Monday Morning Rangers Notes: Speculation & Statistics
Joey Matschulat
Did the Texas Rangers "err" in exercising Hank Blalock's 2009 option?Because we're all sick of talking about Ben Sheets and Michael Young:
● In reading Gil LeBreton's Rangers-centric column in last Friday morning's edition of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, I stumbled upon a peculiar supposition -- peculiar in that it mirrored something I had been privately pondering for quite some time:
In hindsight, the Rangers appear to have erred in exercising Hank Blalock’s $6 million option. Six million for a player without a position seems wasteful now, especially with a young DH-in-waiting, Max Ramirez, already on the roster.
Now, we can argue about the various merits and weaknesses of player forecasting systems until we're blue in the face, but there's no denying that such toys are very fun to play with in the months leading up to Opening Day, and one thing that the two most reputable systems currently available to us -- Sean Smith's CHONE and Dan Szymborski's ZiPS -- are saying is that Blalock's and Ramirez's offensive projections are not exactly worlds apart.
Assuming a league-average on-base percentage of .335, the CHONE-projected offensive disparity between Blalock (.345 wOBA) and Ramirez (.332 wOBA) over 700 plate appearances is a little less than eight runs; crudely convert the duo's ZiPS-projected batting lines (.272/.335/.454 for Blalock, .257/.333/.433 for Ramirez) into wOBA while again utilizing a baseline of 700 plate appearances, and the disparity is slashed to just five runs.
If you're a believer in those projections, or are just exceedingly high on what Ramirez could immediately contribute to the Rangers' 2009 lineup, then it probably makes a lot of sense to question whether spending $5.95 million to keep Blalock in Texas for one more season was actually an astute baseball decision -- or, to phrase it a slightly different way, whether retaining Blalock represented the best possible usage of scarce monetary resources on the part of the Rangers.
If you're not a believer in those projections, or if you believe Blalock is poised to assemble a torrid first-half run at the plate (one that would presumably make him an attractive mid-season trade commodity, even though he doesn't presently appear to be one), or if you believe that employing Ramirez as a designated hitter in the majors for the entirety of the 2009 season would unfairly typecast him as a designated hitter and consequently undermine his trade value (although remember that ESPN.com's Keith Law asserted just four days ago that Ramirez would "never be better than fringe-average overall [defensively]"), then you probably also believe that exercising Blalock's 2009 option was a smart play.
I'm not sure that I necessarily agree with LeBreton's characterization of Blalock's retention constituting a fundamental error in judgment on the part of Texas, and general manager Jon Daniels certainly doesn't agree with that position, but it's definitely something worth chewing on.
● One ancillary component of last season's monster 901-run campaign -- the Rangers' most prolific from a pure run-production standpoint since 1999 -- that I suspect may have been overlooked to an extent was the superb baserunning that ceaselessly oiled the cogs of a truly devastating offensive machine.
The good people at Bill James Online maintain separate baserunning analysis sections for individual players and entire teams, with data spanning back through 2002, and during the process of swiftly poring through some of those numbers, I came to the not-so-startling realization that this ballclub -- over the last seven years, at least -- has been very, very good at utilizing the basepaths to its advantage:
[Click the table for a marginally less fuzzy version.]
So, what precisely are these numbers and what do they mean? According to Bill James Online, the 'Net Gain' column on the far right-hand of the table equates to "the entire team’s overall contribution on the bases; their basestealing, avoidance of the double play, and success at taking the extra base while avoiding being thrown out."
The 'BR Gain' column comprises "the total of all the types of extra baserunning advances minus the (triple) penalty for all the BR Outs compared with what would be expected based on the MLB averages," with positive integers being above average and negative integers being below average, while the 'SB Gain' column is evidently based on a break-even point -- in terms of successfully stealing bases -- in the general vicinity of 66 percent. Joe Sheehan of Baseball Prospectus famously argued five years ago that the break-even point is actually right around 75 percent, but then the Rangers still managed to swipe bases at a 76.4 percent success rate in 2008 (81 of 106), so they came out ahead either way.
That healthy +58 in the 'BR Gain' column was actually the best mark in baseball in 2008 (Cleveland and Florida came in at +55 and +52, respectively), and the overall +89 in the 'Net Gain' column was the third-best mark in the game, behind only the defending World Series champion Phillies (+114) and the Rockies (+103); furthermore, Texas has placed among the top five in baseball in the 'Net Gain' column four of the last five seasons, with 2006 being the only exception.
