Jayhawk Bill

The forecasts I find for JD Drew range from Bill James's .278/.393/.465, 20 HR, 78 RBI in 510 AB to ZiPS' .259/.362/.412, 10 HR, 60 RBI in 352 AB. How's about this: .286/.379/.462, 10 HR, 62 RBI in 420 AB? That's JD Drew's second-half batting line, doubled. Terry Francona played JD Drew injured for most of the first half, and he posted a wretched .171/.315/.237 playing hurt in May. He was .290/.385/.459 in 390 AB if you just delete the month of May. Serious stats guys, proceed to challenge me for failing to regress to the mean and for failing to apply aging curves when I know better: I'm predicting JD Drew to hit .290/.385/.460 in 400 AB, and I'm predicting at least one trip to the disabled list to make this batting line possible. Drew can hit this well, but he can't hit this well playing hurt. I'm projecting that Tito and the FO have learned their lesson regarding Drew and playing hurt, and that his batting line will improve while his playing time drops.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/chat/chat.php?chatId=422 Note that he's not mentioned salary, just player values: if you include the high salary that Santana would earn in 2008, it definitely shifts in favor of making a trade, whether now or in July. (One could check that using MORP figures when PECOTA comes out in a few days.) It's not that the trade was worse than keeping Santana, it's that the trade was so much worse than what the Twins could have done had they traded Santana in December. :dunno:

The old rumor that comes to mind for me is Coco + Lugo to the White Sox for O-Cab. Minnesota just announced that it's rebuilding this year (well, more or less made it official ) giving the White Sox a slightly better chance, and the trade fills two positions for Chicago with World Series veterans while bringing an upgrade at SS to Boston. O Cab is a free agent after this year, putting him in "contract year" mode and potentially opening a slot for Jed Lowrie in 2009. I'm hoping that this morphs into a Crisp + Lugo for Greene trade, which makes more sense for both the Padres and the Red Sox, but there are no current rumors to that effect.

A good chance? Absolutely. A likelihood? I'll respectfully differ. Passed on him? The White Sox gave up Neal Cotts to the Cubs in the Aardsma trade. Boston gave up Mota, a guy who posted a 2.60 ERA at age 20 with Lowell, as well as Socolovich, also just 20, who was a victim of bad defense at Greenville but whose K/BB ratio improved to 2.10 with his promotion. We're not talking top prospects in any case, but the point is that Aardsma isn't necessarily a throwaway. I'd suggest that Aardsma is an MLB-average relief pitcher who may not ever reach the potential that his velocity might suggest. If Farrell makes him into a better relief pitcher, I won't be surprised. But if Aardsma does improve, feel free to call Farrell "Miracle Worker" in your future posts, given your current perspective.

Actually, Aardsma's tendency to allow home runs, on a career basis, looks normal. His MLB HR/FB rate is 11.8%, right in the expected 11-12% range. The kicker is Aardsma in Wrigley. He's allowed 7 of his 14 MLB home runs in Wrigley Field, where he's thrown to only 134 of his 437 career total batters faced. I don't know exactly what the issue is, but the spike in Wrigley--coupled with the spike in AAA in 2007--makes me slightly concerned. Charlotte, where he played AAA this year, has a whopping 154% Park Factor for home runs allowed, and he gave up only one AAA home run on the road...it looks as if Aardsma struggles more than average in more challenging home run environments, but not that he usually yields too many home runs. But regarding his pitches, here's a chart of his fastballs: Edit: I can't maintain the image link: go check it out at the link below. http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/web-based-pitchf-x-tool/ Not-so-great control, IMO. YMMV. :dunno:

