (Jim Rice, Ryne Sandberg) have made it into Cooperstown, it is hard to shut the door on those deserving based on their superior careers to the lesser enshrined members.

Here are the nominees worth commenting on, followed by the rest of the ballot that is undeserving...

Roberto Alomar - YES. In my perfect world Small Hall I would say NO but in the real world where Ryne Sandberg is in the HOF, Rob-HIV gets a YES vote.

Bert Blyleven - YES, and if I only had one vote Bert would get it.

Andre Dawson - YES. In my perfect world Small Hall I would say NO but in the real world where Jim Rice is in the HOF, Dawson gets a YES vote.

Barry Larkin - YES. I would vote YES knowing it would at least keep him on the ballot, as he has an uphill battle having played in the shadow of Ripken and Ozzie, but it is important to lay a foundation and see how the consensus builds. I have no faith in the Baseball Writers to get any of these votes right.

Edgar Martinez - NO. This guy was such an Angel killer that I want to vote for him to ensure that he stays retired, but NO.

Mark McGwire - NO. He was a one-dimensional player and the gaudy numbers are byproducts of the juice. If Dave Kingman is not in the HOF, McGwire should not be either. Add to that the issue of character, which I believe is one of many important factors that should lead to enshrinement in Cooperstown, and seeing as he could not man up in front of congress, screw Mark McGwire.

Tim Raines - YES. If I only had two votes he would get my other vote. His tragedy is that he played in the shadow of Rickey Henderson.

Alan Trammell - YES. He makes my Small Hall with Bert and Raines. His biggest career mistake was not doing a hand summersault onto the field each opening day.

Kevin Appier - No; Harold Baines - No; Ellis Burks - No; Andres Galarraga - No; Pat Hentgen - No; Mike Jackson - No; Eric Karros - No; Ray Lankford - Who? No; Don Mattingly - No; Fred McGriff - No; Dale Murphy - No; Jack Morris - No; Dave Parker - No; Shane Reynolds - Who? No; David Segui - Who? No; Lee Smith - No; Robin Ventura - No; Todd Zeile - No

And here is hoping that the Veterans Committee adds Bobby Grich to the Cooperstown Roster.

Weekend Dad Mug -- Hall of Fame Edition

Fatter than Joey — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:57:51 -0000

More photos » by Anonymous - AP

Will former Brewer Dave Parker who "did everything that you could possibly do in baseball", be a part of the 2010 HOF class? (AP Photo/File)

Browse more photos »

Hey Kids! Back so soon? -- Why did your Regular Dad drop you off at my doorstop again? Your guess is as good as mine.

In either case let me get some clean sweatpants on (I had a little trouble with the turkey), and tell you all about a bunch of guys that played the game the way it was supposed to be played, not with all the muscle pills that the players use today.

The BBWAA is a group of Busterolney's that randomly elect retired players to be enshrined in the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown every year. They released their ballot on Friday. The names that are going into the fishbowl this year are as follows:

Roberto Alomar, Kevin Appier, Harold Baines, Bert Blyleven, Ellis Burks, Andre Dawson, Andres Galarraga, Pat Hentgen, Mike Jackson, Eric Karros, Ray Lankford, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez, Don Mattingly, Fred McGriff, Mark McGwire, Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, Dave Parker, Tim Raines, Shane Reynolds, David Segui, Lee Smith, Alan Trammell, Robin Ventura, Todd Zeile

Former Brewer, Dave Parker believes he should be elected.

The most interesting ballot newbies this year are Roberto Alomar, Edgar Martinez, Fred McGriff and Barry Larkin. This quartet should make for an interesting election, as none of them are slam-dunks, nor are they easily dismissed.

The Bleacher Report makes an argument for Edgar Martinez. Did you know only Jimmy Foxx and Babe Ruth have a higher BA, while accumulating more BBs (at least 1200 BBs) than strikeouts in their careers?
The Bleacher Report then continues on wondering "How can the Crime Dog McGriff not get elected"? Maybe the answer is to kick Tony Perez out of Cooperstown?
The NY Times catches us up on who Roberto Alomar is spitting on these days...
MLB.com has a summary of the arguments for including Barry Larkin.
And finally, the Bleacher Report just wonders if no one at all will be elected in 2010.

