Daisuke Matsuzaka, again
Rumors are starting to bubble again. The New York Times ran a story which speculated the Yankees, who’ve been sent home early again, might pursue him if he’s posted. The Mariners almost certainly would.
We’ve written about him before, including a whole spate of articles at this time last year, when it looked like he might have been posted then.
Matsuzaka pitched on the 8th for the Seibu Lions in the playoffs (against the Chiba Lotte Marines, managed by Bobby Valentine)… going seven innings and throwing 142 pitches.
142. In seven innings.
Which brings up the huge negative about Matsuzaka, even if he’s posted: his workload has been absolutely insane. Maybe he’s one of the few players who can take that kind of abuse and remain effective, but he’s only 25, and he was overworked horribly during years where that kind of abuse most harms pitchers. Teams should be scared.
If he’s posted, it’s going to take a lot of money to get him. He’s undeniably talented, though we can debate what meaningless rotation number label you could put on him. But it’d be like buying an amazingly risky used car:
“How much for this 2005 Boxster of yours?”
“Oh, $55,000.”
“That’s really expensive, but it is nice… how many miles?”
“220,000.”
“Um… wow. You sure drove it a lot. Do you have maintenance records?”
“A what now?”
“Regular service.. oil changes?”
“Phhhbbbllltttt. Every morning I go out, put it in neutral, rev it all the way up a couple times while it’s still cold, peel out, and then drive the rest of the day. If the oil light comes on, I just pour some of that Slick 50 stuff in.”
Millwood vs Burnett
Who is the best pitcher available this winter? For most of the spring and summer, everyone agreed it was A.J. Burnett. However, as the season went on, Kevin Millwood‘s ERA just kept going lower and lower. By the end of the season, he bested Johan Santana for the AL ERA title, and people began to realize how well he had pitched. Combine that with Burnett’s ERA of near 6.00 in September and his publicized ouster from the Marlins, and, well, there’s no longer a consensus on which pitcher is going to be more highly sought after this winter.
Even within the commenters here, there’s no real agreement. Millwood or Burnett, Burnett or Millwood. Back and forth we go. Well, let’s get to the bottom of this. Which one is better?
Control
Controlling the strike zone has never been Burnett’s strength. He walked 9 percent of the batters he faced this year and 8 percent in 2004. His career mark is 10.5 percent.
Millwood is, comparatively, a strike throwing machine. He walked just 6.5 percent of the batters he faced this year. He struggled with his control in 2004, matching Burnett’s 8 percent mark, but that appears to have been an anomoly. His career mark is just over 7 percent.
Burnett can be expected to walk about 20-30 more batters than Millwood given the same number of batters faced over the course of a season. That’s a very significant number. Big edge to Millwood.
Dominance
Burnett’s a classic power pitcher, so this is where he makes up for his occassional wildness. He struck out 8.7 batters per game, fifth best in the National League, totaling 23 percent of the batters he faced. In other words, he racks up a strikeout every four batters. That’s dominance.
Millwood is no slouch here either, though. His 7.0 strikeouts per game looks vastly inferior, but he didn’t get to face the opposing pitchers. His mark, 18 percent of the batters he faced, was good for 8th best in the American League. His 2004 season in Philadelphia, he struck out 20 percent of the batters he faced.
Burnett’s certainly the more dominant strikeout pitcher. He’s one of the elite strikeout arms in the game. But Millwood isn’t chopped liver here either. Edge to Burnett, but not an earthshattering one.
Contact Type
A.J. Burnett was a dominant groundball pitcher this year, posting a 2.42 G/F rate (by ESPN’s calculations). The Hardball Times has him as the fifth biggest groundballer in the National League. He was in the same class as guys like Tim Hudson and Mark Mulder, notorious groundball machines. However, this was a substantial leap for Burnett. He’d never been anything close to this before. In 2004, his G/F rate was 1.49, and his career mark is 1.42. Burnett saw a 40 percent increase over his previous career best in G/F rate. None of the other dominant groundball pitchers in baseball have ever had seasons where there G/F rates were as low as Burnett’s have historically been. If he can continue his groundball dominance going forward, he’ll be historically unique. At this point, there’s not anywhere near enough evidence to suggest that this was a legitimate improvement on Burnett’s part; the best guess on the information we have is that it was likely a career year, one that probably won’t be repeated.
