SB Nation User Blog: Peter Bendix

No More Gray Squirrels

Peter Bendix — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:12:23 -0000

“Hey Peter,” my friend Marc asked me on a cold Boston day back in April, “do you have any interest in blogging about baseball?”

I enjoyed writing and I enjoyed baseball, so I thought this would be a fun opportunity. Never did I expect to meet and engage with so many interesting and intelligent people during the season.

Now, as I bid farewell, I want to thank each and every person who has read Beyond the Boxscore. I know that sounds corny, but it’s true: we write for you, and I’m flattered that you took time out of your day to read our thoughts, analysis and ramblings. I appreciate your comments, compliments, and criticism. I appreciate your insights and incisive questions, and I enjoyed discussing the glorious game of baseball with you. You pushed me to be a better writer, a better analyst, and a better baseball fan.

I especially want to thank Marc Normandin and RJ Anderson for offering this opportunity to lowly ol’ me, and for not sending me to low-A ball after they saw what I could (or couldn’t) do. I want to thank Dan Turkenkopf and Sky Kalkman for being such excellent colleagues, along with Harry Pavlidis and Chris Quick, who I didn’t get to know as well but, judging from their work on BtB and elsewhere, will help take Beyond the Boxscore to new heights. I also want to thank David Appleman for the opportunity to contribute to the excellent community over at Fangraphs, as well as Dave Studeman at Hardball Times for hosting an article I co-wrote.

As for you, reader, I only ask that you keep on reading. There is some incredible stuff being done, both here on BtB and in other places across the web. Keep asking questions, keep testing ideas, and keep watching baseball. The baseball community is a large and welcoming place, and there is room for many different people with many different opinions. Only through research, discussion and criticism can we begin to unravel our favorite pasttime’s mysteries, mysteries that keep us up at night, mysteries that keep us warm in the winter, and mysteries that enthrall us throughout the summer months.

As I prepare to engage in the next chapter of my life, I hear Branch Rickey’s words in my head: “Never surrender opportunity for security.” And, as I seek out my next opportunity, I know that BtB has dedicated writers – and incredible people – who will continue to move baseball analysis further beyond the boxscore.

Rays sign Pat Burrell to a Steal of a Deal

Peter Bendix — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:46:52 -0000

The Rays have reportedly inked Pat Burrell to a 2-year deal worth $16 million total.

Think about that.

Pat Burrell is going to be paid $8 million a year. For only two years. His successor in Philadelphia – an older, less effective, worse fielder (contrary to what his employers may think) – is getting paid $30 million over three years. And Burrell wasn’t offered arbitration, so the Rays won’t have to give up a draft pick to sign him.

Seriously, what a deal.

Finances aside, Burrell is EXACTLY what the Rays need: a right-handed, middle-of-the-order bat. Burrell is a terrible fielder, but will only have to play the field in an emergency, and will become the full-time DH. He hit .250/.367/.507 last year, and has posted OBPs of over .360 (including three years over .380) every year since 2004, and has slugged over .500 for four consecutive years. He crushes lefties (.276/.410/.540 in his career) but is very good against righties too (career .251/.352/.467). Even though he has spent his entire career in Philadelphia (and has played in a hitter-friendly park for most of it), his career home OPS is 851, and his career road OPS is 853.

Last season, Eric Hinkse had a wRAA (weighted runs above average) of 6.5. Cliff Floyd was 4.8. Together they were 11.3. Pat Burrell was 24.3 (and he was 30, 24, and 32 over the previous three years). It’s fair to assume that Burrell is at least approximately twice as good as the players who DHed for the Rays last year, and is approximately a 1.5 – 2 win upgrade (at least) over the previous DHs.

That may not sound like a lot, but think about it this way: Eric Hinske and Cliff Floyd were actually fairly productive for the Rays in 2008 – 11.3 wRAA is nothing to sneeze at. Even if Burrell is “only” twice as good as those two, it’s not like those two were bad in the first place – so twice as good is saying something. Furthermore, Burrell is only one player, so the Rays in essence free up a roster spot by not having to use a platoon at DH.

Burrell is also very low-risk, having an established track record of consistent success throughout his career – especially over the last four years. His OPS+ since 2005 has ranged between 122 and 128 – now that’s consistency.

