Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Trent Richardson Interviews Fellow Brown Brandon Weeden

Today's Fun Fact

According to a few of the best estimates, Franklin Gutierrez is about 20 runs better than an average defensive center fielder.

According to a few of the best estimates, Endy Chavez is about 20 runs better than an average defensive left fielder.

According to a few of the best estimates, Ichiro is about 10 runs better than an average defensive right fielder.

Together, those three players would save a team something like 50 runs in the field (over average) if they played ~every day. If the average team allows 750 runs in a season, than a regular outfield of Chavez/Gutierrez/Ichiro would reduce that figure by 6.7%.

Over the past three years, Safeco has reduced runs by about 8%.

If the Mariners were to field a trio of Chavez/Gutierrez/Ichiro on a regular basis this season, they would be providing for themselves an approximation of the Safeco effect on the road, and nearly doubling it for themselves at home.

Comment 124 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Not sure if the two effects compound

but it’s awesome anyway.

There was a comment on Tango’s blog about a week ago, http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/article/sample_v_true_talent/ , from Michael Litchman “Reminds me of the "it makes perfect sense that a good outfielder has more value in a large outfield and that a poor fielder’s value if mitigated in a small outfield" argument. Unfortunately the evidence, for whatever reasons, suggests the opposite is true.”

Now, in the same quote MGL says something relevant, on another topic, which is basically that although there probably is an interaction effect between Howard’s and Utley’s defense, the amount that this makes Utley look good is probably more on the order of a run or two than a win or two. Similarly, I’m sure that if I’m understanding the MGL quotation above correctly, Gutierez, Ichiro, and Chavez plus Safeco may not receive a full addative effect while playing at home, but the degree to which Safeco offsets their defensive value is probably on the order of a few runs, not a few wins.

by philosofool on Mar 25, 2009 9:40 PM PDT reply actions  

That's always made sense to me,

and I’ve always struggled to understand how people think that a smaller OF will make it more acceptable to play an inferior fielder than a superior one. Think about it like this: Say you’ve got an outfield of 3 Gutierrez’s and another one of 3 Ibanez’s. Imagine the Gutierrez’s have a perfectly circular range around them of, say, 50 feet, and the Ibanez’s have a perfectly circular range of 25 feet around them. Envision those circles in an unreasonably huge OF, say 600 feet to the wall at all places. There’s alot of empty space for both groups of OF, and while the Gutierrez’s are covering more of it than the Ibanez’s, it’s still only a small percentage of the total field and there’s lots of places a ball can be hit where simply no one is going to get to it.

Now envision gradually bringing the wall in, maybe 25 feet at a time, and shifting in the fielders appropriately as well. Gradually the Gutierrez’s range circles get closer and closer together and less “automatic hit” space exists. The same happens for the Ibanez’s but at a slower clip. Eventually there reaches a point where the Gutierrez circles begin to overlap as they can get to nearly everything hit into the OF and there are only a few places where it can be hit that they won’t get to it. Using the hypothetical 50 foot radiuses, this would be something like a 200 foot OF wall – where they could stand in one spot and have their circles reach both the OF wall and the IF dirt, and overlap each other where they meet. You’d have to hit the ball either in the far corners or against the wall midway between two of the Gutierrez’s to get it past them – in short, they can basically get to everything at this point, and it’s going to be near impossible to get OF hits on them. At the same time, the 25 foot radius Ibanez’s are leaving a tone of open room, and hits are still falling in.

Now yes, it does beging to become advantagous to play the better hitting Ibanez’s if you continue to bring the wall in to 150 feet. Then while the Gutierrez’s wouldn’t be letting ANY hits happen at all, the Ibanez’s would be giving up only a handful themselves, in the same spots as the 200 foot OF Gutierrez’s, and somewhere around here is where it becomes ok to play the inferior fielder.

Now this was all highly unscientific, the numbers were extremely arbitrary, and the whole situation somewhat absurd, but if you understood it as I meant for it to have been understood, then the takeaway message is that you can’t “hide” bad defenders in small parks until the park gets so small that the bad defender’s range starts to overlap with his neighbor and he can still reach the OF wall and sideline. And the typical 20-30 foot fluctuations in OF wall size among MLB parks very likely aren’t enough to make that happen.

by Terminator X on Mar 25, 2009 11:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

We all know defense doesn't matter.