Millwood also saw a significant bump in his G/F rate this season, though that one is far easier to explain. His career G/F rate is 1.01, and he’s been a flyball pitcher his whole career. His mark this year, however, is 1.39. According to a recent study done by Dave Studeman found, Jacobs Field is the most groundball prone park in baseball, inflating groundballs by around 11 percent. It’s not a big surprise that Millwood saw a big boost in his G/F rate in the one season he’s spent in the Jake.
Safeco Field, ironically, plays as one of the most flyball oriented parks in baseball, so any pitcher coming into Safeco should be expected to see his G/F rate decline, at least marginally. Projecting anything over a 1.5 G/F rate for Burnett in Safeco would be folly; Millwood probably projects right around the 1.0-1.2 mark he’d estabilshed as his career norm. Burnett’s certainly the better bet if you want groundballs, but he’s a very poor bet to retain his elite groundball status in future years.
Durability
Burnett has thrown 854 innings over 7 major league seasons. He had Tommy John surgery in 2003. He also experienced arm problems in the minors and had to miss a few starts this season with various health issues. His mechanics are mediocre, and he has a fairly violent delivery.
Millwood has thrown 1,600 innings over 9 major league seasons. He missed a significant part of the 2001 season in Atlanta with a shoulder injury, but never had surgery. He’s also had minor back and groin problems that have kept him out of starts the past several seasons, but he’s made 30+ starts in 3 of the past four seasons. His mechanics are clean and he has a smooth, easy delivery. As far as pitchers go, Millwood’s basically as little of an injury risk as you’re going to find. He’s an innings eater and has proven quite durable.
If you want to make sure you’re big ticket pitcher investment takes the hill frequently the next few years, Millwood is your guy.
Performance
A.J. Burnett posted a 3.45 ERA this year in one of the most pitcher friendly parks in the National League. His career record is 49-50. His ERA the past four years is almost a full run higher away from the friendly confines of Pro Player Park.
Kevin Millwood posted a 2.86 ERA in a neutral park in the American League. His career ERA is lower despite pitching in significantly less friendly environments. He has 107 wins against 75 losses.
No brainer, right? Millwod by a mile.
Not so fast. Burnett’s Fielding Independant ERA this season was 3.09 vs 3.77 for Millwood. Even after adjusting for league factors, Burnett’s FIP is significantly better. His mark was 27 percent better than the NL average; Millwood’s just 13 percent better than the average AL pitcher. The main difference in their amount of runs allowed this season was in their strand rate. Millwood allowed just 21 percent of the runners he put on to score, while Burnett allowed 32 percent of his runners to cross home plate. There’s little evidence to suggest this is a repeatable skill, and the gap will almost certainly close next year. If you even up the strand rates for both pitchers, Burnett’s overall numbers are actually better than Millwood’s this year.
Millwood’s 2005 performance was a lot more valuable to his team than Burnett’s was. But we don’t care about that. We’re looking forward, and Burnett’s 2005 performance projects better in the future than Millwood’s does. Millwood has the longer track record, but Burnett’s more recent track record is better. We’ll call this a push.
For the last few months, I was on the Millwood bandwagon. However, down the stretch, he got a significant amount of help from his defense, and his late season push to the ERA crown eliminated whatever chance he had of being undervalued. There’s no way Kevin Millwood is a value buy as a free agent anymore. If you want him, you’re paying top dollar for him, because the market for him is going to be very strong.
The market for Burnett is still strong, though he’s not the undisputed number one arm on the market anymore. And that will hurt him. The teams looking for pitching aren’t going all out for Burnett. They have viable backup plans in place, lessening the risk of one team blowing everyone else out of the water. That’s why the 5 years, $65 million speculation that creeped up over the weekend isn’t like to materialize.
At this point, I see no clear advantage to pursuing either pitcher in lieu of the other. Neither one will be a bargain. They’re going to be the two most expensive free agents to sign this offseason, and their price tags will be similar.
What’s the best course of action for the M’s, then? Pursue both. The M’s did a nice job covering their bases last offseason in their pursuit of two hitters, pitting Sexson and Delgado against each other for one position and using the leverage to make sure they got one of the two. It’s time for round two. Don’t pick between them; let them fight for the M’s. Make similar offers to both pitchers and the first one to sign gets it.
