SB Nation User Blog: fphjr01

Dealing with Ryan Howard

fphjr01 — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 12:34:57 -0000

I'm wondering if it is time to start re-thinking the Braves current approach with Ryan Howard. In his last 4 games against the Braves, he has been able to accomplish the following:

3-3, 2HR's, 3RBI's (i.e. he won the game offesnively by himself)

3-3, 2HR's, 4RBI's (accounted for all of Philly's runs)

0-4, 1RBI (yes! we got him!)

1-3, GWHR

Another important point to consider is Howard's platoon splits this year, which are the following:

vs. RHP: .311/.389/.686

vs. LHP: .195/.279/.341

Seeing as all of our starters are RH, I really can't see any reason to continue to pitch to this guy. After Howard, Werth has been dangerous, but has an .806 OPS vs. RH compared to a 1.119 OPS against LH -- I'd much rather take my chances with him at this point. Finally, Ibanez has a .586 OPS over the last month. How many games does Howard have to win all by himself before we give someone else a chance?

Braves 1B situation in near future

fphjr01 — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:44:22 -0000

From what I can tell, the Braves will have a few spots to fill in their lineup for next year: 1B, corner outfield, closer. This post concerns some options for 1B, with some assumptions I'll outline below. Appreciate everyone's thoughts and comments.

The main assumption I'm going to make is that Freddie Freeman is the Braves 1B of the future, and by future I mean 2012 at the earliest. Freddie turns 20 this September, and while it appears that he's been shut down for the year with an injury, he is still showing a lot of promise. Prospects flame out and appear out of nowhere, but he seems to have a good shot at success. If he arrives to stay on the ML roster in 2012, he'll be 21 going on 22 -- that's pretty young.

So now the question I've been pondering is this -- what can the Braves do to best bridge the gap to Freddie, that both keeps the team competitive in the short term and yet doesn't block Freddie when he's ready (hopefully) just a few years from now. The ideal solution would be a player who is signed for the next 2 years maybe with an option for a third. I've taken a look at the starting 1B all across MLB and organized them into groups as detailed below.

1. Untouchables: These are players, in my opinion, who will not under any conceivable circumstance appear in a Braves uniform. Reasons for this include: already locked up in a long term contracts, very expensive (think $12M / yr or more), have no-trade clauses, or are young superstars pre-arbitration (i.e. their current owners would be foolish to trade them). Players on this list are:

Ryan Howard, Albert Pujols, Derrick Lee, Lance Berkman, Joey Votto, Todd Helton, Mark Texiera, Miguel Cabrera, Justin Morneau, Kendry Morales

2. Players not better than what we have now: Currently, the Braves have two viable options (as I see it) for 1B, Martin Prado and Adam LaRoche. I took a look at player WAR over the last few years, and the following players are in my judgment inferior to just playing Prado everyday, or resigning LaRoche to a market-value deal.

James Loney, the SF duo (Garko / Ishikawa), Lyle Overbay, Hank Blalock

3. Players currently under contract who hit FA in 2011: This group would basically be a 1yr rental, at which point the Braves would have to either re-sign (and potentially block Freeman) or repeat the process after the 2010 season. In my opinion, Freeman probably will not be ready by 2011, so I don't think acquiring one of these players helps the Braves as much in the interim. They are:

Jorge Cantu, Carlos Pena, Adam Dunn, Paul Konerko, Victor Martinez (who should probably be "untouchable")

With the players above eliminated from contention, we have two groups left of players I think could be a good fit for the near future.

4. Free Agents after 2009: The following is not an exhaustive list of FA, but rather the folks I felt are / were at some point good enough to be a ML starter.

Adam LaRoche, Nick Johnson, Carlos Delgado, Russell Branyan, Aubrey Huff

5. Players who might make sense to acquire: These players are currently under contract, but for a long enough period of time to acquire without blocking Freeman. Ideally they'd hit FA when he's ready, at which point we could let them walk and maybe nab some draft picks in the process:

Prince Fielder, Adrian Gonzalez, Conor Jackson

Now that I've binned all the players, who should we sign already? Here's my take, player-by-player from lists 4 and 5.

