Friday, February 02, 2007
Super Bowl XLI Predictions
So Super Bowl XLI is this weekend, pitting two very unlikely teams against one another. The Chicago Bears, an offensively inept team that struggled badly at various moments in the NFL season, are playing the Indianapolis Colts, a team that seemed sunk when it fell behind the New England Patriots 21-3 in the AFC title game, but whom nevertheless rallied from the 18-point deficit and won 38-34 in dramatic fashion. I can’t say that I am impressed by either team. The Bears especially seemed to benefit strongly from home field advantage, while the Colts did seem to tough up their dead-last ranked defense and become a tougher team in the playoffs.
It reminds me a lot of last year’s Super Bowl, when two very flawed teams faced-off in Detroit. The Steelers had surged into the playoffs late with a team much weaker than the one that had gone 15-1 the previous season. The Seattle Seahawks, whose 13-3 regular season mark was largely built on the rubble on a depleted NFC, were nowhere as good as what their record suggested. I think that this game is very similar. Neither one of these teams dominated the opposition in the regular season, both of these teams had a lot of flaws. I personally expected to see the Saints and Patriots in this game.
I could see this game devolving into a blowout, the way so many Super Bowls in the 1980s did, if the Colts offense gets off to a fast start and the Bears offense struggles. I am skeptical about the big-play capacity of the Bears offense, so this is a definite possibility. Generally speaking, however, I think the Bears defense will keep the game close. I call it, Colts 27, Bears 17, with Peyton Manning, that long-suffering QB finally winning the big one.
(1) comments
It reminds me a lot of last year’s Super Bowl, when two very flawed teams faced-off in Detroit. The Steelers had surged into the playoffs late with a team much weaker than the one that had gone 15-1 the previous season. The Seattle Seahawks, whose 13-3 regular season mark was largely built on the rubble on a depleted NFC, were nowhere as good as what their record suggested. I think that this game is very similar. Neither one of these teams dominated the opposition in the regular season, both of these teams had a lot of flaws. I personally expected to see the Saints and Patriots in this game.
I could see this game devolving into a blowout, the way so many Super Bowls in the 1980s did, if the Colts offense gets off to a fast start and the Bears offense struggles. I am skeptical about the big-play capacity of the Bears offense, so this is a definite possibility. Generally speaking, however, I think the Bears defense will keep the game close. I call it, Colts 27, Bears 17, with Peyton Manning, that long-suffering QB finally winning the big one.
Labels: NFL, Predictions, Super Bowl
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Rod Barajas
Several weeks ago, very quietly, the Phillies signed catcher Rod Barajas, the Texas Rangers former backstop, to replace Mike Lieberthal, who left the Phillies to join the L.A. Dodgers with off-season along with Randy Wolf. The Phillies functioned quite well in 2006 with Carlos Ruiz and Chris Coste splitting the catching duties after the team dealt Sal Fasano and Lieberthal spent time on the D.L., however, Pat Gillick signed Barajas and clearly views Ruiz as the team’s backup in ’07. Coste, I am beginning to worry, might not even be a Phillie in 2007. But is Rod Barajas really the Phillies best option?
To say that Barajas signing isn’t Pat Gillick finest hour is an understatement, in my estimation. Let’s review Barajas production at the plate:
OBP / GPA / ISO
2004: .276 / .237 / .204
2005: .306 / .254 / .212
2006: .298 / .237 / .154
Confused about what I’m talking about? Here are the stats I refer to defined:
Gross Productive Average (GPA): (1.8 * .OBP + .SLG) / 4 = .GPA. Invented by The Hardball Times Aaron Gleeman, GPA measures a players production by weighing his ability to get on base and hit with power. This is my preferred all-around stat.
Isolated Power (ISO): .SLG - .BA = .ISO. Measures a player’s raw power by subtracting singles from their slugging percentage.
On-Base Percentage (OBP): How often a player gets on base. (H + BB + HBP) / (Plate Appearances)
Runs Created (RC): A stat originally created by Bill James to measure a player’s total contribution to his team’s lineup. Here is the formula: [(H + BB + HBP - CS - GIDP) times ((S * 1.125) + (D * 1.69) + (T * 3.02) + (HR * 3.73) + (.29 * (BB + HBP – IBB)) + (.492 * (SB + SF + SH)) – (.04 * K))] divided by (AB + BB + HBP + SH+ SF). If you use ESPN’s version be advised that it is pitifully is out-of-date, however. James adjusted RC after the 2004 season ended.
While I am impressed by the raw power Barajas shows at the plate, those On-Base-Percentage numbers are just horrifically low. Barajas seems to be a slugger, which might not be a bad fit for the Phillies lineup, but Barajas is a slugger in the “free-swinging” variant, which is out of place on a team that milked plate appearances better than most (3.82 pitches per plate appearance, one of the best in the N.L.). Barajas took 3.61 pitches per plate appearance.
I’d also note that the team has major problems with production from the bottom of its lineup and will enter the 2007 season with Aaron Rowand, Wes Helms, Barajas and a Pitcher hitting #6 thru #9. I am not optimistic about the Phillies chances of scoring many runs once Pat Burrell takes his cut. Perhaps Barajas power might help even out the issues here – sure he won’t get on base much, but his occasional 385-foot blasts could score two or three runs anytime Aaron Rowand decides to draw a walk – but the fact remains that the Phillies are going to have a lop-sided lineup, with the murderers row #1 - #5 (Rollins, Victorino, Utley, Howard and Burrell), and the remedial group in the bottom half. I hope this lack of balance doesn’t cause problems for the Phils.
