SB Nation User Blog: BLee2525

Drew Stubbs

BLee2525 — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 17:15:21 -0000

Here was John's comment from the book on Stubbs:

http://www.minorleagueball.com/2007/12/7/143649/622

He's since been promoted to AAA Louisville. His numbers across 3 levels:

High-A Sarasota: .261/.366/.406, 21 2B, 4 3B, 5 HR, 50BB, 82K, 27/35SB in 303 AB
AA Chattanooga: .315/.400/.402, 8 2B, 0 3B, 0 HR, 11BB, 21K, 3/4SB in 92 AB
AAA Louisville: .316/.381/.579, 2 2B, 1 3B, 2 HR, 3 BB, 7K, 2/2 SB in 38 AB

2008 Totals: .277/.374/.420, 31 2B, 5 3B, 7 HR, 64BB, 110K, 32/41 SB in 433 AB

Obviously, sample size caveats apply to the AA/AAA numbers, but he looks to be improving the strikeout rate, which was his major red flag coming into the season, and maintaining a nice walk rate in the high minors. The power numbers aren't spectacular, however, Sarasota and Chattanooga are both pitchers' environments, and he looks to be hitting the ball with some authority thus far at AAA. He also has a tremendous defensive reputation, with some going as far as to say he could contend for a gold glove in CF today.

So, what are the projections for Stubbs now? Nice 4th OF? Ryan Sweeney with speed? Perennial .380 OBP, 20/20 leadoff hitter? Does the strikeout rate still worry you? Do you anticipate any further power development? Yeah, I know that's a lot of questions.

Just curious on people's thoughts on Stubbs now that the production appears to be catching up to his scouting reports.

Closer Usage

BLee2525 — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 23:15:27 -0000

While watching Mike Lincoln, in his 2nd inning of work, give up the game-winning HR's in the 10th this afternoon despite Francisco Cordero sitting in the bullpen, the issue of closer usage came up in the game thread. BubbaFan, like some MLB managers, advocated bringing your closer in for the 9th or 10th inning of a tie game at home. At that point, if your offense gains a lead, it's a walk-off, and there's nothing for a closer to do. I advocated an even broader use of the closer; use him in almost all tie games, regardless of home or road situation, instead of the 1-inning, 3-run saves.

Well, that sent me to Cordero's game logs to check Dusty's usage of Cordero against where I would use him. Obviously, hindsight is 20/20, but I'll try to be objective and look at the game situation at the time to determine where I might differ from Dusty in my bullpen philosophy.

Games I would not have used Cordero where Dusty did:
5/31 (1 inning, 2 run defecit)
4/10 (1 inning, 3 run lead. Send Weathers, Bray or Affeldt in with that kind of lead.)
4/13 (1 inning, 8 run defecit)
4/16 (1 inning, 9 run defecit)
4/24 (1 inning, 2 run defecit)
5/3 (1 inning, 8 run defecit)
5/10 (1 inning, 8 run lead)
5/24 (1 inning, 5 run lead)
5/27 (0.1inning, 3 run lead)
6/9 (1 inning, 5 run lead)
6/12 (1 inning, 4 run lead)

Games I would have used Cordero, where Dusty did not:
4/8 @ Mil, Bottom 9. Reds tie it up on a Patterson HR in the top of the 9th. I would bring Cordero in to hold the tie. Could have changed the outcome, too, as Dusty went to Weathers in the 10th, and he gave up 3 hits and a run to blow it.
4/11 @ Pit, Bottom 8. Down 1-0, I'd bring Cordero in 1) because he hadn't worked in 3 days, and 2) to hold the score where it was to see if we can get the offense going. Ultimately, it didn't matter, as the Reds didn't score in the top of the 9th.
4/12 @ Pit, Bottom 8. Down 4-3 in the game, down 2-0 in the series. Bring Cordero in to hold it down, and see if I can steal one. This one didn't end up mattering, either.
4/19 vs. Mil, Top 9. I'd have used him for a 2nd inning here. He hadn't pitched in 2 days, and this was a tie game going to extras. Weathers blew the lead by giving up 2 runs in the 10th.
4/25 @ SF, Bottom 8. Down 1-0 at this point, and Cordero hasn't worked in almost a week. This is a no-brainer. This one could have changed the outcome, as Harang started the 8th, giving up a run, and turned it over to Burton, who allowed another Giants' runner to score. The Reds' run in the top of the 9th would have tied it if those other 2 didn't score first.
5/19 @ LA, Bottom 9. Tie game on the road. This one could have mattered, as the Dodgers scored against Weathers to win it in that inning.
6/2 @ Phi, Bottom 8. Down 5-4, I'd have brought him in here. Wouldn't have mattered, as Weathers didn't give up a run, and the Reds didn't score in the top of the 9th.

