One More Bat
With spring training a few weeks away, we have a pretty good sense about most of the roster.
Johjima and Clement are going to split time behind the plate. Depending on how much Clement shows defensively, the M’s may or may not carry Jamie Burke as a third catcher.
Beltre is at third, Betancourt is at short, and Lopez is at second. Branyan is penciled in as the first baseman, and Chris Shelton will fight Mike Morse for the right to be his platoon partner. Reegie Corona is currently the reserve middle infielder/pinch runner, but the team is looking to upgrade and might bring in a better player to unseat him.
In the outfield, Gutierrez is the center fielder and Ichiro is in right. Endy Chavez and Wladimir Balentien are the current candidates for the LF job.
However, Zduriencik has made it clear that his preference would be to add one more good major league hitter, preferably a lefty, before the club gets to Arizona. With the other six spots essentially taken, the new player will have to come from the LF/1B/DH pool. Here are a few of the more popular options, as they currently stand, if we allocate approximately 2000 plate appearances and 2,900 defensive innings to those three positions.
Stand Pat
In this scenario, the M’s would likely run different platoons with Chavez and Balentien in LF, Branyan and Shelton/Morse at first, and a rotating wheel of DH’s that would look something like this:
LF PA Innings wOBA UZR Chavez 300 850 0.304 10 Wlad 300 600 0.313 -5 1B PA Innings wOBA UZR Branyan 400 850 0.337 -3 Shelton 275 600 0.335 3 DH PA Innings wOBA UZR Clement 300 0.338 Wlad 150 0.313 Branyan 100 0.337 Shelton 75 0.335 Johjima 50 0.304 Lopez 30 0.324 Beltre 10 0.338 Ichiro 10 0.338 Total 2000 2900 0.325 5
The wOBA projections come from Sean Smith’s CHONE projection system – I put in the defensive projections. The offense would be -8 runs over 2,000 PA, the defense is +5 runs, the position adjustment for these three is a total of -35 runs, and the replacement level adjustment is +67 runs. Add it all up, and you get +28 runs above replacement, or +2.8 wins. That’s the status quo.
Trade for Nick Swisher
Here’s my preferred alternative – trading for Nick Swisher and giving him all of the PA’s that would have gone to Wlad (he’d either go away in the Swisher deal or in a separate trade) plus some of the PA’s that would have gone to Chavez.
LF PA Innings wOBA UZR Swisher 600 1100 0.360 5 Chavez 150 350 0.304 4 1B PA Innings wOBA UZR Branyan 400 850 0.337 -3 Shelton 275 600 0.335 3 DH PA Innings wOBA UZR Clement 300 0.338 Branyan 100 0.337 Shelton 75 0.335 Johjima 50 0.304 Lopez 30 0.324 Beltre 10 0.338 Ichiro 10 0.338 Total 2000 2900 0.340 9
The new wOBA from these three positions is .340, which translates to a 26 run offensive increase. There’s also a 4 run defensive increase, so the group goes from 28 runs above replacement to 58 runs above replacement, or +5.8 wins. Using Nick Swisher to replace Wladimir Balentien and cut Endy Chavez’s at-bats gives the Mariners a +3.0 win surge for 2009.
The other fun thing about Swisher is that his experience as a 1B gives you some serious flexibility. In late game situations with the lead, you could move Swisher to first and use Endy as a defensive replacement in the outfield, maximizing his defensive innings without giving him that many at-bats. You could also use Swisher as Branyan’s platoon partner instead of Shelton/Morse. Lots of options with Swisher on the roster.
Sign Adam Dunn
For those of you who are salivating over Adam Dunn sitting out there without a real contract offer, here’s the same analysis, except we sub in Dunn for Swisher.
LF PA Innings wOBA UZR Dunn 500 1000 0.373 -12 Chavez 150 450 0.304 5 1B PA Innings wOBA UZR Branyan 400 850 0.337 -3 Shelton 275 600 0.335 3 DH PA Innings wOBA UZR Clement 300 0.338 Dunn 100 0.373 Branyan 100 0.337 Shelton 75 0.335 Johjima 50 0.304 Lopez 30 0.324 Beltre 10 0.338 Ichiro 10 0.338 Total 2000 2900 0.344 -7
Instead of a .340 wOBA and a +8 defense, the team gets a .344 wOBA and -7 defense. That’s a seven run offensive increase and a 15 run defensive decrease. Instead of being +5.8 wins, the team would get +5.0 wins from these three spots. That makes Dunn a +2.1 win increase over the status quo and a -0.8 win decrease over trading for Nick Swisher. Considering Swisher’s contract (3 years, $22 million with a club option that could make it 4 years and $31 million) and Dunn’s reported demands (4 years, $56 million), in order for Dunn to make sense, he’d have to either cut his asking price in half or the Yankees would have to be demanding the moon for Swisher. Neither of those seem likely. As long as Swisher’s a possibility, Dunn doesn’t make sense.
And finally…
Sign Ken Griffey Jr
It won’t help the team. I promise.
LF PA Innings wOBA UZR Chavez 300 600 0.304 8 Wlad 250 500 0.313 -4 Griffey 150 350 0.332 -4 1B PA Innings wOBA UZR Branyan 400 850 0.337 -3 Shelton 275 600 0.335 3 DH PA Innings wOBA UZR Griffey 250 0.332 Clement 150 0.338 Wlad 100 0.313 Shelton 50 0.335 Johjima 30 0.304 Lopez 25 0.324 Beltre 10 0.338 Ichiro 10 0.338 Total 2000 2900 0.326 0
The team would get an extra run on offense and lose 5 runs on defense compared to the status quo. Yep, that’s a downgrade. They’d be a half win better by not adding Griffey. Whatever money you’d spend on Griffey would be wasted, both in terms of improving the club on the field and in limiting the playing time of players with some career ahead of them past 2009. Toss in the opportunity cost of not acquiring a real hitter to fill the void, and it’s a move that doesn’t make any sense at all.
So, to sum this up:
Make no more moves, platoon Wlad/Chavez in LF: +2.8 wins
Trade for Swisher: +5.8 wins
Sign Dunn: +5.0 wins
Sign Griffey: +2.4 wins
One of these options is clearly superior to the rest of them. Nick Swisher please.
Ken Griffey, please not.
A few questions for you.
1 Is Wlad so bad in the field that he is -5 over half a season? I know he didn’t look good last year but I don’t think he really played enough for that to outweigh his MiL performances (reportedly adequate).
2 Doesn’t the Dunn scenario change completely if he’s kept out of the field? I know he wants to play but they all say that. As for the contract demands, well they are ridiculous – nobody is offering that kind of money to Manny even. As the calendar turns to Feb., I think it’s quite possible that he settles for something like 2/22 and tries to test the market again in 2010-11.
Nice breakdown, I particularly like this part:
I’m definitely in favor of the Swisher option, but you’d have to think that at some point, Dunn will realize there’s no way he’s getting 4/$56 in this market and come down significantly in his demands. So I wouldn’t mind that option, either.
Dave – nice post.
In your opinion, what would we reasonably have to give up to land Swisher?
Also, this may be getting too far into fantasy land, but if Washington is the most serious suitor for Swisher I assume they would need to move Johnson to make room for him at first (they can’t possibly fit him into that outfield!). And Johnson would be just as attractive.
+5.8 wins turns the M’s from a ~78 win team to an ~84 win team. That makes them contenders. Even a +5 win acquisition makes the M’s a contender for this year, so I’d be entirely happy with a Dunn acquisition at a reasonable price. If Dunn’s demands come down, then the M’s will find him worthwhile.
Dave’s right: Swisher’s the superior acquisition. But Dunn ain’t bad, as long as they don’t commit too many years.
Is Wlad so bad in the field that he is -5 over half a season?
He’s never been good out there. Last year wasn’t a mirage – he gets bad jumps and takes bad routes.
Doesn’t the Dunn scenario change completely if he’s kept out of the field?
Until there’s an actual indication that he’s willing to DH, that’s not a possibility.
I think it’s quite possible that he settles for something like 2/22 and tries to test the market again in 2010-11.
