Leave it to New York Times hack Tyler Kepner to transform a serious news story about PED allegations against A-Rod into a venomous, whacked-out rant that makes demented WFAN callers seem lucid by comparison.
My favorite part about Kepner's piece is the following, when he basically says the Yankees are looking to get out of A-Rod's contract by what would amount to insurance fraud:
"The results of baseball’s investigation, in theory, could help the Yankees if they attempt to void Rodriguez’s contract. That would not be easy — the Yankees failed to do it with Jason Giambi — but there may be another exit strategy.
"The Yankees have continued to emphasize the seriousness of Rodriguez’s hip injury, with General Manager Brian Cashman asserting last week that it could keep him out all season, not just for the first half. The natural next step in that progression is that the injury would end his career, as it did for Albert Belle of the Baltimore Orioles in 2001. This would allow Rodriguez to collect his money — but with insurance, not the Yankees, covering most of it.
"That is the dream outcome."
First, as a member of the reality-based community, I must report that I heard Cashman say on the radio, in simple English, that A-Rod is likely to play next year; but merely that there is a slight possibility he may not.
That's just a routine, predictable observation on Cashman's part; most serious medical procedures have a range of possible outcomes with varying probabilities. The sports media's distorted and inflammatory presentation of Cashman's comments reveal more about the incompetency of the media than anything about A-Rod's health.
But Tyler Kepner took it to a new level by portraying Cashman's comments as a first step in using insurance to get rid of A-Rod's contract. Kepner is implying that Cashman's comments are spinning the injury as a prelude to the "dream outcome" Kepner rhapsodizes about.
But what Kepner's getting all excited about would merely amount to an attempt at insurance fraud - hyping the extent of an injury for financial advantage. And a rather clumsy attempt - this imaginary scheme would not exactly rise to the Double Indemnity level.
Indeed, Kepner's theory is so stupid that it is actually pretty funny. He's basically saying that all the Yankees need to do is spin the sports media with a few more comments that "emphasize the seriousness of Rodriguez’s hip injury" and then the insurance company will fork over $100 million. Someone has to tell poor Tyler Kepner that insurance companies have medical investigators, and that such investigators might possibly use means other than reading Brian Cashman quotes in the sports pages to easily uncover such a fraud.
Contrast Kepner's bilious rant with Michael Schmidt's excellent piece on the allegations. Schmidt's article provides news, which is what I expect from something called the "newspaper." Kepner however is as demented as Jerome from the Bronx - but that is unfair to Jerome, because Jerome's rantings had a style that was fun to listen to.
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Marcels Projections for AL East Catchers and Musings on Francisco Cervelli
The Yankees' decision to let Russell Martin go obviously weakened the team at the catcher position. To gauge where the team stands, I thought it would be fun to compare the Marcels projections of the 2013 AL East catchers.
Note: Marcels does not project defense, so this article focuses solely on offense.
The following table lists Marcels projections for the likely starting and backup catchers of the AL East teams, sorted by wOBA. I also included Russell Martin for the sake of comparison:
Note: I did not include Austine Romine because he has only 20 MLB PAs. Marcels projections for players with so little MLB experience are merely noise.
Looking at the starters, as expected Wieters projects to be the best catcher in the division. Russell Martin would have put the Yankees in the middle of the pack - Martin's projection is similar to Saltalamacchia's and Arencibia's, and much better than the Rays' catchers.
However, backup catchers always play a significant number of games, so let's look at how the catchers project by team for the major "percentage" stats, again sorted by wOBA. The last row of the table also includes the MLB averages for catchers:
The key observations from the team perspective are that:
Now let's focus on the Yankees. Their projected number of PAs is 512, well short of 640. It might be Cervelli or Stewart or some other catcher(s), but someone will have to fill the gap. The projections suggest Stewart will catch about 60% of the time, Cervelli about 40%. This should not be taken too literally; the way the Marcels algorithm works, it merely reflects that Cervelli had 3 MLB PAs in 2012 while Stewart had 157; which, arguably, was due to Stewart lacking minor league options.
I bring projected playing time up because when you look at Cervelli's projection, it shows some promise. He lacks power, but his on-base percentage is pretty good. Indeed, his projected wOBA is similar to Russell Martin's. This however does not mean we should equate Cervelli's and Martins's projection. Martin has proven he can put up such numbers over the course of the season, while Cervelli has been a part-timer. Marcels itself tells you this, in the Reliability column.
Let's however look at optimistic side and speculate a bit. Let's suppose the projection reflects Cervelli's true talent. Let's further suppose that he can hold up physically as a regular catcher. If we give Cervelli 490 PAs and Stewart 150, Yankee catchers move from a below-average wOBA to .307 wOBA - around league average. They also would generate about 5 more batting runs - if we follow the traditional sabermetric convention of 10 runs equating to a win, that gives the Yankees a 1/2 win.
Let's not take this 1/2 win measure too literally. On an individual basis, a player whose skills are measured as being a 1/2-game better than another player's could impact several games. It's a matter of random timing as to whether a few walks help win games or go for naught.
Cervelli himself provides a perfect example. In 2012, he only had 3 PAs, and so according to this sabermetric convention, Cervelli contributed to 0 wins. However, in the next-to-last game of the season, Cervelli drew a 2-out, 12th-inning walk, and eventually came around to score the game-winning run. This was a huge win, as it preserved a 1-game lead over the Orioles.
