2014 MLB Thread & Pissing Match

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Just out of curiosity, how do you come up with that math?  For every 3 days that a pitcher who will pitch once every 5 days is on the DL we should subtract an entire win from their predicted win total?  The Brewers are not going to win every day Garza's on the bump, and they aren't going to lose every day his replacement pitches, but even if that were the case, that'd be 1 loss for every 5 days on the DL.

the Brewers hired Dusty Baker?

[akmarq]

I recognize where the stats come from - I've been a fan of sabremetrics for 30 years. But sometimes they tend to be very conservative in that they don't account for outliers and try to bring everything back to the middle. Looks like that was the case with the predicted records. I think any system that doesn't account for any team to win more than 91 games has some inherent flaws.

I use several of these sites to help in developing my player projections. I like baseballhq.com the best.

Was reading a chat with Jeff Sullivan on Fangraphs today and someone brought up the exact same issue with the 91 win ceiling. This was his response (much better formulated than anything I could come up with):

Q: Jeff, I've been looking at the projections page and noticed only one team is projected for 90 wins. Then I went to ESPN and looked at standings for the last 10 years or so. I noticed that every year at least 5-10 teams won at least 90 teams. Are the teams really that close or is it just a by-product of the projection process?
9:23

A:(Jeff Sullivan): Projection process. You can think of the projections as being somewhat heavily regressed. In reality, we get a season sample size of 1. So the results are going to be a lot more scattered, and instead of observing true-talent records, we'll observe true-talent records +/- luck. Some teams will play above their heads, some teams will play below

[Benny B]

Just out of curiosity, how do you come up with that math?  For every 3 days that a pitcher who will pitch once every 5 days is on the DL we should subtract an entire win from their predicted win total?  The Brewers are not going to win every day Garza's on the bump, and they aren't going to lose every day his replacement pitches, but even if that were the case, that'd be 1 loss for every 5 days on the DL.

That would be a pretty decent and mathmatically-sound rebuke... unfortunately, results in sports - like most of life - are dependent upon a sequence of events that wouldn't exist if not for the sequence itself.  Chaos theory, butterfly effect, chain-reaction... the same concept goes by many different names.  In baseball, one of the more oft-used terms is "pressing;" although we use it mostly to refer to a player in a slump trying to do too much to break out of it, thereby extending the slump further, the same phenomenon can affect his teammates when a key member is slumping or absent from the lineup or rotation... others try to do too much to compensate and will usually turn in a below average performance, thereby amplifying the marginal effect that the key player has on his team's overall performance.  The same works the other way around... when a team is "firing on all cylinders" - as the Brewers did during Aug 2011 - players typically outperform their respective norms and the team will - as a result - exceed its "on-paper" expectations.

But that's way too existential for your average baseball player - and fan - to understand, so allow me to offer a more simplistic mathematical explanation:

I believe the Brewers will win between 74 and 94 games.  I also believe Garza will miss a total of two months (a/k/a the GZ_DL factor).  A GZ_DL of 60 days divided by a range of 20 games gives me a 3 to 1 GZ_DL:L ratio.

How's that for math?

[Spotcheck Billy]

Fuzzy

[brandx]

Was reading a chat with Jeff Sullivan on Fangraphs today and someone brought up the exact same issue with the 91 win ceiling. This was his response (much better formulated than anything I could come up with):

Q: Jeff, I've been looking at the projections page and noticed only one team is projected for 90 wins. Then I went to ESPN and looked at standings for the last 10 years or so. I noticed that every year at least 5-10 teams won at least 90 teams. Are the teams really that close or is it just a by-product of the projection process?
9:23

A:(Jeff Sullivan): Projection process. You can think of the projections as being somewhat heavily regressed. In reality, we get a season sample size of 1. So the results are going to be a lot more scattered, and instead of observing true-talent records, we'll observe true-talent records +/- luck. Some teams will play above their heads, some teams will play below

Pretty good explanation. But I think he undercuts his websites purpose a little with the statement. Most sabermetricians try to reduce the luck element. So if a guy hits 10-15 more home runs than expected, is it luck or did his flyball rate go up last year and it went unnoticed so some improvement should be expected.