If he takes a short term deal, it won’t be to DH. He can’t re-establish his value without trying to show some defensive improvement. You won’t be able to get him on a short term deal without letting him play the field. Pick your poison.
I’m definitely in favor of the Swisher option, but you’d have to think that at some point, Dunn will realize there’s no way he’s getting 4/$56 in this market and come down significantly in his demands.
Yea, probably. I think he eventually realizes he can’t get more than $10 million for 2009 and signs a one year deal with plans on hitting the market again next winter. But, in that scenario, he’s not going to be looking to change leagues and give up his glove, so a 1/10 type contract is much more likely to land him in Atlanta or Washington or some other NL city.
+5.8 wins turns the M’s from a ~78 win team to an ~84 win team.
You’re reading it wrong. M’s with Swisher are +5.8 wins compared to replacement. M’s as they are now are +2.8 wins compared to replacement. The improvement is +3 wins, not +5.8 wins. That takes them from ~78 wins to ~81 wins.
Johnson would be just as attractive.
Except that Johnson would primarily replace Branyan, rather than Balentien and Chavez, so the baseline for the offensive improvement is higher. And you’d have to weigh in the likelihood of injury, and the expected performance of his replacement.
I know that Swisher gives the M’s a better chance to win now, but is it possible that Z is looking to next year’s FA? Holliday, Ankiel, Bay, Nady, Dye, Crawford, and several others will be FA after ’09. I realize that many of these guys may sign with their current teams this spring, but some of them will be out there next year.
The Mariners have some money coming off the books after this season, maybe it wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world if they gave Wlad a chance to play every day this season, and if (when) he proves to not be up to the challenge, go for one of next year’s guys.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the idea of Swisher for the next 3-4 years, I have always liked him. He may prove better than anyone I mentioned. Just trying to look at all angles.
Oops. Thanks for pointing out my mistake, Dave.
Still, 81 wins is better than 78, and ups the chance of catching a few breaks and riding them to the playoffs.
Mike,
Johnson would be replacing the revolving door DH (or Branyan/Shelton/Morse take that spot and he plays first) and while the overall improvement may not be as dramatic because you don’t take Wlad out of left field it is still significant. But again, I’m putting the cart before the horse here.
So, Dave, what would you expect that the Yankees would be looking for in exchange for Swisher? I would tend to think they would not be doing the kind of “Randy Winn/Jamie Moyer for various semi-interesting gambles” kind of trade, where a veteran gets dealt for whatever minor league spare parts you can fetch, since the Yankees really don’t HAVE to deal the guy for salary, and could let him be a 1B/OF supersub if they wanted. I suspect they’d want a pretty high quality prospect back- not Truinfel (because they’d be laughed out of the room), but the next tier down.
People keep talking like Wlad is some sort of unknown quantity (not picking on you in specific), but that’s just not true.
He is what he is; a guy whose value is almost entirely tied up in his power and offers no defensive value.
Safeco also hits him with a double whammy because it penalizes him both for being a righty pull hitter, and for being a poor defender.
Whatever upside he might have (I don’t personally think there is much at this point) is not going to happen in Seattle, and I would not at all be surprised to see him gone before Opening Day.
I think the Adam Dunn option is misleading. Even if he did end up spending some time in the field I highly doubt he would get five times as many AB’s at LF than DH. I think you should have added another option titled “Sign Dunn as DH.” There’s no way the Mariners give him 500 AB’s as a LF with Endy Chavez sitting on the bench and Clement’s bat still in its developmental stages.
Any thoughts on Ronny Cedeno to fill the Bloomquist role? Does he make any sense for the M’s?
Why include that option when there’s been no indication he’s willing to sign anywhere as a full-time DH?
Any thoughts on Ronny Cedeno to fill the Bloomquist role? Does he make any sense for the M’s?
Hey, I have an idea. Why don’t you stop turning every single thread we do into a chance for you to rosterbate.
It’s getting old. Knock it off.
I wonder if the Yankees would be interested in a recently extended lefty power pitcher in exchange for Swisher and a young pitcher of their own?
The way those numbers come together are a little misleading. The Griffey number is really hampered by Wlad putting up 350 ab’s with terrible production. Griffey + Wlad not playing would do significantly better.
Also Dunn Playing and Dh-ing some would do much better. Swisher may be the best move, but Griffey + someone else cheap and good at d would also work. The assumptions above are reasonable..but they should not be interpreted as Swisher great, Dunn okish, Griffey stupid.
With the addition of someone else or the subtraction of assumed guys playing the win/values will move around.
A subtle alternative would be to stand pat for now until teams have to shrink their rosters. I think players need to pass through waivers. If that is true, aren’t the M’s near the front of the line with their poor 2008 performance?
Seems there should be some slight improvements on the garbage heap.
Why include that option when there’s been no indication he’s willing to sign anywhere as a full-time DH?
You have to assume that Dunn will get to a point where he has to either let go of some of his demands or take a lower paying job so there will probably be some comprimise.
If that option was included, we could draw our own conclusions by choosing a scenario somewhere on the line between the two (Dunn in LF/Dunn at DH).
Thanks to Dave for the piece. I don’t want to sound unappreciative.
Awsome post Dave. I’m not in the “sign Griffey” group but I’m curious what the projections are if he’s strictly a DH.
I read somewhere that the Yanks like Swisher more than they like Nady. Either way, what would it take to get Swisher?
Griffey + Wlad not playing would do significantly better.
No, it wouldn’t. If I gave all of Wlad’s playing time in LF to Chavez, the team would gain one run. If I gave half of it to Chavez and half of it to Griffey, the team would lose one run.
Griffey + someone else cheap and good at d would also work.
How about No Griffey + Someone Else Cheap And Good. Because, you know, the value lies in the cheap/good guy, not Griffey.
The assumptions above are reasonable..but they should not be interpreted as Swisher great, Dunn okish, Griffey stupid.
Actually, that’s exactly how they should be read.
- I think you include it because it makes the projections look like they were skewed towards making the case against Dunn.
W/R/T Dunn…it seems like people would’ve been more accepting of the conclusions (and therefore mande the argument more interesting/acceptable) if you said that Dunn is only the better option if he:
1) Plays DH and is given a contract of X yrs / $Y
2) Plays LF and is given a contract of A yrs / $B
That way you can establish a baseline of when Dunn becomes the value pick up that others here claim/think he has become.
For example…would Dunn looking at the economy (knowing it isn’t gonna get better next year) rather take a 2yr / $20 million dollar deal with the assumption he would DH over a 1 yr / $9 million deal where he might be in the same position next year with teams not having any money to spend.
Just a thought..
You know the best way to get me to do your work for you? Accuse me of slanting the post in favor of a predetermined outcome.
You guys are ridiculous sometimes.
Hey Dave – Getting Swisher, as you’ve shown, would certainly be the boost we’re hoping for. But it seems like I keep hearing more about the Yankees prefering to move Nady instead of Swisher (swish is younger, has three years left vs. Nady 09 FA). Is this all rosterbation? It seems like the liklihood of the Yanks trading Swisher is decreasing. Could Nady be a solid option for us? I know at fangraphs he’s a -7.2 fielding for his career. He was 3.7 wins last year, but only 1.1, 0.8 and 1.0 in the three years prior.
Aaron M.
Assuming Dunn would DH, it might add half a win to his value (by capping his position/defense penalty at -17.5 runs) which would make the Swisher/Dunn scenarios closer to a push win-wise in ’09.
That said, Swisher would still be the better player skill-wise and his contract situation would likely be more desirable as well.
Are you referring to the -2.7 career OF UZR/150 and if you are that was because he was -41.0 in CF. I don’t think Nady is an option for the same reason we should get rid of Beltre… I don’t see them re-signing with us after the 2009 season.
[metacommentary]
Also, Swisher will cost something of value to acquire. Dunn wouldn’t cost any picks to sign since he wasn’t offered arbitration.
The cost of acquiring Swisher is an important wild card to consider when debating Swisher vs Dunn isn’t it?
No…the -7.2 is fielding in terms of win value, not UZR/150. Sorry, should have mentioned that the first time.