You can thank Ian Kinsler (+41 in 'Net Gain'), Josh Hamilton (+32), Michael Young (+18) and Marlon Byrd (+10) for heavily contributing not only to one of the more potent lineups in franchise history, but also to one of the more shrewd baserunning units -- an underrated accomplishment for which second-year baserunning coach Gary Pettis should be commended.
● Speaking of underrated facets of the game of baseball, another component of the offensive/defensive value continuum that is not readily quantifiable is the outfield arm -- a problem which John Walsh of the The Hardball Times has tirelessly worked to solve by retroactively employing Retrosheet play-by-play data in order to compute run values for outfield arms (you can click here to read more about Walsh's methodology and the statistics I'm about to quote, including Kill+ and Hold+ -- the rates of obtaining baserunning kills and holds relative to league average, respectively, normalized to 100 in the vein of OPS+).
Two Rangers outfielders amassed enough throwing opportunities to qualify for cameo appearances in Walsh's tables, and both fared favorably: Josh Hamilton's cannon arm (Kill+ of 45, Hold+ of 109) was worth approximately half a run above average in center field, while Brandon Boggs (Kill+ of 219, Hold+ of 105) further solidified his standing as perhaps the preeminent defensive left fielder in the organization with an arm that was worth approximately 2.6 runs above average, or nearly six runs over the span of a full season's worth of outfield throwing opportunities.
Individually, the numbers don't seem like much, but cumulatively they add up rather quickly, and it will be interesting to see where the likes of Marlon Byrd, Nelson Cruz and David Murphy registered in 2008 relative to their peers once The Hardball Times updates outfield arm data league-wide.
Quick Hits: Texas and Minnesota continue to mull the idea of inking free-agent right-hander Eric Gagne ... The Rangers dispatched a scout to watch free-agent right-hander Kris Benson throw a bullpen session in Phoenix on Saturday, though to what extent they are interested in the 34-year-old hurler is not currently known ... Former Rangers left-hander Kenny Rogers is contemplating retirement ... The Rangers have opened their new sales office in Fort Worth, which will primarily focus on increasing corporate accounts and marketing to potential clients in the area in the short run.
Reader Comments (17)
Nice analysis on the base running, I haven't seen any other Ranger site look at that.
I think you have to leave Ramirez in AAA catching for a while. He may not turn out to be a catcher, but it's too early to give up on him just yet. Even in this down market $6 M hardly seems crippling, and Blalock may turn out to be a Loftonesque trade chip and bring back another Ramirez (though probably someone farther away from the majors). Make Ramirez either become a catcher or prove that he isn't one and make that decision later.
Blalock will surely get injured in the spring, and then Max will be brought up to DH, where he belongs. It's so easy to look past the reason why the team is in this awkward position with Blalock in the first place - the guy just hasn't been able to get it together in the health department for the past few seasons.
The difference between the 2009-going forward Rangers from teams in the recent past is that then when a guy went down, there was no one down in the minors who could conceivably come up and produce. Now, though, there are a few guys who ought to be concerned (Hank included) about losing their jobs permanently if they keep missing significant time with injury.
I agree, I think we needed to pick up Blalock's option or sign another DH type (Pat Burell) because we have so many young players. I think rookies and 2nd year players at SS, C, DH, and 1B is a little too much. Plus it gives Max the time to learn to catch increasing his value to the Rangers.
At the beginning of the off season, I didn't think Burrell or any other good hitters could be had on a year contract. Blalock was (and still is the best option). If Maximus is blowing people away in AAA then you can look to move Blalock in season and bring up Max.
I see your point, but I don't know if the number of young guys is really a problem, since there are a few vets on the squad. Bringing in an OF/DH bat would make sense, if you think Byrd or Murphy or Cruz aren't going to make it as full-time starters, but Burrell's off the market, and it does need to be a righty bat (so that precludes Dunn). Other right-handed hitting power guys still available:
DH types:
Nomar
Aurilia
Sexson (I bet Gabbard would love that)
Thomas
OF types:
Manny
Do any of those guys excite you? Me neither.
I guess the other option is to try to trade for a DH/OF guy (I think that's what the Sheffield buzz was about earlier). Don't know who that would be, and the trade would have to involve a bunch of our spares - and what kind of player are you going to get for a bunch of spares?
So I think Daniels is probably doing the right thing in this market with this group of FA players available. That is, stick with the "plan," go with what you got, and adjust accordingly by bringing the youth up and seeing what they can do. If the team is out of contention in July, then you start dumping guys like Millwood, Padilla, Blalock, Byrd, Benoit, Turnbow - whoever is performing and has any value. I don't think any of those guys are part of the long-term plan anyway.
