SBNation.com User Blog: Justin Mos

Cubs lock in Anthony Rizzo

Justin Mos — Mon, 13 May 2013 04:42:59 -0000

Cubs lock in Anthony Rizzo

Well, figured I'd post this here, always good to have more contracts to look to when it comes to locking in players and complaining/praising GM's. We don't seem to have any players that would be a very good comparison to Rizzo that seem like they need locked up now, but it's always nice to have more info.

Phil Irwin's winsome curve

Justin Mos — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 22:38:20 -0000

Phil Irwin's winsome curve

Click the links to the other videos to see even more impressive curveballs. In honor of his start tomorrow, I feel this needed to be posted.

Ranking the top 10 best pro careers in Pittsburgh sports

Justin Mos — Sat, 09 Mar 2013 18:50:10 -0000

OK, I saw a ranking for top athlete's that made me die a little inside, so I decided I'd so my own list to purge said feelings out of myself. I also used top sport careers to make it a little more objectively for myself, so I don't get caught up in the minuiate of deciding whether the ability to fly on ice and bulldoze people is inherently more athletic than throwing a ball 100 MPH, etc. I am also limiting this to baseball, hockey, and football, sorry Arnie Palmer/Billy Conn, I don't know you guys well enough to judge you in comparison to the others. So without further ado, here is my list.

Keep in mind I just wanted this out as soon as possible for my own sake, so don't be too hard on me.

Honorable mentions

Sidney Crosby- This man is 2nd in Points per game as a Penguin, sandwiched between Lemieux and Jagr. He has a bright future but I don't think I should be putting him up here yet. He will be in a few years I'm guessing, as of now he's played 434 games in his NHL career, whereas Jagr in comparison played around 800 in a Pens uniform.

Willie Stargell- Great hitter, hall of famer, but I don't feel he deserves top 10. He's a great player but I just couldn't put him in the same category as the others.

Terry Bradshaw- The guy won 4 super bowls, had a cannon for an arm, and could scramble with the best of them. I have a hard team putting him off the list, looking at 10, 9, and 8 and wondering how I could get one of them off the list for Bradshaw. Unfortuantely for him I couldn't find a way to get him above the other three, who all had something about them that put them on top

10. Troy Polamalu- The strong safety position has taken a life in the NFL as one of a player who must be skilled at covering like a cornerback and tackling/blitzing like a linebacker. You generally hope your strong saftety is very good at one and competent at the other, but Polamalu enters the realm where even his generally considered weaker side of pass coverage is still great. The man has been a signature player on the defense that has been a contributor to 3 super bowl appearances and 2 wins. I couldn't allow myself to be wishy washy so I put him on the list instead of Bradshaw even though Bradshaw contributed to 4 super bowls. I honestly had a hard time placing this guy, but I feel he belongs for some reason.

9. Josh Gibson- An amazing athlete who performed unfortunately in an era when his talents where unable to be shown in MLB, he nonetheless proved to be a force in the Negro Leagues. While his Negro league play might not have been as impressive as his exhibition and independant league play, that is to be expected as it was against top competition. In his 16 season 510 game Negro league career he hit a home run every 16.13 AB, which puts him between Prince and Cecil Fielder in Home run rate. Keep in mind though, he did this from the catcher position. Saying he would be the all-time leader in HR Rate among catchers (he slightly edges out Piazza) is one thing, but the amount he leads the rest of the field by is enormous. No other catcher besides Gibson and Piazza is in the top 100 in HR rate. He simply was in a league of his own at his position. O, hitting .359 doesn't hurt either. The only thing holding him back is his relatively low games played in his career against high level competition compared to other baseball players, (Negro League seasons were light on games), hence my reluctance to put him higher. Yes 16 seasons is a ton, but when Barry Bonds played twice as many games as you and I knock him for not playing enough, I'd be a hypocrite to allow you to be higher on the list.

8. Roberto Clemente- One of if not the best outfield arm of all-time. Very good hitter, 56 all-time among ALL position players in WAR/game (Stargell isn't top 200). A legend simply put who is VERY hard to seperate career from persona. I struggled to figure out where this guy belongs on my list and I figured here was the right spot.

7. Mel Blount/Rod Woodson- Yes, this is a cop-out, but I couldn't choose who to put first, and these two men are two of the greatest to play the position of cornerback in NFL history. Let's start with Blount, This man played cornerback in a different era, one in which physicality was more the norm, but man did he play it well to the point that the Mel Blount rule was put into effect to open the game up more. Widely regarded as one of the best defensive backs to play the game, in 1994 he made the NFL's all-time team list for the leagues 75th anniversary. Woodson was also a member of said team, had intense drive shown by playing in the super bowl after getting reconstructive knee surgery earlier in the season, and along with Blount also won a defensive player of the year award with the Steelers.

6. Barry Bonds- Now this guy had 7 seasons with Pittsburgh, and that made him difficult to rank. On one hand he had 2 MVP seasons, outside of his rookie year his WORST season was 5.5 WAR, in 1992 he led the league in BA/OBP/SLG/BB and was indisputably one of the best players in the league. I don't think people realize exactly how great Bonds was in his younger years as a Pirate. He definitely was on a first ballot hall of fame track, (or deserved it at least) even if his power numbers didn't improve at all from his early years in Pittsburgh. A great peak, but longevity is holding him back from the career list for me.