If Stewart had been hitting, the probability of him getting on base would have been around 4% lower than the probability of Cervelli getting on base. We'll never know whether last season's huge walk was one of those plate appearances where Cervelli's skill advantage came into play.
But for 2013, one perspective is that if Cervelli is indeed 4% more likely to get on base than Stewart, over 490 PAs Cervelli would reach base about 20 more times than Stewart. That could quite possibly flip a few games to the Yankees.
Note: Marcels does not project defense, so this article focuses solely on offense.
The following table lists Marcels projections for the likely starting and backup catchers of the AL East teams, sorted by wOBA. I also included Russell Martin for the sake of comparison:
| Hitter | Team | Age | PA | AB | H | 2B | 3B | HR | BB | SB | CS | BA | OBP | SLG | wOBA | Batting Runs | Reliability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wieters, Matt | Orioles | 27 | 552 | 495 | 127 | 26 | 1 | 20 | 51 | 3 | 1 | .257 | .328 | .434 | .326 | 70 | 85% |
| Ross, Dave | Red Sox | 36 | 315 | 281 | 72 | 15 | 1 | 10 | 29 | 3 | 1 | .256 | .326 | .423 | .322 | 39 | 64% |
| Saltalamacchia, Jarrod | Red Sox | 28 | 463 | 420 | 99 | 22 | 2 | 21 | 37 | 2 | 1 | .236 | .299 | .448 | .318 | 56 | 76% |
| Martin, Russell | Pirates | 30 | 490 | 429 | 100 | 18 | 0 | 17 | 51 | 8 | 2 | .233 | .322 | .394 | .313 | 57 | 82% |
| Cervelli, Francisco | Yankees | 27 | 215 | 189 | 50 | 8 | 1 | 4 | 19 | 3 | 1 | .265 | .338 | .381 | .312 | 24 | 56% |
| Arencibia, J.P. | Blue Jays | 27 | 435 | 399 | 94 | 19 | 2 | 20 | 29 | 3 | 1 | .236 | .290 | .444 | .311 | 51 | 77% |
| Thole, Josh | Blue Jays | 26 | 416 | 372 | 97 | 18 | 1 | 5 | 37 | 2 | 1 | .261 | .331 | .355 | .295 | 43 | 77% |
| Lobaton, Jose | Rays | 28 | 302 | 265 | 62 | 14 | 1 | 6 | 30 | 3 | 2 | .234 | .317 | .362 | .294 | 31 | 49% |
| Molina, Jose | Rays | 38 | 356 | 324 | 78 | 14 | 1 | 9 | 25 | 4 | 1 | .241 | .300 | .373 | .293 | 36 | 69% |
| Teagarden, Taylor | Orioles | 29 | 236 | 211 | 48 | 10 | 1 | 7 | 19 | 3 | 1 | .227 | .296 | .384 | .292 | 24 | 37% |
| Stewart, Chris | Yankees | 31 | 297 | 267 | 63 | 14 | 1 | 6 | 23 | 3 | 1 | .236 | .299 | .363 | .284 | 29 | 56% |
Note: I did not include Austine Romine because he has only 20 MLB PAs. Marcels projections for players with so little MLB experience are merely noise.
Looking at the starters, as expected Wieters projects to be the best catcher in the division. Russell Martin would have put the Yankees in the middle of the pack - Martin's projection is similar to Saltalamacchia's and Arencibia's, and much better than the Rays' catchers.
However, backup catchers always play a significant number of games, so let's look at how the catchers project by team for the major "percentage" stats, again sorted by wOBA. The last row of the table also includes the MLB averages for catchers:
| Team | PAs | BA | OBP | SLG | wOBA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Red Sox | 778 | .244 | .310 | .438 | .320 |
| Orioles | 788 | .248 | .318 | .419 | .315 |
| Blue Jays | 851 | .248 | .310 | .401 | .303 |
| Yankees | 512 | .248 | .316 | .371 | .295 |
| Rays | 658 | .238 | .308 | .368 | .293 |
| MLB Avg. | .248 | .318 | .400 | .307 |
The key observations from the team perspective are that:
- David Ross' batting skills and Taylor Teagarden's lack thereof projects the Red Sox to have slightly better overall offense from their catchers than the Orioles.
- Ross sure would have been an upgrade over Chris Stewart. (The Red Sox got Ross for a modest 2-year, $6.2 million deal.)
- The Yankees' catching projects to be horrific.
Now let's focus on the Yankees. Their projected number of PAs is 512, well short of 640. It might be Cervelli or Stewart or some other catcher(s), but someone will have to fill the gap. The projections suggest Stewart will catch about 60% of the time, Cervelli about 40%. This should not be taken too literally; the way the Marcels algorithm works, it merely reflects that Cervelli had 3 MLB PAs in 2012 while Stewart had 157; which, arguably, was due to Stewart lacking minor league options.
I bring projected playing time up because when you look at Cervelli's projection, it shows some promise. He lacks power, but his on-base percentage is pretty good. Indeed, his projected wOBA is similar to Russell Martin's. This however does not mean we should equate Cervelli's and Martins's projection. Martin has proven he can put up such numbers over the course of the season, while Cervelli has been a part-timer. Marcels itself tells you this, in the Reliability column.