Kevin Millwood or A.J. Burnett? What’s the right answer?
How about “yes please”?
Purges begin
Ed Wade is out in Philly. In the short term, I expect a rise in Ryan Howard rumors.
In Baltimore, Jim Beattie’s not going to return. He was as close to a GM as the team’s had in years. Mike Flanagan might be next.
This comes only a couple days after the Devil Rays finally firing Chuck LaMar, who by any reasonable standard did an awful job in Tampa, and the Rangers got a new GM as well.
Who’s next?
Lincoln, Armstrong, and the business side
Speculation and more speculation from a still jet-lagged author
Much is frequently made of what kind of a leader Howard Lincoln is, as a representative of the team’s ownership group, of which Nintendo of America forms the bulk. Lincoln is the Chairman and CEO of the company, and Chuck Armstrong is the President.
Howard Lincoln gets singled out for a lot of attacks. He’ll say things like “we have talked to a lot of season-ticket holders over the course of the last year, and one of the things we hear consistently is the following, we love this team, we love to watch major league baseball in Safeco Field, we appreciate the fact it is safe, secure, offers a family-friendly environment, and yeah, we’d like to see the team win (so would we) but nevertheless we like to come to Safeco Field. ” (msb sent us a whole transcript of an interview he did. msb is awesome, and feel free to thank her when you see her in the comments)
That kind of talk makes the serious fan blanch. The immediate reaction is “who the heck are they talking to?” followed by “would people please stop telling them that?”
Read more
Spiezio and female companion v cabdriver
Former Mariner Scott Spiezio (who, you may remember from way back, was brought in to provide clubhouse leadership, grit, and character) was charged with assaulting a cabdriver in Chicago.
Spiezio […] argued with the driver, Gani Musabar Hasan, over the credit card fare, [police spokesman] Bayless said. During the argument, Jennifer Pankratz, 27, reached through the cab’s partition for the credit card, grabbed it and broke Hasan’s glasses, authorities said.
The result:
Pankratz was charged with battery and criminal damage to property, and Spiezio was charged with theft, criminal damage to property and simple assault. Bail for each was set at $1,000.
A quick search reveals Ms. Pankratz has done some modeling and that she is likely the same Jenn who is, reputedly, Spiezio’s girlfriend. Spiezio and Ms. Pankratz can be seen together in this photo.
You can purchase a Pankrantz 2003 “Benchwarmer” collector’s card on a signed (maybe) Ebay right now for $1.34 if you act within the next few days or an unsigned for $3.00 in the next day.
While bidding for those items is not hot, remember for contrast that a Scott Spiezio 1997 rookie card is worth (based on recent sales) under $1.
2005 Year in Review
Early in the week I had written up the Rogers Hornsby quote about what to do doing winter on a markerboard in my house. The guy who lives next to me – an unabashed Yankee lover – says to me, “Nice quote. But I don’t get it. The season is just starting.â€Â
I wanted to punch him in the face.
Here’s the final tally on the Mariners’ 2005, because the baseball season is definitely over.
Vital Signs
Wins: 69. Losses: 93. Games out of first place: 26.
The Mariners claim the cellar for the second consecutive season, and rumor has it, become the first team since Connie Mack’s Philadelphia A’s to follow-up a pair of 90-win seasons with a pair of 90-loss seasons. Nevermind that the M’s had four 90-win seasons prior to last year. But that’s for another day. It’s only the second time since 1992 (don’t count ‘94) that the Mariners failed to win 70 games. On the bright side (bright as in dark and dreary as a November afternoon in Seattle), there happen to be 10 seasons in Mariner history that were worse than this one, according to winning percentage. Again on the plus side, the Mariners improved by 6 games over last year. And they finished 3 games closer to first place. That’s something, ain’t it?
Runs Scored: 699 (13th in the American League). Batting average: .256 (last). On-base percentage: .318 (last). Slugging percentage: .392 (13th). Home runs: 129 (13th). Bases on balls: 466 (8th). EqA: .249 (12th, tied with Kansas City). The American league average is .267/.328/.424.