This is, of course, an obvious attempt by Theo Epstein to have his name linked to the player alphabetically first among all MLB players in history. OK, better reasons to acquire Aardsma, who has a lifetime 5.16 ERA: 1) Mid-90's heat. He's just a little bit wild at times, but this guy can throw hard. As an aside, I suspect that he's a guy who'll benefit from the installation of Pitch f/x in MLB: young pitchers with reputations for wildness used to lose all the borderline calls, but that may be changing, and that'll help Aardsma. 2) Outstanding NCAA pitcher, very cool under pressure in the College World Series. 3) Once-upon-a-time first-round draft choice. 4) His minor-league record was quite good through 2006. His 2007 record should've been better: his K/9 went up to 11.46 and his WHIP went down to 1.05, but he yielded 7 HR in only 35.3 IP. That HR issue is out of line with his career rates, and it has to be an outlier--that happens with home runs sometimes. 5) Aardsma was actually a pretty good pitcher with the Cubs. He yielded eight of his 24 runs that season in two already-lost blowouts in Wrigley Field with the wind blowing out. Except for those two unimportant appearances, he had a 2.72 ERA. As an aside, Dusty Baker, his manager, used him frequently on successive days, a possible reason for his struggles. 6) Believe it or not, his 2007 season was ruined at Wrigley Field, too. He gave up five runs against the cross-town rivals in Interleague play with the wind blowing out (three of those runs coming because he left the bases loaded and the next pitcher immediately coughed up a home run). Guillen brought him in to pitch the very next day and left him out there to give up four more runs in 33 pitches in a blowout. Except for those two games, he posted a 4.18 ERA in MLB last season. His FIP was 4.15 and his xFIP was 4.22, right near that 4.18 figure--he was really an AL-average relief pitcher screwed by two bad days. 7) His nickname is "Crazy Eyes." How cool is that? 8) Aardsma was promoted from single-A ball to MLB by the Giants. He was clearly unready, and that may have set back his development. He's ready now. 9) I don't see any record of injury for Aardsma in the past three season. 10) Here's Aardsma's 2007 PECOTA "Stars and Scrubs" chart: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/pecota/images/aardsda01_004.gif See that narrow dark-green band at the bottom where he's obviously similar to one superstar? That similar player is Curt Schilling. Aardsma gets to learn from the one guy with talent like his who made it big in MLB. Overall, I think that Aardsma has a good chance of helping the 2008 Red Sox. I'd be cautious about using him in situations where the wind is blowing out and where a single home run might make a difference, but he's got 97 mph heat and he's better than his MLB stat line looks. Let's see if he's another guy helped by John Farrell--I'm hoping that he makes the 25-man roster.* * If he doesn't, with three years of MLB experience he's probably out of options.

http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/mariners/2008/01/bedardjones_deal_going_down.html

Using 2007 stats: Crisp: 6.0 WARP1 Lugo: 0.5 WARP1 Total WARP: 6.5 / year Greene: 4.3 WARP1 Total WARP: 4.3 / year Both Lugo and Greene seem too low in WARP. That's partly because neither is a great fielder; that's partly because WARP works on current mean productivity for the position, and there are currently several excellent shortstops. Greene is roughly an MLB-average shortstop, all things considered. 2008 Salary: Crisp: $4.75 MM Lugo: $9 MM Total Salary: $13.75 MM Greene: ~$7 MM (likely arb award range; he made $2.25 MM last year, but he hit 27 HR as a shortstop) Total Salary: ~$7 MM Delta WARP1: 2.2 wins Delta Salary: $6.75 MM Cost per anticipated extra marginal win: $6.75MM/2.2 wins = $3.07 MM per win It looks to me as if the extra salary is roughly worth the extra talent, because the price of new free agents would probably approach or exceed $3 million for each win added to a pennant-contending team. The counterargument might be that the average marginal cost per marginal win this century has been closer to $1.5 million. I'd suggest that the $1.5 million figure is too low for two reasons: first, free agent salaries went up sharply after the 2006 season; and second, the price to improve a good team is greater than the price to improve a cellar-dweller, and the Padres tied for the Wild Card NLDS berth in 2007. Furthermore, San Diego has nobody coming up at shortstop--they could use Lugo effectively for years. Add into the mix the fact that Crisp and Lugo would both thrive in PETCO while Greene is more likely to thrive in Fenway, and that one gets fewer years from Greene than from Crisp and Lugo, and the deal continues to make sense to me without Boston offering any salary for Greene. But the work above offers a model for the greatest amount of Lugo's salary that might be justified as a part of this hypothetical trade--roughly $1.6 MM per marginal win ($3.07MM - $1.5MM), or roughly $3.5MM per year for each of the three remaining years. One could certainly tinker with discounted performance values for 2009-2010 to adjust this, but the range of zero to $3.5 MM looks to cover the issue... ...and suggestions of Boston picking up all of Lugo's salary as a condition of such a hypothetical trade look outside the reasonable range. YMMV.