So, that's 12 games Dusty used Cordero where I would not have, and 7 games where I would have used Cordero and Dusty did not. Of Dusty's 12, 6 of them were losses that would not have changed. I highly doubt that we would blow more than 1 of those 6 big leads he used Cordero for. Of course, if it got dicey with one of my second tier guys trying to close out a 3-run lead, I could probably bring in Cordero.

On the other hand, I count 4 games where I could swing the outcome by bringing in Cordero in a situation where most managers would not go to their closer.

It's crazy to me that "old-school" guys say they don't pay attention to stats, but let a stat govern when they use their best reliever. My way, you've used him 5 fewer times at this point in the season, but had the chance to turn 4 losses into wins instead of wasting him for 3, 4, 5, or 8 run leads that Brian B could probably close out, and TheC definitely could.

Who's with me?

(Edit: Dusty used Cordero on 4/19, but didn't stick with him in the 10th. I read that game wrong initially, and had it on both lists)

Reds' Prospects: Deal or No Deal

BLee2525 — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 18:10:05 -0000

While watching A.J. Burnett pitch this afternoon, I had an interesting thought pop into my head; would I be happy with Homer Bailey if he became AJ Burnett? If I could guarantee that Homer became a 25-start-a-year guy who approximates a #2 when healthy, would I cash in any further upside he has?

Then, I started extending it to the Reds' other young players. What kind of career would you have to guarantee to make me cash in any further upside? I thought this would be a game that the rest of the board would find interesting. The question is, would you cash in the upside that the prospect has in order to guarantee the established player's career (Deal)? Or would you prefer to go with what the young guy gives you for his career, thinking that the upside of the young player outweighs the guarantee of the established guy's production (No Deal)?

Homer Bailey - AJ Burnett - A 25-start-a-year guy who is a solid #2 when healthy.

Johnny Cueto - Tom Gordon - Several years as a league-average starter, followed by a long career as a very good short reliever.

Jay Bruce - Jim Edmonds - 15 years as a 130 OPS+ guy, but only 5 seasons with 30+ HR, only 4 with 100+ RBI, and only 4 with 100+ Runs. Textbook "Hall of Very Good" guy.

Joey Votto - Eric Chavez - Several 30-100 seasons at his peak, but finished as a productive player by age 30.

Edinson Volquez - Jack McDowell - Several years of good, consistent production, contends for a Cy Young or two, done by age 30.

My initial answers would be Deal on Bailey and Volquez, No Deal on Cueto, Bruce and Votto.

Reds' Defensive Review

BLee2525 — Sun, 18 May 2008 16:48:11 -0000

Much has been made of the struggles of the offense, but at the quarter pole, I wanted to take a position-by-position look at the defense. JinAZ (jinaz-reds.blogspot.com) and Doug (redsminorleagues.com) have done far better stuff on defense in the past, but I think this works as a quick-and-dirty look. Defensive stats are notoriously effected by small sample sizes, especially over a quarter of a season, but I think there's something to be gleaned from what the stats say so far. The main basis of comparison I'm using is THT's Revised Zone Rating (RZR), with bonus points added and subtracted for Out of Zone (OOZ) plays, Double Plays, and errors as applicable.

1B - Joey Votto ranks 9th out of 14 qualifying 1B in RZR. He's really at the back end of the "average" tier, though, as he's only .016 out of 7th, and almost .100 ahead of #11. He leads the NL with 20 OOZ Plays, and also leads the NL in assists. His Double Play numbers are right in line with the rest of the NL, and while he has the lowest FP of NL 1B's, the small sample size means that he's really only 1-2 errors away from average.
Bottom line - The low RZR and FP are concerning, but the huge OOZ and assist totals make him Average, with the potential to be better.

2B - No surprise here. Brandon Phillips is 1st in the NL in RZR. He's 2nd in the NL in FP (Iguchi has 0 errors, Phillips has 1), and his Double Play numbers are right around average. The only knock is that he only has 4 OOZ plays, but given the rest of the numbers, that's nit-picking.
Bottom line - Excellent. No debating that.