Aaron M.-
Don’t worry about it. I’m the idiot who didn’t look there. Like I said earlier, I don’t think Nady is an option unless GM Z is pretty certain he can re-sign Nady for a few more years. As for Swisher, I think we would have to give up a ton to acquire him and if we only gave up prospects with low salaries, we are already at what are budget is for 2009 is so we’d have to make a deal that includes Washburn or Batista as well.
Dave, I agree that Swisher is the best option.
With that said, what would be a reasonable trade idea for the M’s to propose to the Yankees?
My fear here is that dealing with the Yankees would make getting a deal done really tough.
Realistically, what would Swisher cost? You said maybe Balentien and we’ve all heard Heilman. What else would go into this?
[off-topic]
We’ve heard Heilman might be traded, yes, but to the Yankees? I don’t think the New York media would stand for that.
Well like I said earlier we are at what our budget is supposed to be. If you want to add a guy that is going to be making $6 million you need to send at least $6 million worth of contracts in the other direction. The Yankees probably want pitching and maybe some catching.
Rob Johnson as a prospect
Washburn as a salary component
that should start the trade talks
Great post. Period.
Two things.
1. As people have said, there’s no way Dunn gets that money.
2. What if he’s willing to take the DH?
The M’s could offer him more $$ than someone else on the condition that he has to sit on the bench every other half inning.
My question: Is that possible (in your opinion)?
Also, would that be better than Swish?
Not that I am advocating Griffey, but wouldn’t his wOBA and contribution be significantly higher if he were giving you those 400 ABs strictly against RH pitchers?
Also, taking ABs from Clement at DH in the Dunn or Griffey scenario would probably cause him to take more ABs from Joh at C, which would increase team wins as well.
[off-topic]
[please read the comment guidelines, especially the part at the end]
[off-topic]
Since some people seem to have difficulty restraining the urge to speculate randomly about any and all available players, let me spell out some of the topics in this post.
Hit one of those topics, and everything should be fine.
As always awesome post.
People keep asking what will it take to get Swisher over and over and over. I don’t think anyone has an answer to that. I’m sure if Dave knew he would have included it in the post.
The problem is that I can see the Yankees just using Swisher as a 4th outfielder off the bench, knowing that he is a great back up plan should anyone get injured. They aren’t presented with a need to trade him and unless they are given a substantial offer probably won’t. I think people are looking for a steal that might not be there.
Taking a step back, it seems to me the point is this. For something like $10M, the M’s can add right around 3 wins over doing nothing. It might cost them less money but more talent, in the case of Swisher, and it might make Dave mad, in the case of Dunn. In either case, though, 3 wins, or even 2.5 wins, for $10M, when those wins get you right into contention in a down year in the AL West, is a good deal. The M’s should do one of them.
As an aside, does anyone else feel like Marcel might be missing something with Swisher? To me, the fact that he really really struggled last year is a red flag. Dunn may have old player skills but he has been extremely consistent. I trust Marcel’s view of him. While Swisher’s peripherals indicate he may bounce back… I’d be worried. I’ll bet PECOTA gives him a much larger chance of being flat-out terrible than it gives Dunn.
[off-topic]
also i know it’s off-topic but [off-topic]
Jeff Nye,
Perhaps I wasn’t clear on my opinion, but I prefer the Swisher option, if he isn’t too costly to get from NY. I don’t think Wlad will ever blossom, in Seattle or anywhere else. I was just offering a possible alternative.
It comes down to whether or not the M’s are in a realistic position to compete this year. If they are, then go for Swisher, if not, MAYBE next year’s crop offers a better long term solution. Getting Swisher now could be the solution to now and the next few years.
I know Wlad is not a good option, but he is what is here now, if we do not have the payroll flexibility to make more moves, we will be forced to wait until next year.
As an aside, does anyone else feel like Marcel might be missing something with Swisher? To me, the fact that he really really struggled last year is a red flag.
Swisher had the highest line drive rate of his career in 2008, and he still had a very low BABIP. I can’t attribute 100% of his poor year to bad luck, but it was definitely responsible for a lot of it. His isolated power was pretty much unchanged from 2007. His K% and BB% were close to his career norms. I really see no red flags.
Marcel is actually being pretty conservative. Bill James and CHONE project him to be even better. So I imagine PECOTA will be pretty much in that same range.
Jason and his Mariners were on an epic quest for the Golden Fleece; these Mariners continue in their endless search for the Left Hand Sock.
Though perhaps the better analogy is Odysseus, with Sexson as the Cyclops, Spiezio as Charybdis, and the revolving door of Olivo/Davis/Torrealba/Cirillo/Aurilia as the many-headed Scylla.
Yankees current depth chart.
With Matsui and Damon’s past injury history, the Yankees need to make sure they have quality OF depth. As Rob Neyer has pointed out a few times in his ESPN blog recently, the Yankee’s primary restriction when building their roster is the 25 spots available on it whereas most teams have a payroll restriction that comes into play first. Therefore, it’s not like they need to get rid of Swisher just because he’s not projected to start on opening day.
Unless the Yankees decide to pick up Ramirez or Dunn – which is unlikely – I can’t see them having any incentive to trade Swisher unless they can rob someone in the process. They are going to Spring Training with the full complement of available outfielders as they are spending too much money to win this year to have their season crippled by potential cripples. I don’t know about you, but if I had to chose between keeping Swisher or Nady to fill the 4th OF / back-up 1B role behind Matsui, Cabrera, Damon, and Texiera, I’d keep Swisher every day.
As to what it would take to get him should the Yankees be interested, start with a catcher and a reliever go from there. Something like Rob Johnson and Heilman would probably get the conversation started if they were interested in moving Swisher.
As for people who ask about Nady, CHONE projects him to be just over average with the bat. For his career he’s an average RF/LF and slightly above average 1B. Unless he’s basically free in a trade, you can approximate his production from a bargain free agent signing (see Shelton and Branyan) without giving up players.
Somworld.com just came out with a review of the 2008 Mariner card ratings. Sadly it’s [deleted, ot]
I don’t have anything to back it up, but I think we can expect laughter in response to starting the conversation with Johnson and Heilman.
Heilman is maybe a 1 WAR reliever or starter, if we’re being fairly optimistic.
Swisher is a 2-3 WAR 1B/OF. Realistically, there’s just no way you trade Heilman for Swisher straight up, ESPECIALLY since Heilman’s gone after ’09, whereas Swisher’s under a very reasonable contract going forward. He’s easily worth Heilman + a good, solid prospect well above replacement value down the road who doesn’t clutter the Yankee roster during 2009.
And yes, I know Cashman got Swisher for the talent equivalent of the spare change under my couch. That does not mean Swisher’s going to be traded to US in a similar deal. Presumably Cashman is a bit better at assessing talent value for trades than the White Sox are, which is why he acquired the guy in the first place.
Wlad doesn’t fit onto the Yankee roster in that scenario, since he a) plays the same position Swisher does, b) he has to stick on someone’s 25 man roster coming out of spring training or be subject to waivers, as he’s out of options, and c)he is a worse player than Swisher is, so the Yankees would be objectively better off KEEPING Swisher on their bench and signing a warm body for the bullpen than accepting a Wlad+Heilman package and having Wlad as the bench player.
So, the M’s would probably have to put a third team into the mix if they wanted to move Wlad as part of the package to get Swisher- and odds are the Yankees would want significant talent back for Swisher.
Personally, with the 2009 draft looking like the Mariners will have tons of opportunity to reload the farm system with interesting talent, I don’t think we should be nervous about making deals with talent from our farm system, if we’re getting a player back with significant upside who stays under team control for a number of years (Swisher). This could easily be a deal that works out well for both the Yankees (they trade a guy they can’t really use efficiently on the 2009 25 man roster for some talent down the road, plus maybe an interesting arm/depth to the rotation or bullpen, if it ends up being Heilman + prospects) AND the Mariners (they fix a major hole in the 2009 roster, lose talent they can’t use efficiently, and can restock minor league talent in the 2009 draft).
Heilman’s under club control through 2010.
Ha! I learned a new word today….