In other turkey grease fires, former Milwaukee superstar Bud Selig announced his pending down-stepping. Stories about Bud Selig interest me about as much as stories about your Regular Dad, or what you are doing in school, so I will leave it to you to find more about this if you so desire.

The Red Sox are in the market for a SS, and now that Alex Gonzalez has been inked by the Jays, Marco Scutaro is the Sox's primary target (Too bad the Brewers didn't have a SS to trade to Boston). Weighing in with the definitive opinion on Scutaro, is deep-frying super-utility man Lou Merloni.

Will Felipe Lopez be joining JJ Hardy in Minnesota next year? -- Bleacher Report seems to think Lopez could be a perfect fit. This just in, Felipe Lopez's wife is turkey-fire hot!

Doug Melvin weighed in on the future of Felipe Lopez and other things in a ESPN interview.

The Brewers may very well pass on offering Lopez and Mike Cameron Arbys.
Mat Gamel could end up in the OF
Cory Hart's attempt to embrace patience was an epic fail
2010 Batting order musings.

I don't want you to think that every Thanksgiving story needs to be exclusively about turkey fires, so here is a nice piece about Prince Fielder and Casey McGehee's son Mack. On the other hand, I do want you to commit to memory the things I am not thankful for, conveniently organized in one of those Sporcle quizzes your Regular Dad seems to be so fond of.

Unless you are Ned Yost, Ned Yost IV or Julian Tavarez, I hope you had a great Thanksgiving weekend!

Poll

Which newbie do you think should get the most votes on the 2010 ballot for the HOF?

Edgar Martinez

40 votes

Roberto Alomar

40 votes

Fred McGriff

25 votes

Barry Larkin

52 votes

Shane Reynolds

4 votes

161 votes | Poll has closed

MLB Hall Of Fame Ballot Announced - Cast Your Ballot

Al — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 20:57:07 -0000

More photos » by Steve Nesius - AP

Put Andre Dawson in the Hall of Fame!

Browse more photos »

Today, the Baseball Hall of Fame announced its 2010 ballot, which contains 27 players. Any player getting votes on 75% of the ballots submitted will be admitted to the Hall in the Class of 2010. Here's the complete list:

Roberto Alomar, Kevin Appier, Harold Baines, Bert Blyleven, Ellis Burks, Andre Dawson, Andres Galarraga, Pat Hentgen, Mike Jackson, Eric Karros, Ray Lankford, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez, Don Mattingly, Fred McGriff, Mark McGwire, Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, Dave Parker, Tim Raines, Shane Reynolds, David Segui, Lee Smith, Alan Trammell, Robin Ventura, Todd Zeile.

The results of the BBWAA voting will be announced on January 6, but now, you can submit your own ballot. Unfortunately, the SBN polling system doesn't allow multiple votes on one poll, so the poll here will let you vote for the ONE player you would vote for if you had only ONE vote (rather than the 10 you'd get on the BBWAA ballot). In the comments, you can leave your entire list of who you'd vote for. Below the fold I'll reveal my own ballot.

My 2010 inductees to the Hall of Fame, if I had a ballot, would be: Andre Dawson, Bert Blyleven and Roberto Alomar. Tim Raines and Barry Larkin are close, but I think I'd leave them for future ballots.

It is a crime that Blyleven isn't in already. He is fifth on the all-time strikeout list, threw 60 shutouts (ninth all-time, and among his contemporaries, only Tom Seaver and Nolan Ryan threw more, and only one more, 61), and played on two World Series winners, the 1979 Pirates and 1987 Twins. His lack of 20-win seasons (only one) and the fact that he played in small markets works against him; if he'd have been a Yankee, he'd have been in long ago.