Runs allowed: 751 (7th). Staff ERA: 4.47 (7th). DIPS ERA: 4.64 (12th). Strikeouts: 885 (last). Bases on balls: 495 (9th). Home runs allowed: 178 (10th, tied with Baltimore). Starters ERA: 4.92 (11th). Relievers ERA: 3.52 (5th). Defensive efficiency: 70.2% (5th).
A proposal to the M’s marketing for a 2006 slogan: Seattle Baseball – At least it’s not the 80’s anymore!
Read more
The Mariners are not the Indians
A series of digressions and random musings on the topic by a severely jet-lagged author
The M’s business-side leadership has said that they don’t want to be Cleveland, a team that tore down dramatically, saw attendence decline dramatically, and only now has recovered. This is not particular news, as they’ve said many times before that their goal is to remain competitive. And you almost never hear a front-office type of any stripe, be it GM or President, say that a season’s lost.
However, this distaste for Cleveland and their rebuilding comes more from a fear of declining revenues than of on-field success. Cleveland hasn’t done so badly for itself.
2001: Won the division, went 91-71.
2002: They get a new GM, who makes one final go at it but the team fails, dropping to 74-88. The teardown begins.
2003: Year two of the teardown, things get worse. 68-94.
2004: Things start to turn around, and they go 80-82.
2005: They miss the playoffs by a couple of games, finishing 93-69.
The Indians, like the Mariners, started their rebuilding with little help from the farm system, having expended many outstanding prospects in the 1994-2001 contention runs. It took them two years before they got back to .500 and three before they contended again.
If the Mariners pulled that off and started to fight for division titles in 2007, that wouldn’t be that bad at all. Many teams have endured much longer and more painful rebuilding, drawn out into hopelessness. What are they afraid of, then? From baseballreference and ESPN:
2001: 91-71. Attendance: 3,175,523 (3rd out of 14)
2002: 74-88. Attendance: 2,616,940 (5th out of 14)
2003: 68-94. Attendance: 1,730,002 (12th out of 14)
2004: 80-82. Attendance: 1,814,401 (12th out of 14)
2005: 93-69. Attendance: 1,973,185 (12th out of 14)
That’s what scares them: the possibility that a couple of bad years will turn the fan base off, and winning won’t bring fans back. This year’s Indians barely drew better than the 1993 Indians that played in Cleveland Stadium.
After that, they moved to Jacobs Field, had good seasons and started to draw better.
There’s a maxim floating out there that attendance goes up the year after success, but that’s not always true, and there so many other factors at play that it’s almost meaningless. We may see the Indians draw a lot better next year, for instance. They sold out that last series against the White Sox, for instance, and 25 thousand went to the mid-season Devil Rays series before that. They generally drew more the deeper into the season they went.
But back to the comparison. The Mariners, unlike the Indians, have not suffered the same decline:
2003, last contending year: 3,268,509 (2nd out of 14)
2004, first bad year: 2,940,731 (3rd out of 14)
2005, second bad year: 2,689,529 (4th out of 14)
Starting from similar points, the Mariners have seen a drop of only ~600k, while the Indians during their fall were down 1.5 million.
It’s true that the Mariners have a newer stadium, but that shouldn’t reassure them. Other teams with new stadiums have seen them go empty when the on-field product stinks. The novelty doesn’t last long. The Indians, for example, moved into a great park in 1994 (especially compared to the competition of the time), had a winning team, it was a great place to be, and people kept coming out for eight years.
The Mariners moved into Safeco Field in mid-1999. There’s been enough time for the new-stadium smell to waft away. As long as the crowds are good, and they’ve been great, especially in the summer, the atmosphere’s family-friendly, people keep turning out, and the money flows in, but what they must worry about is the steady erosion in turnstile counts (which they don’t release). At some point, and no one knows where that is, the feeling of being out with the crowd goes away, and then the stragglers leave too.
Safeco Field isn’t a better place to see a game than Pittsburgh’s stadium, and they only drew 23,000 a game. Cincinnati, in a new park, almost got 24,000 to their games. That’s not just market size, either — Pittsburg’s got well over two million people, and Cincinnati might squeak over that as well if you took a census today. In both cases, though, those franchises weren’t doing anything when they got the stadium and didn’t do anything of note afterwards.
The Indians may be the best example for looking at the Mariners even if they got their new toy much earlier: they’re a team that was winning from the mid-90s, moved into a new stadium, and continued to win.