cough, cough...1915...cough

OK, good to know your thoughts. You should try selling your toilet paper. My understanding is that these reports support individuals' efforts to make considerable money regarding baseball. Of course, you might find your subjective opinion on that subject unsupported by facts...just as your opinions in other areas might or might not be correct. The "Bill James" line is from the Bill James Annual, which is the work of several contributors these days. FWIW, the Bill James projections were quite favorable to the Yankees on the whole...would you like to see the Yankees projections from just CHONE and Marcel?

Mike Easler was fired from his last job as an MLB hitting coach by the Cardinals in 2001. He was kind enough to file a lawsuit, although he later retracted it. Easler's minor league managing record is weak, "highlighted" by a 34-83 record with the FSL Miami Miracle in 1990. I look at the 2000-2001 Cardinals and I see one guy who clearly got better when coached by Easler: JD Drew. If that's the full record of success, I'm not sure that I'd hire Easler and risk a lawsuit, even if his name is "Hit Man."

Line up their careers before and up to their breakout seasons (1969 for Rico, 2007 for Greene, when they were about a year apart in age) and consider that Rico had a large home ballpark advantage while Greene had a striking home ballpark disadvantage. Consider the context of each era as well and you're pretty close...both were also similar fielders, good but not stellar in their 20's. Not really. Coco Crisp has a much cooler name than Bernie Williams. Hideki Matsui has a much larger collection of porn than Manny Ramirez. Ah, personal attack. :harhar:

"Homerism?" Let’s check what neutral projections—Bill James, CHONE, and Marcel--suggest regarding which players will go up or down from their 2007 marks in runs scored, with the median in parentheses: Posada: 3 down (-15) Giambi: 3 up (+32) Cano: 3 down (-13) Rodriguez: 3 down (-25) Jeter: 2 up, 1 down (+4) Damon: 2 up, 1 down (+2) Cabrera: 3 up (+6) Abreu: 3 down (-24) Matsui: 3 down (-19) OK, I’d already granted that Cabrera and Giambi would do well. I’d then said that I think a whole bunch of other guys will show decline—and sure enough, five of the other seven starting players are universally considered by serious projections to be due for decline. The sum of the median declines projected for those five is 96 runs. Jeter and Damon are treading water with mixed projections. At first it looks as if Giambi can make up a good chunk of those lost runs, but the issue goes further than that—as the Yankees’ starters OBP drops, there are fewer outs remaining for the bench players to use. The lost bench productivity has to be considered, too—and that’s why the work I did earlier showed a drop all the way back to around 800 runs scored for the whole team. Let’s contrast this with the Boston starters: Varitek: 3 up (+3) Youkilis: 3 down (-14) Pedroia: 1 up, 2 down (-9) Lowell: 3 down (-39) Lugo: 1 up, 2 down (-1) Ramirez: 2 up, 1 down (+3) Crisp: 1 up, 2 down (-5) Ellsbury: 3 up (+58) Drew: 3 up (+11) Ortiz: 1 even, 2 down (-7) On the up side, JD Drew is projected to rebound more than Cabrera is expected to improve, and Ellsbury is projected to improve far more than Giambi is expected to rebound. Varitek is projected to improve by all three systems, but not by much. Five Red Sox are treading water with mixed projections, including Manny, whom you pegged for a decline. Mike Lowell is projected to decline from his outstanding 2007, just as I’d previously indicated. Overall, though, the Red Sox players aren’t projected to decline, and their high OBPs leave lots of playing time for bench players such as Chris Carter, Brandon Moss, Jed Lowrie and Alex Cora, all of whom are reasonable hitters--hitters who can be expected to create lots of runs. That leaves just one other decline: Kevin Youkilis. Most of the projection systems go back three years, and in 2005 Youkilis was used as a bench player—a bench player with a .400 OBP, but a bench player. That year as a bench player factors into these projections and lowers them. If he’d started in either MLB or MiLB, the systems would project him forward using MLB stats or MiLB MLEs, but time spent on a bench projects to future time spent sitting, just as if he’d been injured. Injuries tend to repeat themselves; benching a .400 OBP guy to give lesser hitters their playing time is just bad management by Terry Francona. I’ll be eager to see the PECOTAs: their use of 20 most-comparable players rather than generic formulaic curves will probably make a difference. I suspect, however, that these three projections understate Youkilis’s potential because of his bench time. (As an aside, Pedroia probably suffers a little bit because of his misuse in late 2006 and early 2007, when Francona was determined to start Alex Cora against the easier pitchers and Pedroia against the tougher ones, costing Pedroia both OPS points and playing time.) In summary, my only difference with the projection systems regards Kevin Youkilis. Youkilis’s career has few comparables, but here’s one: John Kruk. Kruk started out a whole lot like Youkilis, getting good OBP in limited playing time, and he peaked a little late at ages 28-32. Youkilis is also quite similar to Ferris Fain, and Ferris Fain had a strong peak at ages 29-31, with a sharp decline after age 33. I see Youkilis maintaining at least his current productivity through his early 30’s, too, just as I see him tailing off rapidly before age 35. If my difference with the systems on one player out of 18 brands me as a “homer,” well, OK…but your difference with professionals on so many of these players suggests that whatever label you choose for subjective favoritism, it applies several times as much with respect to yourself than it does to me.