On the plus side, Barajas power at the plate is what separates him from Fasano, who was an absolute disaster offensively with the Phillies. Fasano’s GPA with the Phillies was .224 and his ISO was .143. When he joined the Yankees for twenty-eight games at the end of the season, he did substantially worse, with an unthinkably bad .171 GPA and a .143 ISO. Barajas will be a much more potent offense force than Fasano.
Barajas:
Runs Created / Home Runs / Doubles
2004: 43 / 15 / 26
2005: 56 / 21 / 24
2006: 36 / 11 / 20
The issue, to me, is whether or not Barajas will be a more potent offensive threat than Carlos Ruiz, a player whom many in the Phillies blogging community are high on. Here is what the new Bill James Handbook says on the question
2007 Proj. Stats:
Barajas / Ruiz
GPA: .234 / .276
ISO: .171 / .182
OBP: .288 / .352
Ruiz looks like the clear-cut winner here. Having him hit lower in the Phillies lineup could solve those balance issues quite nicely.
The issue then becomes defense. As you know, most of catching is defensive, it is helping the pitcher get through the game, keeping runners from stealing second and third, and being a roadblock at home plate. Here are the differences between Barajas and Ruiz defensively … Teams tried to steal 0.66 bases a game against Ruiz, and Ruiz caught them 15% of the time. Teams tried to steal against Rod Barajas 0.58 times a game and he caught 28%. Advantage: Barajas?
No. Barajas played with the Texas Rangers in the American League in 2006. First off, teams are less likely to steal in the American League than in the National League. Specifically, there were 0.77 attempted steals a game in the A.L. and 0.82 in the N.L. So I’d say that the numbers are about even, which means that nobody tried to run more on one pitcher than another. Plus, the Phillies played against a lot of teams that like to run, like the Florida Marlins (168 attempted steals in 2006), the New York Mets (181 attempted steals), and the Washington Nationals (185 attempted steals). Sure, Barajas played against the Angels, a devoted team of little ballers, but he also played against the flat-footed Oakland A’s.
Defensively, I think the two players are about even, so I wonder about Pat Gillick’s wisdom in bringing Barajas aboard and supplanting the Coste / Ruiz platoon at catcher. Are the Phillies really improving themselves, or is Gillick and the rest of the Phillies brass just unable to trust Coste and Ruiz with the job? We’ll see how the season shakes out, but I am not much of a fan of Mr. Barajas at the moment.
(1) comments
To say that Barajas signing isn’t Pat Gillick finest hour is an understatement, in my estimation. Let’s review Barajas production at the plate:
OBP / GPA / ISO
2004: .276 / .237 / .204
2005: .306 / .254 / .212
2006: .298 / .237 / .154
Confused about what I’m talking about? Here are the stats I refer to defined:
Gross Productive Average (GPA): (1.8 * .OBP + .SLG) / 4 = .GPA. Invented by The Hardball Times Aaron Gleeman, GPA measures a players production by weighing his ability to get on base and hit with power. This is my preferred all-around stat.
Isolated Power (ISO): .SLG - .BA = .ISO. Measures a player’s raw power by subtracting singles from their slugging percentage.
On-Base Percentage (OBP): How often a player gets on base. (H + BB + HBP) / (Plate Appearances)
Runs Created (RC): A stat originally created by Bill James to measure a player’s total contribution to his team’s lineup. Here is the formula: [(H + BB + HBP - CS - GIDP) times ((S * 1.125) + (D * 1.69) + (T * 3.02) + (HR * 3.73) + (.29 * (BB + HBP – IBB)) + (.492 * (SB + SF + SH)) – (.04 * K))] divided by (AB + BB + HBP + SH+ SF). If you use ESPN’s version be advised that it is pitifully is out-of-date, however. James adjusted RC after the 2004 season ended.
While I am impressed by the raw power Barajas shows at the plate, those On-Base-Percentage numbers are just horrifically low. Barajas seems to be a slugger, which might not be a bad fit for the Phillies lineup, but Barajas is a slugger in the “free-swinging” variant, which is out of place on a team that milked plate appearances better than most (3.82 pitches per plate appearance, one of the best in the N.L.). Barajas took 3.61 pitches per plate appearance.
I’d also note that the team has major problems with production from the bottom of its lineup and will enter the 2007 season with Aaron Rowand, Wes Helms, Barajas and a Pitcher hitting #6 thru #9. I am not optimistic about the Phillies chances of scoring many runs once Pat Burrell takes his cut. Perhaps Barajas power might help even out the issues here – sure he won’t get on base much, but his occasional 385-foot blasts could score two or three runs anytime Aaron Rowand decides to draw a walk – but the fact remains that the Phillies are going to have a lop-sided lineup, with the murderers row #1 - #5 (Rollins, Victorino, Utley, Howard and Burrell), and the remedial group in the bottom half. I hope this lack of balance doesn’t cause problems for the Phils.
