Comments on: Bedard And The Budget http://www.ussmariner.com/2010/02/09/bedard-and-the-budget/ Seattle Mariners blog and general baseball discussion Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:35:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Pete Livengood http://www.ussmariner.com/2010/02/09/bedard-and-the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-364157 Pete Livengood Fri, 12 Feb 2010 01:32:17 +0000 http://ussmariner.com/?p=10148#comment-364157 Agreed. Last year, the Mariners got 21 or so WAR from their position players, but also got ~16 from their pitching staff. I'm not sure if you included the bullpen in your 15 estimate or not (my sense is not - that was just the rotation). So, the estimate I cited above is an improvement of about seven wins, and including the bullpen to your earlier ~15 WAR estimate for the rotation, you have to think they get maybe a 2-win upgrade there. Now, I am pretty sure some of the numbers I used were too high. Figgins, Ichiro, and Gutierrez in particular are likely to see some regression, and the cumulative numbers at catcher and LF look a bit high to me. But I do think maybe a 2.5-3 win upgrade for position players is realistic, to go with maybe a 2-win upgrade for the pitching staff. Now, in <a href="http://ussmariner.com/2009/10/05/war-and-the-2009-mariner/" rel="nofollow">this post</a>, Dave explained how to use component WAR to estimate a third-order pythag of sorts. He explains that based on those 21 (pos players) + 16 (pitching) WAR last year, plus the 46 wins a team of replacement players would get you, the Mariners projected to a an 83-win team. He also says that you can basically say +/- 5 to that, based on luck (and the M's got 85). If I'm right, the 2010 version should project to an 87-88 win team - which <em>might not</em> be enough to win the division. It is probably within that +/-5 that the division will be won or lost. If that 7-win upgrade among position players and 2 for the pitching staff actually holds up, then yeah, the M's should win the division. Agreed. Last year, the Mariners got 21 or so WAR from their position players, but also got ~16 from their pitching staff. I’m not sure if you included the bullpen in your 15 estimate or not (my sense is not – that was just the rotation). So, the estimate I cited above is an improvement of about seven wins, and including the bullpen to your earlier ~15 WAR estimate for the rotation, you have to think they get maybe a 2-win upgrade there.

Now, I am pretty sure some of the numbers I used were too high. Figgins, Ichiro, and Gutierrez in particular are likely to see some regression, and the cumulative numbers at catcher and LF look a bit high to me. But I do think maybe a 2.5-3 win upgrade for position players is realistic, to go with maybe a 2-win upgrade for the pitching staff.

Now, in this post, Dave explained how to use component WAR to estimate a third-order pythag of sorts. He explains that based on those 21 (pos players) + 16 (pitching) WAR last year, plus the 46 wins a team of replacement players would get you, the Mariners projected to a an 83-win team. He also says that you can basically say +/- 5 to that, based on luck (and the M’s got 85). If I’m right, the 2010 version should project to an 87-88 win team – which might not be enough to win the division. It is probably within that +/-5 that the division will be won or lost. If that 7-win upgrade among position players and 2 for the pitching staff actually holds up, then yeah, the M’s should win the division.

]]> By: Ralph_Malph http://www.ussmariner.com/2010/02/09/bedard-and-the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-364156 Ralph_Malph Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:44:23 +0000 http://ussmariner.com/?p=10148#comment-364156 That's certainly true, but you're not going to have to win 103 games to win the West. In the playoffs, a rotation of Felix/Lee/Bedard would look awfully good -- probably the best 1-2-3 punch in baseball, if Bedard is effective. That’s certainly true, but you’re not going to have to win 103 games to win the West. In the playoffs, a rotation of Felix/Lee/Bedard would look awfully good — probably the best 1-2-3 punch in baseball, if Bedard is effective.

]]> By: Pete Livengood http://www.ussmariner.com/2010/02/09/bedard-and-the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-364154 Pete Livengood Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:21:43 +0000 http://ussmariner.com/?p=10148#comment-364154 Put another way - the Yankees rotation looks good because they won a championship with it, but that championship was won on the backs of their offense much more than their pitching. Put the 2009 Yankees rotation with the 2010 Mariners offense, are they champions? Could they win the AL West? The AL East? The Wild Card? Maybe, but it sure looks a lot iffier. Put another way – the Yankees rotation looks good because they won a championship with it, but that championship was won on the backs of their offense much more than their pitching. Put the 2009 Yankees rotation with the 2010 Mariners offense, are they champions? Could they win the AL West? The AL East? The Wild Card? Maybe, but it sure looks a lot iffier.