Except for Lowell, I don't see any Red Sox player as set for obvious decline, mostly because they already had off seasons in 2007 or because they're too young to anticipate any decline. :dunno: We'll see.

Career Splits Home: 27 HR Away: 47 HR GB/FB: 0.77 FB%: 45.5% Here's Greene's 2007 PETCO hit chart: http://www.talksox.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=312570 I count seven outs that would've been two doubles and five home runs had he been playing in Fenway; YMMV. That would've been 32 home runs, not 27...but everything changes in a new league. BSN07, I'd agree with you--I see Greene as, for better or worse, another Petrocelli.

Matsui is still an aging outfielder with a serious injury in a recent season. Giambi? Heck, I don't know: he could go either way, although I expect that he'll find some way to do moderately well with free agency looming again. Sean Smith has his own algorithms, but he's looking at player aging curves, context of performance, regression to the mean, and previous performance. The high OBP of A-Rod and Posada made a difference by giving Damon and the other Yankees more opportunities to hit, and A-Rod probably drove Johnny home a few times, but the big things that dropped Damon's projection were, I'm confident, his age, his injury history, and simple regression to the mean. An average MLB team might have five starters a little over their projection, two a little under, and one complete collapse due to injury. That would sum to a dead-accurate projection. You'll find that most serious systems will have patterns of results similar to this. Damon was barely over his projection. A-Rod, Matsui, Cano and Jorge were way over expectations...Giambi was way low, and it almost averaged out (842 runs scored vs. 800 runs scored by the projected starting lineup). OK, your position is clear: the Yankees will WAY outperform their CHONE projection, which would suggest roughly 800 runs for the team for the year. You're expecting WAY more than 800-odd runs, and, in fact, more runs than the 968 scored by the team in 2007. My position, written previously, is We could both be right: the Yankees' starting position players could score 970-odd runs, and the Red Sox could score a couple more than the Yankees. Alternatively, either of us could be right individually, or we might both be mistaken. Perhaps somebody will remember this thread in October.