On the plus side, Barajas power at the plate is what separates him from Fasano, who was an absolute disaster offensively with the Phillies. Fasano’s GPA with the Phillies was .224 and his ISO was .143. When he joined the Yankees for twenty-eight games at the end of the season, he did substantially worse, with an unthinkably bad .171 GPA and a .143 ISO. Barajas will be a much more potent offense force than Fasano.
Barajas:
Runs Created / Home Runs / Doubles
2004: 43 / 15 / 26
2005: 56 / 21 / 24
2006: 36 / 11 / 20
The issue, to me, is whether or not Barajas will be a more potent offensive threat than Carlos Ruiz, a player whom many in the Phillies blogging community are high on. Here is what the new Bill James Handbook says on the question
2007 Proj. Stats:
Barajas / Ruiz
GPA: .234 / .276
ISO: .171 / .182
OBP: .288 / .352
Ruiz looks like the clear-cut winner here. Having him hit lower in the Phillies lineup could solve those balance issues quite nicely.
The issue then becomes defense. As you know, most of catching is defensive, it is helping the pitcher get through the game, keeping runners from stealing second and third, and being a roadblock at home plate. Here are the differences between Barajas and Ruiz defensively … Teams tried to steal 0.66 bases a game against Ruiz, and Ruiz caught them 15% of the time. Teams tried to steal against Rod Barajas 0.58 times a game and he caught 28%. Advantage: Barajas?
No. Barajas played with the Texas Rangers in the American League in 2006. First off, teams are less likely to steal in the American League than in the National League. Specifically, there were 0.77 attempted steals a game in the A.L. and 0.82 in the N.L. So I’d say that the numbers are about even, which means that nobody tried to run more on one pitcher than another. Plus, the Phillies played against a lot of teams that like to run, like the Florida Marlins (168 attempted steals in 2006), the New York Mets (181 attempted steals), and the Washington Nationals (185 attempted steals). Sure, Barajas played against the Angels, a devoted team of little ballers, but he also played against the flat-footed Oakland A’s.
Defensively, I think the two players are about even, so I wonder about Pat Gillick’s wisdom in bringing Barajas aboard and supplanting the Coste / Ruiz platoon at catcher. Are the Phillies really improving themselves, or is Gillick and the rest of the Phillies brass just unable to trust Coste and Ruiz with the job? We’ll see how the season shakes out, but I am not much of a fan of Mr. Barajas at the moment.
Labels: Barajas, Catchers, Coste, Fasano, Ruiz
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
The Farm Report, Part VI: Scranton Red Barons
We come to the end … As I noted in Part I last Monday, the Phillies broke their affiliation with the Scranton Red Barons and moved their Triple-A team to beautiful Ottawa, where they will be called the Lynx for 2007 before moving to the Lehigh Valley to become the Iron Pigs in 2008. I can’t say I am much for the name, but I do see the benefit of having the Phillies most important affiliate close to the big team.
It was a good season for the Scranton Red Barons: they went 84-58 in the International League (IL), but were defeated in the playoffs. Like the Muckdogs and Blue Claws, the Red Barons led their league in ERA, an impressive feat for teams in the Phillies system: three of their six teams led their league in ERA. Oh, and the Phillies minor league teams ranked eighth in baseball in winning percentage.
The Red Barons team ERA was 3.28, much better than the 3.80 league ERA. The quality of the fielding behind the Red Barons hurlers is a factor here: the Red Barons were second in the IL in fielding percentage and when you convert the Red Barons home runs, walks and strikeouts into a Fielding Independent Pitching ERA (FIP), the Red Barons ERA rises to 3.69.
Confused about what I’m talking about? Here are the stats I refer to defined:
ERA – Earned Run Average: (Earned Runs * 9) / IP = ERA
FIP – Fielding Independent Pitching: (13*HR+3*BB-2*K / IP) + League Factor Evaluates a pitching by how he would have done with an average defense behind him by keeping track of things that a pitcher can control (walks, strikeouts, home runs allowed) as opposed to things he cannot (hits allowed, runs allowed).
HR/9 – Home Runs allowed per nine innings: (HR * 9) / IP
K/9 – Strikeouts per nine innings: (K * 9) / IP
BB/9 – Walks per nine innings: (BB * 9) / IP
Gross Productive Average (GPA): (1.8 * .OBP + .SLG) / 4 = .GPA. Invented by The Hardball Times Aaron Gleeman, GPA measures a players production by weighing his ability to get on base and hit with power. This is my preferred all-around stat.
Isolated Power (ISO): .SLG - .BA = .ISO. Measures a player’s raw power by subtracting singles from their slugging percentage.
However the Red Barons pitchers did pitch extremely well:
IL / Red Barons
HR/9: 0.76 / 0.68
BB/9: 3.17 / 2.83
K/9: 6.94 / 6.46
They were much, much better than the league average in allowing home runs and in preventing walks, though a little behind the curve in getting strikeouts. What is interesting to me is that so few of the Phillies top prospects even threw innings with the Red Barons in 2006: Scott Mathieson threw 34, Cole Hamels threw 23, and J.A. Happ threw six.