Let's however look at optimistic side and speculate a bit. Let's suppose the projection reflects Cervelli's true talent. Let's further suppose that he can hold up physically as a regular catcher. If we give Cervelli 490 PAs and Stewart 150, Yankee catchers move from a below-average wOBA to .307 wOBA - around league average. They also would generate about 5 more batting runs - if we follow the traditional sabermetric convention of 10 runs equating to a win, that gives the Yankees a 1/2 win.
Let's not take this 1/2 win measure too literally. On an individual basis, a player whose skills are measured as being a 1/2-game better than another player's could impact several games. It's a matter of random timing as to whether a few walks help win games or go for naught.
Cervelli himself provides a perfect example. In 2012, he only had 3 PAs, and so according to this sabermetric convention, Cervelli contributed to 0 wins. However, in the next-to-last game of the season, Cervelli drew a 2-out, 12th-inning walk, and eventually came around to score the game-winning run. This was a huge win, as it preserved a 1-game lead over the Orioles.
If Stewart had been hitting, the probability of him getting on base would have been around 4% lower than the probability of Cervelli getting on base. We'll never know whether last season's huge walk was one of those plate appearances where Cervelli's skill advantage came into play.
But for 2013, one perspective is that if Cervelli is indeed 4% more likely to get on base than Stewart, over 490 PAs Cervelli would reach base about 20 more times than Stewart. That could quite possibly flip a few games to the Yankees.
Thursday, January 24, 2013
The Yankees Are No Longer Even Pretending To Try
It's painful to realize that the Yankees were too cheap to sign Scott Hairston, whom the Cubs nabbed for a 2-year $6 million deal.
Not that Hairston's more than a role player. It's just that the Yankees' offseason has been so dismal that they are in a position where they could use such a role player to bat against lefties.
Hal Steinbrenner seems to be modelling his ownership based on how the Wilpons ran the Mets into near-irrelevancy.
Not that Hairston's more than a role player. It's just that the Yankees' offseason has been so dismal that they are in a position where they could use such a role player to bat against lefties.
Hal Steinbrenner seems to be modelling his ownership based on how the Wilpons ran the Mets into near-irrelevancy.
Saturday, January 19, 2013
FBI Spent Years Investigating Lyrics of "Louie Louie"
If you love music, history, or wacky-but-true stories, you will love reading about how the FBI, in the early 1960s, spent 2.5 years investigating whether the lyrics of "Louie Louie" had a secret, obscene meaning.
Really.
This piece is from one of the best sites on the Internet, snopes.com. If you are not familiar with it, snopes.com is invaluable for filtering truth from the rivers of digital bullshit with which we are bombarded.
From a baseball perspective, it's always good to read about schemes that are exponentially more idiotic than Yankee moves such as the Ed Whitson and Kei Igawa signings.
Monday, January 14, 2013
Mining the Scrap Heap for a Lefty Bat
At the moment, I suspect the following 11 players would make the Opening Day roster:
The first 8 players form the regular lineup - substitute Cervelli for Stewart if you prefer. The bench includes the backup catcher and a couple of righty bats for the left-handed platoon lineup.
As described in a previous post, the current members of the team project to a 90-win team. The offense projects to be slightly above average. The 2 remaining "open" roster positions could be used to improve the apparently mediocre lineup - one would hope the Yankees will acquire better options than Matt Diaz and Jayson Nix to fill out the roster!
The conventional wisdom is that the Yankees need a right-handed bat; and there's no doubt that's true. However, I would argue that the Yankees badly need a lefty bat too. The reason is that the starting lineup against righty pitchers seems to be something like this:
There isn't a no-brainer prospect in the farm system to fill this role - perhaps Zoilo Almonte will get a chance, but right now that is more a hope than a plan. There also are no serious trade candidates worth speculating upon. So here are some guys still available on the scrap heap, along with their 2013 Marcels projections:
Thome, Giambi, and Hafner are really just DHs. If the Yankees were inclined to spend a roster spot on that type of player, Hafner is probably the best bet, given his age.
If they want someone who can play the field, that would be Johnny Damon. He was awful last year. However, Damon hit above league average in the previous few seasons, so he might be able to beat his poor projection. But probably I'm just saying this because I like Johnny Damon.
Luke Scott has appeal because on paper he could play the outfield. However, he may also now be just a DH; perhaps because of his injuries, he did not play an inning in the outfield last year, and only 6 games at 1B.
None of these guys are all that appealing; this is why they call it the scrap heap. Aspiring to get lucky with one of these guys is one of the costs of losing Nick Swisher.
So, if you want someone who can play in the field, Damon's worth a shot. If you're content to have a lefty DH, Hafner, Scott, and Thome are all decent candidates. They all have health risks; they all have good potential upside as classic Yankee Stadium sluggers.
Let's say the Yankees sign Hafner. If I add Hafner's projected stats to the 2013 projections, and correspondingly drop the hideous Matt Diaz, the Yankees project to score about 10 more runs. That's worth another win from a Pythagorean expectation perspective, bumping up the Yankees' projected record to 91-71. Of course as the previous post says, let's not take projections too literally; the point rather is that adding Hafner (or someone equivalent like Thome or Scott) improves the Yankees odds of winning the AL East, with no prospect cost. Given the seeming skimpiness of the current lineup, let's hope the Yankees give one of these guys a shot.