That's the fun of the new stats. They aren't the answer for everything but they should have in the 60% - 65% range of accuracy. Some things you still need to see though. I like to watch BP when going to games and remember watching Adrian Beltre at age 19 on a team that also had Raul Mondesi and Gary Sheffield.  Took 10 minutes before I told my buddy "this guy is gonna be in the hall of fame. Even at 19, you could see the swing. Saw the same last summer in Tennessee on vacation when I took in a couple AA games. Javier Baez has the swing. It's been compared to Hanley and Sheffield - but I saw Ernie Banks. You don't need advanced stats for those kind of things.

[akmarq]

Pretty good explanation. But I think he undercuts his websites purpose a little with the statement. Most sabermetricians try to reduce the luck element. So if a guy hits 10-15 more home runs than expected, is it luck or did his flyball rate go up last year and it went unnoticed so some improvement should be expected.

That works for retrospective analysis, but the nature of projections is that you have to give a 'luck free' baseline and then acknowledge that everything else is just going to happen. What he's (really they) done via regression is eliminate the 'luck' fluctuations that aren't predictable or explainable enough to account for in a model. That gets back to the nature of prediction vs projection - no one can use stats to predict how many games a team will win with reliable accuracy, but these projections work great over large sample sizes (several seasons).

I'm not sure if the player projections (Zips and Streamer) that are fueling the record projections use peripheral stats like FB% or BAIBP. I know they're mostly using RC+ so I'd guess not? Again, the projections do have a 4 year history so I'd imagine most of that would be accounted for.

That's the fun of the new stats. They aren't the answer for everything but they should have in the 60% - 65% range of accuracy. Some things you still need to see though. I like to watch BP when going to games and remember watching Adrian Beltre at age 19 on a team that also had Raul Mondesi and Gary Sheffield.  Took 10 minutes before I told my buddy "this guy is gonna be in the hall of fame. Even at 19, you could see the swing. Saw the same last summer in Tennessee on vacation when I took in a couple AA games. Javier Baez has the swing. It's been compared to Hanley and Sheffield - but I saw Ernie Banks. You don't need advanced stats for those kind of things.

Absolutely agree. Reading about baseball and watching baseball are two completely different activities for me. Reading about it (and to a lesser extent fantasy) engages my nerdy analytic side. Watching it fulfills the irrational fan side of me. The best part of baseball is when those two cross over each other. For a Mariners fan, that mostly means "Felix Hernandez is pitching. Drop everything."

[Spotcheck Billy]

From today's JS

Brewers are polling their fans on Ryan Braun

The Milwaukee Brewers want to know what their fans think about Ryan Braun.
 
In the wake of Braun’s season-ending, 65-game suspension in 2013 and subsequent admission to using a banned, performance-enhancing substance, the Brewers included a series of questions about their embattled star in a comprehensive survey made available to season ticket holders on the team’s website.
 
The survey includes a wide swath of questions that polls fans on their interest level in the team, personnel changes made over the off-season, expectations for 2014, ownership’s commitment to being competitive and the Miller Park experience during games. But deep in the survey is the series of blunt, multiple-choice questions about Braun and how fans feel about him after his PED scandal.
 
“We wanted to do a fairly detailed and comprehensive survey, asking a lot of questions about fans’ views of the team, the state of the team, the ballpark, the experience,” said Brewers chief operating officer Rick Schlesinger. “For us to not ask questions about Ryan, in our view just didn’t make sense.
 
“Obviously, he’s a very important player. We all know what transpired in 2013. I think it’s important for us as a business (and) in our market what our fans think about our key assets, including key players such as Ryan Braun. We would have been remiss, candidly, if we didn’t ask those questions.
 
"There’s no question that how our fans view Ryan Braun is important to us. What happened in 2013 as far as being suspended was a significant event here. There’s no doubt about it. A lot of fans have a lot of different opinions. I do a lot of speaking engagements and a lot of people express their views. I like for people to express themselves, candidly or otherwise.
 
“Frankly, we need to know as an organization what people think about us. If we’re asking fans questions but not asking about Ryan Braun, what are we doing as an organization? If people have strong opinions, we need to know that. We don’t expect everybody to have a great opinion about Ryan Braun.”
 