I still think you take the veteran bat in Blalock who's still relatively young and who's proven to be an all-star caliber player when healthy
now let me bounce 3 players off you:
Player A: .273/.337/.452
Player B: .251/.336/.410
Player C: .271/.347/.495
same three:
Player A: .272/.335/.454
Player B: .257/.333/.433
Player C: .282/.354/.531
Want another bonus? Player A bats Left, B and C both bat Right. Player A is of course, our good friend Hammerin' Hank Blalock. B is Max Ramirez - that right handed slugger everyone seems to think would balance our lefthanded heavy lineup.... but who's C? Well it's Nelson frickin' Cruz.
Why not DH our worst defensive outfielder in an attempt to continue to improve our defense across the board? The go with a starting outfield of Byrd, Hamilton, Murphy with Boggs as a top reserve for his defensive ability.
Law seems so sure Max Ram won't develop into anymore than a fringe catcher, but how bout we give him that oppertunity? Why not let him catch full time at AAA for this season instead of trying to force all 3 of our young catchers into the major leagues where Ramirez most certainly would never get the chance to catch. We're already breaking in a young short stop, moving another player to third and handing a starting position to a still unproven (at the major league level) Cruz. I just think the less guys we juggle at this point the better.
Obvioulsy it will work itself out. If Blalock doesn't pan out, then give Cruz a shot. Both guys who were essentially guarenteed a shot on the big league squad anyway. If neither work, THEN I think you being to look towards Ramirez. Any extra catching he accrues at AAA will only help his career in the long run.
And you know, the original direction I was going to go in with the Blalock/Ramirez conundrum was where I was going to attempt to link it with the Sheets situation; in other words, that $6 million of capital you spent to keep Blalock potentially looms much larger if you're trying to best a competitive third-party bid but can only go so high.
Now, that point now appears moot, as the Yankees are reportedly closing in on a one-year deal with Andy Pettitte that would effectively end their pursuit of Sheets (per Rosenthal, the base value of the deal would be worth less than $6 million, but incentives -- based on innings pitched, I presume -- could push it above $12 million), and there are really no other teams legitimately in the mix (although I'm sure there's still some peripheral interest in a few front offices out there), but you still wonder...
Robert: I know what you're saying about Cruz being the Rangers' worst defensive outfielder, and agree with it to an extent, but it should be regarded as somewhat remarkable that the club's worst major league defensive outfielder is still a defensive asset in right field. His range is probably slightly above average out there at this point, and his arm, though a bit erratic, is unbelievable.
In other news:
● I was just thinking about this last night, and now it appears that it's going to be resolved: Texas is close to a one-year deal with Byrd, averting arbitration.
● Timmy Mac is busy doing what he does best -- inciting discussion by suggesting the signing of Sheets would put Texas in a position where they "could contend." I don't think the talent disparity between Oakland/Anaheim/Texas is all that great if the Rangers close the deal on Sheets, and it's not a completely far-fetched proposition, but a lot of things would still have to break right.
● The Astros' farm system is hilariously bad:
● ESPN.com's Keith Law tabs Wilfredo Boscan (the subject of another fantastic Professor Parks interview back in November) as a potential top 100 candidate for 2009:
Prediction: Word leaks of a preliminary agreement between Texas and Sheets before the week's up.
Awesome stuff today, Joey.
That's an interesting angle on MaxRam/Blalock - I'm still of the opinion though that Max should get more time in AAA to refine his defense in hopes we'll be able to use his bat behind the plate eventually, so I don't think having Blalock around will be completely superfluous. The thing that concerns me is Hank's salary, and whether or not that could become a stumbling stone in signing Sheets, as Joey mentioned above. If that where to become the case, I might be a proponent of a slightly modified version of Robert's suggestion: getting rid of Blalock and rolling with some rotation of the outfielders and catchers at DH for awhile. Not only would that keep our outfield fresh, but it would help us get as good a look as possible at the offensive capabilities of Teagarden and Salty - which depending upon how much progress Max makes on his defensive/gamecalling abilites this year could be pretty important if we're forced into trading one of the trio at the deadline.
Good point Jon, exactly why I've never thought a team should field a full time DH (unless of course it's David Ortiz or Edgar Martinez), but with the number Ramirez is supposed to put up this season, I would rather carry the extra pitcher and use the DH position to give starters a day off from the field without totally losing their bat. I wouldn't be completely against doing something like DHing Kinsler whenever we start a lefty, and bringing in a more consistent glove for the position. Obviously seems like a travesty now, but in reality the only lefty in our rotation will likely be Harrison who probably won't be anymore than the 4 or 5 starter. That would mean he's probably only pitching once a week, and don't see a reason with our utility infielder playing that 2B position once a week in his place.