Perhaps the most amazing part of this deal is not just that the Rays managed to upgrade one of their few remaining “weaknesses” (again, Floyd and Hinske were actually pretty good last year), but that they were able to do so on such favorable terms. Although Burrell is going to be 32 years old next season, the Rays are only on the hook for two years. Burrell may begin to decline as he exits his prime, but he’s a very good bet to remain approximately as good over the next two years as he has been for the last four. Predicting one and two years down the road is much, much easier than predicting four or more years.

And the Rays are only going to be paying him $8 mil per season! That’s truly incredible, especially considering that Raul Ibanez is going to be making more money per season, and is signed for more years. $8 million per season has not been anywhere close to the going rate for free agents of Burrell’s caliber in recent years. To put this deal in perspective, the cost-conscious Minnesota Twins signed Michael Cuddyer to a three-year, $24 million (that’s $8 million per season for those of who you failed second grade math) extension one year ago. And he was still under the team’s control at the time. So the Twins decided that they should extend Cuddyer because, at the time, paying him $24 million over three years was actually saving the team money.

Think about that: Pat Burrell is getting paid the same amount of money per season, for one less season, than Michael Cuddyer, even though Burrell was a free agent when he signed his contract, and Cuddyer was not.

(Incidentally, when he signed his deal, Cuddyer was coming off of his second best season, in which he hit .276/.356/.433. The previous year he had hit .284/.362/.504 – eerily similar to Burrell’s line last year of .250/.367/.507, no? Of course, Cuddyer’s OPS+ over the previous four years were 95, 97, 99, and 97).

The Rays mitigate risk by inking Burrell to only a two year deal, and are able to retain a semblance of financial flexibility by getting him for only $8 mil per year. Beyond that, he’s twice as good as the already-decent guys who DHed last season, and fits the exact description of what the Rays need: a right-handed hitting, high-OBP guy with pop.

It’s difficult to improve a team that made it to the World Series and had a third-order Pythagorean record of 97-65. But by replacing Edwin Jackson with David Price, adding Matt Joyce as a right fielder and inserting Pat Burrell as the DH, the Rays have done just that.

Don’t give the division to the Yankees just yet.

This is funny.

Peter Bendix — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:30:02 -0000

This is funny.

I don't know how to sum this up. If you watch this and have any suggestions, feel free to post them...

Verducci Effect Update: 7 Risky Pitchers for 2009

Peter Bendix — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 03:55:10 -0000

“It's like training for a marathon. You need to build stamina incrementally. The unofficial industry standard is that no young pitcher should throw more than 30 more innings than he did the previous season. It's a general rule of thumb, and one I've been tracking for about a decade. When teams violate the incremental safeguard, it's amazing how often they pay for it.”

So wrote Tom Verducci last February, illustrating what he called the “Year After Effect,” but has since gained popularity as the “Verducci Effect.” Let’s start by looking at the seven players that Verducci identified as being particularly risky for the 2008 season, and then let’s try to identify some risky players for 2009.

Here are the pitchers that Tom Verducci listed as being possible victims of the so-called Verducci Effect in 2008:

Ian Kennedy
Fausto Carmona
Ubaldo Jimenez
Tom Gorzelanny
Dustin McGowan
Chad Gaudin
Yovani Gallardo

Wow – pretty convincing evidence for this theory. Kennedy was awful at the major league level; Carmona was hurt for much of the year and ineffective when healthy; Gorzelanny’s ERA went up nearly three full runs; Gallardo got hurt and missed most of the season (although this is unfair, as his injury was a fluke unrelated to his shoulder or arm).

Jimenez defied the Verducci Effect, pitching nearly 200 innings and showing tremendous improvement. Gaudin pitched primarily out of the bullpen and maintained his production. However, five of the seven players that Verducci identified as being particularly risky were either hurt or very ineffective in 2008.

Of course, caveats abound: there is no control study, and we know that pitchers – especially those under 25 – are inherently risky, not just pitchers who have had big innings increases. Furthermore, this is a very selective sample: in order to accumulate a large increase in innings, you have to be pretty effective – perhaps even more effective than your “true ability,” thus making regression more likely. Still, the results are convincing, and Verducci writes of similar results from past seasons as well.

So what about 2009? Well, we can identify seven pitchers once again who may be at increased risk due to the so-called Verducci Effect.

Jon Lester (162 IP last year, 237 this year – 76 inning increase). Lester’s situation is certainly unique: he has progressed nicely in his recovery from cancer, and seemed to gain strength as the season progressed. I’d subjectively guess that Lester is less likely to be effected by the innings increase than another pitcher, simply due to Lester’s conditioning program that allowed him to re-gain his strength (and then some) after cancer. I have also full faith in the Red Sox’s ability to handle him appropriately. Still, a 76 inning increase is enormous, and probably makes Lester a risk.

