|
| |
June 2008 - Posts
-
Recently I have been thinking about what our offense needs to do to improve. After long deliberation, my hypothesis is that what this team needs to do to be successful is draw a lot more walks and thus hit more multi-run home runs. My concern, it seems to me, is that the Brewers have this incredibly powerful ballclub that is underperforming in the department of finding ways to get on base. I believe that we can pinpoint that by hitting woes (I'd point to Weeks and Braun as the main culprits, because they are the ones that see the most PA that are not hitting enough, but then you also have your problems with Cameron and Hall, which is of a completely different sort than Braun and Weeks), but we can also see that overall, this team does not draw enough walks as a whole, across the board.
I suspect that this is the reason that we are often frustrated as fans -- our offense has massive potential for efficiently scoring runs, but is not yet living up to that potential.
So, I decided to take a look today and see how the Crew compares to other NL ballclubs in terms of efficiency, which I am designating by the true outcomes -- HR, BB, K -- and focusing on what teams in the NL are doing when they are not putting the ball in play.
This is going to seem somewhat counterintuitive, but it is absolutely the case that the most efficient offense possible, in ideal terms, would be an offense that hit a home run in every single plate appearance. An offense where one plate appearance equals one run would score more runs than any other type of offense in baseball -- now, when we start adding outs into the equation, we can weigh different types of outs, such as outs that are put in play, and outs that are not (like strike outs). In order to best analyze the efficiency of an offense and their dependence upon true outcomes, we are going to throw out every type of out that is put in play, and only consider strike outs.
Now, all we need to do is add in walks, and we have three areas in which we can analyze offenses, quite thoroughly as well. My hypothesis is that offenses that do not depend upon putting balls in play will on the whole be better offenses because they will depend upon luck less, and they will emphasize power and patience more (power being a trait for home runs, patience being a trait for walks, and then their inverse correlation -- big power players will get walked more because of potential run producing outcomes, and patience will also correspond to the ability to better drive the ball).
Overall, the best possible offense would never put the ball in play. So, we ought to analyze the traits of NL offenses and their production when they do not put the ball in play.
First, let's organize them by OBP and SLG:
OBP
1. Cardinals (3189 PA): 902 PA, 561 AB, 81 HR, 480 K/323 BB; .144/.468/.578; 54 solo HR
2. Braves (3159 PA): 908 PA, 577 AB, 79 HR, 498 K/313 BB; .137/.452/.548; 40 solo HR
3. Phillies (3165 PA): 1000 PA, 659 AB, 107 HR, 552 K/309 BB; .162/.448/.649; 60 solo HR
4. Mets (3121 PA): 889 PA, 565 AB, 71 HR, 494 K/307 BB; .126/.444/.503; 41 solo HR
5. Cubs (3212 PA): 1012 PA, 657 AB, 91 HR, 566 K/324 BB; .139/.441/.554; 49 solo HR
6. Reds (3110 PA): 970 PA, 650 AB, 86 HR, 564 K/304 BB; .132/.419/.529; 53 solo HR
7. Pirates (3095 PA): 870 PA, 591 AB, 81 HR, 510 K/248 BB; .137/.414/.548; 40 solo HR
8. Brewers (3042 PA): 962 PA, 672 AB, 102 HR, 570 K/252 BB; .152/.407/.607; 63 solo HR
9. Nationals (3073 PA): 909 PA, 603 AB, 59 HR, 544 K/271 BB; .098/.402/.391; 38 solo HR
10. Dodgers (2978 PA): 780 PA, 519 AB, 52 HR, 467 K/244 BB; .100/.401/.401; 33 solo HR
11. Astros (3000 PA): 824 PA, 578 AB, 82 HR, 496 K/224 BB; .142/.398/.567; 52 solo HR
12. Rockies (3112 PA): 925 PA, 631 AB, 68 HR, 563 K/269 BB; .108/.391/.431; 39 solo HR
13. Diamondbacks (3029 PA): 1025 PA, 711 AB, 82 HR, 629 K/290 BB; .115/.386/.461; 48 solo HR
14. Giants (3073 PA): 848 PA, 575 AB, 52 HR, 523 K/248 BB; .090/.383/.362; 35 solo HR
15. Marlins (3021 PA): 1053 PA, 781 AB, 115 HR, 666 K/247 BB; .147/.368/.589; 64 solo HR