5. Arky Vaughan- OK, stop the fanboy rants and listen for second. This guy was a consensus top 5 SS in MLB history. 25th among players at all positions in WAR/game and 2nd or 3rd among SS, (depending on if you count A-Rod) No dispute, look at the numbers, particularly era adjusted ones because the straight up ones are blindingly ridiculous. Bill James put this guy at #2 all time among SS, and I don't think many would consider that a big stretch at all (A-Rod probably could've made a case if he stayed at short, but he didn't). The guy with Pittsburgh batted .324/.415/.472 with Pittsburgh from the SS position over 10 years. Despite all that, I still had a very hard time placing him. His 3 extra seasons and his performance made him very comparable to Bonds overall in Pittsburgh Sports career territory. Frankly, I went with Vaughan only by a hair because I see his 10 year career with Pittsburgh as enough to be considered a top 10 at his position all-time, and I don't think 7 years of Bonds was enough to put him top 10 at his position all time

4. Jaromir Jagr- On One hand, I knew I had to put this guy high up, the question was how high up? In 11 seasons in Pittsburgh he played at an extremely high level, he's one of the top wingers of all-time, he had his MVP award, (2 if you include the Pearson), had 4 straight scoring titles to end his time in Pittsburgh, and that was during the height of the dead puck era, where scoring was hard to come by. I think Jagr's totals in these seasons get overlooked because they aren't as gaudy as other players, but in those 4 seasons he was #1 each year in scoring when everyone was having a hard time scoring. On one hand he has all that going for him, on the other, I can't help but feel he might be higher up than he should be. O well, no backing off now.

Intermission- For the top 3, these 3 stand out because they are either in the discussion for best player to play the game based on their career in Pittsburgh, or a considered the best player at their position all time. With the other players on the list, I could point to someone else who played the position as better, or at least in the running.

3. Joe Greene- Consensus best defensive tackle of all-time, Pillar of the steel curtain. I go to John Madden's comments on Joe Greene to sum him up . John Madden's opinion was that the whole steel curtain was essentially built on Lambert lining up behind Greene and rampaging into the backfield. Madden and the coaching staff came to the conclusion that the Steel Curtain would be in fact made useless if one just pushed Joe Greene into Lambert, completely negating the whole system. They tried it but realized their plan couldn't succeed because of one reason and one reason only, you COULD NOT push Joe Greene backwards, you just couldn't. The whole system in Madden's eyes worked because one defensive player enabled a variation of the 4-3 scheme that no other team could use as effectively. For this, he gets #3 on the list.

#2 Honus Wagner- You really can't say enough about the guy, when considering a guy for the SS position you can't with a straight face say anyone was better than him, ever. The gap between him and #2, (unless of course you consider A-Rod) is an enormous gap. Whether you consider that #2 to be Ripken Jr. Vaughan, Banks, et al. he just demolishes them in terms of accomplishments. Led league in BA 8 times, Slugging 6 times, WAR through the roof. Got same amount of hall of fame votes as Babe Ruth, just a ridiculous player. Research him and the next guy on the list if you want stats, because I could go all day.

1. Mario Lemieux- In the running for greatest player all-time in hockey with Gretzky and Bobby Orr being the other two commonly cited, even when hobbled by disease and injury he was a threat that few could match. Blessed with great frame, awareness, grit, etc. he took to the NHL like few ever have. When he made his first retirement he ended his career #1 in points per game, the only qualified player in NHL history to have a points per game average above 2. He eventually came out of retirement and still played at a high level in the dead puck era. In his first year out of his comeback he played 43 games only and still finished 26th in scoring, leading the lead in points per game even in a much more defensive era.

Keep in mind I just wanted this out as soon as possible for my own sake, so don't be too hard on me.

Honorable mentions

Willie Stargell- Great hitter, hall of famer, but I don't feel he deserves top 10. He's a great player but I just couldn't put him in the same category as the others.

Pirates in on Wandy Rodriguez

Justin Mos — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 00:42:38 -0000

Pirates in on Wandy Rodriguez

Pirates also pulled Alen Hanson from his WV game... perhaps correlation.

(I apologize if not fanshot worthy, erase this Charlie if it belongs somewhere else.)

James McDonald adds a slider, dominates

Justin Mos — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:48:32 -0000

James McDonald adds a slider, dominates

A look from fangraphs at how James McDonald has mostly scrapped his changeup for a slider and how the slight improvement in command of a secondary offering and slight increase in swing and miss rate from the change has considerably improved his pitching. It mentions that he likely won't keep up the ERA but that this change is responsible for some of his improvement and that the Pirates deserve credit for helping him turn things around.

Poll: If you could, what is the lowest acceptable performance you would "Lock" Pedro in to?

Justin Mos — Sat, 30 Jun 2012 02:01:57 -0000

So, it's not quite halfway into the season and we've seen good Pedro, bad Pedro, etc. Pedro, and etc. etc. pedro. Needless to say to anyone who has been following the team, but his highs and lows have both been of great magnitudes. My question to all the Pirates faithful here, is that if you could in theory "lock in" Pedro's end of year numbers for BOTH THIS YEAR AND NEXT YEAR, would you, and if yes what would be the minimum triple slash that you would accept for him? I'll let arguments begin in the comments, but just to let you know the poll numbers I chose were arbitrarily chosen by me for no reason other the fact I like them for the purpose of this excercise. If you would accept something even lower than the first option, mention it in the comments as well.

Poll

Which is these triple slashes is the MINIMUM it would take to for you to say, "I'd lock in Pedro's numbers for this year and next at this level"?

.220/.290/.410 (Just don't give me super bad Pedro)

2 votes

.225/.295/.470 (His season up to this point in the aggregate, maybe with more consistency though)

19 votes

.240/.310/.490 (A power heavy guy who at least gets on base at an over .300 clip is enough for me)

68 votes

.250/.330/.510 (It'd take a borderline top 10 3rd base bat at least to get me to lock him in)

43 votes

Better than that (I believe before the end of next year Pedro will be better than all of those choices)

20 votes

152 votes | Poll has closed

Nats sign Brad Lidge to 1-year deal

Justin Mos — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:58:22 -0000

Nats sign Brad Lidge to 1-year deal

Contract is for 1 year $1 million plus incentives. Seems reasonable, maybe even a bit cheap to me considering the market for relief pitchers.

Handshake labor deal reached

Justin Mos — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 07:47:12 -0000

Handshake labor deal reached

If this is true, this is about worst case scenario for Pirates. A draft tax of 75-100% of each dollar spent above a threshold, more players get super two status, if a player is going to be a free agent, the qualifying offer will be determined by a formula instead of arbitration from what I've gathered, and the number will be likely above $12 million for one year. Also, if the player declines and signs, instead of the signing team losing the pick altogether, they just move to the end of the first round, meaning that signing a big buck free agent won't stop the Yankees and Red Sox from picking in the top 32 picks.