Anyone who thinks differently is a moron. This team is really gonna miss Raul Ibanez’s leadership out there. You simply can’t quantify team chemistry. This team will probably lose 105 games this year, because Ichiro is selfish and not a winner. Why haven’t we signed Washburn long term yet? Bring back Bavasi.

by SethGrandpa on Mar 25, 2009 9:57 PM PDT reply actions  

Also, Bavasi wouldn't have hired some inexperience manager like Wakamatsu..

He would have kept Willie like all of us fans wanted. Not to mention trading Putz for a bunch of nobodies.

by seamariners85 on Mar 26, 2009 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'm going to say....

I think you’re high on Franklin in CF (5-10) and you’re conservative on Ichiro (20-25). Call it a wash but at the end of the year when all the metrics are compiled I’ll be tap dancing saying “I told you so!”

by coasty141 on Mar 25, 2009 10:47 PM PDT reply actions  

Ichiro has been +10.4 career in RF according to UZR, including a +7.6 mark in CF/RF combined last year.

Gutierrez has been +29.8 UZR over his career, including +21.7, and +35 over 150 games in RF. Assume he gets 15 runs worse switching to CF this year, he’s close to +20, and Ichiro is close to +10. If they completely change their historical defensive performances though, you may be right.

Interestingly, Ichiro was 5.4 (10.7/150 games) in CF last year compared to +2.2 and +3.3/150 in RF.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on Mar 25, 2009 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't know, I just read FanGraphs' UZR numbers...

Ichiro

Gutierrez

They label it by specific OF position, so I assume that means it’s positionally adjusted. But I’m not sure.

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on Mar 25, 2009 11:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cool, thanks.

I was being lazy, digging around I usually learn something that’s unrelated but good info anyway.

by Kermit. on Mar 25, 2009 11:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

But as we've all talked about, you can pick a different metric (or the same metric with different PBP data)

and get a different answer.

A result of Gutierrez being +5-10 and Ichiro being +20 is well within the error bars. Ichiro was always #1 for RF’s according to RZR, for example. Hell, according to PMR, Ichiro’s was 20 runs above average in CF in 2006, extrapolated to a full season’s worth of chances. He was over 20 runs in RF often, according to some metrics. Yes, yes, UZR is best and all that. But UZR driven by STATS data versus UZR driven by BIS data gives you a totally different answer (switch the PBP provider and Ichiro goes from a +5 or so defender to an abysmal, well below average fielder.

by marc w on Mar 26, 2009 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

20-25?

You’re so crazy. Ichiro would need 4 arms and a rocket pack to be +25 runs.

by Edgar for Pres on Mar 25, 2009 11:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ichiro hurts the team

by not having four arms and a rocket pack!

by sooper jeenyus on Mar 26, 2009 1:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

What do you think UZR stands for?

UZR = U+Z+2R
U- Upper arms
Z- Zingers (really hard throws per year/assists)
R- Rocket packs (Multiplied by 4 because of the increased range for the x, y, and z axis plus speed increase)

If Ichiro has 4 arms and a rocket pack, together with his 11 assists late year, it’d be this:
(4+11+4(1)) = +19 runs

If Ichiro has 2 arms and no rocket pack with his assists, it’d be:
(2+11+4(0)) = +13 runs

He’s bringing down the team by not using his remaining two arms and rocket pack…

by Ezzra on Mar 26, 2009 1:42 AM PDT up reply actions   3 recs

It’s probably picking knits somewhat, but I’m not sure these numbers are additive for an outfield composed of 3 above average defensive outfielders. That is, it seems to me that an excellent cf will save more runs defensively if he is placed next to two below avg corner of’s than if he is playing next to 2 other excellent of’s. The increased range of all 3 outfielders will end up in some cancellation of their respective defensive runs saved effect. Although, that being said, i’m not sure how large or small this effect is and it will definitely be fun to watch them play.

by bobdobalina on Mar 25, 2009 11:11 PM PDT reply actions  

To the best of my knowledge

there is no evidence that this is actually true.

by Jeff Sullivan on Mar 26, 2009 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

Plus, won't having competent outfielders beside them make them less likely to wear themselves out?

A good CFer flanked by crappy corner OFers has to work harder to track down balls in the gaps. Having three great OFers means there are more balls two guys can get to, and that means they don’t both have to try hard all of the time.