16. Padres (3158 PA): 1025 PA, 720 AB, 71 HR, 649 K/276 BB; .099/.367/.394; 39 solo HR
SLG
1. Phillies (3165 PA): 1000 PA, 659 AB, 107 HR, 552 K/309 BB; .162/.448/.649; 60 solo HR
2. Brewers (3042 PA): 962 PA, 672 AB, 102 HR, 570 K/252 BB; .152/.407/.607; 63 solo HR
3. Marlins (3021 PA): 1053 PA, 781 AB, 115 HR, 666 K/247 BB; .147/.368/.589; 64 solo HR
4. Cardinals (3189 PA): 902 PA, 561 AB, 81 HR, 480 K/323 BB; .144/.468/.578; 54 solo HR
5. Astros (3000 PA): 824 PA, 578 AB, 82 HR, 496 K/224 BB; .142/.398/.567; 52 solo HR
6. Cubs (3212 PA): 1012 PA, 657 AB, 91 HR, 566 K/324 BB; .139/.441/.554; 49 solo HR
7. Braves (3159 PA): 908 PA, 577 AB, 79 HR, 498 K/313 BB; .137/.452/.548; 40 solo HR
8. Pirates (3095 PA): 870 PA, 591 AB, 81 HR, 510 K/248 BB; .137/.414/.548; 40 solo HR
9. Reds (3110 PA): 970 PA, 650 AB, 86 HR, 564 K/304 BB; .132/.419/.529; 53 solo HR
10. Mets (3121 PA): 889 PA, 565 AB, 71 HR, 494 K/307 BB; .126/.444/.503; 41 solo HR
11. Diamondbacks (3029 PA): 1025 PA, 711 AB, 82 HR, 629 K/290 BB; .115/.386/.461; 48 solo HR
12. Rockies (3112 PA): 925 PA, 631 AB, 68 HR, 563 K/269 BB; .108/.391/.431; 39 solo HR
13. Dodgers (2978 PA): 780 PA, 519 AB, 52 HR, 467 K/244 BB; .100/.401/.401; 33 solo HR
14. Padres (3158 PA): 1025 PA, 720 AB, 71 HR, 649 K/276 BB; .099/.367/.394; 39 solo HR
15. Nationals (3073 PA): 909 PA, 603 AB, 59 HR, 544 K/271 BB; .098/.402/.391; 38 solo HR
16. Giants (3073 PA): 848 PA, 575 AB, 52 HR, 523 K/248 BB; .090/.383/.362; 35 solo HR
OBP/SLG rank
1. Phillies 4
2. Cardinals 5
3. Braves 9
4. Brewers 10
5. Cubs 11
6. Mets 14
7. Reds 15
8. Pirates 15
9. Astros 16
10. Marlins 18
11. Dodgers 23
12. Nationals 24
13. Rockies 24
14. Diamondbacks 24
15. Giants 30
16. Padres 30
These OBP and SLG show that an offense that has very good numbers on balls-not-in-play are not necessarily imbalanced or homer-happy offenses; for instance, although the Cubs are one of the better HR teams in the NL, they are not necessarily recognize as one, and their main point of success is their OBP, and especially their BB. The same goes for the Cards, Braves, and Mets, who post excellent OBP in these categories without a great dependence upon HR. Oddly enough, there is a strong correlation between the teams that get on base at the lowest percent and the teams that hit fewest HR.
Now that we have the basics organized, let's look at the best type of hit, the only type of hit that one can get without putting the ball in play: a home run. There are numerous things we can do here -- for instance, I have included solo HR with overall HR, and we will be able to analyze a team's HR efficiency, as well as their overall ability to hit HR. HR efficiency is important because although a team that hits more home runs will probably have a more efficient offense overall (or at least the potential for a more efficient offense), a team that hits multi-run HR frequently will have the most efficient offense.
So, here are three HR categories: HR efficiency (solo HR/total HR), total HR, and solo HR (although we want to find and reward efficient home run teams, we also do not want to punish teams that flat out hit a ton of solo HR, and a ton of HR overall, at the expense of teams that might hit very little HR, even if they are efficient):
HR efficiency
1. Pirates (3095 PA): 81 HR, 40 solo HR (49.4%)
2. Braves (3159 PA): 79 HR, 40 solo HR (50.6%)
3. Cubs (3212 PA): 91 HR, 49 solo HR (53.8%)
4. Padres (3158 PA): 71 HR, 39 solo HR (54.9%)
5. Marlins (3021 PA): 115 HR, 64 solo HR (55.7%)
6. Phillies (3165 PA): 107 HR, 60 solo HR (56.1%)
7. Rockies (3112 PA): 68 HR, 39 solo HR (57.4%)
8. Mets (3121 PA): 71 HR, 41 solo HR (57.7%)
9. Diamondbacks (3029 PA): 82 HR, 48 solo HR (58.5%)
10. Reds (3110 PA): 86 HR, 53 solo HR (61.6%)
11. Brewers (3042 PA): 102 HR, 63 solo HR (61.8%)
12. Astros (3000 PA): 82 HR, 52 solo HR (63.4%)
13. Nationals (3073 PA): 59 HR, 38 solo HR (64.4%)
14. Dodgers (2978 PA): 52 HR, 33 solo HR (63.5%)
15. Cardinals (3189 PA): 81 HR, 54 solo HR (66.7%)