- Stewart, Chris
- Teixeira, Mark
- Cano, Robinson
- Jeter, Derek
- Youkilis, Kevin
- Suzuki, Ichiro
- Gardner, Brett
- Granderson, Curtis
- Cervelli, Francisco
- Nunez, Eduardo
- Canzler, Russ
The first 8 players form the regular lineup - substitute Cervelli for Stewart if you prefer. The bench includes the backup catcher and a couple of righty bats for the left-handed platoon lineup.
As described in a previous post, the current members of the team project to a 90-win team. The offense projects to be slightly above average. The 2 remaining "open" roster positions could be used to improve the apparently mediocre lineup - one would hope the Yankees will acquire better options than Matt Diaz and Jayson Nix to fill out the roster!
The conventional wisdom is that the Yankees need a right-handed bat; and there's no doubt that's true. However, I would argue that the Yankees badly need a lefty bat too. The reason is that the starting lineup against righty pitchers seems to be something like this:
- Ichiro, RF
- Jeter, SS
- Cano, 2B
- Teixeira, 1B
- Granderson, LF
- Youkilis, 3B
- Nunez, DH
- Stewart, C
- Gardner, CF
There isn't a no-brainer prospect in the farm system to fill this role - perhaps Zoilo Almonte will get a chance, but right now that is more a hope than a plan. There also are no serious trade candidates worth speculating upon. So here are some guys still available on the scrap heap, along with their 2013 Marcels projections:
| Hitter | Age | PA | AB | H | 2B | 3B | HR | BB | SB | CS | BA | OBP | SLG | wOBA | BRs | Reliability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thome, Jim | 42 | 325 | 284 | 70 | 14 | 1 | 15 | 39 | 2 | 1 | .246 | .338 | .461 | .340 | 45 | 73% |
| Hafner, Travis | 36 | 368 | 322 | 82 | 16 | 1 | 13 | 36 | 2 | 1 | .255 | .342 | .432 | .331 | 48 | 78% |
| Giambi, Jason | 42 | 272 | 234 | 55 | 11 | 1 | 10 | 31 | 2 | 1 | .235 | .331 | .419 | .320 | 34 | 61% |
| Scott, Luke | 35 | 396 | 355 | 86 | 21 | 1 | 16 | 33 | 4 | 1 | .242 | .311 | .442 | .320 | 50 | 78% |
| Damon, Johnny | 39 | 377 | 341 | 84 | 17 | 3 | 8 | 31 | 8 | 2 | .246 | .311 | .384 | .304 | 41 | 82% |
Thome, Giambi, and Hafner are really just DHs. If the Yankees were inclined to spend a roster spot on that type of player, Hafner is probably the best bet, given his age.
If they want someone who can play the field, that would be Johnny Damon. He was awful last year. However, Damon hit above league average in the previous few seasons, so he might be able to beat his poor projection. But probably I'm just saying this because I like Johnny Damon.
Luke Scott has appeal because on paper he could play the outfield. However, he may also now be just a DH; perhaps because of his injuries, he did not play an inning in the outfield last year, and only 6 games at 1B.
None of these guys are all that appealing; this is why they call it the scrap heap. Aspiring to get lucky with one of these guys is one of the costs of losing Nick Swisher.
So, if you want someone who can play in the field, Damon's worth a shot. If you're content to have a lefty DH, Hafner, Scott, and Thome are all decent candidates. They all have health risks; they all have good potential upside as classic Yankee Stadium sluggers.
Let's say the Yankees sign Hafner. If I add Hafner's projected stats to the 2013 projections, and correspondingly drop the hideous Matt Diaz, the Yankees project to score about 10 more runs. That's worth another win from a Pythagorean expectation perspective, bumping up the Yankees' projected record to 91-71. Of course as the previous post says, let's not take projections too literally; the point rather is that adding Hafner (or someone equivalent like Thome or Scott) improves the Yankees odds of winning the AL East, with no prospect cost. Given the seeming skimpiness of the current lineup, let's hope the Yankees give one of these guys a shot.
Sunday, January 6, 2013
Updated Yankee and Blue Jay Marcels Projections
I ran Marcels projections for the 2013 Yankees and Blue Jays, based on their current depth charts, and the results correspond to what most of us no doubt perceive regarding the offseason: the Yankees have gotten a bit worse while the Blue Jays have significantly improved.
The Blue Jays are projected to have a 91-71 record, the Yankees 90-72.
Before proceeding with the numbers, let's put these projections in context. These projections do not say the Yankees "are an 90-win team" in a precise sense. Marcels is a good projection system with a proven level of accuracy within a reasonable range. However, the projections are not prophecies. Rather, they are probabilistic estimates of future performance. This makes them a useful tool - a mechanism that gives us some insight into the quality of teams' rosters - as we play armchair GM.
First, here are the team results. The Blue Jays project to outhit the Yankees, while the Yankees project to have better pitching:
Runs scored were calculated using batting runs, and runs allowed using the pitchers' projected runs allowed. Expected wins-losses were then calculated using the Pythagorean expectation formula.
