The Rangers' Looming Injury Cloud
Joey Matschulat
Ian Kinsler is expected to begin the 2010 regular season on the 15-day disabled list with a high right ankle sprain.When people think of something as being in a "state of flux," it's implicitly understood that there are forces in play generating some basic amount of instability/uncertainty -- for example, Tommy Hunter's strained oblique muscle, which ultimately proved most advantageous for Matt Harrison's immediate future, but not before the "state of flux" label was affixed to the starting rotation by several media outlets. Ditto for the bullpen and the catching/utility infielder situations, all of which were unsettled to varying degrees but now appear to be coming into clearer focus.
One of the things that's been on my mind for a little while now, though, is how quickly the Rangers could revert to a full-fledged state of flux insofar as both their lineup and their starting rotation are concerned. While the prospect of significant in-season player turnover hardly constitutes a unique challenge for major league teams, it becomes a bit more alarming when your team is not only (a) expected to compete for a division title and, the eyes of some, amass 90-plus wins, but also (b) relying so heavily upon so many players with health- and performance-based questions.
First of all, let's be patently upfront in giving credit where credit is due -- Texas, as evidenced by the relatively low "dollars lost" figures posted at Baseball Prospectus and Beyond the Box Score (which don't perfectly align due to differing methodologies, but do paint similarly bright pictures), has ranged from okay to very good over the last 4-5 years in terms of keeping its higher-salaried talent on the field and away from the disabled list; BP calculated that the Rangers lost just $6.8 million due to injuries last season, one of the lower marks in baseball, and I would like to think that's at least partially attributable to a team medical staff which is perceived within the game as better than average.
Of course, the obvious counterargument one could make is that the low figures tallied by the Rangers in the "dollars lost" columns in recent years were largely effectuated by below-average team payrolls, which leads directly into a second key point: player salary and talent level/production are two completely different animals. Of the top 12 producers of wins above replacement for Texas last season, only two banked more than $3.2 million (Michael Young and Kevin Millwood); eight earned less than $2 million, and five earned sub-$500,000 salaries. The point? Dollars lost to injury isn't a very useful proxy for value (e.g. wins above replacement) lost to injury.
It's that latter notion -- the "value lost to injury" -- that's especially unnerving. When juxtaposed against their three division rivals, the Rangers' projected starting lineup boasts four "red-light" players and one "yellow-light" player (according to the team health reports published by Baseball Prospectus's Will Carroll, which denote relative injury risk through the use of a traffic-light system), far worse than the Angels (one yellow, one red) and Athletics (two yellow, one red) but on par with the Mariners (one yellow, four red). The key difference? In the aggregate, Seattle's red-lit players aren't nearly as critical to the success of their season as the Rangers' red-lit contingent, comprising Taylor Teagarden, Ian Kinsler, Josh Hamilton and Vladimir Guerrero.
But what does a red light really mean relative to a yellow light, or a yellow light to a green light? Quantifying the value of Will Carroll's traffic-light system is an exercise rife with sample-size issues, but Jared Cross recently found that red-lit hitters (average 25.1 days on the disabled list) not only spent nearly twice as much time on the disabled list in 2009 as their green- (14.9 days) and yellow-lit (12.7 days) counterparts, but also fared worse relative to their offensive projections.
That being injury-prone isn't exactly conducive to overperforming shouldn't come as much of a shock to anyone; similarly, maybe it shouldn't come as much of a shock to any of us if guys like Hamilton and Guerrero don't fulfill our wildest expectations. It's also why it's so frustrating to see Ian Kinsler already dealing with injury problems so early on; his past and present ailments have generally been of the "freak" variety, the sort that you wouldn't regard as recurring issues, but at some point you have to accept that the frequency of said injuries stems from a root cause, that apparently being his all-out style of play. Great for team energy and creating some extra value, but not necessarily so great from a health standpoint.
The starting rotation is an entirely different kettle of fish, at least in the comparative sense: Rich Harden is the Rangers' lone red-lit starter (and for good reason, considering that he's accrued a whopping 367 disabled-list days over the last five seasons), after which C.J. Wilson (yellow?), Scott Feldman (yellow), Matt Harrison (yellow?) and Colby Lewis (?) neatly compose a rather nebulous group of pitchers. Literally every starting candidate from the No. 6 starter (Tommy Hunter) on down is at least yellow-lit, which I suppose serves as something of a reminder that the injury nexus is virtually inescapable for pitchers of any age.