16. Giants (3073 PA): 52 HR, 35 solo HR (67.4%)
HR Total
1. Marlins (3021 PA): 115 HR, 64 solo HR (55.7%)
2. Phillies (3165 PA): 107 HR, 60 solo HR (56.1%)
3. Brewers (3042 PA): 102 HR, 63 solo HR (61.8%)
4. Cubs (3212 PA): 91 HR, 49 solo HR (53.8%)
5. Reds (3110 PA): 86 HR, 53 solo HR (61.6%)
6. Astros (3000 PA): 82 HR, 52 solo HR (63.4%)
7. Diamondbacks (3029 PA): 82 HR, 48 solo HR (58.5%)
8. Pirates (3095 PA): 81 HR, 40 solo HR (49.4%)
9. Cardinals (3189 PA): 81 HR, 54 solo HR (66.7%)
10. Braves (3159 PA): 79 HR, 40 solo HR (50.6%)
11. Mets (3121 PA): 71 HR, 41 solo HR (57.7%)
12. Padres (3158 PA): 71 HR, 39 solo HR (54.9%)
13. Rockies (3112 PA): 68 HR, 39 solo HR (57.4%)
14. Nationals (3073 PA): 59 HR, 38 solo HR (64.4%)
15. Dodgers (2978 PA): 52 HR, 33 solo HR (63.5%)
16. Giants (3073 PA): 52 HR, 35 solo HR (67.4%)
Solo HR
1. Marlins (3021 PA): 115 HR, 64 solo HR (55.7%)
2. Brewers (3042 PA): 102 HR, 63 solo HR (61.8%)
3. Phillies (3165 PA): 107 HR, 60 solo HR (56.1%)
4. Cardinals (3189 PA): 81 HR, 54 solo HR (66.7%)
5. Reds (3110 PA): 86 HR, 53 solo HR (61.6%)
6. Astros (3000 PA): 82 HR, 52 solo HR (63.4%)
7. Cubs (3212 PA): 91 HR, 49 solo HR (53.8%)
8. Diamondbacks (3029 PA): 82 HR, 48 solo HR (58.5%)
9. Mets (3121 PA): 71 HR, 41 solo HR (57.7%)
10. Braves (3159 PA): 79 HR, 40 solo HR (50.6%)
11. Pirates (3095 PA): 81 HR, 40 solo HR (49.4%)
12. Rockies (3112 PA): 68 HR, 39 solo HR (57.4%)
13. Padres (3158 PA): 71 HR, 39 solo HR (54.9%)
14. Nationals (3073 PA): 59 HR, 38 solo HR (64.4%)
15. Giants (3073 PA): 52 HR, 35 solo HR (67.4%)
16. Dodgers (2978 PA): 52 HR, 33 solo HR (63.5%)
HR Ranking
1. Marlins 7
2. Phillies 11
3. Cubs 14
4. Brewers 16
5. Reds 20
6. Pirates 20
7. Braves 22
8. Astros 24
9. Diamondbacks 24
10. Cardinals 28
11. Mets 28
12. Padres 29
13. Rockies 32
14. Nationals 41
15. Dodgers 45
16. Giants 47
I find it very interesting that the teams that hit the most home runs are not necessarily the most efficient HR teams. The best team in this regard is the Cubs, who do not lead the NL in HR, but hit a lot of HR anyhow, and a lot of multi-run HR.
To round out this offensive picture, we have BB and K, the other two true outcomes, which will help us to analyze the most efficient offenses. It may seem counterintuitive, but in this study I am rewarding teams that strike out more, because striking out more is a characteristic of teams that rely on true outcomes and will accumulate more true outcomes. I would suggest that the best possible team would be a team that could walk more than any other team, hit more home runs than any other team, and strike out more than any other team. We are not concerned with putting the ball in play here, so we're not going to reward putting the ball into play:
BB
1. Cubs (3212 PA): 324 BB
2. Cardinals (3189 PA): 323 BB
3. Braves (3159 PA): 313 BB
4. Phillies (3165 PA): 309 BB
5. Mets (3121 PA): 307 BB
6. Reds (3110 PA): 304 BB
7. Diamondbacks (3029 PA): 290 BB
8. Padres (3158 PA): 276 BB
9. Nationals (3073 PA): 271 BB
10. Rockies (3112 PA): 269 BB
11. Brewers (3042 PA): 252 BB
12. Giants (3073 PA): 248 BB
13. Pirates (3095 PA): 248 BB
14. Marlins (3021 PA): 247 BB
15. Dodgers (2978 PA): 244 BB
16. Astros (3000 PA): 224 BB
K
1. Marlins (3021 PA): 666 K
2. Padres (3158 PA): 649 K
3. Diamondbacks (3029 PA): 629 K
4. Brewers (3042 PA): 570 K
5. Cubs (3212 PA): 566 K
6. Reds (3110 PA): 564 K
7. Rockies (3112 PA): 563 K
8. Phillies (3165 PA): 552 K
9. Nationals (3073 PA): 544 K
10. Giants (3073 PA): 523 K
11. Pirates (3095 PA): 510 K
12. Braves (3159 PA): 498 K
13. Astros (3000 PA): 496 K
14. Mets (3121 PA): 494 K
15. Cardinals (3189 PA): 480 K
16. Dodgers (2978 PA): 467 K
The best teams here are the Cubs, Reds, Phillies, Diamondbacks, and to a lesser extent the Nationals -- each of these teams exhibit a high number of strike outs as well as a high number of walks. That's what we're looking for here, and that's what we'll reward. Unbalanced offenses are the Brewers and Marlins, who do not walk enough, and the Cards and Braves, who do not strike out enough.