The first multiple-choice question is an easy one: What is your opinion of Ryan Braun? Fans have these choices as answers: extremely favorable, very favorable, somewhat favorable, neutral – neither favorable nor unfavorable; somewhat unfavorable, very unfavorable, extremely unfavorable.
 
The questions then become a little move involved, not to mention blunt. Fans are asked: Which sports blogger statement about the recent criticism of Ryan Braun comes CLOSEST to your view?
 
*If Ryan Braun returns to playing at an All-Star level, then that is enough for me to respect him as a player and root for him, regardless of how I might view him as a person or a role model.
 
*Ryan Braun will always be tainted by what he did. He disgraced himself, the team and baseball. His apologies mean nothing.
 
*Ryan Braun needs to apologize to the fans one more time at the beginning of this season because what he did was wrong. That will make it clear that he gets it. But after that apology, it’s time to move on.
 
*Ryan Braun already apologized enough. He is an extraordinary player, offensively and defensively. I hope he’ll be a Brewer for his entire career and I’ll always support him.
 
*Ryan Braun will have to show me that he truly is sorry for what he did. He needs to continually demonstrate that he is remorseful and I will take a wait and see approach before I make a final judgment on him.
 
Fans are then asked: Which of these four press/blogger statements about Ryan Braun do you agree with the most?
 
*I don’t like Ryan Braun, and I don’t care what he says or does going forward.
 
*Ryan has made himself available on multiple occasions to the media to discuss, and it’s now time for the Brewers to turn their focus to this season. Looking back isn’t productive, and while they understand the interest, they need to move forward.
 
*Ryan has taken steps to reconnect with fans, sponsors and the public. He’s made numerous appearances locally, called fans and sponsors, and has made a serious effort to put this behind him the right way.
 
*Ryan has served his punishment. Period. He has repeatedly apologized. There is nothing more to talk about. It’s time for the Brewers to get back to baseball and focus on their commitment to fans to fielding a winning baseball team.
 
Lastly, fans are asked: In light of Ryan Braun’s return to the Brewers this season, how do you feel about the future of the Milwaukee Brewers?
 
*More excited
 
*About the same
 
*Less excited
 
One month after he accepted his suspension last July 22 stemming from MLB’s investigation into the scandalous Biogenesis clinic, Braun released a written statement of apology with vague details of his PED use. He admitted to using a “lozenge and a cream” to help recover from an unspecified injury during the 2011 season.
 
Braun tested positive after the Brewers’ first playoff game that year for synthetic testosterone but had the result overturned on appeal, avoiding a 50-game suspension. He then vigorously attacked the MLB drug program and pointed a finger at the urine specimen collector, Dino Laurenzi Jr.
 
After Braun was nabbed by MLB investigators, much of the public outrage centered on his cover-up and attack on Laurenzi Jr. He later placed phone calls to season ticket holders to apologize in person, participated in the team’s Thanksgiving food drive and appeared at the “Brewers On Deck” fan festival in late January. Each time, he admitted to making a “big mistake” that he regretted but refused to answer specific questions about his PED use.
 
The Brewers now are trying to take the “temperature” of their fans to see if they think Braun has done enough to atone for his mistake and subsequent actions. I asked Schlesinger if the information would be forwarded to Braun if the survey shows fans think he needs to do more to get their forgiveness.
 
“If we get some specific, strong indications, again not just whether it’s about Ryan or other things, we have to digest that and take it into account,” said Schlesinger. “What we’re going to specifically do with the responses in relation to Ryan Braun, we haven’t determined.
 
“With the Ryan Braun information we get, if we get information that tells us we need to take a different direction or we need to do a better job of explaining things or we need Ryan to do more things, we’re going to look at it and figure out what to do with it. We’re certainly taking this very seriously. The information, we think, is going to be helpful to us and make us more responsive to fans, which is the ultimate goal here.
 
“We haven’t talked about it. If we get some information that is useful, we will talk about it with Ryan. But I haven’t talked about it with (principal owner) Mark (Attanasio) and we haven’t decided what level of information sharing we will do with this.”
 
Otherwise, what will the club do with the feedback it gets on Braun, you ask?
 