On the plus side for Pirates hope, after the Astros move to the AL, 10 teams make playoffs!

Jason Kendall's "albatross" gives a sobering view on free agency

Justin Mos — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 05:02:56 -0000

When the name Jason Kendall pops up, a large amount of Pirates fans first reaction is "albatross contract". A large amount of those left would probably think "gruesome injury". While that probably gets rid of the majority of fans, some of those who remain might have a thought similar to, "good player who got injured and unfortunately couldn't live up to his amazing early career after getting hurt". After the jump, I'm going to look into the player Kendall was, and show how his reputation in Pittsburgh relative to his performance shows why signing a player to a "fair market" deal in Pittsburgh, and especially "overpaying" for said player, is a dangerous thought.

First things first, let's discuss Kendall's performance before the fateful contract was signed. Most people here realize Kendall was good, but I'm not sure most here appreciate exactly how good. In his age 23-27 seasons, B-R has as his most similar player by season Mickey Cochrane in every one of those years (a hall of famer for those here who haven't heard of him). In his age 23-26 seasons, his OBP over 2211 PA was .408. His lowest ISO in any of those seasons was .140. In his age 23-26 seasons, he was worth 20 fWAR and 19.1 bWAR. To put that in perspective, fWAR had Yogi Berra at 18.5 WAR in his age 23-26 seasons and bWAR had it at 15.9. He was on a hall of fame pace and even the red flag he had for health, (he only played 78 games in 1999, while putting up 4.1 WAR in them, a better pace than MVP winner Chipper Jones) could be viewed as minor compared to his amazing skill level, as he had proved that he could put together all-star caliber seasons even without a full compliment of games. Outside of the fact that he played the position of catcher, he's the exact kind of player that any team that wants to compete would love to have.

Now, some people here are possibly going, "I knew that he was amazing, but the thing is that we complain about the contract being an albatross because it crippled us and he didn't provide nearly enough value to justify the contract he was given DURING it". The whole point of this post is to point out that what Jason Kendall did provide during the length of his contract was around what fangraphs calls FAIR value.

Now, many of you might be like "wait, did this nobody just say that the Kendall contract was FAIR??!!" Some might even be questioning my sanity now. I'm here to tell you that by fWAR, he provided 52.4 million dollars in value. By bWAR he provided fairly similar value, albeit slightly lower, and according to bWARs numbers he was paid approximately 58.635 million dollars over that time period. He provided 1 fWAR per 2.93 million he was paid. By bWAR it was 1 WAR per 3.07 million, even it out and you got a 1 WAR per 3 million dollar guy, hardly even in the market back then what would be called a horrible deal. I also should probably mention that he provided well over half the WAR of the 6 year contract in the 3 years he spent with the Pirates.

The thing was, he provided very good on base skills, (in the first 5 years of the "albatross" contract he had an OBP of .371, though his slugging I think was very close) and what was considered average catching skills. Those skills were enough to make him a commodity that was paid fair value, even if the amount he was paid seemed absurd to many of the fans at the time and maybe even more now, it was in retrospect a deal that looks much better than most big money contracts that you see nowadays.

So, if you've read through all of this, you might be wondering what this has to do with the free agent market, and the answer is simple, if we pay market price for an elite free agent and get merely "market level performance", history shows us that a lot of fans will consider it a bad deal. If the Pirates are going to spend money on a player, that player darn well better perform above and beyond the level of his contract, in short, we must underpay for him to be truly appreciated. Those people who want to spend a boatload of cash on a free agent superstar should realize this, and maybe rethink their positions. As Jason Kendall has shown, you can live up to your contract by market terms, and still be unappreciated and thought of badly despite being possibly the best catcher the Pirates have ever had.

How much do we expect Jeff Francis to make?

Justin Mos — Fri, 14 Oct 2011 02:38:13 -0000

So, I was looking at potential replacements for Paul Maholm that could possibly be on the market, and Jeff Francis popped out at me as a possible signing. Yes, he had injury ridden 08 and 09 campaigns, but he bounced back in 2010 to a 3.79 xFIP and 3.88 FIP season for 2.0 WAR and had a 4.29 xFIP season and 4.10 FIP season this year while throwing 183 innings and accumulating 2.6 WAR. Not to mention that he has shown significant upside before the injury with a 3.6 WAR season in 2006 and a 4.1 WAR season in 2007. He seems actually fairly comparable to Maholm with a slightly better past peak but with an injury history as well. My question is how much do you think he will make in 2012? He made $2 million plus performance bonuses this year, but I'm pretty sure he'll get a pay hike after pitching at an acceptable level in 2011.

Now I won't make a poll on this, because I expect opinions to wildly very, so state in the comments how much you think he will make in the off season, how many years he'll sign to, and if YOU believe the Pirates should attempt to sign him, and if so at what price.

Money Spent On Players in 2011, By Team

Justin Mos — Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:51:45 -0000

Frankly, I'm surprised that this long after the draft that this hasn't been done already. I'm merely combining the draft bonus totals and the payroll totals of the MLB teams and adding them together (ESPN for salaries and BA for draft bonuses). That way, we get the amount of money spent on ballplayers in 2011 by MLB teams without counting the small amount minor league players make outside of bonuses.