3B - Edwin Encarnacion is 8th out of 15 in RZR, dead average. Double plays are average, too. Unfortunately, he's 2nd to last in OOZ Plays, and tied for the most errors in the NL. While this may seem like a poor performance, it's actually a big improvement from EE, as he's ranked at or near the bottom in RZR the last 2 years, while still last in FP and OOZ.
Bottom Line - Below Average but, as noted, improving.

SS - Conventional wisdom suggests that Jeff Keppinger has held his own at SS. Statistical analysis shows that's not the case. He's 2nd to last in the NL in RZR, 3rd to last in OOZ plays (9. The only guy below him in RZR has 26). The FP is solid, but it's tough to make errors when you don't get to any balls. Double plays are significantly below average, too.
Bottom Line - Poor. Kepp deserves an everyday shot somewhere, but not at SS.

LF - For all the beatings he takes, Adam Dunn's defense looks to be improved this season. He's typically among the bottom 5 in RZR with the Burrells and Carlos Lees of the world. So far this season, he's 6th out of 11, but his raw numbers show him in the middle tier with Juan Pierre and Ryan Braun, significantly ahead of Burrell, Lee and the like. He's also dead league average in OOZ plays, where he's typically brutal. He has 1 more error than league average, but interestingly, both of his errors have been on throws this year.
Bottom Line - Surprisingly Average.

CF - Corey Patterson has a reputation as a guy who can really go get them in Center. As terrible as his bat has been, the defensive reputation is borne out in the stats. He's 2nd in the NL in RZR (.003 behind the leader, Rick Ankiel), and has 16 OOZ plays, slightly below average. He has 2 OF assists, and 2 errors, which pretty much cancel each other out.
Bottom Line - Excellent

RF - Ken Griffey, Jr. has lost many, many steps. Last in the NL in RZR, 2nd to last in OOZ plays, 2nd to last in FP. There's really nothing else to say. He's awful in Right.
Bottom Line - Poor. Very, very poor.

How to fix it? That's the good news. The defense has been at least decent at 7 of the 9 positions. RF and SS look to be really dragging us down. I'm told there's a RF at AAA who looks to be solid defensively. He's supposed to be able to hit a little, too. Deal Griffey, bring up The Boss, problem solved. SS is a little trickier. Alex Gonzalez's 2007 rates Above average defensively (Excellent RZR, solid OOZ, poor FP), but we're not sure when he'll be available. I think we could deal Griffey to Cleveland for Josh Rodriguez (SS prospect) and Chuck Lofgren (power LHP). Rodriguez might not be ready yet, but I think he could be a long-term answer. The good news is that the defensive issues are no longer team-wide, and can be significantly improved with upgrades at only 2 positions.

What's wrong with the offense?

BLee2525 — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 01:40:24 -0000

A few interesting splits for your perusal:

I think most people here subscribe to the theory that the most important thing the top of the lineup can do is get on base. Get to the big boppers, and give them somebody on base in front of them to drive in. Seems pretty simple, but how are the Reds doing in that regard?

OBP from leadoff hitter: .324
OBP from #2 hitter: .311
OBP from #3 hitter: .304
OBP from #4 hitter: .306

Ouch.

Marty's constantly railing on the team's performance with Runners in Scoring Position. Lack of situational hitting and what not. He's kinda wrong, though. Actually, he's really wrong.

Overall BA: .255
BA with Runners On: .268
BA with RISP: .262

Strikeouts must be the issue, then. We all know that strikeouts are the debil, and we have a whole bunch of swing-and-miss bastards on this team. Put the farking ball in play, am I right?

123 strikeouts, 2nd fewest in the NL.

Well, what the hell's the problem then? If they're putting the ball in play, and hitting with ducks on the pond, they should be bringing runs home in bunches, right?

# of AB with Runners On: 321, 11th in NL
# of AB with RISP: 183, 14th in NL

Oh, right. That.

One good way to help yourself out is to see a lot of pitches. Control that strike zone. Take some walks, find something to hit. Get the starter out of the game as soon as you can.

#P/PA: 3.74, T-14th in NL
# of PA's vs. opponent's relievers: 296, 14th in NL.