Now, for the big point: to what % do each of these teams rely on the true outcomes? Here I divided the PA from balls not put in play by the total number of PA, to get an idea of who relies on this the most. The reason that this is important is that we can weigh the percentage at which a team relies on the true outcomes against their success for executing the true outcomes. For example, a team like the Brewers, who have unbalanced true outcomes (good HR, good K, not enough BB) will not be as effective if they rely on the true outcome too heavily. Meanwhile, a team that executes with good individual true outcome traits but does not rely on the true outcome enough will not produce as much offensively, and will be wasting potential run-scoring resources:
PA%
1. Marlins (3021 PA): 1053 PA; 34.9%
2. Diamondbacks (3029 PA): 1025 PA; 33.8%
3. Padres (3158 PA): 1025 PA; 32.5%
4. Phillies (3165 PA): 1000 PA; 31.6%
5. Brewers (3042 PA): 962 PA; 31.6%
6. Cubs (3212 PA): 1012 PA; 31.5%
7. Reds (3110 PA): 970 PA; 31.2%
8. Rockies (3112 PA): 925 PA; 29.7%
9. Nationals (3073 PA): 909 PA; 29.6%
10. Braves (3159 PA): 908 PA; 28.7%
11. Mets (3121 PA): 889 PA; 28.5%
12. Cardinals (3189 PA): 902 PA; 28.3%
13. Pirates (3095 PA): 870 PA; 28.1%
14. Giants (3073 PA): 848 PA; 27.6%
15. Astros (3000 PA): 824 PA; 27.5%
16. Dodgers (2978 PA): 780 PA; 26.2%
So, with that, here are the overall rankings:
1. Phillies: 34
2. Cubs: 45
3. Marlins: 52
4. Brewers: 54
5. Reds: 66
6. Braves: 66
7. Cardinals: 74
8. Diamondbacks: 83
9. Pirates: 86
10. Mets: 89
11. Astros: 91
12. Padres: 100
13. Rockies: 107
14. Nationals: 118
15. Dodgers: 141
16. Giants: 144
The Phillies are easily the best true outcome offense because they rely on the true outcome a lot, walk a ton, strike out at a good clip, and hit home runs frequently and with good efficiency. The Marlins are an interesting case because although they cleaned up in a lot of HR categories, and did well with K, they do not BB enough. This could explain some of their struggles -- if they rely on the HR and K in their offense without walking, they will not maximize their production.
So, this is one way to conceptualize offensive production for a baseball team. Walk a lot, hit a lot of home runs, and strike out a lot: minimize your dependence upon luck and do not give the fielders a chance to field against you. If an offense can exhibit these types of skills, and excel in their usage, they will have aspects of offensive production that will be difficult to take away.
-
Today I was browsing through Baseball Reference's National League page, and I stumbled upon an interesting fact -- Ryan Braun and Corey Hart are among the top players in the NL based on the "Power/Speed Number." The "Power/Speed Number" was designed by Bill James, and he himself calls it a "freak show stat" -- meaning, the number itself does not have much explanatory value, but rather serves the purpose of an index.
The simple explanation of the stat is that it is meant to evaluate classes of players, specifically those clubs of HR/SB greats -- 15/15, 20/20, 30/30, 40/40, etc. The all-time greats in this category are Barry Bonds, Rickey Henderson, Joe Morgan, Bobby Bonds, and Willie Mays. The stat is simply calculated as follows: (2*HR*SB)/(HR+SB) -- the structure of this equation weights HR and SB together in a way that gives an advantage to a player with a lot of HR and SB, rather than a player with an unbalanced total in one of the categories -- ex., if a player steals 25 bases and hits 17 HR, their power/speed number is 20.2 (2*17*25)/(17+25), whereas a player that steals 40 bases and hits 5 HR will have a number of 8.9, and a player that hits 50 HR and 1 SB will have a number of 1.9.
So, here are the individual NL leaders in Power/Speed Number:
1. Hanley Ramirez, FLA 17.4
2. Lance Berkman, HOU 15.3
3. Brandon Phillips, CIN 13.5
4. Jose Reyes. NYM 12.2
5. Ryan Braun, MIL 11.4
6. Nate McLouth, PIT 11.2
7. Carlos Beltran, NYM 11.0
8. Corey Hart, MIL 10.9
9. David Wright, NYM 9.6
10. Alfonso Soriano, CHC 9.5
Other Brewers starters are not far off:
Rickie Weeks 8.6
Mike Cameron 7.1
I decided to take the logic of this relationship between power and speed -- that players that can both hit home runs and steal bases in bunches possess two valuable tools -- and apply it to NL teams. Here's what I found....in cases where teams had similar power/speed numbers, I included other stats that indicate power and speed effectiveness, such as XBH%, SB%, and SLG:
Here are the NL teams, ranked by power/speed number...