1. Yankees $203,178, 860

2. Phillies $ 177,666, 181

3. Red Sox $ 171,236, 176

4. Angels $ 142,317, 124

5. Cubs $ 138,375, 213

6. White Sox $ 132,071, 839

7. Mets $ 126,929,811

8. Giants $124,050,333

9. Twins $ 118,639,300

10. Tigers $ 108,583,932

11. Dodgers $ 107,298,291

12. Cardinals $ 103,300,072

13. Mariners $96,196,100

14. Rangers $ 96,078,265

15. Orioles $93,736,138

16. Brewers $ 93,006,633

17. Rockies $91,965,971

18. Braves $90,738,892

19. Reds $82,560,266

20. lAstros $75,514,800

21. Nationals $72,895,029

22. Blue Jays $72,614,300

23. Athletics $68,342,800

24.Diamondbacks $65,569,833

25. Pirates $62,635,700

26. Marlins $60,662,000

27. Indians$56,564,167

28. Padres $56475640

29. Rays $53,415,071

30. Royals $49,778,400

As you can see, with the draft spending included, most things don't change. The Yankees are still in a class of their own, and the Phillies (surprisingly to me in second, I assumed Red Sox) could take on half of what the Royals spent and still be in 2nd place. The Cubs move ahead of their chicago brethren in money spent because the Cubs spent a decent chunk of change on the draft and the White Sox spent the least, (less than we spent on picks NOT named Cole or Bell). In terms of "places" the Mariners jumped the most, up 5 from 18th in MLB payroll to 13th in this exercise. The Braves dropped from 15th to 18th.

What does this tell us about Pirates spending? Well, they still are fairly low spenders at 25th out of 30, but as a %, the difference between them and the "mid tier spenders" decreases quite a bit. On MLB payroll, we spent a little less than 54% what the Brewers, the 16th placed team spent, but in this exercise we spent a little more than 67% what the 16th placed team, still the Brewers, spent.

Probably the most useful, (and hopeful) example listed on this chart is the Oakland A's. With a payroll in MLB of $65,275,500, they have the kind of payroll that many fans have been yearning for for years. The type of payroll that a lot of those same fans claim that the Pirates would never be willing to pay under public Cheap-O #1 Bob Nutting. The fact is though, that in the amount of money spent on players this year, the Pirates spent only around $5.5 million less than the A's. That means that if you treat the draft and MLB spending as part of one budget, (which the Pirates officially claim not to do, but for the sake of this exercise just to have fun we'll do it) then if the Pirates for some stupid reason decided to only spend as much as the A's on the draft, and still planned to spend the same amount of money overall on players, they would have fielded a team with a $59,568,400 payroll to spend the same amount of money as they did this season. Now, I'd argue that it wouldn't have been smart to field such a payroll going into this season when it looked like we had no shot at contending, but the fact is that Bob Nutting has already shown he will spend that kind of money on players, and that is why so many of us here at Bucs Dugout believe that when the time comes to up payroll for a team that is a true contender, he very well may put up the money needed.

UPDATE: It has come to my attention via Mr. E that the Pirates have spent closer to $52 Million in payroll to go along with the 17 million in the draft, which combined with Latin American signings puts the Pirates over $70 million dollars spent on players this year.

This is the better link to Pirates spending on MLB payroll provided by Pirates Prospects

http://www.piratesprospects.com/2010/10/2011-pittsburgh-pirates-40-man-roster-and-payroll.html

Thankfully, because of the direction of my mistake in using ESPN for my financial numbers, my point isn't nullified but further underscored.

Plight of the Pirates

Justin Mos — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 14:50:09 -0000

Plight of the Pirates

The article describes the Pirates quick fall, in turn criticizing the Pirates for not acting early and then admitting that they probably made the best decision given the circumstances and praising NH for not mortgaging the farm.

Jeff Keppinger trade discussion, after the fact

Justin Mos — Wed, 20 Jul 2011 04:22:16 -0000

Jeff Keppinger was dealt to the San Francisco Giants for 2 Giants prospects. The prospects were 2 strikeout pitchers with walk issues that were bullpen guys that ranked 22 and 29 in the Giants organization. What's nice about knowing this is that it gives us an idea of how much he would've cost for us. My question is, would anyone here have been interested in adding Keppinger as a temporary 3rd baseman then utility infielder/outfielder for once Pedro gets back for a similar price?

That similar price, I'd say is Diego Moreno and Tony Watson. Both are pitchers with good stuff that could prove useful, but both are also relievers. Neither are very highly ranked on our prospect lists as of May, (though Moreno might've climbed since then), and while Moreno might be more valuable than either Giants pitcher traded, I wanted to make sure the deal would've gotten done, without giving up anything more than relief candidates.

Now, Jeff might have been only a very marginal upgrade at any position he plays, (or temporary probable decent upgrade at 3rd) and he doesn't fit one of the "pressing need" positions of the Pirates, but I'm interested to see what the people here have to say about this possibly coulda happened deal. It's one of those deals that slightly improves the club currently, protects against injury, and doesn't result in the team giving up top prospects. Keppinger has been a .307/.320/.436 guy this year who almost never walks or strikes out. His salary is 2.3 Mil this year and he is an unrestricted free agent next year. He can play all the infield positions apparently for those interested, though his defense isn't exactly good, and he has experience in the outfield as well. If we had gotten him I would have seen him as a nice guy to have around in case of injury. That's just my opinion though, let's hear your thoughts.

Poll

If you were Neal Huntington, would you have traded Diego Moreno and Tony Watson for Jeff Keppinger if you had the chance?

Yes

23 votes

No

59 votes

Heck no

25 votes

107 votes | Poll has closed

Celebrating Derek Jeter's career, by comparing him to Arky Vaughan

Justin Mos — Sun, 10 Jul 2011 06:00:00 -0000

Derek Jeter has put up one of the greatest offensive careers by a shortstop in league history. He just put up his 3000th hit, an impressive counting number. More importantly for this case he is top 10 in Wrc+ (wOBA adjusted for era) among shortstops and I don't think it is disputable that offensively he has had a hall of fame caliber career, even his most adamant haters should grudgingly admit that much. That said, this post isn't just meant to extol the virtues of Jeter, cause that wouldn't be fun on it's own, right? I am here to enlighten everyone here who doesn't know about the second best shortstop in Pirates history, a guy be the name of Arky.