We're giving up outs, we're not working counts, we're doing exactly what the pitcher wants us to do. We keep the opposing starter in the game too long. We're trying to "manufacture runs" (3rd in NL in Sac Bunts) It's not situational hitting or "selfish swinging" like Marty and Cowboy will tell you. There's your problem with the offense.

Baseball Trivia on Fay's Blog

BLee2525 — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:35:29 -0000

Fay posted an interesting bit of trivia on his blog today.

Who was the first pitcher to defeat all 30 current MLB Teams? Apparently, this had several beat writers stumped in Pittsburgh for quite some time.

Multiple posters chimed in with Al Leiter. Fay confirms that Leiter is the correct answer. One reader adds that Kevin Brown, Terry Mullholland, and Curt Schilling all achieved the same feat after Leiter.

One problem. That's not right. Leiter was the first guy to beat all 30 current franchises, but he never beat the Washington Nationals, a current MLB team. Similarly, Brown, Mullholland, and Schilling all beat the Expos (thus, all 30 franchises), but have not beaten the Nationals. So, none of those guys have beaten all 30 current MLB teams.

One guy has. Name him.

Who are you, and what the hell have you done with John Fay?

BLee2525 — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:11:02 -0000

Dunn Has Shown He Deserves Long-Term Deal

Highlights:

Those of you who like the "Moneyball" numbers game love Dunn. His OPS (on-base percentage plus slugging percentage) annually is among the best in baseball.

He's 22nd in the category among active players. Only three players under age 30 are above him - No. 2 Albert Pujols, No. 14 Miguel Cabrera and No. 20 Mark Teixeira.

I think OPS is much more important than batting average. I also think the most overlooked stat in baseball is games played.

He's a guy who always has been liked by everyone who covers the team on a daily basis, although not so much by some columnists. (Ed. - Whoever could he mean?)

If the Reds win early and Dunn performs as usual - 40 home runs, 100 RBI, 100 runs and 100 walks - Castellini will work out a deal.

The Fay, I take back most of the nasty things I ever said about you.

Fun with Numbers: 40 HR and only 100 RBI? WTF?

BLee2525 — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 23:13:19 -0000

Today, in our third installment of Fun with Numbers, we'll take a look at another oft-cited criticism of Adam Dunn. A guy with 40 HR should drive in way more than 100 runs. After all, there are guys in the NL with less than 30 HR who drive in 110+ HR's every year. It seems like Dunn never drives anybody in unless it's via the longball. Stat-heads will tell you that it's difficult to drive in runs unless there's runners on base in front of you, and a guy batting 5th just doesn't get that many runners in front of him. They'll also tell you how awesome Magic: The Gathering is. Let's examine just how many opportunities Dunn gets, and how well he brings guys home when he gets them..

First, we'll compare Dunn to his teammates. I've taken the number of runners that each of the Reds' "run producers" has driven in, subtracted out the number of HR's, and divided by the total number of baserunners in front of them. This will tell us how often these guys bring in the runners that are on base when they come to bat. note that I've included baserunners in all plate appearances, so "soft walks" hurt, and I've also taken HR's out, so we're really getting a true ratio of runners driven in to runners on. Here's the numbers:

Dunn: 106 RBI - 40 HR = 66 driven in / 395 total baserunners = 16.7% of baserunners driven in

Griffey: 93 RBI - 30 HR = 63 driven in / 413 total baserunners = 15.3% of baserunners driven in

Phillips: 94 RBI - 30 HR = 64 driven in / 461 total baserunners = 13.9% of baserunners driven in

Edwin: 76 RBI - 16 HR = 60 driven in / 372 total baserunners = 16.1% of baserunners driven in

As you can see, Dunn got more runners home despite having fewer opportunities than either Griffey or Phillips. I included Encarnacion because he fared surprisingly well in this study. But, I think the point to be made here is that despite the strikeouts and low BA with RISP, Dunn does a better job getting runners home than anybody else on the team.

Now, the logical next step is how does Dunn fare against the top RBI men in the NL? Dunn was 10th in the NL, so let's look at the 9 guys ahead of him. It may not surprise you that Dunn had the fewest baserunners of any of the top 10. It may surprise you, however, to see just how many more baserunners these guys got than Dunn's 395.