It’s the difference between Mike Cameron making a catch look easy and Willie making a catch look hard. Sure, they both made the catch, but Cameron’s catch took less out of him.

Though I suppose this also increases the chance to two outfielders getting confused about whose ball this is, or possibly colliding while going for the same ball (luckily, Ichiro’s skeleton is reinforced with adamantium).

I like using semi-colons; they make me feel smart.

by Llewdor on Mar 26, 2009 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

Good god.

The bullpen projections are going to be all over the place.

by Terminator_X on Mar 26, 2009 5:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yes, a-hole picks will be discarded once I close balloting

And I actually share no opinion at all on the playing time forecast of any player other than Juan Pierre, so there is no “groupthink” influence.

In any case, most of the ballots will come from my non-readers, like at SBNation or other places.

by tangotiger on Mar 26, 2009 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

Good to know

and I hope you know I wasn’t criticizing your work or the survey itself – I’m just a natural skeptic when it comes to things like this.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Mar 26, 2009 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions  

So will things like Felix pitching zero be discarded as well?

As I’ve said below, this is a theoretical possibility (same for Bedard, Morrow, etc.) whereas some awful AAA reliever is 100% not getting 200+ innings in the bigs this year (for the record, voting Gaby Hernandez at 0 MLB innings was the easiest pick on the whole ballot)

by seattlebruin on Mar 26, 2009 10:15 AM PDT up reply actions  

Is this something you're allowed to do?

At least as it pertains to Mariner players?

Fans are typically idiots.

by The Typical Idiot Fan on Mar 26, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

Limits

I’m only limited on things they ask me. Think of me as a consulting company, like STATS.

by tangotiger on Mar 26, 2009 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's funny though

Even with those random 0’s for Ichiro and Felix, the final projections look pretty similar to what everyone here seems to think right?

by d0nkey on Mar 26, 2009 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well I guess it's possible that a star pitcher suffers an injury and doesn't pitch at all in a season

there is exactly a 0% chance that Gaby Hernandez throws 200+ innings for the Mariners this season. The money line on this occurrence would be like +48343u585348300000, minimum bet $20.

by seattlebruin on Mar 26, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions  

I could buy a small country with that $20 bet. Count me in!

I’ll go and shank all the pitchers in the thigh and force them to play Gaby 200+ innings.

Wait, even then he probably wouldn’t get that many IPs

by d0nkey on Mar 26, 2009 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

Another of my problems with the wisdom of crowds

“the wisdom of crowds” assumes an actual crowd, with all the randomness that the word “crowd” implies – Tango’s community forecasts are done by more or less the same set of people that read Tango’s work, which means they’re all generally inclined towards the same opinion. Whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing, I don’t know.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Mar 26, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions  

I was always concerned with the fact that, for the M's, the people who fill out the survey

are those who are most influenced by the Cameron/Sullivan/Carruth/MacAree hive mind. There was a conversation here about that a year or two ago, and Tango helped me see that it’s not as big of a problem as I’d imagined… wish I had a link….

by marc w on Mar 26, 2009 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions  

This is a bit aggressive

Gutierrez, for his career, is +21 as a corner outfielder. Yes, his UZR/150 is absurd for the 159 innings he’s played in CF, but that’s a sample so small to be worthless. +20 as a CF is rare territory – that’s Andruw Jones, Cameron in his prime, healthy Erstad… I don’t think we can project Gutierrez to be that good. I’d call him +10 as a CF.

I’d project the trio for more like +35.

by davidcameron on Mar 26, 2009 7:53 AM PDT reply actions  

I think fangraphs has made it too easy to look up hard defensive numbers.

Not that they are to blame, but for all your warnings about how approximate these figures are it is just too easy to look them up, quick-figure a three year average and quote is as a solid figure.

PMR has Gutierrez at about +13 and +26/150G as a right fielder in 07 and 08, respectively. That should give you a +5-15 CF if I’m not mistaken and I’ll take it any day though it’s not as tantalizing as cutting 20 runs off the projected RA column.

by Bearskin Rugburn on Mar 26, 2009 8:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

I went aggressive with Gutierrez because I didn't want to seem ultra aggressive with Chavez by calling him > +20

which, I dunno, he might just be. But yeah, 50 is the maximum upside. How about this: 40 runs, and the Oakland park effect, rather than 50 and Seattle.

by Jeff Sullivan on Mar 26, 2009 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

Don't give in, Jeff!