Adam LaRoche - Best season is about 2.5 WAR, which means he's an average to slightly above 1B. Has a history of starting slow and then pouring it on in the 2nd half, which has held true for us so far. Good with the glove, which is a plus, and no injury history to speak of. Probably would stay with the Braves if we don't low ball him.

Nick Johnson - He is the offensive yin to LaRoche's yang; whereas LaRoche has nice power and decent OBP, Nick gets on base at a tremendous clip -- .400+ lifetime average, but has limited power. He is a prototypical 2 hitter, a spot the Braves don't particularly need. Has a very checkered injuy past, has had about the same or slightly higher WAR as LaRoche. All things equal I'd probably rather have LaRoche for durability.

Carlos Delgado - I think the main question with this guy is does he still del-got-it? He'll turn 38 next year, and that's getting old for a Braves team that has gotten decidedly younger in the last two years. That said, he did hit 38 HR's last year for folks who like counting stats. All those bombs equated to 2.9 WAR, however, and his output was almost entirely in the second half, when he went nuts. He's missed basically the entire year with the newly vogue hip impingement, so he's an injury risk as well.

Russell Branyan - a career journeyman who's never started until this year, where he has taken full advantage and been a winning lottery ticket for the Mariners. He's 34 with basically this year as evidence of his potential. Which Branyan is the real one? Not sure I want to gamble for two years to find out.

Aubrey Huff - Huff seems to alternate between pretty darn good (4+ WAR) and pretty lousy (< 1 WAR seasons), and is awful this year. I think he could play a little 3B in a pinch, which would give the Braves some flexibility, but we probably don't need that with Infante and Prado. Another guy that's hard to call.

Prince Fielder - Is this guy untouchable? I don't necessarily think so. Main reason is because the Brewers don't have the biggest budget in the world and they need pitching, something we have an excess of. Prince is signed through 2010, and then has his 3rd year of arbitration in 2011. If we could line up a deal for him, we'd be bringing in a premier slugger to fill out the middle of the lineup. He would likely cost us big, however -- the Brewers would probably want Jurrjens as a start. Finally, in the event Freeman doesn't work out, we could always just try and open the pocketbook and make Prince the franchise player, as Lowe and Chipper's salaries will be coming off the books when he hits FA or the year after.

Adrian Gonzalez - Personally, I think he's untouchable, but people love to dream about getting this guy. I leave him here simply because the Padres are re-building and no one on that roster now may really be untouchable. A king's ransom would be required to pry him loose, and I doubt if the Braves could come out ahead in such a deal.

Conor Jackson - Not sure what to make of Jackson -- he's missed almost the entire year with some kind of pneumonia, and he probably isn't that much better than LaRoche even when he's healthy. Only reason to consider him is he has 2 years of arbritration left, so he'd be cheaper in dollars than the FA but would cost other prospects in return.

So at the end of the day, what do I think we should do? If I were Frank Wren, I'd inquire about what it might take to relieve the Brewer's of Fielder's salary, and see if a blockbuster deal could happen. Otherwise, I think LaRoche is probably our best option. He's not as good as he's been this summer, but he's at least league average with potential for more. The other FA are either old, injury-prone, hit-or-miss, or really not that much of an upgrade, and could cost draft picks to sign for the same money. Adam is not exactly elite talent -- a 2 year deal with a 3rd option + buyout could probably get him to stay. If he wants huge money, we could start Prado at first, but that hurts the infield flexibility that has been so valuable to the Braves this year.

Pitching Matcups for the Weekend

fphjr01 — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:56:55 -0000

Everything that I've been able to find regarding Braves starters for the crucial series this weekend with the Phils has us starting, in order, Jurrjens, Kawakami, Vazquez. The Phillies, from what I can tell, plan to use Blanton, Hamels, and Happ, in that order.