]]> By: Pete Livengood http://www.ussmariner.com/2010/02/09/bedard-and-the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-364153 Pete Livengood Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:11:52 +0000 http://ussmariner.com/?p=10148#comment-364153 Ralph, I think that is a useful point if you are looking at pitching staffs in isolation, but as you say is an "unfair comparison" otherwise. Even if our rotation is likely to put up as many WAR as the 2009 Yankees, that doesn't mean we should go out and expect to win 103 games, either. Here are the 2009 Yankees offense, by position/2009 WAR, and the 2010 Mariners by position/2009 WAR (where there is no 2009 WAR or a significantly changed role, I've used a 2010 projection, or failing that, a WAG): YANKEES MARINERS C Posada 4.0 Johnson/Moore/Bard 1.2 1B Teixeira 5.1 Kotchman/Garko 1.8 2B Cano 4.4 Lopez 2.6 3B Rodriguez 4.4 Figgins 6.1 SS Jeter 7.4 Wilson 1.9 LF Damon 3.0 Byrnes/Lang/Saunders 2.5 CF Cabrera 1.6 Guti 5.9 RF Swisher 3.5 Ichiro 5.1 DH Matsui 2.4 Bradley/Griffey 1.2 Ignoring bench (which I'd expect will favor the Yankees too), the primary starting nine for the Yanks produced 35.8 WAR. That's an offense that can overcome an average starting rotation. The Mariners - even with some potential double-counting issues and a couple of unlikely-to-be-repeated career years, come in at 28.3. The Mariners will have to have a better rotation to be comparable to the Yankees. Ralph, I think that is a useful point if you are looking at pitching staffs in isolation, but as you say is an “unfair comparison” otherwise. Even if our rotation is likely to put up as many WAR as the 2009 Yankees, that doesn’t mean we should go out and expect to win 103 games, either.

Here are the 2009 Yankees offense, by position/2009 WAR, and the 2010 Mariners by position/2009 WAR (where there is no 2009 WAR or a significantly changed role, I’ve used a 2010 projection, or failing that, a WAG):

YANKEES MARINERS
C Posada 4.0 Johnson/Moore/Bard 1.2
1B Teixeira 5.1 Kotchman/Garko 1.8
2B Cano 4.4 Lopez 2.6
3B Rodriguez 4.4 Figgins 6.1
SS Jeter 7.4 Wilson 1.9
LF Damon 3.0 Byrnes/Lang/Saunders 2.5
CF Cabrera 1.6 Guti 5.9
RF Swisher 3.5 Ichiro 5.1
DH Matsui 2.4 Bradley/Griffey 1.2

Ignoring bench (which I’d expect will favor the Yankees too), the primary starting nine for the Yanks produced 35.8 WAR. That’s an offense that can overcome an average starting rotation. The Mariners – even with some potential double-counting issues and a couple of unlikely-to-be-repeated career years, come in at 28.3. The Mariners will have to have a better rotation to be comparable to the Yankees.

]]> By: Ralph_Malph http://www.ussmariner.com/2010/02/09/bedard-and-the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-364148 Ralph_Malph Thu, 11 Feb 2010 18:28:26 +0000 http://ussmariner.com/?p=10148#comment-364148 Is a rotation headed by Felix, Lee, and RRS really that bad, even if 4 and 5 are question marks? If Lee and Felix are 6 WAR each and RRS is 2, that's 14 from your top 3. Suppose Snell gives you 1.5 and #5 is replacement level. How many teams have a 15+ WAR rotation? And none of that even counts whatever Bedard gives you in the second half (and the playoffs). The Yankees' rotation last year was CC (6 WAR), Pettitte (3.3), Burnette (3.1), Chamberlain (1.5), and a bunch of other guys at #5 who were barely above replacement level as starters (Wang, Mitre, Hughes, Gaudin, Aceves each in single digits for starts). I'll take our rotation over that one, thank you very much. Looked at another way, the Yankees were 146 RAR from starting pitching. Felix and Lee were 145 RAR, and RRS was 15 RAR as a part-time starter. 4 and 5 don't have to be very good for us to have a very good rotation. Sure, the Yankees may be an unfair comparison because their offense was awesome, but I don't think anybody said their rotation was too weak to win a championship. Is a rotation headed by Felix, Lee, and RRS really that bad, even if 4 and 5 are question marks? If Lee and Felix are 6 WAR each and RRS is 2, that’s 14 from your top 3. Suppose Snell gives you 1.5 and #5 is replacement level. How many teams have a 15+ WAR rotation? And none of that even counts whatever Bedard gives you in the second half (and the playoffs).

The Yankees’ rotation last year was CC (6 WAR), Pettitte (3.3), Burnette (3.1), Chamberlain (1.5), and a bunch of other guys at #5 who were barely above replacement level as starters (Wang, Mitre, Hughes, Gaudin, Aceves each in single digits for starts). I’ll take our rotation over that one, thank you very much.