Sunshine, lollipops, and rainbows are manning this outfield. We will get to 50. WE WILL!

by Wilder. on Mar 26, 2009 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

Was Andruw Jones really as good as his UZR numbers?

I took a look at his fangraphs stats, and they’re just mind-blowing. I can’t believe them. He averaged 23 UZR over 6 years, with a high of 30 UZR in one year. The only other centerfielders from 2002-2008 to even crack the 20s ONCE were Coco Crisp, Darin Erstad, and Corey Patterson. Is Andruw Jones just that out of this world, or are there explainations why the fielding stats are so skewed for him?

by Decatur on Mar 26, 2009 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

There's a chance he got a ton of OOZ plays shallow in center because he used to play so shallow

but that just means he was phenomenal at getting back to cover the back end of his zone too, which still makes him a terrific fielder. Not sure how highly UZR values OOZ plays, though

by seattlebruin on Mar 26, 2009 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, well we miss Choo over here, so it all evens out.

Throw the snacks in the bag and I'm ghost like Swayze!
Preserved In All His Greatness - R.I.P. The Reignman 1989 to 1997

by JLProck on Mar 26, 2009 9:08 AM PDT up reply actions  

Him too.

Throw the snacks in the bag and I'm ghost like Swayze!
Preserved In All His Greatness - R.I.P. The Reignman 1989 to 1997

by JLProck on Mar 26, 2009 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

(Valbuena)

Maybe.

"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett http://mvn.com/marinersminors/

by JY on Mar 26, 2009 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions  

Choo, Valbeuna, Cabrera

It seems like we give the Indians a MLB-ready, league average regular as a Christmas card every year.

by Decatur on Mar 26, 2009 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

The Valbuena thing is different, seeing as how they gave us an MLB-ready, league average (minimum) regular

Choo stung, but I could sort of understand the intent, even if I didn’t like the execution.

There was no reason for the Cabrera deal. None. It never made sense, and it very quickly became darkly hilarious.

Next, on Baseball tonight, ESPN’s Eduardo Perez breaks down the surprising Asdrubal Cabrera of the Indians…..

by marc w on Mar 26, 2009 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

His career LD% is north of 23

he may have been lucky, but I doubt he’s been so lucky that BABIP is the only thing carrying him

by seattlebruin on Mar 26, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Are you saying that their WAR peak is...what, 2?

Or are you saying that they’ve both got significant flaws that will prevent them from reaching their peak?

Jeff talked about Choo, but in Cabrera you’ve got a solid defensive middle infielder who walks more than 11% of his PAs in MLB at the age of 23. My guess is that you think he’s a minus defender, is that it? Or is it just that you think he’s gotten all out of his skillset that he can?

by marc w on Mar 26, 2009 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Pretty much a maxed out skillset

He’s got decent defence but I’ve never seen that bat going anywhere. I’m probably not giving him as much credit as he deserves in reaction to the ‘LOL THAT WAS DUMB BAVASI MADE THE WORST TRADE EVER’ comments that the trade generated, though.

by Graham MacAree on Mar 26, 2009 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

That trade garnered a lot of praise at the time.

Anyway, the guy can take a walk. The question is only if he can generate some of the gap power he showed in the minors. I think he’s a league average bat, regardless of position, in 2010 or so.

He’s damn close to league average this year, with projections ranging from .321-.334. If he slugs .410 or so, he’s clearly above average, and I’d think that’d have to be the absolute lowest a ‘peak’ projection could go given his minor league performance and ARL.

by marc w on Mar 26, 2009 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

I was nowhere near the internet at the time

But I remember Indians fans trying to troll us over the Choo and Cabrera trades

by Graham MacAree on Mar 26, 2009 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

Trolling is never cool

but I will be mighty tempted if we unload Jarrod Washburn (“But his ERA is under 3 the first two months! He’s figured it out!”) for quality prospects.

by marc w on Mar 26, 2009 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well, sure

But it seemed bizarre to gloat over getting Choo and Cabrera (I was much higher on A-Cab at the time) for a DH platoon that we really really needed.

by Graham MacAree on Mar 26, 2009 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