To get to these team numbers, I started with the projected stats for players on each team most likely to play significant roles. I then adjusted each team's totals to a full-seasons worth of plate appearances and innings pitched; the details are at the end of this post.
Following are the player projections. I selected the players using my knowledge of the teams plus their depth charts.
Yankee pitchers:
Yankee hitters - Since we know A-Rod will likely miss at least half the season, I halved the PAs Marcels projected for A-Rod, and prorated his other stats:
Blue Jay pitchers: The sums of projected games slightly exceeded 162, I removed a few projected starts from their spot starters and correspondingly incremented their games relieved.
Blue Hay Hitters - The Marcels projections for the 2 catchers are based on both being regulars; so to make this realistic, I reduced Josh Thole's projected PAs by 40%, and prorated his other stats:
I'll be doing a similar exercise for the other AL East teams at some point.
The Blue Jays are projected to have a 91-71 record, the Yankees 90-72.
Before proceeding with the numbers, let's put these projections in context. These projections do not say the Yankees "are an 90-win team" in a precise sense. Marcels is a good projection system with a proven level of accuracy within a reasonable range. However, the projections are not prophecies. Rather, they are probabilistic estimates of future performance. This makes them a useful tool - a mechanism that gives us some insight into the quality of teams' rosters - as we play armchair GM.
First, here are the team results. The Blue Jays project to outhit the Yankees, while the Yankees project to have better pitching:
| Team | W | L | RS | RA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blue Jays | 91 | 71 | 784 | 691 |
| Yankees | 90 | 72 | 758 | 678 |
Runs scored were calculated using batting runs, and runs allowed using the pitchers' projected runs allowed. Expected wins-losses were then calculated using the Pythagorean expectation formula.
To get to these team numbers, I started with the projected stats for players on each team most likely to play significant roles. I then adjusted each team's totals to a full-seasons worth of plate appearances and innings pitched; the details are at the end of this post.
Following are the player projections. I selected the players using my knowledge of the teams plus their depth charts.
Yankee pitchers:
| Pitcher | IP | G | GS | H | R | ER | HR | BB | SO | ERA | FIP | WHIP | HR/9 | SO/9 | SO/BB | Reliability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aardsma, David | 26 | 26 | 0 | 24 | 13 | 12 | 3 | 10 | 22 | 4.15 | 4.13 | 1.31 | 1.0 | 7.6 | 2.2 | 15% |
| Chamberlain, Joba | 38 | 38 | 0 | 37 | 18 | 17 | 5 | 12 | 35 | 4.03 | 4.06 | 1.29 | 1.2 | 8.3 | 2.9 | 40% |
| Eppley, Cody | 49 | 61 | 0 | 48 | 23 | 22 | 5 | 17 | 39 | 4.04 | 3.88 | 1.33 | 0.9 | 7.2 | 2.3 | 36% |
| Hughes, Philip | 161 | 30 | 28 | 160 | 84 | 78 | 25 | 46 | 136 | 4.36 | 4.43 | 1.28 | 1.4 | 7.6 | 3 | 76% |
| Kuroda, Hiroki | 190 | 29 | 29 | 186 | 82 | 75 | 23 | 49 | 147 | 3.55 | 4.00 | 1.24 | 1.1 | 7.0 | 3 | 81% |
| Logan, Boone | 57 | 84 | 0 | 53 | 26 | 24 | 6 | 22 | 58 | 3.79 | 3.61 | 1.32 | 0.9 | 9.2 | 2.6 | 51% |
| Nova, Ivan | 161 | 27 | 26 | 166 | 83 | 77 | 21 | 53 | 131 | 4.3 | 4.30 | 1.36 | 1.2 | 7.3 | 2.5 | 76% |
| Pettitte, Andy | 98 | 16 | 16 | 94 | 43 | 39 | 12 | 31 | 82 | 3.58 | 4.07 | 1.28 | 1.1 | 7.5 | 2.6 | 55% |
| Phelps, David | 87 | 29 | 10 | 76 | 37 | 35 | 11 | 31 | 79 | 3.62 | 4.13 | 1.23 | 1.1 | 8.2 | 2.6 | 51% |
| Pineda, Michael | 77 | 13 | 13 | 65 | 35 | 33 | 9 | 24 | 77 | 3.86 | 3.66 | 1.16 | 1.1 | 9.0 | 3.1 | 54% |
| Rapada, Clay | 46 | 85 | 0 | 42 | 22 | 20 | 5 | 18 | 41 | 3.91 | 3.97 | 1.3 | 1 | 8 | 2.3 | 35% |