Cole Hamels (190 IP last year, 262 this year – 72 inning increase). Hamels pitched 35 innings in the postseason this year after 227 regular season innings. Hamels had shed his tag of being injury prone, but he’s still only 24 years old, and a 72 inning increase is huge.

Chad Billingsley (147 IP last year, 212 this year – 65 inning increase). Billingsley’s innings have been steadily increased for several years now, but a 65 inning increase is enormous. Billingsley is big and athletic and has no history of injury, but it still a risk for 2009.

John Danks (139 IP last year, 195 this year -56 inning increase) – Danks was very effective in 2008, thanks in no small part to the introduction of the patented Cooper Cutter. However, he also saw a huge jump in his innings pitched, leading him to be pretty risky for next season.

Mike Pelfrey (146 IP last year, 200 this year – 54 inning increase). Pelfrey is a prime candidate to be a victim of the Verducci Effect. I can’t fault the Mets for the way they used him in 2008, since they were in a heated playoff race and Pelfrey was very effective. However, he threw many more innings than he ever had, making it fairly likely that Pelfrey will experience an injury and/or ineffectiveness in 2009. It’s far from a certainty, but if I was a Mets fan, I’d be very worried.

Tim Lincecum (177 IP last year, 226 this year – 49 inning increase). Yes, we all understand that Lincecum is a freak of nature – even by major league pitchers’ standards. Still, a 49 inning increase is nothing to sneeze at, especially in a young pitcher. I personally think he’s likely to be effective once again in 2009, but the innings increase is noteworthy nonetheless.

Jair Jurrjens (142 IP last year, 188 this year – 46 inning increase). Jurrjens’s innings increase isn’t quite as large as some of the other players on this list, but it still well exceeds the 30-IP threshold. Although he was a pleasant surprise for the Braves in 2008, Jurrjens may experience injury and/or regression in 2009.

Can the Royals win the AL Central?

Peter Bendix — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 20:32:37 -0000

In this space, I have been quite critical of the Royals this offseason – from the Coco Crisp trade to the Mike Jacobs deal to the Kyle Farnsworth signing, I disagreed with the direction that the team was heading. In short, I believed that the Royals were being short-sighted, and making moves designed to aspire to mediocrity, rather than long-term success.

I more or less still believe this to be true: it’s not that moves such as the Coco Crisp trade were bad in a vacuum, but they represented only short-term marginal upgrades, not enough to get the Royals into contention in a year or two, and not enough to give them long-term hope of contending.

That being said, I want to examine the question: can the Royals win the AL Central in 2009?

This idea is not a preposterous as it may first seem. The Central was relatively weak in 2008 and is poised to be underwhelming again in 2009. Last year, the White Sox won the division and also had the most third-order wins of any team in the division, posting a third-order record of 88-75. The Royals finished last, with a respectable third-order record of 76-86. The 12 game difference between the first place and last place teams was by far the smallest difference of all of the divisions in baseball. Furthermore, the division looks like it will be tightly bunched again in 2009: there are no teams that stand out as being awful, and there are no teams that could claim to be elite, either.

In 2008, the Royals were poor at run prevention, but not awful. Although their 4.48 team ERA ranked 22nd in baseball, they weren’t far off from the 16th place team, which had a 4.36 ERA. The Royals actually had the 12th best Park Adjusted Defensive Efficiency in baseball, despite running David DeJesus and Joey Gathright out in center field; replacing them with Coco Crisp should help their defense considerably.

Furthermore, the Royals were 25th in runs scored, thanks in large part to a pathetic .320 team OBP, tied for fourth-worst in baseball. Ironically, the Royals publically stated their need for more OBP and traded for Mike Jacobs (and his .299 OBP) soon afterwards. However, even though Jacobs is probably not going to top a .320 OBP next year, he will likely be an improvement over Ross Gload, who hit .273/.317/.348 in 388 at bats at first base last year. If the Royals turn to young slugger Kila Ka’aihue, who posted an MLE of .243/.392/.443 last year, they could see further production from their first base position.

Billy Butler is also a good bet for improvement, as the 22-year-old hit .275/.324/.400 last year but is probably better than that (his minor league track record is immaculate, and after being recalled from the minors on June 28 Butler hit .284/.320/.444 over the rest of the season this year).