This really is rehashing a 2 year old argument

and the argument was never with you, but it’s just not that hard to get a DH platoon. People do it all the time. Jack Z just did. DH platoons do not require good prospects in change.
Second, when you see someone who’s had two/three GREAT months, that’s a bad time to acquire them. We ‘priced’ Benuardo as if their true-talent was somewhere in the neighborhood of their april-june 2006, and that was absurd.
The process in these trades was horrible. Yes, the allure of Benuardo was great given the flaming pile of shit Everett left on the door, but that doesn’t get you off the hook for panicking, Mr. Bavasi.

by marc w on Mar 26, 2009 4:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

To be fair,

it is generally harder to get a DH platoon mid-season than it is in the off season.

by Matthew on Mar 26, 2009 5:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

Of course.

It’s still not this hard. And I think I’m definitely preaching to the choir when I saw the wrong way to go about it in mid-season is to look and see who’s been outrageously ‘hot’ for two months and then spending whatever it takes to get those guys.

by marc w on Mar 27, 2009 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

I never said it was a great idea

It was just never what I’d point to as HOLY SHIT BAVASI SUCKS (which game 5 months later)

by Graham MacAree on Mar 26, 2009 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think the thing that came 5 months later

can only truly be explained by looking at the Benuardo deal.

It still doesn’t actually make sense, but looking at the precedent helps you wrap your mind around all of the stupid.

by marc w on Mar 27, 2009 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

Diminishing Returns

At some point, you get diminishing returns. I don’t think you can stack all those numbers together and say, “Hey, we’re going to save 100 runs a year because of the defense and the park!”

Consider, by analogy, stacking good defense on top of high-strikeout pitching. Sure, the defenders will make the pitchers look better, but the high strikeout total will reduce the number of balls in play, and thus diminish the value of the defense.

by robbbbbb on Mar 26, 2009 9:28 AM PDT reply actions  

Is that necessarily true, though?

I’m asking because I don’t know, not to be snarky – but this statement

the high strikeout total will reduce the number of balls in play, and thus diminish the value of the defense.

doesn’t ring true to me – the defense still has the same value even if it’s not in use, does it not?

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Mar 26, 2009 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'm guessing that UZR/150 is based on an average number of flyballs being hit/chances/whatever

which would mean that high strikeout pitchers would start to reduce the value of the defense, since they’re not saving runs that have already been saved. On the other hand, I’d expect this effect to be fairly small – no matter who the pitchers are, there are going to be a reasonable number of chances in the OF – even if you reduce the chances by 50%, you’re probably talking about a ~5 run diminishing return, tops, which isn’t a ton in the grand scheme of things.

by seattlebruin on Mar 26, 2009 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

BULLSHIT ALERT!

Keep in mind I’m just making up numbers here, my point was that I think this effect would be very small when you figure out it’s actual run value

by seattlebruin on Mar 26, 2009 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

Positional protection, as everybody knows.

See, when a hitter knows there’s a top flight defender in say, RF he’s going to try and hit it to the weak link which in the past was Raul. This reduced Ichiro’s chances and most definitely lowered his defensive rankings. Now Ichiro has some defensive protection in L & CF, he’s going to get more chances as he’s the perceived weak link. BINGO! BANGO! BONGO!

by Kermit. on Mar 26, 2009 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

Those are two different situations

In the latter situation, the pitching staff allows fewer balls in play, which reduces the impact of the defense. But in the former, you have no such condition. It’s just a ballpark with deep fences.

by Jeff Sullivan on Mar 26, 2009 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

There's no evidence this is true

Everyone assumes it is, but every bit of actual evidence we have says its not. Carl Crawford didn’t get worse when they replaced Delmon Young in CF witih BJ Upton. Randy Winn didn’t get worse when he started playing next to Mike Cameron. Nick Markakis didn’t get worse when the Orioles imported Adam Jones.

by davidcameron on Mar 26, 2009 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well, I think it's because we have some evidence that it happens on the IF

people extrapolate that the same phenomenon must happen in the OF. And frankly, it’s kind of WEIRD that it doesn’t. But yes, we don’t have evidence that it happens. I think you may see some of it in Ichiro’s out-of-zone plays in RZR when he was a CF, and there may be other isolated oddities like that.

by marc w on Mar 26, 2009 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions  

Diminishing Returns on defense are a Myth

I posted to Tango’s blog specifically about diminishing returns and the response I got from Michael Lichtman was something like “in principle, you would, but in practice, it won’t happen because you’d need off-the-charts, unprescendented good OFs, like a +250 runs OF, for this to start happening.”