“We’re not going to look at any one answer,” said Schlesinger. “We’re going to look at how people respond and get a sense of what people think about the direction of our organization. The questions about Ryan Braun are going to be relevant.
 
“I can’t tell you we’re going to do anything specific in response to the questions we asked about Ryan Braun. I think we do have our own views about what the population thinks about Ryan Braun. But rather than ‘guestimate,’ I’d rather have some concrete survey data that gives us indications about what our market is thinking. I think we can address certain perceptions people might have, whether it’s about Ryan Braun or the direction of the team or the Miller Park experience.
 
“We think the information is important to have. I do expect our fans to be honest and candid. They always have been. They’ll tell us what they think about a range of things including Ryan Braun.”
 
The Brewers have a lot at stake with Braun, who has seven years and about $127 million remaining on the biggest contract in club history. Should the club get overwhelmingly negative feedback on Braun in the survey, I asked Schlesinger if it might affect the player’s future with the club.
 
“That is so hypothetical and speculative, it’s not for me to answer,” said Schlesinger. “We’ll see what information we get from the survey and learn from it, see what our fans are thinking about the team from a lot of angles.
 
“Our job is to take that information and use it wisely, and figure out how to improve areas we need to improve, maintain areas where we are doing great and just overall make sure there’s a good connection between the fan base and organization.”
 
The Brewers recently reintegrated Braun into their marketing and promotions for the 2014 after a period of exclusion. I asked Schlesinger if that will be stepped up should the survey provide mostly positive feedback from fans on Braun.
 
“What I’ve seen to date, before this survey, is that fans don’t have that view of Ryan and don’t want us to scale back any marketing we do,” said Schlesinger.
 
“I would take exception with the perception that we scaled back on Ryan. When Ryan wasn’t playing and was suspended, clearly your marketing is going to be reflective of the players that are playing as well as the players that are not playing. We had more marketing of some of the players that were playing.
 
“We haven’t exclusively focused on Ryan in our marketing in the past. We aren’t doing it currently and we’re not going to do it in the future. We’ll take the data that we get and we will learn from it.”

[akmarq]

Anyone tuning into spring training today? Desperate times do call for desperate measures - it's not compelling but it's baseball.

[WellsstreetWanderer]

friend called me today and told me the Twins opener might be delayed as much as two weeks. What's up Twin Cities?
Can't clear the ballpark?

[Spotcheck Billy]

should have built it with a roof, never understood why they didn't after Miller Park showed how much of a difference it makes all season

[akmarq]

never understood why they didn't after Miller Park showed how much of a difference it makes all season

My  understanding is that they couldn't pass the bonding for the higher cost removable roof. Not saying that was a good decision (it was really as equally a bad decision as all new stadiums are) but that's the reason.

[WI inferiority Complexes]

My  understanding is that they couldn't pass the bonding for the higher cost removable roof. Not saying that was a good decision (it was really as equally a bad decision as all new stadiums are) but that's the reason.

It would've cost an extra $100m to add a retractable roof to the stadium, and neither the Twins, nor the county or state were willing to pay for it.

I've never been to Target Field, but I know their home broadcasters often cite how beautiful the stadium is without the roof, stating that they couldn't have the "open" feel if it had a retractable roof.

[Spotcheck Billy]

It would've cost an extra $100m to add a retractable roof to the stadium, and neither the Twins, nor the county or state were willing to pay for it.

I've never been to Target Field, but I know their home broadcasters often cite how beautiful the stadium is without the roof, stating that they couldn't have the "open" feel if it had a retractable roof.

I'm sure they're right but when a family wants to come in for game(s) from up north in July knowing that the games will be played rain or shine, well the Brewers have found out more are willing to make the trip because of that. I think that's one big reason attendance has increased (beside the product improving since then as well). I don't know what the ROI on $100M is but of course it also helps with attendance the 3 months or so that is fricking cold outside.

[Benny B]

I'm sure they're right but when a family wants to come in for game(s) from up north in July knowing that the games will be played rain or shine, well the Brewers have found out more are willing to make the trip because of that. I think that's one big reason attendance has increased (beside the product improving since then as well). I don't know what the ROI on $100M is but of course it also helps with attendance the 3 months or so that is fricking cold outside.