What’s interesting, then, is why. Why haven’t Seattle fans found other things to do in the same way Cleveland has?
It’s not a difference in population. Cleveland, like Seattle, is often perceived as a small-market team, but is only smaller by about 500,000 people.
There’s some difference in approach, but it would be hard to say that the Mariners have not lost the same kind of key, fan-favorite players the Indians have, both through free agency and in trades for players who can contribute in the future. The Mariners, by having more money, have been able to spend heavily on high-profile free agents, but can that be that huge of a difference in keeping butts in seats? Are Seattle summer nights that much more pleasant?
I don’t know, and neither does Howard Lincoln or Chuck Armstrong. This must scare them: there’s no good reason to to be assured that fans will be around much longer, and a lot of evidence they’ve been lucky to continue to see great crowds. They may see dramatic declines even if they get back to 80 wins this season. The only thing they can know will keep the turnstiles moving and the money flowing is to win, and win now.
And this brings me to another difference between the Indians and the Mariners. The Indians, through years of careful construction starting with that failed first year, go into 2006 with their front office secure and a lot of flexibility in deciding what they want to do next.
Bavasi, by contrast, will be given some amount of money this off-season. Could be $20, 25 million, maybe much more or it might be, as the Times reports, orders to cut half the budget and sell a kidney. It comes with a high goal: he needs to get the team fighting for a pennant, worst to first, or they’ll likely fire him. He knows this. He also knows that given the team in front of him, spending that on 5 random third-tier free agents at $4m a piece isn’t going to get the team there. It’ll take trades, weird players, crazy cheap gambles, and if it fails, well, he was going to get canned anyway.
It’ll be interesting.
If the M’s were the Indians, we could at least look forward to respectability this year. The club’s fear of losing its fan base may drive it to success, and it may doom them to being expensive and bad for a long time.
To-do list
Hey, I’m back from Australia. Coming up soon, so you fine readers don’t have to reconstruct it in every thread, I’m going to try and update the Mariner contract sheet with the latest information for at-a-glance payroll and status information (and Finnigan refutation).
And a bit on Howard Lincoln, Chuck Armstrong, and why the business side of the team does and doesn’t matter.
I’ve also been thinking about doing a couple Attrition War updates, adding data and trying to make it available in a format that would help people do follow-up research. We’ll see how that goes. That project’s a huge time sink, which unfortunately means thoughts of keeping it current/ongoing/etc are impractical, and also has kept me from some of the follow-ups I wanted to do.
Other than that, I’m going to try and reset the body clock and see how that goes.
Mind Game out
The long-delayed “Mind Game: How the Boston Red Sox Got Smart, Won a World Series, and Created a New Blueprint for Winning” is finally available (according to Amazon, it’s by the excellent Steve Goldman, who wrote and edited, and also some of the old Baseball Prospectus guys who didn’t say, write chapters like me and others… which is kinda annoying, since this is the last BP book my name’s going to be on in any capacity and I worked hard on it).
I’d tell you how the final product is, but as an author, it’s unlikely I’ll ever be receiving a copy (don’t ask). The stuff I read was quite good, though, I liked my chapters, Goldman’s great, and the reception seems to be excellent, so I’m confident it’s worth checking out if you get the chance. However, I don’t get any money if it sells well and no longer have any stake in BP’s success, so don’t at all feel like a purchase supports, even indirectly, me or USSM.
Jonah Keri’s doing a book signing for Mind Game December 17th at Third Place Books, which I’m sure we’ll be plugging again as that approaches.
Coaching Carousel
You know, I think, currently, we are in the most underrated phase of being a baseball fan. Sure, the playoffs are great, but I’m not sure there are many things more fun than reading about the managerial and coaching changes and the potential interviewees. Every day, you learn shocking things that bring a smile to your face. For instance, today I learned that Lee Tinsley is the D’backs outfield instructor and is in line to become their first base coach. Lee Tinsley!
Watching the coaching carousel take place brings back memories. Did you know Torey Luvullo is one of the better young managerial prospects in the game and has an interview for the Dodgers opening? Or that Mickey Brantley is a hitting instructor in the Mets organization? I mean, when I think Mickey Brantley, I think disciplined hitting.
Those who can’t, teach, right?