Holliday 476
Howard 501 (!)
Cabrera 433
Fielder 409 (50HR and only 119 RBI??? WTF!?!?!?!)
C.Lee 490
Hawpe 467
Beltran 432
Atkins 520 (!!!)
Wright 428

Now, let's take a look at what would happen if Dunn were given the same opportunities as the top RBI guys in the NL. We'll hold Dunn's 16.7% rate of baserunners driven in, and add his 40 HR's for an "adjusted" RBI total. The numbers in parentheses are the RBI total of the players listed, and the number after the equal sign is Dunn's "adjusted" RBI total based on that player's number of opportunities.

Holliday (137) = 119
Howard (136) = 124
Cabrera (119) = 112
Fielder (119) = 108
C.Lee (119) = 122
Hawpe (116) = 118
Beltran (112) = 112
Atkins (111) = 127
Wright (107) = 111

So, given the same number of opportunities as the other guys, Dunn would be 5th in the NL in RBI; ahead of Lee, Hawpe, Atkins and Wright, and tied with Beltran. Would anybody have a problem wit him then? Hell, just swap Dunn and Phillips in the lineup, and Dunn drives in 117 (16.7% * 461 = 77 + 40 = 117).

So, really, anybody bitching about Dunn's low RBI total relative to his HR's is asking him to drive in runners that aren't there. I find that rather unreasonable. Dunn's "clutch" reputation is almost entirely based on experimenter's bias and lack of opportunity, and has nothing to do with actual performance.

I am in hate with Paul Daugherty

BLee2525 — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 04:20:44 -0000

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20080227/COL03/302270113/

Highlights:

It helps that Votto is so entirely without pretense he could teach a humility class, and that when they were passing out fat heads to eternally praised ballplayers, Bruce was playing golf.

It's good that off the field, neither takes himself entirely seriously. What seals it is their stated desire to be Reds a long time. We don't hear that a lot much from our sports stars. First, Brandon Phillips. Now, Votto and Bruce. What's going on?

Notably absent: The Reds' best offensive player, a self-effacing guy who's already signed one extension in Cincy, has publicly stated his desire to sign another, and took it upon himself to take Bruce under his wing this offseason. Let's give Daugherty the benefit of the doubt, though. Maybe he just forgot.

The Reds are in transition, from a team whose clubhouse revolved around Ken Griffey Jr. and Adam Dunn to one filling up with happy-to-be-here players. What that means come March 31 is anybody's guess. But the face is changing. It's looking more like Big Thing and The Champ.

Whoops! Guess not. Way to turn an article about 2 exciting young talents into another forum to air your personal vendetta against the Reds' best offensive player. Stay classy, Doc.

I don't understand it. The media often laments the lack of spontaneous, fun-loving players in baseball; everybody's just spouting off cliches. We have a genuinely funny guy who's a damn good baseball player, a great person off the field according to everybody who covers him, and a great teammate according to everybody in the locker room, and he constantly gets shit on by everyone who covers Reds' baseball. He's signed one extension, wants to sign another, he's provided the best moments on the field (Opening Day 2HR game, GW GS vs. CLE) and off the field (Banana Phone, Ichiro at the cage, "The Next Big Thing") that this town has seen in the last decade. But apparently, he's not happy to be here. He's the sullen dick that's been bringing down the locker room all these years.

And, just so everybody knows, I went to saw the Reds when they came to DC last year, and I'm happy to report that Dunn jogged both out to his position and back to the dugout in each inning. I was watching that specifically.

Idea for New Feature for John

BLee2525 — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:48:18 -0000

I've been kicking this idea around for a bit, and with the "Road Ahead" post, I thought this might be a good time to discuss it. I haven't come up with a good title yet, so hopefully somebody can help me out with that.

It seems like prospect debates often devolve into "Hall of Famer" or "Total Bust." In reality, there's a lot of gray area; role players, league average performers, once-in-a-while All-Stars; career paths that are rarely projected for top prospects. The idea would be to take a prospect, and describe 3-4 different career paths based on their skill development. John did something similar with his Scott Kazmir Crystal Ball (http://www.minorleagueball.com/story/2005/9/22/174917/818), but I would look for a more in-depth discussion of the different career paths rather than a prediction of exact stats.

I think it would be an especially interesting feature for a tools guy like Cameron Maybin or Drew Stubbs, as they could carve out a niche being anything from a 4th OF who plays all 3 positions to a perennial All-Star.

Thoughts? Possible titles?