Doesn’t it feel strange to realize if Jeter put up the same performance in New York that he did in Pittsburgh, he’d only be the 3rd greatest shortstop in franchise history as a hitter? At this point some people are probably saying, OK, I've heard of Honus Wagner, but Jeter's a top 10 all time hitting shortstop, and I don't think the Pirates have ANOTHER one of those, or I'd have heard of him. Then, they finally found out about Vaughn, research him, and realize the Pirates in fact DO have another top 10 hitting shortstop of all time. I don’t think many people would dispute that who looked at the numbers. Arky Vaughan was indeed a shortstop for the ages, and a better hitter than even Derek Jeter.

Arky Vaughan fun fact about his plate discipline, the man walked OVER 3 TIMES MORE OFTEN THAN HE STRUCK OUT. Jeter, more K’s than BB. Arky Vaughan has higher BA. Arky Vaughn, higher OBP, higher SLG, and if you want to adjust for era, Arky Vaughan’s Wrc+ is 14 or 15 points higher than Jeter's.

Yet more hype for Vaughan, his 1935 season Wrc+ is higher than any season in Derek Jeter’s, Ichiro Suzuki’s, Alex Rodriguez’s, or even Albert Pujols’ career.

You say you don't like fancy stuff like wRC+, well then try this on for size. In that 1935 season he had a .385 average, a .491 OBP, and a ,607 SLG for a .494 wOBA. What’s funny is he lost the MVP that year to a Gabby Hartnett, a catcher whose stats that year were quite spectacular, but not up to Arky’s. Hartnett was inferior in OPS, wOBA, and even the traditional MVP categories of the time like BA, RBI, hits, runs, home runs, and stolen bases. That .385 average was the highest single season average for a shortstop in the 20th century, and it was backed with a ton of walks and decent power to boot.

Some people here probably want that fabled thing called consistency and figure that with a season like that, he was probably a streaky hitter if I've never heard of him. Well, here was Arky Vaughans WORST offensive triple slash line with the Pirates in all 10 years he played for them. Are you ready for this? .318/.375/.412 for his WORST season.

Jeter is one of the top 10 hitting shortstops of all time, and a hall of fame guy, but as this guy named Vaughn who most here probably have only heard of in passing at most can show, the teammates and media can change an amazing player into a legend, and turn an even greater player into just a name by their failure to build up a player over the years. I'm pretty sure someone here if they tried could show off Arky's case even better than I, and argue that he is potentially the 2nd or 3rd greatest hitting shortstop of ALL-TIME. If so, get to it if you feel like it. I feel my job is done if I have brought attention to Arky Vaughan.

EDIT: Even I needed to learn more about him. It took a person from the comments to tell me I was spelling his name as Arky Vaughn, and not Vaughan as is correct.

Also, I might need to hide from some people for this comment, but Vaughan was probably the best baseball player to wear the #21 in Pirates history. (Off the field stuff combined with postseason heroics and career length obviously make Clemente THE #21 in Pirates history, I'm not disputing THAT at least, just the skill of each ballplayer relative to the league at their position. I don't think anyone would put Clemente as a top 5 outfielder of all time objectively, (Ruth, Ted Williams, Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, and Stan Musial spent half+ their careers as outfielders) but I find it hard to find someone who would objectively put Vaughan OUTSIDE the top 5 at shortstop)

Kovacevic: McCutchen All-Star snub is inexplicable

Justin Mos — Mon, 04 Jul 2011 16:29:37 -0000

Kovacevic: McCutchen All-Star snub is inexplicable

Dejan giving his two cents on the snub.

Charlie Morton's Dilemma

Justin Mos — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 17:14:42 -0000

Charlie Morton's Dilemma

A Fangraphs post that says temper your enthusiasm for Charlie Morton, because his completely new approach to pitching has probably fooled some batters this year who expected something different. Now that he is predictable, he might need to adjust because he's essentially throwing one pitch in the same spot and not many people can get away with that.

Neil Walker Swinging Out of His Shoes

Justin Mos — Tue, 05 Apr 2011 17:38:03 -0000

Neil Walker Swinging Out of His Shoes

Fangraphs post about Neil Walker's hot start, with a graph demonstrating his problems against sliders so far this season. Small sample size is all we have at this point in the season, as you'll see from the article.

Pirates RS projections based on Community Projections

Justin Mos — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 01:34:40 -0000

Well, we got eight batters finished for our fan projections, so I figured now would be as good a time as any to see how our individual projections would most likely play out on the field in terms of the offensive stat that means the most to a teams success, runs scored. I'm assuming Garret Jones numbers will equal Matt Diaz numbers for platoon purposes and assuming very slightly better pitcher batting than last year, (my pitcher slash line is .100/.136/.126). I threw the numbers into http://lineupsimulator.com/ after transforming each line into a number, (this took forever). I also threw the numbers into http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/LineupAnalysis.py which is less intricate but you don't have to type in at bats and I thought it would be nice to have a second source. Our expected runs scored over the year if our lineup stays healthy and performs exactly to fans expectations is, (drum roll please)

by lineupsimulator- 640 over the course of the season, which would be 53 runs more than last year, THE NUMBERS I USED ARE AT THE BOTTOM, DON'T READ THEM UNLESS YOU ARE REALLY INTERESTED. Other than PA off by a decent bit, I thought that the numbers were very good and followed the projections just about to the T. This amount seems disappointing as it would only move us from 30th to 29th in the league in offense, and it just doesn't seem right. By contrast, the baseballmusings said that said projections, (using only OBP and SLG) would result in much more runs being scored. I would seriously like any informed opinion on what mistakes I might have made or if these projections generally are so drastically different in terms of run amounts. Thank you very much.