While this fairly large staff-wide injury risk factor aligns Texas more closely with the divisional norm than anything else (only the Angels actually have more than one green-lit starter), the thing that concerns me is that Harrison is, in my mind at least, still anything but a lock to stick in the rotation long term. Lewis? I'm hopeful, but the scouting reports out of Surprise have been decidedly mixed and he has no assurance of anything beyond game No. 1 in spite of his guaranteed two-year contract.
Wilson and Feldman are probably the two surest things on this pitching staff after accounting for both performance and durability, but it's still likelier than not that one, if not two, of the five starters breaking camp are either injured or toast performance-wise by mid-June. Neftali Feliz appears to be out of the rotation picture for the foreseeable future, leaving Brandon McCarthy (red) and the understandably yellow-lit Tommy Hunter and Derek Holland standing as insurance. It's not inconceivable that Dustin Nippert is the No. 6-7 starter a few months down the road. I'm probably traversing the worst-case scenario roadway here, but I think you can understand where I'm coming from and why there may be a certain false sense of security percolating around this team.
What can be done to address these issues? Nothing, really; there's no money to do anything materially affecting the roster until at least mid-season, nor will any meaningful trade opportunities likely materialize until then. This team essentially is what it is right now: a true-talent 85- to 87-win ballclub that has a pretty slim chance of pulling off something much bigger (think 92-plus wins) and a slightly larger chance of collecting 88 to 90 wins. That's great and all, and it's certainly not my intention to put a damper on the impending season-opening festivities, but I think the risk factors surrounding this team might be a little more numerous than even I wanted to admit. We can only hope they don't end up being the sorts of decisive factors that can make or break a season.
Reader Comments (12)
It's easy to understand why the Rangers went and got Lewis and have worked so hard to build rotation depth. Someone(s) will go down but I'm more sanguine about the alternatives this year than in almost any year in recent memory.
Some baseball mind once said, (paraphrasing) "You're guaranteed to win a third of your games and lose a third of your games - what you do with the rest is the difference." - That is so true. Injuries are a big part of that final third.
Every team has injury issues. Name the last team not to put a critical player on the DL during the season.
Depth helps more than anything. The Rangers are short of depth at a couple of places (left handed reliever comes to mind right away) but then, so is every team.
Another big part of the last "third" is luck. What if Hambone hadn't gotten hurt last year? What if...
"...Lewis? I'm hopeful, but the scouting reports out of Surprise have been decidedly mixed and he has no assurance of anything beyond game No. 1 in spite of his guaranteed two-year contract..."
FINALLY someone publicly admits that Colby Lewis is a HUGE wildcard in this rotation.
When he signed with the Rangers, everyone auto penciled him in as the 3rd SP... but I could not find 1 ounce of proof that he'd even MAKE the rotation, let alone by the #3 starter.
I think Hunter is also a HUGE question mark... I wouldn't be the least bit suprised if he has a down season and is moved out of the rotation (I certainly hope not... obviuosly).
So, where does that leave us; Harden (scary), Feldman (not scary at all), CJ (kind of scary), Harrison (Scary), and Lewis (kind of scary and maybe not very good). Outside of a healthy Harden and the workhorse Feldman, the rest of the line up is sketchy... very sketchy.
I'm not trying to be a Debbie Downer here... I'm as excited as anyone for the 2010 Rangers... but it's tempered enthusiasm based on relative inexperience and injuries. The best thing going for them is their SP depth. Probably more collective depth than any team in baseball.
BTW - As Hamilton goes, the lineup goes... he BETTER have a monster season or reaaching 87-92 wins is a pipe dream.
At this time I am more concerned about how the Rangers do in April then injuries. They have a history of losing April and two of those three years were train wrecks. Their record over sring taining was not all that good in terms of wins and losses. A win in April is just as good as a win in September and this is going to be a very competitive division.
Yes, I am aware of all the mitigating factors regarding spring traininng, but I like to worry.
As far as injuries, Kinsler is the most troubling. Hamilton & Vlad are backed by one of my favorite players Murphy so depth mitigates potential injuries there. However, Young is no spring chicken and another hamstring injury is a concern over a long season.
Pitching depth off sets any injury concerns in hat aspect of the game. However, losing Hunter is a set back.
However, catcher is a mess. Hopefully new ownership will allow this to be addressed via trade at the break. Like to see someone step forward (Salty), but am beginning to lose hope.
So my biggest concern is the impact of losing Kinsler and Hunter on how the teams plays in April because f the historically poor/slow starts in April under Wash.
Every guy in the rotation is a question mark - even Harden. But the good news is most of these guys are in their 2nd or 3rd year and are improving and benefitting from their experience. It says a lot that BMac goes to the minors, rather than the rotation, after his poor spring. The past 2 seasons, he would have been in the #3 or #4 spot regardless.