Because the Braves have had 2 off days this week, we have the perfect opportunity to line up our rotation to maximum advantage, which I don't think we've done at the moment (JJ / Blanton, KK / Hamels, JV / Happ). What I would like to see is the following:

JJ vs. Blanton (JJ on 6 days rest)

JV vs. Hamels (JV on 6 days rest)

Hanson vs. Happ (Hanson on 5 days rest)

Obviously, this punts KK to the makeup game against Arizona on Monday, but setting up the rotation this way does not force anyone into less than 5 days rest, gives JJ and JV 6 days, nets a much improved matchup against Hamels, and puts Hanson in the series, who at this point I'd much rather see than KK. I'm not saying that KK has been bad of late -- I just like my chances with Hanson that much more. To be fair to KK, he does seem to up his game against premier opposition.

The Braves have 9 shots remaining left against the Phils and I think this is one of the times in the season where you take whatever advantage you can with rotation flexibility available to you. KK has been servicable for us this year, but Hamels owns the Braves, and I'd feel better about that game with the best starter we've got toeing the mound.

Brooks Conrad Scouting Report?

fphjr01 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:19:09 -0000

Brooks Conrad Scouting Report?

Can someone summarize the scouting on this guy? Its only been 3-4 games or so, but I agree with Bobby in that I like what I'm seeing from him.

Regarding Statistics

fphjr01 — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 01:32:25 -0000

There's been a lot of noise here and on other boards about whether statistical analysis is the be-all end-all of baseball analysis or whether what you see with your eye trumps what some guy can produce on his excel spreadsheet. My personal take on the matter follows below. Hopefully we can have a productive discussion.

Statistics can tell us two things: what has already happened and what is likely to happen, with a certain degree of confidence. Statistics cannot guarantee that anything will happen -- only what is likely or unlikely to happen. Another important point to consider regarding statistics is the issue of "sample size", specificaly having enough "measurements" to fully capture the distribution of results. Baseball in my view is very amenable to statistical analysis, because there are a great number of results that can be catalogued, followed, and analyzed -- it is relatively easy to generate a large enough sample size for a large number of things.

Often, the debate with respect to statistics centers around outliers -- results that seem to be far away from what is viewed to be the average. If you believe that all the results in baseball are normally distributed, then it is reasonable to expect that results far away from the average are unlikely to occur. What people are arguing then, is whether an outlier is really an unlikely (often referred to as lucky / unlucky) event, or whether something has fundamentally changed the distribution of the results.

An example of an outlier could be McCann's eyesight as it relates to his offense -- at the start of the year, he struggled with the bat. His performance was below his career averages, and it was discovered that he could not see the baseball. Thus if nothing was done to correct the problem, then he probably would have had a terrible year. Fortunately, his problem was diagnosed and corrected, and now his performance is much closer to career averages, if not above.

In my view, when a discussion of statistics vs. "what I see" evolves, the only issue worth discussing is whether something has occurred that has changed the distribution of results. The problem with the "what I see" argument is that it is entirely subjective, and can only be evaluated by the observer. People often can look at the same situation and see different things -- whether a pitch is a ball or a strike for instance. Statistics have an advantage in this regard in that they are objective and can be evaluated by anyone. The disadvantage is that statistics often do not correlate perfectly with results and there is always room for debate to determine which statistic correlates better with the result of interest.

Finally, in my opinion, many of the "modern" statistics do a good job of predicting what will happen with a level of confidence that is adequate for me. At the same time, I acknowledge that it is entirely possible that KJ's suckiness and Raul Ibanez' awesomeness are results of some fundamental change in the way they are playing the game this year vs. previous years. Maybe KJ should have given Joe Boo a live chicken instead of the KFC, who knows. But I'll choose to believe stats more often than what someone sees, because as I argue above, I have no way to judge for myself how valid or not someone else's observation is.