A couple more years of this global warming thing, and it will be too cold to play outdoors baseball before May 1 every year.  At that point, the team will have no choice but to move somewhere else.

In other words, the return on $100M is being able to hang on to something that will give you a return.

[🏀]

Yeah, Minny screwed that up and I hate baseball roofs.

[akmarq]

I've never been to Target Field, but I know their home broadcasters often cite how beautiful the stadium is without the roof, stating that they couldn't have the "open" feel if it had a retractable roof.

I cruise over there every year to catch the Ms and drink beer and it really is a top notch stadium. Probably my favorite outside of maybe Camden Yards. It's also well located - on lightrail lines with craft brewery options within walking distance.
 
Logistically I get the argument for a roof but it needs to be done right. Miller feels like a hermetically sealed airport terminal with the roof closed. Safeco still has good airflow and breeze with their roof and it makes all the difference.

Saw today that E. Santana is changing agents - hopefully that means he'll sign somewhere soon

[Benny B]

I cruise over there every year to catch the Ms and drink beer and it really is a top notch stadium. Probably my favorite outside of maybe Camden Yards. It's also well located - on lightrail lines with craft brewery options within walking distance.
 
Logistically I get the argument for a roof but it needs to be done right. Miller feels like a hermetically sealed airport terminal with the roof closed. Safeco still has good airflow and breeze with their roof and it makes all the difference.

Saw today that E. Santana is changing agents - hopefully that means he'll sign somewhere soon

Comparing Miller Park's roof to anything that's hermetically sealed would be like describing Marge Schott as a diversity-embracing egalitarian.

[akmarq]

Comparing Miller Park's roof to anything that's hermetically sealed would be like describing Marge Schott as a diversity-embracing egalitarian.

Not sure I get what you mean...does the roof leak? I've never experienced that...

[tower912]

Tigers snake bit by injuries this spring.     Dirks gone until July, Iglesias gone for the year, Rondon having Tommy John surgery, Sanchez already having a cortisone shot in his shoulder.   

[NavinRJohnson]

How bout that Cabrera contract? Holy hell. Guess we know why they traded fielder.

[CTWarrior]

How bout that Cabrera contract? Holy hell. Guess we know why they traded fielder.

I don't get it.  He was signed for two more years!  What if last season's injuries are a sign of things to come?  Why not at least wait until this offseason to do this?  It's not like they would have to give him more if he hits .350 45 140 this season.  You can pretty much guarantee he won't be worth his paycheck the last 3 or 4 years of the contract.  Granted, Cabrera is light years ahead of him, but didn't anyone learn anything from the Ryan Howard contract?  He's the best hitter in baseball at the moment so unless the injury bug hits him the Tigers won't be regretting this contract for a couple of years, anyway.

[🏀]

How bout that Cabrera contract? Holy hell. Guess we know why they traded fielder.

Because Fielder's wife was sleeping with the clubhouse?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Tigers Sign Cabrera To Record Extension, Create Ripples Across MLB Front Offices

Published March 28, 2014

The Tigers and 1B Miguel Cabrera on Thursday agreed to an eight-year, $248M extension, and while execs around MLB hold Cabrera in the "highest regard," they are "appalled" at the move, according to ESPN's Buster Olney. Olney said, "They're asking questions like, 'Why would the Tigers not wait until after the 2014 season to do this, because he's not a free agent until after 2015 and he turns 31 this April.' They're asking questions like, 'Why not give him a three-year extension rather than an eight-year extension?' And they note that Cabrera probably has a future as a DH and the game's best DH, David Ortiz, just got $16 million in his extension, or about half of what Cabrera is going to make. Rival executives fear the ripple effects from this deal" ("SportsCenter," ESPN, 3/28).