ROSTERBATE
I am seriously laughing my ass off…
okay back to the topic….PLEASE TRADE FOR NICK SWISHER!!!
Dave or anybody else…do you have some stats for how well Swisher hits at Safeco? I have seen quite a few A’s games and I seem to remember Swisher all over the scoreboard…
You know who does? ESPN. And MLB.com. Baseball-reference.com And a ton of other sites. They’re great!
Sorry DMZ we just got the internet up here in Canada…and some of the lines are frozen…
Thanks…Baseball-reference.com is helpful
Okay I looked it up……
Yup..we should trade for Nick Swisher….
Yeah, I don’t see the Yankees being at all motivated to move Swisher unless someone was offering them the moon. Any inquiry is probably met with “Nah… but what about Nady?”
As for Griffey, well, given the other players out there waiting for their phones to ring, I wouldn’t be surprised if he spends the season playing cards with Barry Bonds, figuratively speaking. Maybe the M’s can sign him in September when the rosters expand, to do a short Welcome “Home” tour (and bump the attendance if there isn’t a pennant chase to keep people interested).
I still have yet to see an answer from Dave. What’s it going to take in your opinion to get Swisher from the Yankees? Thanks.
Oh yeah.. and what does “rosterbate” mean?
Joser – you forgot Kenny Lofton.
Agreed. As much as I now realize that he would be a drain on the team competing in 2009, I would still love to see a farewell tour for a month or two. Unfortunately, even if the team brought him in as a 25th player, I don’t think he or the casual fans would be okay with the situation and would immediately adjatate to have him replace Chavez in the lineup because Griffey could hit better (not considering the 30 runs per year Chavez would be saving us over Jr in the field).
“roster” from roster construction
I’m sure you can figure out the rest.
What it sounds like — obsessively spewing speculative lineups all over other discussions (ie discussions that have nothing to do with the overall composition of the team). Usually they involve complete fantasy (what if we trade our garbage for one great player from each of six other teams), but even when they amount to reasonable roster construction they’re off-topic (and annoyingly long, since they involve lists of players) so they get deleted.
Occasionally there will be a roster-construction post, where rosterbation is encouraged (if the post doesn’t explicitly encourage it, it’s not). And while there’s a lot more latitude given in game threads, people who obsessively rosterbate there get moderated too.
But questions about moderation should be emailed (address at the top left of the page).
I’m squarely in the camp that says “yes, we should get Nick Swisher. But, eh, how exactly are we gonna do that?”
I think you just gave me nightmares for a week.
profmac, et al.: ask and you shall receive. (Or, better, go look for yourself.)
I really liked eponymous coward’s post about Heilman and Swisher’s win values (1.0 and 2-3wins, respectively). So my question is this: if we aren’t able to move Wlad and shanghai a third team into the Swisher deal, is Greg Halman too valuable to give up for Swisher? I think the Yankees might bite at Halman and Heilman for Swisher (although they might ask for another WAR too). I know Halman’s a high-risk, high-reward guy, and Dave’s current future forty pegs his potential at 2.5 WAR in with a 2010 MLB debut. John Sickles has Halman as our #2 prospect and a potential all-star. But I like Heilman + Halman for Swisher, if we can pull it off, because Sean Smith’s Chone projection has Swisher’s production as a 2.5-3 WAR player holding steady through 2012. I don’t know what PECOTA says, though, since I’m not a BP subscriber. Thoughts?
OK. To play along…
Seattle calls the Yankees and ask about Swisher, offering Wlad, Heilman and an Ichiro autographed jersey or something.
Cashman responds by saying that they aren’t all that motivated to deal Swisher, despite what the papers say, and that the Yankees have all of that data on how good Swisher is too. After all, New York just dealt for him. But, you, know, Posada is banged up and they could use a young catcher. Make it Clement instead of Wlad and maybe we can start the discussions.
What does Z say?
It’s hard for me to see a scenario where Swisher is traded right this second unless the Yanks get catching help back, and Joh’s contract is such that he’s not attractive as trade bait.
It’s one thing to say that Seattle should trade for Swisher — heck yes! Who doesn’t like that idea? But I don’t see where the names being talked about here do anything to help the Yankees, and Cashman’s not going to deal him for pocket lint.
In what way does signing Barry Bonds becaome a bad thing? He’ll bring more walks to the team by himself than we had all of last season.
I’m not going to edit the post, but we’re not going to beat the Barry Bonds dead horse any more in this thread.
In what way does signing Barry Bonds becaome a bad thing? He’ll bring more walks to the team by himself than we had all of last season.
No he won’t. He still has a huge perjury trial to get passed that begins in March I believe. It’s going to be hard for him to fulfill a MLB contract from prison.
I just turned on MLB net and see the Yankees have just signed Xavier Nady to 1yr 6.55 M. If I read the ticker tape at the bottom correctly
Seems to me the Yankees are not going to deal Swisher. But if they were to deal him, aren’t they going to want some young talent for him? I think the M’s should go after Adam Dunn. Here’s why:
He is a free agent.
We DONT HAVE to give up ANY talent to sign him.
The only thing he will cost us is money.
Yes I think Swisher would be a much better fit. I am a huge fan. I just think getting him is a little unrealistic. While Dunn is looking for a home. Of course his defence sucks. Maybe he splits time in LF and DH. But are we not better with him on the team?
[off-topic]
You are short changing Griffey.
1. You did not weight the sum of his UZR statistics.
2. I don’t care what CHONE says. Griffey is going to put up more than .332 wOBA. That is the problem with stats. They don’t take qualitative differences, like knee surgeries, into account. (Bill James gets this. CHONE does not.) Griffey is more likely to put up 2007 numbers than 2008 numbers.
That said, I do think Swisher is a better fit. I just don’t think Griffey is a bad option.
Griffey would be DHing the majority of the time anyways. 350 innings in LF might be a stretch.
That’s exactly the point, Roy. Why is Ken’s UZR being given the same weight as Chavez’s or Balentien’s in the analysis?
When you make the adjustments I describe, then Griffey is much more comparable to Swisher.
And the Griffey simulation has him only having 400 ABs. So if he signed a $4 million deal we would be paying him $10,000 an ab? While Dunn and Swisher both have 600 ABs each if they signed with us?
Good point… I can understand some adjustment because of worries about his health, but he has average more than 500 ABs the last 2 seasons.
As usual, it all comes down to money…
Would Griffey take $4M or demand 7?
Would the Yankees swallow any of the $21M owed to Swisher?
The Yankees will definitely not swallow anything owed to Swisher. He’s worth every penny so it would be ridiculous to ask for them to swallow some of the money, not to mention there are other teams interested in him that would be willing to pay every penny.
You did not weight the sum of his UZR statistics.
Yes I did. I’m not an idiot. Griffey’s a horrible, awful, disastrous outfielder at this point in his career. The fact that he’s only a -4 reflects that the team would only give him ~350 innings in the outfield.
I don’t care what CHONE says.
I don’t care what you say. Isn’t this productive?
Just because you don’t agree with CHONE doesn’t make it wrong. It has an established track record of success at projecting things accurately. You don’t.
(Bill James gets this. CHONE does not.)
Did you know the CHONE projections and the Bill James projections for Griffey are almost exactly the same? No, seriously. They are. The entire difference in their projected performances is the projected run environment. The BJO projections think that offensive levels will be significantly higher than the last few years. In terms of valuing Griffey, CHONE and BJO agree.
Griffey is more likely to put up 2007 numbers than 2008 numbers.
No, he’s not.
I just don’t think Griffey is a bad option.
That’s okay – you’ve given us more than enough reason to not really care what you think.
You know, Griffey in 2009 looks more and more like Carl Everett in 2006: “lefthanded veteran sock” that has a high chance of being a complete crapfest, with no empirical evidence of being a superior option than any number of “free talent” options, and all the arguments basically boiling down to shibboleths like “veteran leadership” or wishful thinking about reversing recent performance slides.
I just don’t think Griffey is a bad option.
Griffey hasn’t been able to hit LHP for years. His role at this point is, at best, the LH side of a DH platoon or LH bench bat. Russ Branyan could do the exact same thing, be better at it, plus play other positions (1B, even 3B in a pinch).