Mike Aviles is very likely to decline, but could remain a solid shortstop, and even a decline from Aviles should make the Royals be awfully glad that they got rid of Tony Pena Jr., who hit an incredibly bad .169/.189/.209 last year (I don’t know what’s more amazing – that Pena was that bad, or that Pena received 225 at bats despite being that bad).

As my colleague David Golebiewski wrote over at RotoGraphs, Alex Gordon is also a good bet to improve in 2009. Additionally, after being the beneficiary of some good luck in 2007, Brian Bannister was afflicted with some bad luck in 2008; Bannister’s 5.56 tRA* doesn’t exactly inspire visions of grandeur in his future, but suggests that Bannister may be able to improve upon his abysmal 5.76 ERA.

Additionally, Luke Hochevar may be better than his 2008 indicated as well: although Hochevar posted a 5.01 ERA, it was accompanied by a 4.98 tRA* (which translates to an ERA of around 4.58). Again, not amazing, but better than 2008.

Finally, the Royals will benefit from playing in the AL Central. None of their competitors is likely to be among the league’s elite, as each has significant question marks about their team. It’s very possible that the 87-88 wins could win the division. If you assume that the Royals are somewhere around a 78-win team right now, it only takes one or two surprise performances and/or a little luck to get that number up to 87 wins.

The key to the Royals having a legitimate chance of contending in 2009 is threefold: they need their players to perform well (and need something somewhat unexpected to happen, like Billy Butler breaking out); they need to outplay their Pythagorean record (although probably not by that much), and they need other teams in the division to perform relatively poorly (in other words, they need everyone to be under 90 wins). While each of these elements is unlikely, it’s not altogether unreasonable that the Royals could contend for the division in 2009.

Giants sign Randy Johnson

Peter Bendix — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 23:19:10 -0000

What a weird offseason in San Francisco.

The Giants signed Randy Johnson to a one year deal worth $8 million yesterday. This signing comes on the heels of several other acquisitions: Edgar Renteria, Bobby Howry and Jeremy Affeldt. This is a disturbing trend – that’s four smart, sensible moves by Giants GM Brian Sabean.

All of these deals are short-term deals (two years or less), thereby limiting the team’s risk. Furthermore, there is reason to believe that each of these players is going to be productive – perhaps even more so than they were last year.

Johnson had a 3.91 ERA last year, but a 3.76 FIP and should benefit from gettingout of the hitter-friendly environment of Chase Field. While he may not pitch 200 innings this year, Johnson did manage 184 innings last year as well as 205 innings in 2006 and 225 in 2005. While Johnson’s fastball now hovers around 90-91 MPH, he still struck out 8.46 hitters per nine last year, while walking only 2.15 per nine. In other words, despite his advanced age, Randy Johnson has a very reasonable chance of being an above-average starting pitcher for 170+ innings next year.

The scariest thing about this development is that the San Francisco Giants now have to be considered outside threats in the NL West. Don’t laugh – it’s true. As pathetic as their offense is, their pitching is so good as to make up for it. You know how good Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain are; Jonathan Sanchez is on the brink of breaking out (although his ERA was 5.01 last year, his FIP was 3.85 and there’s reason to believe he can be even better than that); Barry Zito had a 4.33 ERA and 80/54 K/BB ratio in his last 106 innings of 2008; and Randy Johnson is Randy Johnson.

Furthermore, there’s reason to believe that Matt Cain and/or Jonathan Sanchez could join Lincecum as an elite pitcher in 2009. Both of them have tremendous stuff, and there’s a chance that either/both of them “figure it out” in 2009, elevating them to the level of the NL’s best. Of course, this may not happen, but even if both pitch worse than their stuff, they should each be productive pitchers.

On the other hand, questions abound – how well will Lincecum hold up after his huge workload last season? Can Barry Zito build on his “strong” finish to 2008? Can Randy Johnson’s back hold up? And the Giants lack quality depth for their rotation as well. And, then there are their offensive issues. So there is considerable risk for the Giants 2009 season, and chances are they will not compete for the division. However, there is a reasonable chance that the Giants can contend in what should be a very weak division – if they avoid setbacks, and one or two things go their way (like Sanchez elevating his game, for example), then the Giants could really surprise some people.

Yankees sign Mark Teixeira; Billy Beane Rejoices

Peter Bendix — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 21:07:50 -0000

Maybe the Yankees read Beyond the Boxscore after all.