Looked at another way, the Yankees were 146 RAR from starting pitching. Felix and Lee were 145 RAR, and RRS was 15 RAR as a part-time starter. 4 and 5 don’t have to be very good for us to have a very good rotation.

Sure, the Yankees may be an unfair comparison because their offense was awesome, but I don’t think anybody said their rotation was too weak to win a championship.

]]> By: Mariners2620 http://www.ussmariner.com/2010/02/09/bedard-and-the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-364145 Mariners2620 Thu, 11 Feb 2010 05:01:27 +0000 http://ussmariner.com/?p=10148#comment-364145 I think that Jack Z almost has to pull off one more trade for a Francisco Liriano or an Aaron Harang. At least a Washburn signing. I just can't see this rotation starting the season. Too many question marks outside of Hernandez and Lee. If Smith's arm gives out on him early on in the season, we have a Fister/Vargas/Olsen stepping in (which one of them will already be in the rotation as it currently stands. The defense will be fantastic, but the defense can only do so much. Snell is a huge question mark, and he might not even make the rotation. We have to do one more thing. I feel awful saying that, because Z has already done so much this off season for this team. However, we currently don't have a formidable rotation. I think that Jack Z almost has to pull off one more trade for a Francisco Liriano or an Aaron Harang. At least a Washburn signing. I just can’t see this rotation starting the season. Too many question marks outside of Hernandez and Lee. If Smith’s arm gives out on him early on in the season, we have a Fister/Vargas/Olsen stepping in (which one of them will already be in the rotation as it currently stands. The defense will be fantastic, but the defense can only do so much. Snell is a huge question mark, and he might not even make the rotation. We have to do one more thing. I feel awful saying that, because Z has already done so much this off season for this team. However, we currently don’t have a formidable rotation.

]]> By: Evoxx http://www.ussmariner.com/2010/02/09/bedard-and-the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-364141 Evoxx Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:48:21 +0000 http://ussmariner.com/?p=10148#comment-364141 Fair price for pitching is in itself a bargain because teams overpay for pitching, especially potential top of the order starters. Fair price for pitching is in itself a bargain because teams overpay for pitching, especially potential top of the order starters.

]]> By: nathaniel dawson http://www.ussmariner.com/2010/02/09/bedard-and-the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-364140 nathaniel dawson Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:05:17 +0000 http://ussmariner.com/?p=10148#comment-364140 <blockquote>On the flip side, where’s Leroy Stanton when you need him? Haven’t seen his outlandish arguments as of late.</blockquote> Are what you consider to be outlandish arguments better than trolling?

On the flip side, where’s Leroy Stanton when you need him? Haven’t seen his outlandish arguments as of late.

Are what you consider to be outlandish arguments better than trolling?

]]> By: Pete Livengood http://www.ussmariner.com/2010/02/09/bedard-and-the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-364136 Pete Livengood Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:03:37 +0000 http://ussmariner.com/?p=10148#comment-364136 diderot - I, too, like this kind of incentive structure, but I can't see it becoming any sort of trend-setter. If the pitcher is any good and isn't hurt, <em>somebody</em> will offer guaranteed money, and there is too much risk if you offer that kind of structure to a healthy pitcher that you will piss him off and he will (correctly) think the team is trying to pass most of the injury risk to the player. diderot – I, too, like this kind of incentive structure, but I can’t see it becoming any sort of trend-setter. If the pitcher is any good and isn’t hurt, somebody will offer guaranteed money, and there is too much risk if you offer that kind of structure to a healthy pitcher that you will piss him off and he will (correctly) think the team is trying to pass most of the injury risk to the player.

]]> By: et_blankenship http://www.ussmariner.com/2010/02/09/bedard-and-the-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-364134 et_blankenship Wed, 10 Feb 2010 20:34:46 +0000 http://ussmariner.com/?p=10148#comment-364134 Correction: I previously commented that it would be great if Bedard could trim his pitch per inning count down to around 15. I did some research. In 2009, only 4 pitchers who logged 100+ IP were below 15 P/IP (Pineiro, Carpenter, Halladay, Duke) and the average for this group was about 16.3. Bedard's average P/IP during his gravy years was about 16.5 P/IP. In other words, anything near 15 for Bedard is unrealistic. Going from 18 to 16.5 would still be a major improvement, but spread out over a 100-pitch start, the difference is only about .5 of an inning. Correction: I previously commented that it would be great if Bedard could trim his pitch per inning count down to around 15. I did some research.

In 2009, only 4 pitchers who logged 100+ IP were below 15 P/IP (Pineiro, Carpenter, Halladay, Duke) and the average for this group was about 16.3. Bedard’s average P/IP during his gravy years was about 16.5 P/IP.

In other words, anything near 15 for Bedard is unrealistic. Going from 18 to 16.5 would still be a major improvement, but spread out over a 100-pitch start, the difference is only about .5 of an inning.

]]>