If it was August 31, the Mariners were 16 games out, and it was time for Griffey’s last curtain call before retiring, I wouldn’t care- sure, let’s get sappy. But Griffey really doesn’t belong on this team.
You did not weight the sum of his UZR statistics.
Yes I did. I’m not an idiot. Griffey’s a horrible, awful, disastrous outfielder at this point in his career. The fact that he’s only a -4 reflects that the team would only give him ~350 innings in the outfield.
Ok, you’re not dumb. (Mind you, I never said you were.) But you are sloppy for not including that fact in your description of your methodology.
I don’t care what CHONE says.
I don’t care what you say. Isn’t this productive?
Just because you don’t agree with CHONE doesn’t make it wrong. It has an established track record of success at projecting things accurately. You don’t.
I did not just vaguely question the legitimacy of CHONE. In fact, I think CHONE is quite good. Instead. I gave a very specific, legitimate reason why stats cannot accurately model Griffey performance (ie his knee). You can choose to respond to that or you can just get defensive.
Griffey is more likely to put up 2007 numbers than 2008 numbers.
No, he’s not.
Please feel free to respond to the substantive rationale I have offered.
I just don’t think Griffey is a bad option.
That’s okay – you’ve given us more than enough reason to not really care what you think.
Seriously, Dave, I appreciate what you are doing here at USSM. But personalizing your rebuttal this way is truly classless.
Yawn, this again.
Look, your attempt to derail this into yet another pointless “Griffey is awesome” discussion has a tenuous connection to the original post at best; you’re lucky Dave gave you a response at all.
And really, when you show up saying ridiculous things like “I don’t care what CHONE says” and making assumptions, despite mounds of evidence to the contrary, that Dave’s analysis is shoddy in its methodology…what level of civility do you expect, again?
You don’t get to show up, start kicking sand in people’s faces, and then pitch a fit when they do a better job kicking it back at you.
Dave’s a big boy and can stick up for himself, but my patience for people taking potshots at him for allegedly being mean to them on the internet is at its end.
Add something useful to the discussion, or feel free to show yourself to the door. At this point, I can’t be bothered to care which you choose.
And by the way, I readily admit that I don’t know the exact differences between BJ’s projections and CHONE, but from what I can tell from examining several players, the difference between the 2 is not “projected run environment.” It looks to me like Bill’s method places greater weight on statistics from years prior to 2008… something that is entirely consistent with my belief that Griffey will put up numbers closer to those of 2007 than those of 2008.
(Also, I am sorry for calling you sloppy. Can we drop the personalization of arguments?)
I would honestly rather have Shelton DH against RHP than sign Griffey to a 1 year $4 million deal. Shelton may be Right handed but he hits better agasint RHP. In his 636 ABs against RHP Shelton’s OPS is 838… Griffey’s was 841 last year.
The difference between CHONE and Bill James is that CHONE gives reasonably accurate answers and James’s projections are always high.
You can’t just deploy whichever numbers suit your argument best without at least a basic understanding of what they are and how they were derived.
But you are sloppy for not including that fact in your description of your methodology.
No, I think it’s entirely appropriate to assume that people could tell that the UZR scores were scaled to the allocated innings in each example. Notice how Endy Chavez got a +10 UZR in the status quo example, a +5 in the sign Dunn example, and a +8 in the sign Griffey example? I gave people the benefit of the doubt that they could figure out that the varying amounts of playing time also affected the defensive value of each player.
I gave a very specific, legitimate reason why stats cannot accurately model Griffey performance (ie his knee).
It’s not a legitimate reason until you prove it’s legitimacy. Right now, it’s an unsubstantiated accusation. If you want to prove that CHONE consistently undervalues players who played injured, the data is available to you. Knock yourself out.
If we’re going to give credence to everyone’s unsubstantiated theories, then I’m going to say that Griffey would struggle here because he’s got a mistress in town that his wife doesn’t know about who will try to wedge his way back into his life if he returns to Seattle, causing all kinds of family problems and taking his focus off baseball. What’s that, you say? I have no evidence that this is true?
Exactly.
Please feel free to respond to the substantive rationale I have offered.
Offer some, and I’ll respond.
But personalizing your rebuttal this way is truly classless.
I didn’t personalize anything. I simply said that you’ve given us reason to believe that you don’t know enough about the subject at hand to take your opinion seriously. That’s true.
And by the way, I readily admit that I don’t know the exact differences between BJ’s projections and CHONE, but from what I can tell from examining several players, the difference between the 2 is not “projected run environment.â€
Yes, it is. I even wrote about this two weeks ago. I don’t just make crap up. Really, you’ll do a lot better if you change your default assumption from “Dave screwed up” to “hey, maybe he knows something I don’t”.
(Also, I am sorry for calling you sloppy. Can we drop the personalization of arguments?)
Sure. All we ask is that you treat us with some respect and we’ll do the same for you. Marc W is a perfect example of how to disagree without being disagreeable.
The difference between CHONE and Bill James is that CHONE gives reasonably accurate answers and James’s projections are always high.
Not true. Jose Lopez’s CHONE and BJ wOBA projections are identical and CHONE projects a higher batting average.
It’s not a legitimate reason until you prove it’s legitimacy. Right now, it’s an unsubstantiated accusation. If you want to prove that CHONE consistently undervalues players who played injured, the data is available to you. Knock yourself out.
Do you not consider Griffey’s own admission to be evidence? Or do you think he is a liar? Do you also believe that Griffey’s knee surgery never actually happened? Or do you just think it was inconsequential?
Also, I am not saying CHONE is generally bad. I am just saying it is not a good predictor in this specific case because of an identifiable qualitative factor
Sure. All we ask is that you treat us with some respect and we’ll do the same for you. Marc W is a perfect example of how to disagree without being disagreeable.
Fair enough. I look forward to more reasonable interactions in the future.
RE: the differences between CHONE & BJ’s projections
I missed your discussion, but I will say this. If “projected run environment†was the primary reason for the difference, then the CHONE-BJ differential would basically be proportional across all players. However, that is not the case. In fact, the CHONE-BJ differentials vary widely and they are much more closely correlated with players’ 2007-2008 differentials. That’s not to say that “projected run environment†is not a factor, it’s just not the only one and it doesn’t look like the primary one.
If you want to prove that CHONE consistently undervalues players who played injured, the data is available to you. Knock yourself out.
By the way, I never intended to challenge the overall general validity of CHONE. That was my mistake for leaving that impression.
I do, however, believe that CHONE is a bad predictor when there are idiosyncratic factors involved. Griffey said he played on a bad knee and he had surgery. Those are facts not captured in the CHONE model.
Not true. Jose Lopez’s CHONE and BJ wOBA projections are identical and CHONE projects a higher batting average.
Graham wasn’t saying that BJO projections are higher for every single player. He’s saying that the total level of projected offense is always high, and he’s right. Did you notice that both CHONE and BJO project Lopez for a .324 wOBA, but that translates to -1.4 runs in CHONE and -10.7 runs in BJO?
Do you not consider Griffey’s own admission to be evidence? Or do you think he is a liar? Do you also believe that Griffey’s knee surgery never actually happened? Or do you just think it was inconsequential?
The latter. I see no reason to believe that the fact that a 38-year-old had knee surgery makes him more likely to perform better as a 39-year-old. Players make excuses for the changes in their performance all the time – Washburn called his pitching coach, Batista discovered a miracle pitch, Gil Meche fixed his mechanics… yada yada yada.
Until you can prove a systematic bias in projection systems like CHONE towards players who played injured, there’s no reason to believe the assertion that he’ll rebound to 2007 form.
If “projected run environment†was the primary reason for the difference, then the CHONE-BJ differential would basically be proportional across all players.
You’re missing the point.
You’re saying that we don’t recognize how valuable Griffey could be next year, and using BJO projections to back up your assertion. We’re pointing out that BJO projections don’t back up your assertion. They think he’s going to be just as lousy as CHONE does. CHONE calls him a +2 run hitter, BJO a +3 run hitter. The BJO projections do not support the idea that Griffey is going to be a better player than CHONE thinks.