Also, I hate it when people cry “diminishing returns” about defense. It’s just a prejudice. When would you ever say “diminishing returns” when you improve your bullpen, your lineup or your starting rotation? You wouldn’t. But the longstanding prejudice against defense from “hitter positions” (corners) always has people bringing up some mythical diminishing returns from defense.

by philosofool on Mar 26, 2009 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

The phenomenon does not exist

Yes, in principle you can have an OF that is too good. However, in practice there is no evidence that this happens. In order to prevent it, you simple move your RF and LF further toward the corners. In order for it happen in practice, you would basically need to have an OF so good that he was capable of playing two positions at once.

The concern is legitimate only before you have looked at the evidence. Once you have looked at the evidence, you see that there is not, in practice, any diminishing return on improving OF defense. Which, I think, means that the concern is imperfect.

by philosofool on Mar 26, 2009 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

That's exactly what I'm saying.

Being concerned is fine. In this case, there’s not much evidence to support it.

by seattlebruin on Mar 26, 2009 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think you hear 'dinishing returns' about a pen or a line-up all the time.

You’ve heard it this year from Royals fans after the Farnsworth acquisition, for example.
You’ve heard it all off-season from M’s fans who’re convinced that pitching/defense alone isn’t going to help the team win.

There’s still a good argument that 99% of the time, it doesn’t matter – if you’ve got a good staff and you add another pitcher (San Francisco), there aren’t diminishing returns even if you don’t improve the line-up: a run saved is as valuable as a run scored (within normal ranges, of course). Still, I think it’s a common theme in fan complaints.

by marc w on Mar 26, 2009 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

Although there's diminishing returns for the playoffs

For one example. You’ll give at least three pitchers pitching twice in a seven-game series, so you want them to be aces, but the #4 only pitches once a series at most, and the #5 doesn’t pitch at all, so adding an ace as your #4 or #5 doesn’t help as much for the playoffs

by Decatur on Mar 26, 2009 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

But you don't build your roster in October.

And having those extra aces at #4 and #5 does help, because if they are truly aces, you wouldn’t skip turns in the rotation.

Also, in your scenario, to have diminishing returns you would have to guarantee a 7-game series. Unfortunately, there are no guarantees in the playoffs.

by Wilder. on Mar 26, 2009 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

Hmmm

Yeah, you’re probably right. I was just thinking out loud about the diminishing returns idea. I guess my point I was trying to make is that if you’re in July and in a pennant race and have three (or more) outstanding starters, filling a roster hole by trading for a 5 win position player would probably help in October more than trading for a 5 win starting pitcher. Also, I think you should build your roster for October to some extent (e.g. the 2001 Mariners’ starters weren’t high-strikeout pitchers, and I think we got burned in the postseason for it).

See the Secret Sauce article (sorry, hyperlink is not cooperating for some reason)
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5541

by Decatur on Mar 26, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

You're probably correct about the position player being worth more in October

although it depends entirely on what you’re replacing. But the impact it has on your team in the playoffs isn’t the only thing that matters, obviously. And an extra relief ace is nothing to shake a stick at.

by Aaron Campeau on Mar 26, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Heh.

Fitting that my Ichiro fanshot photo is automatically linked to this thread…

This signature space for rent.

by PositivePaul on Mar 26, 2009 3:02 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

By reading a game thread of your own volition you agree to accept all liability for any and all damage done to your delicate sensibilities.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Starlin Castro's fit with Seattle
Kawasaki80_small
Lists! So many lists!
M_s_hat_copy_small
OT -- May 22nd In Memoriam
Ichiro_small
Why do managers and media members hate walks?
Wbc_029_small
Friday Morning Music Thread
Small
Dustin Ackley BP swing vs game swing
Beastquakerwallpaper_small
More on the Struggles of Smoak
Randy2_for_sbn_small
Albert Pujols 2012: Three Retrospectives
Small
On Batting Orders
Niehaus_small
More on Dustin Ackley and the strikezone

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Yahoo_full_count

Sexy People

Wbc_029_small Jeff Sullivan

Small Matthew

Claw_small JY