The Red Barons leading pitcher by innings was Eude Brito, who went 1-2 with a 7.36 ERA with the Phillies in 2006, but who went a respectable 10-8 with a 3.17 ERA with the Red Barons. The Red Barons best pitcher, however, was Brian Mazone, who went 13-3 with a 2.03 ERA. Mazone’s strikeout numbers weren’t great (5.96 K/9), but he was tough with the walks (2.52 BB/9), and he was extraordinarily difficult to get a home run off of: 0.42 HR/9.
Meanwhile, the Red Barons position players didn’t fare so well. Despite having players like Carlos Ruiz, Chris Coste, Michael Bourn, Chris Roberson and Danny Sandoval, all players who got time with the Phillies, and in the cases of Ruiz and Coste, played big parts in the Phillies run to the playoffs, the Red Barons ranked twelfth in the IL in runs scored out of fourteen teams. They didn’t steal many bases (a surprise given that Roberson and Bourn have speed to burn), they didn’t get on base particularly well (twelfth in OBP) and they didn’t have much power (ninth in slugging percentage). Ruiz was the Phillies power hitter, clubbing sixteen home runs and twenty-five doubles.
Interestingly, Coste actually played very badly in his 39 games with the Red Barons, hitting a .174 GPA with a .095 ISO.
It will be interesting to see what Michael Bourn will do in 2006, if he should remain in Triple-A for 2007. The speedster stole fifteen of the sixteen bases he attempted in 2006, impressive given that he only had thirty-five singles or doubles and twenty walks. Bourn could rack up 100+ steals in 2007 if he plays anything like a full season with the Lynx, but my gut tells me that Chris Roberson will be playing outfield for the Lynx while Bourn will be the Phillies fifth outfielder this summer.
In the final analysis, my view is that the Phillies have a very strong minor league system that is, especially when looking at the pitching end of things, developing a lot of prospect that will one day wear the red pinstripes. The development of the Phillies minor league system is a great, under-appreciated story: so many of the Phillies top draft picks are important members of the team today, like Chase Utley and Pat Burrell, and so many players are on their way to give the Phillies an opportunity to compete now and into the future. I'll keep tabs on the Minors as the season progresses and let everyone know how the players we've discussed are doing.
Tomorrow, Rod Barajas: Better or Worse than Sal Fasano?
(0) comments
It was a good season for the Scranton Red Barons: they went 84-58 in the International League (IL), but were defeated in the playoffs. Like the Muckdogs and Blue Claws, the Red Barons led their league in ERA, an impressive feat for teams in the Phillies system: three of their six teams led their league in ERA. Oh, and the Phillies minor league teams ranked eighth in baseball in winning percentage.
The Red Barons team ERA was 3.28, much better than the 3.80 league ERA. The quality of the fielding behind the Red Barons hurlers is a factor here: the Red Barons were second in the IL in fielding percentage and when you convert the Red Barons home runs, walks and strikeouts into a Fielding Independent Pitching ERA (FIP), the Red Barons ERA rises to 3.69.
Confused about what I’m talking about? Here are the stats I refer to defined:
ERA – Earned Run Average: (Earned Runs * 9) / IP = ERA
FIP – Fielding Independent Pitching: (13*HR+3*BB-2*K / IP) + League Factor Evaluates a pitching by how he would have done with an average defense behind him by keeping track of things that a pitcher can control (walks, strikeouts, home runs allowed) as opposed to things he cannot (hits allowed, runs allowed).
HR/9 – Home Runs allowed per nine innings: (HR * 9) / IP
K/9 – Strikeouts per nine innings: (K * 9) / IP
BB/9 – Walks per nine innings: (BB * 9) / IP
Gross Productive Average (GPA): (1.8 * .OBP + .SLG) / 4 = .GPA. Invented by The Hardball Times Aaron Gleeman, GPA measures a players production by weighing his ability to get on base and hit with power. This is my preferred all-around stat.
Isolated Power (ISO): .SLG - .BA = .ISO. Measures a player’s raw power by subtracting singles from their slugging percentage.
However the Red Barons pitchers did pitch extremely well:
IL / Red Barons
HR/9: 0.76 / 0.68
BB/9: 3.17 / 2.83
K/9: 6.94 / 6.46
They were much, much better than the league average in allowing home runs and in preventing walks, though a little behind the curve in getting strikeouts. What is interesting to me is that so few of the Phillies top prospects even threw innings with the Red Barons in 2006: Scott Mathieson threw 34, Cole Hamels threw 23, and J.A. Happ threw six.
The Red Barons leading pitcher by innings was Eude Brito, who went 1-2 with a 7.36 ERA with the Phillies in 2006, but who went a respectable 10-8 with a 3.17 ERA with the Red Barons. The Red Barons best pitcher, however, was Brian Mazone, who went 13-3 with a 2.03 ERA. Mazone’s strikeout numbers weren’t great (5.96 K/9), but he was tough with the walks (2.52 BB/9), and he was extraordinarily difficult to get a home run off of: 0.42 HR/9.
Meanwhile, the Red Barons position players didn’t fare so well. Despite having players like Carlos Ruiz, Chris Coste, Michael Bourn, Chris Roberson and Danny Sandoval, all players who got time with the Phillies, and in the cases of Ruiz and Coste, played big parts in the Phillies run to the playoffs, the Red Barons ranked twelfth in the IL in runs scored out of fourteen teams. They didn’t steal many bases (a surprise given that Roberson and Bourn have speed to burn), they didn’t get on base particularly well (twelfth in OBP) and they didn’t have much power (ninth in slugging percentage). Ruiz was the Phillies power hitter, clubbing sixteen home runs and twenty-five doubles.