Dawson, I also believe should have been in long ago, and this time, with no "gimmes" among first-timers on the ballot, should get in. He got 67% of the vote last year and almost everyone who's gotten that much support in the past should get in.

Alomar had a decline in his last few years, otherwise he'd have gotten 3000 hits and been a lock (he finished with 2724). He was a 12-time All-Star and generally recognized at the best at his position (after Ryne Sandberg retired) among active players.

Barry Larkin suffered too many injuries and didn't have that many MVP-type seasons. In fact, he had a better year the year after he won his only MVP (1996) than the year he won it (1995). And Tim Raines, too, became mostly an ordinary player the last few years of his career, after being one of the best players in the game from 1981-85.

You may disagree. Cast your votes and post your comments!

Poll

Vote for the ONE player you would choose for the Hall of Fame on this year's ballot, if you had ONLY one vote.

Roberto Alomar

154 votes

Kevin Appier

4 votes

Harold Baines

11 votes

Bert Blyleven

223 votes

Ellis Burks

3 votes

Andre Dawson

963 votes

Andres Galarraga

14 votes

Pat Hentgen

6 votes

Mike Jackson

1 votes

Eric Karros

10 votes

Ray Lankford

6 votes

Barry Larkin

84 votes

Edgar Martinez

64 votes

Don Mattingly

114 votes

Fred McGriff

23 votes

Mark McGwire

106 votes

Jack Morris

38 votes

Dale Murphy

40 votes

Dave Parker

9 votes

Tim Raines

54 votes

Shane Reynolds

0 votes

David Segui

7 votes

Lee Smith

129 votes

Alan Trammell

48 votes

Robin Ventura

20 votes

Todd Zeile

7 votes

2138 votes | Poll has closed

A's Off-Day Chat with True Blue LA

67MARQUEZ — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 23:26:32 -0000

After suffering a sweep at the hands of the San Francisco Giants, the A's get the day off to ponder their next task: a three-game set with the Los Angeles Dodgers, who are coming off a successful weekend in which they took two of three from the Texas Rangers, and own the best record in all of baseball (42-22).

This is the first encounter between the two teams since the A's swept a home series in 2006. In fact, Oakland has won 10 of the last 12 meetings, and enjoys a 12-7 record overall against Los Angeles. However, they are only 3-5 at Dodger Stadium, having last played there on June 11, 2000, when Kevin Appier spun a complete-game, seven-hit shutout for the visitors. Eric Chavez and Miguel Tejada drove in two runs apiece in Oakland's 6-0 win (just in case anyone needed another reason to bemoan our current predicament on the left side of the infield).

Of course any mention of A's and the Dodgers is sure to conjure up conversations of a certain homerun, but I prefer to remember the 1974 World Series when the Mustache Gang captured its third straight title by beating LA in five games.

The 1974 World Series had a happier ending than the '88 Fall Classic.

I had a chance to toss some questions at Eric Stephen of True Blue LA:

67M: With the Dodgers comfortably in front in the NL West, and with Manny due to return first week of July, is this team primed to make its first Series trip in 21 seasons?

ES: With the unpredictability of short series in the postseason, I never like to predict that far ahead, but the Dodgers are certainly set up for a run in the playoffs. Taking into account starting pitching, bullpen, offense, and defense, there is no better team in the National League. Depending on what moves are made at the July trading deadline, the Dodgers are as primed as anybody to make their first World Series trip since the Kirk Gibson-led club in 1988.

(He had to mention that name, didn't he?)

67M: What has Joe Torre's presence meant to the Dodgers? What impresses you most about him?

ES: Torre isn't a fiery guy, like Kirk Gibson was, but he seems to be a calming influence on the club. He never gets too high or too low, and the professionalism rubs off on the club. Torre can sometimes be maddening -- he batted Matt Kemp 9th on Saturday, for instance -- but for the most part he has played his best eight players all season.