He's listed at 210 pounds, which is 25 pounds heavier than Rico Petrocelli, who averaged over 30 HR/year from 1969-71 because he was getting over 60% of his home runs at Fenway. *** Again, this Khalil Greene thing is a reach: 1) The Padres are thinking of trading Greene; 2) Greene was linked with Boston in trade rumors before Lugo was signed; 3) Boston and San Diego trade frequently; and 4) There is a rumor of an O-Cab for Crisp+Lugo deal, and Greene for Crisp+Lugo works better for Boston while still being a big win for the Padres. Could happen. Probably not. We'll see. :dunno:

OK, let's look at that "Perfect Storm:" Matsui beat his projections by 63 Runs + RBI. Abreu beat his projections by 36 Runs + RBI. Cano beat his projections by 43 Runs + RBI. Damon missed his projections by only 12 Runs + RBI. Giambi missed his projections by almost 100 runs--but he only used up 254 at bats. Melky beat his projections by 14 Runs + RBI. Jeter exemplified Yankee Pride by matching his summed Runs + RBI projections exactly. And, of course, Posada beat his projections by 39 Runs + RBI and Alex Rodriguez beat his projections by 79 Runs + RBI. That's not a "Perfect Storm." That's one guy down, three at breakeven, and five significantly exceeding expectations. The only two guys you can reasonably expect to do better in 2008 are Melky and, maybe, Giambi. Most of that lineup looks to have overperformed in 2007 and set for a bit of a decline in 2008. *** You can't have it both ways. Either you can try to claim that the system understates reasonable expectations, which makes the 2008 Red Sox candidates for greatest hitting team in MLB history, or you can claim that the system overstates expectations, which makes the 2008 Yankees candidates for the AL East cellar. Or, hypothetically, you could accept that the 2008 Yankees are in for a challenge trying to match their 2007 hitting prowess, while the Red Sox look as if they may do much better. Or you could call the system "stupid" because it didn't consider how well the Yankees' bench players would hit when it projected how well the Yankees' starters would hit, leaving the starters' projections 160 runs short of the ultimate team total...but that just doesn't seem to make much sense. :dunno:

I waited until I was sure that you'd seen my request for citation regarding your assertion that my source was flawed before addressing the part of your post referring to my research as "stupid." See, jacksonianmarch, you're blowing smoke. You're claiming that my sources are wrong, and when tasked to prove your words, you ignore the fact that you can't back up your words. Where I come from, you'd have two choices: you either acknowledge your mistake, or you explain why you're right. You've done neither. You've insulted my work then run away. But I'm a Red Sox fan. Perhaps our ethical standards are different than those of Yankees fans. :dunno: And, perhaps, our grasp of reality is better...I readily acknowledge that Boston might well fall a bit short of what one of the respected systems suggests. You claim an extra 150-odd runs scored for the Yankees over neutral, respected projections and call those opposing you "stupid." *** I'd prefer not to be insulted, nor to insult others. If posters--even regular posters--choose to lower the tone, though, I'm forced to stand up for my beliefs. Jacksonianmarch, if you disagree with me, I'll respect that. If you can show where I've erred, I'm eager to learn and to do better in the future. You've insulted my research, though, and you can't verify your own claims. That action I do not respect.

Link? :dunno: Here's my link: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=564 Which shows that the CHONE projections for hitters were second-best of the major systems last year in average error, outperforming ESPN, Marcels, Rototimes, Rotowire, The Hardball Times and ZiPS. CHONE was third in correlation coefficient and first in Root Mean Square Error, placing it at or near the top in every category.

I'm almost certain that he will not. Lopez had time in both MLB and MiLB in the four years 2004-2007. You usually get just three option years--it was unusual that he had a fourth (I forget the reason.) In any case, he should now be out of options.

If his agent weren't Boras, I'd be saying "hometown discount." Holliday is worth a whole lot for his near-MVP 2007 season, and I can't believe that he'd've gotten under $10 million in arb. If he did anything similar in 2008, he might've been looking at $15-20 million in final-year arb. The only ways this helps Holliday are: 1) Insurance against an injury: he just made three times his career earnings to date; and 2) It helps his team for two years and helps his reputation for when he does go to free agency.