In the space we have been lamenting the Yanks’ seeming lack of interest in Mark Teixeira, a player who would immediately improve their offense and defense and is likely to age gracefully. And today comes word that Teixeira will sign an 8-year contract with the Yankees. As such, it’s now fair to say that this has been a good offseason for Brian Cashman.

With Teixeira in tow, the Yankees offense becomes formidable once again, rather than league average. Teixeira instantly improves their infield defense, and allows Nick Swisher to move to the outfield, thus improving the outfield defense too (assuming he’s not in center). The Yankees now can rotate Swisher, Hideki Matsui, Xavier Nady and Johnny Damon between DH and the two corner outfield spots, leaving Melky Cabrera (or Mike Cameron) in center, and thus improving the defense even further.

This is perfect for the Yankees: Nady is best deployed in part-time action, against all lefties and maybe a few righties. Matsui can avoid lefties (not that he’s particularly bad against them anyway), and both he and Damon are significant injury risks. Swisher should rebound from an awful 2008 and can man any outfield position.

The situation gets a bit murkier if it turns out that Jorge Posada can’t be a full-time catcher, but even if that’s the case, Posada can DH some of the time, benching someone like Matsui. The Yankees can try to trade any of these players, but they have no pressing needs and may better off keeping them in case of injury.

While it appears that the Yankees stole Teixeira from the clutches of the Red Sox, the big losers in this situation are the Angels.

While losing Francisco Rodriguez is of relatively little importance to them, losing Teixeira is a huge blow. Their offense was below-average last year and lacks upside once again in 2009, and downgrading from Teixeira to Kendry Morales would be a huge loss. There is still time for the Angels to improve their team, but simply signing Brian Fuentes isn’t the answer. We’re talking about an Angels team whose third-order Pythagorean record was 84-78, and who just lost Mark Teixeira and Francisco Rodriguez. Somewhere, Billy Beane (and Jon Daniels) is smiling.

This is, of course, a big upgrade for the Yankees, but it doesn’t guarantee anything. Last season, the Yankees finished with 91 third-order wins, behind the Blue Jays (92), Rays (97) and Red Sox (102). While the Yankees have undoubtedly improved themselves, they can’t be assured of a playoff spot, let alone a division title. The Rays and Red Sox should once again be very competitive, and while the Yankees signings may have closed the gap it also probably hasn’t created much of a gap between the Yanks and their competitors, either.

The AL East should once again be a dogfight – it’s very possible that this division will contain the three best teams in baseball. The Yankees may be the slight favorites, but at this point the division is way too close to call. Should make for a fun season.

Should the Padres Trade Adrian Gonzalez?

Peter Bendix — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 19:18:59 -0000

The Padres are clearly in rebuilding mode, coming off of a 63-win season and with little hope of competing next year, even in a weak division. They have made their intention of trading Jake Peavy known, and even though talks have stalled, Peavy is still very likely to be dealt this offseason.

That begs the question: should they trade their other big ticket, Adrian Gonzalez?

The answer, of course, is that it depends on what they would receive in return. However, there are few players who would command more on the trade market than Gonzalez, and it may behoove the Padres to deal him now.

Everyone knows that Adrian Gonzalez is good, but few people understand just how good he is. He hit .279/.361/.510 this year with 36 homers, a slight improvement in his offensive production from last year (when he hit .282/.347/.502 with 30 homers). However, overall offense declined in 2008, leading Gonzalez to have an OPS+ of 138, as compared to 125 last year (and 127 in 2006). Gonzalez is a lefty who struggles against left-handed pitching, but is still decent: he has a career line of .248/.308/.427 against southpaws – he certainly doesn’t need to be platooned.

However, Gonzo has been hampered by playing half of his games in PETCO Park. His career line at home is .264/.336/.439, as compared to a .299/.360/.544 line on the road. Of course, we can’t take these splits at face value: unlike every other non-Padre, Gonzalez’s road stats don’t include games played in PETCO, and he has played 38 games in Chase and Coors Field every year. However, there’s no question that PETCO has significantly hampered Gonzalez’s overall offensive statistics.

Defensively, the numbers and the subjective ratings disagree. Gonzalez won a gold glove this year – not that that’s a reliable indicator of defensive prowess – but ranked below-average according to both UZR and John Dewan’s +/- numbers. The truth probably lies somewhere in between – while Gonzalez is not the defensive wizard of a Mark Teixeira or Albert Pujols, he’s certainly not an albatross like Ryan Howard.