FWIW, John and I just recorded the pilot episode of the (still very rough and still very untitled) BBTiA podcast -- if anybody is just really compelled to hear what our voices actually sound like and maybe a small portion of the show, drop us a line. We're not going to publicly release this version, but we're very optimistic and should hopefully have a first official show out before P&C report.
And yes, I sound much more lucid than I did during my abortive RPiA guest appearance.
As far as the name of the show, we're already leaning towards something but are open to suggestions. I might drop a line in the Forum.
And meanwhile, here's the latest from T.R. on Sheets:
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090126&content_id=3774038&vkey=news_tex&fext=.jsp&c_id=tex&partnerId=rss_tex
I guess one year with a 2010 club option is a decent enough compromise if the Rangers absolutely refuse to budge from their position, but by that same token, any team that elects to offer comparable money and two guaranteed years jumps into the lead...
I wonder what's in his medical records that have scared teams off so much. I have a hard time thinking a Rich Harden or any other pitcher with a similar injury history but natural ability would still be on the market right now.... there must be something nasty on that thing that no one's talking about.
You know, I don't see the point in simply signing Sheets to a 1-year deal... if he revives his value, he's as good as gone in 2010, which kind of defeats the purpose of signing him to anchor the staff while Holland and Feliz break in.
Not that I wouldn't take him and any contribution he'd make here on a 1-year deal, but I don't know why we're resisting 2. Like Robert said, it makes you wonder what's in those medicals...
PS - dropped you a line re: the podcast, Joey.
Well, Pettitte looks to be off the board now. Now we're waiting to see when and if Oliver Perez accepts NY's offer. And then there's Randy Wolf, who looks to be headed to LA.
I know this sounds like crazy talk since I'm speaking about the Rangers, who have the absolute worst rotation in all of baseball (or at least did last season), but with all this talk of Sheets' arm woes, is there any thought of making him a closer? Might save some wear and tear, and he'd be dominant.
Just a question - please don't crucify me, guys.
JDolla,
Peter Gammons (who's nearing a John Madden level of senility), suggested as much at the end of the regular season. I think everyone just kind of ignored him though. I'm thinking it would take a great amount of money to get him to make that change to a closer, or he'd have to sign a long term deal somewhere... miss extended time throughout the first couple of seasons through it, then maybe THAT team could convince him to move. Whatever medical problem that currently exists with him right now, that has prevented teams from signing him would also prevent him from closing. At this point I wouldn't be surprised if he needed TJ surgery or at teams at least believe he may need TJ surgery with the way they've avoided him. Honestly, if he wasn't a Texas native and Mike Maddox wasn't here I'm not sure he'd even be an option in Texas. I think we're all wanting to get that bargain ace - and while each day goes by he gets cheaper and cheaper - there's a reason why he's not with another team.
Robert -
I'm trying to piece all of this together, but it doesn't add up. Yes, the medical report must be frightening - otherwise someone of Sheets' talent would have been long ago swooped up. However, if he needs TJ surgery - why didn't he do it last fall? Why is he waiting around, letting the 6 months of the off season go by - wasted. Now his recovery time will be almost 2 full seasons if he has to get the TJ surgery done. The other thing is this - why, if this is true, is Texas even interested in him at all? They don't need another pitcher drawing salary all year from the DL - they already have McSlim to fill that role.
JDolla,
The answers to those questions are pretty simple:
a.) the reason he wouldn't do it last season is that he'd go into free agency with virtually no chance to get a deal for a year because of the surgery
b.) the only team that would REALLY know if he needs something like TJ surgery would be the Brewers. Just because teams have looked at his medical reports doesn't mean they've gotten to give him a physical. At a matter of fact, I'm not sure a regular physical could ever show something like a tear like that.
Don't get me wrong, the Rangers obviously want Sheets, but there's no sense in investing 2 or 3 years into a guy who will miss 2 years recovering. Granted this is ALL personal speculation, but pitching is at an absolute premium even in a Recession, so someone of Sheets' talent shouldn't still be on the market. If he is, there's something terribly, terribly wrong.
Maybe I'm extremely naive, but if he is THAT injured, that would most likely indicate he is not going to pitch in 2009. And if he's not going to pitch in 2009, and still trying to fool someone into giving him a guaranteed contract for 2009 - isn't that a bit on the dishonest side?