Interestingly, Coste actually played very badly in his 39 games with the Red Barons, hitting a .174 GPA with a .095 ISO.
It will be interesting to see what Michael Bourn will do in 2006, if he should remain in Triple-A for 2007. The speedster stole fifteen of the sixteen bases he attempted in 2006, impressive given that he only had thirty-five singles or doubles and twenty walks. Bourn could rack up 100+ steals in 2007 if he plays anything like a full season with the Lynx, but my gut tells me that Chris Roberson will be playing outfield for the Lynx while Bourn will be the Phillies fifth outfielder this summer.
In the final analysis, my view is that the Phillies have a very strong minor league system that is, especially when looking at the pitching end of things, developing a lot of prospect that will one day wear the red pinstripes. The development of the Phillies minor league system is a great, under-appreciated story: so many of the Phillies top draft picks are important members of the team today, like Chase Utley and Pat Burrell, and so many players are on their way to give the Phillies an opportunity to compete now and into the future. I'll keep tabs on the Minors as the season progresses and let everyone know how the players we've discussed are doing.
Tomorrow, Rod Barajas: Better or Worse than Sal Fasano?
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
The Farm Report, Part V: Reading Phillies
It occurred to me as I began to write this article that the Phillies have had remarkable success with their draft choices in the recent past. Between 1998 and 2002, the Phillies took as their top draft choice, Pat Burrell, Brett Myers, Chase Utley, Gavin Floyd and Cole Hamels. Of those five players, four are currently playing on the Phillies roster and are major contributors, while Floyd is busy rehabbing him career in the Chicago White Sox system.
The Phillies, whatever their faults, do a good job of identifying and grooming talent for the big leagues. It makes me wonder then why the Phillies don’t have more talent in their system at Reading, which turned in a decent 71-69 record in the 2006 Eastern League, fifteen games behind Akron.
I’m a little baffled about how the Reading Phillies wound up ranking fourth of twelve Eastern League teams in runs scored. They ranked fifth in On-Base-Percentage, but were eleventh of twelve teams in terms of Isolated Power, and they ranked eleventh in stolen bases attempted and gained. They were a little better than most teams in terms of getting on base, but that’s about it. Otherwise they were a very boring, below-average team.
Confused about what I’m talking about? Here are the stats I refer to defined:
Isolated Power (ISO): .SLG - .BA = .ISO. Measures a player’s raw power by subtracting singles from their slugging percentage.
On-Base Percentage (OBP): How often a player gets on base. (H + BB + HBP) / (Plate Appearances)
Slugging Percentage (SLG): Total Bases / At-Bats = Slugging Percentage. Power at the plate.
ERA – Earned Run Average: (Earned Runs * 9) / IP = ERA
FIP – Fielding Independent Pitching: (13*HR+3*BB-2*K / IP) + League Factor Evaluates a pitching by how he would have done with an average defense behind him by keeping track of things that a pitcher can control (walks, strikeouts, home runs allowed) as opposed to things he cannot (hits allowed, runs allowed).
HR/9 – Home Runs allowed per nine innings: (HR * 9) / IP
K/9 – Strikeouts per nine innings: (K * 9) / IP
BB/9 – Walks per nine innings: (BB * 9) / IP
The position-player talent is a little thin at Reading. Nary a one mentioned well from the scouts, though I noticed that first baseman Gary Burnham hit well in 2006. His .235 ISO was impressive and his .987 OPS is about two hundred points higher than any other relief pitcher. After Burnham, you’d have to focus on outfielder Michael Bourn, whom Baseball America rates as the Phillies seventh-best prospect. Bourn showed good skills in getting on base – .350 OBP – and showed real speed on the base-paths, stealing thirty of the thirty-four bases. Not a power-hitter – 72 of his 87 hits were singles – he seems destined to be the Phillies fifth outfielder in 2007, beating out Chris Roberson for the job. Call it a hunch, but the Phillies will want Bourn in Philly in 2007.
Meanwhile, the pitchers were slightly below-average as well. The team ERA – 3.86 – was just under the league average of 3.81. The team FIP was slightly worse: 3.96. Here is how the Phillies stacked up with the rest of the league:
Eastern League / Reading
HR/9: 0.76 / 0.93
BB/9: 3.24 / 3.01
K/9: 7.38 / 7.45
Gio Gonzalez pitched for the Reading Phillies and struggled in 2006 (7-12, 4.66 ERA), but he’s now gone, traded to the White Sox. The Phillies had three other prospects at Reading that we want to focus on: Zach Segovia, Scott Mathieson and J.A. Happ.
Segovia is a top prospect in the Phillies system, a pitcher who had Tommy John surgery in 2004 and seemed to really regain his form last season, going 11-5 with a 3.11 ERA in Reading. He struck out 6.31 batters per nine innings, under the league and team averages, but displayed phenomenal control, allowing just 2.02 walks per nine innings and 0.67 home runs. Segovia, who doesn’t place in Baseball America’s Top Ten Phillies prospects, is nevertheless a good bet to make it to the Phillies late this season or definitely in 2008.