1. Astros (80 HR, 75 SB): 34.6% XBH; 77.42 power/speed; 72.8% SB; .414 SLG
2. Phillies (105 HR, 60 SB): 38.4% XBH; 76.36 power/speed; 89.6% SB; .440 SLG
3. Brewers (100 HR, 54 SB): 38.6% XBH; 70.13 power/speed; 73.9% SB; .430 SLG
4. Mets (65 HR, 73 SB): 31.5% XBH; 68.77 power/speed; 80.2% SB; .391 SLG
5. Rockies (68 HR, 65 SB): 33.9% XBH; 66.47 power/speed; 81.3% SB; .405 SLG
6. Reds (85 HR, 52 SB): 34.4% XBH; 64.53 power/speed; 67.5% SB; .400 SLG
7. Cubs (88 HR, 49 SB): 33.4% XBH; 62.95 power/speed; 70% SB; .447 SLG
8. Marlins (112 HR, 39 SB): 38.9% XBH; 57.85 power/speed; 76.4% SB; .447 SLG
9. Dodgers (51 HR, 64 SB): 28.3% XBH; 56.77 power/speed; 75.3% SB; .381 SLG
10. Giants (50 HR, 60 SB): 33.3% XBH; 54.55 power/speed; 70.6% SB; .396 SLG
11. Cardinals (77 HR, 32 SB): 31.2% XBH; 45.21 power/speed; 68.1% SB; .418 SLG
12. Nationals (58 HR, 35 SB): 31.7% XBH; 43.66 power/speed; 68.6% SB; .360 SLG
13. Braves (78 HR, 28 SB): 31.5% XBH; 41.21 power/speed; 73.7% SB; .420 SLG
14. D’backs (82 HR, 26 SB) 38.5% XBH; 39.48 power/speed; 66.7% SB; .414 SLG
15. Pirates (80 HR, 23 SB): 33.5% XBH; 35.73 power/speed; 74.2% SB; .409 SLG
16. Padres (69 HR, 24 SB): 31.6% XBH; 35.61 power/speed; 72.7% SB; .379 SLG
For a more thorough look at these rankings, here are the NL teams ranked according to SB%...
1. Phillies (105 HR, 60 SB): 38.4% XBH; 76.36 power/speed; 89.6% SB; .440 SLG
2. Rockies (68 HR, 65 SB): 33.9% XBH; 66.47 power/speed; 81.3% SB; .405 SLG
3. Mets (65 HR, 73 SB): 31.5% XBH; 68.77 power/speed; 80.2% SB; .391 SLG
4. Marlins (112 HR, 39 SB): 38.9% XBH; 57.85 power/speed; 76.4% SB; .447 SLG
5. Dodgers (51 HR, 64 SB): 28.3% XBH; 56.77 power/speed; 75.3% SB; .381 SLG
6. Pirates (80 HR, 23 SB): 33.5% XBH; 35.73 power/speed; 74.2% SB; .409 SLG
7. Brewers (100 HR, 54 SB): 38.6% XBH; 70.13 power/speed; 73.9% SB; .430 SLG
8. Braves (78 HR, 28 SB): 31.5% XBH; 41.21 power/speed; 73.7% SB; .420 SLG
9. Astros (80 HR, 75 SB): 34.6% XBH; 77.42 power/speed; 72.8% SB; .414 SLG
10. Padres (69 HR, 24 SB): 31.6% XBH; 35.61 power/speed; 72.7% SB; .379 SLG
11. Giants (50 HR, 60 SB): 33.3% XBH; 54.55 power/speed; 70.6% SB; .396 SLG
12. Cubs (88 HR, 49 SB): 33.4% XBH; 62.95 power/speed; 70% SB; .447 SLG
13. Nationals (58 HR, 35 SB): 31.7% XBH; 43.66 power/speed; 68.6% SB; .360 SLG
14. Cardinals (77 HR, 32 SB): 31.2% XBH; 45.21 power/speed; 68.1% SB; .418 SLG
15. Reds (85 HR, 52 SB): 34.4% XBH; 64.53 power/speed; 67.5% SB; .400 SLG
16. D’backs (82 HR, 26 SB) 38.5% XBH; 39.48 power/speed; 66.7% SB; .414 SLG
...and SLG...
1. Cubs (88 HR, 49 SB): 33.4% XBH; 62.95 power/speed; 70% SB; .447 SLG
2. Marlins (112 HR, 39 SB): 38.9% XBH; 57.85 power/speed; 76.4% SB; .447 SLG
3. Phillies (105 HR, 60 SB): 38.4% XBH; 76.36 power/speed; 89.6% SB; .440 SLG
4. Brewers (100 HR, 54 SB): 38.6% XBH; 70.13 power/speed; 73.9% SB; .430 SLG
5. Braves (78 HR, 28 SB): 31.5% XBH; 41.21 power/speed; 73.7% SB; .420 SLG
6. Cardinals (77 HR, 32 SB): 31.2% XBH; 45.21 power/speed; 68.1% SB; .418 SLG
7. Astros (80 HR, 75 SB): 34.6% XBH; 77.42 power/speed; 72.8% SB; .414 SLG
8. D’backs (82 HR, 26 SB) 38.5% XBH; 39.48 power/speed; 66.7% SB; .414 SLG
9. Pirates (80 HR, 23 SB): 33.5% XBH; 35.73 power/speed; 74.2% SB; .409 SLG
10. Rockies (68 HR, 65 SB): 33.9% XBH; 66.47 power/speed; 81.3% SB; .405 SLG
11. Reds (85 HR, 52 SB): 34.4% XBH; 64.53 power/speed; 67.5% SB; .400 SLG
12. Giants (50 HR, 60 SB): 33.3% XBH; 54.55 power/speed; 70.6% SB; .396 SLG
13. Mets (65 HR, 73 SB): 31.5% XBH; 68.77 power/speed; 80.2% SB; .391 SLG
14. Dodgers (51 HR, 64 SB): 28.3% XBH; 56.77 power/speed; 75.3% SB; .381 SLG
15. Padres (69 HR, 24 SB): 31.6% XBH; 35.61 power/speed; 72.7% SB; .379 SLG
16. Nationals (58 HR, 35 SB): 31.7% XBH; 43.66 power/speed; 68.6% SB; .360 SLG
I know that many commonly suggest that Melvin built an unbalanced Brewers offense, with a low contact ability and a certain type of streakiness, but I think we might also find that Melvin built an offense around two incredibly important tools -- speed and power. While the Brewers offense needs to improve their ability to get on base, and their ability to make contact and even hit more, one thing is certain: the type of skills our hitters have allow them to hit well for power, and we have several basepath threats on our team.