That’s not to say that “projected run environment†is not a factor, it’s just not the only one and it doesn’t look like the primary one.
It is. Read the comments in the post I linked to again.
1. I am not using BJ’s projections to support my hypothesis. I am just saying that I think BJ’s method places greater weight on previous years than the CHONE method. By doing that BJ’s system is less susceptible to errors created by idiosycracies in the previous year. However, BJ’s method still suffers from the same problem to a lessor degree.
2. I am saying that there is a systematic bias in CHONE (and BJ’s method for that matter). It occurs when relatively idiosyncratic events occur (e.g., freak injuries). Go back and test the accuracies of BJ’s projections and CHONE. Compare players who had freak accidents or off-season surgeries with players who didn’t. I’ll bet you 2 Safeco beers that CHONE underestimates the next year’s performances of the idiosyncratic players on average.
3. I read your posting on the differences between CHONE & BJ. First, am I correct in thinking that BJ keeps his method secret? Second, the initial posting does not refute the observation that the variance in the CHONE-BJ differential is not proportional across players. If the differences were due to a fixed year effect (projected offensive environment), then the BJ-CHONE differential would be proportional across all players (or at least across players on the same teams if proj off env calculations are park-specific). I have not done any kind of detailed analysis, but I will say that after looking at several players, it appears to me that the more influential difference is that Bill decays the weights he places on previous years’ stats more gradually than CHONE does.
I don’t know what else to say. Everything you just said is unfounded speculation. If you’re just going to keep repeating your assertions without providing evidence that they’re true, we’re not going to get anywhere.
You could answer 3 questions.
Am I mistaken in thinking that Bill James keeps his methodology secret?
What about the CHONE model makes you believe that it adequately controls for idiosyncratic player injuries?
Why is the CHONE-Bill James projection differential not proportional across all players in the same projected run environment?
Am I mistaken in thinking that Bill James keeps his methodology secret?
As far as I know, the formula isn’t published anywhere. Correct. That doesn’t mean you couldn’t re-engineer it, though. The basic conceps of a projection system aren’t going to change much. If you use the normal framework and spend enough time tweaking the variables, you’ll probably be able to reproduce his projections.
What about the CHONE model makes you believe that it adequately controls for idiosyncratic player injuries?
I’ve seen no evidence to believe otherwise.
Why is the CHONE-Bill James projection differential not proportional across all players in the same projected run environment?
Okay, let me try this again.
BJO projections are not just CHONE times a run environment multiplier. No one is saying they are simply a ccpy of CHONE with a 10% markup. Like any two projection systems, they differ on some players.
That does not change the fact that BJO projects a significantly higher run environment for 2009 than any other projection system out there. And, given this fact, you have to compare the projections for each player to the relative average of all of his projections to determine a player’s value.
Remember, this comment that you made is the root of this whole discussion:
(Bill James gets this. CHONE does not.) Griffey is more likely to put up 2007 numbers than 2008 numbers.
That comment is demonstrably wrong. You claimed that CHONE has a systematic bias against players who were injured in the most recent year, and BJO corrects for this. There is zero evidence that is true. Your number one exmaple, Griffey, even shows that this isn’t true.
Griffey, 2007, +19.9 wRAA
Griffey, 2008, +3.1 wRAA
Griffey, BJO, +3.2 wRAA
Griffey, CHONE, +2.1 wRAA
BJO is not projecting a return to ’07 form for Griffey. They are projecting him to be just as bad as he was last year, except that his raw totals are inflated by the fact that BJO expects offensive levels to rise next year.
You have to compare players relative to the average of the projections that you’re using. You can’t just look at one player’s CHONE and one player’s BJO projections, notice that BJO’s got a higher BA/OBP/SLG, and decide that BJO thinks the player is going to perform better than CHONE. This is completely wrong.
As far as I know, the formula isn’t published anywhere. Correct. That doesn’t mean you couldn’t re-engineer it, though. The basic conceps of a projection system aren’t going to change much. If you use the normal framework and spend enough time tweaking the variables, you’ll probably be able to reproduce his projections.
This is an interesting response given that you have dismissed my comments as “pure speculation.” You have not been told the exact composition of the formula nor have you run proper multiple regression analyses to estimate the formula. (By the way, with a proper database of stats & statistical software, this could be done in 15 minutes.)
BJO projections are not just CHONE times a run environment multiplier. No one is saying they are simply a ccpy of CHONE with a 10% markup. Like any two projection systems, they differ on some players.
Do players on the same team not face basically the same “run environment?” If so, then the effect of the environment should have a proportional effect across players. If there is some variation across players, then you need to be exploring individual differences between players (e.g., pre-2008 stats) rather than differences across environments.
I think part of the misunderstanding has to do with the fact that we are calculating the CHONE-BJ differential differently. See below…
That comment is demonstrably wrong. You claimed that CHONE has a systematic bias against players who were injured in the most recent year, and BJO corrects for this. There is zero evidence that is true. Your number one exmaple, Griffey, even shows that this isn’t true.
Griffey, 2007, +19.9 wRAA
Griffey, 2008, +3.1 wRAA
Griffey, BJO, +3.2 wRAA
Griffey, CHONE, +2.1 wRAA
BJO is not projecting a return to ‘07 form for Griffey. They are projecting him to be just as bad as he was last year, except that his raw totals are inflated by the fact that BJO expects offensive levels to rise next year.
When I discuss the differences between CHONE & BJO, I am focusing on wOBA. I am not sure why you are focused on wRAA. wRAA is a function of wOBA. If you don’t understand the variance in wOBA, then speculating about differences in wRAA is pointless.
Griffey, 2007, .369 wOBA
Griffey, 2008, .332 wOBA
Griffey, BJO, .354 wOBA
Griffey, CHONE, .332 wOBA
As you can see, my statement about BJ’s projections being closer to historical stats is in fact substantive.
I will say that it is interesting that CHONE predicts Griffey to underperform 2008. It is possible that CHONE uses a nonlinear age vector. Or it is possible that CHONE uses some sort historical stat difference score or trend calculation. Either way, these are individual differences, not environmental differences.
I will also say this. Injuries matter, but they are not readily available in codified form. So I highly doubt they have been specifically incorporated into BJO or CHONE. To the extent that these projection methods rely on stats from multiple years, they are able to smooth over idiosyncrasies in specific years to some extent. However, that is a very suboptimal way of dealing with variance created by injuries. With that in mind, I stand by initial assertion that you are not giving Griffey enough credit.
You have not been told the exact composition of the formula nor have you run proper multiple regression analyses to estimate the formula.
You do realize you’re the one making the claim here, right? The burden of proof is on you. You want people to believe your unsubstantiated claim, you prove it. Do the work, come back, and show some evidence. Or admit you’re wrong. Either way is fine with me. But you don’t get to pretend like I’m the one not backing up my claims. That’s you.
Do players on the same team not face basically the same “run environment?â€
I don’t think you understand what a run environment is.
I think part of the misunderstanding has to do with the fact that we are calculating the CHONE-BJ differential differently. See below…
No, the misunderstanding is that you have a fundamental flaw in your understanding of what the projections are telling you.
When I discuss the differences between CHONE & BJO, I am focusing on wOBA. I am not sure why you are focused on wRAA.
I’m going to phrase this as nicely as humanly possible.
I know what wOBA is. I know what wRAA is. I’ve spent a significant amount of time explaining these metrics to people the last few months.
Here’s what you just can’t grasp, for whatever reason, and I don’t know how else to explain to you.
League Average wOBA in the BJO projections is not equal to League Average wOBA in the CHONE projections. A .335 wOBA in BJO is not equal to a .335 wOBA in CHONE. You have to understand this, because it’s driving your misunderstanding of this entire conversation.
The BJO projections think that offensive levels across all of baseball are going to be significantly higher than CHONE does. BJO always thinks that offensive levels are going to be higher than they really are. If we used BJO’s definition of average, MLB teams would score something like 5.5 runs per game next year, much higher than the 4.6 of 2008.