The key to Gonzalez’s trade value is his team-friendly contract. Gonzo can’t be a free agent until the 2012 season, and is due a total of $13.25 million over the next three seasons – his age 27-29 seasons, arguably the most productive seasons of any hitter’s career. Gonzalez has also missed a total of seven games over the last three seasons, and played in all 162 games this year.

So what might he command on the trade market? Well, his contract would allow small-market clubs like the Indians, Twins, Rays and maybe even the Marlins to get involved in the bidding, rather than having it relegated to large-market teams (like the Johan Santana sweepstakes). Gonzalez is extremely low risk and offers a very high reward – he has patience and power, and will be entering his prime having already established a very high level of play. He may lose a little bit in a transfer to the more difficult American League, but his numbers can only go up upon leaving PETCO Park.

Justin rated Gonzo as 31 runs above replacement this year – a 3-win player. However, that includes a -4 rating for defense, which I think undersells Gonzalez’s defensive ability, as well as only a +47 offensive rating, which probably undersells his offense, thanks to PETCO Park.

If we assume that Gonzalez is going to be somewhere around 4-5 wins above replacement for each of the next thee years, we come up with a value of ~$22 million per season, or roughly $66 million over the next three years. And remember, Gonzalez will only be paid $13.25 million in that time.

Thus, it follows that teams would be willing to part with top-notch prospects in return for Gonzalez. They essentially can give up $53 million “worth” of players and still break even – and even this isn’t a fair comparison, because it doesn’t factor in A) the inherent risk associated with prospects, even top prospects, and B) the increased value that Gonzalez adds to a team on the cusp of success, and it’s most likely a team like this – rather than someone like the Pirates – is going to acquire him, should he be dealt.

It’s rarely in a team’s best interests to trade top-notch prospects for a “veteran” – especially for smaller market teams that rely on cost-controlled players to compete. However, in the case of Adrian Gonzalez, it would behoove many teams to give up a lot in return for Gonzalez, thanks to the unique combination of his low risk, his high amount of production, his age, and his contract status. Therefore, it’s likely that the Padres could get a significant haul in return for him. I’m talking a type of deal that would eclipse what the Rangers received for Mark Teixeira (Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Elvis Andrus, Neftali Feliz, Matt Harrison, and Beau Jones).

Adrian Gonzalez’s trade value could be immense, and the Padres are not going to compete this year (or probably next year). It makes sense for them to attempt to deal Gonzalez, and it makes sense for a whole host of other teams to part with a lot in return for him.

The JJ Putz Three-Way Trade

Peter Bendix — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 02:28:42 -0000

Mets obtain JJ Putz, Sean Green and Jeremy Reed.

Indians obtain Joe Smith and Luis Valbuena.

Mariners obtain Franklin Gutierrez, Jason Vargas, Endy Chavez, Aaron Heilman, Mike Carp, Ezequiel Carrara and Maikel Cleto

Although it only involves one big name, this 12-player trade probably qualifies as a blockbuster. Let’s examine the deal.

For the Mets: Obviously, Putz is the prize in this trade. In Putz, the Mets get a guy who was perhaps the most dominant reliever in the game in 2006 and 2007, before running into injury woes. However, it is those injury woes that allowed the Mets to get Putz without giving up any amazing prospects. Although Putz returned to action in 2008, he didn’t quite return to form (although he was very good), and questions remain about whether he can stave off injuries in the future. Furthermore, he won’t be cheap: Putz is due $5 million this year, and has a club option worth $8.6 million for next year. Yes, that’s probably below market value, but it’s not chump change either. If healthy, Putz can be a dominant force in the back end of the Mets bullpen.

Reed is very similar to Endy Chavez – actually, Reed is younger and cheaper than Chavez – but is probably miscast as an everyday player, especially in a corner. He can have some value as a defensive-minded fourth outfielder, but the Mets should still be looking for an everyday corner outfielder.

Green has posted xFIPs over right around 4.00 over the last two seasons, and has some value in a major league bullpen. He’s probably not quite as good as Joe Smith, but is worth having as a middle reliever.

The Mets are in the position where they can afford to gamble on someone like Putz. The money is of very little consequence to them, and a healthy Putz would be a tremendous benefit to their bullpen. They gave up value, but nothing irreplaceable.