67M: The Dodgers have struggled offensively of late. Often when you see a star player go down (or in this case, get suspended), his teammates tend to pick up the slack over a short period of time. But the longer the star player is out, the harder it becomes to maintain that kind of production. What are your thoughts on that, and do you think that has been the case with Manny being gone?

ES: I think that's a valid point. There have been points in the past few weeks when everyone is struggling offensively, and we think, "how in the hell do we still have the best record in baseball?" Andre Ethier was pressing in May, and struggled mightily (.211/.306/.295).

67M: Then again the Dodgers still rank high in nearly every offensive category (though home runs is not one of them), including second in batting and in runs scored. Who would you say has picked up the slack the most in Manny's absence?

ES: Casey Blake and Juan Pierre carried the club in May, while Andre Ethier and Matt Kemp have picked it up in June.

67M: One more Manny question: do you expect there to be any negative ramifications upon his return, from a team/chemistry standpoint?

ES: The team loves having Manny around, so I don't think there will be any negative ramifications when he comes back, other than perhaps having to deal with the media crush. Besides, any negative feeling should be offset by the positivity of having his bat back in the lineup.

Manny is a playful dude. If someone puts eye black in the ring of his hat, a la Jesse Orosco, I'm sure Manny would laugh it off, rather than blow up at the team like Kirk Gibson did in 1988.

(I am detecting a disturbing trend in Eric's responses.)

67M: Is Andre Ethier pretty much everything you've expected from him so far? Is he just beginning to scratch the surface?

ES: I think that surface was scratched last season. I can't see him performing much better than he did last season, but he should be a very good player for the next few years at least. Ethier in 2008 was the last left-handed hitting Dodger outfielder to hit 20 homers, post a .375 OBP, and have at least seven sacrifice flies since Kirk Gibson in 1988.

(OK, really?)

67M: Pitching is still the key to going far in October, and the Dodgers' collective ERA is tops in the National League. Chad Billingsley has been superb, and we're glad not to have to face him. What can we expect to see from Clayton Kershaw (Tuesday), Hiroki Kuroda (Wednesday), and Randy Wolf (Thursday)?

ES: Tuesday: You will see a fastball and a curveball from Kershaw, and little else. If he can get the curve over for a strike, you will be in trouble; otherwise, if you're patient enough, he will be out of the game after five innings

Wednesday: This will be Kuroda's fourth start since coming off the DL, so he's still getting back into the groove. Usually, Kuroda has excellent control, and you will see a steady diet of fastballs and sliders.

Thursday: Most likely you will see a Randy Wolf no-decision (he has 9 on the season in 14 starts), but while he's in the game you will see a lot of strikes, via both the fastball and curveball. Wolf had a bit of a HR spell recently (six HR over four starts), but he was brilliant on Saturday in Texas (five shutout innings before a two-hour delay thanks to a light malfunction).

67M: For A's fans there is a certain former Dodger whose name we are not allowed to mention. I'm pretty sure you know who that is (well, duh). Any Oakland player, past or present (ha) that falls into that category for Dodger fans? Or for that matter, any player from any team? Say, Jack Clark?

ES: I can't think of any particular Oakland player, past or present, that I absolutely hate. I do love Dennis Eckersley, however.

(Ouch.)

67M: Another name not high on our list is Rafael Furcal. Your take on the whole situation, where it looked like he might be headed to Oakland, and ultimately re-signed with the Dodgers?

ES: Two things:
1) He was much closer to becoming a Brave than becoming an Athletic.
2) You wish you were paying a shortstop, hitting .247/.313/.324, $30 million over three seasons?

(I was just trying to figure out a way to keep him from mentioning the Unmentionable One.)

67M: Looking toward the future, who are some of the big names in LA's farm system?

ES: Josh Lindblom impressed in spring training, and has done nothing to disappoint in Double A so far this season. Of all the prospects, he's the most likely to make an impact with the big club this season. Long term, pitchers Chris Withrow and Ethan Martin, and shortstop Dee Gordon have made big strides this year.