-
After a fine 6-3 homestand, the Crew started the road trip off with a bang, scoring four runs behind a CG, four hitter by Ben Sheets. Sheets is currently in one of his zones, working his consecutive quality starts streak to seven games and running. His quality starts come in the midst of an overall rotation production surge, and tonight's was especially welcome because of the sudden number of short outings against the Orioles, and also because Sheets finally worked a very efficient start once again -- tonight he pitched the full game in the number of pitches normally needed for a 7 IP outing.
Of course, these quality start streaks for Sheets are nothing new, but we might be in the midst of one of his best quality starts streaks of his career:
1. 6/29/05-8/10/05: 5-2, 9 GS, 68 IP, 55 H, 19 R, 60 K/8 BB; 2.51 runs average, 7.56 IP/GS
2. 4/20/04-6/8/04: 3-3, 9 GS, 67.7 IP, 46 H, 19 R, 66 K/8 BB; 2.53 runs average, 7.52 IP/GS
3. 8/28/04-10/2/04: 3-4, 8 GS, 60 IP, 45 H, 15 R, 67 K/8 BB; 2.25 runs average, 7.50 IP/GS
4. 5/1/07-6/9/07: 5-1, 8 GS, 51.3 IP, 48 H, 15 R, 41 K/11 BB; 2.63 runs average, 6.41 IP/GS
5. 5/21/08-6/23/08: 5-0, 7 GS, 51.7 IP, 45 H, 11 R, 41 K/9 BB; 1.91 runs average, 7.39 IP/GS
6. 5/9/02-6/7/02: 1-3, 6 GS, 39.7 IP, 40 H, 14 R, 28 K/18 BB; 3.17 runs average, 6.62 IP/GS
7. 8/23/06-9/13/06: 2-1, 5 GS, 35.7 IP, 25 H, 10 R, 37 K/3 BB; 2.52 runs average, 7.14 IP/GS
8. 7/19/03-8/3/03: 3-1, 4 GS, 26.7 IP, 25 H, 6 R, 18 K/2 BB; 2.02 runs average, 6.68 IP/GS
In his streaks of 4 or more quality starts, Sheets has never posted an undefeated record, or a runs average as low as his current runs average during the last 7 starts. Another welcome sign is an increased K/BB ratio of 41/9, especially given the lower K/9 IP and K/BB totals Sheets put up in recent seasons after changing his pitching style somewhat.
Sheets is certainly working electric stuff, and getting through starts when he doesn't have his best stuff, or the circumstances demand a different approach -- such as the Coors Field start where Sheets relied almost exclusively on his array of fastballs (with varying amounts of tailing fastballs and sinkers).
Meanwhile, on the contract front, the value of Sheets and his quality starts streaks means that he faces a very high percentage of batters during a quality start, throughout the course of his career. Sheets' first advantage as a starting pitcher is that he faces more batters and plate appearances than the vast majority of position players. Over the course of a full season of 30 GS (or more), Sheets will face just under 809 batters per season, which can probably only be matched by a batter that bats in the lead-off spot for all 162 games.
Even beyond the sheer number of plate appearances that Sheets faces -- making him much more valuable than any position player -- Sheets also works a very significant number of batters faced during his quality starts, meaning that his quality start workload alone approaches a good percentage of the PA put up by a middle-order batter during a season:
(these stats do not include tonight's 9 IP and 30 BF):
Sheets: 204 GS, 1325 IP, 606 R, 5495 BF; 4.12 runs average, 6.50 IP/GS; 26.96 BFP/GS; 808.8 BF/30 GS
2001: 9 quality starts, 245 BF
2002: 20 quality starts, 572 BF
2003: 17 quality starts, 484 BF
2004: 22 quality starts, 606 BF
2005: 16 quality starts, 473 BF
2006: 11 quality starts, 297 BF
2007: 14 quality starts, 381 BF
2008: 10 quality starts, 316 BF
Career: 119 quality starts (58%), 3374 BF (61%)
Average: 17.4 quality starts/30 GS; 493.4 BF/17 quality starts
My point in posting these batters faced numbers is to emphasize the value of players of Sheets' talent level. I want to completely refute the argument that a starting pitcher that only goes once every five days is not as valuable as an everyday player -- because a pitcher faces so many batters during a game, and a player of Ben Sheets' level faces even more batters because he works even deeper into games than most starters, even an average pitcher is probably worth the value of an everyday player. But because Sheets pitches so many quality starts, and faces such a high percentage of his batters during quality starts, he is even more valuable.
Another point in posting these batters faced numbers is to emphasize the value of a player of Sheets' talent level, even with an injury risk. If we give Sheets even 20 games started, he faces almost 540 batters, which is a significant workload only slightly less valuable than an everyday player. Add into those 540 batters Sheets' % of quality starts, and even in a short season he has the ability to face nearly 330 batters during quality starts.