| Rivera, Mariano | 35 | 37 | 0 | 32 | 14 | 13 | 3 | 9 | 30 | 3.34 | 3.34 | 1.17 | 0.8 | 7.7 | 3.3 | 40% |
| Robertson, David | 62 | 66 | 0 | 53 | 22 | 21 | 5 | 24 | 73 | 3.05 | 3.02 | 1.24 | 0.7 | 10.6 | 3.0 | 57% |
| Sabathia, C.C. | 184 | 26 | 26 | 174 | 78 | 69 | 19 | 49 | 175 | 3.38 | 3.46 | 1.21 | 0.9 | 8.6 | 3.6 | 82% |
Yankee hitters - Since we know A-Rod will likely miss at least half the season, I halved the PAs Marcels projected for A-Rod, and prorated his other stats:
| Hitter | PA | AB | H | 2B | 3B | HR | BB | SB | CS | BA | OBP | SLG | wOBA | BRs | Reliability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cano, Robinson | 617 | 560 | 169 | 39 | 3 | 27 | 46 | 5 | 2 | .302 | .360 | .527 | .369 | 100 | 87% |
| Cervelli, Francisco | 215 | 189 | 50 | 8 | 1 | 4 | 19 | 3 | 1 | .265 | .338 | .381 | .312 | 24 | 56% |
| Diaz, Matt | 286 | 262 | 65 | 15 | 1 | 5 | 18 | 4 | 1 | .248 | .302 | .370 | .290 | 29 | 67% |
| Canzler, Russ | 249 | 227 | 60 | 10 | 1 | 7 | 18 | 3 | 1 | .264 | .319 | .410 | .311 | 29 | 30% |
| Gardner, Brett | 277 | 240 | 64 | 10 | 3 | 4 | 30 | 19 | 5 | .267 | .354 | .383 | .329 | 35 | 78% |
| Granderson, Curtis | 611 | 533 | 130 | 20 | 6 | 34 | 65 | 14 | 4 | .244 | .330 | .495 | .352 | 88 | 87% |
| Jeter, Derek | 631 | 576 | 163 | 26 | 2 | 11 | 44 | 12 | 4 | .283 | .338 | .392 | .319 | 74 | 87% |
| Nix, Jayson | 316 | 284 | 65 | 15 | 1 | 9 | 22 | 6 | 3 | .229 | .293 | .384 | .289 | 32 | 69% |
| Nunez, Eduardo | 284 | 258 | 70 | 13 | 2 | 6 | 20 | 16 | 4 | .271 | .323 | .407 | .319 | 35 | 63% |
| Rodriguez, Alex | 254 | 225 | 59 | 11 | 1 | 10 | 24 | 4 | 1 | .262 | .339 | .453 | .342 | 35 | 84% |
| Suzuki, Ichiro | 604 | 567 | 155 | 23 | 4 | 7 | 30 | 28 | 6 | .273 | .311 | .365 | .293 | 64 | 87% |
| Stewart, Chris | 297 | 267 | 63 | 14 | 1 | 6 | 23 | 3 | 1 | .236 | .299 | .363 | .284 | 29 | 56% |
| Teixeira, Mark | 530 | 459 | 114 | 24 | 1 | 26 | 56 | 3 | 1 | .248 | .336 | .475 | .346 | 74 | 86% |
| Youkilis, Kevin | 506 | 435 | 110 | 23 | 3 | 18 | 55 | 3 | 1 | .253 | .350 | .444 | .343 | 69 | 83% |
Blue Jay pitchers: The sums of projected games slightly exceeded 162, I removed a few projected starts from their spot starters and correspondingly incremented their games relieved.
| Pitcher | IP | G | GS | H | R | ER | HR | BB | SO | ERA | FIP | WHIP | HR/9 | SO/9 | SO/BB | Reliability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dickey, R.A. | 197 | 30 | 29 | 184 | 80 | 73 | 22 | 51 | 157 | 3.34 | 3.89 | 1.19 | 1 | 7.2 | 3.1 | 81% |
| Johnson, Josh | 162 | 26 | 26 | 147 | 67 | 63 | 13 | 52 | 142 | 3.50 | 3.42 | 1.23 | 0.7 | 7.9 | 2.7 | 75% |
| Buehrle, Mark | 182 | 28 | 28 | 190 | 86 | 80 | 23 | 43 | 112 | 3.96 | 4.30 | 1.28 | 1.1 | 5.5 | 2.6 | 81% |
| Morrow, Brandon | 140 | 24 | 24 | 123 | 67 | 62 | 15 | 50 | 143 | 3.99 | 3.70 | 1.24 | 1 | 9.2 | 2.9 | 75% |
| Romero, Ricky | 173 | 27 | 27 | 163 | 90 | 82 | 20 | 75 | 137 | 4.27 | 4.51 | 1.38 | 1 | 7.1 | 1.8 | 81% |
| Happ, J.A. | 145 | 27 | 25 | 145 | 83 | 78 | 20 | 61 | 130 | 4.84 | 4.45 | 1.42 | 1.2 | 8.1 | 2.1 | 75% |
| Janssen, Casey | 62 | 61 | 0 | 55 | 24 | 23 | 7 | 17 | 58 | 3.34 | 3.68 | 1.16 | 1 | 8.4 | 3.4 | 55% |
| Santos, Sergio | 34 | 34 | 0 | 31 | 16 | 15 | 4 | 14 | 36 | 3.97 | 3.82 | 1.32 | 1.1 | 9.5 | 2.6 | 41% |
| Oliver, Darren | 58 | 67 | 0 | 54 | 23 | 21 | 5 | 17 | 50 | 3.26 | 3.55 | 1.22 | 0.8 | 7.8 | 2.9 | 53% |
| Delabar, Steve | 59 | 54 | 0 | 50 | 27 | 26 | 9 | 22 | 63 | 3.97 | 4.24 | 1.22 | 1.4 | 9.6 | 2.9 | 42% |
| Lincoln, Brad | 81 | 50 | 2 | 80 | 41 | 39 | 12 | 25 | 68 | 4.33 | 4.38 | 1.30 | 1.3 | 7.6 | 2.7 | 59% |
| Rogers, Esmil | 78 | 51 | 1 | 86 | 47 | 45 | 10 | 31 | 71 | 5.19 | 4.24 | 1.50 | 1.2 | 8.2 | 2.3 | 65% |
| Perez, Luis | 54 | 41 | 0 | 53 | 27 | 25 | 6 | 20 | 47 | 4.17 | 4.09 | 1.35 | 1 | 7.8 | 2.4 | 48% |