67M: And finally, not that I am ever one to dwell on the past (ahem), but if baseball had actually awarded home-field advantage to teams with the better record, you do realize that Game 1 of the 1988 Series would have been played in Oakland, right?

ES: The Dodgers got lucky in two respects that year; they also had home field advantage against the Mets, whom they beat in seven games (in the NLCS). If you'll excuse me, I'm going to watch my 1988 World Series DVD set.

Thanks, Eric. Tell your boys to go easy on us.

Dallas Braden makes his first inter-league start tomorrow; game time is 7:10PM.

1996: The Twilight of Roger Clemens' Career?

devil_fingers — Thu, 14 May 2009 16:57:02 -0000

More photos » by David J. Phillip - AP

I'm telling you, I think Wyers simply is misremembering why the original FIP is so perfect. First, this McNamee stuff, now BaseRuns. Two more on the enemies list...

Browse more photos »

In a recent interview, Dan Duqette, General Manager of the Red Sox from 1996-2002, with reference to that "other stuff" that I'm sick of reading about and don't really want to write about, was asked again about his famous "twilight of his career" comments during his negotations with the Clemens camp, during which he made a non-infamous public comment about Roger Clemens being in the "twilight of his career." The aftermath of this, of course, was Clemens going to Toronto and winning two Cy Youngs in a row in 1997 and 1998. Then he retired on top. No, wait, I mean he pitched 9 more seasons after that and won two more Cy Youngs while appearing in in several World Series, winning two with the Yankees in 1999 and 2000.

In an ensuing discussion at Baseball ~~Primer~~ Think Factory, some commentators wondered whether or not it was reasonable for Duquette to have seen Clemens as being on the decline. In an obvious sense, the answer is "yes," as almost all baseball players (with very, very few exceptions outside of Barry Bonds and Honus Wagner) are in the "twilight of their career' at 33. Again, I'm not going to discuss the "other stuff" that may or may nor have helped Clemens in his post-1996 career. Nor am I really interested in evaluating the state of sabermetric analysis inside and and outside of baseball at that point. What I simply want to do is to see what "twilight" meant at that point. Again, this isn't meant to say what Duquette "should have known," especially since Voros McCracken's discoveries were a long way off. This is just to gain a big of perspective on Clemen's status in the game using more contemporary methods of pitcher valuation such as those used here.

Using FIP (Fielding Indepedent Pitching) -ERA to calculate pitcher WAR (Wins Above Replacement), here are my calculations for the top 5 pitchers in the American League in 1996.

Player	IP	FIP	Win%	RAR	WAR
Roger Clemens	242.7	3.57	.665	69.2	6.8
Kevin Appier	211.3	3.53	.650	59.2	5.7
Ken Hill	250.7	4.14	.601	58.0	5.5
Pat Hentgen	265.7	4.07	.586	57.4	5.4
Charles Nagy	222.0	3.90	.613	53.8	5.1

For good measure, let me (without introduction) do the same calculation using BaseRuns-FIP as developed by Colin Wyers, a very cool dynamic FIP that I want to start using more and more and my "go to" pitching stat, and hope discuss in more detail down the road. I've simply droppped it in in place of FIP while using the same methods for getting win%, the same park adjustments, etc. as above. Once again: the 5 most valauble AL pitchers of 1996:

Player	IP	BsR-FIP	Win%	RAR	WAR
Pat Hentgen	265.7	3.95	.666	78.6	7.8
Roger Clemens	242.7	3.79	.672	73.2	7.2
Kevin Appier	211.3	3.60	.690	67.6	6.7
Charles Nagy	222.0	3.84	.655	63.3	6.2
Ken Hill	250.7	4.19	.625	63.9	6.1

Clearly, the Cy Young voters that season preferred BsR-FIP over the other kind!

There are a lot of factors that go into a decision to resign a player. We haven't gone into the negotiations or Clemens' recent performance. This isn't a career retrospective, or an evaluation of Duquette's decisionmaking. But looking at the numbers above, I think it is fair to say that "twilight of his career" may have been pushing it.