Sheets' obvious value is during a full season, where his quality starts workload accumulates a high number of batters faced and plate appearances. But even if Sheets is injured during a good portion of his next contract, he remains a very valuable pitcher because of his ability to pitch so many quality starts.
I do not think that Sheets' injury history should be an issue, or will be an issue, in his next hunt for a contract, and I think that it should be quite clear just how valuable the Ben Sheets of the world are to a baseball team.
-
Our pitching staff has really turned it around since the Dodgers series, when Sheets finished that series with the now infamous 6 run 7th inning. Even more impressive, the turnaround since the Dodgers series includes the Red Sox sweep of the Brewers, so when we look at the team's 16-12 record since May 15, we're really talking about a 16-9 record since May 18. That's very good.
Here's the drastic change: despite losing Yo Gallardo, removing Villanueva from the rotation and moving McClung into the rotation really stabilized the rotation, and McClung's recent success combines with five consecutive quality starts from Sheets, a higher percentage of quality starts from Parra, and a more even performance from Suppan. The only trouble in the rotation currently comes from Bush, the only Brewers starter that has not improved (well, that's a lie. He's improved from a 6.48 runs average to a 5.91 runs average. But you get the picture).
Compare...
Through May 15: 10-13, 41 GS, 238.3 IP, 257 H, 132 R, 156 K/88 BB; 18 quality starts
Dave Bush: 1-4, 6 GS, 34.7 IP, 35 H, 25 R, 20 K/16 BB; 2 quality starts
Ben Sheets: 4-1, 8 GS, 52.7 IP, 42 H, 20 R, 43 K/12 BB; 4 quality starts
Manny Parra: 1-2, 8 GS, 39.3 IP, 48 H, 25 R, 30 K/22 BB; 1 quality start
Jeff Suppan: 2-2, 8 GS, 46.7 IP, 54 H, 27 R, 21 K/19 BB; 5 quality starts
Carlos Villanueva: 2-4, 8 GS, 45 IP, 59 H, 31 R, 28 K/13 BB; 3 quality starts
Yovani Gallardo: 0-0, 3 GS, 20 IP, 19 H, 4 R, 13 K/6 BB; 3 quality starts
...with...
After May 15: 13-8, 28 GS, 170.7 IP, 169 H, 76 R, 119 K/44 BB; 15 quality starts
Dave Bush: 1-3, 6 GS, 35 IP, 39 H, 23 R, 17 K/6 BB; 2 quality starts
Ben Sheets: 3-0, 5 GS, 36.7 IP, 37 H, 8 R, 29 K/5 BB; 5 quality starts
Manny Parra: 4-0, 5 GS, 28.3 IP, 29 H, 13 R, 26 K/10 BB; 2 quality starts
Jeff Suppan: 2-2, 6 GS, 39 IP, 34 H, 16 R, 25 K/16 BB; 3 quality starts
Carlos Villanueva: 0-1, 1 GS, 4 IP, 5 H, 6 R, 3 K/2 BB; 0 quality starts
Seth McClung: 3-2, 5 GS, 27.7 IP, 25 H, 13 R, 18 K/7 BB; 3 quality starts
The differences, overall, are quite significant:
Through May 15: 4.99 runs average, 5.81 IP/GS; 43.9% quality starts
After May 15: 4.01 runs average, 6.10 IP/GS; 53.6% quality starts
10% better in the quality start department, and while pitching one out deeper into each start (on average), the rotation is also averaging almost one less run per 9 IP. That's a very high drop.
Even better, the peripherals have improved, so it's not like this improvement is smoke and mirrors:
Through May 15: 1.45 WHIP, 9.71 H/9 IP, 5.89 K/9 IP, 3.32 BB/9 IP, 1.77 K/BB
After May 15: 1.25 WHIP, 8.91 H/9 IP, 6.27 K/9 IP, 2.32 BB/9 IP, 2.70 K/BB
Allowing fewer baserunners, striking out more, and allowing fewer walks (resulting in more strike outs per walk) accounts for the whole sale runs average and IP/GS improvements, and of course, a higher percentage of quality starts.
For a more concrete idea of what these numbers mean, here's how each average start would look from both portions of the season:
Through May 15: 5.81 IP, 6.27 H, 3.22 R, 3.80 K/2.14 BB
After May 15: 6.10 IP, 6.04 H, 2.72 R, 4.25 K/1.57 BB
Really, on a per-start basis, that improvement is very good.
Now, I honestly do not think we can expect all aspects of these wholesale improvements to continue. I think Suppan is pitching over his head, and McClung might come back down a little bit from his recent success. After 68 IP, Parra is getting to the point where he will become a complete wildcard; it really is unclear just how much we should expect from him. In roughly six more starts, we will see him reach the 100 IP plateau, and in 12 starts we will see him near his career high for IP. Given these factors, it's difficult to project anything from Manny (although he certainly has the stuff to succeed).
Sheets is pitching like Sheets, and on the other side of the coin, Bush really is due to improve, and there's always the chance at another stint with CV.
Another factor has to be the impending trade deadline, where the Brewers' rotation has a real chance to improve, both in terms of depth and in terms of quality IP. if the Crew can acquire another quality starter to fill in the middle rotation, the pressure will be eased off of Parra and Suppan, and either Bush or McClung can be switched out of the rotation completely.
Given the trade deadline, and the recent success across the board, a level of performance near this current level should be attainable, although there will probably be more rough patches to come.