Jose Tabata          609    68    122    42    6    9    30    8
Andrew McCutchen    599    73    112    39    6    20    35    11
Lyle Overbay    590    77    100    31    2    21    1    0
Pedro Alvarez    580    76    92    32    2    33    2    1
Garret Jones    570    64    86    39    2    23    9    4
Neil Walker          560    49    100    36    3     17    4    4
Chris Snyder    550    74    84    30    1    13    1    1
Ronny Cedeno    540    37    110    12    1    10    14    4
pitcher          530    22    48    1    0    2    1     0

Strand rate data fun

Justin Mos — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 23:23:02 -0000

In the discussion over whether Olsen or Morton should be 5th starter, Rainja brought up the point that Morton's .320 BABIP and 62% strand rate over his 250 inning MLB career are not unlucky. His logic stated that since great pitchers are ones who get outs in all situations, great pitchers will have great strand rates because they are better at getting batters out in all situations. I decided I'd do some research on the past year and see if there were any pitchers most people would consider good who put up subpar strand rates, to see if this theory held up. I also checked to see if there were many pitchers with high strand rates and weak peripherals, (for ease of search, I defined weak periphs as having a K/BB ratio 1.80 or under, arbitrary yes, but I think most would agree that 1.8 is not good as far as K/BB goes). Here are some of my findings.

GOOD PERIPH- BAD STRAND RATE CLUB

These are the pitchers that most people would consider to be viable MLB pitchers who have put up a bad strand rate in the past year, this is out of 92 qualified pitchers. Best 1/3 I considered "high strand rate" and worst 1/3 I considered "low strand rate"

"Elite Pitcher group"

Zack Grienke- 3rd worst in the league among qualified pitchers with 65.3%
CLIFF LEE- 9th worst in the league among qualified pitchers with 67.9%
Hiroki Kurudo- 15th worst in league among qualified pitchers with 68.9%

"Good pitcher group"

Doug Fister- 7th worst in league among qualified pitchers with 67.7%

James Shield- 12th worst among qualified with 68.4%

Wandy Rodriguez, (maybe he deserves elite status based on numbers) 20th worst among qualified with 69.4%

Yovani Gallardo- 24th worst among qualified with 69.8%

BAD PERIPHERAL- GOOD STRAND CLUB

Clay Buchholz- 8th best among qualified with 79%

Jon Garland- (worse K/BB than Morton!) 23rd best among qualified with 75.9%

Randy Wolf- 30th best among qualified with 75.3%

This data is only a one year sample size, and as all of you know, (or should know), one year doesn't tell you everything. What it does tell to me though is that strand rate is obviously not always going to be good for great pitchers and bad for lesser pitchers, (though the data seems to imply that bad strand rates for "good" pitchers are more common).

What does this mean for the Charlie Morton/Scott Olsen debate? What it says to me is that strand rate, like BABIP, is very hitter dependent. It says that the .320 BABIP and 62% strand rate over 250 innings for Morton actually COULD BE, (I'd say extremely likely is) the result of small sample size. Cliff Lee for example pitched around 500 innings between 2005-2007 with a strand rate of 69.3% then 400 innings in 2008-2009 with a strand rate of over 77% and then pitches 210 at a 67.9% rate in 2010. The fact is that while Scott Olsen might very well be a better choice than Charlie Morton, data such as strand rate and BABIP should not be used to support that fact.

Comments are welcome, I'm sorry I didn't go more in depth as I should have, but I wanted to at least show a little bit of info about why judging a player on their strand rate can be dicey. BABIP judging been done to death in other places, so I just decided to show a little about why strand rate is suspect to similar problems. I'm guessing Vlad could explain it better and give the amount of data needed to actually make the argument, but I figured I'd at least foster discussion.

Our favorite platoon target, and the other guy who should be

Justin Mos — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 14:29:08 -0000

Here it seems a lot of us like the idea of platooning Garret Jones, and the splits do certainly tell a tale. This is a lefty who hits .215/.256/.354 against lefties this year for an OPS of .610 and hits for .270/.339/.449 against righties this year for an OPS of .789. That is a spread of 179 points and as he is a lefty, as Vlad would mention, there is not a huge likelihood of him regressing to the 1.09 platoon split that righties would seem to regress to. What is crazy is that this spread is SMALLER than his career split, which is 241 points! Clearly, this makes him quite the target for platoon work.

But, let me tell you about a different hitter, that has been even more extreme this year if not for career. A guy who hits .287/368/.481 for an OPS of .850 against righties. That sounds really good doesn't it? That hitter has also hit .182/.262/.273 for an OPS of .536 against lefties. In short, better than Garret against righties and worse against lefties for an OPS spread of 314 points! This guy is a switch hitter who's career split isn't Garret Jones sized, but at 106 points I'd say it's pretty sizeable. This guy, is Ryan Doumit. He's an .800 OPS career against righties and .694 against lefties. Discuss.

What is going on?

Justin Mos — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 18:14:37 -0000

Answer truthfully, who would have put money on this over/under? Over/under of number of articles by Bob Smizik that would be agreed with by the majority of the people at Bucs Dugout in August of 2010

Now, I'm figuring that most of you would bet the under, with the feeling that even if he SOMEHOW manages to write something that we like, it would be a one time fluke and I would at least get my money back. BEHOLD

Props to jlk9697 for pointing out this article first

http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs/bobsmizik/archive/2010/08/26/ap-article-on-pirates-unfair.aspx#comments

Read this article, and the comments, and you will be wondering if someone took over for Smizik without his permission, sorta like what happened when J. Jonah Jameson was in the hospital and the Daily Bugle made a positive article regarding Spider Man to take from comics. A like to jlk9697's post here gives a brief synopsis for the TL;DR crowd and those who refuse to visit Smizik on principle even when you agree with him.

http://www.bucsdugout.com/2010/8/26/1651995/smizik-logical

If that wasn't enough, he had to write THIS ONE TOO

http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs/bobsmizik/archive/2010/08/27/littlefield-drafts-still-haunt-pirates.aspx

This article describes Dave Littlefield's drafts. Someone in the comments stated that we all know that DL was inept so why did he do it and SMIZIK SAID THIS

(This article has nothing to do with my feelings about Littlefield, who was a good guy and a terrible GM. It's point was to show how barren the Pirates system was when Huntington took over.

WOW

I'm sure some people probably would say, "what's the big deal, this is simple stuff", but it's SMIZIK, he is ripped on so much here when his articles disagree, I feel that he should at least be congratulated for his articles that agree with us.