Scott Mathieson pitched briefly with the Philadelphia Phillies in 2006, but struggled and will miss the 2007 campaign with Tommy John surgery. Mathieson did pitch extremely well in 2006 in Reading, going 7-2 with a 3.21 ERA. What was really impressive were Mathieson’s 9.62 strikeouts per nine innings. Hopefully he’ll regain his form once he returns in 2008.
J.A. Happ is probably the best prospect in Reading at the moment. Happ, whose 3-7 record in Clearwater didn’t reflect that fact that he had a 2.81 ERA there, pitched very well with the Reading Phillies. How well? Happ’s 6-2 record doesn’t tell the full story: his ERA was 2.65 and he K’d 9.76 batters per nine innings. He also surrendered just two home runs in seventy-four and two-thirds innings of work. Check out how well Happ pitched relative to Segovia, Mathieson and Gonzalez:
FIP:
Gonzalez: 4.71
Segovia: 3.51
Mathieson: 3.19
Happ: 2.61
Like Segovia, expect to see Happ in Philadelphia either by the end of 2007 or definitely in 2008. Tomorrow we bring our series to a close with a look at Scranton.
(1) comments
The Phillies, whatever their faults, do a good job of identifying and grooming talent for the big leagues. It makes me wonder then why the Phillies don’t have more talent in their system at Reading, which turned in a decent 71-69 record in the 2006 Eastern League, fifteen games behind Akron.
I’m a little baffled about how the Reading Phillies wound up ranking fourth of twelve Eastern League teams in runs scored. They ranked fifth in On-Base-Percentage, but were eleventh of twelve teams in terms of Isolated Power, and they ranked eleventh in stolen bases attempted and gained. They were a little better than most teams in terms of getting on base, but that’s about it. Otherwise they were a very boring, below-average team.
Confused about what I’m talking about? Here are the stats I refer to defined:
Isolated Power (ISO): .SLG - .BA = .ISO. Measures a player’s raw power by subtracting singles from their slugging percentage.
On-Base Percentage (OBP): How often a player gets on base. (H + BB + HBP) / (Plate Appearances)
Slugging Percentage (SLG): Total Bases / At-Bats = Slugging Percentage. Power at the plate.
ERA – Earned Run Average: (Earned Runs * 9) / IP = ERA
FIP – Fielding Independent Pitching: (13*HR+3*BB-2*K / IP) + League Factor Evaluates a pitching by how he would have done with an average defense behind him by keeping track of things that a pitcher can control (walks, strikeouts, home runs allowed) as opposed to things he cannot (hits allowed, runs allowed).
HR/9 – Home Runs allowed per nine innings: (HR * 9) / IP
K/9 – Strikeouts per nine innings: (K * 9) / IP
BB/9 – Walks per nine innings: (BB * 9) / IP
The position-player talent is a little thin at Reading. Nary a one mentioned well from the scouts, though I noticed that first baseman Gary Burnham hit well in 2006. His .235 ISO was impressive and his .987 OPS is about two hundred points higher than any other relief pitcher. After Burnham, you’d have to focus on outfielder Michael Bourn, whom Baseball America rates as the Phillies seventh-best prospect. Bourn showed good skills in getting on base – .350 OBP – and showed real speed on the base-paths, stealing thirty of the thirty-four bases. Not a power-hitter – 72 of his 87 hits were singles – he seems destined to be the Phillies fifth outfielder in 2007, beating out Chris Roberson for the job. Call it a hunch, but the Phillies will want Bourn in Philly in 2007.
Meanwhile, the pitchers were slightly below-average as well. The team ERA – 3.86 – was just under the league average of 3.81. The team FIP was slightly worse: 3.96. Here is how the Phillies stacked up with the rest of the league:
Eastern League / Reading
HR/9: 0.76 / 0.93
BB/9: 3.24 / 3.01
K/9: 7.38 / 7.45
Gio Gonzalez pitched for the Reading Phillies and struggled in 2006 (7-12, 4.66 ERA), but he’s now gone, traded to the White Sox. The Phillies had three other prospects at Reading that we want to focus on: Zach Segovia, Scott Mathieson and J.A. Happ.
Segovia is a top prospect in the Phillies system, a pitcher who had Tommy John surgery in 2004 and seemed to really regain his form last season, going 11-5 with a 3.11 ERA in Reading. He struck out 6.31 batters per nine innings, under the league and team averages, but displayed phenomenal control, allowing just 2.02 walks per nine innings and 0.67 home runs. Segovia, who doesn’t place in Baseball America’s Top Ten Phillies prospects, is nevertheless a good bet to make it to the Phillies late this season or definitely in 2008.
Scott Mathieson pitched briefly with the Philadelphia Phillies in 2006, but struggled and will miss the 2007 campaign with Tommy John surgery. Mathieson did pitch extremely well in 2006 in Reading, going 7-2 with a 3.21 ERA. What was really impressive were Mathieson’s 9.62 strikeouts per nine innings. Hopefully he’ll regain his form once he returns in 2008.