All in all, it's quite a good thing to have a rotation carrying a ballclub.
-
Following a solid 7 IP outing in Houston, where Sheets did not have his best stuff early and worked his way to a quality start late in the game, the Brewers' ace has pitched 5 consecutive quality starts. This is all following the 6 run blow-up against the Dodgers, about which Sheets felt personally responsible and embarassed. Five consecutive appearances by "angry Ben" has really helped the Brewers along, with the ace working into the 9th twice during the stretch, and averaging better than 7 IP a start over those 5 GS.
One thing that bothers me about Sheets' recent rampage is Yost's pitch count tactics with the ace. Yesterday, for instance, Sheets had battled for the quality start after 6 IP, which were fairly inefficient, given his pitch count. Yost allowed the ace to pitch one more inning, which effectively torched his pitch count; Sheets finished the 7th inning with 117 pitches, a count of well over 16.5 pitches per IP.
Sheets is having a stellar season for the Brewers right now, and from his comments after the Pittsburgh complete game, he has taken the rotation on his own shoulders and is determined to lead the team. I think it is clear that this veteran leadership is invaluable to the Brewers.
Part of me wonders, however, what the consequences will be if Yost keeps allowing Sheets to rack up the pitches. After a relatively efficient start to the season, compared to his career norms, Sheets' efficiency has regressed slightly over his last 5 starts, and his pitch efficiency has ballooned in his three most recent starts. Perhaps this can be attributed to his start at Coors, which was more taxing on Sheets' arm because of the atmosphere and game conditions in Denver; perhaps a stretch of starts at home in humid Miller Park will help the ace along.
Here is a breakdown of Sheets' pitch efficiency, using the Dodgers' start at Miller Park as a breaking point for the early season, given Sheets' comments about that start (it serves as a type of watershed for Sheets' season thus far):
First 8 starts: 52.7 IP, 787 NP (43 K/12 BB) = 14.93 NP/IP
Last 5 starts: 36.3 IP, 548 NP (29 K/5 BB) = 15.10 NP/IP
Last three starts: 21.7 IP, 339 NP (17 K/5 BB) = 15.62 NP/IP
The jump between the first 8 starts and the last 5 starts is not awful; it basically amounts to little more than one extra pitch per 7 innings for the ace. However, the trend in the last three starts is more alarming. Compared with his earlier efficiency numbers, the NP/IP above 15.60 means that Sheets is throwing roughly 4 or 5 more pitches per 7 IP. That does not seem entirely alarming over the course of three games, but if an entire 34 game season of 7 IP starts progressed at that rate, Sheets would amass up to 170 more pitches on his arm (which would equal approx. 1.5 extra GS workload).
It is difficult to pinpoint why the ace is throwing more pitches, however:
First eight starts: 7.34 K/9 IP, 2.05 BB/9 IP; 3.58 K/BB; 59 GO/54 AO; 1.02 WHIP
Last five starts: 7.19 K/9 IP, 1.24 BB/9 IP; 5.80 K/BB; 45 GO/34 AO; 1.16 WHIP
Last three starts: 7.05 K/9 IP, 2.07 BB/9 IP; 3.40 K/BB; 29 GO/17 AO; 1.11 WHIP
Sheets' strike out rate per 9 IP is lower, and is walk rate is almost equal to his first eight starts, when he was much more efficient. He is allowing more baserunners than earlier in the season, and he is also pitching more ground outs than earlier in the season. As I mentioned above, this could be the result of pitching at Coors, where Sheets was likely attempting to sink the ball, relying heavily on his fastball and not using his curveball very much. The result was an outing of 100 pitches in 6 IP (16.67 NP/IP), with 11 ground outs (vs. 4 air outs).
Perhaps the key for Sheets is not necessarily striking out fewer batters in order to pitch more efficiently, but to pitch a greater number of air outs.
Of course, that also could mean more home runs allowed:
First eight starts: 7 HR; 1.20 HR/9 IP
Last five starts: 4 HR; 0.99 HR/9 IP
Last three starts: 2 HR; 0.83 HR/9 IP
Ironically, Sheets' pitch efficiency is better when he allows more HR per 9 IP. Given his style of pitching, he seems to be most effective when he allows the HR ball, records air outs, and strikes out a bunch:
Career: 15.39 NP/IP; 7.64 K/9 IP, 1.93 BB/9 IP, 3.96 K/BB; 1389 GO/1397 AO; 1.20 WHIP; 1.05 HR/9 IP
If he could maintain a career line, perhaps improving on the efficiency slightly, he will lower the workload on his arm.
I probably do not need to mention it, but the more inefficient starts that Yost allows Sheets to rack up on his arm, and the larger Sheets' workload, the more question marks could be raised for his long term viability in the organization. Perhaps Yost is allowing Sheets to pitch long, inefficient starts recently because he knows the current status of the organization's negotiations with Sheets; Yost probably knows the odds of the Brewers signing Sheets better than anyone.
Yet, given the chance, any chance whatsoever, that the Brewers could re-sign Sheets, his workload in 2008 will suddenly become a salient point. Hopefully the issue will be resolved easily with a stretch of efficient starts by Sheets, pitching in a familiar environment (or, at least, pitching somewhere closer to sea level).
More Posts Next page »
|
|
|