Because the BJO projections are forecasting an increase in offensive levels, Griffey’s .354 wOBA from Bill James is exactly the same thing as his .332 wOBA in CHONE. It’s the same projection.
It’s the same projection. Read that again until you realize that it’s true.
Then, we’ll keep talking if you have any more questions.
Not true. Jose Lopez’s CHONE and BJ wOBA projections are identical and CHONE projects a higher batting average.
Yes I just made that up because clearly I know sweet bugger all about projection systems. I have been caught out.
Wait no.
Thanks for the responses, Dave.
Re: wOBA, I must confess. If you have a list of numbers in the same column with the same label, but they actually represent different statistics, then I am confused. I guess part of my confusion is that projected SLG, OBP & OPS follow the same pattern as wOBA in Griffey’s case. Surely projected SLG, OBP and OPS mean the same things to CHONE & BJO.
I am also confused by the way you are defining environment. In most social sciences, environmental conditions are by definition consistent across co-located individuals (e.g., players on the same team). Environmental characteristics can interact with individual differences, but that just leads back to my original assertion that CHONE & BJ have different assumptions about the roles of individual characteristics.
Finally, I will say that I agree that I have made an untested claim that CHONE probably underestimates the performances of players that have been injured in the previous season. However, you have also made an unsubstantiated claims about the differences between BJ’s projections and CHONE if you have neither specific knowledge of Bill’s formula nor results from multiple regression estimates.
Re: wOBA, I must confess. If you have a list of numbers in the same column with the same label, but they actually represent different statistics, then I am confused.
They don’t represent different statistics. This is why I asked you to read the post I did about this at FanGraphs. I’ll try an example to see if it’s easier to understand, though.
Let’s say Bill James and Sean Smith sit down and decide to project the 2009 performances of 500 players using their respective systems. The results are like this.
400 players – BJO has higher wOBA
50 players – same wOBA for both
50 players – CHONE has higher wOBA
The average of all the BJO projections is clearly going to be higher. Let’s say that the average wOBA of the 500 players for BJO is .340, and for CHONE, it’s .330.
Therefore, according to BJO, a player with a .340 wOBA will be a league average hitter. However, in CHONE, .330 is league average, so a .340 wOBA would be a better than average hitter. In terms of relative value (which is all we really care about), .340 and .330 would be equal.
Because BJO projects so many more players to do better overall, the effect is simply to increase the projected run environment of baseball as a whole. Therefore, when you look at the projected wOBA for each player, you have to keep in mind the context of the projection system’s definition of league average.
That’s why I kept pointing you to wRAA. That was showing you that the difference in wOBA between the two systems wasn’t an actual difference in projecting the relative value of Ken Griffey Jr for 2009. The two systems are in total agreement – Griffey will be a barely above average hitter. They just have a different opinion of what average is.
This is the point we’ve been tyring to drive home to you, and it’s all laid out in the comments section of the fangraphs post I’ve linked to. This isn’t something we’ve ignored or been unaware of. I was the one who pointed out to everyone “hey, these projections have different baselines, act accordingly”.
CHONE and BJO are in agreement on Griffey. They both think he’s a league average hitter. Thus, any argument built on the premise that BJO has some kind of advantage over CHONE in terms of it’s Griffey projection is faulty just by the nature of the argument. I don’t need to do a multiple regression to disprove your theory.
Thanks again, Dave, for your patience. First, let me apologize for confusing my original assertion by opening up a can of worms about the CHONE-BJ differences. That is only indirectly related to my initial contention.
I do see your point about the BJ-CHONE difference with regard to Griffey. When you average everything out, the difference could be the difference in scale. That’s why I did not deny that BJ’s projections are generally higher. I would be interested in just how much of a general scaling difference there is between the 2 methods. The difference in Griffey’s CHONE & BJ wOBA projections is .22, not .10.
Still, if a scaling difference is the case, then that implies that all of BJ’s projections should be scaled down in a proportionally (or nominally) consistent manner. Yet, a difference in scaling cannot explain all of the variance in the projections. As you said, many of BJ’s projections are equal to or less than the CHONE projections. That means there are differences in the methods that go beyond scaling. I hypothesize that one of those differences is that BJ places greater weight on stats before the previous year. (Sorry, I don’t have a good database to prove or disprove that using a proper method.)
The real issue I raised about Griffey was whether the projections adequately explained variation due to unexpected injuries. Using multiple years of data certainly helps smooth over problems created by idiosyncrasies in any particular year. However, without some specific knowledge of particular injuries, no general statistical method can be completely accurate.
There are certainly examples of what I am saying. Randy Johnson (2003-2004), Varitek (2006-2007), Furcal (2005-2006), B. Giles (2007-2008), Lidge (2007-2008) are all guys who seemed to benefit from knee surgery. There are also guys who seemed to go the other direction after knee surgery (e.g., Berkman, Ortiz, Bay, Castillo, Mueller) so surgery could be, as you suggested, an excuse or a cause of other negative issues.
Either way, it seems to me that projections of previously injured players really need asterisks. Qualitative data (e.g. trustworthiness of the player) becomes much more important. This is one reason why the “make-up” argument can never be entirely dismissed. So in my mind, you have to ask yourself whether Griffey is intentionally or unintentionally misleading he public by using his knee as an excuse.
By the way, Dave, I encourage you to drop the term, “environment,” when describing the differences between CHONE & BJO. The term has a meaning in social science statistics that is different from the way you are using it. I encourage you to simply say that the mean of BJ’s projections is higher than the mean of CHONE. That is very different from saying BJ’s projections are ALWAYS higher than CHONE.
Yes. Also, I encourage you to stop using the term “offensive” as it sometimes means causing displeasure or breeching moral boundaries.
“Offensive” has two meanings. Environment does not.
Like many of the factual assertions you’ve made so far, that is incorrect.
Merriam-Webster Online has three!
Interestingly enough, your definition of environment isn’t specifically called out there. Must not be a website about social sciences.
Sabermetrics is a social science. If you don’t want to use the terminology of social science, then I guess that is up to you.
And by the way, the relevant definitions in Webster are consistent with the social science definition.
Let me know when you wear out the shovel you’re using to dig yourself down, I’ll have someone lower a new one to you.
I’ll admit, Merriam-Webster isn’t always that reliable.
I was looking for a specific definition of this word but couldn’t find it!
LOL… Webster is entirely consistent with the social science definition.
Cute, Jeff. Regardless of how it seems to you, I promise I am not trying to pointlessly whip up a debate.
It’s fine to say that BJO is higher on average than CHONE. However, when you use the term, environment, you imply that the differences are exclusively due to factors outside of the abilities and efforts of the hitters. Obviously, none of us know that because none of us have specific knowledge of Bill James’ formula.
I would be interested in just how much of a general scaling difference there is between the 2 methods. The difference in Griffey’s CHONE & BJ wOBA projections is .22, not .10.
Just find players with similar wOBA projections and similar playing time estimates, then look at their wRAA. That will give you an idea of the run per PA difference. With Griffey, we know the projections are no more than 3-4 runs apart, because the wRAA difference is just 1.1 runs and CHONE only projects 40 more at-bats than BJO.
As you said, many of BJ’s projections are equal to or less than the CHONE projections.
Many is probably an overstatement. I can find a handful, but certainly they are in the minority.
That means there are differences in the methods that go beyond scaling. I hypothesize that one of those differences is that BJ places greater weight on stats before the previous year. (Sorry, I don’t have a good database to prove or disprove that using a proper method.)
Sure – I’m certain there are minor differences in the projections themselves. However, you don’t need a database to prove or disprove your theory. Simply pick ~50 players randomly, go to their FanGraphs page, and copy down the projections for both CHONE and BJO. Then, calculate the actual differences in projections and find out if the players that BJO is higher on than CHONE (beyond the scaling difference) are indeed players whose performance was better in ’06/’07 than in ’08.
It might not prove your theory is entirely true, but at least then we’ll have some reason to think that there might be reason to look into this further.
However, without some specific knowledge of particular injuries, no general statistical method can be completely accurate.