However, Omar Minaya should not assume that Putz will be healthy for 70 or 80 innings this year. The Mets’s problem in the past has been an embarrassing lack of depth, and this trade does little to help. If Putz (or Francisco Rodriguez) gets hurt, the Mets bullpen will once again be exposed, with little to help them in the short-term. The pen has the chance to be above-average, but also the chance to be awful. For a team like the Mets, which harbors legitimate playoff hopes in 2009, they had better make sure that they have a Plan B and Plan C for their bullpen.

For the Indians: The Tribe once again cashes in on the presence of Grady Sizemore by trading a guy who profiles better as a center fielder. They did this with Coco Crisp in 2005 (not that that worked out particularly well for either team), and they do it again by trading Gutierrez. Gutierrez fields (and hits) like a center fielder, but was playing right field for the Indians. Certainly, his defense was valuable there, but it’s a lot easier to find a corner outfielder than a center fielder. In return, the Indians get another legitimate piece to add to their bullpen in Joe Smith, and an intriguing second baseman in Luis Valbuena.

In his first two years in the majors, the 23-year-old Smith has posted xFIPS of 3.73 and 3.80. His tRA* has been 4.25 and 4.27 (remember, to convert tRA* to an ERA scale, subtract .40 from tRA*). He’s a side-arming righty who shouldn’t face lefties in important situations, but strikes out over eight batters per nine innings and gets grounders on over 60% of his balls in play. There’s a good amount of value in a pitcher like that.

Valbuena, 23, is probably not ready for the majors. He had a nice season in 2008, hitting .301/.380/.430 between double- and triple-A, and showing excellent plate discipline in the process (he walked 59 times and struck out 69 times). I don’t know much about his defense, but it is supposed to be above-average. His defense is vital: as a second baseman, Valbuena could make it in the majors, but if he has to move to left field he probably won’t hit enough. Valbuena is not terribly young and didn’t show much offensively prior to the 2008 season, so he will have to prove that his 08 isn’t a fluke.

This trade is interesting for the Indians. They cash in on Gutierrez’s value as a center fielder, but they didn’t add a starting pitcher or a ready-for-the-majors infielder, their two biggest needs. Mark Shapiro clearly felt that this would be the best trade the Indians could find for Gutierrez, who has more value for another team than he does for the Indians. Smith will be a nice cog in what should be an above-average bullpen, and Valbuena has value as a young second baseman who can hit a little too. However, it appears that Shapiro made this deal with the long-term in mind, rather than as a short-term fix to the Tribe’s problems. That’s not necessarily bad, but it means the Indians still have more moves to make for the 09 season.

For the Mariners: They are the winners of this deal. They have absolutely no use for a reliever like Putz, who’s a big injury risk and is due nearly $14 over the next two years, no matter how good he is when healthy. They are able to add both quality and quantity to their system in return for a guy who had little value to them. They essentially swap Reed for Chavez, which is probably a wash – Chavez is probably a bit better, but is older and more expensive too. They lose Green, but again, he’s hardly an integral piece, and the bullpen is the least important part of a rebuilding club.

The key to this deal for Seattle is Franklin Gutierrez. Yes, he’s a career .258/.308/.409 hitter – and he’s been awful against right-handers (.246/.298/.378 in his career). However, his defense is off-the-charts. He has rated as the best right fielder in baseball for two years in a row, according to John Dewan’s plus/minus numbers. Other metrics have his defense rated similarly high. If he puts his up a 700 OPS with awesome defense in center field, he’s a very valuable player. Furthermore, he’s only going to be 26 next season, and his minor league numbers suggest that he could possibly improve offensively. Finally, he won’t even be arbitration eligible until 2010, and can’t be a free agent until 2013.

The Mariners also buy low on Aaron Heilman. While he posted a 5.21 ERA last year, he also had a very high home run rate and a low strand rate. It’s unclear whether Seattle intends to use Heilman as a starter or a reliever, but either way, Safeco should help build his trade value back up, allowing the Mariners to spin him to another team if they so desire.

In Carp, Vargas, Carrara and Cleto, the Mariners add additional depth to their system. Each of these players has a legitimate chance of contributing at the major league level, even if none projects to be a star (although Cleto has a higher ceiling than the other players, as well as more risk). Every minor league system needs guys like this, and occasionally they outperform expectations. The fact that they are additional players in this deal, rather than the only players, makes this an outstanding deal for the Mariners.