Blue Hay Hitters - The Marcels projections for the 2 catchers are based on both being regulars; so to make this realistic, I reduced Josh Thole's projected PAs by 40%, and prorated his other stats:
| Hitter | PA | AB | H | 2B | 3B | HR | BB | SB | CS | BA | OBP | SLG | wOBA | BRs | Reliability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arencibia, J.P. | 435 | 399 | 94 | 19 | 2 | 20 | 29 | 3 | 1 | .236 | .290 | .444 | .311 | 51 | 77% |
| Bautista, Jose | 465 | 387 | 102 | 19 | 1 | 31 | 70 | 7 | 2 | .264 | .381 | .558 | .391 | 82 | 85% |
| Bonifacio, Emilio | 401 | 357 | 99 | 13 | 5 | 4 | 35 | 26 | 4 | .277 | .341 | .375 | .321 | 48 | 79% |
| Cabrera, Melky | 521 | 478 | 145 | 28 | 6 | 12 | 35 | 12 | 5 | .303 | .349 | .462 | .343 | 73 | 85% |
| Davis, Rajai | 477 | 442 | 114 | 24 | 4 | 7 | 27 | 39 | 10 | .258 | .305 | .378 | .306 | 54 | 82% |
| Encarnacion, Edwin | 575 | 507 | 136 | 27 | 0 | 29 | 57 | 9 | 2 | .268 | .346 | .493 | .356 | 86 | 84% |
| Gose, Anthony | 295 | 261 | 66 | 13 | 3 | 5 | 26 | 14 | 3 | .253 | .326 | .383 | .313 | 34 | 44% |
| Izturis, Maicer | 409 | 371 | 96 | 21 | 1 | 5 | 30 | 12 | 4 | .259 | .319 | .361 | .300 | 43 | 78% |
| Lawrie, Brett | 485 | 439 | 124 | 24 | 4 | 14 | 36 | 13 | 6 | .282 | .342 | .451 | .340 | 65 | 74% |
| Lind, Adam | 431 | 396 | 98 | 17 | 2 | 17 | 29 | 2 | 1 | .247 | .299 | .429 | .310 | 50 | 83% |
| Rasmus, Colby | 565 | 505 | 123 | 24 | 5 | 20 | 51 | 7 | 4 | .244 | .314 | .430 | .315 | 68 | 85% |
| Reyes, Jose | 617 | 563 | 165 | 31 | 11 | 11 | 46 | 33 | 8 | .293 | .345 | .446 | .340 | 86 | 87% |
| Thole, Josh | 250 | 223 | 58 | 11 | 1 | 3 | 22 | 1 | 1 | .260 | .331 | .359 | .294 | 26 | 77% |
I'll be doing a similar exercise for the other AL East teams at some point.
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
New York Times Publishes a Load of Bullshit
The great Yankee GM George Weiss famously said:
"To hell with newspapermen. You can buy them with a steak."
Which I mention because David Waldstein of the New York Times ended 2012 with a blog post so void of journalistic integrity that it made me wonder if he was trying to curry favor with Hal Steinbrenner in order to get a cushy position on YES. Perhaps that is unfair - perhaps this merely reveals Waldstein as a lazy and incompetent journalist - but the post carries so much water for Hal Steinbrenner that one has to wonder.
The post began with a barrage of interesting facts, excerpted below:
"As of Dec. 31, 2012, the Yankees’ payroll was right at the targeted threshold of $189 million....the Yankees have contractual commitments to 14 players worth $189,475,000....it doesn’t include technically unsigned players like Phil Hughes, Boone Logan, Joba Chamberlain, Ivan Nova and Clay Rapada, who are under the Yankees’ control....Once the Yankees come to agreements with those players, the payroll will rise, but it won’t affect their seemingly ironclad plan to be under $189 million for 2014."
I expected Waldstein was leading up to an analysis of what the Yankee roster might look like with such a payroll. Otherwise, why waste the reader's time mentioning this number?
However...well, let's describe the ways in which Mr. Waldstein seemed to use the New York Times as part of Hal Steinbrenner's PR operation.
First, Waldstein used loaded language to describe the luxury tax rate considerations. In the following quote, note how he uses the word "soar" to describe a potential tax rate raise of 10%, and "plummet" to describe a potential rate decrease of 22.5%:
"If the Yankees are over the $189 million mark for 2014, their luxury tax rate would soar to 50 percent (they are currently at 40 percent). If they are below it, the rate would plummet to 17.5 percent."