J.A. Happ is probably the best prospect in Reading at the moment. Happ, whose 3-7 record in Clearwater didn’t reflect that fact that he had a 2.81 ERA there, pitched very well with the Reading Phillies. How well? Happ’s 6-2 record doesn’t tell the full story: his ERA was 2.65 and he K’d 9.76 batters per nine innings. He also surrendered just two home runs in seventy-four and two-thirds innings of work. Check out how well Happ pitched relative to Segovia, Mathieson and Gonzalez:
FIP:
Gonzalez: 4.71
Segovia: 3.51
Mathieson: 3.19
Happ: 2.61
Like Segovia, expect to see Happ in Philadelphia either by the end of 2007 or definitely in 2008. Tomorrow we bring our series to a close with a look at Scranton.
Monday, January 29, 2007
How Good is the Phillies Outfield?
I was participating on Philly Sports Talk with Rich and Jim Dogg recently when I was asked what I felt the Phillies biggest flaw was going to be in 2007. I mulled the question over and chose to give a response that probably surprised a lot of people: the outfield. Most people might guess the bullpen or the starting rotation, but the more I thought about it, the more I wondered if the outfield might be the weakest link in the Phillies chain in 2007.
In the past the Phillies have always been pretty strong in their outfield, boasting formidable offensive forces like Bobby Abreu and Pat Burrell, along with strong role players like Jason Michaels and Kenny Lofton. In 2006 the Phillies shifted their offensive alignment, first bringing in Aaron Rowand to play centerfield and then sending Abreu to the Yankees. The Phillies also sat Pat Burrell often and actively sought to deal him to the Baltimore Orioles and to the San Francisco Giants. Unless something earth-shaking occurs, the Phillies seem set to go with Rowand, Burrell and Shane Victorino in 2007 as their offensive alignment.
What’s wrong with these three guys? Well, simply put, each one of them has a flaw. Pat Burrell can’t play defense and can’t run. Rowand and Victorino can’t hit.
Defensively, I am working with a lot of conjecture and speculation, but I think we can safely make three points:
1. Pat Burrell is rapidly becoming a lousy left fielder.
2. Aaron Rowand had an average season in 2006, which was terrible because the Phillies aren’t paying him to be an average center fielder.
3. Shane Victorino was probably the Phillies strongest defensive outfielder in 2006. He might have had one of the strongest arms in baseball.
Offensively, Victorino hit just six home runs in 2006 and had a slugging percentage of .414. He’s a fairly light-hitting (.127 ISO) outfielder playing on a team that is basically built around the long-ball. He doesn’t hit the ball very far, and he isn’t that great about getting on base: .346, which is largely a product of a .287 batting average. Aside from his good batting average, Victorino does a bad job getting on base. He drew just 24 walks in 462 plate appearances in 2006.
Confused about what I’m talking about? Here are the stats I refer to defined:
Gross Productive Average (GPA): (1.8 * .OBP + .SLG) / 4 = .GPA. Invented by The Hardball Times Aaron Gleeman, GPA measures a players production by weighing his ability to get on base and hit with power. This is my preferred all-around stat.
Isolated Power (ISO): .SLG - .BA = .ISO. Measures a player’s raw power by subtracting singles from their slugging percentage.
Walks per plate appearance (BB/PA): BB / PA = .BB/PA Avg
Runs Created (RC): A stat originally created by Bill James to measure a player’s total contribution to his team’s lineup. Here is the formula: [(H + BB + HBP - CS - GIDP) times ((S * 1.125) + (D * 1.69) + (T * 3.02) + (HR * 3.73) + (.29 * (BB + HBP – IBB)) + (.492 * (SB + SF + SH)) – (.04 * K))] divided by (AB + BB + HBP + SH+ SF). If you use ESPN’s version be advised that it is pitifully is out-of-date, however. James adjusted RC after the 2004 season ended.
RC/27: Runs Created per 27 outs, essentially what a team of 9 of this player would score in a hypothetical game.
As Victorino is basically Abreu’s replacement, I’d note the massive difference between the two at the plate in 2006:
Runs Created per 27 Outs:
Abreu: 8.36
Victorino: 5.15
The reason why is fairly simple: Bobby Abreu forced the opposing pitcher to make 4.47 pitches every time he went to the plate. Shane Victorino forced the pitcher to make just 3.42 pitches per plate appearance.
Rowand was worse: 4.02 RC/27. While he displayed more power at the plate than Victorino (.163 ISO), Rowand was a free-swinger who was even less choosey than Victorino (3.40 P/PA). Rowand grounded into nearly three times the double plays as Victorino (13 to 5) in 17 fewer plate appearances. Rowand was also, not surprisingly, worse at drawing walks:
BB/PA:
Victorino: .052
Rowand: .040
Pat Burrell is an offensive force: 6.18 RC/27, .244 ISO … I am a big fan of Burrell’s because I love how he’s combined patience at the plate with power. He hit 29 home runs and 24 doubles in 2006, and still managed to draw a walk every sixth plate appearance (.172 BB/PA). He may be sliding defensively, but he’s still a great offensive player. Here is how the Bill James Handbook thinks these three will do in 2007:
Victorino: 67 Runs Created / .244 GPA / .135 ISO
Rowand: 71 Runs Created / .258 GPA / .160 ISO
Burrell: 87 Runs Created / .290 GPA / .230 ISO
Given that outfield is typically a position you trade defense for offense, I’m not sure the Phillies can get away with having two defensive-oriented outfielders on the same team. I’m also not sure that the Phillies have a particularly strong unit assembled here. The New York Mets are blessed with a strong defensive center fielder named Carlos Beltran. But unlike Rowand, Beltran is an offensive monster at the plate, with a 9.05 RC/27. Certainly compared with the Mets, the Phillies have a weak outfield, but generally I worry about the level of production that the Phillies will get from Victorino, Rowand and Burrell in 2007. This could be the factor that keeps the Phillies from challenging the Mets next season.