Braves 2010 payroll -- Options for the future

fphjr01 — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 19:05:46 -0000

There's been quite a bit of speculation recently about what the Braves could / should / might do with the roster for this year and 2010. I'm in the camp that not much will happen this year, and if anything, we might sell. The Braves are a .500 team to this point, and have played the easiest schedule in all of ML baseball to get there. Not the markings of a playoff team. So to help guide future couch GM's with actual numbers, here we go:

The total payroll for the Braves for this year is somewhere between $95 - 100M, and closer to the $95M. For the purposes of this fanpost, I have assumed that the payroll will not be drastically increased, if at all for 2010. So, anything you propose from here has to add up to somewhere in that range. If we look at the players on the roster, there are several decisions to make:

Players with Option for 2010: Tim Hudson, $12M

Arbitration Eligibles: Jeff Francoeur, Casey Kotchman, Kelly Johnson, Matt Diaz, Peter Moylan, Jeff Bennett. There is an outside chance that Yunel will become a Super 2, but it is very unlikely at this point.

Free Agents: Raphael Soriano, Mike Gonzalez, Garrett Anderson, Tom Glavine, Greg Norton

Just to remind those scoring at home, a major league roster has 25 players, typically 12 pitchers and 13 position players. My best guess as to the makeup of the 2010 roster will now follow, with known contracts included, and my estimates for arbitration for a few others. Pre-arbitration players are assumed to make $0.5M for the purpose of simplicity

Starters:

1 - Derek Lowe - $15M

2 - Jair Jurrjens - $0.5M

3 - Javy Vasquez - $11M

4 - Kenshin Kawakami - $7.3M

5 - Tommy Hanson - $0.5M

Bullpen:

Closer - ???

8th inning - ???

7th inning - Moylan - $1.0M (my estimate)

6th inning - Bennett - $1.0M (my estimate)

Long Relief - Campillo - $0.5M

LOOGY - Eric O'F - $0.5M

"Mop up" - AAA callup - $0.5M

Position Players:

1B - Casey Kotchman - $4.0M (my estimate)

2B - Kelly Johnson - $3.5M (my estimate)

SS - Yunel Escobar - $0.5M

3B - Chipper Jones - $14M

C - Brian McCann - $5.5M

LF - ???

CF - Schafer - $0.5M

RF - ???

backup C - David Ross - $1.6M

4th OF - B Jones - $0.5M

Utility - Omar Infante - $2.2M

Utility - Martin Prado - $0.5M

Pinch Hitter - Greg Norton - $1.0M

Examining the above, I've left the LF / RF / Closer / Setup roles as "???" because LF / RF are black holes this year that demand attention, and we almost certainly won't keep both Soriano and Gonzalez. I've assumed that we will bring back G Norton to pinch hit, and he doesn't cost much, but you are free to argue there. As it stands now, we are "locked in" to a total of ~$72M, with about $38M of that in pitching and $34M of that for position players.

Now, my comments about the roster:

1. I think we can easily afford to keep either Soriano or Gonzalez, and offer a competitive salary for them. Gonzo will probably be the cheaper of the two, and I estimate $6-8M would be more than enough to get him.

2. Tim Hudson's option for 2010 is $12M. If we keep him AND pay to keep one of our own closers, we'll have about $8-10M left to fill both corner outfield spots AND a setup man. That might get 1 better-than-average talent (and that's if we go cheap for the other spots), but certainly not an elite player (Bay or Holliday). Thus I expect (hope?) that JV and Tim will be mutually exclusive.

3. If #2 plays out the way I think it will, we will have almost $20M to go after an elite corner outfield spot, fill the other corner spot, and pay an established setup man if we so choose. I much prefer this flexibility than signing both Tim and JV.

4. Implicit in the above is that FYF is gone -- either by trade or simply non-tendered. Ditto for Glavine and Garrett Anderson. Moylan will almost certainly be kept, and Bennett probably will too, unless he continues to be "unlucky" or just be bad, depending on your point of view. I'm NOT suggesting that we non-tender Matt D, but if we can find a full time replacement, then maybe we run out of space for him. Another option would be to show G Norton the door and have Matt D as a PH / 5th OF / utility guy. Figure his salary in the $1-2M range.