Evey team, every team, is imperfect. Injuries, under performance, unexpected roadblocks, are part of baseball's seasons, for every team. The optimism here is from the value and talent level of the whole, and that is what is ultimately being counted on, as opposed to riding any one or three individuals backs to get where this thing is pointed.
There are mostly really good pieces in place. Perfect pieces? No. But collectively, the 25, and the half-dozen or so who will provide backup support have been built to compete. Not just show up and play the game to an outcome, but to compete, night in and night out. Yes everything has to fall in place for that competitiveness to translate to a playoff berth, but that is true for every team.
This is as good a squad as the Doug Melvin teams of the late 90's. Yeah, they've still got to go out and do it, but I really can't comprehend why at the end of March we'd be looking at potential reasons for it not working out. Thank your lucky stars we're not Mets fans.
I see, so head case Salty was hurt often last year, has had surgery thoracic outlet syndrome and not been able to play yet this year, but Teagarden, who was never hurt last year and played every inning asked this year is the Red LIght risk? So this is what the other side of the looking glass looks like. Remember, white line fever said in the paper today that Today's line up, which includes Salty, is the opening day line up. Apparently, having the better batting average, superior defensive skills, better pitcher handling, being more healthy and durable and throwing out an ungodly percentage of attempted steals is not nearly as impressive as looking like a beast in the showers. Seriously, what kind of clouded judgment is being used for your, Texas, Rangers?
I think most of us that follow every move the Rangers make have had some of these thoughts. I would temper any concern with our group of injury risks with knowing that the team we may have to beat out this season (if the Angels do come back to the pack and I personally think that will be the case) is going into the season without one of the 2 best pitchers in the division on the shelf. Cliff Lee's injury is one that's plagued him in the past and could be something that takes him a while to get past. I encourage everyone to take a look at this post and be encouraged: http://www.lookoutlanding.com/2010/3/28/1394192/if-it-goes-wrong. In my mind it sure puts in perspective that the other teams in our division have a lot of concerns themselves...
Personally, I think we're much better built (although we are thin in areas depth-wise as was pointed out) to withstand some of these nagging injuries. Obviously if we lose a main cog or 2 for lengthy amounts of time we're probably going to be looking at 2011 as "the" year. That's true of every team in the big leagues except maybe the Yankees and Red Sox.
Augie, as far as how the catcher decision is being made, I don't really trust either of those guys to hold down the fort for a majority of a season - yet. I like Teagarden, but before getting to the big leagues he was injury prone and I think you should temper all of what you wrote with the fact that he has struck out in 1 out of every 2 at bats this spring! Obviously, the brain trust has serious concerns that he is anything more than a backup and they think that Salty's has the higher upside. However it goes this year, if one or the other doesn't step up and take the position we're going to be fishing for a front line catcher next off-season.
The thing that makes me smile is that the Rangers have young stud arm after young stud arm, as far as the eye can see back into their farm system. No other team can match that for the long haul. Whether it will happen this year, no one can know. But this team is going places in the next few years, and no amount of nail-biting over whether this year's No. 4 starter might get hurt will change that.
I think its fair to say the Rangers success depends on health more than most, especially with core offensive players like Hamilton and Kinsler. But its also pretty exciting to say that the roster as constructed has the talent to seriously contend for the division, and even the depth to get by for while in case of injuries (more so in the pitching staff than the lineup).
Naming the starting catcher should be based upon performance. TT is clearly the more deserving candidate.
I see, so head case Salty was hurt often last year, has had surgery thoracic outlet syndrome and not been able to play yet this year, but Teagarden, who was never hurt last year and played every inning asked this year is the Red LIght risk?
Salty is a red-light player as well; Will Carroll rationalized his decision to project Teagarden over Salty by pointing out that there was zero doubt as to whether Salty would receive a red light or not, thus rendering him a "less interesting" player to project. I don't disagree, but given that the THRs are ostensibly focused on starters, it's also a little confusing for those unfamiliar with the Rangers.
As far as some of the other points being made about the catching situation ... it would appear that the "Opening Day starter" designation for Salty is being extrapolated by some, and I just don't think that's the right way to look at this. I've been projecting a 60-40 playing time split in Salty's favor for going on a month now, and if anything I'm tempted to revise it to 55-45 -- Washington isn't apt to employ a straight-up platoon, I don't think, but I suspect Teagarden is going to get a decent chance to show us something, at least at the start of the season.