(4) comments
In the past the Phillies have always been pretty strong in their outfield, boasting formidable offensive forces like Bobby Abreu and Pat Burrell, along with strong role players like Jason Michaels and Kenny Lofton. In 2006 the Phillies shifted their offensive alignment, first bringing in Aaron Rowand to play centerfield and then sending Abreu to the Yankees. The Phillies also sat Pat Burrell often and actively sought to deal him to the Baltimore Orioles and to the San Francisco Giants. Unless something earth-shaking occurs, the Phillies seem set to go with Rowand, Burrell and Shane Victorino in 2007 as their offensive alignment.
What’s wrong with these three guys? Well, simply put, each one of them has a flaw. Pat Burrell can’t play defense and can’t run. Rowand and Victorino can’t hit.
Defensively, I am working with a lot of conjecture and speculation, but I think we can safely make three points:
1. Pat Burrell is rapidly becoming a lousy left fielder.
2. Aaron Rowand had an average season in 2006, which was terrible because the Phillies aren’t paying him to be an average center fielder.
3. Shane Victorino was probably the Phillies strongest defensive outfielder in 2006. He might have had one of the strongest arms in baseball.
Offensively, Victorino hit just six home runs in 2006 and had a slugging percentage of .414. He’s a fairly light-hitting (.127 ISO) outfielder playing on a team that is basically built around the long-ball. He doesn’t hit the ball very far, and he isn’t that great about getting on base: .346, which is largely a product of a .287 batting average. Aside from his good batting average, Victorino does a bad job getting on base. He drew just 24 walks in 462 plate appearances in 2006.
Confused about what I’m talking about? Here are the stats I refer to defined:
Gross Productive Average (GPA): (1.8 * .OBP + .SLG) / 4 = .GPA. Invented by The Hardball Times Aaron Gleeman, GPA measures a players production by weighing his ability to get on base and hit with power. This is my preferred all-around stat.
Isolated Power (ISO): .SLG - .BA = .ISO. Measures a player’s raw power by subtracting singles from their slugging percentage.
Walks per plate appearance (BB/PA): BB / PA = .BB/PA Avg
Runs Created (RC): A stat originally created by Bill James to measure a player’s total contribution to his team’s lineup. Here is the formula: [(H + BB + HBP - CS - GIDP) times ((S * 1.125) + (D * 1.69) + (T * 3.02) + (HR * 3.73) + (.29 * (BB + HBP – IBB)) + (.492 * (SB + SF + SH)) – (.04 * K))] divided by (AB + BB + HBP + SH+ SF). If you use ESPN’s version be advised that it is pitifully is out-of-date, however. James adjusted RC after the 2004 season ended.
RC/27: Runs Created per 27 outs, essentially what a team of 9 of this player would score in a hypothetical game.
As Victorino is basically Abreu’s replacement, I’d note the massive difference between the two at the plate in 2006:
Runs Created per 27 Outs:
Abreu: 8.36
Victorino: 5.15
The reason why is fairly simple: Bobby Abreu forced the opposing pitcher to make 4.47 pitches every time he went to the plate. Shane Victorino forced the pitcher to make just 3.42 pitches per plate appearance.
Rowand was worse: 4.02 RC/27. While he displayed more power at the plate than Victorino (.163 ISO), Rowand was a free-swinger who was even less choosey than Victorino (3.40 P/PA). Rowand grounded into nearly three times the double plays as Victorino (13 to 5) in 17 fewer plate appearances. Rowand was also, not surprisingly, worse at drawing walks:
BB/PA:
Victorino: .052
Rowand: .040
Pat Burrell is an offensive force: 6.18 RC/27, .244 ISO … I am a big fan of Burrell’s because I love how he’s combined patience at the plate with power. He hit 29 home runs and 24 doubles in 2006, and still managed to draw a walk every sixth plate appearance (.172 BB/PA). He may be sliding defensively, but he’s still a great offensive player. Here is how the Bill James Handbook thinks these three will do in 2007:
Victorino: 67 Runs Created / .244 GPA / .135 ISO
Rowand: 71 Runs Created / .258 GPA / .160 ISO
Burrell: 87 Runs Created / .290 GPA / .230 ISO
Given that outfield is typically a position you trade defense for offense, I’m not sure the Phillies can get away with having two defensive-oriented outfielders on the same team. I’m also not sure that the Phillies have a particularly strong unit assembled here. The New York Mets are blessed with a strong defensive center fielder named Carlos Beltran. But unlike Rowand, Beltran is an offensive monster at the plate, with a 9.05 RC/27. Certainly compared with the Mets, the Phillies have a weak outfield, but generally I worry about the level of production that the Phillies will get from Victorino, Rowand and Burrell in 2007. This could be the factor that keeps the Phillies from challenging the Mets next season.
Labels: Burrell, Outfield, Rowand, Victorino