While Seattle may not have received any star players, the fact that they were able to get this much for Putz, Reed, and Green is impressive. Their outfield defense should be spectacular (and could help drive up value on some of their mediocre pitchers), and they added a tremendous amount of quality depth to their minor league system. All in exchange for a reliever who has extensive injury concerns and is due almost $14 million over the next two years.

While Jack Z and company have only been in charge for a short time, all signs point to an impressive regime righting the ship in the northwest.

Just How Much of an Upgrade Are CC Sabathia and AJ Burnett?

Peter Bendix — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 03:55:36 -0000

In 2008, the Yankees were 7th in the AL in runs scored, 8th in ERA, and 25th in baseball in defensive efficiency. So how do the Yankees choose to solve these problems? By throwing $250 million at the top two free agent starters on the market.

Don’t get me wrong: Sabathia and Burnett are excellent pitchers, and as lucrative as their two deals are, I don’t necessarily think they’re terrible deals for the Yankees. Unlike just about every other team, the Yankees can afford to overpay players, both in terms of AAV and years. If Burnett or Sabathia get hurt, the Yankees will still be able to make other moves to improve their teams, so neither contract is likely to be crippling. And if healthy, both men are excellent pitchers. The thing is, the Yankees pitching was already pretty good, and the Burnett/Sabathia combo may not be quite the upgrade that many Yankee fans think.

In 2008, the Yankees received 448 innings from the trio of Mike Mussina, Darrell Rasner, and Sidney Ponson, none of whom will return in 2009. These three combined to give up 219 runs, good for a 4.39 ERA. Let’s charitably assume that Sabathia and Burnett can cover these 448 innings between the two of them next season (let’s give 248 innings to Sabathia and 200 innings to Burnett). Obviously, this is somewhat optimistic, as it’s likely that both pitchers won’t quite reach these innings totals, but let’s run with it.

Marcel predicts Sabathia to have a 3.22 ERA next season, and Burnett to have a 3.97 ERA. If this holds true, that means that Sabathia would allow 89 runs over 248 innings and Burnett would allow 88 runs over 200 innings. Thus, in the 448 innings between them, Burnett and Sabathia would allow 177 runs combined.

As you recall, Mussina, Rasner, and Ponson allowed 219 runs in the same amount of innings last season. Thus, Sabathia and Burnett would qualify as a 42-run upgrade, or approximately four wins. Remember, we’re assuming that Sabathia and Burnett are able to total 448 innings between them, an unlikely assumption.

Rather, it’s more likely that some of those innings will have to go to the bullpen, which is collectively as not as good as Burnett and Sabathia. However, even a charitable assumption nets the Yankees only four marginal wins over Mussina/Rasner/Ponson.

Of course, this is somewhat unfair: Mussina will not return in 2009 no matter what, and if they Yankees didn’t sign Sabathia or Burnett, they would likely have to give his innings to an inferior pitcher. But the point remains: as good as Burnett and Sabathia are, they’re only a four-win upgrade over the pitchers they’re replacing, because the Yankees pitching staff in 2008 wasn’t that bad. Four wins is no small amount – especially for a team like the Yankees that will probably be fighting for their playoff lives – but it’s probably less of an upgrade than many Yankee fans, and perhaps the front office themselves, believe.

The Yankees pitching should be even better thanks to a full season from Chien-Ming Wang and perhaps Joba Chamberlain. However, none of this changes the fact that their offense is average and their defense is awful. If anything, we can expect their offense to be worse next season: yes, Posada will be back, they’ve acquired Swisher, and we can expect some improvement from Robinson Cano. However, losing Bobby Abreu and Jason Giambi will be a big blow, Johnny Damon is probably going to regress, and Alex Rodriguez and Derek Jeter will be a year older. Furthermore, their team defense is still in shambles (although adding Mike Cameron would be a huge boost).

If only there was a free agent available who could improve the Yankees offense and defense at the same time. Ideally, this guy would be a switch-hitter with patience and power, as well as an established track record of excellence. It would be nice if he was relatively young – say, 28 or so – and be athletic enough so as to probably age well. Alas, there is no one like that available.

Oh wait – yes there is. Even with the additions of Sabathia and Burnett, the Yankees should sign Mark Teixeira. Adding him to this team would take them from contenders to favorites, now and in the future. Their offense and defense would both be a lot better right away, and the Yankees would have, on paper, the very best team in baseball. Adding Sabathia and Burnett is a nice start to the offseason, but it won’t be complete unless they add Teixeira as well.