UPPING THE SALARY ANTE: In Detroit, John Lowe reports the extension, which averages out to an MLB-record $31M per year, is the "second deal in baseball history" worth at least $30M per season. Dodgers P Clayton Kershaw, one year "from free agency, signed a long-term deal" for $30.7M per season during the offseason. The extension puts Cabrera’s "total contract" at 10 years and $292M through '23. That would pass Yankees 3B Alex Rodriguez for the "largest lucrative contract in baseball history, by total value" (DETROIT NEWS, 3/28). Also in Detroit, Lynn Henning writes the Tigers have "made him a centerpiece of their past decade’s revival and a source for Comerica Park attendance that has reached the 3 million mark the past two seasons" (DETROIT NEWS, 3/28). ESPN.com's Christina Kahrl wrote the extension "almost automatically makes you wonder if this is what the Tigers decided to do with their entire dividend" from trading 1B Prince Fielder to the Rangers last year (ESPN.com, 3/27). But SI.com's Jay Jaffe wrote the contract "locks in what’s likely to be his decline phase at a fairly steep price" (SI.com, 3/27).

PAYING FOR THE DEAL LATER: ESPN.com's Keith Law wrote under the header, "Miguel Cabrera Deal A Disaster For Detroit." The "issues with the deal are the timing and the length." The timing "makes no sense -- Cabrera had two seasons to go to free agency, and the Tigers could just as easily have taken care of this next winter" (ESPN.com, 3/27). YAHOO SPORTS' Jeff Passan wrote this "may well be the greatest debacle in the desolate baseball wasteland filled with bad-contract carcasses." Passan: "There are mistakes. There are messes. And there is this. This is irresponsible" (SPORTS.YAHOO.com, 3/27). MLB Network's Ken Rosenthal asked, "Why do this when he has two years left on this deal? Do you fear inflation that much? We have yet to see a 10-year deal to a player in his 30s look really good after the first few years" ("MLB Tonight," MLB Network, 3/27). ESPN's Robert Flores wondered how soon until the Tigers have "buyer's remorse after this deal." ESPN's Scott Van Pelt: "It's like driving off the lot with a car. It’s shiny, but as soon as the wheels are dirty (it depreciates) immediately" ("SportsCenter," ESPN, 3/27).

DISASTER WAITING TO HAPPEN? ESPN's Nate Silver said Cabrera's contract is "almost for sure going to be a disaster." Silver: "If you go back and look at the contracts that were signed for this length with guys in their 30s ... almost always these contracts are regretted after five years" ("Olbermann," ESPN2, 3/27). SI.com's Michael Rosenberg writes this contract "will be a disaster." It just "isn't sensible to think he will be an elite player for 10 more years." Cabrera "may play until he is 40, but at a $30-million-a-year level? Highly doubtful." The contract "makes the least sense of all the big baseball contracts in the millennium." Rosenburg: "What was the urgency here? Cabrera turns 31 next month. He has two years left on his contract. Even if Cabrera has another MVP-type season, as I suspect he will, would his price have been that much higher in a year? And even if the price did go up, why couldn't the Tigers just let Cabrera walk as a free agent?" (SI.com, 3/28).

SCHERZER NEXT? ESPN's Manny Acta noted Cabrera's contract could "limit the Tigers" from re-signing P Max Scherzer and "continue to have that good pitching staff." But ESPN's Olney said the Tigers "could sign Scherzer because they're the one team that seems to be comfortable operating with a deficit" ("Baseball Tonight," ESPN, 3/27). Scherzer, who is set to become a free agent after this season, recently turned down a reported six-year, $144M extension with the Tigers (THE DAILY).

[tower912]

I'm not in favor in principle to these kind of deals.    They never work out at the end.    ARod, Pujols.  IMO, Mr. I was rewarding Miggy and making sure he retires a Tiger.    He may not see a WS ring, but he can make sure Miggy is still in Detroit long after Mr. I passes away.   BTW, they are all overpaid.   

[brandx]

I'm not in favor in principle to these kind of deals.    They never work out at the end.    ARod, Pujols.  IMO, Mr. I was rewarding Miggy and making sure he retires a Tiger.    He may not see a WS ring, but he can make sure Miggy is still in Detroit long after Mr. I passes away.   BTW, they are all overpaid.   

These kind of deals show how the owners have so much money that they almost don't know what to do with it. Players share of new revenues is going down every year. Since 2002 player salaries as a share of new revenue has declined from 56% to 40%. Average payroll has gone up 58% in that time while team revenue has gone up 122%.

So while players are making more - owners are making much more.