The misleading nature of this language becomes apparent when you look at the actual dollars. To illustrate, let's extrapolate the 2012 payroll to the 2014 rates. In 2012, the Yankee payroll was assessed at $225 million. Applying the 2014 cap of $189 million, the Yankees would be $36 million over the cap. The following table shows what the Yankees would pay at these 3 rates:
Waldstein then further calls his journalistic integrity into question with this statement:
"the rate would plummet to 17.5 percent, and that could translate into potential savings of $50 million."
This is just bullshit. As we've just seen, the amount due to the luxury tax rate considerations is a fraction of $50 million!
The potential for $50 million in revenue instead has to due with a messed-up scam straight out of The Producers, which I've described here. The luxury tax rate is merely a red herring: the Yankees want fans to believe the rate is the issue. When journalists such as Waldstein fail to point out the real issue, they are merely functioning as Yankee PR.
Waldstein then closed his piece with the following editorial comment, which is what made me wonder if his purpose was to butter up Hal Steinbrenner:
"the Yankees have paid $224.2 million in luxury tax over the last decade. And people wonder why Steinbrenner wants to avoid paying even more."
The reason this is a silly statement is because amounts without context are meaningless. Yes, the Yankees have led the league in luxury tax payments. However, the Yankees also have blown away the rest of the league in terms of revenues. This is why the Yankees are the most valued property in baseball; Forbes estimates their value at $1.85 billion. And this is in addition to the value of YES, which is around $3 billion. This is a testimony to George Steinbrenner's obsession with winning, which Yankee fans have richly rewarded by attending and watching the games.
That is why many observers "wonder why Steinbrenner wants to avoid paying even more." In financial terms, I believe the correct term for what Steinbrenner is trying to do is "killing the goose that laid the golden egg."
"To hell with newspapermen. You can buy them with a steak."
Which I mention because David Waldstein of the New York Times ended 2012 with a blog post so void of journalistic integrity that it made me wonder if he was trying to curry favor with Hal Steinbrenner in order to get a cushy position on YES. Perhaps that is unfair - perhaps this merely reveals Waldstein as a lazy and incompetent journalist - but the post carries so much water for Hal Steinbrenner that one has to wonder.
The post began with a barrage of interesting facts, excerpted below:
"As of Dec. 31, 2012, the Yankees’ payroll was right at the targeted threshold of $189 million....the Yankees have contractual commitments to 14 players worth $189,475,000....it doesn’t include technically unsigned players like Phil Hughes, Boone Logan, Joba Chamberlain, Ivan Nova and Clay Rapada, who are under the Yankees’ control....Once the Yankees come to agreements with those players, the payroll will rise, but it won’t affect their seemingly ironclad plan to be under $189 million for 2014."
I expected Waldstein was leading up to an analysis of what the Yankee roster might look like with such a payroll. Otherwise, why waste the reader's time mentioning this number?
However...well, let's describe the ways in which Mr. Waldstein seemed to use the New York Times as part of Hal Steinbrenner's PR operation.
First, Waldstein used loaded language to describe the luxury tax rate considerations. In the following quote, note how he uses the word "soar" to describe a potential tax rate raise of 10%, and "plummet" to describe a potential rate decrease of 22.5%:
"If the Yankees are over the $189 million mark for 2014, their luxury tax rate would soar to 50 percent (they are currently at 40 percent). If they are below it, the rate would plummet to 17.5 percent."
The misleading nature of this language becomes apparent when you look at the actual dollars. To illustrate, let's extrapolate the 2012 payroll to the 2014 rates. In 2012, the Yankee payroll was assessed at $225 million. Applying the 2014 cap of $189 million, the Yankees would be $36 million over the cap. The following table shows what the Yankees would pay at these 3 rates:
| Rate | Taxed Amount |
|---|---|
| 50% | $18,000,000 |
| 40% | $14,400,000 |
| 17.5% | $6,300,000 |
Waldstein then further calls his journalistic integrity into question with this statement:
"the rate would plummet to 17.5 percent, and that could translate into potential savings of $50 million."
This is just bullshit. As we've just seen, the amount due to the luxury tax rate considerations is a fraction of $50 million!
The potential for $50 million in revenue instead has to due with a messed-up scam straight out of The Producers, which I've described here. The luxury tax rate is merely a red herring: the Yankees want fans to believe the rate is the issue. When journalists such as Waldstein fail to point out the real issue, they are merely functioning as Yankee PR.
Waldstein then closed his piece with the following editorial comment, which is what made me wonder if his purpose was to butter up Hal Steinbrenner:
"the Yankees have paid $224.2 million in luxury tax over the last decade. And people wonder why Steinbrenner wants to avoid paying even more."
The reason this is a silly statement is because amounts without context are meaningless. Yes, the Yankees have led the league in luxury tax payments. However, the Yankees also have blown away the rest of the league in terms of revenues. This is why the Yankees are the most valued property in baseball; Forbes estimates their value at $1.85 billion. And this is in addition to the value of YES, which is around $3 billion. This is a testimony to George Steinbrenner's obsession with winning, which Yankee fans have richly rewarded by attending and watching the games.
That is why many observers "wonder why Steinbrenner wants to avoid paying even more." In financial terms, I believe the correct term for what Steinbrenner is trying to do is "killing the goose that laid the golden egg."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)