Answer truthfully, who would have put money on this over/under? Over/under of number of articles by Bob Smizik that would be agreed with by the majority of the people at Bucs Dugout in August of 2010

Props to jlk9697 for pointing out this article first

http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs/bobsmizik/archive/2010/08/26/ap-article-on-pirates-unfair.aspx#comments

http://www.bucsdugout.com/2010/8/26/1651995/smizik-logical

If that wasn't enough, he had to write THIS ONE TOO

http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs/bobsmizik/archive/2010/08/27/littlefield-drafts-still-haunt-pirates.aspx

This article describes Dave Littlefield's drafts. Someone in the comments stated that we all know that DL was inept so why did he do it and SMIZIK SAID THIS

(This article has nothing to do with my feelings about Littlefield, who was a good guy and a terrible GM. It's point was to show how barren the Pirates system was when Huntington took over.

WOW

What 2 awesome games can do for your line

Justin Mos — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 18:21:23 -0000

A.232/.300/.384 line is not pretty, it is a line that would POSSIBLY be adequate for a good fielding utility infielder who doesn't play much, but is not attractive, a .684 OPS, pfft... foget about it. A .259/.325/.509 line is MUCH more attractive though, its a dude with an OPS of .834, the dude might not get on base enough to be considered amazing, but its a line I would love to have on my team. That's what 2 days from Pedro Alvarez has done to his line.

It got me thinking, what if we took the best 2 games of a persons season, had them just so happen to fall on the next two games, and see what it does to a persons line. While at first I felt like adding Pedro's totals to certain players, I figured that I would be at least slightly more realistic and pretend that they repeated their 2 top games of THIS season again over the next 2 days. For a quick example, though I won't get into detail for him, Bobby Crosby's best game of the season was either a 2 for 4 game with 2 doubles or a 1 for 2 game with a homer and its really not hard to pick those out for him. You then pretend that in his next 2 games he goes 3 for 6 with 2 doubles and a homer, because he has shown himself capable of doing those performances this season, and see what it does to his line. I've decided to do it to some vilified players for fun.

Woo, that out of the way, lets start with Ryan Church, because his numbers are fun to play with.

Current line of .190/.246/.325 I think that ugly is a proper word to describe that line, maybe even a little generous. Church's two best games of the season for boosting that line are a 3 for 3 game with a homer and a walk against Philly and a 3 for 3 game with a double and a walk against Atlanta, adding 6 for 6 with 2 walks, a double, and a homer changes his line to .219/.297/.373, which is still not pretty, though I'd say with decent fielding that would merely make his season bad, as opposed to what many people here have called it. PROBABLY that would even be a line you could trade if you added solid fielding.

Now lets do Aki Iwamura's cause his might be interesting, I'm not sure how it will change his line.

.182/.292/.267 is the line he had when he got the boot here in Pittsburgh. Not Church ugly because we all know that OBP is more important than slugging and the .46 point difference in OBP is a point in Iwamura's favor, but still ugly. His 2 best games that I am putting on this list are a 2 for 4 game with a walk and a home run, (yes, Iwamura hit a home run this year, don't act too shocked) and a 3 for 6 game with a walk. That would bring his line to .206/.310/.297, which like Church is still ugly, but at least the OBP number is slightly prettier being on the good side of .300. Guess I was wrong about it possibly being interesting, still not good enough to stick, (I also ran the numbers if I added his 2 for 5 game with a homer instead of the 3 for 6 game and it came out to ..195/.303/.310, which gives him a SLG and OBP over .300, but I think .07 of OBP is worth more than .13 of SLG by Sabermetric studies).

Lastly, lets put Andy LaRoche through this exercise

Andy's current line is .232/.297/.310 and his two best performances of the year were a 4 for 4 game and a 4 for 5 game, all singles. That would change his line to .259/.320/.355 which actually sounds like the line of a mediocre bench player as opposed to a complete scrub. Add in the fact that LaRoche CAN hit for power on a good day and that he's streaky and it does seem possible that one week of LaRoche being on fire could really spike his numbers. NFW has done his job, and Pedro is Pedro, but if the display that Alvarez had against Wolf was against a righty, I think you could have made a case for their to be a platoon split between Alvarez and LaRoche. Really, Alvarez seems like the kind of guy who might follow the Ryan Howard career path, (outside of huge contract, I wouldn't mind that) and have bad splits against lefties career wise, and Andy LaRoche has a .714 OPS career against lefties in 288 AB, (not a ton, but not a tiny SS) This post wasn't meant to be a plug for LaRoche, but on the fly, sorry if it turned into one. If someone else wants to continue the fun of the 2 big nights idea, feel free, and have fun!

Woo, that out of the way, lets start with Ryan Church, because his numbers are fun to play with.

Now lets do Aki Iwamura's cause his might be interesting, I'm not sure how it will change his line.

Lastly, lets put Andy LaRoche through this exercise

Anybody worried at all?

Justin Mos — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 01:25:59 -0000

"According to league sources, the Flyers have a verbal agreement in place with the San Jose Sharks to fork over a seventh-round pick next season if they can sign San Jose's Evgeni Nabokov before July 1, when he becomes an unrestricted free agent.

Don Meehan, the agent who represents Nabokov, told CSNPhilly.com earlier that his client's no-trade clause is not an issue. San Jose obviously has given the Flyers permission to get a deal done and Meehan is willing to engage the Flyers ahead of July 1."

I'm surprised that there isn't a thread about this on the first page. Noted that the dude hasn't produced big in the biggest pressure situations at times, i.e. playoffs and olympics (he did make it to the western conference finals this year though, yes his team was stacked, but he could have choked worse earlier, that duly noted), but this dude seems to possibly be the key to ending the revolving door goalie in Philly and I find it a little scary to think that the Flyers will FINALLY have a quote unquote "franchise" caliber goalie if they manage to sign him. The cap raising makes it actually possible that they might sign him and might be part of the reason, (this deal) that the Flyers were willing to trade Hamhuis' rights to us. Anyone elses' thoughts, opinions, etc. is welcomed.