My final comment also deals with Tim's option. While picking it up AND keeping JV doesn't look like the best use of limited funds, what it DOES let us do is prevent our division rivals (i.e. Mets & Phillies) from simply signing him and dramatically improving their suspect pitching staffs. Thus, while it may limit our flexibility to spend on offense, it may be wise to keep Tim in the fold -- that way we can try to trade Tim or JV, and control where they go, and don't improve the other NL east teams while we stand still. There's also always the possibility that we get stiffed by FA's again and end up with nothing worth spending $ on, in which case, I'd definitely want Tim on the roster.

Braves offense / pitching / defense stats

fphjr01 — Tue, 19 May 2009 14:30:26 -0000

I'm home sick today, so I thought I would spend a little bit of time digging through Braves stats as a team for the season to date. This is probably an exercise in stating the obvious, but given the quality of recent fanposts, I'm certainly not lowering the average here. Everything below is on a team average basis. Maybe that's a good thing to look at and maybe its not, but I thought it was interesting.

Batting:

OBP = .342, 6th in the NL ; SLG = .395, 13th in the NL ; BB / K = 3rd in the NL ; "SPD" rating = LAST in the NL, LAST in MLB, and LAST by a large margin.

Believe it or not, the Braves actually have more home runs than the Mets at this point, even though I think we would agree that the Mets have a better offense. To me, power is an issue, but I think the most glaring problem is team speed. We have the fewest stolen bases and the 4th most GIDP, and as we saw last night, that really takes us out of innings. GIDP can be a tricky stat though, b/c the leaders in the NL are the Dodgers and Mets -- having lots of guys on base apparently leads to more GIDP opportunities -- no shocker there.

Perhaps instead of (or at least in addition to) pondering how we can add a "power bat", maybe we should think about getting some guys who can improve our team speed.

Pitching:

FIP = best in NL ; K / BB = tied for best in NL ; HR / 9 = best in NL

Pitching is not the Braves problem. We (myself included) like to complain about relievers sucking, bullpens blowing leads, JoJo in the 5th spot, but the truth is all teams deal with pitching problems, and on the whole, we are better than everyone else in the NL.

Fielding:

I'm not a huge fan of UZR stats and the like, b/c you need too much data before the noise drops down enough to make some conclusions, if you can conclude anything at all. All I'll say here is that it seems like (author's totally subjective, un-statistical observation) the errors / lapses / whatever that the Braves are making here seem to occur in game-changing situations (late, runners on, etc.) more often than usual. Maybe this isn't true at all, but I can only hope that the law of averages here will even things out, so that the team doesn't have to play "perfect" to avoid defense costing them games.

All said and done, things don't seem quite as bad as they feel after the last few days, which is almost always the case if you take a deep breath and try to view things objectively. All the other teams in the NL east have issues at this point. Personally, I'd like to see the team stand fast for now, and if anything try and better position ourselves for future years. If that means sell this summer, then so be it -- I think we are more than 1 player away from fixing what ails the offense. The good news is our pitching is great, and looking great for years to come, which is exactly where I want to be.

Time Out for Schafer

fphjr01 — Thu, 07 May 2009 13:12:32 -0000

Over the first month of the season, I think Jordan has been pretty good, considering he's never had a AAA at bat. But it's time for the kid to take a break. Over the last week:

2 for 23, 15K; including 0 for the last 14 with an astonishing 11K

The good news is that Jordan's eye is looking great. He leads the team with 20 BB's, although some of those have been IBB to get the pitcher up. Reports say his wrist is an issue. If this is true, then he needs to rest it and get back to full strength. It doesn't matter if he is Willie Mays in CF -- 11K in 14AB is not helping the team.

I know Blanco hasn't been tearing it up at Gwinett, but he's got MLB experience, and I doubt he would be worse than the last week of Schafer. Time to give the kid a two-week breather and straighten out?