No statistical method can be completely accurate even with specific knowledge of injuries. Perfection is not the measuring stick. The question here is whether reported injury information makes the projections better. You think it’s certain that it does – I think it’s just as likely that most of the injuries of Griffey’s variety (played through the problem, talked about it when season was over) won’t have any actual predictive value.
Just like with all the “so and so reported to camp in the best shape of their life” stuff, it’s better ignored than trying to be factored in. Those kinds of reports make projections less accurate, not more accurate, so they’re best left ignored. I think it’s quite possible that injuries of the Griffey variety are the same.
So in my mind, you have to ask yourself whether Griffey is intentionally or unintentionally misleading he public by using his knee as an excuse.
I don’t think that’s the question at all. I’m sure Griffey believes it’s part of the reason he had a bad year. After all, his knee hurt, and he had a bad year, so therefore, hurting knee must have caused bad year. People draw these conclusions all the time. Doesn’t make them true, though.
I’m not arguing that Griffey’s misleading anyone. I’m just saying that there’s no evidence to compel us to assume that a player who says he played hurt will then resume playing like his pre-injury self. Remember, he’s going to be 39 this year. Injury or no injury, the idea that he should be projected to hit like he did when he was 37 flies in the face of what we know about how player’s age. That kind of assumption requires evidence.
By the way, Dave, I encourage you to drop the term, “environment,†when describing the differences between CHONE & BJO. The term has a meaning in social science statistics that is different from the way you are using it.
I didn’t create the term run environment. In the statistical community of baseball analysts, run environment is widely understood as the way I’m using it. I’d encourage you to read more about them, starting here.
However, when you use the term, environment, you imply that the differences are exclusively due to factors outside of the abilities and efforts of the hitters.
Every year, BJO projects ridiculously high offensive levels. It’s fair to say that the reason for this is not that his projections are overly optimistic because he just thinks this current crop of players is that awesome, but because there’s a flaw in his formula that causes offensive levels to consistently be overstated.
That’s an environmental factor that affects every player in the projection and is not specific to the player themselves. Thus, the usage of the word fits the context.
Gosh, it seems like the folks over at Fangraphs such as Tom Tango, are also using the term “environment” in a way that you would also consider inconsistent with social science statistics (if you read Dave’s link and the comments under it). It’s almost as if it’s nomenclature that sabrmetricians can understand that’s specific to their field, but that can’t possibly be true, could it? I suppose it’s a pity that Jack Zdurencik hired someone with such imprecise understanding of the language of his craft.
Thanks, Dave. Two points –
1. I agree with you that Griffey might really believe his knee was an issue. That’s I why a made sure to say “intentionally or unintentionally misleading.”
2. In the first two links you provided about “run environment,” Tango is using the term, environment, in a manner that is consistent with the social science definition. I didn’t check the other links. Notice how in both postings, he is discussing the use of proportional linear weights. In the second posting, he discusses ways to fragment the effects of the run environment, but he is still talking about the use of proportional weights to control for environmental factors.
Now look at the differences in the BJ & CHONE projection across players. There is a noticeable difference in the mean so, as I previously suggested, part of BJ’s “flaw” could be that he has put the wrong weight on the influences of the environment. So it is probably correct to say that that the BJ-CHONE difference is partly due to the environment. However, there is also a lot of variation across individual players’ BJ-CHONE differentials… even across players on the same team. Those differences must be attributed to individual differences, not environmental differences (unless Bill is taking an extraordinary amount time to measure each player’s different environmental characteristics, which is unlikely). So there is more to the story than just the influences of different assumptions about the run environment.
Saying things are so doesn’t make them so, as you have consistently and generously shown us all.
That’s why I clearly described the definitional difference in the subsequent message. I encourage you to discuss the substance of the definition if you are interested.
I’ve read 2 articles by Tango about run environment. He does not use run environment to explain individual differences in either article in the way that Dave used projected offensive environment to explain variation among individual players’ wOBA projections. So as far as I can tel, Tango’s definition is consistent with mine. Maybe you can show me a specific blog entry where Tango uses run environment to explain individual differences, but I have not seen it yet.
Also, if you could refrain from using the term “player” in the future as it can mean a person who pursues and engages in as many sexual encounters as possible outside of monogamous relationships, that would help too.
DMZ, I think we should note that the term “run” refers to the act of scoring in baseball, as opposed to the mode of locomotion where both feet leave the ground during strides. This would no doubt help to keep the discussion clear for everyone who is following it.
Perhaps we should also clarify that the term “term” in this case refers to a name used to describe something, and not the assigned time in office for an elected position.
Wow, Crack anaysis AND high comedy. This blog is unreal.
Understanding what Dave means by environment is important because it helps explain why he thinks variation between individual players exists. The fact is that BJ’s projection might not be a little higher because of environmental factors (e.g., park factors, pitching quality). It might be because BJ is simply putting different weights on multiple individual characteristics, including historical stats. If that is true, then the predictive value of just slapping a proportional weight on BJ’s projections to bring the mean into line with that of CHONE is lower than it would be otherwise.
Dave’s point about Griffey’s injury is well-taken. We don’t have any clear evidence about how such injuries affect the validity of predictions. However, it is totally reasonable to conclude that the injury creates a level of uncertainty about Griffey that does not exist with the other options. And none of this discussion addresses the assumptions that Dave’s original analysis makes about the way Griffey would be used if he was on the team. I guess we will just have to wait and see. Regardless, I have always agreed with Dave’s conclusion that Swisher is probably the best option assuming salaries are in line with most expectations. I doubt we will see Griffey as an M.
When you say crack, you should be more specific, as this can be confused with ass cleavage.
…or the stuff you smoke when you come up with your jokes…
However, it is totally reasonable to conclude that the injury creates a level of uncertainty about Griffey that does not exist with the other options.
It’s also just as reasonable to stick with the negative hypothesis (as Dave has, that there’s no predictive value in special pleading Griffey’s 2008 injury into evaluating his performance projection for 2009 upwards) until such time as someone proves your assertion.
And none of this discussion addresses the assumptions that Dave’s original analysis makes about the way Griffey would be used if he was on the team.
You know, nothing’s stopping you from doing your OWN analysis. I’ll go out on a limb and say that at best, if you do a bunch of wishful thinking where you throw away 2008, you still end with a relative ranking of something like this:
Swisher>Dunn>Raul>Griffey
(Just eyeballing the OPS’s, that seems to be how it would work, and Dunn, Raul and Griffey are all varying shades of awful in the OF.)
You’re still talking about someone who has zero defensive value and can’t hit LHP (he hasn’t since 2005)- even IF we are generous with his 2009 projected performance. That’s simply not a valuable package, given that Russell Branyan can do everything Griffey can at this point in his career (and realistically, that’s what you would use Griffey for on a good team- 200-300 PAs off your bench).
Thanks for the comments, eponymous.
It’s also just as reasonable to stick with the negative hypothesis (as Dave has, that there’s no predictive value in special pleading Griffey’s 2008 injury into evaluating his performance projection for 2009 upwards) until such time as someone proves your assertion.
The injury issue might not change the nominal projection for Griffey, but it does significantly lower the certainty about that projection.
You know, nothing’s stopping you from doing your OWN analysis.
I wish. Time and a proper database would help.
Swisher>Dunn>Raul>Griffey
I generally agree with your analysis… although you can’t really separate the projections from the costs of acquiring each of those players.
Where I doubt Dave’s analysis is the suggestion that Griffey would make the team worse… especially if he was used exclusively at DH for 400-450 PAs against righties. To the best of my knowledge, the CHONE and BJ projections assume KG would be hitting against both lefties and rightes like he did in 2008. But your point about Branyan is well taken. Despite the nature of Safeco, I tend to think this team could use a good right handed bat more than a left-handed bat.
So how does Abreu compare? Looks like he is out for a one year deal as well. You run his numbers?
I CAN NOT shake the “bring Griffey back!” feeling BTW… no matter HOW much evidence I see (and knowingly suspend believe). This is why I will never be a good SABR guy.
Thankfully this new managment team looks to be saving me from myself.
Dave what were the lgwOBA and wOBA scale that you used for this analysis?