"According to league sources, the Flyers have a verbal agreement in place with the San Jose Sharks to fork over a seventh-round pick next season if they can sign San Jose's Evgeni Nabokov before July 1, when he becomes an unrestricted free agent.

Don Meehan, the agent who represents Nabokov, told CSNPhilly.com earlier that his client's no-trade clause is not an issue. San Jose obviously has given the Flyers permission to get a deal done and Meehan is willing to engage the Flyers ahead of July 1."

Sigining news around the league

Justin Mos — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 03:00:48 -0000

I figured I'd update everyone here a little with how some of the other teams in the league are doing in the extremely important activity of signing draft picks. It seems as if some teams have really jumped out of the gate, here are some links

The Twins sign two

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11041136¬ebook_id=11046180&vkey=notebook_min&fext=.jsp&c_id=min

The Royals sign seven

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11041140¬ebook_id=11043346&vkey=notebook_hou&fext=.jsp&c_id=kc

The Astros sign nine

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11029518¬ebook_id=11034726&vkey=notebook_hou&fext=.jsp&c_id=hou

The A's sign frickin 17 already

http://www.csnbayarea.com/06/11/10/As-Agree-to-Terms-with-17-Draft-Picks/landing.html?blockID=251999&feedID=2797

The Phillies, Braves, and Rays all sign first round picks, (though in the Rays case, their second pick, 31st overall, a compensatory pick for not signing their pick from a year ago and the Braves pick is the 35th overall, supplemental first).

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11041136¬ebook_id=11046180&vkey=notebook_min&fext=.jsp&c_id=min

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11028294&vkey=draftcentral2010&fext=.jsp

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100609&content_id=10987836¬ebook_id=10987838&vkey=notebook_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

You can read the articles if you want but I will point out some highlights. The 35th overall pick in the draft signed for 800k, which seems to be really low, and either his agent didn't do his job, he really wanted to sign quick, or he got picked so early because the Braves knew he would sign cheap (possibly a combination of all three as well).

Out of the A's picks, the earliest drafted pick signed was their 6th rounder, so they still got a lot of work to do in signing their top picks same with the Royals, the earliest drafted player they signed was their 6th rounder, and the Astros earliest drafted player was their 4th rounder, with their next earliest being 8th.

I'm sorry I haven't posted more info, but I figured this could help a bit here and get some discussion going.

The Twins sign two

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11041136¬ebook_id=11046180&vkey=notebook_min&fext=.jsp&c_id=min

The Royals sign seven

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11041140¬ebook_id=11043346&vkey=notebook_hou&fext=.jsp&c_id=kc

The Astros sign nine

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11029518¬ebook_id=11034726&vkey=notebook_hou&fext=.jsp&c_id=hou

The A's sign frickin 17 already

http://www.csnbayarea.com/06/11/10/As-Agree-to-Terms-with-17-Draft-Picks/landing.html?blockID=251999&feedID=2797

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11041136¬ebook_id=11046180&vkey=notebook_min&fext=.jsp&c_id=min

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11028294&vkey=draftcentral2010&fext=.jsp

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100609&content_id=10987836¬ebook_id=10987838&vkey=notebook_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

I'm sorry I haven't posted more info, but I figured this could help a bit here and get some discussion going.

On signing draftees

Justin Mos — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 05:41:14 -0000

The Twins sign two

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11041136¬ebook_id=11046180&vkey=notebook_min&fext=.jsp&c_id=min

The Royals sign seven

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11041140¬ebook_id=11043346&vkey=notebook_hou&fext=.jsp&c_id=kc

The Astros sign nine

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11029518¬ebook_id=11034726&vkey=notebook_hou&fext=.jsp&c_id=hou

The A's sign frickin 17 already

http://www.csnbayarea.com/06/11/10/As-Agree-to-Terms-with-17-Draft-Picks/landing.html?blockID=251999&feedID=2797

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11041136¬ebook_id=11046180&vkey=notebook_min&fext=.jsp&c_id=min

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11028294&vkey=draftcentral2010&fext=.jsp

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100609&content_id=10987836¬ebook_id=10987838&vkey=notebook_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

I'm sorry I don't have more info, but I figured this could help a bit here and get some discussion going.

The Twins sign two

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11041136¬ebook_id=11046180&vkey=notebook_min&fext=.jsp&c_id=min

The Royals sign seven

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11041140¬ebook_id=11043346&vkey=notebook_hou&fext=.jsp&c_id=kc

The Astros sign nine

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11029518¬ebook_id=11034726&vkey=notebook_hou&fext=.jsp&c_id=hou

The A's sign frickin 17 already

http://www.csnbayarea.com/06/11/10/As-Agree-to-Terms-with-17-Draft-Picks/landing.html?blockID=251999&feedID=2797

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11041136¬ebook_id=11046180&vkey=notebook_min&fext=.jsp&c_id=min

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100610&content_id=11028294&vkey=draftcentral2010&fext=.jsp

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100609&content_id=10987836¬ebook_id=10987838&vkey=notebook_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

I'm sorry I don't have more info, but I figured this could help a bit here and get some discussion going.

The Yankees beat us at our own game!

Justin Mos — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 03:05:51 -0000

Having NH as our GM, I thought that we were guaranteed to do at least one thing better than any other team, even the Yankees, and I turned out to be wrong. No, it isn't outspending the opposition, though I am pretty sure we will do that again this year. No it is not picking players who will instantly be downgraded by some people just because they are now in the Pirates organization, (though with some less intelligent people, this might be true as well). It all comes down to one thing I thought we were a lock for but the Yankees are beating us this year at it.

Picking Right Handed Pitchers with Zac(k) in their name. We drafted a total of one, Zachary Weis, with the 297th overall pick of the draft. The Yankees, well, thet drafted Zachary Varse at 355th overall, and Zachary Muding at 925th overall. Really, we draft 16 RHPs in 2 days of the draft and have NH, and we still can't get more Zac(k)s than the Yankees? I'm through with this team...